Insignia of Rank in the Nahua World: From the Fifteenth to the Seventeenth Century 1607322404, 9781607322405

Citation preview

Insignia of Rank in the Nahua World

Insignia of Rank in the Nahua World From the Fifteenth to the Seventeenth Century

Justyna Olko

Univer s i t y Pr ess of Color a d o

Boulder

© 2014 by University Press of Colorado Published by University Press of Colorado 5589 Arapahoe Avenue, Suite 206C Boulder, Colorado 80303 All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America The University Press of Colorado is a proud member of the Association of American University Presses. The University Press of Colorado is a cooperative publishing enterprise supported, in part, by Adams State University, Colorado State University, Fort Lewis College, Metropolitan State University of Denver, Regis University, University of Colorado, University of Northern Colorado, Utah State University, and Western State Colorado University. This paper meets the requirements of the ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanence of Paper). Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Olko, Justyna.   Insignia of rank in the Nahua world : from the fifteenth to the seventeenth century / Justyna Olko.        pages cm     Includes bibliographical references and index.   ISBN 978-1-60732-240-5 (hardback) — ISBN 978-1-60732-241-2 (ebook) 1.  Aztecs—Clothing. 2.  Aztecs—Jewelry. 3.  Clothing and dress—Symbolic aspects—Mexico.  I. Title.   F1219.76.C68O53 2013   391.0089952—dc23                                                             2013024352 23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

Codex Ixtlilxochitl illustrations of Neçahualpilli (front, from fol. 108r) and Neçahualcoyotl (back, from fol. 106r), courtesy, Bibliothèque nationale de France.

1

For my mentors, Jerzy Axer and James Lockhart

Contents

List of Figures

xi

Preface xix 1. Introduction The Focus and Organization of This Book

1 2

Literature and Sources Written Sources in Nahuatl Written Sources in Spanish Preconquest Monuments Pictorial Manuscripts

6 8 10 12 13

The Nahua Background The Nahua World before Contact The Imperial Perspective Rulers and Lords Postcontact Rearrangements

17 17 20 24 27

2. The Repertory of Elite Apparel and Insignia of Rank

33

Hairstyles

34

Headdresses

37 vii

viii

C ontents

Xiuhhuitzolli Other Elite Headdresses

37 54

Ear Adornments

70

Nose Ornaments

73

Lip Ornaments

76

Neck and Chest Ornaments

79

Capes

84

Xicolli

105

War Gear for the Upper Body Tlahuiztli Shields and Weapons

106 109 132

Hand Attributes

139

Apparel for the Lower Body Loincloths Leg Bands Sandals

143 143 144 145

Female Garments

146

Seats

148

Summary

152

3. Images of Rank by Region

187

The Imperial Core: Mexico-Tenochtitlan and Surroundings Preconquest Sculpture Monuments Mexica Royal Imagery in Colonial Pictorial Manuscripts Tlatelolco Tetzcoco

188 188 203 219 222

Beyond the Valley of Mexico: Northern Regions

242

Beyond the Valley of Mexico: Southern Regions

245

Beyond the Valley of Mexico: Southeastern Regions

261

Toward the Gulf Coast: Eastern Regions

271

A Case of Resistance: Tlaxcala and Its Iconography of Rank

276

Regional Conventions and Imperial Impact

284

Postconquest Strategies in Images of Rank

288

Convergence of Form and Meaning

291

C ontents

4. Functions and Meanings of Precontact Costume and Status Items

309

Insignia as Vehicles of Transformation

315

Clothes and the Notion of Civility

322

Inspiring Terror and Pride: Battle Costumes

324

5. Postcontact Survivals and Adaptations

335

Changes in Costume Repertory

335

Survival of Native Dress and Status Symbols

340

6. Summation

359

Appendix: Dictionary of Insignia and Accouterments

367

Abbreviations Used

445

References

447

Index

473

ix

Figures

1.1. Late Postclassic Mesoamerica

18

1.2. The Valley of Mexico at the time of contact 19 1.3. Members of native nobility, Primeros Memoriales, fols. 55v, 56r 25 2.1. Hairstyles: (a) short hair with a protruding forelock, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 53v; (b) long hair tied at the neck, Codex Mendoza, fol. 63r; (c) temillotl, Codex Mendoza, fol. 67r; (d) axtlacuilli/neaxtlahualli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r 35 2.2. Turquoise diadem: (a) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51v; (b) Tovar Manuscript, fol. 93, (c) Codex Tulane 38 2.3. Turquoise diadem in association with Mexica state officials: (a) tlacochteuctli and tlacateuctli with turquoise diadems directly over their heads, Codex Mendoza, fol. 17v; (b) teuctli acting as constable and judge, Codex Mendoza, fol. 64r 41 2.4. Turquoise diadem in association with Mexica judges, Codex Mendoza, fol. 68r 42 2.5. Turquoise diadem in association with Mexica judges, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fols. 26r, 36v 43 2.6. Turquoise diadem in association with war leaders and worn at war: (a) Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 33v, fragment; (b) Codex Azoyú 2, fragment 44 xi

xii

F igures

2.7. Xiuhteuctli, Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fol. 6v 47 2.8. Examples of the turquoise diadem in Chichen Itza: details from Upper Registers D and E, Interior Wall, Lower Temple of the Jaguar 48 2.9. Turquoise diadem worn in Tula and Chichen Itza: (a) Atlantean figure in Chichen Itza, Upper Temple of the Jaguar, Great Ballcourt; (b) Atlantean figure from Tula; (c) Toltec warrior from Ixtapatongo rock painting 49 2.10. Pillbox headdress in Chichen Itza, Atlantean figures, Upper Temple of the Jaguar, Great Ballcourt 50 2.11. Pillbox headdress in Tula, Atlantean pillar 51 2.12. Oval Palace Tablet, Palenque 51 2.13. Mosaic headdresses in Classic Maya culture: (a) Stela 31, Tikal, right side; (b) Stela 31, Tikal, left side; (c) limestone panel, Temple XVII, Palenque; (d) pillbox headdress, the Oval Palace Tablet, Palenque; (e) domed mosaic headdress, Lintel 2, Piedras Negras; (f ) Stela 26, Piedras Negras; (g) Stela 7, Piedras Negras 52 2.14. War-serpent headdresses in Teotihuacan: (a) figurine with a war-serpent headdress similar to “trapeze and ray” year sign; (b) figurine with a platelet war-serpent headdress; (c) Late Postclassic image of Xiuhcoatl, Codex Nuttall, fol. 76 52 2.15. Golden headbands or frontlets given in tribute from Tochtepec, Codex Mendoza, fol. 46r 55 2.16. Aztaxelli head device: (a) Codex Mendoza, fol. 57r; (b) Codex Tudela, fol. 22r; (c) Primeros Memoriales fol. 266r 57 2.17. Tlaxcalan red-white twisted headbands with aztaxelli and aztaxelli quetzalmiahuayo devices: (a) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 29; (b) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 5; (c) Genealogía de Maxixcatzin 57 2.18. Possible examples of quauhtzontli: (a) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 57; (b) Codex Azcatitlan, fol. 18 detail; (c) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 264r 60 2.19. Xipe Totec wearing the tlauhquecholtzontli, Codex Tudela, fol. 12r 62 2.20. Tlalpiloni hair binders: (a) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; (b) Manuscrito del Aperreamiento (BNF 374); (c) Codex Ixtlilxochitl, fol. 108r 64 2.21. Different kinds of headgear: (a) quetzalquaquahuitl, Primeros Memoriales, fol.73v; (b) wreath head ornament, probably icpacxochitl, Codex Mendoza, fol. 71r 65

F igures

2.22. White feather-down head adornment: (a) Codex Mendoza, fol. 66r; (b) Mapa Quinatzin, fol. 3; (c) Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, fol. 21v; (d) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 32, detail 66 2.23. Coçoyahualolli ornament: (a) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 53r; (b) Códice de Tepetlaoztoc, fol. 3; (c) Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fol. 43r 67 2.24. Copilli headpieces: (a) copilli as part of the cuextecatl outfit, Codex Mendoza, fol. 23r; (b) citlalcopilli, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 34r 69 2.25. Elaborate warrior outfits with earplugs, labrets, and back devices in the Primeros Memoriales, fols. 72r, 72v, 73r 71 2.26. Royal nose plugs: (a) xiuhyacamitl worn by Axayacatl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51r; (b) image of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina, Tovar Manuscript, fol. 109 74 2.27. Curved labret, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fols. 39, 40 79 2.28. Mortuary bundle of a ruler, Codex Tudela, fol. 58r 81 2.29. Mortuary bundle, Codex Tudela, fol. 55r 84 2.30. White capes bordered with eyes: (a) Codex Mendoza, fol. 64r; (b) Codex Tulane 86 2.31. Neçahualpilli, Codex Ixtlilxochitl, fol. 108r 87 2.32. Axayacatl and Mocteucçoma Ilhuicamina, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51r 88 2.33. Toltec garments with mosaic design: (a) possible turquoise-mosaic hip cloth on the relief figure in Tula; (b) possible turquoise-mosaic sandals, Atlantean figure, Tula 89 2.34. Netted capes, Codex Mendoza, fols. 57r, 61r, 63r 92 2.35. Textiles with turquoise mosaic and quilted designs: (a) one of the capes belonging to Martín Ocelotl; (b) fragment of a cotton textile identified as a xicolli garment, Offering 102, Museo Templo Mayor; (c–e) capes given in tribute, Codex Mendoza, fols. 27r, 32r, 49r 93 2.36. (a) Painal wearing xiuhtlalpilli hip cloth, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 261r; (b) Yacateuctli wearing the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 262r 95 2.37. Ehuatilmatli: (a–c) Primeros Memoriales, fols. 51r, 52r, 53r 99 2.38. Jaguar-skin capes or capes with jaguar-skin design: (a–b) Codex Tudela, fol. 87v; (c) Codex Mendoza, fol. 31r 99 2.39. Examples of capes in the Codex Tudela: (a) quauhtilmatli, fol. 88r; (b) tonatiuhyo tilmatli, fol. 88r; (c) mictlanteuctli tilmatli, fol. 86r 101

xiii

xiv

F igures

2.40. Examples of the ecacozcayo tilmatli: (a) Codex Tudela, fol. 85v; (b–c) Codex Mendoza, fols. 52r, 53r 102 2.41. Ixnextlacuilolli tilmatli, Codex Mendoza, fols. 34r, 36r 104 2.42. Capes with regional designs: (a) ometochtecomayo tilmatli; (b) ocuiltecayo tilmatli, Codex Mendoza, fols. 46r, 34r 105 2.43. Sleeveless jackets: (a) xicolli with a fringed border, Codex Mendoza, fol. 66r; (b) xicolli bordered with eyes, Codex Tudela, fol. 54r 107 2.44. Ichcahuipilli protective tunic: (a) Codex Mendoza, fol. 67r; (b) Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fol. 34r 108 2.45. Neçahualcoyotl, Codex Ixtlilxochitl, fol. 106r 110 2.46. Coyote outfits: (a) citlalcoyotl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 79v; (b) tlecoyotl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 79r 112 2.47. Battle suits in the Codex Mendoza: (a) coyotl with the xicacoliuhqui shield; (b) ocelotl with the cuexyo shield; (c) cuextecatl with the cuexyo shield; (d) quetzalpatzactli with the xicacoliuhqui shield; (e) cicitlalo cuextecatl; Codex Mendoza, fols. 39r, 37r, 65r 113 2.48. Ocelotl costume with a variant of the teocuitlaanahuacayo shield, Codex Tudela, fol. 12r 114 2.49. Military outfits, including eagle and coyote or jaguar suits, delivered among other tribute goods, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 33v 115 2.50. Mexica battle suits, including eagle and jaguar costumes, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 34r 116 2.51. Tzitzimitl insignia: (a) quetzaltzitzimitl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 73v; (b) xiuhtototzitzimitl or xoxouhqui tzitzimitl, Codex Mendoza, fol. 21v 119 2.52. Copilli back devices: (a) quetzalcopilli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 75r; (b) aztacopilli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 77r; (c) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 39 120 2.53. Quaxolotl costume: (a) tlapalquaxolotl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 76r; (b) iztac quaxolotl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 76r; (c) coztic quaxolotl, Codex Mendoza, fol. 26r; (d) tozquaxolotl, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 51 121 2.54. Itzpapalotl and Otonteuctli: (a) itzpapatlotl device, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 78v; (b) impersonator of Otonteuctli in the feast of Xocotl huetzi, Codex Tudela, fol. 20r 122 2.55. Xopilli insignia in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fols. 25, 28 122

F igures

2.56. Battle suits awarded to brave warriors: (a) warrior who took two captives, wearing the red cuextecatl costume; (b) warrior who took three captives, wearing the papalotl back device; (c) Otomi-rank warrior carrying the xopilli back device; (d) quachic warrior carrying the panitl insignia; Codex Mendoza, fol. 64r 123 2.57. Tozcololli: (a) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 77v; (b) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 53 124 2.58. Different tlahuiztli: (a) quetzaltonatiuh, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 29; (b) çacuantonatiuh; (c) ometochtlahuiztli; (d) quetzaltototl; (b–d) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 74r 125 2.59. Aztatzontli back device: (a) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 77r; (b) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 37 125 2.60. Examples of patzactli insignia worn as back devices: (a) cueçalpatzactli; (b) cacalpatzactli; (a–b, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 76v); (c) quetzalpatzactli, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 48 127 2.61. Patzactli and momoyactli in the Codex Mendoza, fol. 26r: (a) cueçalpatzactli; (b) momoyactli 127 2.62. Eagle warrior with the quetzalpatzactli back device, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 34r 128 2.63. Quetzalapanecayotl in the feast of Xocotl huetzi, Codex Tudela, fol. 20r 130 2.64. Examples of head insignia: (a) ananacaztli, Primeros Memoriales, fol.75v; (b) xiuhananacaztli, Codex Ixtlilxochitl, fol. 106r 131 2.65. Different cuexyo chimalli variants: (a–d) Codex Mendoza, fols. 19r, 20r, 25r, 51r; (e–h) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 46; (i) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 59 133 2.66. Terminal Classic-Early Postclassic examples of the cuexyo chimalli outside the Huastec region: (a) Chichen Itza, Upper Temple of the Jaguars; (b) Tula 134 2.67. Different shields: (a) tehuehuelli/ihuiteteyo chimalli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 80r; (b) quauhtetepoyo chimalli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 75v; (c) macpalo chimalli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 80r 135 2.68. Ruler holding a smoking tube and with a flower bouquet, Florentine Codex, Bk. X, fol. 30r 138 2.69. Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in the Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 60r 141 2.70. Hip cloth in the Codex Mendoza, fols. 62r, 68r 145

xv

xvi

F igures

2.71. Female shifts (huipilli) in the Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 30v 147 2.72. Female skirts (cueitl), in the Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 30v 149 2.73. Different kinds of seats: (a) icpalli/tolicpalli, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 33v; (b) tepotzoicpalli, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 33v; (c) oceloehuaicpalli, Tovar Manuscript, fol. 93; (d) xiuhicpalli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51r; (e) low stool, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 1 151 3.1. Stone of Tiçoc 190 3.2. Reliefs in Tepetzinco 191 3.3. (a) Dedication Stone; (b) Hamburg Box 193 3.4. Participants of the feast of Izcalli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 253r, fragment 195 3.5. Temple Stone, an upper part 196 3.6 Xipe Totec dress: (a) Xipe Totec in the Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 43r; (b) Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin wearing the costume of Xipe Totec, Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 85v; (c–d) Axayacatl wearing the costume of Xipe Totec, Codex Cozcatzin, fols. 13v, 14r 197 3.7. Precontact and postcontact rulers of Tenochtitlan in the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 51r–52r) and Florentine Codex (Bk. VIII, fols. 1r–4v) 206 3.8. Precontact and postcontact rulers of Tetzcoco in the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 52r–53r) and Florentine Codex (Bk. VIII, fols. 7r–8v) 207 3.9. Precontact and postcontact rulers of Huexotla in the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 53r–53v) and Florentine Codex (Bk. VIII, fols. 9r–10r) 208 3.10. Precontact and postcontact rulers of Tlatelolco in the Florentine Codex 211 3.11. Mexica rulers in the Plano parcial de la Ciudad de México: (a) Motecuhçoma Xocoyotzin; (b) Cuitlahuac; (c) Quauhtemoc; (d) don Pablo Xochiquentzin; (e) don Diego Huanitzin; (f ) don Diego de San Francisco Tehuetzquititzin; (g) don Esteban de Guzmán; (h) don Cristóbal de Guzmán Cecetzin; and (i) don Luis de Santa María Cipac 214 3.12. Don Esteban de Guzmán, Codex Osuna, fol. 500r 215 3.13. Native rulers and officials of Tenochtitlan in the Codex Aubin, fols. 32r, 53v, 58v, 79r 217 3.14. Titres de Propriété Mexico Tenochtitlan 219 3.15. Techotlalatzin wearing a fur cape, while his wife and children appear in cotton garments, Codex Xolotl, fol. 5 225 3.16. Investiture of Ixtlilxochitl, Codex Xolotl, fol. 7 226

F igures

3.17. Tetzcocan rulers in the Mapa Tlotzin 227 3.18. Boban Calendar Wheel: (a) Neçahualcoyotl and Itzcoatl; (b) don Antonio Pimentel Tlahuitoltzin 230 3.19. (a) Precontact and (b) postcontact rulers in the Códice en Cruz 232 3.20. Rulers of Tepetlaoztoc, Códice de Tepetlaoztoc, fol. 4v: (a) don Diego Tlilpotonqui; (b) don Luis Tejeda 233 3.21. Foundation of Tepechpan, Tira de Tepechpan 236 3.22. Accession of Caltzin in Tepechpan (upper register) and the foundation of Tenochtitlan (lower register), Tira de Tepechpan 237 3.23. Colonial rulers of Tepechpan: the mortuary bundle of don Cristóbal Maldonado and don Bartolomé de Santiago seated on the curule seat and wearing the Spanish crown; Tira de Tepechpan 238 3.24. Mapa de Cempoala 240 3.25. Mapa de Atenco-Mizquiahuala 244 3.26. Códice de Huichapan, fol. 26: (a) Itzcoatl and his wife and (b) Itzcoatl with two other rulers 246 3.27. Códice de Santiago Tlacotepec (BNF 32), document presented by Alonso Gonzáles 248 3.28. Códices del Marquesado del Valle de Oaxaca, native rulers depicted in the documents from Tezoyuca and Taquitenango 249 3.29. Mapa del Coatlán del Río 251 3.30. Litigio sobre tierras en el pueblo de Huitzila, Morelos 252 3.31. Palimpsesto Veinte Mazorcas 254 3.32. Codex Humboldt Fragment 1, fol. 25, fragment 255 3.33. 4 Rain/Quiyauhtzin, the ruler of Tlapan, shown wounded and meeting the representative of Tenochtitlan, Codex Azoyú 2 256 3.34. Don Domingo Cortés Quapoltochin in the Codex Azoyú 1 and 2 259 3.35. Icxicoatl and Quetzaltehueyac in Chichimec dress, Historia ToltecaChichimeca, fol. 2r 263 3.36. Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan, fragment 266 3.37. Codex Tulane, fragment 268 3.38. Matrícula de Huexotzinco: (a) fol. 687r; (b) fol. 711r 269

xvii

xviii

F igures

3.39. Lienzo de Coacoatzintla, delimitation of borders and meeting with Spanish authorities 273 3.40. Lienzo de Coacoatzintla: (a) don Juan de Mansilla and don Francisco Tlauhquechol in traditional apparel and (b) don Juan de Mansilla in Hispanized costume 274 3.41. Lienzo de Coacoatzintla, native officials in Hispanized costume, don Francisco Tlauhquechol is the first one on the left 275 3.42. Tlaxcalan lords greeting Cortés, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 5 277 3.43. Tlaxcalan nobles in the genealogical document BNF 104 279 3.44. Genealogía de Zolín 280 3.45. Códice de las posesiones de don Andrés, fragment 281 3.46. Genealogía de don Francisco Aquiyahuateuctli 283 3.47. Spears and walking sticks: (a) Codex Xolotl, fol. 9; (b) Codex Mexicanus, fol. 33; (c) Codex Azcatitlan, fol. 5 292 3.48. Investiture of native officials, Codex Osuna, fol. 471v 293 3.49. Motecucçoma Xocoyotzin, Tovar Manuscript, fol. 117 294 3.50. Spears-varas held by precontact rulers, Codex Azcatitlan, fol. 3 294 3.51. Investiture scene, Tira de Tepechpan 295 3.52. Pointed-finger gesture, pre-Hispanic examples: (a) Codex Nuttall, fols. 56 and 57; (b) wall painting in Teotihuacan 296 3.53. Finger-pointing in postcontact sources: (a) Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fol. 29v; (b) Codex Cozcatzin, fol. 1v; (c) Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fol. 46v 296 3.54. Native diadems transformed: (a) archbishop Alonso de Montufar, Codex Aubin, fol. 49r and (b) yellow “turquoise” diadem 297 4.1. Royal accession, Codex Tudela, fol. 54r 317 4.2. Royal accession, the penitential phase, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 46r 318 4.3. Coronation of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina, Tovar Manuscript, fol. 109 319 4.4. Awards to brave warriors, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 56v 326 5.1. A native person wearing a cape, a Spanish shirt, and trousers, Matrícula de Huexotzinco, fol. 484v 336 5.2. Joyas de Martín Ocelotl 341 5.3. Fiesta real in the Códice de Tlatelolco, fragment 346

Preface

I have long been enthralled with status items and images of power among the ancient Nahuas, and all the more so when I became aware that the topic is not only fascinating in itself but a window onto other essential dimensions of their culture. The present book is the result of many years of researching and developing perspectives on the pre-Hispanic and early-postconquest Nahua world. The first results of my studies on the insignia and iconography of rank were presented as a doctoral dissertation at the University of Warsaw in 2005 and were soon published as Turquoise Diadems and Staffs of Office: Elite Costume and Insignia of Power in Aztec and Early Colonial Mexico. Since that time I have added other themes to my research, but the insignia of rank did not cease to fascinate me and occupy the core of my effort. For one thing, the enormous source base needed more time for its potential to be developed. In this process my approach to some aspects of my studies gradually matured as I reformulated and reassessed my earlier work. In my continued work on the topic, I have broadened the thematic and chronological scope, incorporated an even wider source base, and posed entirely new questions. As a result, the present book, though drawing on the earlier publication in various ways, is not an updated version of it but an entirely different work, embracing new themes, goals, and additional research results, as well as new ways of presentation. The temporal interval between the two books has made it possible for me to see many important issues in a new light and address them in a different way, including the treatment of Nahuatl terms and the creation of the contextual xix

xx

P reface

dictionary of pertinent terminology. It has also helped me to focus more consciously and directly on a methodological approach bridging precontact and postcontact eras. I have become increasingly aware of the potential of combining different categories of sources rarely explored in a single study, weaving together methods and perspectives associated with ethnohistory, philology, anthropology, and art history. Thus my book strives to cross disciplinary and temporal divisions in the belief that a better understanding of a native culture and its response to cross-cultural transfers can be achieved through a more holistic, comprehensive approach. Such a stance seems particularly propitious when dealing with the abundant material referring to the attributes of rank and ways they were employed in imagery and social practice, both before and after the arrival of the Europeans on the scene. Some of the results extend beyond the theme of insignia and elite attributes. They throw light on essential aspects of Nahua (or Aztec) culture manifest in a wide array of cultural and political practices, embracing elite ideology, interregional interactions, and posturing toward the past. Reflecting native responses to the Spanish world and attitudes developed toward preconquest traditions, this study also reveals a constant interplay between novelty and continuity, change and survival, in which the two are deeply intertwined. As this book deals with Nahuatl terminology and contains abundant material in Nahuatl, an explanation of the orthographic conventions used is called for. Words and passages quoted from particular sources are reproduced with the original spelling; most of them appear in endnotes and appendix, though some can also be found in the text proper. Whenever I rewrite Nahuatl terms in the main text, I follow a standardized orthography based on that of the grammarian Horacio Carochi, frequently used in works of Nahua philology and ethnohistory today. Proper names are given in the same orthography and are spelled the same throughout the book for consistency; in the original sources one sees them in many forms which can make it difficult even to recognize them as referring to the same person. I hope it will not disturb readers to see Moteucçoma where they may be used to Moctezuma or Motecuhzoma, Tiçoc instead of Tizoc, Neçahualpilli instead of Nezahualpilli, Teçoçomoc instead of Tezozomoc (except in biliographic references to already published works), or Quauhtinchan and Quauhtitlan for Cuauhtinchan and Cuauhtitlan, respectively. Many people have helped me with the present book. I am indebted most of all to James Lockhart, who passed away earlier this year, for sharing his knowledge with me through the entire process of writing, especially in matters of Nahuatl and English composition. I cannot thank Jim enough for his unceasing aid and guidance in all I have been doing in my studies and research, well beyond this book project. My deepest thanks go to Jerzy Axer for his unwavering support and care

P reface

ever since my student days and for giving me absolute freedom—but also constant inspiration—in all my scholarly activities. To him I owe an exceptional research space and stimulating milieu that I am lucky enough to be able to share with my students, colleagues, and friends. I would like to thank Frances Berdan for her insightful remarks and for bringing important data and references to my attention; John Sullivan for his comments on my compilation and reconstruction of the vocabulary of native terminology referring to status items; María Castañeda de la Paz for helping me with valuable information and interpretations; Michel Oudijk for his comments and for providing me with an unpublished manuscript of his work; Jerome Offner for commenting on parts of this work and sharing his ideas with me; Miguel Ángel Ruz Barrio for his important remarks and suggestions; and Rebecca Horn for a helpful reader’s report. Juan José Batalla Rosado generously contributed his time, deep expertise, library resources, and other materials of study for both my dissertation and the present book. I give my deep thanks to Ryszard Tomicki for guiding me in my student days and, later on, helping to shape my understanding of Mesoamerican cultures and sharing his exceptional knowledge of source criticism and methodology. I have benefited from conversations with Stephanie Wood and Robert Haskett and appreciate greatly the opportunity to present results of my research during a lecture series at the University of Oregon in 2010. I am grateful to Alexandre Tokovinine for commenting on supplementary data from the Maya area and for providing me with additional materials. I extend my gratitude also to persons who helped me to shape the original dissertation, offering sound advice, suggestions, and information at various stages of the project: Agnieszka Brylak, Patricia Díaz Cayeros, Alfredo López Austin, Julia Madajczak, Katarzyna Mikulska-Dąbrowska, José Luis de Rojas, Mariusz Ziółkowski, and Jarosław Źrałka. Important parts of my research were accomplished thanks to the hospitality of several institutions and their staff: Dumbarton Oaks Library and Collection in Washington, DC, the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University, the Archivo General de la Nación (Mexico), the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia (Mexico), the Museo de América in Madrid, the Biblioteca Hispánica de la Agencia Española de Cooperación Internacional in Madrid, the Archivo General de Indias in Seville, the Instituto de Investigaciones Estéticas de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, and the Museo del Arte Virreinal in Puebla. I would like to thank Miłosz Giersz for preparing maps for this book, Frances Berdan for permission to reproduce line drawings from the Codex Mendoza, and Emily Umberger for allowing me to use her drawings of Aztec sculptures. I am grateful to the Academia Real de la Historia (Madrid), the Archivo General de la Nación (Mexico), the Benson Latin American Collection (University of Texas), the Biblioteca Laurenziana (Florence), the Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican

xxi

xxii

P reface

Studies, the John Carter Brown Library (Brown University), the Middle American Research Institute (Tulane University), and the Staatsbibliothek in Berlin for permission to reproduce their numerous pictorial resources at no charge. My work on this book was supported by a grant from the Foundation for Polish Science within its Focus Program (2010–2013) and I am extremely grateful for the many ways in which the Foundation has encouraged my research during the last several years. Finally, I feel endlessly indebted and thankful to my family, whose constant support, patience, and sacrifice make my work possible. My parents, Bożena and Mariusz Olko, have understood my passion since I became fascinated with preHispanic cultures in primary school, bolstering and encouraging me in my plans through all these years. I am exceptionally fortunate that my husband, Mateusz Bajer, has shared my enthusiasm for the Nahuas and other Mesoamerican cultures, helping me in many aspects of my work, participating in some of my research trips, and taking on numerous family duties, especially during my stays abroad. Our precious ones, Antoś and Gabrysia, who are growing up hearing regularly about the Nahuas and Nahuatl, constantly help me to find a better balance between all my activities.

Insignia of Rank in the Nahua World

1 Introduction

“Let your Majesty not imagine that what I say is fabulous, for it is true that Moteucçoma had had copied very faithfully all the things created in both land and sea of which he had knowledge, in gold and silver as well as in precious stones and feathers, in such perfection that they almost appear to be the things themselves . . . Besides this, Moteucçoma gave me much clothing that belonged to him, which considering that it was entirely of cotton with no silk, in the whole world the equal could not be made or woven, nor in so many and diverse colors and workmanship, which included very marvelous garments for men and women.”1 As implied by this enthusiastic account by Hernando Cortés, among the first European visitors to imperial Tenochtitlan, the Spaniards were not only attracted by the material value of what they witnessed upon their encounter with one of the most advanced societies in pre-Hispanic Mesoamerica. Such sensitive observers as Cortés were also impressed by the astounding level of native craftsmanship. He was able to appreciate the high quality, pageantry, and sumptuousness of the accouterments and jewelry of the Mexica of Tenochtitlan and other Nahuatl-speaking groups who occupied the Valley of Mexico and adjacent regions. Indeed, this was one of the most compelling aspects of native culture, deservedly catching the attention of sixteenth-century Spanish authors. And, surprisingly enough, it is a subject that has not received enough scrutiny by modern scholars. My own fascination with native adornments and status items, their meaning and roles, started many years ago when I was almost entirely focused on the pre-Hispanic DOI: 10.5876_9781607322412.c001

1

2

I ntroduction

world, though already beginning to perceive the research possibilities offered by postconquest sources. I became interested in how the Nahuas themselves referred to their costume and insignia much more than in the descriptions of European observers such as Cortés. I wanted to find out how much can be learned from native records in different genres, especially when these are combined with other categories of extant sources studied in a cross-disciplinary perspective. Perhaps the greatest advantage of the available corpus of data on costume and insignia is in its potential for creating both a very broad systematic study and more focused, interpretative searches. With time, the study of postconquest resources has brought me to the realization that I should not only make full use of them to illuminate earlier times, but that I should include the later time as an equal component within the larger topic and not accept a rigid and unrealistic barrier between the two. As a result of an inclusive approach to the topic in several dimensions, this book has characteristics of a reference work and a research monograph at the same time, providing both a systematic listing and analysis of extensive data and an interpretative study based on contextual reading of a wide range of sources. I now turn to more detailed discussion of the points I have just made. The Focus and Organization of This Book

It is a general tendency among Mesoamerican scholars that preconquest and postconquest themes and perspectives are treated separately and are rarely combined in the same study.2 This dominant attitude ignores the important fact that the bulk of currently available evidence dates from the postcontact era and can be explored to address issues referring to both epochs at the same time, instead of focusing exclusively on one or the other. Such a procedure also means shutting our eyes to the native perspective, which saw many preconquest phenomena as continuing after the arrival of the Europeans on the scene and either avoided seeing an abrupt break with the Spanish conquest or tried to minimize it. The nature of the available data makes it virtually impossible to understand many aspects of native culture and its transformations under European impact without studying both epochs within a unified approach combining precontact and postcontact data, though keeping in mind their distinct contextual frameworks and inherent differences. This book is an attempt to reconstruct the repertory of insignia of rank in the Nahua world and the ways they were used, based on the currently available body of native and Spanish written sources in different genres, as well as indigenous painted manuscripts. By insignia of rank I understand all components of elite dress and certain portable items, accessories, or accouterments, such as seats, mats, staffs, and weapons. The chronological framework encompasses the last several decades before

I ntroduction

the Spanish arrival, the period of expansion of the Triple Alliance of Tenochtitlan, Tetzcoco, and Tlacopan in the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, as well as the early postconquest era up to the seventeenth century. At the heart of my research is the Valley of Mexico, the center of the Nahua world, but the study extends to other areas inhabited by Nahuatl-speaking communities and to regions dominated by other ethnic groups but controlled by the Triple Alliance. Thus, to the extent made possible by existing sources, the study embraces territories surrounding the Valley of Mexico, including portions of the present states of Hidalgo, Estado de México, Morelos, Guerrero, Puebla, Tlaxcala, Oaxaca, and Veracruz, but giving special emphasis to states in this geographically vast area that were fully or partially Nahua. I have excluded the core Mixtec and Zapotec regions in Oaxaca, characterized by the strength of local traditions that should be studied in their own right. The only exception is parts of the Mixteca Baja region that have been included in the general discussion because of the region’s strong ties with the Nahua zone, at least as seen through the postconquest evidence. Thus, the innovation of this study is that it deals with the Nahua world both before and after the conquest on the same basis, trying to view similar phenomena across the time span embracing both the dominance of the Triple Alliance and the reorganization of native sociopolitical organization and culture under Spanish rule. The justification for this approach lies not only in the strong lines of continuity between the two eras, but also in the simple fact that much can be learned about pre-Hispanic status items by how they were described and used in colonial times. This method also makes it possible to trace changes occurring over time and, by grasping the nature of these transformations, to understand more fully not only the degree of overlapping but also the distinctiveness of preconquest and postconquest functions and meanings. By the same token, this study integrates written and pictorial sources often dealt with separately, treating both the visual vocabulary and the Nahuatl terminology as equal dimensions of the research. Nahuatl resources are not handled as simple listings of terms referring to the attributes of rank, but are studied in their own context, in actual statements in real texts belonging to many distinct genres, including accounts provided by elite collaborators but compiled by their European patrons: historical annals, early dictionaries, “mundane” documents such as wills, and so forth. The same principle applies to the spatial approach, incorporating the whole Nahua sphere in its broadest sense. This makes it possible to transcend the narrow perspective limited to Tenochtitlan and its closest vicinity, a strong, if not dominant, focus of contemporary research. The core of the book is the extensive chapter 2, containing a systematic and analytical reconstruction of the Nahua repertory of elite dress and status items as used before the Spanish conquest. Although the emphasis is inevitably on the insignia

3

4

I ntroduction

employed by the Mexica, for the great majority of the extant sources refer specifically to Tenochtitlan, the customs of other groups are also discussed whenever possible. The study embraces elite costume in the wide sense, that is, what was worn by rulers, lords, nobles, and high-ranking warriors, with some references also to the prestigious insignia granted to long-distance merchants. Strictly religious insignia, especially those worn by impersonators of gods, remain beyond the scope of this book. However, it is not possible to draw a clear borderline between secular and ritual costume in the Nahua world, because the most important elite garments were used in ritualized contexts or in rituals proper. Therefore, whenever religious paraphernalia form part of the accouterments worn by rulers and nobles, in addition to being worn by deities’ representatives or priests, they are embraced by the analysis. While focusing on descriptions and references to native attire and symbols of rank, I pay special attention to their contextual use and symbolic meaning, when hints can be retrieved from extant sources. This is, for example, the case with the turquoise diadem (the royal headdress in Tenochtitlan and beyond), the royal cape, exuberant battle insignia, and even flowers carried as essential attributes of nobility. The wide scope of this reconstruction was made possible by the creation of a complex database recording all attestations of a given item in textual and pictorial sources, together with the available contextual information. This approach helps to define basic contexts, where identified attributes and garments appear, shedding important light on ways they were used, groups of their wearers, and symbolic meanings. But even more important for this reconstruction was the identification of the original Nahuatl terminology describing the repertory of status items, with possible variants and synonyms, as well as attempts at translation. The latter are often strengthened by additional clues provided by native texts and by identifying pictorial images of objects known by their Nahuatl terms. This way of data gathering has made it possible to reconstruct the spatial distribution of certain items and their terminological variants and functional range. A natural extension of this chapter is the appendix at the end of the book. Presenting in compact form and expanding on the data discussed in the main text, it is conceived as a contextual dictionary of identified terms designating elite garments and attributes, with short descriptions, groups of users, and references to their attestations in written sources and in pictorial material. References are limited to secure identifications based on terminological correspondences or iconographic verisimilitude, omitting problematic cases such as ambiguous mentions in Spanish texts that ignore the original terms. Chapter 3 takes a different standpoint, centering on pictorial records, embracing both preconquest sculptures and postconquest native manuscripts to address the

I ntroduction

iconography of rank in a regional perspective, from the times of the Triple Alliance through the sixteenth and, to a lesser degree, the seventeenth centuries. Crucial for this part of the research has been broadening the analysis by incorporating local evidence from regions surrounding the Valley of Mexico and inhabited by distinct ethnic groups interacting with the speakers of Nahuatl at different levels. By discussing many different kinds of royal images, I define pictorial conventions specific to different altepetl (native states, see below) and regions, examining the degree of unification of attributes in the wider geographic perspective and the evidence of local traditions. An important issue addressed in this part of the book is the identification of imperial influence associated with Tenochtitlan and Tetzcoco, both within the Valley of Mexico and beyond it, in territories subject to the political and cultural impact of the Triple Alliance. A related question that I reassess is the degree of trustworthiness of postcontact imagery for the reconstruction of local precontact iconography of rank and for detecting possible signs of imperial impact and its nature. However, my focus exceeds the themes related to the expansion of status items identified with the Triple Alliance. By broadening the factual base as much as possible, I have been able to learn more about the local point of view of different polities and communities, thus complementing the imperial perspective. Yet another essential aspect of this analysis is the role of garments and other status items in constructing the image of the native nobility and the rhetoric associated with it, including in the postcontact era. Basing myself on extensive pictorial evidence, I discuss how accouterments of both native and European origin were skillfully employed to mark degrees of status and political aspirations, or to downgrade the position of competing groups or individuals, not without hints of animosities rooted in the past. Messages encoded in this imagery often conveyed indigenous claims to legitimate status, personal and ancestral history, heritage, or deserved privileges. It is also possible to see how native painters resorted to a mixture of traditional and new attributes to define political roles and offices of the postconquest world, trying to relate them both to their counterparts from the past and to disruptions occurring right before their eyes. Bringing the systematic reconstruction to another level, chapter 4 focuses on the functions and symbolic meanings of preconquest costume and accouterments. It broadens earlier analyses by discussing native concepts related to precious insignia as they can be retrieved from the Nahuatl terminology and its semantic fields implied by extant texts. Special attention is given to the indigenous notion of status items as the innate property of the nobility and the links with crucial religious conceptualizations. The possible meanings of special-purpose costume items are elucidated by their roles in the rituals of royalty, and especially investiture. Focusing strongly on native texts, this interpretative part also discusses the communicative

5

6

I ntroduction

role of garments on the battlefield, as part of ritualized political acts and in ethnic stereotyping, where they expressed the ideas of barbarism and civility, affinity and strangeness. Chapter 5 takes a different but complementary approach, extending the analysis to the social practice of New Spain. By examining the evidence on customs of dress and their transformations among the postconquest Nahuas, my intention is to assemble and examine dispersed evidence on the survival of preconquest status markers in colonial reality. This would not be possible without resorting to native documents such as wills and historical annals. Combined with iconographic evidence and Spanish accounts, these reveal the scope of the use of traditional garments and symbolic objects, both inherited from the ancestors and manufactured anew according to older patterns. Despite fragmentary evidence, it is nevertheless possible to grasp the significance these items continued to have for the descendants of the pre-Hispanic nobility and even to trace the survival of basic concepts attached by them to the ancient insignia of rank. It was in colonial festivities patronized by the Spanish crown and in the merging of the traditions of the two worlds that these costumes of the past became the principal visual expression of native identity and autonomy under colonial rule. Chapters 2 and 3 are largely devoted to factual points and close analysis, while chapters 4 and 5 are more thematic and interpretative. In view of the complexity of this work, then, I provide in chapter 6 not an expansive chapter of conclusions but a brief summation that identifies the main points and indicates where in the book the reader can find them thoroughly discussed. The reader should be particularly aware that chapter 3 ends with a separate subchapter of conclusions relative to the wider implications of the data analyzed in this part of the book. Literature and Sources

I now turn to discussing in some detail a wide variety of works and sources that are explored in this book in different ways. Some are of primary importance, forming the basic foundation for the present study, while others are probed mainly for supplementary information and perspectives, but in a sense they are all equally important within my methodological approach of treating all available evidence as a whole. Though it presents many challenges, the combination not only of different genres, material from different regions, and sources traditionally explored within distinct subdisciplines has many advantages in addressing topics cutting across both preconquest and postconquest perspectives, or an imperial vision and regional variation. A close presentation of pertinent literature and sources is not only much needed as an introduction to the work, but it may prove particularly

I ntroduction

useful for readers who, depending on their special experience, have greater familiarity either with the precontact-related corpus or the postcontact sources. Already in the late nineteenth century, Nahua costume and insignia of rank began to attract the attention of the first Mesoamerican scholars such as Antonio Peñafiel (1903) and especially the outstanding German researcher Eduard Seler (1902–23, II: 509–619). Seler briefly discussed all the insignia that he could find in written and pictorial sources available to him, identifying representations of particular items and showing considerable concern with translating their Nahuatl names. In fact, his pioneering, comprehensive, and acute research remained unsurpassed for many decades. The topic was much later taken up again on a small scale by Thelma Sullivan (1972), who translated the list of military insignia contained in the Primeros Memoriales (PM), and by Patricia Anawalt in her study of Aztec civil and war costumes, including back insignia and shields, based on the analysis of the relevant content of the Codex Mendoza (Anawalt 1992). Anawalt (1981) also authored a general monograph on native costume, Indian Clothing before the Conquest, in which she described the basic clothing repertories worn in different Mesoamerican regions, with no special focus on elite dress. She also dealt with more specific garment types, their significance, and their social roles (Anawalt 1979, 1984, 1990, 1993), getting involved in a polemic with Carmen Aguilera concerning the technique of manufacture and symbolism of the Mexica royal cape (Anawalt 1996a; Aguilera 1997). Several studies have focused on royal headdresses (Nicholson 1967; Noguez 1975; Neurath 1992) and the Xipe Totec dress of Mexica rulers (Nicholson 1959, 1972; Dyckerhoff 1993; Vié-Wohrer 2002). Nahua dress in the postconquest epoch was touched on by James Lockhart (1992, 198–200), whereas Stephanie Wood described Spanish material culture, including dress and status items, illustrated in native pictorial manuscripts (Wood 2003, 46–59). In addition, an insightful analysis of Mixtec symbols of rank by Manuel Hermann Lejarazu (2005) provides an important point of reference for studies focusing on the Nahua world. Although these studies together represent a valuable contribution to our knowledge of native accouterments, one misses a comprehensive monograph devoted to elite status items and based on the wide range of currently available sources, all the more so if their potential for this kind of research is considered. On a very general level, extant sources that can be employed to address this broad topic include both textual and pictorial records, with some additional data provided by museum items. Written texts encompass original sixteenth- and seventeenth-­century Nahuatl documents of many different genres as well as works in Spanish authored by Spaniards, natives, and persons of mixed descent. It should be emphasized that not only language and authorship, but also characteristics and functions of specific genres determined the nature of the information recorded and

7

8

I ntroduction

the channels in which particular media circulated. Many of the Nahuatl genres can be considered a response to the Spanish system requiring the use of different kinds of legal documents; some items were produced to supply “ethnographic” information collected by the Europeans and to help with Christianization, while others use alphabetic texts to transmit aspects of native oral tradition, also often including pictorial records. Except for religious texts composed by Spanish priests and friars with the help of native collaborators, the bulk of these documents were written by indigenous authors alone. Written Sources in Nahuatl

Of primary importance for the research on native status items are some Nahuatl works compiled by fray Bernardino de Sahagún with the help of his native informants and aides. Thanks to this method of data collection, giving priority to the original terminology and often combining textual data with visual representations, sections of the manuscript known as the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 55r–57v, 68r– 69r, 72r–80r) as well as Book VIII of the Florentine Codex (FC) are fundamental for studies of Nahua costume and insignia. The first of these manuscripts was probably made in the early 1560s, possibly with the active assistance of indigenous informants from Tepepolco, where Sahagún stayed between 1558 and 1561 (Nicholson 1997, 6–13; León-Portilla 1999, 111–33).3 The content of this manuscript suggests that native collaborators from Tenochtitlan-Tlatelolco also played an important role; that role is much more salient in the later work known as the Florentine Codex. This extensive and lavishly illustrated opus, ordering data on the indigenous world according to the concept of a European encyclopedia, was probably prepared between 1578 and 1580 as one of the versions of Sahagún’s now lost main work, the Historia general. The relevance of this corpus, aside from the pictorial matter itself, lies not only in extensive samples of original terms referring to status items, but also in rich contextual data that, in addition to providing insights into the meaning and functions of particular items, help us either to visualize those of them whose pictorial representations have not survived, or identify them in extant iconographic material. An important genre of Nahua writing were historical records structured as annals. Called xiuhpohualli, or “year counts,” they were based partly on preconquest glyphic and pictorial prototypes capable of recording only rudimentary information— including, for example, royal accessions, deaths, war, and natural events—and partly on the extensive oral recitations that accompanied the pictorials. Continuing to thrive after the conquest, they quickly became adapted to an alphabetic mode of expression. Some of the native annals preserved the strong pictorial component till

I ntroduction

the end of the sixteenth century. This was not a linear change, however, for others were composed at a relatively early date as entirely alphabetic accounts, accommodating a much wider range of topics and traditional concepts than any other genre of postconquest Nahua writing. In addition to the chronological presentation of key events from the point of view of a given polity (altepetl) and its representatives, they sometimes contain dialogue forms and speech taken down from the oral tradition that originally played a crucial role in complementing the abbreviated year-count records. At times interesting facts, including costume details and references to particular insignia, are also provided by what seem to be descriptions of probable pictorial prototypes. Together with the contextual information on the use of such objects by particular individuals or in events of some importance for a community, this kind of evidence is particularly telling. Usually expressing the point of view of a citizen identifying himself with a specific subdivision of the native state, Nahua annals convey the local vision of political life and cultural changes; survivals of earlier concepts, structures, and offices; interactions with competing indigenous entities and with the Spanish world; as well as all sorts of current concerns of the community. All this is communicated in traditional vocabulary, which nevertheless also reflects ongoing language change occurring in native communities. A more conservative way of expression, with hardly any loanwords, is usually retained when speaking about the preconquest past, as is the case with the Anales de Tlatelolco or the Anales de Quauhtitlan. These two entirely alphabetic works, composed between the 1540s and 1560s, provide important data on the preconquest use of elite garments and status items.4 Other documents, such as the so-called Anales de Juan Bautista, focusing on events between 1519 and 1569, reveal how traditional insignia continued to be used in early colonial times. We also learn about their much later survival in the work of the lateseventeenth century Tlaxcalan annalist don Juan Buenaventura Zapata y Mendoza. Of particular importance are accounts by probably the most outstanding Nahua annalist, don Domingo de San Antón Muñón Chimalpahin Quauhtlehuanitzin, active in the early seventeenth century. From Chalco Amaquemecan, he stayed most of his life in Mexico-Tenochtitlan and had access to many Mexica records, but the primary base for his work were sources available in his own altepetl. He interviewed notable leaders in the Chalco region and made use of their ancient manuscripts, both pictorial and alphabetic, including those that his grandfather, don Domingo Hernández Ayopochtzin, had collected (Schroeder 1991, 14–24). Carrying out much more extensive researches than other Nahua annalists, he managed to collect and unify the work of his predecessors by developing a clear textual structure and a uniform terminology. He often enhanced the narrative with rich details, conveying an invaluable view of native sociopolitical organization, attitudes,

9

10

I ntroduction

and concepts (Lockhart 1992, 388). Through these enrichments many details relevant to the topics of this book emerge, going beyond what is found in the typical annals-structured history. An important body of Nahua texts belongs to the category of mundane documents focusing on legal and economic matters, sometimes preserving an additional pictorial content, but at the same time adopting Spanish genres. It is not infrequent to find numerous expressions and conventions transmitted from native oral expression into alphabetic texts, and especially in letters and petitions, sometimes considerably deviating from their European models. Of special value for the current work are Nahuatl wills, of which a large corpus has survived. Closely following the Spanish prototype and becoming strongly conventionalized, they nevertheless absorbed some of the speechlike and declamatory characteristics typical of the native mode of expression. Indigenous testaments, especially those made for important members of the Nahua nobility, reveal continuities and changes in the use of status items of both preconquest and European origin, functioning also as an important vehicle for conveying traditional terminology referring to power and rank. The latter is also to be found in songs and speeches recording in alphabetic form the remnants of preconquest oral tradition, whose conventions are often transmitted also in religious genres recording the Christian or merely Christianized content in the native language. These genres represent a separate category of Nahuatl texts, done under Spanish ecclesiastical auspices, strongly based on European prototypes and reflecting the goals of religious policy and instruction. Among them are catechisms, prayers, and confessionaries composed by Spanish priests with the help of native assistants. It is often difficult to assess the degree of indigenous authorship in such texts: usually serving very practical needs of friars working among local communities, they also embraced some of the preconquest orality and elegant language of the upper class. Somewhere in-between the predominantly native and Hispanized literature are Nahuatl plays composed by diverse authors. They too incorporate preconquest forms of expressions and terms as well as sociopolitical, cultural, and even religious concepts into the general European framework. Whereas much of their language is based on neologisms and translations of Spanish terms, what also comes to sight is the fully traditional vocabulary applied to new contexts, inevitably amplifying or transforming its original meanings. Written Sources in Spanish

Not all native writers stuck to their own language. As a result of ongoing Hispanization, important members of the native nobility chose to record the stories

I ntroduction

of their ancestors in Spanish, thus making them available to a different audience. Their importance, from my point of view, lies not so much in the frequent attempts of native authors to prove their familiarity with the European tradition, but in their use of Nahuatl terms and in providing additional data directly based on native written and pictorial prototypes. Don Hernando de Alvarado Tezozomoc, a member of the royal dynasty of Tenochtitlan, is known for his Spanish Crónica mexicana (1598) and the Nahuatl annals copied and enhanced by Chimalpahin (Crónica mexicayotl ). His major Spanish chronicle conveys the Mexica version of their history and was based on a now lost Nahuatl prototype, the so-called Crónica X (Barlow 1945). Historians had long been puzzled by the poor Spanish of this work as well as omnipresent Nahuatl expressions and syntax, though authored by a high-level interpreter and a heavily Europeanized aristocrat. The answer to this conundrum is simple: the earliest extant version of this text is most probably a rough draft of a lost more polished work and constitutes the direct translation of the original Nahuatl source dictated by the author himself (Díaz Migoyo 2001). Therefore, in spite of its confusing syntax and wording, this account preserves a profusion of references to royal apparel and status items using the original terminology mentioned in the context of public rituals, wars, ceremonies of investiture, funerals, and many other events. Another famous Spanish-writing chronicler of native origin, don Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl, a descendant through his mother of the rulers of Tetzcoco and Teotihuacan, used indigenous pictorial manuscripts (among them the Codex Xolotl and Mapas Quinatzin and Tlotzin), now-lost written Nahuatl sources, as well as oral tradition as his principal sources of information (Calnek 2001, 62–63). The dominant perspective in his works, written in the first half of the seventeenth century, is a subjective exaltation of Tetzcocan history and the admirable achievements of his royal ancestors. A separate group of sources is formed by numerous accounts written by Spaniards, who, with some exceptions, were living in New Spain and had access to both native informants and native documents. Derived from the Crónica X is the chronicle written by fray Diego Durán, who also collected valuable data on the native calendar, religion, and ritual. Although the author was fully familiar with Nahuatl and the bulk of what he tells us was based on the Nahuatl prototype, in vain do we look for any large number of original terms in his work. The same is true for earlier authors writing about native culture, such as fray Toribio de Benavente Motolinía. Later works, such as the Monarquía indiana by fray Juan de Torquemada (1612), are usually complex compilations of earlier authors. Some useful data are to be found in the accounts of conquistadors, such as Cortés or Díaz del Castillo, but again the information on the native world is strongly filtered through European eyes and terminology. Also recorded in Spanish is the copious information provided by

11

12

I ntroduction

native informants in numerous localities of New Spain in the Relaciones geográficas, commissioned by order of the Spanish king between 1579 and 1585, among them the famous Relación de Tlaxcala by the mestizo author Diego Muñoz Camargo, extending far beyond the modest scope of this genre. In general, for the purposes of the current research the value of Spanish sources is much inferior to that of the native documents. Although native dress and insignia caught much attention on the part of European authors, who devoted lengthy descriptions to their richness, wealth, and variety, it is rarely possible to identify a specific item or recover fully reliable data. Preconquest Monuments

Any study on the Nahua nobility and its attributes of rank would be very deficient if it ignored the extant corpus of pictorial sources, and especially pre-Hispanic sculptures and early colonial pictorial manuscripts. Useful also are artifacts preserved in museum collections, including pieces of jewelry and objects of featherworking. The large group of Aztec stone sculptures includes a relatively small number of royal portraits, and those that survive are mainly images of the huei tlatoque (“supreme leaders”; sing. huei tlatoani) of Tenochtitlan. The iconography and style of Aztec monuments have been the subject of numerous studies (Seler 1902–23; Wicke 1975, 1986; Townsend 1979; Umberger 1981, 1996a; Pasztory 1983; Graulich 1992). Although royal costumes on the most important Aztec monuments have already been described and interpreted by various scholars (e.g., Wicke 1975; Townsend 1979; Umberger 1981, 1996a; Pasztory 1983), this research rarely involved an exhaustive examination of all items and identification of corresponding Nahuatl terms. Several monuments represent elite leaders and warriors in processional rows, an iconographic type apparently derived from the relief benches at Tula. Royal imagery is an essential component of colossal sacrificial stones, combining the forms of the quauhxicalli, or sacrificial vessel, and the temalacatl, the gladiatorial stone. The common iconographic theme is the series of conquests by Tenochtitlan, whose leaders are shown as valiant warriors with attributes of their patron gods. In other public monuments, commissioned by different monarchs and on different occasions, the huei tlatoque appear in priestly costume and perform autosacrifice, an ancient Mesoamerican rite of royalty. These works of art communicated important political messages, as with the Dedication Stone, not only commemorating the dedication of the new version of the main temple of Tenochtitlan in the year 1487, but also announcing the transfer of power from Tiçoc to his successor Ahuitzotl (Townsend 1979, 40–42; Pasztory 1983, 150–51). Others, like the so-called Acuecuexatl Stone, enunciate the link between the ruler and his divine protector, in this case the deity

I ntroduction

Quetzalcoatl (Umberger 1981, 130; Pasztory 1983, 157; Quiñones Keber 1993, 151– 52). In spite of strong conventionalization, using relatively simple iconographic and glyphic means, the Mexica sculptors were capable of communicating nuanced political and cultural messages. A good example is the so-called Temple Stone commemorating the New Fire Ceremony that was celebrated as a massive ritual spectacle by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in 1507. In addition to reiterating the priestly and sacrificial functions of the Tenochca ruler, it also declares the prestige of the Chichimec roots and the historical importance of the foundation of Tenochtitlan (Townsend 1979, 49–63; Umberger 1981, 174–91; Pasztory 1983, 165–69). Unfortunately, the famous royal commemorative relief portraits made on the cliff of Chapultepec have not survived to our days except for hardly recognizable remains, but are described in written sources (Nicholson 1967; Umberger 1981, 147–48). Finally, an interesting group of works of art consists of stone boxes decorated with penitential images of their royal owners, which has caused scholars to assume that these were privately owned objects for storing sacrificial implements (Umberger 1981, 97; Pasztory 1983, 247, 255). Whereas preconquest monuments shed much light on the iconography of rank of the rulers of Tenochtitlan and provide a point of comparison with posterior postconquest images, almost nothing is known about such portraits of rulers of other Nahua altepetl. In most of those cases the only clues are provided by pictorial manuscripts made after the Spanish conquest. Pictorial Manuscripts

Indeed, judging by the extant sample, it seems that different manuscript genres became the preferred medium for images of the native nobility in the sixteenth century. Pictorial manuscripts, popularly called codices, played an important role both before and after the conquest. This medium goes back at least to the Classic period (ca. AD 250–900): the oldest traces of native books were found resting on the chests or near the heads of deceased Maya rulers (Fash 1993, 111; Sharer 1996, 603). Also, scribes and painters enjoyed a very high status in both Maya and Nahua worlds.5 This tradition flourished in the communities of Late Postclassic central Mexico, serving a variety of needs and producing ritual-calendrical books, tribute lists, historical accounts, and maps, among other genres that were probably in use. It has also been proposed that pictorial manuscripts played an important political and cultural role in the Triple Alliance, and especially in Tenochtitlan, conveying imperial ideas to the provinces. Thus, it has been possible to trace the emulation of the “Aztec style” by provincial painters in the Gulf Coast region, Hidalgo, and southeastern Guerrero (Boone 1996, 181–82). The precise identification of the imperial impact requires the differentiation of pictorial styles and conventions of

13

14

I ntroduction

the Mexica and Acolhuaque as the dominant forces in the Triple Alliance, as well as defining the criteria of their presence in outer regions. Among them are insignia of rank closely identified with Tenochtitlan and Tetzcoco, and these have been used in this book as sensitive markers of imperial influence in pictorial records from localities beyond the Valley of Mexico. But it is also clear that manuscripts from regions subject to various degrees of impact from Tenochtitlan and its allies reveal strongly local traits coexisting with foreign borrowings and inspirations. A major difficulty in studying pictorial styles in relation to the expansion of the Triple Alliance is the very small sample of preconquest documents, which, to make things worse, come from a limited number of regions. In addition to the corpus of Mixtec screenfold books, several pre-Hispanic codices form what is called today the Borgia Group, probably from the Puebla-Tlaxcala region (Nicholson 1966; Anders, Jansen, and van der Loo 1994). Many of the territories subject to the Triple Alliance remain entirely blank spots on the map of preconquest pictorial styles. Some controversy surrounds possible Mexica manuscripts, the ritual-calendrical Codex Borbonicus and the tribute list known as the Matrícula de Tributos, even though substantial arguments in favor of their precontact status have been presented (Batalla Rosado 1992, 1994a, 1994b, 1994c, 2007). Postcontact imagery cannot be viewed as direct evidence of pre-Hispanic conventions, especially since some traits could have spread after the conquest, for example as a result of the mobility of particular painters. Therefore some scholars prefer to speak of regional colonial schools rather than of colonial heirs of specific preconquest styles (Robertson [1959] 1994). Native manuscript painting continued to develop under Spanish influence until the end of the sixteenth century, continuing in transformed forms well beyond that. During that time the assimilation of Spanish traits strongly influenced manuscript content, format, composition, and formal features, including perspective and the characteristic of line. For the native nobility, pictorial documents carried the bulk of the preconquest tradition but also served current needs as an indispensable reference in the legal framework created by the Spanish crown, helping indigenous records to find new niches in which they could develop. The importance given by the native people to painted and written documents surely had preconquest precedents. As a Spanish vicar once noted, a characteristic of the Nahuas that mirrored Spanish culture was that “they think that, with a piece of writing, a point is won” (Wood 1998, 205). As is evident through both Spanish and Nahua accounts, both groups recognized the importance of writing from the very first encounters. Yet another spur came from secular and religious authorities facing the necessity of commissioning investigations into Indian life.6 Many important manuscripts were created, or in fact copied in considerable degree from native prototypes, as a

I ntroduction

response to this concern. The quick adoption of alphabetic writing played a role in the ongoing extinction of pictorial and glyphic expression, which, however, did not happen immediately and never fully. Indeed, the manuscript-painting tradition was the only major artistic form to survive a considerable time after the importation of European images and techniques. Painted documents and books continued to serve the documentary needs of the indigenous people, favored by their recognition as valid records by the Spaniards and their courts (Boone 2000, 11). Native pictorial records comprise several different forms using different materials, including deerskin, local bark paper (amate), cloth, and European paper. Preconquest and early colonial manuscripts could take the form of the tira, or a relatively narrow strip composed of sheets of animal hide or paper glued together; the screenfold, which can be seen as a specific variant of the tira; the lienzo (cotton cloth, canvas) and the single-panel formats.7 After the conquest many native manuscripts, especially those commissioned by Spaniards, were also made in a European book format. Preconquest documents use native glyphic writing, which in the case of the Nahuas was a mixture of logographs and phonetic signs, with local variants differing in the degree of phoneticism (Lacadena 2008). The scope of this writing system was relatively limited, serving primarily to identify toponyms, personal names, dates, and numbers, only in some cases, as in the Codex Xolotl from Tetzcoco, touching on other topics. This tradition survived until the end of the sixteenth century, when the same document could combine glyphic records with alphabetic glosses, annotations, and texts, these two “layers” not necessarily being made by the same hands and at the same moment. On the basis of thematic content, often corresponding to a specific format, native pictorial documents fall into several genres, some of them with mixed characteristics. Although many different classifications have been proposed,8 I follow the division developed by Glass as encompassing all kinds of extant sources and the most unambiguous in its simplicity. He differentiates ritual-calendrical, historical, genealogical, cartographic, economic, and ethnographic manuscripts; in addition, because of some overlapping between these genres, Glass also uses the category of cartographic-historical manuscripts (Glass 1975a, 28). Extending this basic classification and following the native tendency of blending different forms of presentations within one space, often based on the map format, some documents can be described as cartographic-genealogical, cartographic-economical, genealogicaleconomical, and so forth. Sometimes, however, one manuscript, especially if commissioned by European patrons, embraced more than one specific genre, because its respective parts are based on different native prototypes, as is the case for example with the Codex Mendoza or the Primeros Memoriales, both of them of primary importance for the current study.

15

16

I ntroduction

Ritual-calendrical manuscripts, of which several pre-Hispanic examples have survived, are in great part almanacs based on the 260-day ritual cycle used for divinatory purposes (and called tonalamatl ), sometimes also illustrating the feasts linked to the 365-day calendar. Usually made as screenfolds, some of the divinatory books quickly adopted the European format. Historical records from the Nahua world are mainly year-count accounts, or pictorial annals, dealing with sequential military, political, or administrative events, most frequently using the tira layout, with screenfolds a common variant. Historical books are known from the Mixtec area, but no Nahua annals survive from the precontact era. Their conventions, however, can be relatively well reconstructed on the basis of an early colonial sample. Another important preconquest genre was the map, also known only through postconquest examples. It often merged with other genres, embracing historical scenes, genealogical presentations, and depictions of tribute or parcels of land—this blending revealing a strong indigenous characteristic. Of particular importance for many Nahua altepetl, especially in the regions of Acolhuacan and Puebla, are numerous “placeoriented” cartographic-historical manuscripts relating the local migration and foundation stories, as well as subsequent historical events. No pre-Hispanic examples of native genealogies are known, but this genre, well adapted to early colonial legal and litigation needs and thus growing in importance, probably also had local prototypes (Olko 2008, 2012b). The economic genre encompasses mainly tribute lists serving administrative needs before the Spanish conquest and later evolving to document colonial tax assessments. This category encompasses also cadastral and census documents, financial records, and property plans. Finally, the broad term ethnographic manuscripts refers to the products of European patronage and interest, which could merge both existing genres (e.g., rulers’ lists and tribute lists) and entirely new presentations (e.g., illustrations of native customs). Manuscripts painted by the Nahuas after the Spanish conquest reveal varying degrees of acculturation to European forms and concepts, many of them attesting to the strength of native patterns. Some were copied from pre-Hispanic originals, some were painted according to native canons after the conquest, others combine traditional conventions with foreign impact. Once European borrowings and inspirations have been taken into consideration, the colonial pictorials can be studied as substantial evidence of the indigenous tradition. At the same time, however, they should not be viewed merely as survivals of pre-Hispanic prototypes. Opening an important window into the postconquest Nahua world, they allow us to approach concerns, strategies, ambitions, claims, and concepts of the native nobility of that time, forming the primary evidence for studying their status items and attributes, and, speaking more generally, for the pictorial rhetoric surrounding them.

I ntroduction

The Nahua Background

The study carried out here of course needs to be understood within the context of Mesoamerican and specifically Nahua culture in the time dealt with. Some readers may be more familiar with the precontact context; others with the postcontact. The overall vision has varied considerably between the two subfields. With some notable exceptions, scholars working in the precontact area have been oriented above all to the empire and Tenochtitlan; those in the postcontact to the altepetl as an area-wide phenomenon. The two perspectives can be combined—and indeed the understanding of the role of the altepetl has gained some ground in studies of the precontact world—but generally the student of the broader literature as a whole must deal with quite a tension within it. I have tried to tread carefully on this ground. The Nahua World before Contact

One of the most important culture groups of Mesoamerica, the Nahuas occupied primarily the area of central Mexico, where they coexisted with speakers of other languages (figure 1.1). Nahuatl enjoyed considerable time-depth and importance in the pre-Hispanic world, and its speakers have survived in significant numbers to our days. In the time of the Spanish conquest they represented a highly advanced culture linked in numerous ways to other previous and contemporaneous Mesoamerican traditions. This heritage is manifest in religious beliefs, rituals and mythology, writing and pictorial records, architectural forms and techniques, art styles and iconographic themes, and numerous other elements of material culture. Central Mexican communities shared the mythical-historical tradition of being founded by migrating ancestors, either dispersed Toltec groups settling in the Valley of Mexico after the collapse of their state, or, more frequently, warlike Chichimecs identified with the barbarous north, who took possession of the land. Indeed, the archaeological record seems to support the notion that major groups of migrants arrived in central Mexico at the onset of the Aztec period (ca. AD 1200; Smith 1984; 2008, 76–77), and alleged Chichimec roots remained an important point of reference in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The Nahuas were also linked by economic relationships and trade networks. They engaged in shifting alliances and warfare, imposing and negotiating forms of subordination and sometimes sustaining prolonged hostilities and conflicts. In a broader perspective, they were active participants in what has been called “the Mesoamerican world system.” Based on individual polities that developed as cores, production centers, trading ports, or resource-extraction zones, the regions of that world system were

17

18

I ntroduction

Figure 1.1. Late Postclassic Mesoamerica (© Miłosz Giersz)

linked through intense economic, political, social, and religious interplay (Smith and Berdan 2003a; 2003b, 29–31). At this point a terminological explication is called for. Widely used by the public and scholars, especially anthropologists, is the term Aztec or Aztecs that gained popularity in the nineteenth century. Originally describing the mythical ancestors of the Mexica leaving their place of origin, Aztlan, and not serving as an ethnic name at the time of contact, it has been used in different ways, both in a narrow sense to refer to the Mexica-Tenochca of Tenochtitlan, but also more broadly to designate other Nahuatl-speaking groups. Also today the term Aztecs is commonly employed to name all inhabitants of the Valley of Mexico at the time of the Spanish conquest (e.g., Smith and Berdan 1996a, 3), and sometimes even speakers of Nahuatl in neighboring regions (Smith 1997); such usage is most common among scholars focusing on the perspective of the “Aztec empire” of Tenochtitlan, Tetzcoco, and Tlacopan. This term also serves as the conventional reference to archaeological “Aztec culture” of the Middle and Late Postclassic period (ca. 1200–1521). A more recent name is that of the Nahuas, which is accepted by most scholars studying postconquest societies and which emphasizes the localized sense of identity of particular groups, including both wider (Acolhuaque or Tepaneca) and narrower ethnonyms (Tenochca, Tlatelolca, Quauhtinchantlaca, and many others). Whenever used in this book, in which preference is given to the Nahuas and other specific ethnic

I ntroduction

Figure 1.2. The Valley of Mexico at the time of contact (© Miłosz Giersz)

names, the term Aztec refers to the political organization of the Triple Alliance and its material expressions. Central to Nahua sociopolitical organization were ethnic states called altepetl, which continued after the Spanish conquest and carried a strong sense of microethnicity. These numerous entities, differing in size, rank, and ethnic composition, were scattered throughout the Valley of Mexico and surrounding areas wherever the Nahuas lived (figure 1.2). Being basically groups of people holding rights to certain territories, they could be either entirely sovereign units or subordinated to other altepetl to which they owed tribute. In contrast to hierarchically arranged entities more typical for Spanish modes of organization, altepetl had a cellular structure encompassing symmetrical and self-contained parts of the whole, called calpolli or tlaxilacalli. Operating on a rotational basis and being divided into smaller wards, they replicated on a lower level the general composite structure of the whole (Lockhart 1992, 14–25). Also, relations of personal subjugation and allegiance have

19

20

I ntroduction

been emphasized in modern reconstructions of preconquest altepetl structure (Smith 2008, 91). The head of each altepetl was a dynastic ruler called a tlatoani (“he who speaks”; pl. tlatoque), who usually represented the highest-ranking subentity and received tribute and labor duties from the entire entity. Polities with an established office of that kind were referred to as possessing a tlatocayotl, or rulership. In many cases the cellular organization extended beyond a single-tlatoani unit, especially when native states grew and evolved over time. In complex altepetl the constituent parts ruled by separate tlatoque preserved the rotational and symmetrical arrangement. Such entities could accommodate distinct ethnic groups, who tended to form rival factions (Reyes García 1988; Lockhart 1992, 18–21, 24). Strong internal competition, however, was also common for ethnically unified altepetl, operating on different levels of their subdivisions. Moreover, it seems that a frequent underlying principle of organization, whether in complex or relatively simple entities, was a dual arrangement, or a division into moieties, originally each having its own head (Lockhart 1992, 25). A typical altepetl in the Valley of Mexico had a population of perhaps 10,000 to 15,000, covering an area of 50 to 80 square kilometers. Urbanized centers of most altepetl were of relatively small size due to the heavy distribution of household settlement throughout the countryside, resulting from the nature of intensive agriculture. Many people lived in dispersed rural areas cultivating not only river valleys but also terraced hills. An exception to this pattern was the imperial capital, Tenochtitlan, whose huge size can be explained by its political and economic role within the Triple Alliance (Smith 2008, 90, 195–96). This organization is often referred to as the “Aztec empire” by modern scholars.9 The term empire crops up also in sixteenth-century sources to designate the Triple Alliance of Tenochtitlan, Tetzcoco, and Tlacopan, called excan tlatoloyan (“triple place of rule”) in the original Nahuatl terminology. The Imperial Perspective

The formation of the Triple Alliance postdated the so-called Tepanec war that broke out in the late 1420s and continued in the early 1430s. During this time of turmoil, the Mexica of Tenochtitlan, the Acolhuaque of Tetzcoco, and the Tepaneca of Tlacopan together with their allies overthrew a former hegemonic Tepanec state of Azcapotzalco. The expansionist policy of Tenochtitlan took shape under the rule of Itzcoatl and his successor Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina, stabilizing by the mid-fifteenth century. The consolidation of the Acolhua regional state with its capital in Tetzcoco occurred at roughly the same time, but the exact relationship between these two

I ntroduction

principal allies is far from clear. It seems significant, however, that the coronation of the founder of Tetzcoco’s greatness, Neçahualcoyotl, took place in Tenochtitlan (Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 47), and only later was he able to return to claim his byno-means unified and pacified domain (Ixtlilxochitl 2000, 137–41). Even less clear is the formation process and status of the Tepaneca state, because the subsequent strong position of Tenochtitlan in this area suggests its involvement in the subjugation of Tlacopan’s domain or its later conquests of Tepaneca communities (Carrasco 1996, 591; Hodge 1996, 20–22). At any rate, although each altepetl initially may have governed its territory autonomously, by AD 1519 Tenochtitlan had emerged as the dominant power center. Tetzcoco and Tlacopan reportedly participated in wars under Mexica command and contributed to public works in Tenochtitlan as subordinate altepetl (Carrasco 1996, 600–1). It is difficult to estimate how much of this vision derives from the political rhetoric of Tenochtitlan widely present in extant sources. This propaganda probably affected not only the presentation of external relationships but of internal organization as well. The Mexica offices of the huei tlatoani, the supreme leader, and the cihuacoatl, a principal advisor or co-ruler, betray an original moietal arrangement. For political purposes the Tenochca rewrote their history emphasizing the unity and an almost unlimited power of the principal rulers and leaving little information about possible rulerships in the constituent parts of this extremely complex altepetl (Lockhart 1992, 25). The core area of the Aztec empire corresponded roughly with the Valley of Mexico, though conquered imperial domains extended in almost all directions, encompassing significant portions of the present states of Hidalgo, Guerrero, Morelos, Puebla, Oaxaca, and Veracruz. The central area controlled by the Triple Alliance was characterized by relatively steep political hierarchies in the Tepaneca and Mexica domains, associated with a high degree of control, and by a shallow structure in Acolhuacan, reflecting distinct strategies of administrative control and varying degrees of intervention in the appointment of local rulers (Hicks 1986; Hodge 1996, 34–40). Often viewed by modern scholars as a hegemonic empire, the Triple Alliance expanded both through military conquests and the mere threat of martial intervention (e.g., Hassig 1988; Berdan et al. 1996). Its imperial infrastructure was relatively limited, with the Aztec state emphasizing more subtle or indirect forms of political control. Even so, the Triple Alliance seems to conform to such criteria of imperialism as the size and complexity of the imperial capital, wide presence of its ideology in different media, and the political and economic control of provinces (Smith and Montiel 2001, 245–65). To control their expanding domain, the rulers of Tenochtitlan and their principal allies had to rely on pragmatic strategies that would facilitate the integration of dependent states and assure the flow of goods and labor into the capitals. The

21

22

I ntroduction

efficient organization of the outer provinces, especially in Mesoamerican geographic and climatic conditions, was not an easy task. This area was by no means evenly subordinated, and not all domains lay contiguous to each other. A permanent threat to the integrity of the empire were several unconquered enemy states that included Tlaxcala to the east, the Tarascan state to the northwest, Metztitlan on the northeastern frontier of the empire, and Yopitzinco and Tututepec along the Pacific coast. Although some modern scholars accept the Aztec propaganda that they could have conquered their enemies, especially the surrounded state of Tlaxcala, if they had actually wanted to (e.g., Hassig 1988, 256), there are reasons to believe these enemies represented a serious danger that the empire was not able to overcome (Isaac 1983a, 1983b; Smith 1996, 137). Usually intervention in the local political structure was minimal, and conquered rulers were allowed to retain their traditional positions, provided that they fulfilled tribute obligations negotiated with their imperial overlords. Among the most effective and long-standing ways of integration were strategies based on marriage alliances or granting income-producing lands and revenues from outer conquests to cooperating elites, as well as common participation in religious and political events and gift exchanges taking place in Tenochtitlan (Carrasco 1984; Berdan 1996, 122; 2006, 159; Hodge 1996, 43; Chance and Stark 2007, 209–10). These strategies made it possible for the local elites to accommodate rapidly to the new power structure in the early colonial period: local elites remained in power on the regional level, while centrally imposed officials and tribute collectors replaced former Aztec representatives. This partially accounts for the sense of unbroken continuity at the altepetl level that was frequently perceived from a local perspective. Not all provinces were subordinated in the same way nor did they all share similar obligations. Whereas most subjugated areas were incorporated as tributary provinces, some territories, especially located on imperial frontiers, appear to have been treated more as client states or “strategic provinces.” In such cases formal tribute was avoided in favor of gifts, helping to attain a pragmatic goal of grasping some form of control over these regions at relatively small expense (Berdan 2006, 160; 2007a, 3; Smith 1996, 141, 147; 2001, 143; Berdan and Smith 2003). These strategies entailed different subordination procedures developed by the Triple Alliance, including prolonged and ritualized negotiations that could lead to a relation of dependence through the mere threat of military intervention and not actual conquest. The aim was to acquire new vassals with minimum operational cost, unless political, economic, or strategic factors required the absolute subjugation of a particular area through war (Olko 2004). The resulting forms of collaboration and dependence could range from direct subordination to political clientship and alliance. Thus there was no unified strategy in respect to provinces; the empire apparently took

I ntroduction

different local factors (historical, geographic, economic, or military) into consideration, as well as specific goals it wanted to achieve (Berdan 2007b, 133–36). Ritual and religion played an important role in providing a rationale for expansion. The state propaganda proclaiming the objective of military conquests to be the capture of prisoners for human sacrifice to feed the sun is perhaps the most widely known aspect of the preconquest culture of Tenochtitlan and its allies. This facet of Aztec imperialism, however, was highlighted in early colonial sources, which were created in quite specific circumstances and were motivated by the rhetoric of their time. Aztec conquests were carried out under the auspices of the patron deity Huitzilopochtli, who had been elevated to the rank of the more important and ancient central Mexican deities. To meet the needs of the expanding state, he underwent a process of solarization and even usurped the position of older deities. Patron gods of the vanquished communities were held captive in the principal temple precinct of Tenochtitlan. The main temple itself, known as the huei teocalli, was designed as the center of the Aztec world (Broda, Carrasco, and Matos Moctezuma 1988). Its numerous rebuilding stages contain deposits from the farthest perimeters of the growing empire—such as burials of exotic animals or examples of flora from the geographical frontiers reached during military campaigns—making the remote periphery present right in the center of the empire. It was there that the huei tlatoque staged impressive spectacles overawing the audience with human sacrifice as well as with military and economic power. At the same time they encouraged their guests with generous gifts. These visitors included present and potential vassals as well as overt enemies. Rituals in imperial capitals, where the advantages of submission to imperial control as well as the risks associated with its rejection were consciously highlighted, also provided excellent opportunities for promoting common elite culture. Even if through conquest the economic and political power of the subject nobility became limited and adjusted to the demands of the Triple Alliance,10 local rulers could also profit from their connections in many ways, and especially in political struggles against neighboring enemies or traditional rivals (Berdan 2006, 160–63; Chance and Stark 2007, 219–24). The gains from affiliation with the Triple Alliance were tangible. For example, Quauhnahuac conquered new territories after being subjugated by Tenochtitlan, which implies that the empire supported their new subjects in their own expansion (Smith 2001, 149; 2005, 91). An important dimension of this process of co-opting elites in both independent and subject territories was the spread of elite ideology and material subculture. Provincial nobles appreciated advantages of a friendly association with the empire and often emulated their overlords by sharing prestigious status markers, iconography of rank, and courtly art, all of them merging with local traditions. In fact, the creation of extensive networks connecting elites both on central and peripheral levels, involving such aspects of

23

24

I ntroduction

high culture as writing or artistic expressions, preceded the formation of the Aztec empire (Smith and Berdan 1996b, 211; Boone, Smith 2003, 192). As a result of the practice of polygyny, both ordinary altepetl and imperial structures of the Triple Alliance had to accommodate numerous members of the nobility, whose lands and control of commoners often assured them a significant power base and autonomy. Many of them were the offspring of strategic marital alliances between the imperial nobility and subjugated aristocracy. They undertook a variety of responsibilities and exhibited different degrees of wealth and power, occupying secondary administrative and military offices on various levels of the hierarchy (Smith and Berdan 1996a, 2–3; Smith 2008, 191). The Mexica and their allies surely benefited from preexisting mechanisms—partially independent of their own policy—based on elite-level cooperation and links across the divisions of local interests and political boundaries. The role of exuberant paraphernalia and exotic items serving as status markers of an upper class is manifest in the archaeological record throughout Mesoamerica from the Preclassic period till the Spanish conquest and beyond. While such prestigious goods were commonly, though not exclusively, acquired by means of long-­ distance trade in Mesoamerican societies, and manifesting foreign affiliations was frequently a deliberate strategy of regional elites, Tenochtitlan and its allies acquired huge quantities of these status markers by means of tribute obligations. It has even been suggested that the great demand for luxuries was one of the factors in conquests and tribute assessments of subjugated regions (Smith and Berdan 1996b, 212). Items received in tribute did not include, however, the most prestigious lordly insignia, which were probably manufactured by specialized craftsmen in the metropolis. These highly valued accouterments often made their way in the opposite direction, from the main power center to local rulers, for example as gifts distributed by the imperial rulers to their allies and subjects, as described in extant written sources. In addition, evidence of adoption of imperial symbols of rank, at least in pictorial conventions, comes from the conquered provinces located in the present Mexican states of Guerrero, Hidalgo, Morelos, Puebla, Oaxaca, and Veracruz (Olko 2005, 2006a, 2012a). Upon encountering the Spaniards the Triple Alliance did not survive long, revealing its many weak points, but as a result of its long-term strategies and practices, the extent of local susceptibility to imperial influence is manifest in early colonial native manuscripts from numerous localities beyond the Valley of Mexico, as is shown throughout this book. Rulers and Lords

The bulk of our knowledge about the central Mexican nobility comes from Nahua altepetl both within and outside the Valley of Mexico (figure 1.3). Much

I ntroduction

Figure 1.3. Members of native nobility, Primeros Memoriales, fols. 55v, 56r (courtesy of Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid)

more scarce are insights provided by extant documents relating to other ethnic groups, including those in the localities subject to the impact of the Triple Alliance. Nahua nobles, or pipiltin (sing. pilli), were grouped into noble houses, headed by a lord titled teuctli. These entities were called tecpan in western regions, especially the Valley of Mexico, and teccalli in the east, including the Valley of Puebla (Hicks 1986, 38), where this feature had particular importance. The position of teuctli was a mixture of social rank and hereditary political office. Every teuctli was the holder of a specific lordship including lands, subordinate nobles, and commoners, and he was entitled to a special lordly title identifying him as head of a given tecpan or teccalli (Lockhart 1992, 103, 109). A nobleman was elevated to the teuctli rank with the formal acquiescence of the supreme lord, the tlatoani, in an elaborate ceremony of investiture (Carrasco 1966, 134–38; Motolinía 1970, 151–56; Muñoz Camargo 2002,

25

26

I ntroduction

94–95). Other members of such units included junior kin who were nobles of pilli rank. Although it is generally believed that pipiltin acquired their rank by descent from a tlatoani or teuctli (Carrasco 1971, 354), it seems improbable that only the first generation of their offspring belonged to the nobility; also collateral relatives must have maintained their noble status for some time (Lockhart 1992, 102–103). The tlatoani was a teuctli at the altepetl level, occupying the highest position in the Nahua world and receiving services from the entire domain. The tlatoani had a title specific to that particular altepetl, such as Chichimecateuctli in Tetzcoco, and it always incorporated the word teuctli; it was usually also based in a specific subunit of the altepetl (Lockhart 1992, 109). Like teteuctin, tlatoque possessed rights to lands and macehualtin (commoners); to receive tribute, perform military, judicial, and religious roles; to wear clothing and paraphernalia expressing their rank; and to live in residences of palatial dimensions. These palaces were focal points of the economic, political, and social life of the altepetl, whose lords and nobles sought opportunities for enhancing their prestige through kinship ties and service to the tlatoani while competing for administrative, military, religious, and judicial offices. Although rulers of Nahua altepetl sat at the top of the regional social hierarchy, they could be subordinated to other tlatoque, as was the case with the domains controlled by the Triple Alliance. Across central Mexico particular tlatocayotl, or rulerships, were often small, and their hereditary leaders continuously engaged in competition and conflicts with their peers. The rank of the sovereign of Tenochtitlan was highlighted by his title of huei tlatoani (“great ruler”), claiming superiority vis-à-vis other tlatoque. By the time of the Spanish conquest he enjoyed incomparably high status in the Nahua world, his position being enveloped in esoteric lore expressed by elaborate ceremonies, sophisticated courtly etiquette, and precious insignia. Although the huei tlatoani was elected by a council of high lords, it was believed that his accession had been predetermined by the sign under which he was born (Sullivan 1986, 11). He was conceived as the source of light and heat: at his death, it was said that the torch had been extinguished, the sun had gone down (FC VI, 22). Possessing a special relationship to one of his patron gods, the powerful Tezcatlipoca, the huei tlatoani was called his lips, jaws, tongue, eyes, and ears, as well as a flute through which this deity spoke (FC VI, 48, 52). To understand this metaphor we have to remember the ceremony of Toxcatl, in which the impersonator (-ixiptla) of Tezcatlipoca acted as a substitute for the ruler, and the flute he was playing ensured communication with the god. Thus, as the image and interpreter of Tezcatlipoca, the king received from him not only special faculties but also messages that he had to convey to his people (Olivier 2002, 122–23). He was also strongly associated with Xiuhteuctli, the god of fire and time, who was a manifestation of the creator god Ometeuctli,

I ntroduction

and on numerous occasions donned costumes and insignia of his divine patrons (see chapters 2–4). Postcontact Rearrangements

The position and customary style of life of the Nahua nobility continued after the arrival of the Europeans on the scene. To ensure their survival, native elites developed effective strategies and adaptations to deal with the numerous challenges and difficulties that faced them. Although only a few elements of the Aztec imperial organization persisted after the Spanish conquest, the fundamental feature of preconquest sociopolitical organization—the altepetl—continued in essentially the same shape, only apparently transformed under the guise of the new municipal order. The Spanish government in early New Spain was represented by the viceroy; the members of the high court, or Real Audiencia, residing in MexicoTenochtitlan; corregidores, or judicial and administrative officers in charge of larger districts encompassing several altepetl (corregimientos); as well as additional ad hoc review judges called jueces de residencia, who could be either Spaniards or natives. Initiating their rule, Spaniards usually dealt directly with particular altepetl, just as the Triple Alliance did before the conquest. This reliance on indigenous organization reinforced the unity of precontact entities, enhancing their importance in the early colonial period (Gibson 1964, 63–74; Lockhart 1990; 1992, 28–29; Horn 1997, 19). In most cases they followed preexisting political-territorial units and divisions when introducing the most important institutional forms that affected and transformed the native world. Thus, a single altepetl, with its borders and constituent parts, could successively become an encomienda (a grant of Indian tribute and labor to a Spaniard), a parish, and then, starting in the 1530s, a Spanish-style municipality, acquiring in that way the status among Spaniards of a cabecera, or head town (Lockhart 1992, 29). Across the sixteenth century native altepetl continued as the seats of Indian municipal government based on European models organized as cabildos, or town councils, as well as centers of tribute collection and the organization of labor in the traditional manner. Thanks to the Spanish recognition of local ruling dynasties, in the formation of municipal councils the tlatoani was frequently appointed to the office of the first governor, or cabildo chief.11 In many cases the office of the gobernador preceded the establishment of other cabildo functions by a decade or more, being filled by native tlatoque who tended to hold it for life, although the Spaniards increasingly tried to make it rotational (Gibson 1960, 188; Lockhart 1992, 30–32). This dual role indigenous lords often managed to play was often described as cacique y gobernador, that is, a native ruler and municipal officer. At some places the

27

28

I ntroduction

direct relationship between the tlatoani and the office of governor continued well into the seventeenth century, as is the case of Coyoacan, where in 1633 don Alonso de Guzmán, declared in the written sources to be the tlatoani, also became a governor (Horn 1997, 55). But already in the second half of the sixteenth century the Spaniards, trying to undermine the strong position of the local nobility, resorted to appointing citizens of outside altepetl to assume control, especially at critical moments. Such persons were frequently titled jueces gobernadores and occupied the post during a fixed period of time. However, even this function had preconquest analogies, for non-tlatoani governors may have been perceived as counterparts of quauhtlatoque, or interim rulers in an established tlatocayotl, often reaching their office through merit in war (Lockhart 1992, 33). The domestication of the new system also entailed its adjustment to the traditional structure of the native altepetl. This is well attested in Chalco Amaquemecan, where the rotational governorship followed strictly the preconquest pattern: in 1563 the office began to rotate among the rulers of the five tlayacatl, constituent parts of the complex altepetl (Schroeder 1991, 187). Similar adjustments are mirrored by other posts in native cabildos. In addition to assuring the continuation of native tlatocayotl and lending much of its aura to the postconquest governorship, sixteenth-century municipal organization also provided room for numerous members of the Nahua nobility. A full complement of officials in major altepetl developed by the 1550s, including the posts of alcaldes (judges) and regidores (councilmen), who assumed over time most of the internal affairs of the municipality under the leadership of the governor, acting as first-instance judges and supervising the delivery of tribute, organization of public labor duties, and the management of land. They were recruited from among the group of noblemen close to the tlatoani, representing the main divisions of the altepetl and its major lineages much as in preconquest times. Following this precedent and substantially deviating from the original Spanish model, Nahua alcaldes and regidores tended to represent specific subjurisdictions of the indigenous sociopolitical organization.12 Among minor officeholders were notaries, or escribanos, whose relatively high position probably drew upon the preconquest prestige of the amatlacuilo (scribe and painter of native manuscripts); provincial lieutenants (tenientes); constables (alguaciles); and majordomos (mayordomos). The Nahua category for the intermediate functionaries was often topile, or “holder of a staff.” While in the Spanish cabildo there was a strict distinction between nobles’ and commoners’ offices, a salient characteristic of Nahua municipalities was that many more posts became associated with the noble class (Lockhart 1990, 100; 1992, 36–43; Horn 1997, 57). The strong affinity between preconquest and postconquest sociopolitical structure and officeholding is also reflected in the persistence of native titles, such as

I ntroduction

teuctlatoque, or calpolli heads and judges, equated with alcaldes. The range of survival of ancient terminology of rank extended especially to the domains of hereditary lords, their lands, and their status items, revealing the persistence of certain traditional concepts well into the seventeenth century. Perceived correspondences were often based on cultural misunderstandings between the two sides, helping the indigenous elite to take advantage of the Spaniards’ small acquaintance with native organization. They also benefited from the formal recognition of the local hereditary nobility and its rights by the Spanish crown, successfully maintaining their privileged position within the new political and economic reality. The power of the Indian ruling class remained based on their land possessions and on maneuvering the relationships and obligations imposed on them. For example, during the entire first generation of the encomienda, when its Spanish holders received tributes directly from the Nahua rulers, the latter were able to make extreme demands upon tributaries and to deliver only a portion of the yield to the Spanish recipient (Gibson 1964, 196–97), a strategy that may have had earlier precedents under tribute obligations to the Triple Alliance. Indeed, it has become increasingly clear to modern scholars exploring the Nahua world through its own sources that the results of ongoing cross-cultural transfers as well as the nature of transformations were strongly influenced by precontact sociopolitical structures and key cultural concepts. Many of the sixteenth-century rulers enjoyed the traditional rights and privileges of pre-Hispanic lords: they received tribute and labor from their subjects and crops from lands worked by dependent laborers; they also cultivated traditional networks of elite relationships including strategic marriage alliances. But at the same time they often appealed to Spanish authorities for the confirmation of rights and privileges and for grants of land, coats of arms, or the right to ride a horse and carry a sword. It must be borne in mind, however, that the indigenous population as a whole was also heavily affected by catastrophic epidemics and taxation demands that became increasingly excessive in view of the huge population loss. It has been observed that after 1550 the economic base of the tlatoque was progressively reduced (Gibson 1960, 180; 1964, 197; Horn 1997, 53–54). On the other hand, however, we also find many members of the native nobility successfully undertaking profitable enterprises through the colonial period (Spores 1993, 97–98; Rojas 2010, 250–63). The cultural and economic survival of descendants of pre-Hispanic elites required considerable skills and flexibility, involving the application of diverse strategies in an ongoing process of adaptation to the new reality and its changing circumstances. Although the postconquest Nahua nobles became gradually Hispanized and material prosperity and political status in postconquest terms were among their primary goals, much preconquest lore and behavior identified with elite culture survived,

29

30

I ntroduction

often merging with new models and customs. As shown throughout this book, this is particularly true in an important domain of nobles’ life: their external status symbols and iconography of rank. Notes

1. “Y no le parezca a Vuestra Alteza fabuloso lo que digo, pues es verdad que todas las cosas criadas ansí en la tierra como en la mar de que el dicho Muteeçuma pudiese tener conoscimiento tenía contrahechas muy al natural así de oro y de plata como de pedrería y de plumas, en tanta perfición que casi ellas mesmas parescían. . . . Demás desto me dio el dicho Muteeçuma mucha ropa de la suya, que era tal, que considerada ser toda de algodón y sin seda, en todo el mundo no se podía hacer ni tejer otra tal ni de tantas ni tan diversas y naturales colores ni labores, en que había ropas de hombres y de mujeres muy maravillosas” (Cortés 1993, 229–31). 2. There have been some important exceptions, such as, for example, Berdan 2007a; Boone 2000; Chance and Stark 2007; or Diel 2008. 3. The so-called Primeros Memoriales form part of the Códices Matritenses, manuscripts of complex origin made by different hands and probably at various moments. This topic has been recently reappraised by Ruz Barrio (2013a, b). 4. Anonymous manuscripts known collectively as the Anales de Tlatelolco contain the dynastic history and other accounts of Tlatelolco, Tenochtitlan, and Azcapotzalco from the Mexica migration story till the first years of the colonial period. They are composed of two manuscripts, now in the National Library in Paris: MS 22, written between 1540 and 1550 by various copyists, and MS 22bis, dated much later, perhaps as late as the eighteenth or the beginning of the nineteenth century (Lockhart 1993, 42; Klaus 1999, 7–24). The Anales de Quauhtitlan were composed in 1563 with additions dated to 1570; they recount the history of the Quauhtitlan people as well as that of the Mexica and Acolhua (Bierhorst 1992, 2001, 198–99). 5. See Fash 1993, 136; Boone 2000, 24–27; a person bearing the title of tlacuiloteuctli (“painter lord” or “lord of painters”) reportedly ruled Tlalmanalco when its dynastic rulers were chased away (Chimalpahin 1997a, II: 60–61). 6. Thus, in addition to preconquest survivals, native pictorial documents have been classified as those made under Spanish patronage, native colonial (painted by Indians in perpetuation of older patterns), and mixed colonial (used in economic and mundane affairs of the colonial world or in relationship with Spaniards) (Glass 1975a, 12–17). However, the borders between the last three categories are often blurred. For example, manuscripts made under “Spanish patronage” were usually painted by native persons, who often copied local prototypes, including preconquest originals. Therefore, this division reflects the final destination and way of use, and not the form and content.

I ntroduction

7. The tira may be folded or rolled, and may be read up, down, to the left, or to the right. A screenfold is a manuscript painted on a tira and folded, accordion-pleat fashion, like a screen. Most screenfolds are composed horizontally and many are read in the boustrophedon fashion. A lienzo, of which no preconquest examples survive, is a sheet of cloth, frequently of considerable size, usually made of narrow strips (of cotton, maguey fiber, or other material) sewn together (Glass 1975a, 9). 8. One of the first proposals was a typology made by Robertson, who divided native “histories” into three types: “time-oriented” histories like annals, where “history is a series of events ordered according to time”; “place-oriented” histories organized around geography; and “event-oriented” histories (Robertson [1959] 1994). Nicholson (1971) recognized five kinds of “historical” manuscripts: continuous year-count annals, sporadically dated or undated annals, cartographic histories, genealogies, and dynastic lists. Another typology, based on form and content, has been more recently proposed by Boone, who differentiated distinct “structures of history”: time-line presentations, res gestae presentations, cartographic presentations, and blended structures (Boone 2000, 65–82). 9. The first work to have analyzed systematically the geographical extent of the empire was Robert Barlow’s monograph The Extent of the Empire of the Culhua Mexica (Barlow 1949). The political organization and dynastic relationships were the focus of numerous studies (Carrasco 1984, 1996; Hicks 1986, 1992; Hodge 1994; Rojas 2002). Less research has been concentrated on the mechanisms of territorial expansion and its strategies and ideological background (Conrad and Demarest 1984; Hassig 1988). The imperial capital of Tenochtitlan frequently tended to serve as a model for reconstruction of Aztec imperial culture (Katz 1972; Davies 1974; Matos Moctezuma 1988; Rojas 1986; Zantwijk 1985). A more systematic interest in regional archaeological and ethnohistorical data and core-periphery relations began relatively late. The emphasis on archaeological surveys and excavations of Tenochtitlan’s hinterland (Hodge 1998; Smith 1992) has been accompanied by a trend in ethnohistorical studies toward area-specific investigations (Anderson, Berdan, and Lockhart 1976; Carrasco 1974; Hicks 1984, 1992; Schroeder 1991; Smith 1986, 1992, 2008). An important contribution to the studies on the Aztec empire was the collective work Aztec Imperial Strategies (Berdan et al. 1996), not only providing systematically presented extensive and up-to-date data, but also representing a well-defined and consistent approach to the topic. The authors analyze political, economic, and frontier strategies of the Aztec empire, differentiating also the elite strategy aimed at the maintenance of an upper-class-based network linking most of the state. More recently, the Aztec state and, more broadly, Postclassic Mesoamerica have been approached from the world-system-theory perspective (Smith and Berdan 2003a, 2003b). 10. The political and economic base of the conquered nobility was not only reduced by imperial tribute, but local elites had to give some of their lands to the conquerors. In addition, the Triple Alliance sometimes shifted the power structure within the region (Berdan and Smith 1996, 214–15).

31

32

I ntroduction

11. The situation, however, was more complex in composite altepetl, where multiple rulers and internal divisions both posed a considerable challenge to Spanish officials, spurring local political struggles and power shifts. In practice, the limits of the three new units (encomienda, parish, and town) coincided less than perfectly and sometimes principal moieties could become the base for two encomiendas. Thinking in terms of hierarchical, vertical relationships, Spaniards profoundly misunderstood the native mode of organization, identifying, for example, inner, urbanized calpolli with the cabecera, and outlying units with their sujetos, or “subjects” (Lockhart 1991, 24; 1992, 20, 29). 12. Accordingly, there was an immediate tendency to multiply the posts of alcaldes and regidores rotating among the calpolli in the fixed order, or their number increased until there was one for each major constituent part.

2 The Repertory of Elite Apparel and Insignia of Rank

“All the nobles, all the eagles and jaguars [brave warriors], and the commoners were delighted when they assumed [the paraphernalia]. For they did not lightly attain all the ruler’s gear that they put on; it was worth their life.”1 Indeed, as implied by this Nahuatl text of the Primeros Memoriales, the desire for high-ranking, costly insignia and status items was a strong personal motivation of Aztec nobles and warriors striving for personal promotion, even with their lives at stake. Used in public displays and elaborate ceremonies, the apparel served as an essential marker in social hierarchy and communicated a variety of messages. Beyond individual motives, the need for exquisite costumes and insignia also instigated military campaigns and territorial expansion that were expected to bring both rich war booty and a regular tribute of exotic items and battle suits, among other goods. The enormous variety of status items used by the Nahuas before the conquest included many different categories of apparel, incorporating also foreign objects and styles. Most of these garments and insignia are known by their Nahuatl terms and a great many of them can be identified in pictorial sources, giving us some idea of their appearance. The elite repertory encompasses costume items worn both in secular and ritual contexts, with considerable overlapping between the two. The same basic costume types could be worn by different social groups, the rank being indicated by the kind of material and decoration. A strict division existed between male and female garments. Among the highest-ranking status objects were head adornments made of a huge variety of materials, as well as different kinds of jewelry DOI: 10.5876_9781607322412.c002

33

34

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

such as nose rods, earplugs, necklaces, bracelets, and armbands. Male costume consisted of cotton capes tied over one arm and loincloths, while special jackets and tunics were worn in priestly and military contexts. Special-function garments included body-encasing battle suits, usually accompanied by lavish back insignia and shields. Considerable importance was given to sandals and objects held in the hands, as well as thrones and different kinds of seats. The female costume repertory consisted of shifts, tunics, and skirts. Many of these garment types were panMesoamerican, though different local dressing styles clearly existed (Anawalt 1981). Basing the reconstruction on a universal relationship between body zones and the inner organization of apparel, I discuss the pre-Hispanic costume repertory starting with the head and upper body area, through the torso with arms and hands, down to the legs and feet. A separate category comprises objects carried in hands and seats of authority. Hairst yles

The Nahuas identified the head as the center of sensual, intellectual, and spiritual perception, conceiving it as the point of communication with the society and with the cosmos, symbolically corresponding to the celestial level. This link was strengthened by the belief that the head was a reservoir of tonalli, or a hot, celestial life force forming the spiritual component of different beings, closely associated with their destiny (López Austin 1996, I: 182–83). Also the hairs at the top of the head were believed to contain tonalli, which helps to explain the custom of grasping war captives by their hair as well as the ritual cutting of the hair from the tops of their heads (e.g., FC II, 47–49), in what was possibly an act of deprivation and appropriation of their life force. Indeed, according to a common belief, tonalli could be lost if the hair from that place were cut (López Austin 1967, 90). Thus, the long, curly, and disheveled hair of priests called papahuaque (“those who have long, coarse hair, a mane [papatli]”) signaled and probably even assured their transformation to divine status through an unusual increase of the tonalli (Tomicki 1987, 174). In terms of status items worn, the head was of primary importance in conveying information on the identity, rank, and function of an individual in the Nahua world. It was here where the most salient attributes of rank were displayed according to appropriate conventions. The most basic individual attribute was a hairdo, which could potentially convey a great variety of messages on status, gender, place in the hierarchy, and social role. Although exhaustive analysis of this part of Nahua culture is beyond the scope of this book,2 basic hairstyles are briefly discussed as they can potentially provide important pieces of information while attempting a more complete understanding

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.1. Hairstyles: (a) short hair with a protruding forelock, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 53v (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid); (b) long hair tied at the neck, Codex Mendoza, fol. 63r; (c) temillotl, Codex Mendoza, fol. 67r (b–c, Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan); (d) axtlacuilli/neaxtlahualli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r (fragment; courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid)

of pictorial imagery of native elites. Short hair was by far the most frequent male coiffure, common for pre-Hispanic and colonial nobility. Its variants include a short bunch of hair over the forehead, referred to by the Nahuatl term ixquatzontli, or “forehead hair.”3 Sometimes its depictions are reminiscent of the royal-diadem form, as in the images of colonial governors in the Primeros Memoriales who are no longer shown wearing actual headdresses (figure 2.1a). It remains conjectural, however, whether this similarity was intentional. Long hair was much less common for males, but it frequently appears in the imagery of “semi barbarian” Chichimec chieftains and ancestors as opposed to the short hair of “sedentary” governors. Examples can be found in the Codex Xolotl, Mapa Tlotzin, Mapa Quinatzin, or Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca. Many exceptions can be pointed out, however, and also later rulers could be represented that way, particularly in the Tetzcocan region and in Tlaxcala, where Chichimec ancestry was highly prestigious. Many of the pre-Hispanic state officials and priests depicted in the Codex Mendoza are also shown with long hair tied with ribbons, which was something distinct from the loose, long hair associated with semi-nomad ancestors (figure 2.1b). Although the high ranks of the warrior hierarchy usually had very specific hairdos, in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and in the Codex Mendoza sometimes war leaders, too, wear their hair long. A typical warrior coiffure was the temillotl (“stone pillar”). Most of the hair on the crown of the head was bound, usually with a piece of cloth, in a bunch or a standing “column” (figure 2.1c). The rest of the hair was either left loose or was cut short. The symbolism of this hairstyle should probably also be linked to the significance of the hair from the top of the head as the reservoir of the personal life force, tonalli. The highest members of the nobility are sometimes depicted with a possible variant of the temillotl or a related hairstyle, in which the bunch

35

36

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

of hair is much longer, falling toward the back of the head, and may be tied with a special hair binder with prestigious double-feather tassels (tlalpiloni).4 The typical temillotl hairdo seems to have been most common in the Valley of Mexico, especially in the sources associated with Tenochtitlan-Tlatelolco, but it was also known in other central Mexican regions, especially those corresponding with the modern states of Guerrero, Hidalgo, Puebla, and Tlaxcala.5 The evidence linking the temillotl hairstyle to high-ranking warriors is strong: a warrior was reportedly entitled to wear it only after he had taken four captives (FC VIII, 77)6 and indeed war leaders and commanders are usually pictured with this hairdo. It was apparently prestigious enough to be worn by rulers themselves, perhaps to emphasize their war duties. While it is not clear whether this pictorial convention, found in later colonial manuscripts (Codex Azcatitlan, Codex Cozcatzin, Ordenanza del Señor Quauhtemoc), actually follows the pre-Hispanic tradition, it is quite telling that the early colonial Tetzcocan manuscript Codex Xolotl pictures the leaders from Azcapotzalco, Tenochtitlan, and Tlatelolco wearing this hairdo. This important detail suggests that the temillotl was to certain degree identified with the TepanecaMexica tradition, serving as a visual marker for personages from these places.7 Some kind of an original association with the Tepanecs is perhaps implied by the fact that the title of Temillotzin was gained by the Mexica nobility after the conquest of the Tepanec altepetl Azcapotzalco and Coyoacan, former hegemonic centers (Durán 1984, II: 99). However, as other pictorial documents from Tetzcoco clearly show, it was also used by the highest nobility from that place, or at least it formed part of their imagery in early colonial iconographic conventions.8 While the adoption of this hairstyle from the Tepanecs by the Mexica remains hypothetical, its presence in early colonial pictorial sources originating outside the Valley of Mexico should perhaps be seen in terms of Triple Alliance imperial influence. However, it is possible that the temillotl hairdo was also shared by some communities as an element of a broader central Mexican tradition linked to the military hierarchy, as were different kinds of battle suits. Another prestigious hairstyle, the quachichictli, associated with high-ranking quachic (“shorn,” literally “head-scraped”) warriors, consisted of a stiff ridge of hair going across the top of the head, with the sides shaved. Interestingly, fray Alonso de Molina reports the term quachichictli with the meaning of “tonsure,” which shows how a pre-Hispanic term was transformed and adapted to an entirely new, Christian context. Curiously enough, the analogy between the two hairstyles was based merely on the fact that the head was partially shaved, because the placement and shape of the remaining hair were entirely different.9 The tzotzocolli (“clay jug”), distinguished by having the hair combed up high on one side, was worn by young warriors who had managed to take their first captive with others’ help (FC XII, 54;

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Piho 1973, 97–98, 320). It was tied with a brown cotton thread called tochyacatl and may have been particularly linked to the god Tezcatlipoca (FC II, 70).10 A standard coiffure for Nahua adult women consisted of two hornlike tufts made by parting their long hair in the middle and then folding them up, with the two ends tied at the top of the head (figure 2.1d). The terms for this hairdo were probably axtlacuilli and neaxtlahualli, employed in the Florentine Codex in reference to the hair arrangement of the goddess Cihuacoatl (FC I, 11). The second of these terms is directly derived from the reflexive verb axtlahua, translated by fray Alonso de Molina as “for a woman to wrap her hair around her head, arranging it.”11 It was most common in the Valley of Mexico and adjacent areas, including Puebla and Tlaxcala. Judging by available imagery, it was also used as far south as Oaxaca, even though distinct Mixtec and Zapotec coiffures were predominant in this region. The pictorial content of native manuscripts12 implies strongly that this was the hairdo of married women, while maidens wore their hair long and unbound. The latter style was also common beyond the core area of the Aztec state, especially in Guerrero,13 while in the Valley of Mexico it was frequently attributed to Chichimec female ancestors. Headdresses

Xiuhhuitzolli

A turquoise diadem, or xiuhhuitzolli, enjoyed the status of the most prestigious insignia of the Postclassic Nahua world. The Nahuatl term xiuhhuitzolli means a “pointed turquoise thing,” being derived from the word xihuitl, meaning “turquoise,” and (tla)huitzolli, “something pointed,” coming from a transitive verb huitzoa and probably meaning to “make something sharp or pointed.”14 The symbolism of turquoise is fundamental for the understanding of the conceptual meaning of the royal diadem; on the other hand, the second component of the term possibly implies an association with sacrifice and punishment, for huitzli, thorns or spines, were traditional sacrificial implements.15 This royal headpiece had a diadem-shaped, peaked frontlet and was fastened at the back of the head with a red tie, probably called tzonquachtli in the original terminology.16 The diadem itself was decorated with pieces of turquoise forming a mosaic pattern and glued to a stiff support (figure 2.2).17 Xiuhhuitzolli was the most common term for the turquoise diadem but by no means the only one. A clearly synonymous word was xiuhtzontli (“turquoise hair”), probably used outside Tenochtitlan in the northeastern part of the valley, for it appears in the Primeros Memoriales associated with Tepepulco and in the Anales de Quauhtitlan (fol. 28). In addition, the headdress is described as tlatocayotl (“rulership”; e.g., FC II, 164, Chimalpahin 2003b, 323; in the sixteenth century

37

38

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.2. Turquoise diadem: (a) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51v (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid); (b) Tovar Manuscript, fol. 93 (courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University); (c) Codex Tulane (courtesy of the Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University)

also translated as a “royal crown”18), tepeyotl/tetepeyotl (“something in the form of a mountain, resembling a mountain, peaked” FC VI, 19, 44, 57), or teuctzontli (“lordly hair”; Chimalpahin 1997b, 118). Rather puzzling is the employment of the term copilli in reference to the turquoise-mosaic diadem. It was Eduard Seler who pointed out that the correct term for the Aztec royal crown was xiuhhuitzolli, “for which Torquemada, and after him Clavijero and others, incorrectly give the name copilli” (Seler 1902–23, II: 544). Following him, other scholars carefully differentiate the copilli—the conical Huastec cap (see page 68), part of the cuextecatl battle suit—from the xiuhhuitzolli (e.g., Beyer 1969a; Nicholson 1967; Noguez 1975; Schroeder 1991). However, a more careful analysis of the relevant passage in Torquemada (1977, IV, 329–30) shows that his use of copilli may not be a simple error or an act of ignorance.19 The term copilli refers here specifically to the turquoise diadem and is described as part of the royal costume together with the blue cape, xiuhtilmatli. Almost all the other names of costume elements in this passage are entirely correct. While it seems impossible to point out a direct prototype for this part of Torquemada’s work,20 its Nahuatl terms referring to elite costume items can be traced in several primary Nahuatl sources such as the Primeros Memoriales, Florentine Codex, Anales de Quauhtitlan, and Anales de Tlatelolco.21 It therefore seems probable that the information provided by Torquemada was based on an earlier source associated with the core of the former Aztec empire, especially striking being the terminological coincidences with Sahagún.22 Even more importantly, Torquemada (and, after him, Clavijero) are not the only ones who employed copilli for the royal diadem. Probably the earliest source to have used the term copilli in this context are the Anales de Tlatelolco. The copilli

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

makes an appearance in the so-called Document I, whose orthography suggests a very early date of the first decades after the conquest (Klaus 1999, 24), probably between 1540 and 1550 (Lockhart 1993, 42). Here the royal insignia is named copilli tlatocayotl and in copilli yn tlatocayotl (Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 34); as we have seen, the same pairing with the tlatocayotl appears with the term xiuhhuitzolli itself.23 Accordingly, there should be no doubt that the term copilli tlatocayotl in the Anales de Tlatelolco actually refers to the royal diadem and not to any other headpiece. Besides, in contrast to Torquemada, this is a very early textual use of copilli for xiuhhuitzolli and in an entirely Nahuatl source with a well-known provenience. A slightly later use, but still within a native genre, can be found in the writings of Chimalpahin, the famous annalist from Chalco Amaquemecan writing in the beginning of the seventeenth century. As noted by Susan Schroeder (1991, 181), he “uses copilli, xihuitzolli, and teuhctzontli interchangeably, the first much more than others.”24 The term tlatocayotl should also be added to this set, for it is employed by Chimalpahin in the same context. It is difficult to decide, however, whether all these terms were used as close synonyms, because he sometimes connects them with ihuan (“and”), the first part being in tlatocayotl, in teuctzontli, or teuctzontli alone, and the second, preceded by ihuan, the xiuhhuitzolli or copilli.25 This is confusing enough, and in addition we cannot be sure that Chimalpahin was fully familiar with pre-Hispanic insignia and precontact terminology describing them. It seems, nevertheless, that all the terms enumerated by Chimalpahin on different occasions refer to only one royal headdress: the turquoise diadem. The identification of the tlatocayotl with a crown seems a colonial transformation of an original meaning of this term, which, however, could possibly have already designated the royal headpiece before contact. This terminology is continued in later Nahuatl texts but designates “crown” in the European sense.26 The pairing of xiuhhuitzolli and tlatocayotl in the writings of Chimalpahin, but also much earlier in the text of the Florentine Codex (e.g., FC II, 164), is not a coincidence. Also, the use of copilli as a terminological variant does not seem to be merely an error of an author not well acquainted with the native tradition or language. The comparison of available native sources implies that several terms other than xiuhhuitzolli itself designated the turquoise-mosaic headdress in different localities of the Valley of Mexico. Apparently copilli—indicating also the conical Huastec cap (figure 2.24)—was one of them, probably due to the cap’s conical form, which evoked associations with the pointed diadem. Interestingly enough, the Florentine Codex contains an expression “icopil ujtzauhquj” (icopil huitzauhqui; “his conical, pointed cap”; FC VIII, 35), reminiscent of (xiuh)huitzolli, because huitzauhqui is a preterit agentive from a supposed intransitive verb huitzahui (“to be pointed”), a cognate form of the already-familiar huitzoa.

39

40

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

According to textual and pictorial evidence, the turquoise diadem was used in a vast area encompassing the Valley of Mexico and territories beyond, many of which received strong Aztec political and cultural influence. It seems most common in the sources associated with Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco, including not only postcontact documents but also pre-Hispanic sculptural monuments. Even if it seems to have been of particular importance in imperial Tenochtitlan, its use was by no means limited to the Mexica elite: related evidence comes also from other communities of the Valley of Mexico, including its southern and eastern parts.27 Although the xiuhhuitzolli can be identified in selected pictorial documents from Acolhuacan, its incidence is very rare.28 Its virtual absence from such representative manuscripts as the Codex Xolotl, Mapa Quinatzin, Mapa Tlotzin, Genealogía de los descendientes de Nezahualcoyotl, and the Codex Ixtlilxochitl, or from the writings of don Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl, is probably meaningful, for it seems to imply that the turquoise diadem was rarely used in Tetzcoco, if at all, or at least was not an important part of local pictorial conventions. Even more complete is the absence of the xiuhhuitzolli from Tlaxcalan sources. It is tempting to view this phenomenon perhaps as a deliberate strategy of resistance to the Mexica symbol of power (see pp. 276–284). The turquoise diadem is present with relatively high frequency to the south, southwest, and southeast of the Valley of Mexico.29 It is particularly widespread in Guerrero, where it makes its appearance in all major extant pictorial manuscripts, betraying strong Aztec influence, and especially in those from the former imperial province of Tlapan (figures 3.32, 3.39).30 This situation is mirrored in the area located in the present state of Hidalgo, also forming part of the tributary domain of the Triple Alliance. The wide use of the xiuhhuitzolli as a royal headdress in local pictorial conventions is attested by its appearance in very different kinds of manuscripts, including annals and cartographic-historical documents.31 Tempting though it is to view the spread of the xiuhhuitzolli beyond the Valley of Mexico as Mexica influence in conquered areas, in many cases (and especially in regions whose affiliation with the Aztec state was less formal) its presence should rather be seen in terms of a local emulation of a prestigious foreign status marker. A large majority of the xiuhhuitzolli-wearers in extant pictorial sources are rulers, including both pre-Hispanic tlatoque and early colonial governors (figures 3.8– 3.11). When mentioned in written texts, the turquoise diadem is an essential insignia in royal ceremonies or, in traditional Nahua rhetoric, a qualifier of royal status conceded to someone elected by the gods.32 Its use, however, does not seem to have been limited to the imperial hegemons. Who was entitled to wear the xiuhhui­tz­ olli? An answer to this apparently simple question is by no means easy. According to Xavier Noguez, when the royal diadem does not appear in association with deities or rulers of the status of huei tlatoani, it seems to symbolize the delegation of

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.3. Turquoise diadem in association with Mexica state officials: (a) tlacochteuctli and tlacateuctli with turquoise diadems directly over their heads, Codex Mendoza, fol. 17v; (b) teuctli acting as constable and judge, Codex Mendoza, fol. 64r (a–b, Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

royal power in military and legal domains. This would explain the wearing of the xiuhhuitzolli by judges and war leaders (Noguez 1975, 91–93). Indeed, according to the Anales de Tlatelolco, the ruler of Tenochtitlan, Axayacatzin, sent his messengers with the royal headdress in order to gather allies against Tlatelolco.33 This passage does not make it clear, though, whether the messengers were permitted to wear the royal diadem or only carried it as the representatives of the ruler. Nevertheless, this line of thinking and associating the use of the turquoise diadem with specific kinds of state officials, such as judges or military leaders, has in fact been imposed by the colonial sources and the Europeanized categories they tend to apply, however subtly, to indigenous data. Such relationships are implied by the Codex Mendoza and, to a certain degree, by the Florentine Codex. The first part of the Codex Mendoza (fols. 17v and 18r, as well as the first two folios of its prototype, the Matrícula de Tributos) contains abbreviated images (heads) of imperial officials, tlacochteuctli and tlacateuctli, with turquoise diadems directly over their heads (figure 2.3a). A full-figure image of a state official wearing the xiuhhuitzolli appears

41

42

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.4. Turquoise diadem in association with Mexica judges, Codex Mendoza, fol. 68r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

later in this manuscript: he is shown supervising public works and is identified by the gloss as “teuctli or constable and judge of the lords of Mexico” (fol. 64r; see also figure 2.3b). One of the posterior folios illustrates a court of justice with litigants and judges, all of whom wear the xiuhhuitzolli headpieces (fol. 68r; see also figure 2.4). The same categories of persons are depicted in the Florentine Codex: Mexica judges and commanding officers bearing the title of tlacochteuctli and probably tlacateuctli (FC VIII, fols. 33v, 37r; see also figures 2.5, 2.6a). However, in much the same way as imperial officials in the first part of the Codex Mendoza, royal diadems are not part of their adornments but instead hover over their heads or at their sides.

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.5. Turquoise diadem in association with Mexica judges, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fols. 26r, 36v (courtesy of the Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited)

What is then implied in the Florentine Codex, contrary to some of the images of the Codex Mendoza, is not the act proper of wearing the xiuhhuitzolli but a graphic convention referring to functions or titles. In fact, their native titles are much more pertinent than the somewhat artificial division into legal and military domains. Apparently, there are grounds to believe that the turquoise diadem was worn by a wider category of lords than the tlatoque alone, including a broad group of teteuctin (sing. teuctli), heads of noble houses (teccalli or tecpan). In fact, the titles of personages depicted provide an important hint: all of them contain the term teuctli, in much the same way as it forms part of deity names, like Tonacateuctli or Mictlanteuctli, also shown wearing turquoise diadems. As is well known, the xiuhhuitzolli sign was employed in the Nahua writing system to convey the phonetic value of teuctli, teuc-, or tec- (Beyer 1969a, 407; Nicholson 1967, 71; Graulich 1992, 8; Batalla Rosado 1997). Thus, an essential, though difficult question to resolve is whether the turquoise diadem in the images of state officials indicates their right to wear this prestigious status item (perhaps as representatives of a ruler) or merely expresses graphically the term teuctli that they share as part of their titles of teuctlatoani, tlacochteuctli, tlacateuctli, and the like. The appearance of the xiuhhuitzolli as a detached sign in the images of judges or war leaders would work in favor of the latter interpretation,34 but pictorial conventions may not fully reflect the ways this insignia was used in social practice.

43

44

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.6. Turquoise diadem in association with war leaders and worn at war: (a) Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 33v, fragment (courtesy of the Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited). (b) Codex Azoyú 2, fragment (drawing by Justyna Olko)

Going beyond the pictorial data, the most important clue to understanding the actual range of the xiuhhuitzolli wearers seems to be their title of teuctli. The use of the turquoise diadem with the value of tec/teuc/teuctli in the Nahua writing system implies an original relationship between this title and the insignia. It is unclear, though, how much its use became centralized and restricted to the highest tlatoani office in the Aztec period, and particularly in the orbit of Tenochtitlan. On terminological grounds it seems significant that xiuhhuitzolli is often paired with tlatocayotl, referring to both the office and the domain of a tlatoani, strengthening the link between the insignia and the royal rank. It should also be emphasized that a tlatoani was also and primarily a teuctli, with a polity-specific teuctli title, while the number of tlatoque within complex altepetl seems to have been much greater than traditionally envisioned. Each tlatoani was also based in the highest-ranking calpolli, where he served as the teuctlatoani of a smaller entity, or as a chief of a lordly establishment called teccalli/tecpan, while being a ruler of the whole altepetl (Lockhart 1992, 18). Both judging and commanding in war were among primary functions of lords and rulers, while judicial and military offices tended to reflect sociopolitical units of the altepetl. At any rate, the highest military chiefs shared the category of teteuctin, as did the major judges.35 The latter were called teuctlatoque (e.g., FC VIII, 54–55),36 and in the early colonial period this title sometimes referred to calpolli heads, in certain texts even being used for alcaldes (Lockhart

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

1992, 38–39). Said briefly, many titles misconceived in colonial times as separate offices were originarily lordships, for anyone who held them had to be a teuctli in the first place, holding a prominent position in altepetl structure. This basic association is in fact strengthened by the primary association of the xiuhhuitzolli sign with its phonetic value of teuctli, the most fundamental category of lordship or high nobility in the sociopolitical organization of the Nahuas. Thus, the presence of the turquoise diadem in specific contexts, such as war, could be determined by its wearers, who enjoyed the general status of teteuctin in addition to their function-specific titles. According to the account by fray Diego Durán, “great lords and brave captains” were allowed to wear the royal headdress while acting as royal representatives in war, but beyond this context only the ruler enjoyed that privilege.37 If this information is credible, it would imply that the original association between teuctli and the xiuhhuitzolli became limited to certain contexts, with the high rulers of Tenochtitlan attempting to monopolize its use. Indeed, warriors are adorned with diadems on such pre-Hispanic Mexica relief sculptures as the Bench Relief, Templo Mayor Bench Relief, or the Stone of Warriors. Again, the question remains to what degree the images of warriors wearing royal diadems on Mexica stone monuments reflect their own conventions and practices or instead imitate pictorial conventions of Tula. An additional example of the xiuhhuitzolli worn in a martial context, though clearly worn by a ruler, can be found in the Codex Azoyú (figure 2.6b). In any case, the evidence suggesting the use of turquoise diadems by the Mexica lords when performing their military duties should also be seen in terms of the continuation of martial associations acquired by this insignia in its earlier history (see the discussion below). The use of the xiuhhuitzolli by lords commanding in war is attested in the early colonial period, and it seems plausible to view it as a survival of an earlier practice. For example, in the Códice de Tlatelolco the turquoise diadem is worn together with other elements of an elaborate warrior costume by don Martín Tlacateccatl,38 a colonial governor of Tlatelolco, probably making a reference to his participation in the Mixton war (Valle 1994a, 60). An interesting testimony comes from an annotator of the Codex Telleriano-Remensis, who declares he had witnessed the xiuhhui­tz­ olli on the heads of war leaders in a local rebellion in Oaxaca.39 The same headdress is worn by native warriors depicted in the murals in the monastery of Ixmiquilpan alluding to the contemporary “Chichimec war” and probably reflecting at least some aspects of the war costumes used by its participants. No less intriguing than the scope of its users is the symbolic meaning of the turquoise diadem. Its links with the cult of fire have long been suggested (Beyer 1969a, 410; Noguez 1975, 83; Neurath 1992, 125). The xiuhhuitzolli was a diagnostic attribute of the fire god Xiuhteuctli, whose usual insignia also included other turquoise

45

46

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

objects such as the xiuhcoatl or xiuhatlatl fire-serpent weapon, the yacaxihuitl nose plug symbolizing the tail of the fire serpent, and turquoise earplugs called xiuhnacochtli (Beyer 1969a, 410; Noguez 1975, 83–86; see also figure 2.7). Of particular importance is the link between Xiuhteuctli and the fire serpent Xiuhcoatl, for this creature appears to have been the most probable prototype of the xiuhhuitzolli. It was Beyer who first suggested that the xiuhhuitzolli was a schematic form of the head and tail of Xiuhcoatl (Beyer 1965, 310). However, in his other work devoted to the Aztec royal diadem he linked its origin to “personifications of fire” represented by double yellow forelocks over the forehead, symbolizing the flames. Thus, according to Beyer, the direct prototypes of the pointed diadem would be double-peaked forelocks, and an intermediate form was a diadem with two narrow peaks depicted in the Codex Borgia (Beyer 1969a, 409–10). The association of the xiuhhuitzolli with fire is also confirmed by the image of fire priests in the Codex Borbonicus depicted in association with the New Fire Ceremony, and by a fire priest or a ruler participating in the Izcalli feast dedicated to the fire god, as shown in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 253r; see also figure 3.4). This association with the divine fire is deeply rooted in the Aztec concept of rulership and nobility (see also pp. 320–321). Although the idea linking the shape of the xiuhhuitzolli to the fire-serpent head has not been developed or even accepted in any subsequent studies,40 there are good reasons to believe that it is valid. Some of the possible symbolic associations of the xiuhhuitzolli can be traced in its earlier history in Mesomerica. Eduard Seler (1902–23, I: 682) was the first to pay attention to the widespread occurrence of turquoise at Chichen Itza, suggesting that the pointed headpiece from that place is an early form of the xiuhhuitzolli (figure 2.8). Also Jean Charlot noticed the similarity between the xiuhhuitzolli and the headdress commonly worn by pillar figures at this Maya site (Charlot 1931, 278; see also figure 2.9a). After the excavations in Tula and the discoveries of Toltec sculptures, scholars became aware of more direct prototypes of the Aztec royal headdress in the central Mexican tradition (figure 2.9b–c)—the tradition within which Nahua groups claimed cultural continuity. However, the turquoise mosaic diadem seems to have had an even more complex and ancient genesis than Toltec culture. One of the most frequent headdresses worn in Tula and Chichen Itza sculptures is a pillbox headdress, recognizable as a cylindrical helmet topped by a row of short feathers and a longer panache (figures 2.10a–b, 2.11). It has been pointed out that this type of headdress was earlier in use by the Classic Maya, as were many other key diagnostic items for a typical Toltec warrior, including nose plugs, leg laces, and a fending stick (Kristan-Graham 1989, 128, 172).41 However, the mere presence of headdresses sharing the general form of a drum-shaped mosaic headdress in Classic Maya culture does not explain the origin of the xiuhhuitzolli,

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.7. Xiuhteuctli, Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fol. 6v (Bibliothèque Nationale de France)

distinguished by its peaked frontlet; in addition, a pillbox headdress was not used by the Nahuas. It is possible, however, that the pointed headdress in Tula and Chichen Itza was a subtype of a broader mosaic-helmet category (Kristan-Graham 1989, 126; Schele and Mathews 1998, 229; Stone and Zender 2011, 84–85).42 Indeed, a more careful inspection of the mosaic headdresses in the reliefs of Chichen Itza shows that the basic form was a relatively high mosaic-covered band tied at the back, with differently shaped frontlets (of which a cylindrical, drum-shaped form was only one of several possible versions), frequently with huge feathers attached to the top. That they were all variants of the same main type is conspicuous in the imagery of the Atlantean figures in the Upper Temple of the Jaguars, where different versions of the mosaic helmet are shown together (figures 2.9a, 2.10). These include a flat, drum-like frontlet; a peaked frontlet; mosaic frontlets with bird figures; a triplepeak frontlet; and others. This observation is important in view of the fact that the

47

48

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.8. Examples of the turquoise diadem in Chichen Itza: details from Upper Registers D and E, Interior Wall, Lower Temple of the Jaguar (drawing by Linda Schele, © David Schele, courtesy Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies, Inc., www.famsi.org)

mosaic helmet is generally acknowledged to have been used by Classic Maya rulers and to have originated in Teotihuacan as a war-related royal headpiece (Schele and Freidel 1990; Schele and Mathews 1998, 223, 283; Stone and Zender 2011, 84–85). This Teotihuacan war headdress adopted by the Maya in Early Classic times was covered by a mosaic of Spondylus-shell plaques. It is possible, however, that shell was not the only material used to produce the mosaic helmet in the Classic period. In the depiction contained in a coronation scene in Palenque’s Oval Palace Tablet, this object is covered with round disks, indicative of jade rather than shell pieces (Stone and Zender 2011, 85; see also figure 2.12). Most commonly depicted as a pillbox helmet, it also had a zoomorphic, serpentine variant. This second variety has been identified by Karl Taube (1992, 60) as representing the Classic-period war serpent, whose mosaic headdress is depicted in the Temple of Quetzalcoatl in Teotihuacan. In this zoomorphic headdress, the lower jaw of the serpent is frequently intact, with the face of the wearer looking out from within the open maw, as on the famous Tikal Stela 31 (figure 2.13a–b). Moreover, Classic

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.9. Turquoise diadem worn in Tula and Chichen Itza: (a) Atlantean figure in Chichen Itza, Upper Temple of the Jaguar, Great Ballcourt (drawing by Linda Schele, © David Schele, courtesy Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies, Inc., www.famsi.org); (b) Atlantean figure from Tula (after Jiménez García 1996, fig. 21, redrawn by Justyna Olko); (c) Toltec warrior from Ixtapatongo rock painting (after Taube 1999, fig. 28a, redrawn by Justyna Olko)

Maya rulers not only often wore the mosaic helmet, but they also regarded the war serpent as a foreign entity from Teotihuacan. This creature is consistently associated with the iconography of war and with fire in the Classic period, while its sharply back-curved snout is identical to that of Xiuhcoatl of Postclassic central Mexico (figure 2.14c), both of them being linked to a similar conceptual sphere. However, although the Classic entity seems to have been an ancestral form of Xiuhcoatl, turquoise could not have been a component of the Classic war serpent because this stone was not widely introduced in Mesoamerica until the Early Postclassic (Taube 1992, 63–64, 68–70). Early Classic examples of this helmet are concentrated in the area around Tikal, reflecting the main zone of interaction with Teotihuacan. It persisted in a much wider area through the Late Classic period, as confirmed by Stelae 7 and 26 from Piedras Negras as well as other monuments (Stone and Zender 2011, 85; see also figures 2.13c–g). Both entities, the Classic-period war serpent and Xiuhcoatl, were sometimes envisioned as fiery spear-throwers, embodying celestial projectiles—meteorites (Taube 2000, 296–300). Importantly, sometimes the

49

50

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.10. Pillbox headdress in Chichen Itza, Atlantean figures, Upper Temple of the Jaguar, Great Ballcourt (drawing by Linda Schele, © David Schele, courtesy Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies, Inc., www.famsi.org)

zoomorphic head adornment representing this creature takes the form of a platelet headdress, which I believe to be a direct link between the war-serpent headdress and mosaic-pillbox headdresses depicted in Terminal Classic and Early Postclassic art. Also, the feather crest typical for these Classic-period headdresses remained clearly visible in Chichen Itza and Tula mosaic diadems. As has already been suggested, the shape of the xiuhhuitzolli mosaic headdress, just like the war-serpent headdress of the Classic period, is evocative of the fire-serpent (Xiuhcoatl) maw. However, it is also reminiscent of the triangular element of the Teotihuacan “year sign,” in Aztec times associated with the fire god and images of fire serpents.43 The “year sign” headdress, worn by numerous Teotihuacan figurines, is sometimes depicted with a triangular profile or a peaked frontlet strongly evoking the xiuhhuitzolli shape, while war-serpent headdresses on Miccaotli-phase figurines

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.11. Pillbox headdress in Tula, Atlantean pillar (© Justyna Olko)

Figure 2.12. Oval Palace Tablet, Palenque (drawing by Linda Schele, © David Schele, courtesy Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies, Inc., www.famsi.org)

resemble the “trapeze and ray” sign, possibly representing both things (Taube 1992, 67; see also figures 2.14a–b).44 It is thus extremely likely that the “year sign” and the fire/war-serpent head together ultimately led to the xiuhhuitzolli form. The association between the peaked form of the later turquoise diadem and the stylized head of the Classic-period war serpent is further corroborated by the data from the Maya area. The mosaic headdress, no doubt an early form of the pillbox helmet found later in Chichen Itza, is worn by an Early Classic ruler depicted on Stela 1 from Tres Islas and, in the Late Classic, by six kneeling youths of the ajaw rank from Lakamha, Yaxchilan, and Bonampak depicted in a scene of submission to the ruler of Piedras Negras on Lintel 2 from that place. They wear high, rounded diadem-shaped headpieces topped by the year sign and plumage, very similar to a mosaic headdress worn by a fiery feathered serpent in Chichen Itza and to other pillbox head adornments of the Terminal Classic and Early Postclassic times.45 This monument refers to the assuming of the ko’haw, the Teotihuanacoid war helmet, by ruler Mo’-Xook-Chahk Itzam-K’an-Ahk (Martin, Grube 2000, 143–44). His headdress is covered with a

51

Figure 2.13. Mosaic headdresses in Classic Maya culture: (a) Stela 31, Tikal, right side; (b) Stela 31, Tikal, left side; (c) limestone panel, Temple XVII, Palenque; (d) pillbox headdress, the Oval Palace Tablet, Palenque; (e) domed mosaic headdress, Lintel 2, Piedras Negras; (f ) Stela 26, Piedras Negras; (g) Stela 7, Piedras Negras (drawings by Linda Schele, © David Schele, courtesy Foundation for the Advancement of Mesoamerican Studies, Inc., www.famsi.org)

Figure 2.14. War serpent headdresses in Teotihuacan: (a) figurine with a war serpent headdress similar to the “trapeze and ray” year sign (after Seler 1902–23, V: 476); (b) figurine with a platelet war-serpent headdress (after Seler 1902–23, V: 457); (c) Late Postclassic image of Xiuhcoatl, Codex Nuttall, fol. 76 (drawing by Justyna Olko)

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

mosaic and is diadem-shaped, topped by what is probably the “year sign,” and by an elaborate plumage (figure 2.13e). It is this ruler’s headdress that deserves the greatest attention. It strongly evokes the peaked mosaic-headgear variant (the prototype of the xiuhhuitzolli) that we see in Chichen Itza and Tula, while clearly preserving the original relationship to the open jaw of the war-serpent headdress. The evolution of this important insignia between the Early Classic and the Early Postclassic is clearly traceable despite the change of material—from shell (and possibly jade) to turquoise—used to produce the mosaic form.46 Although the concept of the war serpent was apparently adopted by the Maya from Teotihuacan—perceived as a remote center of power and legitimization and probably the original “Place of Reeds” called puh by the Classic Maya (Stuart 2000, 501–6)—they integrated these ideas and the insignia themselves with their own mythological and religious lore. Albeit the association between the mosaic insignia and royalty is not clear in Chichen Itza and Tula,47 the use of the Classic-period war-serpent headdress among the Maya seems limited to rulers themselves. Thus, for the Classic Maya, the war serpent and its prestigious insignia appear to be directly linked to rulership and the concept of celestial fire (Taube 1992, 82; 2000), in much the same way as Xiuhcoatl and the xiuhhuitzolli for the Aztecs. It may be concluded that the Postclassic Nahuas, in their use of the mosaic diadem, drew on an ancient tradition, inherited from and reminiscent of the most important Mesoamerican centers of power of the Classic and Early Postclassic periods. Moreover, the development, ways of use, and conceptual meanings of this insignia seem to be a creative result of many centuries of interplay between central Mexican and Mayan traditions. The Nahuas could have been well aware of the antiquity of their precious turquoise regalia—of which the xiuhhuitzolli seems to have been of primary importance—that expressed close links between the ruler and his patron deity as well as the deliberate association with the admired Toltecs.48 It is therefore not surprising to find the turquoise diadem figuring in their pictorial conventions as a visible marker distinguishing between “uncivilized” Chichimec leaders and later rulers whose power is legalized by the derivation from the Toltec heritage. The fire god Xiuhteuctli, a special patron of the Mexica rulers (Beyer 1965, 311; Noguez 1975, 34; Neurath 1992, 127), perceived as a manifestation of the supreme creation deity, was no doubt fundamental for the Aztec concept of royalty.49 Tracing the roots of royal power to Xiuhteuctli could be seen as claiming it back to Teotihuacan, where the world was created, as an important element of the legitimation of Mexica rule (Sullivan 1980, 233). This association between Xiuhteuctli and the creation is clearly seen in an image from the Codex Borgia (fol. 46) where the

53

54

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

deity is shown within the turquoise enclosure in the scene referring to the fiery creation of the sun. This reading is confirmed by the Nahuatl text of the Florentine Codex (FC VI, 88–89), where the fire god is not only equated with the supreme creator deity but is also said to reside in the navel of the earth, in the turquoise enclosure and surrounded by the waters of the xiuhtototl, or the cotinga bird (Cotinga amabilis; Taube 1992, 80–81). The cotinga bird was associated with the fire god Xiuhteuctli and with turquoise itself (FC XI, 224), belonging to a conceptual framework related to celestial fire, creation, and war.50 While the roots of Xiuhteuctli and the concept of the fire/war serpent can be traced in Teotihuacan, the association between fire, turquoise, and the blue cotinga goes back at least to Chichen Itza times: the image of what is probably the yaxun bird—the Maya name for the cotinga—forms part of one kind of mosaic headdress in the imagery from this place (figure 2.10b).51 As has already been mentioned, Xiuhteuctli and his fire-serpent manifestation were believed to embody the celestial fire, also conceived as a dangerous weapon that could take the material form of turquoise. The stone itself was linked to fire and smoke: according to the Nahuatl text of the Florentine Codex (FC XI, 224), it was “like the lovely cotinga, truly as if smoking. . . . It smokes. It smokes like fine turquoise.”52 The rulers of Tenochtitlan received a portion of this cosmic fire from their divine patron, while the turquoise insignia assured their transformation, becoming also physical containers of the celestial heat (see chapter 4). Appropriating the old insignia of rank as the paramount attributes of their huei tlatoque, the Mexica strove to revive them as prestigious status items primarily associated with imperial Tenochtitlan and its ideology. Other Elite Headdresses

The turquoise-mosaic diadem was not the only kind of royal headpiece worn in pre-Hispanic central Mexico, and usage of other insignia varied across regions. Even if not of Nahua origin, some of these items were known and used also in the Valley of Mexico. One such insignia was a golden diadem, probably made of thin, plated gold, referred to as the tepeyoteocuitlatl, a golden mountain-shaped miter (literally, a “mountain-fashion gold”) mentioned in the Florentine Codex (FC IX, 8, 17) as one of the items brought by merchants through long-distance trade from Tehuantepec. It is explicitly compared to royal crowns: “And these were the personal property of the merchants: mountain-shaped gold, like a royal crown which the rulers of those places wore.”53 Interestingly enough, the term tepeyotl is also employed as a reference to the royal diadem xiuhhuitzolli, no doubt alluding to its pointed shape (FC VI, 19).

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Another term for these or closely related insignia was teocuitlaixquaamatl, or “golden forehead paper,” mentioned as a category of precious objects procured by long-distance merchants and among royal treasures seized (FC IX, 8, 17; XII, 48). The same item, described as a half-miter made of gold and decoFigure 2.15. Golden headbands or rated with precious stones, appears sevfrontlets given in tribute from Tochtepec, Codex Mendoza, fol. 46r (Codex Mendoza, eral times in the Crónica mexicana by F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, Alvarado Tezozomoc as one of the tribUniversity of California Press 1992, ute items collected from Cuetlaxtlan courtesy of Frances Berdan) and Tehuantepec after successful military campaigns (Tezozomoc 2001, 299, 335, 345).54 Golden diadems and headbands are also represented as tribute items given by the province of Tochtepec according to the Codex Mendoza (fol. 46r; see also figure 2.15). The teocuitlaixquaamatl is also mentioned in the account of funeral ceremonies of Axayacatl and Ahuitzotl as an adornment of their mortuary bundles.55 While it may seem surprising to find a foreign status item as part of the royal funeral costume of Mexica rulers, a possible explanation is the conscious use of outlandish, exotic, and prestigious insignia “conquered” by the huei tlatoque of Tenochtitlan during victorious military campaigns. In fact, the first conquest attributed to Ahuitzotl was reportedly in support of an original intervention by imperial merchants in the region.56 This way the golden head adornment may have permanently entered the repertory of adornments used by Mexica rulers, for it appears among the gifts redistributed by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin during his coronation ceremony.57 Thus, the use of golden diadems in Tenochtitlan can probably be seen in terms of an appropriation of a foreign status item as a result of trade and military conquest, by no means superseding the use of the xiuhhuitzolli as the highest royal insignia. More difficult to explain is the description of “the arms” of the Mexica provided by Tezozomoc (2001, 381), with an eagle standing on a rock and adorned with a golden crown called teocuitlaamaixquaçolli (“golden plated head adornment”), probably identical to the teocuitlaixquaamatl. This reference implies that either the golden diadem was more deeply integrated with the Mexica tradition than the already-­ discussed evidence would suggest, or that Tezozomoc resorted to a term most closely corresponding to the Spanish understanding of the royal crown.58 Among common elite headgears were headbands usually tied at the back of the head, most frequently being white, red, and red-white. Judging by pictorial

55

56

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

evidence, there were differences in their regional distribution and contextual use. The white headband seems ubiquitous in the area of modern Puebla59 and sometimes also appears in Tlaxcalan and Valley of Mexico manuscripts. It is possible that the white headband figuring as the main headdress of rulers in the Códice de Xicotepec reflects local Totonac customs (Offner 2010b). Red headbands are frequent in the area corresponding with the present state of Puebla, for example in the Mapas de Quauhtinchan, but are found also in other regions, including the Valley of Mexico (especially worn by foreign warriors, mainly from Puebla and Huexotzinco) and Hidalgo.60 On the other hand, the red-white twisted headband was a typically Tlaxcalan device.61 According to Nicholson, who first highlighted the importance of this status item, it was an exclusive attribute of local tlatoque and teteuctin (Nicholson 1967, 76). Indeed, Tlaxcalan genealogies seem to indicate that only the heads of noble houses and some of their descendants could wear it, but it is difficult to reconstruct the exact range of noblemen entitled to use this insignia. It is frequently worn in the famous Lienzo de Tlaxcala relating the history of the Tlaxcalan-Spanish military alliance, but it is impossible to identify the exact ranks of those wearing red-white twisted headbands. What seems certain enough, however, is that this status item was almost exclusively restricted to Tlaxcala,62 where it was identified as the insignia of the local elite; their set of elite adornments thus seems to have been in many respects different from that of the Valley of Mexico. I have been unable to identify specific Nahuatl terms for different headbands, and the Tlaxcalan headband in particular, except for the tzoncuetlaxtli (“hair leather [band]” or “leather strip headdress”) mentioned as the array of Amimitl, a deity related to the major hunting/stellar “Chichimec” deity Mixcoatl and to Otonteuctli (PM, fol. 264v). The extant image of Amimitl shows a red headband tied at the back, very similar to the already-discussed red or white bands. The “Chichimec” and ritual associations of this adornment are confirmed in Chimalpahin’s writings as the headgear of the migrating Mexica.63 The wearing of this headband is explicitly mentioned in association with the feast of Quecholli, when major celebrations honoring Mixcoatl took place, providing additional confirmation of its Chichimec associations. Thus, in much the same way as the xiuhhuitzolli was laden with associations linking it to the Toltec, or wider Mesoamerican “antiquity,” it is possible that headbands expressed links with “nomad” roots and valiant “Chichimec” founders. We know that these links were particularly important for the Tlaxcalans, the people of Quauhtinchan,64 and probably many other groups living in the Puebla-Tlaxcala region. The acknowledgment of Chichimec roots versus the Toltec heritage played quite a significant role in the Nahua historical tradition and identity: an imperial monument from Tenochtitlan, the Calendar Stone, features the Mexica ruler

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.16. Aztaxelli head device: (a) Codex Mendoza, fol. 57r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan); (b) Codex Tudela, fol. 22r (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid); (c) Primeros Memoriales fol. 266r (Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; drawing by Justyna Olko)

Figure 2.17. Tlaxcalan red-white twisted headbands with aztaxelli and aztaxelli quetzalmiahuayo devices: (a) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 29 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892). (b) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 5 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892). (c) Genealogía de Maxixcatzin (courtesy of the Archivo General de la Nación, Tierras, Vol. 20, 1ª parte, f. 63 v)

Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin as a Chichimec leader proudly exhibiting his ancestral attributes (see chapter 3). Frequently worn together with headbands was the aztaxelli, or a double/divided heron-feather device inserted in the hair (figures 2.16, 2.17, 2.52c). It appears also as the aztaxexelli quetzalmiahuayo, or the “divided heron-feather [headdress] with a quetzal feather crest” (PM, fol. 266r; see also figure 2.16c).65 This term, along with an accompanying drawing of Tlacochcalco Yaotl, a manifestation of the god Tezcatlipoca, indicates that the device was sometimes worn together with the prestigious quetzal-feather crest. Indeed, this elaborate version of the headgear can be seen in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, worn by the principal tlatoque of this altepetl together with the red-white twisted headband (figure 2.17b).66 The same composite insignia adorns principal personages in the Lienzo de Tepeticpac or in the Genealogía de Maxixcatzin (figure 2.17c), which bespeaks their high rank. Other nobles frequently sport the simple version of the aztaxelli, very common in the region as well as in neighboring Puebla. Copious examples appear in both preconquest and colonial manuscripts from the Puebla-Tlaxcala area, including for example the Codex

57

58

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Borgia and related codices, the Mapas de Quauhtinchan, or numerous early-colonial genealogies. Besides, the double heron-feather device is sometimes represented in Mixtec codices, for example in the Codex Nuttall, where it is worn by some of the personages in the famous “gathering of 112 rulers,” who acknowledged the accession of 8 Deer to the throne of Tilantongo, including possible leaders from PueblaTlaxcala wearing red-white twisted headbands together with the aztaxelli. The divided heron-feather device was also known and used in the Valley of Mexico and particularly in Tenochtitlan. In pre-Hispanic monuments it acts as sacrificial apparel for the rulers themselves, as in the Dedication Stone featuring Tiçoc and Ahuitzotl, or in the Hackmack (Hamburg) Box depicting Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin, all of them engaged in ritual bloodletting (figure 3.3). According to the postconquest imagery, it was also worn by warriors and, more rarely, priests.67 As has already been suggested, in Tenochtitlan this heron-feather ornament was particularly linked to Tezcatlipoca (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 150; Olivier 2004, 108, 121–33). Indeed, apart from the already-discussed image of this god in the Primeros Memoriales, the evidence includes several references in Nahuatl sources. According to the Anales de Tlatelolco (1999, 129–30) and the Florentine Codex (FC XII, 53), the aztaxelli was worn by the participants in the feast of Toxcatl, the special festival of Tezcatlipoca, in 1520 when they were attacked by the Spaniards. In addition, the impersonator of Tezcatlipoca wore the aztaxelli quetzalmiahuayo during the same celebration (FC II, 70). This explains the use of the aztaxelli by the tiachcahuan (“masters of the youths”) and telpochtlatoque (“rulers of the youths”) acting under the auspices of Tezcatlipoca. According to the Florentine Codex, during ritual dance they wore the aztaxelli, a red cord with which they tied their hair (tzonchichilicpatl ), turquoise earplugs, and netted capes (FC VIII, 43), which exactly corresponds with their images as seen in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 63r). Although the device is mentioned as one of possible adornments of the seasoned warriors celebrating the festival of Huei Tecuilhuitl (FC II, 100) or is worn by eagles and jaguars, symbolizing brave warriors, on the pre-Hispanic wooden drum tlalpanhuehuetl from Malinalco, it seems to have been particularly associated with young warriors, whose patron was Tezcatlipoca. During the feast of Tititl, a fire priest “arrayed himself as a young warrior” (motelpochichihuaya), putting on a netted cape, the aztaxelli, and a lip pendant (FC II, 157), while the impersonator of Tezcatlipoca in Toxcatl appeared as the god in his manifestation as a young warrior.68 Does this symbolic association of the insignia also provide a clue to its meaning as part of the royal “sacrificial” costume? Considering that Tezcatlipoca was an important patron of the Mexica huei tlatoque, who are shown with his attributes on other occasions, it seems plausible, even if remaining hypothetical.69 However,

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

even if the aztaxelli was employed in Tenochtitlan mainly as a “specialized” object linked to Tezcatlipoca, brave warriors, and sacrifice, at the same time it apparently retained associations with the Puebla-Tlaxcala region. As can be seen in the imagery of the Codex Mendoza (fol. 42r), the inhabitants of Tlaxcala are identified by the aztaxelli device, and the people of Cholula by the aztaxelli combined with a red headband. Another heron-feather headgear was the aztatzontli (“heron hair”), sometimes appearing with the quetzal-feather crest as the aztatzontli quetzalmiahuayo. It appears to have been an ornament worn exclusively by several deities associated with water and fertility, as well as by their impersonators or priests, and it is not attested beyond this purely religious context.70 According to pictorial images, this headdress consisted of medium-length white feathers arranged in a row, sometimes topped by a long green feather.71 It was also used in a costly version, quetzalazta­ tzontli, that, according to one Nahuatl description, despite its name seems to have been made entirely, or in great part, of green quetzal feathers: “the quetzal-heron feather headdress, covered with quetzal feathers, entirely of quetzal feathers, like blue-green, overspread blue-green.”72 This passage could suggest that the term aztatzontli was used in reference to an original shape of the headdress, which was made of entirely different material. However, another description implies that the quetzalaztatzontli combined both kinds of feathers, in accordance with the pictorial evidence: “the headdress of quetzal and heron feathers, [decorated] with gold, interspersed with quetzal feathers, many quetzal feathers rustled from it.”73 While the use of the aztatzontli was apparently limited to deity impersonators and priests, there was a headdress composed of a row of short white or gray feathers encircling the head, depicted frequently in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala but also known in the Valley of Mexico, as confirmed by the imagery from the Codex Azcatitlan (fol. 18; see also figures 2.18a, b). However, it appears to be much shorter than the aztaxelli. A probable candidate for this item is the term quauhtzontli (“eagle hair” or “eagle hairdress”). It is the attribute of several female/earth deities, such as Cihuacoatl, Coatlicue, or Ilamateuctli, and looks exactly the same as the head ornament of warriors (PM, fols. 264r-v; see also figure 2.18c). An interesting description of this headdress is given in the passage referring to the adornment of Ilamateuctli, the aged goddess of earth, death, and the Milky Way. Her quauhtzontli was reportedly made entirely of eagle feathers that were twisted and sewn to each other; this headdress was also called tzompilinalli, probably meaning “mane; withered, coarse hair.”74 This twisted and tangled hair symbolized—in a similar way as the papatli, the mane worn by priests called papahuaque (see page 34)—the links with the Otherworld and carried liminal associations (Tomicki 1987, 169–76). In addition, the twisted hair of earth and death deities alluded to the grass

59

60

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.18. Possible examples of quauhtzontli: (a) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 57 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892); (b) Codex Azcatitlan, fol. 18 detail (Bibliothèque Nationale de France); (c) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 264r (Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; drawing by Justyna Olko)

ball into which spines and other implements of autosacrifice (çacatapayolli) were inserted, and which symbolized the fertilization of the earth by the blood of warriors (Olivier 2004, 414–17; Mikulska-Dąbrowska 2010, 144–46). It is tempting to extend this symbolic meaning of the quauhtzontli to the feather headdress of warriors (probably identical to the already-discussed headpiece of female earth deities) who “provided the drink for the sun, for the earth (Tlalteuctli).”75 Although this reading remains conjectural, there seems to be a clear link between that particular military head adornment and female deities of earth, death, and sacrifice. While many kinds of feathers, such as those of herons and eagles, were easily obtained in central Mexico, numerous elite head adornments were made of exotic plumage, were highly prized, and were invested with profound symbolic meanings. The raw material was procured through long-distance trade and tributary networks, while highly qualified groups of artisans in Tenochtitlan, the amanteca, specialized in featherworking. Esoteric symbolism surrounded the adornments made of blue cotinga feathers, and in particular the headdress called xiuhtototzontli, forming part of the royal war costume that was linked to the fire god Xiuhteuctli.76 This cotinga headdress was ornamented with gold and quetzal feathers.77 A possibly related item, though fashioned as a paper adornment, was the xiuhtotoamacalli quetzalmiahuayo (“a paper crown with the feathers of the cotinga and a spray of quetzal feathers”) worn by Xiuhteuctli himself (FC I, 30). The cotinga headdress is perhaps depicted as worn by victorious Aztec warriors on the so-called Quauhxicalli of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina.78 This insignia would nicely fit into the iconographic theme of this monument, featuring personages clad in Toltec costume, including breast butterfly plates, triangular loincloths, necklaces, as well as nose and ear ornaments. The headpieces decorated with the figure of the cotinga bird were an important component of Toltec-period military costume, later revived in the art of Tenochtitlan. Whereas

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

the bird appears attached to pillbox headdresses worn by personages in Tula and Chichen Itza, its earlier images in the Maya lowlands date to the Classic period. By the onset of the Postclassic period it became associated with the turquoise insignia linked to the concepts of war and celestial fire. Another feather headdress worn by Mexica rulers was the tlauhquecholtzontli, “red spoonbill [roseate spoonbill, Platalea ajaja] headdress,” reportedly part of both dance and war costume (FC VIII, 27, 33).79 As was already pointed out by Eduard Seler, the tlauhquecholtzontli was the feather crown of the god Xipe Totec (“Our Lord, the Flayed One”; see also figure 2.19), who is referred to as tlauhquecholtotec in the Crónica mexicana of Tezozomoc (Seler 1902–23, II: 536). Indeed, the insignia, described as “a costly red spoonbill headdress ornamented with gold and with very many quetzal feathers flaring [from it],” appears among other attributes of this god.80 This identification is additionally corroborated by the information that the tlauhquecholtzontli was the head adornment of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin during his “travel” to Cincalco.81 This event, which reportedly took place in an early phase of the Spanish conquest, has been convincingly interpreted as an attempted ritual suicide, or, in Aztec terms, a passage into the Otherworld in the dress of Xipe Totec, the lord of the mythological location of Cincalco (Tomicki 1990, 254–304). The Xipe Totec dress was an official apparel of the Mexica rulers, in which they were depicted in their famous portraits in the cliff of Chapultepec, wearing the tlauhquecholtzontli together with other attributes of this deity82 (see also pages 196–198). In addition, Tezozomoc mentions an episode when Axayacatl, clad in his Xipe Totec dress, was attacked by a warrior from Toluca and lost this prestigious head insignia (Tezozomoc 2001, 217–18). The same headpiece was reportedly worn by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in his campaign to Xaltepec and put on the mortuary bundle of Axayacatl during his funeral ceremony, again as part of the Xipe dress (Tezozomoc 2001, 388, 243–44). The tlauhquecholtzontli can also be identified in pictorial manuscripts (figures 2.19, 3.6). In the Códice en Cruz it appears as part of the apparel of Axayacatl in an image referring to his campaign in Xiquipilco. As has also been observed by Charles Dibble (1996 [1981]), this scene alludes to a previously mentioned episode when this Mexica ruler became separated from his forces and was wounded in the thigh in individual combat with an enemy warrior. Other probable candidates for the red-spoonbill headdress are found in an image of a Tlaxcalan warrior in the scene of the conquest of Tlaltenanpan depicted in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 61) and of a warrior from Cuetzallan in the same document (fol. 68). Another version of Xipe’s headdress was called the yopitzontli, a conical cap with a forked end.83 Although apparently it did not belong to the royal Xipe costume of the Mexica rulers, it was an important insignia of Zapotec lords, as was already

61

62

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.19. Xipe Totec wearing the tlauhquecholtzontli, Codex Tudela, fol. 12r (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid)

pointed out by Seler in reference to the Lienzo de Guevea (Seler 1902–23, II: 466– 67). An interesting reference to the yopitzontli is provided by fray Diego Durán: according to him it adorned dancers taking part in the sacrifice of the Matlatzinca after a successful military campaign and was still used after the Spanish conquest.84 Different kinds of precious feathers served for the manufacture of a very prestigious insignia called by the general term tlalpiloni (“a thing used to tie something”), a hair binder decorated with double feather tassels (figures 1.3, 2.20). The same term was apparently used to refer to streamers decorating other costume items, like

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

capes or sandals (e.g., FC X, 64, 74). Some of them were received as tribute from Coixtlahuaca and Cuetlaxtlan (Matrícula de Tributos, fols. 12r, 14r; Tezozomoc 2001, 299–300). While the feather hair binders were by far most common in the core area of the Aztec empire, the imagery of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala reveals their use also outside the Valley of Mexico. In the Nahuatl text of the Florentine Codex, the tlalpiloni is mentioned as the royal insignia that in a way defines and qualifies the rulership (FC VI, 44, 57), as royal gifts to other nobles and as precious status items granted to brave warriors for their military achievements (FC IV, 7; V, 158; VI, 72, 106), and in particular as rewards for warriors who reached the position of the huei tiacauh after taking five prisoners in battle (FC VIII, 77). The quauhtlalpiloni, the hair binder made of eagle feathers, appears to be a prestigious status item worn by high-ranking warriors: it is reported as an attribute of Otomi-rank warriors (FC XII, 92; Tezozomoc 200, 171–72), of the “elders” (probably retired warriors) who received the Mexica army during triumph ceremonies after successful military campaigns (Tezozomoc 2001, 136), and as “hair binders of valiant warriors” (trançados de los balientes) distributed as gifts to foreign nobility invited to Tenochtitlan (Tezozomoc 2001, 417). Even more prestigious was the hair binder made of highly prized quetzal feathers, sometimes ornamented with gold. In particular, it could be decorated with golden flint knives and pendants (FC VIII, 74). Rulers adorned themselves with the que­ tzalla­piloni for dance (PM, fol. 56r; FC VIII, 56); it was also placed, among other precious items, on a royal mortuary bundle in funeral ceremonies (Tezozomoc 2001, 241). In a similar way as with other hair binders, the quetzallapiloni was granted to valiant members of the nobility for their military achievements (FC VIII, 74), and in particular to those who managed to take their fourth captive as one of the “royal vestments” (tlatocatlatquitl; PM, fol. 65). Quetzal-feather hair binders were also considered appropriate gifts for nobles and other rulers, vassals, and messengers.85 These prestigious insignia are in fact worn by rulers depicted in the Primeros Memoriales (figure 2.20a), Manuscrito del aperreamiento (BNF 374; see also figure 2.20b), Codices Valeriano, Moctezuma, Vaticanus A, and Ixtlilxochitl (figure 2.20c), while the Codex Mendoza (fols. 64r–65r) features them as adornments of the highest military commandants. Other versions of the hair binder include the çaquantlalpiloni and xolotlalpiloni, which seem to have been less common. The çaquantlalpiloni, a hair binder made of the yellow and black feathers of the troupial (çaquantototl), appears as one of the precious costume items assigned by a ruler to brave warriors and as the insignia of the Otomi-rank warriors.86 A yellow version of the tlalpiloni is depicted as tribute from the province of Cuetlaxtlan in the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 14r); the reference provided by Tezozomoc about the çaquantlalpiloni as a tribute item from this

63

64

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.20. Tlalpiloni hair binders: (a) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid). (b) Manuscrito del Aperreamiento (BNF 374); (c) Codex Ixtlilxochitl, fol. 108r (b, c Bibliothèque Nationale de France)

area makes it certain that this image is the troupial-feather hair binder. Very similar yellow hair binders are pictured as the head adornment of rulers in the Mapa de Atenco-Mizquiahuala from the Relación geográfica de Atenco-Mizquahuala in the state of Hidalgo (figure 3.25); they should probably be identified as the çaquantlalpiloni. On the other hand, the xolotlalpiloni is mentioned only by Tezozomoc (2001, 171) as one of the attributes of the Otomi warriors. This version of the hair binder was probably made of dark yellow parrot feathers for, according to Sahagún, xolotl refers to feathers of a yellow parrot or birds with dark yellow plumage.87 Another headpiece, the teocuitlaquacalalatli (“golden hood” or “golden helmet”), decorated with two quetzal “horns” and worn together with a tunic of yellow parrot feathers, served as part of the war costume of rulers88 and as precious insignia granted to brave nobles for war deeds (FC VIII, 74). It is also mentioned among treasures taken by Spaniards after the defeat of Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco (FC XII, 125). Its description makes it strikingly similar to the quetzalquaquahuitl (“que­ tzal feather horns [insignia]”) pictured as one of the war insignia in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 73v; see also figure 2.21a). Unlike other devices depicted in this section, this item probably was not worn on a back frame but directly on the head, just like the teocuitlaquacalalatli mentioned in the Florentine Codex. A closely related adornment was the iztac teocuitlaquacalalatli quetzaltecomayo (“silver helmet with quetzal feather tufts held in cups”), also mentioned among the war apparel of rulers (FC VIII, 34). That the term quacalalatli referred to an enclosing headgear is confirmed by its employment in reference to Spanish “iron helmets,” tepozquacalalatli (FC XII, 72, 122). Other probable enclosing headpieces were the teocuitlaquaapaztli (“golden head vessel”) and teocuitlaquatecciztli (“shell-shaped headpiece of gold”) mentioned in the Anales de Tlatelolco (1999, 126) as gifts of Moteucçoma to Cortés, the second one also being mentioned by the Florentine Codex (FC XII, 13).

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.21. Different kinds of headgear: (a) quetzalquacuahuitl, Primeros Memoriales, fol.73v (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid); (b) wreath head ornament, probably icpacxochitl, Codex Mendoza, fol. 71r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

The quetzaltotoicpacxochitl is mentioned as the dance adornment of rulers.89 This term is composed of the quetzaltototl (“quetzal bird”) and icpacxochitl, translated by Molina as “flower garland for the head.”90 According to Berdan and Anawalt, this term corresponds to a wreath head ornament worn by an aged man who is drinking, depicted in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 71r; see also figure 2.21b), and a similar headpiece belongs to the god Ixtlilton (FC I, fol.14), the fertility deity connected with social warmth, flowers, feasting, and pleasure (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 237). Thus, the quetzaltotoicpacxochitl should most probably be identified as a sort of wreath decorated with quetzal feathers. The Tetzcocan historian don Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl gives considerable importance to yet another feathered headdress called tecpilotl (“lordly nobility, something associated with lordly nobility”), described as “crests of green feathers.” Reportedly, it was used together with other insignia in the installation rites of “Chichimec” rulers in Tetzcoco.91 Importantly, this item appears in a group of attributes closely associated with an ancestral, “barbarian,” or “Chichimec” identity, like the coçoyahualolli (discussed below) and deer-leather bands, which implies that it too was perceived as part of this tradition. In a similar way, the same author enumerates the tecpilotl among regalia decorating the “high court” of Tetzcocan rulers in the manner of heraldic insignia, including such “Chichimec” items as a bow with arrows.92 These links were also reflected in the chichimecateuctli title of the high tlatoque of Tetzcoco.

65

66

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.22. White feather-down head adornment: (a) Codex Mendoza, fol. 66r; (b) Mapa Quinatzin, fol. 3 (Bibliothèque Nationale de France, drawing by Justyna Olko); (c) Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, fol. 21v (Bibliothèque Nationale de France); (d) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 32, detail (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892)

Ixtlilxochitl also states that the tecpilotl was the headdress delivered as a warning to rebellious rulers during ritualized negotiations about their subject status (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, II: 103). This piece of information implies that this headdress was made of white feathers and balls of down, rather than of green plumage. Although we lack other references to the tecpilotl, the headdress delivered to potential vassals by the Triple Alliance is represented in the Codex Mendoza and Mapa Quinatzin as made of white down (figure 2.22a, b). In addition, the headdress presented in this very context alluded to the head adornment of sacrificed victims, consisting of balls of white feather down, and symbolized the inevitable fate of an opponent in an impending military confrontation (Olko 2004). The identification of the tecpilotl, mentioned as the adornment of early Tetzcocan rulers, with an adornment of white feather down (also associated with captives destined for sacrifice) can be further substantiated by the imagery showing adornment of early Mexica and other groups of Chichimec affiliation. Not infrequently does their headgear take the form of a buildup of white feather down, or of separate balls of down placed on the head.93 The pictorial evidence for this head adornment comes from the Valley of Mexico and the modern states of Puebla, Tlaxcala, and Hidalgo. In the Tira de Tepechpan, illustrations accompanying the work by fray Diego Durán, or Codex Azcatitlan, it is worn by early Mexica leaders like Tenoch and the god-bearers, or by Chichimec leaders in the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca (figure 2.22c). Thus, along with the unquestionable association between white feather down and war captives and its use in the negotiation procedures, this type of headgear was identified as a prestigious adornment of Chichimec ancestors. Interestingly enough, separate feather balls attached to headbands figure as warriors’ headgear in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala do not refer to ancestral apparel but are part of contemporary battle outfits, which can probably be seen in terms of Tlaxcalan emphasis on “Chichimec” identity (figure 2.22d). At any

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.23. Coçoyahualolli ornament: (a) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 53r (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid); (b) Códice de Tepetlaoztoc, fol. 3 (British Museum; drawing by Justyna Olko); (c) Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fol. 43r (Bibliothèque Nationale de France)

rate, it seems reasonable to identify the tecpilotl, referred to by Ixtlilxochitl as the headdress of early Tetzcocan rulers, with the white feather down head adornment found in association with Chichimec chieftains. Commonly used as an attribute of victims immolated in postwar rituals, it linked them to Mixcoatl, their divine patron associated with hunting, war, and sacrifice, and hence also with the destiny of valiant Chichimec warriors, who, like the sacrificed Mimixcoa, symbolically embodied both takers of victims and victims themselves. In Nahua beliefs there was a strong association between hunting and warfare, between the identity of the captor and the sacrificed (Graulich 1997; Olivier 2010). Another important feather head ornament identified in the sixteenth century as part of the historical “Chichimec costume” was the coçoyahualolli, a circular fan device of yellow parrot feathers (Noguez 1978, 34). It consisted of a round, fanlike element made of yellow or multicolored feathers with two long feathers (or sticks with feathers) fixed in an upright position, and hanging paper streamers (figure 2.23). The name is probably derived from coztic (“yellow”) and yahualolli (“something round”), meaning together a “yellow round thing.”94 This device seems to have been strongly associated with the Valley of Mexico tradition, but not exclusively with any particular group. Its presence in the pre-Hispanic sculptural monument from Tenochtitlan, the so-called Temple Stone (figure 3.5), as well as in postconquest pictorial and written sources,95 indicates it was used both by the Mexica and the Acolhuaque, being also shared by smaller subordinated altepetl such as Tepechpan or Tepetlaoztoc.96 This insignia was apparently prestigious enough to be worn by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin on the public monument that celebrated the New Fire Ceremony in 1507 and the foundation of Tenochtitlan in 1325 by the Chichimec ancestors of

67

68

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

the Mexica (see chapter 3). According to Ixtlilxochitl it was one of the regalia used in the coronation of Chichimec rulers in Tetzcoco (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, II, 26), and in almost all known pictorial examples the coçoyahualolli adorns early members of different dynasties sharing the Chichimec tradition: rulers of Tenochtitlan, Tetzcoco, Huexotla, or Tepetlaoztoc. There are some clues, however, that for the Nahuas it was a “Chichimec” insignia in general, for they attribute it also to the Michhuaque, whose ancestors were also classified as “Chichimecs” (FC X, 188). In much the same vein, a Tarascan warrior is shown wearing the coçoyahualolli in the Codex Telleriano-Remensis (fol. 25v). As has already been argued, the term copilli was sometimes employed in reference to the royal turquoise-mosaic diadem. However, in its primary meaning this term designated a conical headpiece of Huastec origin, or at least was identified as such in Aztec times. This category embraced various kinds of headdresses that differed in material and decoration but preserved the same conical form and usually belonged to the Huastec battle suit called cuextecatl. Spindles attached to this headgear alluded to the goddesses of weaving, identified with the Huastec region (figure 2.24a). Some of the copilli caps, however, also appear to have been worn independently. The ocelocopilli (“jaguar-skin conical cap”) was reportedly one of the insignia put on the mortuary bundle of Tiçoc during his funeral ceremony.97 This headpiece probably alluded to the identification of the dead ruler with one of his patron gods, Quetzalcoatl, for the ocelocopilli belonged to his key attributes (PM, fol. 261v; FC I, 9; XII, 12). It is depicted as a cap probably made of jaguar skin and topped by a large quetzal-feather crest. In some cases a separately worn conical cap is decorated with white dots on the black background, usually found as part of the cicitlalo cuextecatl, or a “starry Huastec” suit (Codex Mendoza, fol. 65r; see also figure 2.47e). The “starry” copilli headpiece is worn independently by a warrior in the Florentine Codex (FC VIII, fol. 34r; see also figure 2.24b) and twice in the Codex Telleriano-Remensis as the head adornment of warriors from Tenochtitlan.98 On the other hand, the golden conical cap (teocuitlacopilli) is mentioned as part of the golden treasure stolen by Spaniards (FC XII, 125) and as gods’ apparel (FC XII, 13). Together with its silver version, this headpiece was worn as part of the Huastec battle costume (FC VIII, 35) and given in reward to brave warriors (FC XII, 74). Its variants decorated with cups of que­ tzal feathers (iztac/coztic teocuitlacopilli quetzaltecomayo) are enumerated among rulers’ war accouterments (FC VIII, 35) but, even if they appear separately, it is not entirely certain whether they were used independently from a full cuextecatl body suit.99 Finally, the remaining headgear possible to identify with original Nahuatl terms include different kinds of tzoncalli, a term frequently translated as “wig,” such as the

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.24. Copilli headpieces: (a) copilli as part of the cuextecatl outfit, Codex Mendoza, fol. 23r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan); (b) citlalcopilli, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 34r (courtesy of the Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited)

ihuitzoncalli, a “feather headdress” or “feather wig,” a conventional adornment of several deities,100 also worn by Otomi-rank warriors when they put on the costume of priests of the god Otonteuctli (FC XII, 92).101 Another ritual headpiece was made of paper and called amacalli, frequently ornamented with the quetzal-feather crest (quetzalmiahuayo), a common attribute of deities and their impersonators.102 It does not seem, however, to have been worn by other personages than those directly involved in religious cults. Another ritual item, the ichcaxochitl, or the headdress of unspun cotton known as the adornment of the mother deity Toci-Teteoinnan (PM, fol. 263r), according to Tezozomoc (2001, 243) was also one of the insignia decorating the mortuary bundle of Axayacatl in his funeral ceremony.103 Although Tezozomoc’s explanation of this adornment reveals that he did not really know the item he was describing after the original Nahuatl source (he takes xochitl to be literally “flower” and not a specific headdress or wreath), the reference linking the dead ruler with one of the attributes of the mother goddess remains an intriguing one. In spite of the enormous complexity of the headdress repertory, it seems clear that specific headpieces fall into several basic categories distinguished by form and materials. The turquoise and golden diadems are separate categories in themselves, the first of them being the paramount royal insignia of the Mexica, whereas the ornaments of plaited gold, apparently also worn by the highest elite of Tenochtitlan on some occasions, were probably borrowed from other regions and remained identified as such. Other important groups encompass headbands and their ornaments, feather hair-binders (tlalpiloni), feathered headdresses classified as tzontli, enclosing casks, conical copilli caps, and Chichimec-associated feather head adornments. Less common for strictly elite wearers were headdresses known as specifically

69

70

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

religious adornments, appropriate for gods and their impersonators, such as the tzoncalli, or “wigs,” though several headgears associated with divine beings were also among the most important royal or elite adornments. When used in some ways, such as royal dance adornments, prestigious gifts, or insignia for high-ranking warriors, the function criteria seem less important, repeating with different forms of headdresses, distinguished by their terminological classifications. One can truly speak of an elaborate symbolical code or language regulating the use of specific head adornments that conveyed different messages about the rank and status of their wearers, possible affiliations with divine patrons, the deeds achieved on the battlefield, or the prestige of a gift. Available data on the preconquest headgear of the Nahuas seem to reveal that even slight differences in form or material could make vital distinctions and convey distinct messages about the meaning of a given insignia or its wearer, whose apparel constituted a code in itself. Ear Adornments

An indispensable part of elite apparel were ear adornments, referred to by a general term nacochtli. The prestigious meaning of earplugs in the Nahua world is confirmed not only by abundant imagery of members of nobility wearing these ornaments (figures 2.25a–d), but also by their listing among the insignia of royalty in traditional rhetoric speeches delivered on the occasion of royal elections.104 This broad category of jewelry encompassed different designs and materials (Table A.3). The teocuitlanacochtli, or golden earplugs, were used frequently, though not exclusively, by rulers and noblewomen, especially in dance105 and, reportedly, also in coronation rites in Tenochtitlan.106 Indeed, rulers and lords are frequently shown with golden earplugs (figure 2.25c).107 As attested by different sources, the teocuitlanacochtli were also considered prestigious gifts for the members of the nobility and high-ranking warriors. Thus, they are mentioned among the lordly insignia offered by the inhabitants of Tlatelolco to the royal refugees from Tenochtitlan during the siege of 1521 (Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 136), as gifts to foreign lords (FC VIII, 44) and messengers (Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 53r), or to brave warriors in recognition of their merits (FC VIII, 74).108 In addition to being lordly attributes, golden earplugs could be assigned to high-ranking warriors (such as those of the tiacauh and Otomi rank, FC X, 177; XII, 92) and were worn as part of military apparel by the members of the high nobility (PM, fol. 72r). Golden ear ornaments can also be identified by their distinct forms and designs. Different kinds of long, pendant-shaped golden ear adornments were in use. One kind were the teocuitlanacaztepoztli (“golden ear pendants” or perhaps “metal ear [pendants] made of gold”), reportedly worn by warriors in Quauhtenanco captured

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.25. Elaborate warrior outfits with earplugs, labrets, and back devices in the Primeros Memoriales, fols. 72r, 72v, 73r (a–d, courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid)

by the pochteca merchants and brought to the ruler of Tenochtitlan, Ahuitzotl (FC IX, 3, 5). They are described as long, wide pendants reaching the shoulders.109 Golden ear pendants with quetzal-feather spindles belonged to the costly version of the Huastec (cuextecatl) battle suit and are described as pilolli teocuitlacoztic

71

72

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

imamalacaquetzal (“golden ear pendants, with quetzal feather spindles”; FC VIII, 35). Coztic teocuitlaçoyanacochtli (“gold palm earplugs”) are mentioned and illustrated among the military accouterments of rulers and captains and described as having been made of beaten gold with the border turned back like a palm leaf (PM, fols. 68r, 75v). Both golden and silver earplugs are mentioned as the adornment of women (FC VIII, 47). An equally, if not even more prestigious, nacochtli category were the xiuhnacochtli, or turquoise earplugs belonging to an important set of turquoise accouterments that originated in Terminal Classic–Early Postclassic times and by the time of the Spanish conquest constituted one of the markers of Mexica elite costume (figures 2.25b, d). In much the same way as other turquoise insignia, such as the xiuhhuitzolli, they were made of stone mosaic and are known through extant examples in the Museo Nacional de Antropología in Mexico.110 The term teoxihuitl nacochtli (PM, fol. 65r) probably refers to the same ornament. Another closely related term is xiuhtezcanacochtli, “the turquoise-mirror earplug,” mentioned by Tezozomoc (2001, 451) as part of the attire of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in his sculptured portrait in Chapultepec. However, except for the latter reference, the extant data pointing to a special relationship of rulers with turquoise earplugs seem surprisingly modest, and it is especially noteworthy that they do not appear to have been used in installation rites in Tenochtitlan.111 The Nahuatl text of the Primeros Memoriales lists them vaguely within the broad group of military insignia and accouterments of “rulers and captains,” while direct references to their being worn by rulers and lords (tlatoque and teteuctin), led by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin himself, are limited to the ritual royal dance during the feast of Izcalli, when the highest members of the Mexica nobility put on the costume of the fire god Xiuhteuctli.112 Turquoise earplugs were not only an attribute of the fire deity but also of Huixtocihuatl and Quetzalcoatl (FC I, 22; XII, 12). On the other hand, there seems to have existed a strong association between turquoise earplugs and high-ranking warriors or the highest members of the Mexica aristocracy, such as the tlacateccatl, in their military garb (PM, fol. 65r, 72v, 73r; Codex Mendoza, fol. 64r) or masters of young warriors (tiachcahuan and telpochtlatoque; FC VIII, 43).113 Also made of the turquoise mosaic were serpent earplugs, coanacochtli, adorning the image of Huitzilopochtli in the feast of Toxcatl (FC XII, 52), and coyolnacochtli, earplugs with bells, worn by the impersonator of Tezcatlipoca on the same occasion (FC II, 69).114 In fact, to the traditional apparel of this god belonged also golden-bells earplugs (teocuitlacoyolnacochtli; FC XII, 12). Yet another version of ear adornments decorated with bells was known as the quetzalcoyolnacochtli, “earplugs with quetzal feather and bells,” reportedly awarded to the Mexica merchants in recompense for their services to the state (FC IX, 4, 22).

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Judging by the extant archaeological sample and museum collections, jade earplugs or earflares were frequently used in preconquest Mesoamerica, but textual references to them are scarce. Nahuatl terms referring to such items include the chalchiuhchampochtli, “the ear pendant of greenstones,”115 attributed to the Huastecs (FC X, 186), and chalchiuhcoanacochtli, “greenstone serpent earplugs,” part of one of the divine costumes presented to Cortés by the messengers of Moteucçoma in 1519 (FC XII, 15). Obsidian earplugs, or itznacochtli, much less prestigious and probably more frequently used, are mentioned as attributes of the Otomi people (FC X, 178) and as the adornment of noblewomen (FC VIII, 47). The latter are described as “white obsidian earplugs,” possibly alluding to a light gray variety of the volcanic glass, more common being its black, grayish, and green varieties. Obsidian ornaments were probably more commonly associated with lesser nobles and, explicitly, with commoners (FC IX, 18), because this stone does not seem to have been considered elite material in Mesoamerica.116 Aztec noblewomen also wore the tehuilonacochtli, or rock-crystal earplugs (FC VIII, 47), while “jet earplugs” (teotenacochtli) were attributes of brave warriors (PM, fol. 68v). The cuetlaxnacochtli, or leather earplugs, are listed among items awarded to brave warriors for their battle merits (FC VIII, 74, 77). Mayanacochtli, or “green june beetle earplugs,” were covered with a mosaic of green june beetles.117 Even though they are listed among the accouterments of “rulers and captains” (PM, fols. 68r, 72r; see also figure 2.25a), this kind of earplug was also attributed to the Otomi (FC X, 178). Specific varieties of nacochtli made of modest materials were attributed to foreign groups such as the Otomi: these included earplugs of reed, dried maize stalks, seashell, copper, or pottery (FC X, 177–78). Also wooden earplugs, painted in many colors, were in use (FC IX, 60), probably mainly by commoners. In general, earplugs, even made of precious materials, were not restricted to the highest nobility; many prestigious varieties were awarded to warriors, perhaps to strengthen the sense of ethnic solidarity. Nose Orna ments

Nose ornaments were conceived as elite status markers of primary importance not only in the Nahua world but in Mesoamerica as a whole. Their significance was closely related to the fact that in the Postclassic central Mexico, nose and lip perforation, as well as the subsequent insertion of special insignia, played an essential part in the investiture of rulers, while the wearing of precious nose and lip ornaments became a visual indicator of the achieved status both in iconographic conventions and, no doubt, in social reality. Curiously enough, this presumed importance of nose insignia is apparently not matched by any associated terminological diversity

73

74

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.26. Royal nose plugs: (a) xiuhyacamitl worn by Axayacatl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51r (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid); (b) image of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina, Tovar Manuscript, fol. 109 (courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University)

in Nahuatl. Although there seems to have been no one general term referring to nose ornaments, the yacamitl, meaning “nose arrow,” appears to be the most frequent component of specific types of adornments, even if it designates only very thin nose plugs. Another generic term was yacapilolli, “a nose pendant,” but its use in extant sources appears to be surprisingly rare.118 A special significance and prestige was given to the xiuhyacamitl, or teoxiuhyacamitl, the “turquoise nose arrow” adornment, whose use seems limited to rulers and lords.119 The Florentine Codex includes it among dance adornments and attributes of rulers (FC VIII, 28), and indeed the turquoise nose rod is worn by pre-Hispanic tlatoque illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 51r–52r; see also figure 2.26a) as well as in the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca (fols. 21r, 39v), an illustrated Nahuatl manuscript from Quauhtinchan in Puebla. This latter source reveals that the use of the xiuhyacamitl as a royal attribute was not limited to the Valley of Mexico. This agrees with other sources linking it directly to the investiture ceremony performed both in Tenochtitlan and Cholula, where it was clearly a more ancient rite related to royalty. According to the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, newly arrived Chichimec chieftains acquired the status of legitimate rulers through having their noses perforated with “eagle and jaguar bones” by “Toltec” priests in Cholula who bestowed on them thin turquoise nose plugs (fols. 20v–21r). The turquoise nose ornament shared much of its symbolism and prestige with other turquoise insignia, such as the xiuhhuitzolli, of Early Postclassic Maya-Toltec origin. Thin nose rods are in fact frequently depicted in reliefs of Chichen Itza and Tula.120

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

The use of the turquoise nose rod in similar contexts in Tenochtitlan is abundantly attested by Alvarado Tezozomoc. In his description of the coronation ceremony of Tiçoc, he mentions the perforation of his nose and the insertion of a “small and delicate thin piece of emerald [sic],” that, later on, in the description of the royal dance in the final part of the coronation rites, he referred to with the term xihuitl.121 On the occasion of the coronation of the next ruler, Ahuitzotl, he quotes a complete original term, the yacaxihuitl, or the “nose turquoise,” as put on the elect together with the turquoise diadem (Tezozomoc 2001, 304).122 This term was probably synonymous with or at least closely related to xiuhyacamitl. It appears as part of the adornment of rulers and lords in a ritual dance performed every four years during the feast of Izcalli when they donned the attributes of Xiuhteuctli (FC II, 164),123 which seems to imply that the yacaxihuitl was conceived as an attribute of the fire god. The same term is employed in the listing of the personal treasures of Moteucçoma stolen by the Spaniards, also including such royal insignia as the xiuhhuitzolli (FC XII, 49). Yet another Nahuatl term referring to the thin turquoise nose rod and used in the same context is the teoxiuhyacapitzalli, “thin fine turquoise nose rod,” again mentioned by Tezozomoc (2001, 264) in his description of the coronation of Ahuitzotl and the perforation of the new ruler’s nose.124 Beyond installation rites, the yacaxihuitl was reportedly part of the insignia decorating the mortuary bundle of Tiçoc in his funeral ceremony.125 The use of the turquoise nose ornament in this context is further corroborated by the imagery of the royal funeral bundle in the Codex Tudela (fol. 55r) that bore attributes related to the cult of the fire god, including the blue nose rod. A greenstone version of this ornament was the chalchiuhyacamitl, worn by rulers in dance.126 Another frequent nose ornament, the yacametztli (“nose moon [ornament]”), or nose ornament in the form of the crescent, was a diagnostic trait of pulque deities and some of the mother goddesses associated with Huastec origin (figure 2.25c). Forming part of “Huastec” war costumes, it was made of gold (FC VIII, 35) and is known through extant examples in museum collections.127 The same golden version of this nose adornment—teocuitlayacametztli—is mentioned among costly Mexica insignia stolen by the Spaniards (FC XII, 48) and as an ornament of the impersonator of Xipe Totec (FC IX, 69). Apparently, the nose-crescent ornament could also be worn independently from the cuextecatl costume, as images of a brave tiacauh warrior (PM, fol. 72v) or a Tlaxcalan warrior (Lienzo de Tlaxcala, 61) seem to imply. Teocuitlayacaquaztli, or “the golden nose plate (?),”128 mentioned as one of the dance ornaments of rulers (PM, fol. 56r), should be perhaps identified as a golden nose plate worn by Mexica rulers during the investiture ceremony depicted in the work of fray Diego Durán (1984, II, ills. 15, 37) and in the Tovar Manuscript (fol. 12)

75

76

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

where a large bone-shaped nose plug with wider, flattened ends is represented (figure 2.26b).129 However, taking into account the evidence on the role of the turquoise nose rod in coronation rites in Tenochtitlan, the pictorial data suggesting the use of a golden nose plug in the same context should be treated with caution. Finally, the term teocuitlayacapapalotl (“golden butterfly-shaped nose plate”) is mentioned as one of the precious items handed by the pochteca to Ahuitzotl and as being among the goods taken by Aztec merchants besieged in Quauhtenanco (FC IX, 3, 5). Lip Orna ments

A great variety of terms for lip ornaments implies that numerous kinds of these insignia were in use. The general term for lip plugs is tentetl (literally, “lip stone”) and it appears in this general sense in the Nahuatl sources (figures 2.25a–b). A closely related, equally general term was tençacatl (literally, “lip straw”). Even if they appear to have been used synonymously, it is possible that they differ slightly in form, a tentetl being shorter and perhaps usually round, while a tençacatl was longer and thinner. Yet another broad category encompassed different kinds of tencololli (“something bent for the lips”), a term that designated curved labrets, frequently known under more specific names and betraying specific ethnic affiliations. Labrets figure among the highest insignia of nobility and rulership that are bestowed on rulers by their divine patron and help define the high status they achieved.130 In much the same way, the tentetl appears among precious items described as “the tonalli of rulers,” or that which went to them as their innate property and destiny (PM, fol. 60v; see chapter 4). The teocuitlatentetl, or gold lip plug, appears in numerous contexts: as an attribute of Mexica governors; gifts to foreign rulers; rewards assigned to merchants acting as royal reconnoiterers in a special lip-piercing ceremony; an attribute of merchants who entered Anahuac, which they were permitted to wear on feast days; or one of the items associated with the Otomi ruler.131 It is probable that in fact different golden labret designs were classified under this name, appropriate for distinct contexts and groups of users. One of them was the teocuitlatempilolli (“golden lip pendant”) listed as an adornment of a tiacauh warrior and as a dance adornment of rulers (figure 2.25d).132 Also the quauhtempilolli coztic teocuitlatl, “a gold lip pendant in the form of an eagle,” served as the dance adornment of rulers (FC VIII, 27) and can be identified in the image of Neçahualcoyotl contained in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 106r) as well as in museum collections. A closely related item was the teocuitlaquauhtentetl (“golden eagle lip plug”) listed among the military insignia and accouterments of the rulers and captains (PM, fol. 68r). We learn what such jewelry pieces looked like thanks to the examples of golden labrets decorated with

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

eagle heads extant in museum collections, including the St. Louis Art Museum and Museo Civico di Arte Antica in Turin.133 An eagle-shaped lip plug (quauh­tentetl ) could also be made of flintstone and used by brave tiacauh warriors, or of greenstone (chalchiuhquauhtentetl ) fixed within a gold setting.134 Still within the broad group of golden labrets, a particularly elaborate one was the apatlactempilolli coztic teocuitlatl (lip pendant of gold, in the form of a broadleafed water plant”) reportedly worn by rulers in dance (FC VIII, 28). It is perhaps worn by a brave warrior going unarmed to the battle in the Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 59r). He has a large protruding golden labret in the form resembling a leaf or a flower. Royal dance ornaments also included other sophisticated labret designs such as a boating pole, a pelican, a crescent, and a fire serpent (ahuictempilolli, atototempilolli, metztempilolli, xiuhcoatempilolli; FC VIII, 27). The last one could be of special importance, for its form of the fire serpent alludes to the symbolism of other insignia of Mexica rulers associated with the fire god Xiuhteuctli. In fact, the turquoise lip plug (xiuhtentetl ) proper is found as an accouterment of rulers and noblemen (PM, fol. 72r; see also figure 2.25a), especially in the context of coronation.135 A possibly synonymous term was the xoxouhqui tençacatl, “the bluegreen labret” probably made of turquoise and listed both as attributes of Mexica governors and as precious items assigned to brave warriors, and especially to those of Otomi rank.136 There was also a disk-shaped turquoise labret labeled the temalacatentetl teoxihuitl and employed as a royal dance adornment.137 Other highly prized lip adornments were made of greenstone, for which the most common term was the chalchiuhtentetl (figure 2.25b). It appears in numerous contexts, such as the royal dance, among accouterments of the high nobility and precious royal gifts to brave warriors, and even as one of the costly goods the ruler wagered in ballgames.138 A closely related term was the quetzalchalchihuitl tentetl, meaning “quetzal-feather/precious greenstone labret,” classified as tlatocatlatquitl, or “royal gear,” and given in reward to valiant warriors who managed to take their fourth captive (PM, fol. 65r). The greenstone was in fact set in gold (FC VIII, 27), as perhaps in all prestigious ornaments of this kind, and this version, faithfully depicted, can be seen in the image of a noble from Tetzcoco, as represented in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 107r). Greenstone was also used to produce curved labrets, discussed below. A distinct kind of lip adornment made of amber was called apoçonaltentetl. The special privilege of wearing amber lip plugs was gained by the Mexica merchants for their military merits in southern regions and are described as their neoquichitolli, probably meaning “a recognition of valor.”139 The identification of the apoçonaltentetl with foreign lands, and especially those constituting southern outposts of the Aztec empire, is further corroborated by the Codex Mendoza, which lists yellow

77

78

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

labrets from the provinces of Tochtepec, Xoconochco, and Cuetlaxtlan.140 Extant references to this category of labrets do not suggest that these prestigious merchants’ insignia were employed by the highest elite; in a similar way, a synonymous term apoçonaltençacatl is mentioned as worn by governors (quauh­tlatoque; FC IX, 23) but not by the tlatoque proper. However, another related term, the coztic tençacatl in apoçonalli (“a yellow labret of amber”), made with elements of gold, appears as a dance adornment of rulers (FC VIII, 27). This implies that different varieties of amber labrets, less and more precious, were in use. Other stone labrets included the tehuilotentetl (a lip plug made of rock crystal), itztentetl (an obsidian lip plug), and tepochtentetl (a lip plug of “smoky stone”), all of them reportedly worn by the Otomi people (FC X, 178) and apparently not considered elite adornments. A possible exception could be the labrets manufactured of rock crystal, mentioned both as tribute items from the provinces of Tochtepec and Cuetlaxtlan (Codex Mendoza, fols. 46r, 49r) and among royal dance apparel, decorated with cotinga feathers and set in gold.141 An example of the lip plug made of rock crystal set in gold has been preserved in the Museum für Völkerkunde in Vienna.142 Other materials employed in the manufacture of lip ornaments include seashell (tecçiztentetl )143 and coral (tapachtentetl ), both of them mentioned as attributes of Otomi-rank warriors, in the same way as the nextecuiltentetl (Tezozomoc 2001, 171). This last term should be perhaps translated as “the labret of the crazy ones,” derived from the word nextecuilin, meaning, among other things, “a crazy person.” The name of this particular lip plug probably alluded to the qualities attributed to the Otomi-rank warriors, such as their extreme bravery almost to the point of craziness.144 Another possibility, however, is that it was a labret in the shape of the worm called nextecuilin. The curved labrets, known usually as the tencololli, were traditionally identified as an adornment typical for Huastec people but in fact seem to have been widely used also by the Nahuas in a variety of contexts. Thus, although they were depicted as the attribute of personages from Huexotzinco in various pictorial manuscripts,145 they can also be found in association with Aztec warriors, or as part of the cuextecatl costume worn by them even though retaining Huastec associations (FC VIII, fols. 34r, 56v). The curved labret was also frequently worn by Tlaxcalan warriors, according to the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (figures 2.27, 2.52c). In much the same way, a synonymous term, tençacanecuilli, was reportedly worn by tiacauh-rank warriors (PM, fols. 68v, 73r) but is also mentioned in the context of the installation of Tecocoatzin, a ruler of Quauhtitlan who was hiding in Huexotzinco, where he underwent preparatory fasting ceremonies (Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 42). The çacanecuilli is described as made of a white conch shell cut in a curve (PM, fol. 68v), but other terms imply it could also be made of different materials. Thus, rulers used

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.27. Curved labret, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fols. 39, 40 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892)

the chalchiuhtençacanecuilli, the curved greenstone labret, as one of their dance adornments.146 The same paragraph lists a closely related term, the chalchiuhtencololli, also mentioned in another place as a precious royal gift to brave warriors.147 The co-occurrence of the terms çacanecuilli and tencololli suggests they were not entirely synonymous, probably differing in length or shape. Other curved labret types encompass the apoçonaltencololli (FC IX, 23), made of amber, and blue-green xoxouhqui tencololli, possibly made of turquoise (FC VIII, 74). Summing up, the considerable variety of labret types reveals that several main forms and materials were used to produce many possible combinations. Some lip ornaments seem to have been more prestigious than others and more strongly associated with a particular group of wearers, like merchants or a special category of warriors. In addition, according to the extant data, specific labrets apparently could have been worn by both rulers and lords as well as by other distinguished members of the Nahua society, such as brave warriors. Their prestige was no doubt associated with traditional lip-piercing ceremonies of investiture or elevation in rank. Neck and Chest Orna ments

The most general Nahuatl term for necklaces was cozcatl, which formed part of many more specific names for different neck adornments. This term had a broader meaning, referring to jewels, round beads, or even pieces of jewelry, frequently conveying also the sense of “preciousness,” as in the metaphor in cozcatl, in quetzalli, meaning one’s offspring. Molina translates cozcatl as “jewel, precious stone worked

79

80

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

in a round shape, or beads for praying,”148 though in colonial times also a more specific new term was developed to refer to the rosary: tlapohualcozcatl, or “beads/ string of beads for counting” (Molina, Sp., fol. 32v). However, the direct association with the neck is confirmed by such terms as the quauhcozcatl (“wooden collar”) referring to a wooden device put on slaves’ necks (FC IV, 34, 35). Among the most prestigious was the chalchiuhcozcatl, or a greenstone necklace, which enjoyed a long history as a highly prized insignia in Mesoamerican cultures. Greenstone necklaces, abounding in archaeological material and museum collections, can be found as royal attributes in Teotihuacan, Classic and Postclassic Maya culture, and also in Toltec central Mexico. Not only the precious material itself but also some of the styles of arranging it seem to have continued through considerable time, as was especially the case of a greenstone necklace of radiating pendants. Among the Classic Maya it was worn by rulers, and its use in Aztec times seems to have been confined to a similar group of wearers, while the extant data allow us to link this piece of jewelry to several specific contexts. Appearing together with numerous other adornments in the list of the royal dance accouterments149 in the account by Tezozomoc, the chalchiuhcozcatl belonged to the costume of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin during his “journey” to Cincalco (Tezozomoc 2001, 461). On this occasion he wore the ritual Xipe Totec dress and, indeed, this necklace is listed as part of the Xipe military costume of Mexica leaders (FC VIII, 33). In this last context the chalchiuhcozcatl is described as consisting of both greenstone and turquoise beads. Rulers wear this piece of jewelry in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 55v), Codex Mendoza (fol.10r), and Tovar Manuscript (fols. 127, 128). It also figures as a precious gift and tribute.150 The strong association of the chalchiuhcozcatl with deities of fertility and agriculture (Chalchiuhtlicue, Chicomecoatl, Xilonen, Xochipilli, Tlaloc, Çapotlatenan, and Tezcacoac Ayopechtli) reveals its symbolism linked to vegetation, young maize, water, and rain, which in fact seem to have been the essential pan-Mesoamerican connotations of greenstone (Houston, Stuart, and Taube 2006, 147; Taube 2005). This symbolism stressed the role of Aztec rulers as guarantors and sustainers of fertility, agricultural prosperity, and vegetation renewal.151 A specific kind of greenstone necklace was the chalchiuhcozcatl ololiuhqui, the necklace of round greenstone beads. According to the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68r) it was fashioned entirely of perfectly round, very thick pieces of greenstone. It was worn by rulers when dancing and in war (FC VIII, 28, 33). The necklaces of round greenstone beads depicted on folio 46r in the Codex Mendoza and the neckpiece placed on the ruler’s mortuary bundle shown in the Codex Tudela (fol. 58r; see also figure 2.28) should most probably be identified as the chalchiuhcozcatl ololiuhqui. Likewise, greenstone beads were used in different kinds of the

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.28. Mortuary bundle of a ruler, Codex Tudela, fol. 58r (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid)

chayahuac cozcatl category, discussed below. Also, emeralds were worked into beads of precious necklaces, called quetzalitztli cozcatl (“emerald necklace”) figuring in the Anales de Tlatelolco (1999, 38) as a precious gift to the members of high nobility. Another version of the necklace made of precious stones was called the chal­chiuh­ cozcapetlatl (“greenstone necklace mat” or “greenstone plaited necklace”), part of the apparel of Quetzalcoatl, Tlaloc, and Xilonen, which should probably be envisioned as a wider “band” of greenstone with a golden disk (teocuitlacomalli) in the middle, sometimes decorated additionally with turquoise.152 This assumption about the general characterictics of the cozcapetlatl seems confirmed by Molina, who translated the coztic teocuitlacozcapetlatl as “a wide necklace of gold.”153 The term cozcapetlatl itself is employed by the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68r) in reference to a variety made of gold: the text says that this piece of jewelry was cast of gold, cut into strips, and laid out in three rows like a fine mat decorated with an edge of bells. The word petlatl, “mat,” implies that there would have been two sets of interwoven rows as is the case of the necklace depicted in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 108r; see also figure 2.20c) This kind of neck jewelry is mentioned among dance adornments of rulers and as one of the ornaments worn by lords greeting the Spaniards in 1519 (FC VIII, 56; XII, 43), as part of the royal costume (Torquemada 1977, IV: 329), and among military accouterments of rulers and captains (PM, fols. 68r, 72r), while the golden version is listed as the property of long-distance merchants (FC IX, 18). All these data seem to imply that the cozcapetlatl category embraced necklaces made of precious stones

81

82

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

and gold, perhaps sometimes only of gold, and sometimes combined with greenstone and turquoise. Considering that very similar necklaces (probably mainly made of greenstone) are depicted as worn by the Maya rulers and in Teotihuacan, it seems to be a possible continuation of the prestigious Classic-period insignia. The chipolcozcatl, or necklace of seashells, was made entirely of small snail shells strung together. A more expensive version of this neckpiece was called teocuitlachipolcozcatl, “the necklace of small golden shells” (or “spiral shells/snails”), consisting either of the combination of golden beads and shells or of a golden imitation of small shells. Reportedly, this item belonged to the dance adornment of rulers and the attributes of brave tiacauh-rank warriors (PM, fols. 56v, 68v, 72r–v; FC VIII, 28; see also figure 2.25c). This insignia linked them to their divine patron, Tezcatlipoca: the chipolcozcatl was worn by his manifestation known as Tlacochcalco Yaotl (PM, fol. 266r) and by his impersonators in the feast of Toxcatl, and is listed as part of the costume of this deity (FC II, 69, XII, 12). No doubt its use by Mexica warriors, masters of youths, and war captains alluded to these symbolic connotations.154 The same piece of jewelry is also depicted in the image of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin smelling flowers, contained in the Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 60r; see also figure 2.69). Another similar item was the teocuitlacoztic aquechcozcatl, “the necklace of golden seashells,” an adornment of Quetzalcoatl and a royal dance ornament.155 Because it is listed next to the teocuitlachipolcozcatl, probably the two items differed in form, imitating distinct kinds of shells. Yet another kind of shell neckpiece was the huehuei cozcatl (“great necklace”), worn by tiacauh-rank warriors. Although this term does not allude to any specific material, according to the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68v) it was made of large, polished shells and a disk with a crosspiece in the center. Many varieties of necklaces were made of gold, but sometimes only a general term teocuitlacozcatl (“golden necklace”) is employed, referring, for example, to pieces of jewelry worn by rulers while dancing, in their pleasure time, or belonging to lordly apparel in general (FC VIII, 27, 29–30), goods wagered in ballgames (FC VIII, 29, 58), or prestigious gifts (FC XII, 31, 44). A thin variety was known as the pitzahuac teocuitlacozcatl (“thin golden necklace”), listed among goods of merchants or their trade items. A closely related item was the teocuitlatlapitzalcozcatl, meaning “golden cast necklace” (FC IX, 18).156 The Nahua nobility wore also another golden neck ornament, “the necklace of radiating pendants” (chayahuac cozcatl), made of gold and greenstone beads and having a greenstone disk with round gold bells placed in the center (PM, fol. 68r). As already pointed out by Eduard Seler (1902–23, II: 551), it appears in the list of dance accouterments of the rulers (FC VIII, 28) and on the picture of the mummy bundle of Ahuitzotl contained in the work by fray Diego Durán. Indeed, Alvarado Tezozomoc (2001, 360) mentions the teocuitlachayahuac cozcatl (“golden necklace

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

of radiating pendants”) as one of the attributes of the mortuary bundle of this Mexica tlatoani. It has been possible to identify this necklace also in other sources, such as the Anales de Tlatelolco, where it figures among lordly attributes given by Axayacatl to his personal representatives and to those by whom Aztec rulers were greeted in Acallan (Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 34, 38), among the rulers’ vestments assigned to a valiant warrior when he captured four prisoners (PM, fol. 65r), and as a lordly ornament and personal treasure of Moteucçoma seized by the Spaniards (FC XII, 43, 49). Iconographic renderings of this necklace are quite numerous: the chayahuac cozcatl is worn by high nobles in the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 55v, 72r; see also figures 1.3, 2.25a) and by the Tetzcocan noble Tocuepotzin illustrated in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 108r),157 and it appears as tribute from the Gulf Coast and Huexotzinco.158 The extant data point to a strong association between the chayahuac cozcatl and Aztec rulers. Fancy necklaces included the teocuitlacozcatl temoltic, or “the golden beetlelike necklace,” used as a military insignia of rulers and captains;159 the teocuitlaehuacozcatl (“golden hide necklace”), mentioned as a prestigious gift to foreign messengers (Anales de Quauhtitlan, fols. 52, 53), and the teocuitlatlancozcatl (“golden tooth necklace”), a highly valued trade item (FC IX,18). Finally, the xolocozcatl (“Xolotl necklace”),160 described as having a dog-shaped pendant, was reportedly worn by rulers as part of their fire-god dress in the special dance that took place every four years during the feast of Izcalli devoted to Xiuhteuctli (FC II, 164). The same ornament is also pictured on the mortuary bundle on folio 55r of the Codex Tudela (figure 2.29).161 The origin of this item was ancient: as has been noted by Karl Taube, many parts of the Toltec turquoise warrior regalia were revived in Late Postclassic central Mexican iconography, and among them particularly the xolocozcatl, derived from dog pendants worn by warriors in Chichen Itza (Taube 1994, 233). The butterfly breastplate was another ornament directly derived from the Tula and Chichen Itza repertory, where it adorned figures of richly clad warriors (Kristan-Graham 1989; Taube 1994). In much the same way as turquoise attributes, its symbolism was directly linked to fire and the fire god, and these associations of the butterfly had existed in central Mexico at least since the times of Teotihuacan. Butterfly breastplates adorn the Mexica warriors on the Stones of Tiçoc and the socalled Quauhxicalli of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina as part of their Toltec apparel. The scarcity of data on the use of this item in other contexts suggests it was not much worn in Aztec times beyond a strictly religious context linked to the fire god, but rather it was revived in the iconography of important state monuments as part of Mexica claims to the heritage of their highly admired predecessors. Summing up, most of the necklaces and breastpieces that have been identified show a strong relationship with rulers, aristocracy, and high-ranking warriors. They

83

84

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.29. Mortuary bundle, Codex Tudela, fol. 55r (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid)

seem to have been worn in leisure, festive, religious, and war contexts and to have performed the role of essential lordly attributes, in much the same way as were other categories of personal jewelry listed repeatedly in similar contexts. An interesting symbolic function of neck adornments is implied by the Nahuatl account of the Anales de Tlatelolco (1999, 34), according to which the ruler of Tenochtitlan, Axayacatl, dispatched his messengers with the royal headdress and a necklace (the chayahuac cozcatl made of precious stones). Carrying these special insignia assured the delegation of regal power, transforming them into legitimate representatives of the sovereign as well as executors of his will. On a yet different level, just like other crucial elite attributes, in Aztec times several necklace types seem to have been a conscious continuation of earlier traditions. And, at least sometimes, along with their material form the associated prestige and symbolic meaning were also preserved. Capes

A cape (tilmatli), or a draped rectangular sheet of cloth tied over the arm,162 was a basic male garment in pre-Hispanic central Mexico (Table A.6). The word tilmatli had a broader meaning, referring also to cloth of any kind, clothes in general, and blankets.163 Capes were worn both in secular and religious contexts and—depending on the kind of textile, its quality, and its designs—by both nobles and commoners. Basically, the tilmatli worn by the members of nobility were made of cotton, whereas those worn by the commoners were produced from maguey fiber, also dyed in many colors and designs. Sumptuary laws supposedly prohibited the lower class from wearing capes longer than reaching to the knees, except for warriors who were permitted to hide their scars (Durán 1984, II: 211–13).

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

The most frequently depicted cape in native manuscripts is the white version of the tilmatli, shown as worn even by rulers themselves. It is doubtful that plain capes were indeed characteristic garb of the highest members of nobility; rather it seems probable that we are dealing with a standard pictorial convention in which white symbolized cotton cloaks (ichcatilmatli) supposedly restricted to elite wearers. It is particularly conspicuous in manuscripts like the Codex Xolotl that white capes are a marker of “civilized” descendants of the Toltecs, whereas brown clothes of animal fur denote the Chichimec incomers. In fact, this pictorial convention had a direct impact on written descriptions of colonial authors such as Ixtlilxochitl (1975–77, I: 27, 274) and Torquemada (1977, IV: 329), who insist on white cloaks worn by Toltec rulers. Whereas Torquemada based his account on other written sources, Ixtlilxochitl made a close study and interpretation of native manuscripts, especially from the Tetzcocan region, and it is not infrequent to find in his writings examples of a literal reading of these pictorial sources. White capes are also often depicted in their variants with decorated borders, and especially with the prestigious tenixyo, or cape having a “border of eyes,” restricted to rulers and other highest members of the aristocracy. Examples can be found both within the Valley of Mexico and beyond, in former provinces of the Triple Alliance (figure 2.30).164 This motif, consisting of a band made of white circles with red dots on a black background, was a typical decoration for many kinds of Aztec elite capes, including the most prestigious ones, although they may appear either with or without this border. Patricia Anawalt, in her analysis of the tenixyo garments, points out a strong correlation with Tezcatlipoca and high-status males—gods, rulers, or nobles. Even though she notes four females wearing clothes with this design in the Florentine Codex, she considers it anomalous to the prevailing association with “ruling-class male ritual garments, and ceremonial robes of office” (Anawalt 1992, 142–45). The analysis of the broad repertory of the tenixyo clothes confirms their dominant association with rulers and high nobles. The tenixyo garments frequently figure in royal iconography and are also mentioned or pictured in war-related contexts or worn by lords fulfilling important war or judicial duties (e.g., Codex Mendoza, fols. 64r, 65r; Codex Cozcatzin, fol. 2v; FC VIII, 23–26). The ritual association seems much less common, with examples of priests wearing the tenixyo garments in the Codex Tudela (fols. 44r, 54r; see also figure 4.1). Regarding its use by females, even if this association is indeed ephemeral, these are nevertheless cases of particularly prominent women, such as doña Isabel Tecuichpo in the Codex Cozcatzin (fol. 1v).165 Thus, the “border of eyes” appears to have been a particularly prestigious Aztec, or perhaps even specifically Mexica, motif that survived the conquest and was shared also by elites beyond the Valley of Mexico, in areas under imperial influence.

85

86

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.30. White capes bordered with eyes: (a) Codex Mendoza, fol. 64r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan); (b) Codex Tulane (courtesy of the Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University)

It is not infrequent to find this design framing the most prestigious imperial cape, distinguished by its blue color and turquoise pattern, which, just like other turquoise insignia, belonged to the most important attributes of the huei tlatoque of Tenochtitlan, conveying the idea of legitimate rulership, deeply rooted in the past. These capes are usually pictured as blue mantles with gridlike or diagonally crossing lines giving an impression of a net, with dotted circles or rectangles placed within separate fields delineated by these lines (figures 1.3, 2.31). A similar design is frequently used to represent the turquoise mosaic, for example in the depictions of the xiuhhuitzolli. The most common term referring to this kind of garment was the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli, while the variant with the “border of eyes” was called xiuh­ tlalpilli tilmatli tenixyo or xiuhtilmatli tenchilnahuayo. The meaning of the word xiuhtlalpilli is ambiguous and, as discussed below, different readings are possible. The term xiuhtilmatli tenchilnahuayo (“turquoise [blue] cape bordered with red circles”)166 was employed in reference to exactly the same garment type (PM, fol. 55v), where the term tenchilnahuayo seems to be a variant name for the word tenixyo.

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

This royal mantle has become the subject of intense discussion concerning its actual form and technique of manufacture. Patricia Anawalt, who devoted several studies to the topic (Anawalt 1990, 1993, 1996a), argues that the xiuhtlal­pilli tilmatli was made in the tiedyed technique, and she identifies this item in the written sources both under the complete term and under a shortened form xiuhtlalpilli, when the noun tilmatli does not appear.167 On the other hand, Carmen Aguilera, in her critique of Anawalt’s theory, claims it to have been a fiber net studded with actual turquoise beads or plaques (Aguilera 1997). Although no secure data exist on the pre-Hispanic use of tie-dyeing in Mexico, Anawalt, comparing the designs typical for the xiuhtlalpilli tilFigure 2.31. Neçahualpilli, Codex matli to effects possible to achieve in Ixtlilxochitl, fol. 108r (Bibliothèque the tie-dyed plangi technique, claims Nationale de France) that the name of the item in Nahuatl reflects the technology of manufacture (Anawalt 1996a, 192). However, there seems to be little ground for claiming that this term refers to the technique of dying cloth tied in knots. Another translation, “the turquoise-tied-mantle,” has been proposed by Aguilera (Aguilera 1997, 3).168 In fact, on the language basis, it seems equally justified to construe the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli as a “turquoise knot cape” or a “turquoise knotted cape,” as well as a “turquoise tied cape.”169 In terms of pictorial evidence, there is a very close similarity, or even identity, between the ways the design of the royal cape and surfaces covered by turquoise mosaic, such as the royal diadem, are rendered. The dotted ovals or rectangles appear to be pieces or plates of turquoise attached to the cloth and give an impression of turquoise mosaic (figure 2.32). Suggestions are to be found in pre-Hispanic works of art that the design of the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli can be seen as an imitation of turquoise mosaic as it was depicted in Aztec times and earlier. Considering that the turquoise insignia were used by the Aztec rulers as a conscious revival of prestigious Toltec items, it is interesting to find square-mosaic motifs with dots in the

87

88

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.32. Axayacatl and Mocteucçoma Ilhuicamina, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51r (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid)

middle resembling the similar design on garments worn by warriors or nobles in Tula. A good example is a warrior on Pillar 5 in Building B, the mosaic depicted on the apparel of Atlantean figures from the same building, or on a loose cape or some other garment worn by a figure on a stone slab ( Jiménez García 1996, figures 51C, 3; see also figure 2.33).170 In her argumentation that this garment was actually made of real turquoise stones, Aguilera quotes an interesting piece of evidence: the Nahuatl text of the seventeenth-century Tlaxcalan annals by don Juan Buenaventura Zapata y Mendoza, describing the apparel worn by the local god Camaxtli. Apart from wearing a diadem resembling contemporary bishops’ miters, he reportedly wore “tilmatl auh yni xihuitl tlaçaluli” (Zapata y Mendoza 1995, fol. 1r; Aguilera 1997, 18), which means “cape with turquoise glued to it.” Whereas Aguilera associated the word tlaçaluli with çotica, translated by Molina as “for the bead or a similar thing to be strung,”171 the word in question is in fact tlaçalolli, or “a thing glued to something,” derived from çaloa, meaning “to glue something” (Molina, Nah., fol. 14r). As a matter of fact, an almost identical term, tlaxiuhçalolli, “a thing with turquoise glued on it,” was employed in reference to other objects covered with turquoise mosaic, such as, for example, earplugs or shields (e.g., FC II, 69; XII, 11). Molina also lists a similar word, tlaxiuhçalolmantli, “something worked or tiled in a mosaic manner

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.33. Toltec garments with mosaic design: (a) possible turquoisemosaic hip cloth on the relief figure in Tula (after Jiménez García 1996, fig. 51-C, 3; redrawn by Justyna Olko); (b) possible turquoise mosaic sandals, Atlantean figure, Tula (after Jiménez García 1996, fig. 3, redrawn by Justyna Olko)

[like turquoise]” (Molina, Nah., fol. 146r).172 Thus, the item in question was a cape ornamented with turquoise stones glued or fastened to the cloth. Although we do not know whether this garment was directly related to the royal mantle,173 this evidence strengthens the hypothesis that the most prestigious textiles could have been indeed decorated with real pieces of turquoise. Other insights can be gathered from the work of Alvarado Tezozomoc, who describes the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli in the following way: “they put on him a cape of fine workmanship, with small emerald stones glued to it,” confusing turquoise for emeralds, but specifying precisely the form of the decoration (Tezozomoc 2001, 160).174 Although Anawalt rejects the testimony provided by Tezozomoc in view of his purported heavy degree of “Hispanization” and “removal from the indigenous pre-Conquest tradition” (Anawalt 1996a, 196–200), it should be recalled that his work in the shape that we know today, is the direct, unpolished translation of the Nahuatl prototype.175 Another disputable point is the identification of the royal mantle with netted garments called xiuhayatl and belonging to a group of capes called ayatl (Aguilera 1997, 17). In fact, Seler already identified the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli with the capes worn by the manifestations of Tezcatlipoca: Omacatl and Tlacochcalco Yaotl (e.g., PM, fols. 266r–v), that is, the mecaayatl, or “cord capes,” associated with war and warriors (Seler 1902–23, II: 426). According to Anawalt, the collective evidence indicates that the wearing of fiber-net capes was the particular privilege of warriors on ceremonial occasions honoring their patron Tezcatlipoca. In addition, netted capes formed a separate category labeled cuechintli or chalcaayatl (Anawalt 1996a, 188–95). Indeed, several different types of netted and netlike capes described or pictured in extant sources, for example mecaayatl garments in the Primeros Memoriales,

89

90

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

seem to bear no or little overt relationship to the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli and, on the basis of Nahuatl terminology, can be divided into several related groups. The first category encompasses ayatl netlike or thin capes. According to Dibble and Anderson (FC X, 181, note 53) this type of cape, mentioned, for example, as woven by Otomi women, is often referred to as “netted” but in fact probably consisted of an open-mesh, plain-weave fabric or a gauze weave that would produce the look of a “netted” costume item. They are usually described as items of loose, sparse weave, but some of them also as thick garments (tilahuac; FC X, 73). It seems plausible that the term ayatl referred to a different kind of cape or, perhaps, that in spite of its supposed primary association with the maguey fiber (e.g., FC X, 73), it was sometimes used synonymously with the tilmatli. According to Molina, the ayatl means “a thin cape of cotton or maguey” (Molina, Nah., fol. 3r),176 while other names contain additional clues to the kind of fiber used: the nopalayatl, or netlike nopal cactus cape woven by the Otomi (FC X, 180), or the ichayatl (“maguey fiber [thin?] cape”) and quetzalichayatl (“fine maguey fiber [thin?] cape”), where the word ichtli, or thread made of the maguey fiber, was combined with ayatl, which alone was apparently not sufficient to describe the material used (FC IX, 22; X, 73).177 Related terms include the already-mentioned mecaayatl, the ayatlacuilolli (“a netlike/thin painted cape”) mentioned as a gift from Tlaxcala (Tezozomoc 2001, 416), tleçahuallayatl (“netlike/thin cape with the fire spider web design”) reportedly worn by priests (PM, fol. 268r), as well as the xiuhayatl and teoxiuhayatl, or “netlike/ thin turquoise capes.” The xiuhayatl and teoxiuhayatl are mentioned as garments of Mexica royalty worn at the coronation (described in this context as a blue cape of maguey fiber with the golden-sun design), funeral rites, and sacrificial ceremonies (Tezozomoc 2001, 248, 360, 418). The xiuhayatl also appears in the Anales de Quauhtitlan (fol. 14) as the precious cloth that wrapped the sacred mirror, a sacred bundle of Tezcatlipoca, which guided his followers. Such ritual bundles served to establish and maintain a direct communication with the god (Olivier 2006, 206). Even if the data provided by Tezozomoc could be taken to imply that the xiuhayatl was the same as the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli—also sometimes described by this author as a netted garment—such an identification is not confirmed by any other source. Some clues point out, however, that at least specific varieties of ayatl were netted or see-through garments. During the feast of Etzalqualiztli the priests of the rain god Tlaloc put on their xicolli sleeveless jackets and over them the “ayatl called the mist garment [ayauhquemitl] or a dew garment [ahuachquemitl], with pintail feathers,”178 which implies a light, translucent covering. There seems to be even less doubt that a term chalcaayatl (“thin/netted cape in the Chalco style”) designated netted garments. It was worn on ritual occasions by chief warriors and described as made of “twisted thread, knotted, like a net with small shells. The rulers had golden shells

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

in their netted capes. Of the netted capes of the shorn ones it was said they had fruit. It was said they had fruit, because of very big balls of thread that hung from them” (FC III, 56).179 This intriguing reference to “fruit” (xocotl ) hanging from brave warriors’ capes seems to allude to Otonteuctli, the god embodying the transformation of dead warriors and to the privileged destiny of the heroic ones who died on the battlefield. Thus, Otonteuctli symbolized the glorious dead who had been transformed into stars or birds, and he was also closely identified with the fire god Xiuhteuctli as the fire falling from heaven (conceptualized as celestial missiles). He was the divine patron of an important festival called Xocotl huetzi (“the fruit falls”), celebrated during the annual cycle in Tenochtitlan, in which the xocotl, the falling fruit, was placed atop a ritual pole and then thrown down to be grasped by one of the participants of the feast. The same name was given to effigies of warriors who died on the battlefield; these images were adorned with attributes of Otonteuctli. According to some accounts, the Xocotl huetzi involved the sacrifice of captives, who were cast from the poles, thus becoming living fruits charged with celestial fire and falling to earth. In one of the descriptions of this ritual (contained in the Codex Magiliabechiano and Códice Ritos y Costumbres), the xocotl symbolized Xiuhteuctli, himself represented by a human victim thrown into the fire after falling down from the pole, and referring thus to the transformation of this god through fire (Graulich 1989, 58–62, 66). The idea of war as the earthly projection of the cosmic struggle, the belief in the postmortem transformation of the dead warriors and the subsequent rebirth of their spiritual components through fire, was an essential part of a wider conceptual framework going back at least to the times of Teotihuacan (Taube 2000) and further developed in Aztec times. Thus, the description of the chalcaayatl warriors’ cape implies this item carried considerable symbolic baggage. The xocotl on the netted capes of valiant warriors symbolized their ultimate fate and supernatural transformation, exemplified by their patron Otonteuctli-Xiuhteuctli, but also probably the mission to provide “fruits”—prisoners, human victims—to nourish and fecundate the earth. It is possible that this kind of cape was also identified by the term cuechintli, a netted mantle used by a smilar group of wearers, the only possible difference being the shell decoration attributed to the chalcaayatl variety. The cuechintli was described by the informants of Sahagún as being “like a fish net of a wide mesh with a fringe of brown cotton thread.”180 This item was worn by the impersonator of Tezcatlipoca, the fasting participants of the feast of Toxcatl, as well as, in different varieties, the masters of youths and seasoned warriors (CF II, 69, 99; XII, 53). It is also the adornment of masters of youths and a novice priest in the Codex Mendoza (fols. 57r, 61r, 62r, 63r; see also figure 2.34), warriors in the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 2 and Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 59r), and nobles in the Lienzo de Tepeticpac.

91

92

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.34. Netted capes, Codex Mendoza, fols. 57r, 61r, 63r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

Summing up, the preconquest Nahuas used a special category of netted capes or at least garments of loose thread, labeled cuechintli or ayatl. Although sometimes these items apparently could be worn by the nobility—their usual wearers being priests, warriors, and impersonators of Tezcatlipoca—this apparel did not have anything in common with the turquoise royal cape. In the pertinent imagery, traditional depictions of royal turquoise capes imply textile garments, not loose, netted items. Netted mantles appear as part of the possessions of Martín Ocelotl in the pictorial document accompanying his inquisitorial proceedings preserved in the Archivo General de la Nación in Mexico (figure 2.35a). In this document, the net-looking capes are pictured alongside capes with the unquestionable xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli design and are entirely distinct. Already in Terminal Classic–Early Postclassic Chichen Itza, netted garments were clearly different from turquoisemosaic-covered items, and the same holds true in Mexica iconography, even if in colonial copies.181 It is also meaningful that some of the fur capes worn in depictions of “Chichimec” rulers are covered with the diamond-shaped design, similar to that of the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli. This seems to be part of a convention that imitates the design of the most prestigious capes to mark the status of a cape as a royal garment, even if there is a basic difference in the material used. What seems to be of primary importance is the design on the cloak, imitating the turquoise mosaic, for it is simply impossible that these fur capes were depicted or imagined as netted garments. In addition, a synonymous term for this kind of cloak appearing in the Primeros Memoriales, xiuhtilmatli tenchilnahuayo (“turquoise [blue] royal cape bordered with red circles”) does not allude in any way to a knotted or netted texture.

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.35. Textiles with turquoise-mosaic and quilted designs: (a) one of the capes belonging to Martín Ocelotl (Archivo General de la Nación, Inquisición, vol. 37, fol. 79; drawing by Justyna Olko); (b) fragment of a cotton textile identified as a xicolli garment, Offering 102, Museo Templo Mayor (drawing by Justyna Olko); c–e. capes given in tribute, Codex Mendoza, fols. 27r, 32r, 49r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

Taking into account available evidence already discussed, it is possible that the most precious capes worn by the rulers of Tenochtitlan could have been indeed decorated with turquoise stones, as could have been other royal insignia. What seems unequivocal, is that entirely cotton capes with painted (or, less likely, woven) imitations of the turquoise-mosaic design were in common use among the members of the ruling class, which could have been especially the case for lower (or provincial) lords emulating powerful sovereigns. A similar kind of a cotton textile has been discovered in an offering associated with the Templo Mayor and identified as a xicolli garment (figure 2.35b).182 It is decorated with a painted black design of dots and squares resembling the pattern of the turquoise mosaic and closely follows images in pictorial manuscripts, such as the capes in the inquisition document associated with Martín Ocelotl (figure 2.35a). In particular, this could be also the case of the cacamoliuhqui and some of the nacazminqui, frequently figuring as tribute items in the Matrícula de Tributos and Codex Mendoza (figures 2.35c–e). These varieties are usually identified as quilted mantles (e.g., Berdan and Anawalt 1992), but it is perhaps not coincidental that their design consists of diagonal lines delineating diamond-shaped fields with small rectangles in the middle. Precisely within this variety, an additional piece of evidence is provided by the cape described as “diagonally divided turquoise knotted/tied cape [with the turquoise-mosaic design], on which a spear eagle stands” (FC VIII, 23).183 It is called xiuhtlalpilnacazminqui, where the term nacazminqui indicates that it was diagonally divided so that one-half contained the turquoisemosaic design (xiuhtlalpilli) while the other had the eagle (tlacochquauhtli) motif. Unfortunately we lack an image of this garment, but its description is concurrent with the nacaz­minqui and nacazminqui tenixyo capes, frequently figuring as tribute

93

94

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

items in the Matrícula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza, and usually containing two differently ornamented halves, diagonally divided, and framed with a decorated border. Significantly, one-half usually contains the blue “quilted” design on a white background, similar to the design of the xiuhtlalpilli capes, and thus most probably being its painted imitation. Yet another question potentially illuminating the meaning and form of royal turquoise mantles is the relationship between these capes, the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli, and aprons (hip cloths), called the xiuhtlalpilli. While some scholars take xiuhtlalpilli as a reference to capes,184 this term should be understood primarily as the hip cloth, or tlalpilli, a kind of garment used in specific contexts by the preconquest Nahuas (Aguilera 1997, 6, 15–17). However, the use of this term appears to be more complex, for indeed sometimes the term xiuhtlalpilli was almost certainly employed in reference to the cape and not the hip cloth because it is listed among other elite capes (FC VIII, 23–26; XII, 6). Surprisingly enough, in two other cases this item is labeled as a cape, even though the description implies the cloth wrapped around the waist.185 The first fragment describes the costume of Tezcatlipoca given to the Spaniards: “one cape with the turquoise [mosaic] design, called tzitzilli, folded at the corners so as to tie it in the back, and over it rests the back mirror.”186 According to the second reference, concerning the same costume put on Cortés, “they tied the back mirror to his waist, also they bound around his buttocks the cape called tzitzilli.”187 Aguilera is probably right in her association of the term tzitzilli with low-quality turquoise, and thus with a specific name for the xiuhtlalpilli (Aguilera 1983, 175), for this word is probably related to tzitzitl, a second-quality, cracked and stained turquoise used in the manufacture of mosaics.188 This is yet another piece of evidence supporting the hypothesis that the royal xiuhtlalpilli cape may have been decorated with real pieces of turquoise, at least in exceptional cases. In any case, the references just discussed imply that although the garment was labeled a cape, it was folded, wrapped and tied around the waist, and topped by a small mirror, the tezcacuitlapilli, worn on the back. Thus, either because the precious turquoise cape itself could have been folded as a hip-covering cloth (perhaps as on one of the images of Painal, the manifestation of Huitzilopochtli, discussed below), or because of the intrinsic relationship between the two items, they were simply confused with each other or there existed some sort of identity between them. The same kind of hip cloth is mentioned as part of the array of Huitzilopochtli and Painal, his substitute in the feast of Panquetzaliztli (FC I, 2; PM, fol. 261r; see also figure 2.36a). The latter is clad in a large piece of textile (perhaps a cape) forming a sort of a hip cloth with a design identical to that seen on royal turquoise capes. In this particular case, the term xiuhtlalpilli explicitly refers to a “turquoise

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.36. (a) Painal wearing xiuhtlalpilli hip cloth, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 261r; (b) Yacateuctli wearing the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 262r (Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; drawings by Justyna Olko)

hip cloth,” which is also clear enough in the description of the costume of a sacrificial victim prepared by the pochteca merchants that mentions tying the xiuhtlalpilli around his waist (FC IX, 60). The same term is listed among the accouterments worn by lords in a special processional dance that took place every four years as part of the feast of Izcalli, but here it probably qualifies the xicolli jacket bearing the xiuhtlalpilli design (FC II, 164). As has already been discussed, it was during this festival that they wore other turquoise items associated with Xiuhteuctli and derived from the Tula-Chichen Itza tradition. And indeed, aprons covered with the design alluding to the turquoise mosaic are worn by figures in the reliefs of both of these centers, whereas the cape with a similar design is apparently absent. Hip cloths of different kinds are among the most salient garments for male figures in Tula and Chichen Itza. In Aztec times, this type of apparel became primarily associated with gods and their impersonators, both in the Valley of Mexico and in the Borgia Group manuscripts, while in the Mixtec area it was frequently worn in secular contexts (Anawalt 1981). It is thus possible that Early Postclassic hip cloths, in much the same way as other turquoise regalia, should be seen as direct prototypes

95

96

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

of the Aztec xiuhtlalpilli and probably also the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli proper. In other words, I hypothesize that the design of the most prestigious royal cape was derived from a Toltec-associated hip cloth with the turquoise design or indeed covered with turquoise, with pieces of stone attached to a cotton cloth in a way imitating mosaic. Moving even further, although the term xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli can be understood as “turquoise knotted/tied cape” (and hence, “the cape with the turquoise-mosaic design”), an alternative reconstruction of its meaning may be simply “the cape like the turquoise [mosaic] apron.” While tlalpilli is translated by Molina as “cosa atada, o añudada” (“something tied or knotted”), we should consider the explanation he gives for the related reflexive verb tlalpilia: “atarse la manta el indio, o añudarla, quando se la pone” (“for an Indian to tie on a cape, or knot it when he puts it on”; Molina, Nah., fol. 124v). Thus, this verb conveys the sense of tying a piece of cloth on or around the body—that is, girding (and hence having nothing to do with the tying of knots or a net)—as one would expect from the tlalpilli hip cloth.189 An important clue to the reconstruction of possible functions and meanings of the Mexica royal cape is its regional distribution. Extant sources link it strongly to the Valley of Mexico and especially to the rulers of Tenochtitlan, whereas the only case of its use in a Tetzcocan source is the late image of Neçahualpilli in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 108r; see also figure 2.31). The mantles with turquoise design can be found in manuscripts from conquered provincial areas, such as the Códice de Huichapan from Hidalgo (fol. 26), where it serves to identify the Mexica rulers. In the Codex Azoyú 2 from Tlapan in Guerrero, this cape is worn by one of the local pre-Hispanic rulers and a local leader governing immediately after the Spanish conquest. Thus, while in some places the turquoise royal cape seems to have been part of the conventional image of imperial sovereigns, in the distant province of Tlapan the prestigious foreign mantle became associated with the indigenous elite, subject to the Aztec state. An interesting example comes from the Mapa de Atenco-Mizquiahuala, a locality in Hidalgo, where a ruler of Santa María de Atengo is clad in a light blue cape with a “diamonds and dots” design resembling that of the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli (or probably one of its painted imitations) and framed by a red border (figure 3.25). It would be another example of the use or emulation of the prestigious Mexica royal cape by the provincial nobility. An alternative explanation could view it perhaps as a continuation of the local tradition preceding the Aztec empire. Mizquiahuala belonged to a former province of Axocopan that as part of its tribute obligations delivered capes with a similar design (Anawalt 1992, 136–39). However, other specifically Mexica costume elements are also pictured in this document, which would work in favor of the emulation of imperial conventions. Also, the Códice de Huichapan comes from a former province of Xilotepec, reportedly paying tribute of cacamoliuhqui

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

capes, but only the Mexica rulers and not the local nobility, are shown wearing these prestigious garments. All this seems to imply that early colonial native manuscripts reflected an imperial convention. As has been pointed out, many royal insignia discussed so far were not associated exclusively with rulers; however, the use of the turquoise cape seems to have been very restricted. It is found in association with tlatoque, in great part pre-Hispanic Mexica monarchs, and also with some deities such as Huitzilopochtli or Yacateuctli (figure 2.36b). According to written testimonies, this garment was worn by the rulers of Tenochtitlan in coronation ceremonies and during the spectacles of sacrifice of war captives190 or given as a prestigious gift to other rulers.191 Similar to other turquoise regalia, they were conceived as inherited items of antiquity. It was Patricia Anawalt who proposed that the emperor’s blue cloak was not only a symbol of rulership but also was used “as an heraldic device to declare Toltec genealogical heritage, a necessity for rulership in Late Postclassic central Mexico” (Anawalt 1996a, 204). However, the “Toltec” link is based on the inclusion of the xiuhtlalpilli in the list of Toltec insignia (FC X, 169) and, although this item is commonly identified as a cape, terminologically it designates the blue hip cloth. It is therefore possible that it was rather the turquoise-mosaic apron used in Toltec times that inspired the ritual use of this garment in the Aztec times as well as the use of the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli repeating the same design. In addition, Anawalt claims that the ancient cults of Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca are reflected respectively in the Mexica’s knotted (tie-dyed) and netted capes that were distinct categories, conveying two different messages.192 However, there is no doubt that both the blue apron and cape formed part of the complex of the turquoise royal insignia derived from the Early Postclassic tradition and comprising also the xiuhhuitzolli, xiuhyacamitl, xiuhtentetl, or xolocozcatl. Starting in the end of the Classic period and through early colonial times, these adornments were closely associated with the fire god Xiuhteuctli, rather than with Quetzalcoatl. In much the same way as other turquoise regalia, a turquoise-color hip cloth or kilt figures as an attribute of Xiuhteuctli in the Codex Telleriano-Remensis (fol. 24r). At the same time, this garment is found in association with Tezcatlipoca, another patron of the rulers of Tenochtitlan.193 The turquoise-mosaic mantle does not exhaust the repertory of royal capes, worn in numerous designs. Extant images of Aztec rulers show different kinds of blue capes bearing no trace of the turquoise-mosaic design. It is difficult to say if, at least in some cases, they are simplified colonial images of the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli, or plain blue capes that were actually worn. In fact, the term xiuhtilmatli, literally a “turquoise cape” or “[turquoise] blue cape,” may primarily designate blue cotton capes, but sometimes it seems to have been used as an alternative appelation for the xiuhtlalpilli garments.194 In colonial manuscripts blue capes appear to be associated

97

98

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

mainly with pre-Hispanic and early colonial lords, attesting to the prestige attached to this “color of royalty” in a broad area reaching beyond the Valley of Mexico.195 Royal imagery contained in the Primeros Memoriales also encompasses personages clad in multicolored capes with the crisscross design and glossed as tlatlapaltilmatli, or “varicolored capes.” This variety of mantle also appears in the Anales de Quauhtitlan, the Matrícula de Tributos, the Codex Mendoza, and the Crónica mexicana by Tezozomoc (where it appears in a synonymous form tlatlapalquachtli) as tribute items from imperial provinces. However, unlike the royal capes pictured in the Sahaguntine manuscript, tlatlapaltilmatli illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos are decorated with multicolored stripes on a cotton surface. Thus, it seems certain that “netted” or “gridlike” designs visible on the royal tlatlapaltilmatli capes in the Primeros Memoriales refer to designs on whole cotton cloth and not “netted” garments.”196 Another widely represented group of capes are animal-skin garments and those made of textiles imitating such animal skins, classified by a general term ehuatilmatli (“leather cape” or a “hide cape”);197 more specific appellations were in use in relation to the hides of particular animals (figure 2.37a–c). The ehuatilmatli was common for the imagery of Chichimec leaders and warriors in the Valley of Mexico and Puebla, no doubt reflecting a common historical tradition of migrations from the north and the concept of semicivilized ancestors. Such capes are frequently worn by early Mexica and Acolhua rulers but do not appear in extant Tlaxcalan sources, which seems surprising in view of their sharing, or even vaunting, the same Chichimec tradition. What deserves attention is the way Mexica leaders in their fur capes were depicted in the Primeros Memoriales: unlike Tetzcocan and Huexotla rulers, their animal-hide capes are drawn in a way similar to “knotted” turquoise garments, the only difference between them being their brown color (figure 2.37a). The way they are pictured seems to emphasize the prestige of this tradition as well as the status of the rulers of Tenochtitlan versus their neighbors. The oceloehuatilmatli, or jaguar-skin capes, were among the most prestigious fur garments (figure 2.38). However, in contrast to other hide capes, this variety was not exclusively associated with Chichimec leaders or early dynastic rulers.198 Besides, the jaguar-skin garment should be differentiated from the ocelotilmatli, or textile capes bearing a pattern imitating a jaguar skin. The references in the Florentine Codex (FC X, 180) and the Crónica mexicana (Tezozomoc 2001, 384, 409) explicitly refer to the ocelotilmatli as a woven cape. The use of different varieties of capes dyed with jaguar-skin markings is also confirmed by such terms as the ocelotlapanqui tilmatli (“the cape with a split jaguar [design]”)199 or the ocelotentlapalli tilmatli with the image of a jaguar.200 Alluding to the symbolism of jaguar skins as pan-­ Mesoamerican markers of royal power since the Preclassic times, cotton capes with

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.37. Ehuatilmatli: a–c Primeros Memoriales, fols. 51r, 52r, 53r (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid)

Figure 2.38. Jaguar-skin capes or capes with jaguar-skin design: (a–b) Codex Tudela, fol. 87v (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid); (c) Codex Mendoza, fol. 31r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

the jaguar design figure as the adornment of rulers and noblemen as well as prestigious gifts to the members of high nobility.201 The differentiation between actual animal hides identified as an apparel of Chichimec ancestors and their cotton imitations used at the time of contact is mirrored in terms designating capes of other animal skins. The cuetlachehuatilmatli (“wolf-skin cape”), the mizehuatilmatli (“the cape of mountain-lion skin”), the ocotoch­ehuatilmatli (“bobcat-skin cape”), and the maçaehuatilmatli (“deerskin cape”)202 are all enumerated among items belonging to the royal costume repertory (PM, fol. 55v), but some of them were also associated with rulers of the Teochichimeca (FC X, 172). A term cuetlachtilmatli, or “wolf cape,” probably designated a textile version in much the same way as the jaguar-cape varieties, especially since this garment is listed among feathered and textile capes (FC VIII, 24). This assumption is further confirmed by a related term cuetlachixyo tilmatli (“the

99

100

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

cape with a wolf face”), an adornment of rulers and noblemen (FC VIII, 25) that does not seem to have been of leather. Thus, actual animal-skin capes figure as an important feature of preconquest pictorial conventions, and it is entirely possible that prestigious jaguar skins were used as royal attributes in Aztec times, but cotton mantles imitating the skins of wolves as well as jaguars and other felines were widely accepted as prestigious elite garments. On the other hand, among remote cotton counterparts of the coyoehuatilmatli (“coyote-skin cape”) were the coyoichcatilmatli (“coyote-colored cotton cape”), mentioned among gifts during the feast of Izcalli (FC II, 165); the coyoichcacanahuac tilmatli (“thin coyote-colored cotton cape”), mentioned among tribute items in the Anales de Quauhtitlan (fol. 65); and the coyoichcatentlayahualo tilmatli (“coyotecolored cotton cape with a spiral border”), worn by rulers and noblemen (FC VIII, 24).203 These items were made of brown cotton called coyoichcatl (“coyote-colored cotton”), a name still attested among some contemporary communities (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 159). Coyoichcatl is explicitly mentioned among kinds of varicolored cotton grown by the Toltecs and among varieties sold by a cotton seller (FC III, 14; X, 75). Its identification as brown cotton is further corroborated by the placing of coyoichcatilmatli together with a tawny cape (quappachtilmatli).204 An important group of Aztec elite capes bore religious motifs alluding to particular gods or ceremonial contexts. Some of them seem to have been prescribed for special occasions, like the quauhtilmatli (“the cape with an eagle [design]”; see also figure 2.39a) used in times of mourning (Tezozomoc 2001, 421–22) or fasting capes decorated with bone motifs and called neçahualquachtli omicallo (“fasting cape with the bone repository [design]”).205 The blue-green version of this cape covered the head of a Mexica electee during fasting in coronation rites in Tenochtitlan, while the accompanying lords veiled their faces with its black variety (FC VIII, 62–63; see also figure 4.2). These garments were identified with precious textiles that enveloped sacred bundles of the royal patron gods, Huitzilopochtli and Tezcatlipoca, whereas the motifs of the crossed bones on the clothes worn by a future king alluded to his symbolic death and rebirth after a passage through the Underworld (Olivier 2006, 208–18). Even if in many cases we lack information on the ritual contexts in which different capes were used, their designs suggest profound symbolic meaning, probably conveying essential information on the identities and functions of their wearers. One such garment was the tonatiuhyo tilmatli, or “the cape with the sun [design],” mentioned as the adornment of rulers and noblemen (PM, fol. 55v) and probably pictured in the Codex Tudela (fol. 88r; see also figure 2.39b).206 The rulers of Tenochtitlan also wore a closely related variant known as the tlauhtona­tiuhyo tilmatli (“the cape with the red sun [design]”), which could also be given to the

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.39. Examples of capes in the Codex Tudela: (a) quauhtilmatli, fol. 88r; (b) tonatiuhyo tilmatli, fol. 88r; (c) mictlanteuctli tilmatli, fol. 86r (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid)

elite of enemy states (Tezozomoc 2001, 170, 409, 417). Numerous capes in extant Nahua sources bear the “wind jewel” or a conch-shell motif, usually depicted as its cross-section, and associated with the god of wind and breath of life, EhecatlQuetzalcoatl. This category encompasses capes identified by a general term ecacozcayo,207 or the cape with the “jewel of Ehecatl” design (figure 2.40), tribute items from Tochpan and Atlan, garments of the highest state officials (Codex Mendoza, fol. 65r), and prestigious gifts (FC XII, 6; Tezozomoc 2001, 291).208 Its variant, the camopalecacozcayo tenihuiyo tilmatli (“the orange-purple cape with the wind jewel [design] and the feathered border”), was worn by rulers and noblemen and also given in tribute.209 Another variety bearing religious motifs was the ometochtecomayo tilmatli tenixyo, “the cape with wine-god jar [design], with the border of eyes.” Its design—the pulque vessel with the curled yacametztli nose-ornament symbol inside—alludes to the god of alcoholic beverages, Ometochtli, and other octli deities, while the localities tributing these capes, mainly the Tochpan province, were places of special devotion to these gods (Seler 1902–23, II: 524). Many capes decorated with religious symbols are depicted in the Codex Tudela (fols. 85v–88v; see also figures 2.39a–c); they were copied in the Libro de figuras and are reflected through their subsequent reproduction in the Codex Fiestas (fols. 57r–58v) and Codex Magliabechiano (fols. 2v–8v).210 Some clues to their identification are provided by the glosses contained in the Codex Fiestas (Batalla Rosado 2002, 273–74), but frequently the exact identification remains elusive.211 At least sometimes the attribution provided by glosses seems convincing, as in the case of a cape decorated with the image of a knot with red-white streamers placed within the red-white circle and linked to the god Xipe Totec (Codex Fiestas, fol. 57v), for these are typical attributes of this deity. Another interesting example is the identification of the cape with the water-beetle design surrounded by four eye signs as the mictlanteuctli tilmatli, “the cape of the death god,” which seems accurate in view of

101

102

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.40. Examples of the ecacozcayo tilmatli: (a) Codex Tudela, fol. 85v (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid); (b–c) Codex Mendoza, fols. 52r, 53r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

the symbolic relationship between the beetle and this deity (Batalla Rosado 2002, 360–61; see also figure 2.39c). It seems probable that this set of capes represented garments used for purely religious purposes. Many capes were decorated with flower patterns. In pictorial and written sources they are associated with pre-Hispanic and colonial rulers, lords, nobles, and, less frequently, warriors obtaining such mantles as rewards for their battle deeds. As reflected by their Nahuatl names, the designs of fancy, colorful capes worn by rulers and noblemen imitated many flower species, including bouvardia, dahlia, loeselia, magnolia, philodendron, plumeria, poinsettia, polianthes, and popcorn flower. At least some of those species were attributed with special qualities: the cacaloxochitl (plumeria flower) and eloxochitl (magnolia), mentioned as decoration of royal capes (cacaloxochyo and eloxochyo tilmatli), figure in the Codex Badianus among flowers relieving the fatigue of rulers and those performing public offices (Codex Badianus 2000, 70; Heyden 1983, 16–17, 49–50). Yet another interesting group of capes—mantles bearing regional designs or associated with particular regions and ethnic groups—provides interesting evidence how particular garments were perceived as badges of ethnic identity. In addition, the same data shed some light on the Aztec use and appropriation of foreign capes, their attitude toward customs of other peoples (frequently, conquered foreign groups), and on imperial tribute policy. Some of these garments were identified with the semi-barbarian Chichimec tradition and qualities that played an important role in the Nahua understanding of their own past and identity, as well as ideas relative to the status of contemporaneous ethnic groups. A good example is that of maguey-fiber capes, ichtilmatli, often worn by commoners but also associated with the style of life of neighbors, such as the Otomi, pictured as semicivilized groups by the Nahuas (FC X, 180). Alvarado Tezozomoc, describing gifts received

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin during his coronation from the ruler of Tlaxcala, says that maguey capes were signs of mountain people, Chichimecs.212 Thus, this category of garments was on the one hand identified with ethnic groups who were considered culturally inferior because of their style of dress, but was on the other hand conceived as a marker of the “severe” style of life of the Chichimecs and, as such, belonged to different Nahua communities, as Chichimec descendants. This ambiguous attitude toward certain categories of garments can perhaps be seen in references to the cape termed ilacatziuhqui tilmatli, designating capes of either spiral design or twisted weave. Although this term appears in reference to cloaks of poor quality woven by the Otomi women (FC X, 180), it is also mentioned as one of the prestigious items given by a ruler to brave warriors (FC VIII, 74; Torquemada 1977, IV: 330) and among trade and tribute items (FC IX, 2; Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 65). Several specific kinds of capes worn by the Aztec elite were recognized as foreign items and were received in tribute. One of them was the ixnextlacuilolli tilmatli (possibly “the cape painted with an ashen surface” or “the cape painted with ashen face/eyes”),213 a red-white cape with the “border of eyes” and swirls, lines, circles, and eyes on the surface of the cloak (figure 2.41). According to the Florentine Codex (FC X, 186), it belonged to the costume repertory of the Huastecs, but in the Matrícula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza this kind of mantle appears as tribute from Cuetlaxtlan on the Gulf Coast, and not the Huastec region proper. Two other provinces providing these capes, Ocuillan and Tlachco, were located to the west of the Valley of Mexico. Precisely this variety of garments is mentioned among gifts redistributed by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin at his coronation (Tezozomoc 2001, 382–85), which implies that foreign items reaching Tenochtitlan as tribute played a part in imperial ceremonies as status-markers redistributed to loyal allies, subordinated elites, and invited enemies. A somewhat similar situation is reflected by the data on another cape, the alreadymentioned ometochtecomayo tilmatli tenixyo linked to the cult of pulque gods, probably identical to the tochpanecayotl tilmatli, “the cape in the Tochpan style” (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 133; see also figure 2.42a). Indeed, this imperial tribute item was reportedly sent by the province of Tochpan, but also by Tochtepec located to the southeast of the Valley of Mexico.214 Again, these Gulf Coast–associated capes were worn by Aztec rulers and lords and given as royal gifts (FC VIII, 23; IX, 5; Codex Mendoza, fol. 65r). Another foreign cape, the ocuiltecayo tilmatli, or “the cape in the Ocuillan style,” whose design consisted of two elaborate stripes of red alternating with black and white curlicues, was provided by the provinces of Ocuillan, Tollocan, and Xocotitlan (figure 2.42b). This region is a more or less contiguous area to the southwest and west of the Valley of Mexico and may reflect an actual “origin area” of this specific variety of cape.

103

104

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.41. Ixnextlacuilolli tilmatli, Codex Mendoza, fols. 34r, 36r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

Noting that specific provincial cape designs—such as the ometochtecomayo or ecacozcayo tilmatli—that were associated with particular regions of the ethnically diverse Aztec state were worn by imperial dignitaries in the Codex Mendoza, that is, were used at the highest imperial level, Patricia Anawalt suggested that the Mexica sought additional validity through incorporation of older cultures’ traditions (Anawalt 1992, 131). A possible example of such a practice is the range of providers of textiles that contained a blue-and-white diaper design composed of evenly spaced squares. As many as 11 out of 38 Aztec provinces sent this variety, which was similar to the most prestigious royal capes with the turquoise-mosaic design.215 What seems interesting is that all these tribute areas fall within both the southeastern portion of the ancient Acolhua kingdom and the approximate boundaries of the fourteenth-century Tepanec domain, as well as within the confines of the Toltec state as reconstructed by Nigel Davies (Anawalt 1992, 138–39; Davies 1980, 71). Even if the outline of the Toltec state remains hypothetical and uncertain (Prem 2000), the fact that all 11 provinces form a contiguous area around the Valley of Mexico seems noteworthy, implying that this region indeed shared a common tradition of cape design. Although it is difficult to prove the hypothesis that the Mexica rulers took advantage of an old prestigious regional design of Toltec origin (Anawalt 1992, 139), this zone of production indicates a well-grounded tradition. It remains impossible to decide whether it reflects an older heritage or a manufacture area enforced or shaped by the specifications of imperial demands. At any rate,

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.42. Capes with regional designs: (a) ometochtecomayo tilmatli; (b) ocuiltecayo tilmatli, Codex Mendoza, fols. 46r, 34r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

the appearance of similarly decorated capes in two northern provinces, Xilotepec (Codex de Huichapan) and Axocopan (Mapa de Atenco-Mizquiahuala), can be interpreted in two ways: as the continuation of the local tradition going back to Toltec times or, as has already been suggested, as the emulation of Mexica conventions. In the case of other tribute areas, for example, those located to the south, the production of this specific variety of textiles may have been imposed by the Triple Alliance. Likewise, requesting the ixnextlacuilolli and ometochtecomayo from regions lying far beyond their probable areas of origin should perhaps be seen as part of an intentional tribute policy based on a deliberate strategy of the imposition of demand for selected nonlocal items in order to stimulate trade in and between the conquered zones. Such a strategy has been identified in reference to some of the natural resources, regional food products, and exotic materials (Berdan 1996, 129; Smith and Berdan 1996b, 210; Berdan 2007b, 131), and it could possibly be extended to specific garments. Xicolli

Whereas capes were by far the most common upper-body apparel worn by males, xicolli, or short, sleeveless jackets with ties in front and fringes, were also in use

105

106

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

(figure 2.43). Enjoying great popularity in the Mixtec region, among the Nahuas they were special-purpose garments of restricted, ritual use (Anawalt 1981, 39–42). They are almost invariably associated with deities and their priests, with the exception of Mexica messengers depicted in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 66r). Some of the latter, notably, also perform certain ritualized negotiations and symbolic acts toward an enemy ruler, which possibly explains the use of apparel linked to ritual contexts. A specific version of the xicolli was a blue “mist jacket” (ayauhxicolli), sometimes referred to as a “dew jacket” (ahuachxicolli), linked to agrarian deities such as the rain god Tlaloc and the maize god Cinteotl; it was probably a see-through garment.216 The ayauhxicolli decorated the mortuary bundle of Axayacatl during his funeral ceremony (Tezozomoc 2001, 243), which does not mean, however, that it was one of the royal attributes but rather a component of one of the costumes of divine patrons of a deceased ruler that expressed his links to the supernatural. A cotton, fringed garment identified as a xicolli has been discovered in one of the offerings in the area of the Templo Mayor, accompanied by ritual objects symbolically linked to the rain god Tlaloc (López Luján and Chávez Balderas 2010, 315–16). It bears a painted design alluding to the “turquoise mosaic” typical of the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli. The ceremonial jacket was worn by rulers and lords also as part of the costume of the fire god Xiuhteuctli during the feast of Izcalli when, every four years, they performed a special processional dance (figure 3.4), and during the fasting period of coronation rites, when, as has already been mentioned, they died and were reborn to the new role (FC II, 164; VIII, 62–63). In the latter context, an electee himself wore the xicolli xoxouhqui (“green-blue sleeveless jacket”), whereas lords accompanying him were clad in the black version, or the tliltic xicolli. These ritual garments were put on with the capes decorated with bone motifs and called omicallo (literally, “with the bone repository [design]”), so probably the same version of the xicolli is referred to in merchants’ sacrificial rites as worn by a main priest in charge of ceremonial bathing of slave victims. It is a “divine jacket” (teoxicolli) with feathered borders and made in different colors and in the pattern of skulls and bones (tzotzontecomayo omicallo; FC IX, 60). It is thus not surprising to find the xicolli as part of the royal apparel on pre-Hispanic sculptural monuments (e.g., the Dedication Stone or the Cerro de Malinche reliefs) that signaled the priestly doings of Mexica rulers. War Gear for the Upper Body

The Aztec military costume repertory included items that fulfilled both protective and representative functions, conveying information on rank and individual achievements. The military hierarchy was carefully encoded in apparel worn at

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.43. Sleeveless jackets: (a) xicolli with a fringed border, Codex Mendoza, fol. 66r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan); (b) xicolli bordered with eyes, Codex Tudela, fol. 54r (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid)

peace and in war: whereas special capes and jewelry were awarded to accomplished warriors, those of high rank were also entitled to wear elaborate costumes and insignia on the battlefield, not without important consequences for the conduct of war and related behaviors. Standard battle attire for the upper body included an ichcahuipilli, or a padded cotton shirt reaching to the top or middle of the thigh, and found in both undecorated and decorated versions (figure 2.44). The second of the battle garments, the tunic with a short skirt (ehuatl ), was made of feather-­covered material and hence probably did not perform protective functions. Although some scholars suggest that “it resisted lances, arrows, and even swords” (Hassig 1988, 90), it is more probable it was worn over a protective ichcahuipilli or other quilted armor, thick enough to minimize the blows of the enemy (Seler 1902–23, II: 545). Also, the enclosing body suits (tlahuiztli) could have been worn over shielding cotton armor (Anawalt 1981, 55–56). The ichcahuipilli was a widely used garment in most of the regions of central Mexico in the Late Postclassic.217 Though this protective shirt was a special-purpose garment rather than a status marker, it was also worn in more elaborate versions by the members of nobility and by rulers themselves.218 Pictorial images suggest that this cotton armor was usually white and tied either in the back or the front,

107

108

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.44. Ichcahuipilli protective tunic: (a) Codex Mendoza, fol. 67r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan); (b) Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fol. 34r (Bibliothèque Nationale de France)

whereas especially prestigious versions were possibly decorated with the “border of eyes” (Codex Cozcatzin, fol. 2v) and decorated with the turquoise-mosaic design (Codex Vaticanus A, fols. 58r, 58v). The use of the latter variety seems confirmed by the imagery of the Codex Azoyú 2, where a blue ichcahuipilli worn by a ruler is painted the same way as turquoise diadems represented in this manuscript. It is thus possible that this version of the ichcahuipilli was used as yet another prestigious garment in Aztec-elite costume repertory whose symbolism alluded to the “turquoise mosaic” and, as such, was emulated by provincial elites. The ehuatl (“skin”) was particularly associated with, if not restricted to, the highest nobility and military ranks (figure 2.25a–d).219 It was a textile tunic covered with feathers and ending in a border resembling a short skirt. Its territorial distribution appears to have been limited to the Valley of Mexico and Tlaxcala, but it also figures in manuscripts from regions under the dominance of the Triple Alliance and sharing Aztec pictorial conventions.220 Almost all of them are described as covered by feathers and having hanging feathered borders forming the lower “skirt,” sometimes decorated with small pendants. The ehuatl was frequently combined with other battle insignia, but the use of the same tozehuatl tunic with four different suits and back insignia (FC VIII, 34) suggests that no strict associations existed, though probably the matching of colors played a role. Known varieties were reportedly decorated with feathers of yellow and red parrots, trogons, herons, or even turkeys (see Table A.7). Among different styles, a special prestige was attached to the xiuhehuatl, “the turquoise [blue] tunic,” also called xiuhtotoehuatl (“the blue cotinga tunic”), made of cotinga feathers fastened to a piece of cloth (PM, fol. 68r; FC VIII, 34).221 This

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

garment was worn as part of the blue Xipe Totec dress of Mexica rulers (FC VIII, 33) or used by the members of the high nobility together with the quetzalpatzactli device (PM, fol. 72r; FC VIII, 34). Beyond Tenochtitlan, the ehuatl of turquoiseblue feathers adorns the Tetzcocan ruler Neçahualcoyotl depicted in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 106r; see also figure 2.45). It must have been a widely recognized outfit, for it is mentioned in the account by Chimalpahin, the famous native writer in the annals genre from Chalco, focusing only on significant details or entirely omitting secondary information. Chimalpahin places the xiuhehuatl among war insignia worn by the ruler of Tenochtitlan, Ahuitzotl, during his expedition to Tziuhcoac, probably referring to his Xipe Totec garb (Chimalpahin 2003b, 164).222 As we have seen, continuing the Toltec-period associations of the turquoise-colored cotinga bird, the xiuhtototl in Aztec times was closely identified with the fire god (FC VI, 88–89; Taube 1992, 80–81). Thus, the blue ehuatl tunic shared its symbolism with the turquoise or turquoise-blue regalia of Mexica rulers. Tlahuiztli

An important part of elite-costume repertory were feather-ornamented battle body-suits that encased arms and legs, and sometimes the head as well. Worn in martial and ritual contexts and combined with insignia carried on the back, they were made in different colors and patterns, often reflecting different grades of the military hierarchy. Although these costumes are usually referred to as tlahuiztli, Molina translated this term as “arms or insignia,”223 perhaps referring simultaneously to symbols of rank and to armor in general. Indeed, in the Matrícula de Tributos the word tlahuiztli seems to be always associated with the entire warrior costume, including the fitted body suit, headdress, and a shield (Anawalt 1981, 55). Although shields are normally differentiated in Nahuatl terminology, the Matrícula de Tributos seems to include them in tlahuiztli outfits. In much the same way, in the Primeros Memoriales, the gloss “here end the noble gear, the insignia”224 closes the insignia section, encompassing also decorated shields, pertaining to the nobility. Shields and tlahuiztli form part of a metaphorical expression in chimalli in tlahuiztli (or in tlahuiztli in chimalli; Anales de Quauhtitlan, fols. 34, 41, 44; FC II, 123; VI, 163; XII, 95), probably meaning a complete war outfit with its heraldic implications, not necessarily including fighting weapons, though it is not entirely clear.225 References provided by Nahuatl sources imply both narrower and wider applications of tlahuiztli: it could designate a separate head insignia such as the ananacaztli (Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 49) or feathered insignia attached to wooden frames and carried on the back (e.g., FC II, 93–94, 113; VIII, 27, 74), but also entire body suits such as the cuextecatl tlahuiztli (FC II, 123). On the other

109

Figure 2.45. Neçahualcoyotl, Codex Ixtlilxochitl, fol. 106r (Bibliothèque Nationale de France)

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

hand, the insignia carried on the back are sometimes designated also by a general term tlamamalli, “thing carried on the back” (e.g., FC VIII, 33, 34; IX, 92), but having a broader meaning, for example referring to the loads that merchants transported on the back (FC IX, 14, 15) and other burdens and loads physically carried that way, and also in a metaphorical sense (FC II, 134; III, 9; VI, 132).226 The association of this wider term with the tlahuiztli is confirmed by the attestation tlamamalli tlahuiztli (FC IX, 96) and yn itlaviz yn itlamamal (PM, fol. 72v). Additional insights into the meanings of the tlahuiztli are provided by a complex expression in tlahuiztli in tlatquitl employed in the Primeros Memoriales.227 It designates a complete battle outfit, as is implied by the images of rulers and high warriors (fols. 72r–73r), accompanied by listings of particular items, which are preceded by the appellation yn itlatqui, yn itlaviz.228 This semantic field of the expression is confirmed by Molina, according to whom, armas para la guerra were called yaotlatquitl or yaonechichiuhtli (both meaning exactly “war gear/equipment”229), whereas armas de caualleros, that is, the war apparel restricted to nobles and highly ranked personages, is translated as tlatocatlahuiztli (“royal tlahuiztli”; Molina, Sp., fol. 13v). On the other hand, while translating the term insignias, he resorts to both tlahuiztli and tlatquitl, implying the close correspondence between the two, but additionally qualifying the tlatquitl as the gear of tiacauh-rank warriors or men in general (tiacauhtlatquitl, oquichtlatquitl ). “The honorable insignia” are also rendered as the “tlahuiztli given to someone” (tetlahuizmactli).230 Thus, in full accordance with Nahuatl sources, tlahuiztli and (yao/tiahcauh/oquich)tlatquitl are attested by Molina as synonymous expressions, designating a whole military outfit as well as its particular components such as back and head insignia and, potentially, also battle garments such as ehuatl tunics (e.g., FC IX, 89) and probably shields. This term was applied by the Nahuas not only to strictly battle adornments but also to the insignia of the gods, and especially those supported by carrying frames (e.g., FC II, 94). Tlahuiztli is related to tlahuilli (“brightness, light of candles”), tlahuillotl (“luminary or light”), or tlahuizcalli (“brightness of dawn”), all derived from the verb tlahuia, probably conveying the more general sense of “to give light, to shine.”231 Thus, this term was associated with the shining qualities of colorful, frequently golden elite war insignia, which were expected not only to highlight the status of their wearers but also to intimidate the enemy. When the huei tlatoani of Tenochtitlan and other high lords exhibited costly insignia during a special dance performed during the feast of Ochpaniztli, their tlahuiztli are described as shimmering and gleaming from a great distance.232 The importance given to a glowing appearance in Aztec war apparel is also confirmed by the Nahuatl account of the Spanish conquest, where considerable emphasis is given to the shining, brilliant qualities of the battle apparel of one brave native warrior instilling terror among the enemy (FC XII, 92).

111

112

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.46. Coyote outfits: (a) citlalcoyotl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 79v; (b) tlecoyotl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 79r (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid)

The great variety of forms of the tlahuiztli attests to the importance of displaying lavish military insignia in the Nahua world (Table A.8). Encasing body suits fell into several varieties. One of the most popular was the coyote costume manufactured in several colors, including red, yellow, white, red, and blue, as well as the spotted design alluding to a starry sky,233 all of them made of feathers of different birds attached to a cloth backing and pictured as limb-encasing costumes covering also the head. The upper part, topped by a quetzal-feather crest, was shaped as open coyote jaws from which the face of the warrior emerged (figures 2.46, 2.47a).234 The range of wearers of the coyotl suit included ranks of the high warriors, quauhtin and tiacahuan, as well as rulers and nobles. The black coyote suit was awarded to brave warriors and noblemen (FC VIII, 51), whereas the yellow variety, or tozcoyotl, appears in the Matrícula de Tributos and Codex Mendoza among tribute items delivered by the provinces of Acolman, Axocopan, Quauhtitlan, Quauhnahuac, Hueipochtlan, and Huaxtepec—that is, mainly central provinces within or near the Valley of Mexico, in its northeastern and northwestern parts, except for Quauhnahuac lying to the south. Several varieties of this costume (iztac coyotl, tozcoyotl, xiuhcoyotl ) were also clearly used in Tlaxcala as examples from the Lienzo de Tlaxcala show. This costume enjoyed a long tradition in Mesoamerica going back at least to the times of Teotihuacan.235

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.47. Battle suits in the Codex Mendoza: (a) coyotl with the xicacoliuhqui shield; (b) ocelotl with the cuexyo shield; (c) cuextecatl with the cuexyo shield; (d) quetzalpatzactli with the xicacoliuhqui shield; (e) cicitlalo cuextecatl; Codex Mendoza, fols. 39r, 37r, 65r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

Closely related was the jaguar outfit, also an enclosing costume with an animal head topped by a quetzal-feather crest (figures 2.47b, 2.48). Although it is illustrated in several color varieties in tribute lists, the only recorded Nahuatl term for this battle gear is simply ocelotl. However, its appearance in different colors implies that these suits, or at least some of them, were made of feathers rather than of actual jaguar skins (Anawalt 1992, 117). Just like the coyote costume, this too was an old Mesoamerican war apparel of considerable prestige. Jaguar outfits were given in tribute by several different provinces located to the north, south, and southwest of the Valley of Mexico, including distant areas of Guerrero. The pervasive identification of Aztec warriors with this costume remained emblematic in postconquest times, as can be seen both in native pictorial manuscripts and colonial works of art. This association was rooted in a pre-Hispanic concept of the “eagles and jaguars” that embodied the military ethos of the Mexica. Although the jaguar and eagle “orders” are a myth of the modern scholarly literature (Dyckerhoff 1998), in the language and ideology of Tenochtitlan, the metaphoric expression in quauhtin in

113

Figure 2.48. Ocelotl costume with a variant of the teocuitlaanahuacayo shield, Codex Tudela, fol. 12r (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid)

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.49. Military outfits, including eagle and coyote or jaguar suits, delivered among other tribute goods, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 33v (courtesy of the Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med.Palat.219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited)

ocelome (“the eagles, the jaguars”) indeed referred to exemplary warriors. However, in addition to referring to brave warriors, the terms quauhtli and ocelotl also seem to designate those wearing these particular outfits, as well as the costumes themselves (e.g., FC XII, 110, 115, 116). Curiously enough, this eagle tlahuiztli is absent from the insignia sections of the Primeros Memoriales and from imperial tribute lists. There is no doubt, however, that eagle outfits were among the most prestigious in Tenochtitlan, as confirmed by the discovery of the monumental figure of an eagle warrior in the Templo Mayor, whereas both this outfit and jaguar suits are found in imagery associated with Tenochtitlan, such as the illustrations contained in the Florentine Codex (e.g., FC VIII, fols. 33v, 34r; see also figures 2.49, 2.50) or pre-Hispanic figurines. In many cases references to individual warriors identified as quauhtli or ocelotl may in fact not only allude to their being valiant combatants but also to military outfits worn by them (e.g., FC II, 51; XII, 115). A Nahuatl account of

115

Figure 2.50. Mexica battle suits, including eagle and jaguar costumes, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 34r (courtesy of the Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited)

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

the conquest also explicitly describes a combined version of the two tlahuiztli, the quauhtli ocelotl with eagle and jaguar halves (FC XII, 110).236 Surely, such costumes were known and used beyond Tenochtitlan, and even outside the Valley of Mexico, but the Mexica gave them a special place in their costume repertory.237 Quite common was the cuextecatl (“Huastec”) suit, usually bearing short, parallel black lines referred to as “hawk scratches” (FC VIII, 35),238 and accompanied by a copilli cone-shaped cap, identified with the northern Gulf Coast provenience (figures 2.47c, 2.47e, 2.56a). This headpiece carried the decoration of quetzal feathers girt at the base and a golden disk in the front. An obligatory complement of this costume was also a golden crescent-shaped nose plate (yacametztli) and ear pendants consisting of fillets of unspun cotton, both of them attributes of the Huastec mother goddess called Teteoinan by the Nahuas.239 Similarly to other military costumes, it was manufactured in several color varieties, including also a bicolored version (chictlapanqui cuextecatl ) and a “starry sky” design.240 The whole outfit was accompanied by one of the Huastec-style shields. Long ago Eduard Seler hypothesized that this costume was adopted by the Aztecs after Axayacatl’s victories in the Huastec region (Seler 1902–23, II: 606). However, even if Huastec affiliations of this battle suit seem obvious, its wide distribution and great popularity in a broad area of Postclassic central Mexico makes it impossible to trace its exact origin or history.241 To make the issue even more complex, it must be added that the cuextecatl costume was sent in tribute by 20 culturally and geographically diverse provinces but, strangely, not a single one from the Huastec region (Anawalt 1992, 113). The blue Huastec suit is illustrated in the Códice de Huichapan from Hidalgo, whereas yellow and red versions can be found in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, which implies its wider use also outside the Valley of Mexico. Although several varieties of the cuextecatl suit are listed among royal war insignia (FC VIII, 35) or among prestigious gifts received by the ruler of Tenochtitlan in the ceremony celebrating his military victory (Tezozomoc 2001, 341), their ranking could not have been especially high, considering that these outfits were awarded to a warrior for taking his second captive (Codex Mendoza, fol. 64r) or are explicitly mentioned as given to commoners (FC II, 123).242 In fact, it is not improbable that the cuextecatl outfit, as it was used in the Valley of Mexico and beyond at the time of contact, was not a borrowed item in its entirety but a conventional set constructed by the Nahuas themselves of several elements they identified with Huastec origin such as the copilli cap, “hawk scratches” and cuexyo motifs, the yacametztli nose plug, or the earplugs of unspun cotton identified by them with Gulf Coast mother goddesses. A particularly terrifying battle suit was known as the tzitzimitl, “the stellar demon,” consisting of an encasing outfit with a sacrificial slit over the chest area

117

118

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

and a head-encasing helmet in the form of a skeletal monster (figure 2.51).243 The slit on the chest refers to heart sacrifice, as additionally confirmed by a monumental effigy of the death god discovered in Templo Mayor excavations, though some scholars associate it with a liver (Anawalt 1992, 116; Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 213). Like other battle suits, this costume was worn in several color variants, made of feathers of different birds.244 Given that the symbolism of this war suit alluded to the tzitzimime, fearful demons that threatened the world during solar eclipses, its wearing in battle must have been intended to cause a terrifying effect on the enemy. This tlahuiztli is attested uniquely in Valley of Mexico sources but, according to the tribute lists contained in the Matrícula de Tributos, it was given by 13 different provinces to the north, northeast, south, and southwest of Tenochtitlan. The rank of the tzitzimitl costume must have been high, for its white variety is worn by one of the highest lords bearing the title of tlacochcalcatl (Codex Mendoza, fol. 67r), whereas four different color versions appear as the insignia of rulers and noblemen (PM, fols. 68r, 73v; FC VIII, 34; Sahagún 1997b, 460–62). The ocelotzitzimitl was reportedly one of the items given to the ruler Ahuitzotl in the ceremony celebrating his military victory (Tezozomoc 2001, 341). An exclusively royal battle outfit was the costume of the god Xipe Totec, “Our Lord, the Flayed One,” also known in several varieties. Three different possible versions of this adornment are described in the Florentine Codex,245 but only one of them bears a separate name: Totec, the ocelototec, described as made of jaguar skin, bearing the golden flint knife decoration, and worn together with the sapote-leaf skirt and the jaguar drum on the back (FC VIII, 33). It is possible that the first of the three mentioned costumes described in the Sahaguntine manuscript—a red version of the Xipe dress consisting, among other items, of the tlauhquecholtzontli red-spoonbill headdress—should be identified with the tlauhquecholtotec (redspoonbill Totec) mentioned by Tezozomoc in his description of the Xipe attire that Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin put on during his coronation war (Tezozomoc 2001, 373).246 This feathered gear was combined with a golden drum insignia on a frame carried on the back, described as the teocuitlahuehuetl by the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68r). In addition, the basic component of the Xipe dress was a human skin, rarely mentioned in written sources (e.g., Tezozomoc 2001, 461), but worn as a body suit by Aztec rulers, according to the pictorial sources (figure 3.6).247 This intriguing costume is more thoroughly discussed in relationship to royal imagery in chapter 4. A large group of tlahuiztli were back insignia, falling into several major types. One of them encompasses copilli-shaped back devices, resembling a popular Huastec conical cap but carried on wooden frames.248 Depending on the variety, they were decorated with gold (teocuitlacopilli) or feathers, including those of the

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.51. Tzitzimitl insignia: (a) quetzaltzitzimitl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 73v (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid); (b) xiuhtototzitzimitl or xoxouhqui tzitzimitl, Codex Mendoza, fol. 21v (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

quetzal bird (quetzalcopilli) or heron (aztacopilli) (figures 2.52a, b). These back standards were worn by high-ranking tiacauh and quauhtli warriors as one of the status markers assigned to them for their battlefield achievements (FC VIII, 74). The inhabitants of the Valley of Mexico shared this tlahuiztli with Tlaxcalans, for copilli standards are frequently pictured in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (figure 2.52c). The quaxolotl, or “the Xolotl head [insignia],” was another frequent type of back gear, known in bright red, red, white, yellow, green, and blue variants. It takes its name from the caninoid monster god Xolotl, whose doglike visage decorates the top of an umbrella-shaped device (figure 2.53). Although in the imagery of the Primeros Memoriales these topping heads are in fact skulls, in illustrations from other sources the head is that of Xolotl.249 However, the appearance of skulls implies identity or at least affinity between the quaxolotl and the miquiztli (“death”) insignia: the term tozmiquiztli (“yellow death [insignia]”), listed among gifts redistributed by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin during his coronation ceremony (Tezozomoc 2001, 384), would correspond to the tozquaxolotl (“yellow Xolotl head [insignia]”) mentioned in other sources (PM, fol. 72v; FC VIII, 34). Whereas in the Primeros Memoriales these insignia are worn in combination with prestigious ehuatl tunics, in tribute lists they appear together with plain body suits. Again, according to the extant data, their distribution seems to be limited to the Valley of Mexico and Tlaxcala, with the numerous tributary regions providing this tlahuiztli dispersed in different parts of central Mexico.

119

120

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.52. Copilli back devices: (a) quetzalcopilli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 75r; (b) aztacopilli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 77r (a, b courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid); (c) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 39 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892)

Particularly picturesque were butterfly insignia, whose colorful and richly ornamented wings went flying and shimmering with brightly colored, shiny bird feathers. Made in many varieties, all of them shared a butterfly form attached to a wooden frame (figures 2.25a, 2.56b).250 In addition to colorful versions decorated with quetzal or parrot feathers, this tlahuiztli also carried more ominous associations linking it to other aspects of martial symbolism and ritual sacrifice. Such associations seem quite obvious in the case of the itzpapalotl, or obsidian version of this insignia, constructed on a circular frame that carried two sheets of beaten copper and a butterfly on the top (PM, fols. 68v, 78v; see also figure 2.54a). Its symbolism alluded to the terrifying goddess of war and human sacrifice, Itzpapalotl, Obisidian Butterfly, a patroness of warriors. In addition, the cruciform elements of sheet copper that tip the butterfly’s legs can be found in the depiction of the already-discussed deity Otonteuctli (figure 2.54b; Seler 1902–23, II: 586–87), linked to fire and war, a prototypical warrior who met glorious death and was subsequently transformed by fire (Graulich 1989, 59–62). Thus, the battle butterfly insignia alluding to Otonteuctli transmitted the essential elements of the Aztec ideology of war, conceived as a cosmic struggle influenced by belligerent stars and celestial fire, and of the belief in a special destiny for valiant warriors. These connotations are inherent in the ancient central Mexican symbolism of the butterfly, going back to Teotihuacan and Tula, and linked to celestial fire and transformations of warriors who died on the battlefield. The xopilli (“toe [insignia]”), recognized by its elongated droplet-like shape topped by a feather crest, figures prominently in Mexica tribute lists and the Lienzo

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.53. Quaxolotl costume: (a) tlapalquaxolotl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 76r; (b) iztac quaxolotl, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 76r (a–b, courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid); (c) coztic quaxolotl Codex Mendoza, fol. 26r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan); (d) tozquaxolotl, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 51 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892)

de Tlaxcala. Manufactured in yellow, green, and red varieties, it played a historical role in the famous episode in the battle of Otumba of 1520, when this military standard was captured in the decisive moment by Hernando Cortés, who allegedly managed to kill the commanding general of the enemy, turning the tables and winning this encounter. The Lienzo de Tlaxcala features the claw-back device both in a scene of the battle and a posterior episode with Cortés and a Tlaxcalan noble holding the insignia (figures 2.55, 2.56c). This scene probably alludes to an event related by Ixtlilxochitl (1975–77, II: 233), who mentions that after the victory the Spaniards gave the green claw device (matlaxopilli) to the Tlaxcalans (Seler 1902–23, II: 601). Another frequent standard was the tozcololli or tozcocolli (possibly meaning “bent yellow parrot [feather]”), shaped like a long, twisted frame covered with yellow parrot feathers (PM, fol. 68v; see also figure 2.57).251 According to Seler (1902–23, II: 588) the form and wavy contour of the tozcololli resembled the flayed and wrinkled human skin worn by the god Xipe Totec. While this association remains difficult to verify, it seems clear enough that the symbolism of several other back insignia alluded to particular deities. This was probably the case of the quetzaltonatiuh (“the quetzal feather sun insignia”), shaped like a golden sun with a circle of quetzal feathers in the middle (FC VIII, 35), the insignia linked to the solar deity, patron of warriors.252 Its use outside the core area of the Aztec state is implied by its presence in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (e.g., fol. 29; see also figure 2.58a) and Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 1. It was also made in other varieties, as implied by the çacuantonatiuh device illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 74r; see also figure 2.58b). On the other hand, the ometochtlahuiztli, the “Two Rabbit insignia,” was associated with the octli deities. It was shaped like a pulque pot with the foam of the alcoholic beverage represented by the white-heron

121

Figure 2.54. Itzpapalotl and Otonteuctli: (a) itzpapatlotl device, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 78v; (b) impersonator of Otonteuctli in the feast of Xocotl huetzi, Codex Tudela, fol. 20r (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid)

Figure 2.55. Xopilli insignia in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fols. 25, 28 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892)

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.56. Battle suits awarded to brave warriors: (a) warrior who took two captives, wearing the red cuextecatl costume; (b) warrior who took three captives, wearing the papalotl back device; (c) Otomi-rank warrior carrying the xopilli back device; (d) quachic warrior carrying the panitl insignia; Codex Mendoza, fol. 64r (a–d, Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

plumage and garnished with green quetzal feathers (figure 2.58c). Noting that the heron-feather headdress was a frequent adornment of rain and pulque deities, Seler suggested similar associations for the aztatzontli back device (Seler 1902–23, II: 589). While this term refers primarily to head adornments, it was also employed for

123

124

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.57. Tozcololli: (a) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 77v (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid); (b) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 53 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892)

back standards covered with feathers, white on top, and with a quetzal feather tuft, all fastened on a frame (PM, fols. 68v, 77r; see also figure 2.59a). This device is also pictured in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 37 and possibly fols. 57, 76; see also figure 2.59b) along with another, much more frequent heron standard that features the figure of an entire bird. The latter was a kind of “national” insignia of Tlaxcala, for not only is it one of the most frequently pictured tlahuiztli, but it also appears next to the colonial coats of arms in the allegorical scene of this manuscript. Unfortunately, its name remains uncertain.253 Other standards taking the form of entire bird figures include the quetzaltototl (quetzal bird) and huexolotl (turkey cock) insignia. Special prestige was attached to the first of them, used as war insignia by rulers and noblemen. According to the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68r), it was a frame fashioned like a bird with its wings and tail of quetzal feathers, and with a crest of feathers, which matches an image

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.58. Different tlahuiztli: (a) quetzaltonatiuh, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 29 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892); (b) çacuantonatiuh; (c) ometochtlahuiztli; (d) quetzaltototl (b– d, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 74r, courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid)

Figure 2.59. Aztatzontli back device: (a) Primeros Memoriales, fol. 77r (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid); (b) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 37 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892)

in the same manuscript (fol. 74r; see also figure 2.58d). In the Codex Mendoza (fol. 46r) it is illustrated as the tribute item from Tochtepec, accompanied by a yellow body suit. Its prestigious meaning continued in the early colonial period, for it is depicted in the Códice de Tlatelolco and Mapa de Popotla, reflecting the insignia repertory of Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco. Standing out among various categories of back devices is the patzactli, or “compressed” feather insignia, made of several distinct birds and sharing a panache-like form with a wide, expansive crest of plumes (figure 2.60). While some images suggest

125

126

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

it was worn on the head, framing the face of a warrior, the back variety, fastened to a frame, seems equally common.254 Examples pictured in the Matrícula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza do not betray any wooden frame, but they also omit the frames of almost all other back devices illustrated as tribute items (figure 2.61a).255 It is therefore possible that an enclosing wig topped by a magnificent panache of these insignia was to be worn hovering immediately over the head or even actually resting on it. The only pre-Hispanic source illustrating this item, the Stone of Tiçoc, clearly features the quetzalpatzactli as a back standard, because the ruler also wears a hummingbird helmet (figure 3.1). The different possibilities of wearing this item can be seen in the Codex Xolotl, where one of the personages, Yacanextli, carries it both behind the head and apparently resting on and enclosing his head (fols. 3, 4). This explains why some images seem to contradict the idea of a back device fastened to a wooden frame, picturing the patzactli as a head device (e.g., Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 58r). Nevertheless, sometimes, as in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and Florentine Codex, it is worn entirely on the back (figures 2.60c, 2.62). Cueçalpatzactli, “the compressed macaw feather [insignia],” consisted of “a frame fashioned like a head, which was covered with feathers, and there was a row entirely of macaw feathers on the top” (PM, fol. 68v; see also figure 2.60a). It appears in the Matrícula de Tributos and on the cognate folios of the tribute section of the Codex Mendoza (figure 2.61a) almost as frequently as the prestigious quetzalpatzactli version. The latter, made of quetzal feathers, figures in numerous written and pictorial sources as the dance and war adornment of rulers and noblemen and a prestigious reward to high-ranking warriors (figures 2.60c, 2.62).256 Seler (1902–23, II: 584) hypothesized that the patzactli insignia originated in the remote areas on the Pacific coast because, according to the Florentine Codex (FC IX, 5–8), during the reign of Ahuitzotl the Tlatelolca merchants captured this device in a place called Quauhtenanco in Xoconochco, subsequently presenting this trophy, along with many others, to the ruler of Tenochtitlan. This scenario seems improbable, given that the quetzalpatzactli and cueçalpatzactli were sent in tribute by numerous provinces from different regions of central Mexico, including areas to the west, north, and south of the Valley, Huastec and Totonac regions, and even Coixtlahuaca in the Mixtec area. The patzactli were probably part of the Aztec insignia repertory long before the conquests of Ahuitzotl, as implied by the presence of this gear on the Stone of Tiçoc or by the pervasive association of Moquihuixtli, the ruler of Tlatelolco defeated by Axayacatl in 1473, with the quetzalpatzactli insignia in both written and pictorial sources. The quetzalpatzactli enjoyed popularity also among the Tlaxcalans, as confirmed by the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (e.g., fols. 14, 52) and Muñoz Camargo (2002, 130). Extant images encompass also the aztapatzactli, the compressed heron feather insignia, and the cacalpatzactli made of crow feathers (PM,

Figure 2.60. Examples of patzactli insignia worn as back devices: (a) cueçalpatzactli; (b) cacalpatzactli (a–b, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 76v, courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid); (c) quetzalpatzactli, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 48 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892)

Figure 2.61. Patzactli and momoyactli in the Codex Mendoza, fol. 26r: (a) cueçalpatzactli; (b) momoyactli (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

128

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.62. Eagle warrior with the quetzalpatzactli back device, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 34r (courtesy of the Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med.Palat.219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited)

fols. 73r, 74v; see also figure 2.60b). Even less is known about the remaining two varieties of crest-insignia, tlacochpatzactli (“the compressed dart [insignia]”; PM, fol. 68v) and xiloxochipatzactli (“the young maize flower crest”; FC VIII, 35), aside from the fact that they were war insignia of rulers and noblemen. A similar category of tlahuiztli, though classified under a different term, were the momoyactli standards whose name, meaning the “dispersed/radiating [insignia],” is derived from the verb momoyahua (Molina, Nah., fol. 59r; Beyer 1969b). Although they are considered a separate category (Beyer 1969b; Anawalt 1992),257 it is surprising that this device appears only in the Matrícula de Tributos, where the glosses provide its name, and was redrawn in the Codex Mendoza (figure 2.61b). It is pictured as a rich feather crest placed on a wooden frame and composed of combinations of red, white, and black feathers, sharing with the patzactli proper a huge fan of tightly packed feathers. The feathers of the momoyactli appear to be shorter and less compact, giving the impression of being a modest version of a more elaborate and prestigious patzactli. The lack of explicit depictions of the momoyactli in other pictorials and the total absence of this Nahuatl term in written sources imply either that it was rare or that it was sometimes classified under a broader patzactli category. Another insignia bearing a visual relationship to the quetzalpatzactli is the ornate quetzal-feather crest with a protruding frontal part preserved in the Vienna

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Museum, identified by Zelia Nuttall (1904) with the headdress called the que­ tzalapanecayotl (“quetzal device in the Apaneca style”) and widely known as the “headdress of Moteucçoma.” Images bearing similarity to this feathered adornment appear in several Aztec manuscripts, while their identification with the term quetzalapanecayotl is confirmed by a few glyphs in the Tira de Peregrinación (Seler 1902–23, II: 417). It was already Seler who pointed out that “the apanecayotl or quetzalapanecayotl is a particular name for the adornment worn by the god from Tollan.”258 This identification was further developed by Aguilera, who compared it to the headdress of Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl illustrated in the Codices Magliabechiano and Borbonicus, arguing that the association with this deity is also confirmed by the Florentine Codex and one of the illustrations accompanying the work by fray Diego Durán, where it is worn by the last Toltec ruler, Huemac (Aguilera 1983, 166–80). In much the same way, for Michel Graulich it is the headdress of Quetzalcoatl at the end of his life as well as of Otonteuctli in the imagery related to the feast of the dead, Xocotl huetzi, and thus the adornment identified with the descending afternoon sun (Graulich 1989, 60; figure 2.63).259 This interpretation is supported by an interesting reference provided by the Florentine Codex, that women who died in childbirth carried the descending sun with the quetzalapanecayotl (FC VI, 163). Leaving aside its symbolic meaning, the main difference from the typical patzactli devices is that the gear from Vienna has a protruding frontlet with dots missing in known quetzalpatzactli examples, and it appears to be a headpiece and not an item carried on a frame. As a matter of fact, Seler raised the question of this functional ambiguity, pointing out examples where the quetzalapanecayotl is worn as a back device, as in the image of Axayacatl in the Codex Cozcatzin (figures 3.6c, d) or of a dancer during the Xocotl huetzi feast illustrated in the work by Durán, admitting at the same time that there exists some iconographic evidence of the quetzalapanecayotl worn as a headdress (Seler 1902–23, II: 398–401, 409–19). A large subcategory of back insignia includes banners, or panitl devices, in different shapes and colors. All of them share a construction scheme based one to three tall, vertical poles, to which were attached colorful feather banners (figures 2.25b, 2.50, 2.56d). Some of them were reportedly decorated with gold and silver and could consist of up to five separate flags.260 The panitl back devices are widely present in written and pictorial sources (including pre-Hispanic sculptures) from the Valley of Mexico and beyond, including in Tlaxcala (Lienzo de Tlaxcala, Lienzo de Tepeticpac, Códice de Huamantla), Hidalgo (Códice de Huichapan), Guer­rero (Codex Azoyú 2, Lienzo 1 de Chi­epet­lan), and Puebla (Mapa de Quauh­tinchan no. 1). Curiously, these tlahuiztli are absent from tribute lists despite their apparently popular use. Being worn by warriors of different ranks, including prestigious grades of quauhtin and tiacahuan, some panitl varieties, such as the quetzal-feather

129

130

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

banners or golden banners (quetzalpanitl and teocuitlapanitl ), were carried by the rulers and noblemen but could also be awarded by a tlatoani to brave warriors. Moreover, these prestigious banner types were reportedly raised as a sign to start the battle (FC VIII, 35). Also several headgears are classified by extant Nahuatl sources within the broad tlahuiztli category, and some of them have already been discussed as headdresses. They include the ananacaztli (“the water ears [insignia]”) and xiuhananacaztli (“the blue water ears [insigFigure 2.63. Quetzalapanecayotl in the nia]”), feathered caps with two pointed feast of Xocotl huetzi, Codex Tudela, fol. tufts on two sides of the head (figure 20r (courtesy of the Museo de América, 2.64). The ananacaztli were described Madrid) by Torquemada (1977, IV: 330) as the special insignia of Chichimec rulers of Tetzcoco, and the xiuhananacaztli, made of blue cotinga feathers, is actually worn by Neçahualcoyotl, together with a drum back device, in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 106r). Related tlahuiztli adornments include the already-discussed helmetlike devices known as the quetzal­quaquahuitl and the teocuitlaquacalalatli. Whereas numerous insignia can be traced both in written and pictorial Aztec sources, many of the tlahuiztli listed and illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales are absent from tribute lists of the Matrícula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza (Anawalt 1992, 122). Some omissions can be perhaps accounted for, such as the total absence in tribute manuscripts (and in the Primeros Memoriales) of the eagle costume, the Mexica military outfit well documented elsewhere. In Tenochtitlan the eagle costume was probably linked to the strictly elite group of warriors called the “knights of the sun” (caballeros del sol ) by fray Diego Durán (Dyckerhoff 1998). Their high prestige and restricted use could have been the reason why this and other elite tlahuiztli were not procured through tribute networks. Thus, tribute obligations were probably used to meet the demand for standardized battle costumes, the most sophisticated insignia being made by artisans in Tenochtitlan and elsewhere in the Valley of Mexico, as is indeed implied by the primary sources (e.g., FC IX, 89).261 On the other hand, it becomes clear that the diversity of regions paying tribute of particular tlahuiztli is large enough to distinguish these tribute patterns from hypothetical “origin areas” of particular items. In other words, I doubt if the channels

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.64. Examples of head insignia: (a) ananacaztli, Primeros Memoriales, fol.75v (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid); (b) xiuhananacaztli, Codex Ixtlilxochitl, fol. 106r (Bibliothèque Nationale de France)

by which the tlahuiztli were received as tribute directly reflect strictly local traditions.262 A possible explanation of this phenomenon is that either some of the battle suits were widely shared and known in most of these regions, or the conquered provinces were forced to reproduce or acquire on their own “foreign” costumes on the imperial demand, as was the case of many other tribute goods. A related issue is the degree of correspondence between Aztec and Tlaxcalan repertories. It has been suggested that the repertory of the war gear depicted in the Primeros Memoriales represents a local tradition associated with the locality of Tepepolco, where this manuscript was largely commissioned, and that much of this tradition was borrowed by the Tlaxcalans but only in a small degree by the Mexica (Anawalt 1992, 126).263 However, and especially considering the importance of insignia in conveying information on rank, it would be difficult to explain why a provincial center such as Tepepolco should have a more sophisticated repertory of battle apparel than its more powerful neighbors, who were placed higher in the system of imperial redistribution of gifts, awards, and forms of promotion, as well as in the elaborate sumptuary laws. In addition, the pertinent data contained in the Florentine Codex, Crónica mexicana, Anales de Quauhtitlan, and Anales de Tlatelolco, as well as in the accounts by Chimalpahin and several other sources, leave no doubt that the Aztec costume and insignia repertory was much more complex than the tribute manuscripts alone could reflect and that there is substantial overlapping between images in the Primeros Memoriales and other Nahua sources from the Valley of Mexico.

131

132

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

As could be expected, there are also some tlahuiztli mentioned or depicted in the Florentine Codex and illustrated in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, but absent from the Primeros Memoriales. A possible pattern emerging from the analysis of the evidence relative to the tlahuiztli repertory is that of a considerable congruity between war costumes and devices described in the Valley of Mexico sources and those depicted in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. Many of the insignia pertaining to this strictly Mexica repertory (e.g., the eagle costume, quetzalpatzactli, xopilli, tozcololli, and quetzaltototl) are also present in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan commissioned by the people of Quauhquechollan in Puebla who participated as Spanish allies in the conquest of Guatemala. This is even more surprising given that there were strong differences between royal attributes used by the Mexica and Tlaxcalans, perhaps consciously maintained by the latter. At any rate, there existed a considerable uniformity in war costumes between the Valley of Mexico and the Puebla-Tlaxcala region. It was perhaps the frequent contact on the battlefield or a common tradition that spurred the development and use of shared conventions. Thus, it is probable that most of the insignia conveyed a message on the rank of their wearers rather than on specific ethnic affiliations. Sometimes information on membership in a particular altepetl seems to have been transmitted by distinguishing hairdos and headgears, as was probably the case with warriors’ coiffures of the Mexica, or the twisted headband with the aztaxelli device, a diagnostic element of the Tlaxcalans. In the case of the tlahuiztli, even if ethnic-affiliated outfits (probably not directly borrowed from other groups) such as the cuextecatl became part of the pan-regional repertory, several particular war insignia carried local associations expressing an altepetl-centered identity. The most obvious example is the heron device worn by Tlaxcalan leaders, and possibly the eagle and jaguar suits of the Mexica. Shields and Weapons

Battle outfits and back insignia were usually combined with different varieties of shields (chimalli), many of which bore sophisticated designs and exuberant decoration, performing not only defensive but also representative functions and conveying messages about the rank and status of their users (Table A.10). Prestigious shields were covered with the feather “mosaic,” and extant museum examples of Aztec shields are real masterpieces of featherwork.264 Feathers covered the shield body made of reed or bamboo, and also forming decorative borders.265 Their colors, patterns, or symbolic associations often corresponded to specific warriors’ costumes, complementing the entire outfit and probably being understood as the tlahuiztli themselves.

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.65. Different cuexyo chimalli variants: (a–d) Codex Mendoza, fols. 19r, 20r, 25r, 51r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan); (e–h) Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 46; i. Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 59 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892)

Among the most common designs were several varieties of the cuexyo chimalli, or Huastec shields, bearing the yacametztli (“nose moon crescent”) and “hawk scratches” motifs. These were used in the Valley of Mexico and Tlaxcala but were also depicted in pictorial manuscripts from imperial provinces far beyond.266 Figuring frequently in Mexica tribute lists, they were paired with different battle suits, not only cuextecatl costumes. In addition to Valley of Mexico types, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala contains other related substyles (figure 2.65). Since the cuexyo chimalli is found in association with warriors of lower ranks, it could not have been very prestigious. As with other items apparently signaling ethnic affiliations, the tribute network indicates that they were widely produced, by no means in the Gulf Coast area only. Moreover, this design seems to have been widespread outside the Huastec region well before Aztec times. Identical oval cuexyo motifs appear on the shield from the façade of the Upper Temple of Jaguars in Chichen Itza (figure 2.66a), on a shield held by a warrior on Uxmal Stela 14 (Taube 1994, figure 2.24d), and in the reliefs of Tula (figure 2.66b). Thus, rather than appropriating regional decoration for this shield pattern, the Nahuas drew upon an old Mesoamerican tradition. It seems certain that this design was known on a pan-Mesoamerican scale even if it remained conceptually linked to a Huastec origin. Another ubiquitous shield style often given in tribute, the xicacoliuhqui chimalli (“the shield with the step-fret [design]”), is illustrated in numerous manuscripts from a broad central Mexican area (figures 2.56d, 2.60c). It too appears to have been

133

134

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.66. Terminal Classic-Early Postclassic examples of the cuexyo chimalli outside the Huastec region: (a) Chichen Itza, Upper Temple of the Jaguars (after Taube 1994, fig. 27d, redrawn by Justyna Olko); (b) Tula (after Jiménez García 1996, fig. 193, redrawn by Justyna Olko)

carried mainly by ordinary warriors, but in at least one case it is associated with a ruler—a defeated Moquihuixtli, the ruler of Tlatelolco (Códice en Cruz). A possible explanation is provided by two glossed illustrations of noble warriors in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 72r), which reveal that these two common shield varieties—cuexyo and xicacoliuhqui—were also used in precious versions, namely the quetzalcuexyo chimalli (“the Huastec quetzal-feather shield”) and quetzalxicacoliuhqui chimalli (“the quetzal-feather shield with the step-fret [design]”), prestigious enough to be presented to Ahuitzotl in the ceremony celebrating his military victory (Tezozomoc 2001, 341). Thus, more than the design itself, it was the kind of material used that decided if a particular item could be classified as prestigious and associated with high-rank persons. Frequently depicted in pictorial manuscripts is a shield with five or more balls of feathers spaced in a quinqunx pattern and placed on a differently colored background. This style is usually referred to as the ihuiteteyo chimalli (“the shield with the feather border”; Anawalt 1992, 123; Berdan and Anawalt 1997), because this is the term provided by the Primeros Memoriales, but it does not reflect in any way its specific design. It seems more probable that the term properly designating this shield design was the tehuehuelli chimalli (morphology unclear).267 It also appears in the Primeros Memoriales in reference to a shield design very similar to the one described as the ihuiteteyo (fol. 261r; see also figure 2.67a), and is carried by Huitzilopochtli,

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.67. Different shields: (a) tehuehuelli/ihuiteteyo chimalli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 80r; (b) quauhtetepoyo chimalli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 75v; (c) macpalo chimalli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 80r (a–b, courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid)

which is fully congruent with the basic association of this shield in Mexica manuscripts. The tehuehuelli chimalli, carried by the effigy of Huitzilopochtli in the feast of Toxcatl, is described as made of reeds and decorated in four places with eagle down (FC XII, 52). Its symbolic dimension is also confirmed by its frequent appearance as part of the Mexica symbol of war and conquest, combining a war club or a spear-thrower with a shield. It is thus not a coincidence that the tehuehuelli chimalli is mentioned by Chimalpahin together with a kind of weapon termed otlanamitl (probably meaning “reed arrow”) in a metaphorical expression most probably referring to a martial alliance (Chimalpahin 2003b, 104, 106). Carried by warriors of undefined rank in numerous pictorial manuscripts, in at least several cases it is also associated with rulers—the tlatoani of Tenochtitlan Chimalpopoca in the Codex Xolotl, Chimalpopoca and Axayacatl in the Codex Azcatitlan, and an unnamed lord in the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 1—which confirms this shield style was not limited to the Valley of Mexico. Moreover, it is the device of war captains in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 67r) and the Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 57v). Since these common chimalli styles were widely used regardless of political boundaries, it seems surprising that many kinds of shields illustrated in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala are not repeated in other pictorial manuscripts, and their Nahuatl names remain unknown. As pointed out by Anawalt (1992, 124), there are at least 20 shield designs carried by warriors in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala that do not appear in the Codex Mendoza or Primeros Memoriales. In addition, judging by the pictorial evidence, she believes that no shield motif was firmly linked to a specific costume. While this is certainly true for the cuexyo and xicacoliuhqui chimalli, an exception is the quauhtetepoyo chimalli (“shield with the eagle foot [design]”) covered with eagle feathers that formed this bird’s foot with a golden claws design (PM, fol. 68r;

135

136

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

see also figure 2.67b). As correctly observed by Seler (1902–23, II: 554–55), this shield is matched in tribute lists exclusively with the papalotl device.268 As could be expected, similarly to the most prestigious capes and tlahuiztli styles, shields associated with rulers and endowed with a special meaning are not to be found in any of the tribute lists as they were manufactured of costly materials and, probably, in limited numbers. This was certainly the case of the turquoise-mosaic shield belonging to a wider repertory of royal insignia associated with the fire god. The xiuhchimalli (“turquoise shield”) is not only an attribute of Painal, a manifestation of Huitzilopochtli (PM, fol. 261r; FC I, 3; see also figure 2.36a), but is also mentioned as the war insignia that appeared to the Mexica refugees as a special sign after the battle of Chapultepec (Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 104) and the insignia of the Toltecs (FC III, 22). The special meaning of the xiuhchimalli for Aztec rulers is further corroborated by its listing among the insignia of Moquihuixtli, the tlatoani of Tlatelolco (Codex Cozcatzin, fol. 14r), as well as among the turquoise regalia of Huitzilihuitl, probably in relationship with his coronation (Codex Azcatitlan, fol. 11). The same term appears amidst precious trade items procured in Anahuac and Xicalanco (FC IX, 3, 5, 19) and in the description of the people from a closely corresponding region, the Isthmus of Tehuantepec (Tezozomoc 2001, 334). Do these references imply that the xiuhchimalli was included in a group of objects credited with a foreign origin in spite of its association with other turquoise insignia derived from the Toltecs? Or should they be treated merely as lists of costly insignia that were among the elite merchandise of the Aztec pochteca? Besides, it is not entirely obvious whether in each case the term xiuhchimalli should be understood as a reference to a turquoise-mosaic shield and not simply to a blue shield, perhaps decorated with feathers. On the one hand, the xiuhchimalli is described as “encrusted with turquoise, with glued turquoise [stones],”269 but also in use were blue-feathered styles decorated with precious cotinga feathers, conceptually identified with turquoise. The xiuhtotoehuatl chimalli (“shield of the skin of the cotinga”) was reportedly a royal gift to brave warriors, whereas the xiuhtototica chimalli (“shield with the cotinga [feathers]”) belonged to the ocelototec outfit of Mexica rulers (FC VIII, 33, 34, 74).270 Both the turquoise-mosaic version and the feathered one were among the most prestigious insignia of Aztec rulers. Another royal shield was the teocuitlaanahuacayo chimalli (“golden coastal shield”), its design being divided into three fields, with one half or one third covered by red and white circles, and the two remaining sections bearing jaguar-skin as well as water or precious-jade motifs (figure 2.48).271 This device formed part of the Xipe Totec dress of Aztec rulers (Tezozomoc 2001, 227–28; Dyckerhoff 1993) and was recognized as a royal attribute of the Mexica even beyond Tenochtitlan (Chimalpahin 1997a II, 227–28; 2003a, 146; 2003b, 60). Also macpalo chimalli

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

(“shield with the palm of a hand”), pictured among prestigious insignia in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 80r; see also figure 2.67c) could form part of the royal Xipe costume as worn by Axayacatl in the Codex Cozcatzin (Seler 1902–23, II: 579). What these combinations seem to reveal, beyond symbolic associations linking particular items to various divinities, is a certain margin of choice for combining shield types with specific battle costumes, though surely within a well defined repertory with fixed categories, on the level of both the high nobility and lower-ranking users. Also, other kinds of weapons served as attributes of rank, reaching beyond the primary association with the military sphere. A special, ambiguous meaning was attached to bows and arrows. On the one hand, they were conceived as attributes of the barbarians, especially semi-nomad Chichimecs from the north, and as such are frequently depicted in association with Chichimec chieftains and warriors, as well as early rulers, especially in the region of Tetzcoco and Puebla-Tlaxcala. On the other hand, however, departing from this primary Chichimec association,272 bows and arrows came to symbolize paramount justice, perhaps understood as the heritage of severe and simple but unambiguous laws of the idealized ancestors of Nahua communities. Both Mexica and Tetzcocan sources report the use of bows and arrows as the insignia of rulers acting as supreme judges. Not surprisingly, then, these weapons are included in a traditional set of regalia that were granted to the ruler during his coronation or as part of the protocol of his greeting and reception.273 Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina would, reportedly, not only hold an arrow as the symbol of justice, but also throw it toward those whom he found guilty to confirm the death sentence.274 Various sources refer to them as “golden arrows,” which suggests that they were not actual weapons but imitations made of gold; however, it is difficult to assess the veracity of these data.275 Whereas Tezozomoc places these symbolic weapons on the right side of the ruler (Tezozomoc 2001, 248), Ixtlilxochitl mentions a golden arrow, which he compares to a scepter, held by a tlatoani when confirming death sentences.276 Accordingly, we should not be surprised to find lords carrying arrows as symbols of their rank and power, as in the image of Toquepotzin, a Tetzcocan noble (Codex Ixtlilxochitl, fol. 105r), who holds flowers, a smoking tube, and an arrow. Darts (tlacochtli) are sometimes depicted as royal arms and belong to the conventional “war emblem” (with a shield and sometimes also a spear-thrower) standing for war and conquest. A longer spear or lance, called tepoztopilli in the early colonial period, in the Valley of Mexico sources is associated with high-ranking warriors, war leaders, and royal emissaries (Codex Mendoza, Codex Xolotl ). The way it was represented as a royal attribute (e.g., in the Codex Azcatitlan, Tovar Manuscript, or the Tira de Tepechpan; figures 3.49–3.51) resembles a Spanish staff of justice (vara de justicia), which is part of a broader colonial phenomenon of assimilating objects

137

138

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.68. Ruler holding a smoking tube, and with a flower bouquet, Florentine Codex, Bk. X, fol. 30r (courtesy of the Biblioteca Laurenziana ms. Laur. Med.Palat. 220; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited)

belonging to native and European worlds (see discussion on p. 291–296). Also often depicted in elite imagery was a war club studded with obsidian blades (macquahuitl ), a basic offensive weapon. Carried by warriors of all ranks, it is also brandished by rulers in war contexts277 and is mentioned as well among war accouterments and insignia of high nobles and lords (PM, fol. 68r; Tezozomoc 2001, 227, 373, 401; see also figure 2.25). A spear-thrower (atlatl ), an old central Mexican weapon, was frequently depicted in preconquest sculptural monuments carried by Mexica warriors, in much the same way as it figures in the imagery of their Toltec predecessors. In colonial sources it continues among the accouterments and insignia of brave warriors (PM, fols. 68v–69r), but in fact its presence seems incidental.278 A rather mysterious royal attribute was the tlapetlanilquahuitl (“lightning stick”), described by Tezozomoc as a light war club painted the color of fire and with flames emerging from it, accompanying the mortuary bundle of Axayacatl during his funeral ceremony.279 This symbolic weapon alluded to the celestial fire, being probably identical or at least closely related to the fire serpent (xiuhcoatl), who is sometimes depicted as a fiery spear-thrower and whose Mixtec counterpart, yahui, was the personification of lightning. A possibly related item was an equally intriguing xiuhahuictli, “turquoise pole,” the weapon of a ruler of Tlacopan in the famous civil war with Tlatelolco of 1473 (Chimalpahin 1997a II, 50). Finally, yet another kind of weapon, copper and bronze axes (tepoztli or tepoztlateconi), are typical for royal imagery in Guerrero. Such objects are well known from the archaeological record and pictorial manuscripts from the region, where they figure both as royal attributes and as arms of fighting warriors. This region, including areas conquered by

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

the Triple Alliance,280 belonged to the metallurgical zone of northwestern Mexico, with the main production area located within the Tarascan state in Michoacan. Hand Attributes

In addition to shields and offensive weapons, hand attributes encompassed a wide choice of bracelets, armbands, and other objects carried by the members of the Nahua nobility. The most general names for a bracelet or hand band are matemecatl, macuextli, and matzopeztli. The differences between them are not apparent, but the term matemecatl, “hand stone cord,” implies beads as possibly opposed to other types of bracelets. Among the most appreciated pieces of jewelry were golden bracelets (coztic teocuitlamatemecatl ), worn by rulers and given as prestigious gifts.281 Pictorial imagery shows Aztec rulers also wearing greenstone bracelets (chalchiuhmacuextli),282 identified by the Nahuas as the adornment of other ethnic groups such as the Olmeca-Huixtotin, Mixtecs, and Huastecs (FC X, 185–88). In addition to these pieces of jewelry made of costly materials, the list of royal dance accouterments includes the matzopetztli in cuetlaxtli, “a wristband of cured leather” decorated with a round greenstone or fine turquoise (FC VIII, 27). In fact this term could allude to leather wristbands that are associated with Chichimec ancestors and that are often depicted in such manuscripts as the Codex Xolotl or the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca. A separate category of hand adornments were bracelets with sprays of precious feathers worn on the upper arm and called machoncotl, associated with high-ranking warriors in pre-Hispanic monuments and colonial sources (FC XII, 49, Tezozomoc 2001, 169–70). Based on data in the Florentine Codex that these attributes of warriors from Quauhtenanco were gained by Aztec pochteca, Seler proposed that they were originally brought to Mexico from the Pacific coast (Seler 1902–23, II: 542; FC IX, 3, 5). An additional argument is found in the account by Tezozomoc, who lists the machoncotl among items Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina brought from Tabasco and Tehuantepec (Tezozomoc 2001, 173). Its most prestigious variety was the quetzalmachoncotl, an armband of quetzal feathers, a dance adornment of rulers (FC VIII, 28), probably synonymous with two other terms, quetzalmacopilli and quetzal­mapancatl. The term macopilli, “hand/arm conical thing,” alludes to a diadem-shaped part of this device worn on the upper arm, resembling the shape of the xiuhhuitzolli turquoise headpiece and topped by the crest of feathers, as can be seen in the image of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in the Tovar Manuscript (figure 3.49) and in an illustration in Durán. The macopilli was also used in the turquoise version (xiuhmacopilli; FC VIII, 28), pictured as an adornment of Neçahualcoyotl in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 106r). Little is known about finger rings worn by members

139

140

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

of Nahua nobility, called maxitlaztli or matzatzaztli and mentioned as objects of long-distance trade (FC IX, 2, 8). In addition to the pieces of jewelry, important portable status markers were displayed in the hands. Nahua nobles enjoyed many varieties of feather fans, classified under the general term ecacehuaztli (figure 2.31). Known varieties of fans were made of feathers of crested guan (coxoliecacehuaztli), arara (cueçalecacehuaztli), quetzal (quetzalecacehuaztli), or red spoonbill (tlauhquecholecacehuaztli). A carved wooden handle of a Mexica fan was discovered in the zone of the Main Temple (Templo Mayor) in Mexico City, giving us an idea of how such objects were made.283 Some of them were prestigious attributes of long-distance merchants and messengers (figure 2.69), an association that in Mesoamerica goes back at least to the Classic period. The quetzal variety, for example, described as a large fan with rich feathers and having an image of a golden sun in the middle surrounded by precious stones, is mentioned as a gift presented to Axayacatl by the ruler of Tetzcoco to celebrate the military victory over the Matlatzinca (Tezozomoc 2001, 220). It is also listed among the precious insignia with which Aztec rulers were greeted in Acallan when they took part in the expedition of Cortés to Honduras (Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 38).284 Fans, including royal versions ornamented with gold, were often employed as dance adornments (FC VIII, 28, 56); this use continued in postconquest New Spain on festive occasions, as attested by images of native dances in the Códice de Tlatelolco and by written documents (see pp. 220, 346–347). They also remained an important part of elite iconography.285 Pre-Hispanic elite dancers also carried special hand banners (macpanitl ), such as the costly version (quetzalmacpanitl ) made of quetzal feathers, additionally decorated with feathers of the troupial bird (PM, fol. 56r; FC VIII, 28; IX, 92). Almost as ubiquitous as fans are tubes for smoking tobacco, called acayetl. Tobacco, perfumes, and fragrant flowers were among obligatory greeting gifts presented to rulers and nobles, who indulged themselves with the pleasure of smoking and sniffing. Whereas depictions of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin and other lords holding smoking tubes are heavily Europeanized in style (see figure 2.69; Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 60r; Codex Ixtlilxochitl, fols. 105r, 107r), they are also present in traditional imagery in preconquest style from regions formerly subordinated to the Triple Alliance and lying to the south and southwest of the Valley of Mexico.286 Inasmuch as the smoking of tobacco was supposedly a privilege of nobility, so was the carrying and smelling of fragrant flowers. Members of the Aztec elite carried such flowers with them on numerous occasions, including greetings, banquets, courtly ceremonies, dances, or military triumphs.287 Since “flowers and tobacco were exclusively the ruler’s” (FC VIII, 29),288 bouquets (called xochiecacehuaztli, “fans of flowers,” and tlatlanecutli, “something sniffed”; FC XI, 214) carried by tlatoque functioned

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

as status symbols expressing their nobility, sometimes even being referred to as “lordly flowers” (teucxochitl ).289 Also, flowery gardens were considered a special privilege of elites, while spending time on admiring and smelling exotic flowers belonged to the favorite forms of leisure. This special role of fragrant flowers was strengthened by their esoteric meaning in the Nahua world, where they were identified with “destinies” of Tamoanchan, the flowery place of the cosmic tree, and with the celestial sphere from where the spiritual component of tonalli were sent to human beings (López Austin 1994, 89–93). Thus, the listing of flowers as the tonalli of rulers (PM, fol. 60r) may go beyond the simple notion of their being lordly property or attributes (see pp. 312–315). Aztec imagery of rulers or nobles Figure 2.69. Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin holding or smelling flowers points to an in the Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 60r (drawing existence of a pre-Hispanic iconographic by Justyna Olko) convention, even if extant examples are modest in number and bear a strong stylistic impact of European art. They include a drawing of a ruler smoking a tube and with a floral bouquet placed next to his feet, in Book X of the Florentine Codex; the representations of Neçahualpilli and two other Tetzcocan nobles in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl; Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in the Codex Vaticanus A; and a noble pair in the Codex Tudela (figures 2.31, 2.68, 2.69). Fully preconquest in style are images illustrating the use of these attributes contained in the Codex Xolotl and in local manuscripts from regions beyond the Valley of Mexico. Flower bouquets and smoking tubes are here given in greetings and as gifts among the members of the nobility; they also belong to the royal palace of Tetzcoco illustrated in the Mapa Quinatzin. An additional testimony of the special role of precious flowers in the Tetzcocan court is provided by Ixtlilxochitl, who mentions teoxochitl, “divine flower,” used in the coronation of Chichimec rulers (Ixtlilxochitl, 1975–77, I: 289–90). Much more substantial evidence on flowers in the iconography of rank comes from the region of Puebla-Tlaxcala, where bouquets serve as frequent attributes of

141

142

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

both pre-Hispanic and colonial lords. This is the case of numerous Tlaxcalan genealogies and historical manuscripts such as the Códice de Huamantla and Lienzo de Tlaxcala (figure 2.55). In the case of the Códice de Huamantla, flowers figure as status symbols of almost all the lords, who are linked to their respective teccalli, or noble houses. Iconographic details permit the identification of three flower species depicted, including cacaloxochitl (Plumeria rubra), xiloxochitl (probably Bombax eilipticus or some other flower resembling the red stigma tassels of green maize ears), and yolloxochitl (efflorescence of the magnolia tree, Tlalauma mexicana) (Aguilera 1984, 21). Among several species credited with relieving the stress and fatigue of performing the royal office, Codex Badianus (2000, 70) lists cacaloxochitl (plumeria) and huacalxochitl (philodendron). Thus, the appearance of cacaloxochitl as an elite attribute in the Códice de Huamantla is probably grounded in the more esoteric meaning of this flower. The huacalxochitl, in addition to being used for garment designs, is held by two postconquest nobles depicted in a litigation document from Huitzila in Morelos (AGN, Tierras 1535, exp. 3, f.1), as well as by two native dancers in the Códice de Tlatelolco. It is not unlikely also that the third species depicted in the Códice de Huamantla, xiloxochitl, had a special meaning, for it also figures as an attribute of don Juan de Mansilla, a local ruler depicted in the Lienzo de Coacoatzintla (figure 3.40). The discussion of hand attributes should not overlook the elaborate staffs (topilli) carried by rulers and nobles that had been in use in most Mesomerican societies since the Preclassic period. At the time of the Spanish conquest these objects enjoyed considerable importance among the Mixtecs, but their role in the Nahua world seems to have been more limited. Staffs were primarily associated with deities and their impersonators, at times also being carried by rulers, nobles, or warriors. This was the case of the chicahuaztli (“rattle staff ”), an attribute of fertility deities that complemented the Xipe Totec outfit, whereas the tzapotopil (“sapote staff ” or perhaps “sapodilla staff ”) was reportedly part of the Huastec disguise of a ruler of Quauhtitlan (Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 42). A serpent staff (coatopilli), an attribute of the gods Huitzilopochtli and Coatlicue (PM, fols. 261r, 264v), is also carried by warriors in the pre-Hispanic monument from Tenochtitlan known as the Stone of Warriors, and it belonged to the funeral paraphernalia of Tiçoc (Tezozomoc 2001, 264–65). Former warriors greeted the Mexica army after military campaigns holding the quauhtopilli, eagle or wooden staffs (Tezozomoc 2001, 136). Plain staffs are sometimes depicted in pictorial manuscripts290 carried by elite personages in contexts related to journeys and visits, which brings associations with merchants’ sticks, conventional attributes of Mesoamerican traders. This evidence points to at least a limited pre-Hispanic use of ritual staffs among Nahua nobility,

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

even if these objects caught more interest among the native population in colonial times in view of their similarity to Spanish varas (see pp. 291–296). Apparel for the Lower Body

Male raiment for the lower body included loincloths and hip cloths, leg bands, and sandals. Although it could be expected that costume items of this body zone were of less importance or prestige than those worn on the upper body, they too conveyed important messages on the rank of their wearers and, as in the case of sandals, were royal attributes of primary importance. Loincloths

The Aztec loincloth (maxtlatl ) was a long narrow strip of textile passed between the legs and tied at the waist. There were two varieties: in the first the two ends of the cloth were separated, with one falling in front and the other behind, while in the second version they were tied together in a distinctive knot in the front of the body. Although they were worn by males from all social groups, elite loincloths stand out for the complexity and richness of their design (Table A.11). A “triangular” hip cloth, worn around the waist and usually tied on the right side, was probably a square material folded on the diagonal so as to form a triangle (Anawalt 1981, 21–24). The analysis of written sources indicates that the word tlalpilli was employed in reference to this garment (Aguilera 1997, 15). The most common type in pictorial imagery is the white maxtlatl, whereas sometimes high-ranking wearers are distinguished by loincloths with borders decorated with fringes or “eyes.” Red loincloths seem typical for the Puebla-Tlaxcala region, where they serve as garments of the nobility and warriors. It is possible that these loincloths were called nochpalmaxtlatl, or “carmine-colored breechclouts,” a term designating one of the loincloths reportedly used by rulers in dance (PM, fol. 56v). In the imagery of the Valley of Mexico, rulers often wear blue breechclouts, and this is mirrored by examples from imperial provinces.291 Written sources firmly link this kind of maxtlatl to the rulers of Tenochtitlan, mentioning it as part of the ceremonial adornment of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina as well as of the coronation apparel of Ahuitzotl (Tezozomoc 2001, 160–61, 269, 304–7). It is probable that at least in some cases these blue garments were in fact a loincloth version of the turquoise-mosaic design, yet another component of the royal turquoise costume, as illustrated in the images of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in the Florentine Codex or of Neçahualpilli in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (figure 2.31). In terms of nomenclature, a possible candidate for this breechclout style is the xiuhtezcayo maxtlatl listed as the adornment of

143

144

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

rulers and noblemen (FC VIII, 25). The design of many elite loincloths listed in Nahuatl sources can be matched with similar types of cape decoration.292 The use of a tlalpilli hip cloth among the Nahuas was limited to specific contexts. It is worn by the rulers and warriors on pre-Hispanic monuments, including the so-called Quauhxicalli of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina, the Stone of Tiçoc (figure 3.1), or the Bench Relief, where it forms part of the military garb of the victors in a conscious revival of the Toltec costume.293 The second group of wearers is novice priests, priests, young warriors, and royal emissaries pictured in the Codex Mendoza who often wear a hip cloth together with a loincloth (figure 2.70). Finally, triangular hip cloths were associated with deities, who often displayed the tentlapaltlalpilli, “hip cloth with a red border.”294 The use of male kilts seems even rarer but with an interesting example of the tzapocueitl, or sapote-leaf skirt, a diagnostic attribute of Xipe Totec (PM, fol. 263r; Codex Tudela, fol. 12r; see also figure 2.19), worn as part of this god’s outfit by Mexica rulers (FC VIII, 33–34). An old Mesoamerican adornment, charged with symbolic meaning, was a small mirror, tezcacuitlapilli (“mirror tail”), worn at the back of the waist and decorated with hanging fur or feather “tails.” It is omnipresent in the Classic-period iconography of Teotihuacan and was also worn by contemporaneous Maya rulers as part of their military garb, inspired by the central Mexican ideology of war; later, it enjoyed great popularity in Toltec Tula and in Chichen Itza. The Postclassic Nahuas must have been aware of the antiquity of the tezcacuitlapilli inherited from their glorious ancestors, for it is worn by personages on sculptural monuments reviving the artistic conventions of Tula, in terms of both style and iconography. Although Classicperiod mirrors were usually made of pyrite, turquoise-mosaic back mirrors entered the insignia repertory in Tula and Chichen Itza, being symbolically linked to the sun (Taube 1994, 234), an association that perhaps survived till the Aztec period. Leg Bands

Leg bands, usually classified under a general term cotzehuatl (“calf skin”), were obligatory for rulers and noblemen. Within this category the most prestigious variety was a golden leg band (teocuitlacotzehuatl ), a dance adornment of rulers (FC VIII, 28) worn almost exclusively by them according to the extant imagery (figures 2.31, 2.45).295 A separate kind of adornment was known as the tecuecuextli or icxi­ tecuecuextli (“anklets of beaten [metal]”),296 described as ankle bands with golden bells, put on by the rulers of Tenochtitlan for ceremonial occasions (Tezozomoc 2001, 219, 248) or explicitly classified as the most prestigious royal insignia (Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 136). Surely the same kind of adornment is also referred to as the teocuitlaicxitecuecuextli, golden leg bands (FC XII, 49). According to written

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.70. Hip cloth in the Codex Mendoza, fols. 62r, 68r (Codex Mendoza, F. Berdan, P. Anawalt, eds., vol. 4, University of California Press 1992, courtesy of Frances Berdan)

sources, this term does not itself allude to bells forming part of this ornament, but the word coyoltecuecuextli, mentioned among the products of a copper caster (FC X, 87), explicitly refers to an item with copper bells. Another term, tzicoyolli, mentioned as one of the gifts for Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in his coronation ceremony (Tezozomoc 2001, 383), may also relate to leg ornaments with small bells, whereas icxipepetlactli (“a shining thing for the feet”) is reported as part of a war outfit worn by Ahuitzotl (Tezozomoc 2001, 333). Sandals

Important elite-status markers in the pre-Hispanic world, sandals (cactli) were manufactured in fancy versions, for whose use sumptuary regulations existed. Nobles entering the royal palace and approaching the ruler were supposed to remove their shoes; brave warriors could gain special privileges of wearing sandals

145

146

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

while walking around town, but only plain ones, the costly styles being reserved for great lords (Durán 1984, II: 211).297 A broad category of lordly sandals (tecpilcactli) encompassed many designs and materials: sandals with painted motifs (tlacuilolli cactli), those with a diagonally divided design (nacazminqui cactli), decorated with soft rabbit fur (tochomio cactli), quilted (cacamoliuhqui cactli), or made of the skin of animals such as the jaguar or the wolf (ocelocactli, cuetlachcactli). Sandals of jaguar skin (or bearing the pattern of jaguar hide) surely enjoyed a particularly high prestige as a component of the royal costume and prestigious gifts.298 A special significance was given to the xiuhcactli (“turquoise [blue] sandals”), yet another component of the turquoise garb of the rulers of Tenochtitlan, explicitly presented as a royal attribute (Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 38; Tezozomoc 2001, 269, 418). This term is most probably synonymous with the tlaxiuhicuilolli cactli (“blue-painted sandals”), mentioned in the Florentine Codex (FC X, 169) as one of the precious costume items of the Toltecs and described as painted light blue with thongs in the same color. These prestigious sandals are worn by Aztec rulers in the Florentine Codex (FC VIII, fol.43r), Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 108r; see also figure 2.31), and the Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 60v). Ritual contexts required the use of sandals covered with white down called poçolcactli (“foam sandals”), a frequent apparel of deities and priests. Rulers would reportedly wear them when fasting during coronation rites (PM, fol. 260v; FC VIII, 62–63). Together with other components of their fasting garb, priestly sandals signaled their participation in a ritual of abstinence, prayers, and autosacrifice—crucial rites of passage in their transformations into kings. Female Gar ments

The repertory of female costume included a sleeveless shift called the huipilli, worn over the upper body, or a quechquemitl tunic less frequently used in the Nahua world but common in the Totonac, Mixtec, and Zapotec regions. Each of them was combined with a skirt (cueitl ) reaching down to the calves of the legs. These items were universally worn independently of social class; as in the case of the male tilmatli, the kind and quality of textile as well as the decoration corresponded to the status of a wearer. The huipilli, recognizable by a rectangle over the chest that probably strengthened the neck slit (Anawalt 1981, 46–52), were made in many varieties that often mirrored patterns known in male garments (Table A.14; see also figure 2.71). The most common in pictorial sources are white shifts,299 frequently decorated with step-fret (xicacoliuhqui) borders; some bore striped or curly designs, or had a checkered upper part. A large group are the huipilli with flowery motifs, perhaps

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.71. Female shifts (huipilli) in the Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 30v (courtesy of the Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited)

with xochimoyahuac huipilli (“the shift overspread with flowers”) being a general term for them (FC VIII, 47).300 Another broad term was the xochitenyo or xoxochitenyo huipilli, “flower-bordered shift” (PM, fol. 56r; FC VIII, 47). Specific species represented on female shifts included dahlias and plumeria flowers.301 Quite popular were brownish-yellow shifts (quappachyo and coyoichcayo huipilli) and those of quilted design (cacamoliuhqui huipilli, analogous to cacamoliuhqui tilmatli), the latter given in tribute and used also in Tlaxcala. An important category in pictorial manuscripts is the ehuahuipilli, or the shift made of animal hide; this term was recorded in reference to female garments of the Teochichimeca and listed together with a skin skirt, ehuacueitl (FC X, 172). In much the same way as their male counterparts, these hide garments were part of the pictorial convention representing Chichimec ancestors. The quechquemitl, made of two rectangles of material joined so that a V-neck and sloped shoulders were formed, was apparently used by the Nahuas only in ritual contexts. It may have been borrowed from the Gulf Coast region, where it was the predominant female garment (Anawalt 1981, 35–37). Indeed, it seems to be identified by Aztec sources as a Huastec item: it is worn by a Huastec woman in the Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 61r) and is mentioned as one of the tribute items from the Huastec region (Tezozomoc 2001, 142). The varieties of shifts were often matched by corresponding skirt designs (Table A.15; see also figure 2.72). Skirts were made of wide pieces of cotton, maguey, yucca,

147

148

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

or palm-fiber cloth wrapped around the lower body and secured on the waist. Often, and probably not only in the case of garments worn by noblewomen, they were decorated with special borders and fringes (tlatenyo, cuetenyo; FC II, 99). Omnipresent in pictorial manuscripts is a white skirt with a red border, but Nahuatl sources mention also many specific designs. Among the most popular were skirts with the stepfret and quilted patterns (xicacoliuhqui cueitl, cacamoliuhqui cueitl), common as tribute items and worn by high-ranking females.302 Among the sophisticated varieties were skirts decorated with a maize flower design (miahuacueitl ), a jaguar pattern (ocelocueitl ), or serpent skins (coatlaxipehuallo cueitl), and the yollocueitl, skirts with a heart design (PM, fol. 55v; FC II, 99; VIII, 47). Seats

The repertory of central Mexican insignia of rank would not be complete without the inclusion of seats, a vital category of elite attributes that encompasses wovenreed mats, thrones with backrests, and low stools, often combined with animal hides. Sitting was a conventional posture of Mesoamerican elites, and the Nahuatl metaphor in petlatl in icpalli (“the mat, the seat”), referring to rulership and royal power, alluded to an ancient concept considerably predating Postclassic cultural traditions. The woven mat as a symbol of power is well attested already in Classicperiod central Mexico and the Maya area, but it had probably originated already in Preclassic times. The most common element in the Nahua world and beyond was the tolpetlatl, or reed mat. The word for “mat” was petlatl, but in listing royal seats the Florentine Codex seems to use the pepechtli as a close synonym, even if this word normally means a mattress, something to lie on, or foundation (Molina, Nah., fol. 80v). At any rate, the pepechtli were also made of reed,303 whereas the kinds of petlatl listed in the Primeros Memoriales (PM, fol. 57v) are mirrored by similar types named pepechtli in the Florentine Codex (FC VIII, 31). Made in many varieties, including smooth ones, of thick or frayed reeds, painted, or varicolored (FC X, 86), mats served both as status items and everyday commodities, though surely differences existed between those used by the nobility and by the commoners. Judging by the pictorial evidence, they were usually used in combination with seats placed on them, as can be seen in the images of the Tovar Manuscript, Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 1, and Lienzo 2 de Chiepetlan.304 This arrangement is fully confirmed by written sources, which describe, for instance, the ceremony of receiving Ahuitzotl in Malinalco, where he sat on a jaguar seat over a mountain-wolf mat (Tezozomoc 2001, 319), or a ritual in which Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin rested on a wolf-skin-­ covered seat placed on a mat of jaguar hide (FC IX, 65). Although the basic version

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.72. Female skirts (cueitl), in the Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 30v (courtesy of the Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited)

was indeed made of reed, sometimes elaborately painted as in the variety alahuacapetlatl tlatlacuilolli (“smooth reed mat painted with designs”; FC VIII, 31), the above examples imply that the category of “mat” included also mats of prestigious animal skins, such as jaguar, mountain lion, coyote, or ocelot, referred to under the general term of tequanpetlatl, “mat of wild beasts” (FC IV, 46).305 Thus, petlatl

149

150

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

itself had become somewhat abstract, no longer strictly meaning something matted and interwoven, but anything serving the function of a “mat.” Whereas the word pepechtli, “base,” could naturally refer to skins as well as mats, petlatl would strictly refer to mats only but came to mean the function as well as the type of material and, in a transferred sense, to designate also animal skins. Of these, a special prestige attached to the ocelopetlatl, or “jaguar mat,” which, like other elite attributes made of jaguar skin, was an old Mesoamerican symbol of rulership. It was on a “jaguar mat” and on a “jaguar throne” that the rulers of Tenochtitlan were seated during coronation rites (e.g., Tezozomoc 2001, 248). Seats were designated in Nahuatl by a general term, icpalli, that usually referred to low seats without backrests (figure 2.73a). Those with backrests were called tepo­ tzo­icpalli (figure 2.73b), whereas the plain version could be perhaps called tzinicpalli, “a low seat,” as suggested by the attestation tzinicpalli tlacuilolli, explicitly “the low seat painted with designs,” a counterpart of the corresponding backrest version (tepotzoicpalli tlacuilolli).306 As with different varieties of mats, thrones were covered with skins of jaguar (figure 2.73c), mountain lion, bear, or bobcat/ocelot,307 whereas the wider term cuetlaxtepotzoicpalli referred to seats covered with the cured leather of unspecified animals. That the reed seats were indeed covered by real animal hides, as implied by Nahuatl terminology, is additionally confirmed by the passage in the Florentine Codex referring to the warriors’ parade made before the huei tlatoani after the celebrations of the annual feast of Ochpaniztli. According to this text, “he was seated upon the eagle mat; this was indeed the flayed skin of an eagle upon which he was seated. And he was reclining upon a jaguar seat with backrest, truly the hide of a jaguar with which the seat was covered.”308 In addition, this reference reveals that mats made of eagle skin covered with feathers were yet another important status item in the royal repertory; when combined with a jaguar-skin seat, this set alluded to the military ethos of the Mexica, expressed by the metaphor of eagles and jaguars as exemplary warriors. In this particular example of Ochpanitzli, the symbolism of eagle and jaguar items fully concurred with the ceremonial act, in which the ruler of Tenochtitlan viewed the assembly of brave warriors and awarded them precious insignia and costume items. In fact, a similar combination was present in metaphoric language: ocelopetlatl, quauhpetlatl (“jaguar mat, eagle mat”) expressed the military command and supremacy of Tenochtitlan as the place of invincible warriors.309 A separate category in pictorial and written Nahua sources are putative Chichimec seats made of green plants and usually referred to as the xiuhicpalli or çacaicpalli (“grass seat”; PM, fol. 53r; see also figure 2.73d). Like other attributes identified with quasi-barbarian ancestors, they were conceived as “nomad” counterparts of status items currently in use. Yet another variety, the quecholicpalli, “seats with flamingo

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figure 2.73. Different kinds of seats: (a) icpalli/tolicpalli, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 33v; (b) tepotzoicpalli, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 33v (courtesy of the Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med.Palat.219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited); (c) oceloehuaicpalli, Tovar Manuscript, fol. 93 (courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University); (d) xiuhicpalli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51r; (e) low stool, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 1 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892)

feathers,” were reportedly used by the huei tlatoani during the Xalaquia ceremony (FC IX, 65), as part of the Xipe Totec dress, or as gifts of Mexica rulers to the elite of enemy states (Tezozomoc 2001, 409, 461). Reed seats were commonly used in the Valley of Mexico, Guerrero, Puebla, Tlaxcala, and Veracruz. In pictorial conventions, and perhaps also in social reality, the use of the icpalli with and without backrest expressed differences of rank between rulers and other nobles. In addition, low stools with short legs were widely used by the nobility in Puebla, Tlaxcala, and Guerrero (figure 2.73e), sometimes being combined with reed mats. On the other hand, pillows or cushions, typical for the Mixtec area, can also be found in pictorial manuscripts from Guerrero and Puebla.310 However, it was the reed seat with backrest (tepotzoicpalli) that enjoyed the status of the most recognizable royal throne, dominant in the Valley of Mexico but present also in imperial provinces. In pictorial sources it is usually found in association with pre-Hispanic and colonial tlatoque, lords (teteuctin), and judges, probably also of teuctli rank. Judging by the available evidence, the tepotzoicpalli were used throughout the Valley of Mexico independently of internal political and ethnic divisions. Beyond the central area of the Triple Alliance state, reed thrones can be found in the imagery from the present states of Puebla, Guerrero, Morelos, Hidalgo, and even Oaxaca and Veracruz. As will be discussed in the following chapter, in many cases they coincide with typically Aztec iconographic conventions and insignia of rank. It seems quite meaningful that these thrones are almost entirely absent from Tlaxcala, even if often found in neighboring regions. The only exceptions include

151

152

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

a seat of a foreign ruler of an unidentified place near Teotihuacan depicted in the Códice de Huamantla and a single case in the Lienzo de Tepeticpac, where the reed throne is combined with a low stool. This pattern is congruent with a more general paradigm of Tlaxcalan resistance to Mexica symbols of power. As we have seen, however, this strategy was not mirrored in war apparel, because the correspondence with the Valley of Mexico tlahuiztli repertory is surprisingly great. Accordingly, the wide use of the reed throne as a royal attribute in imperial provinces to the north, south, southeast, and southwest may have been related to imperial impact,311 but in such regions as Puebla, the presence of the tepotzoicpalli overlapped with local styles of elite seats. As will be discussed more fully in chapter 4, even if the confluence of different traditions is conspicuous in colonial pictorial manuscripts from different regions of central Mexico, in many cases it is difficult to decide if we are dealing with iconographic conventions authored or inspired by non-local painters or if the repertories depicted reflect actual pre-Hispanic use of status symbols. Summary

The study of status items used by the preconquest Nahuas is greatly facilitated by the extant corpus of written and pictorial testimony, most of it produced after the Spanish conquest, but with an important point of reference provided by Aztecperiod works of art. This situation is much more advantageous than in the case of other ethnic groups of Mesoamerica, permitting the reconstruction of a broad repertory of terms referring to elite costume items, insignia, and remaining status objects, which in many cases can be additionally identified in available pictorial evidence. This analysis has focused on the native nomenclature, providing accurate contextual translations of the vocabulary relative to status symbols, as well as the identification of possible terminological variants. In addition, it has been possible to show repertories employed in different body sections in accordance with native terminology and classifications. This approach proves very fruitful in reaching a better understanding of how specific items were used and what they meant in the elite subculture, social hierarchy, and communication system of the ancient Nahuas. When combined with additional data provided by the history of art and archaeology, it reveals the complexity of history and the meaning of crucial royal insignia such as the turquoise diadem or the turquoise cape. The latter case also illustrates the difficulties we have to face when attempting a translation of conventional terms that remain ambiguous both on the level of language and in view of the scarcity of data on the technique of manufacture. Still, a study of such a vocabulary, challenging though it is, in many cases does offer valuable clues to a fuller understanding of preconquest clothing codes.

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

These codes, even if impossible to reconstruct in their entirety, are visible in meanings attached to particular items, the ways they were used, and the categories of their wearers. It is clear that styles and materials were employed to create separate categories or subcategories, with implications for their symbolic meaning and prestige. Thus, objects in the same styles, but made of different materials, could be appropriate both for the king and for brave warriors, though the latter were probably members of the nobility themselves. Crucial for encoding symbolic meanings and levels of prestige were specific bird species, whose feathers were employed to produce more and less costly insignia, or kinds of precious stones used for the manufacture of jewelry. Whereas certain categories, such as varieties of earplugs, necklaces, or even capes, seem to be broad enough to permit use both by rulers and by other nobles or high-ranking warriors, sometimes even small differences seem to encode particular meanings and wearing possibilities, especially in the sophisticated military hierarchy and existing promotion system in which the dispensation of status items played an essential role. This costume language is particularly striking when attributes are viewed through their role in ceremonies and other contexts closely associated with the display of insignia of rank, or through conventional circumstances in which the members of the nobility played well-defined symbolic or ritual roles such as fasting, coronations, religious feasts, battles, war parades, and rewarding brave warriors or allies, to name just a few. As has been shown, both the general nature and the slightest detail in their apparel could potentially allude to particular divine patrons, concepts, or even ethnic groups. Certain outfits conveyed meanings linked to specific conceptual frameworks. This was the case of the set of attributes associated with Chichimec ancestors or of the “turquoise attire” of the rulers of Tenochtitlan, consisting of well-defined elements forming a meaningful set. The latter in fact not only derived from the Mesoamerican past but were actually conceived as ancient insignia identified with Toltec predecessors. Even so, the origin history of specific items goes even further back in time, transmitting some of the Classic-period symbolic meanings into the contact period. Several outfits, such as the royal battle costume of the flayed god Xipe Totec, or even the very common “Huastec” war suit, seem to have been conceptual constructs of the Nahuas, making diagnostic components into new wholes and conveying a specific religious or ethnic symbolism for their users. It is challenging to judge the extent of ethnic allusion inherent in specific insignia and costume items. It seems nevertheless clear that some of them, even if of older origin or known also elsewhere, were given a special meaning and preeminence in Tenochtitlan, becoming recognized as specifically Mexica objects as was the case of the xiuhhuitzolli diadem or the eagle and jaguar battle suits. In a similar way, specific “ethnic badges” emphasized the distinctiveness of the Tlaxcalans,

153

154

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

distinguished by their twisted headbands and heron devices, at the same time that they shared the bulk of their insignia with their Valley of Mexico foes. On the other hand, even if some apparently “ethnic insignia” seem in fact to have been part of pan-regional repertories, the display of foreign costume styles and status objects acquired a special dimension in imperial Tenochtitlan, probably expressing the appropriation of the traditions of conquered peoples. Their exhibition could have been intended as a demonstration of power, “a conscious and advantageous manipulation of ethnic symbols” (Berdan 2008, 112). This issue is closely related to the tribute patterns of the Aztec state, in which apparel and insignia played an important role. Though some of them, such as headbands of plaited gold or specific cape designs, indeed seem to have reflected certain regional traditions, in many cases tribute patterns raise doubts about the manufacture of “ethnically charged” status items in the locality of origin and the possibilities of determining their provenience in the period immediately preceding the contact phase. Distribution networks, as can be reconstructed from the Matrícula de Tributos, strongly suggest the existence of an imperial strategy enforcing the production or acquisition of different items, even those of ethnic affiliations, across broad tribute-paying areas, similar to the policy identified with other tribute goods. We will come back to the complex issue of the interplay between local traditions and possible imperial impact in chapter 3. Notes

1. “Ynic quicui yc pachivi yn iollo yn ixquich pilli in ixquich quauhtli yn oçelutl ioan ỹ maçeoalli ca amo çã nen oytech azic yn ixquich ytech quitlalia in tlatocatlatquitl ca imiquiz ypatiuh” (PM, fol. 65r; Sahagún 1997a, 245–46). 2. A basic publication on the topic is the work by Virve Piho (1973). 3. This term is translated by fray Alonso de Molina as “copete de cabellos dela frente” (Nah., fol. 47r). He also gives a possibly synonymous or at least related term, ixquatecpilli, translated as “cabellos que dexã enla frente” in his Spanish-Nahuatl dictionary (Sp., fol. 23r) or as “cabellos que dexan enla frente quando se tresquilan,” in the Nahuatl-Spanish part (Nah., fol. 47r). 4. The difference between the two hairstyles is clearly visible for example in the Mapa Tlotzin, in which Neçahualcoyotl and Neçahualpilli are shown wearing a longer version, and Cacamatzin shown with a short bunch of hair. An “intermediate” variant of mid-length can be seen in the images of Neçahualcoyotl and Itzcoatl in the Boban Aztec Calendar Wheel, a manuscript held in the John Carter Brown Library. 5. The temillotl as specifically a warrior hairstyle is found in Guerrero (e.g., Códices Azoyu 1 and 2), Hidalgo (Códice de Huichapan), Tlaxcala (Lienzo de Tepeticpac, Códice de

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Huamantla and Lienzo de Tlaxcala), and Puebla (e.g., Mapa de Quauhtinchan no 1). It figures abundantly in the Códice de Xicotepec, a manuscript from a Totonac community in northern Puebla conquered by Tetzcoco. 6. Nevertheless, according to the Codex Mendoza (fol. 64r), a warrior who has just taken his first captive already wears this hairstyle. Piho considers this a mistake and believes that the temillotl was a military hairdo starting with the rank of tequihua (Piho 1973, 140). 7. Also in the Codex Telleriano-Remensis, Mexica warriors are frequently differentiated from local opponents by sporting the temillotl hairstyle. This possible identification was by no means exclusive: Tetzcocan manuscripts such as the Códice en Cruz, the Genealogía circular de los descendientes de Nezahualcoyotl, or the Tira de Tepechpan contain single examples of temillotl worn by persons from other localities. 8. Examples of Tetzcocan rulers wearing the temillotl hairstyle can be found in the Mapa Tlotzin, the Boban Aztec Calendar Wheel, or the Genealogía de Nezahualcoyotl, all documents from Acolhuacan. 9. “Quachichictli. corona de clerigo”; a related term is quachichiquilli, referring to a feather head crest (Molina, Nah., fol. 84r). This term is based on the verb ichiqui, meaning to scrape (“ichiqui. Raspar el coraçon del maguei para sacar miel,” Molina, Nah., fol. 32r). 10. A possible rendering of this coiffure appears in the image of the god Tlacochcalco Yaotl pictured in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 266r). The accompanying text mentions the tzotzocolli hairstyle. It was also worn by the ixiptlatl, a substitute of Tezcatlipoca during the feast of Toxcatl (FC II, 70). 11. “Rodear ala cabeça los cabellos la muger, componiendolos” (Molina, Nah., fol.10r; see also Seler 1902–23, II: 521). Axtlacuilli is a related term but is based on the verb cui. In his Spanish-Nahuatl dictionary, Molina also gives axtlahualli for “cabellos compuestos y rodeado ala cabeça de la muger” (Sp., fol. 22v). 12. Codices Mendoza and Xolotl are good examples here. 13. E.g., Codices Azoyu, Lienzo de Aztactepec y Citlaltepec, or Lienzo de Tlapa. 14. A verbal form huitzoa comes from huitztli, “thorn, spine (or anything pointed).” The term xiuhhuitzolli was written in the sixteenth century as xiuvitzolli, xiuhvitzolli, xivitzolli (Florentine Codex), xihuitzolli (Chimalpahin), xiuhhuitzolli, xiuhtzolli, or xiuhhuilzolli (Tezozomoc). In this book I use the transcription xiuhhuitzolli, assuming that the double [w] sound was pronounced in the early colonial period, as seemingly implied by some of the transliteration versions extant in the Florentine Codex (xiuhvitzolli), the Crónica mexicana by Tezozomoc (xiuhhuitzolli and xiuhhuilzolli, the latter with a transcription error lz for tz), and Chimalpahin’s writings (xiuhhuitzolli). See table A.1. 15. The term huitztli is consistently associated with sacrifice, for maguey thorns were used to draw blood. Molina translates vitztic as “cosa aguda de punta,” vitztli as “espina grande, o puya,” vitzuia as “punçar con puya, o espina gorda,” and the expression “vitztli omitl tetech nicpachoa” as “rep hẽder y castigar aotro” (Molina, Nah., fols. 57v, 58r). Similar

155

156

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

connotations were noticed by Michel Graulich, who suggests that, in the context of stone boxes made to receive maguey thorns, the xiuhhuitzolli as a “turquoise thorny thing” refers to precious spines used in autosacrifice (Graulich 1992, 8). 16. Fray Alonso de Molina lists the term tzonquachtli as “Venda de algo muyrica ylabrada conque atauã las coronas o mitras alos señores o alos sacerdotes mayores delos ydolos” (“a sumptuous, decorated band made of some [material], with which they tied the crowns or miters of the lords or of high priests of the idols”; Molina, Nah., fol. 116r). He clearly confuses diadems with European miters, which was a common error in the second half of the sixteenth century. 17. Though no original xiuhhuitzolli survives to our days, this technique is directly confirmed by the Nahuatl passage contained in the Anales de Quauhtitlan. The royal headdress is described as made of precious stones glued or fastened to it: “in yuhqui xiuhtzontli catca amo quimati in tlein tlazalolli in azo chalchihuitl in anozo xihuitl” (“it was like xiuhtzontli, it is not known what was glued [to it]: maybe jade, or perhaps turquoise”; Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 28). 18. “Tlatocayotl. Señorío, reyno, corona real, o patrimonio” (Molina, Nah., fol. 140v). 19. “El rey y señor, para asistir en su real palacio, se vestía de una vestidura tejida y labrada de dos colores, que era blanca y azul presado, que llaman xiuhtilmatli, que es a manera de púrpura; y de esta manera de vestido se lo ponía dos veces al día y ninguna persona (aunque fuesen sus propios hijos) podía vestirlo, so pena de la vida. . . . Para salir de palacio los reyes a visitar los templos se vestían de blanco, pero para entrar en los consejos y asistir en otros actos públicos se vestían de diferentes colores, conforme la ocasión o efecto a que salía; porque si salía a negocio de fiestas, era el vestido diferente que en casos de justicia y en los de justicia diferentes de los que usaba en los criminales que en los civiles; y siempre que en palacio salía al público o se hallaba en estas ocasiones se ponía su corona, que llaman copilli, embutida de muchas y muy preciosas piedras de diferentes colores, y era el color de este copilli o corona del mismo que la manta y vestido que llaman xiuhtilmatli. . . . Llevaba en las piernas unas medias botas de planchas de oro, a manera de las armas blancas que usamos, que llamaban cozehuatl; y en los brazos otras que llamaban matemecatl; y en las muñecas de las manos unas piedras preciosas, que llamaban matzopetztli; y colgada del labio una piedra preciosa, engastada de oro, que llaman tentetl; y en las orejas, a manera de zarcillos, otras engastadas tambien de oro, que llaman nacochtli; y al cuello una cadena de oro y piedras de grandisimo valor y precio, y esta se llamaba cozcapetlatl; y en el yelmo un muy rico penacho de plumas . . . y esta se llamaba cuachiatli y no se la podian poner sino los reyes; y si era emperador, como lo fueron muchos de los chichimecas tetzcucanos, se ponia por los lados de este penacho (que era insignia real) dos a manera de plumajes, en cada lado uno, de pluma rica, que se decian ananacaztli” (Torquemada 1977, IV: 329–30). 20. Fray Juan de Torquemada probably collaborated with Ixtlilxochitl, and he had access to and used indigenous manuscripts from Tenochtitlan, Tlatelolco, Azcapotzalco, Puebla,

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Tlaxcala, and the Tetzcoco area. He also utilized material of Acosta, Herrera, Las Casas, Motolinía, Olmos, and Sahagún, among others (Schreffler 2001, 248). 21. From the terms quoted by Torquemada in the passage in question, tlachquauhyo [tilmatli] appears only in the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 55v, 60r). The war insignia ananacaztli is mentioned in the Anales de Quauhtilan (fol. 49), and Primeros Memoriales (fol. 75r). The necklace cozcapetlatl appears again only in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68r) and the Florentine Codex (FC VIII, 56; X, 188). Apart from Torquemada, the term for a leg band, cotzehuatl, is given only by the Florentine Codex (FC II, 57; VI, 19, 44; VIII, 29; X, 185). Also the bracelet matemecatl is mentioned in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 65r), the Florentine Codex (FC II, 57; VI, 19, 44; X, 185), and also by Alvarado Tezozomoc (2001, 160, 219, 248, 283, 305). Finally, the only textual references to xiuhtilmatli, apart from Torquemada, are in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 53v), the Codex Azcatitlan (fol. 10), and the Anales de Tlatelolco (1999, 38). 22. The form and content of the fragment in question suggest that Torquemada could have taken it in its entirety, including also the use of the term copilli, from a separate source. Compilation, however, cannot be excluded, because some of the data given by Torquemada in this paragraph are conspicuously similar to the information given by Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl, which suggests Torquemada could have used his writings or some related sources. Compare, for example, “Para salir de palacio los reyes a visitar los templos se vestían de blanco, pero para entrar en los consejos y asistir en otros actos públicos se vestían de diferentes colores” (Torquemada 1977, IV: 329) and “[the Toltecs] cuando iban fuera se ponían unos mantos blancos y labrados de muchas colores, puntiagudos por las espaldas como a manera de capilla del fraile, aunque llegaban hasta las corvas; llamaban este manto tosquemitl” (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, I: 27). Compare also “Los hijos de los reyes, cuando estaban en la corte, vestían en palacio vestidos blancos, con sus zanefas de colores y pinturas” (Torquemada 1977, IV: 330) and “Los reyes se ponían siempre unas mantas blancas llanas y otras pardas con aljófar y otras piedras preciosas labradas y hechas unas labores y la cenefa toda de mil colores labrada” (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, I: 274) [all emphases mine].

23. In another place (Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 38) the royal headdress is simply referred to as tlatocayotl. 24. None of these terms is very frequent in his writings, but copilli seems to be somewhat more frequent (Chimalpahin 2003b, 62, 172, 181; 1997a, I, 30) than xiuhhuitzolli (Chimalpahin 1997b, 118; 2003b, 323) or teuctzontli (Chimalpahin 1997b, 86, 118; 2003b, 181).

157

158

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

25. “Oncan quimacac yn tlahtoc[ayo]tl, yn teuhctzontli in iuhqui corona ypan pohuia” (“Then he gave him the tlahtocayotl, the teuctzontli which counted like a crown”; Chimalpahin 1997b, 86). “Ytoca yn cihuapilli Tlacocihuatzin contallilique yn teuhctzontli yhuan yn xihuitzolli yhuan yn ixquich tlamantli tlahtocayotl conmamacaque yn cihuapilli” (“On a noblewoman named Tlacocihuatzin they placed the teuctzontli and the xiuhhuitzolli and all things of the tlahtocayotl they gave to the noblewoman”; Chimalpahin 1997b, 118–19) “. . . chicuacen xihuitl motlahtocatlalli, [a]yemo niman quitlallique y teuhctzontli yhuan [co]pili ca ye quin, ipan inyn, mochi quitlallilique” (“in six years he assumed the rule, [but] not immediately did they place on him the teuctzontli and the copilli, because it was later in that year when they placed all on him”; Chimalpahin 2003b, 181–182). In one place where he lists three terms, Chimalpahin refers to “two things” (ontlamantli), probably taking the expression yn tlahtocayotl, yn teuhctzontli as one thing, separate from the xiuhhuitzolli following it (Chimalpahin 1997b, 118): “Auh conmacaque yn Aoquantzin yn tlahtocayotl, yn teuhctzontli yhuan yn xihui­ tzolli, conaquique ynin ontlamantli yuhqui corona ypan pohuia, yhuan yn ixquich ynic netlahtocatlalliloya, yxquich comamacaque” (“and they gave Aoquantzin the tlatocayotl, the teuctzontli, and the xihhuitzolli, they put on him these two things which counted as a crown, and this is properly with which one was installed as ruler, all they gave him”; Chimalpahin 1997b, 118–119; all emphases mine).

26. E.g., tlatocacopilli, in tetepeyotl in tlatocacopilli, cozic teocuitlacopilli (NT III, 82, 129, 337). 27. E.g., Primeros Memoriales associated with Tepepolco, or Mapa Catastral de Tepoztlan, Panhuacan, Ayapango y Tlanahuac and Relaciones by Chimalpahin from the ChalcoAmaquemecan region. 28. It is limited to only several cases in the Códice en Cruz and to the Tira de Tepechpan that follows Mexica, rather than Tetzcocan, pictorial conventions. 29. Examples from the states of Puebla and Morelos include Matrícula de Huexotzinco, Codex Tulane, Confirmation des élections de Calpan Ms.Mex.73, Lienzo de Oyamatepec y Huitzilatl, Códices del Marquesado del Valle de Oaxaca, Lienzo de Tetlama, and Mapa de Coatlan del Río. 30. This group includes Códices Azoyú 1 and 2, Humboldt Fragment 1, Palimpsesto Veinte Mazorcas, Lienzo 1 de Chiepetlan, Lienzo de Aztactepec y Citlaltepec, Códice de Ohuapan, and Códice de Tecuiciapan. 31. E.g., Anales de Tula, Códice de Huichapan, Códice de Nicolás Flores, and Mapa de Mizquiahuala. 32. E.g., FC VI, 19, 44, 57.

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

33. “Ynic tlayhihua yhquac quitemacac Copilli, tlatocayotl” (“and thus he gave the messengers the royal crown”); “ca no contitlani in Copilli in tlatocayotl yn ipan omotepilizque” (“he dispatched the royal crown so that they guarded people”; Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 34–35). As already discussed, the term copilli tlatocayotl refers to the turquoise diadem. 34. An exception to this convention is the representation of judges sporting the turquoise diadem on folio 68r of the Codex Mendoza, but it remains conjectural to what degree it possibly follows original pictorial conventions. 35. A good piece of evidence comes from the Florentine Codex (VIII, 74), where the judges at the high court called Tlacxitlan are referred to as tlacochcalcatl teuctli, ticociahuacatl teuctli, cihuacoatl teuctli and tlillancalqui teuctli, these titles also referring to the highest military offices. 36. For an “ordinary judge” Molina gives the term tetlatzontequiliani from tetlatzontequi, “to judge” or simply topile (Molina, Sp., fol. 73r). 37. “Que sólo el rey se pusiese corona de oro en la cabeza, en la ciudad, y que, en la guerra, todos los grandes señores y valientes capitanes se la pudiesen todos poner, y fuera de allí no. Los cuales en la guerra representaban la persona real y así podían en la guerra ponerse corona de oro e insignias reales” (Durán 1984, II: 211). Although he writes about the “golden crown,” it seems probable that he was referring to the turquoise diadem whose European counterpart was a golden crown. 38. Tlacateccatl may have been more a title than a name here, though it could serve as both. 39. “Y a solo dos de sus dioses pintaban estas gentes con corona quera el tonacatecotle . . . y este señor de los muertos y esta manera de coronas vide yo a los capitanes en la guerra de coatlan” (fol. 15r). 40. According to an alternative hypothesis explaining the form of the turquoise diadem, “the triangular frontlet may be regarded as a representation of a sun ray or tonalli—the solar heat of the day. On the other hand, a sun ray resembling the year glyph made of turquoise mosaic seems to be a reference to the solar year” (Neurath 1992, 141). 41. Also Karl Taube describes the whole sets of attributes, not only the turquoise diadem, extant in Toltec and Chichen Itza iconography that reappear later in Aztec culture (Taube 1994). 42. According to Kristan-Graham (1989, 126), the earliest representation of this headdress seems to be on Tikal Stela 9 dated to AD 475. 43. The already-mentioned “balloon headdress,” the second form of the Teotihuacan war headdress borrowed together with the war-serpent helmet, was used consistently by the Maya with the Teotihuacanoid “year sign.” Good examples can be seen on Stelae 2 and 16 from Dos Pilas and Stela 2 from Aguateca. 44. The diadem-like shape is seen on some images of a profile fire-serpent headdress, where the serpent’s upper jaw makes a pointed headdress (e.g., Taube 1992, figs. 11a–e).

159

160

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Although in Postclassic times the fire-serpent headdress and the year-sign headdress seem to have functioned independently from the xiuhhuitzolli, as can be frequently seen in the Mixtec codices, Taube notes the conflation of “trapeze and ray year sign” with frontal Xiuhcoatl serpent face on the Codex Nuttall 39 (Taube 1992, 65). 45. These headdresses are illustrated in the murals of the Lower Temple of the Jaguar in the scenes identified as the arrival and honoring of the feathered serpent. This creature emits fire scrolls and wears a rounded mosaic diadem, whose form evokes Late Classic mosaic platelet headdresses. 46. According to Taube, “at Chichen Itza and Tula, there was a virtual cult of turquoise” and, even admitting that the iconography of “Toltec Chichén” exhibits both Maya and Mexican cosmological concepts as “a conscious synthesis of Maya and Toltec traditions,” he considers turquoise regalia a Toltec innovation (Taube 1994, 239–44). However, even if the material support came from the west through north-central Mexico, the Maya were clearly instrumental in the development of the mosaic drum-major headdress forms depicted in Tula and Chichen Itza, even if the original prototypes are to be traced in Teotihuacan. 47. We lack good clues to the identification of numerous personages depicted in these sites and possible difference in their rank. Also, there seem to be no grounds to consider the pointed version of the drum-major headdress as more important than its other variants. 48. The authors of the Florentine Codex make a direct reference to the cape called xiuh­ tlalpilli tilmatli that forms part of the royal “turquoise set” as a special attire of the Toltecs (FC X, 169). 49. According to the Florentine Codex (I, 30), Moteucçoma performed a special dance before the temple of Xiuhteuctli during a feast for this god celebrated every four years. Noguez also notes that during Izcalli, according to Sahagún, the image of Xiuhteuctli was dressed in the attire of Moteucçoma, which confirms his direct association with the fire god (Noguez 1975, 89). 50. Interestingly, the Dresden Codex (page 49) contains the Maya image of Xiuhteuctli with the cotinga bird in his headdress and, according to Taube, also with a version of the xiuhhuitzolli headpiece, which in this image takes the form of a stepped diadem (Taube 1994, 235). 51. It has been proposed that the mosaic headdress with the yaxun bird (Cotinga amabilis) attached “was worn by Aztec emperors and this is the earliest-known example of this headdress in Mesoamerican history, so that the Aztec crown may well have its roots here” (Schele and Mathews 1998, 223–24). However, the only direct analogy that can be made is with the xiuhtototl headdress, which is most probably worn by victorious Aztec warriors on the so-called Quauhxicalli of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina, for no examples of the combination of the xiuhhuitzolli and the xiuhtototl survive in Aztec art. 52. “Iuhqujn xiuhtototl, nelli iuhqujn popoca. . . . popoca, teoxiuhpopoca”; while referring to the sapphire (xiuhmatlaliztli) the text says that “from it a small flame stands out from

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

it like the lovely cotinga” (“itech in iuhquj xiuhtototl, valmoquetza, tlecueçallotontli”; FC XI, 227). 53. “Auh izcatqui, in imiscoaia imasca puchteca: tepeio teucuitlatl, iuhquin tlatocaiotl: commaquia in ompa tlatoque”; FC IX, 17–18. Also: “tepeio, teucuitlatl: iuhquin tlatocaiotl”; FC IX, 8. 54. “Frentaleras de papel, que así le nonbran, dorado, teocuitla yxcuaamatl, bandas anchas doradas”; “señorío de los que ponen los rreyes [en] las frentes, [que] llaman teocuitlayxcua amatl, dorados, senbrados en ellos piedras preçiosas muy menudas que rrelumbraban mucho”; “pusiéronle luego su señorío, [que] llaman teocuitla yxcuaamatl, [que] [e]s una media mitra de papel senbrado de mui rrica pedrería de balor”; “señorío de los que ponen los rreyes [en] las frentes, [que] llaman teocuitlayxcua amatl, dorados, senbrados en ellos piedras preçiosas muy menudas que rrelumbraban mucho.” Also archaeological finds confirm the use of diadems of plaited gold in some regions of central Mexico, as can be seen in museum collections. 55. Tezozomoc 2001, 241, 360. The reference to Ahuitzotl is most explicit as it involves the Nahuatl term proper: “y teocuitlayxcua amatl, el señorío o corona frontalera de oro, esmaltado de pedrería le pusieron [en] la cabeça.” That this information is not coincidental is confirmed by the description of the funeral ceremony of Axayacatl, whose mortuary bundle was adorned with “una media mitra del rey de papel dorado” (Tezozomoc 2001, 241), no doubt another reference to the teocuitlaixcuamatl. 56. E.g., Tezozomoc 2001, 327–35; FC IX, 3–6; The exact status of imperial gains in the region, lands on the way to Xoconochco, remains somewhat uncertain, even if Mexica conquests are reported for Ahuitzotl and Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin (Smith 1996, 147). 57. “Les dio lo que llaman teocuitlayxcuaamatl ytzolli, llamado corona o media mitra de los señores” (Tezozomoc 2001, 385). In a similar context, the gifts to the rulers of Tetzcoco and Tlacopan are described as “coronas o medias mitras de papel dorado” without giving the Nahuatl term (Tezozomoc 2001, 282). 58. A possible argument against the latter is the fact that the extant version of the Crónica mexicana is a rough, dictated translation of a lost Nahuatl prototype; we cannot exclude, however, additional commentaries or changes introduced to the original text by the author himself. 59. It is found, for example, in the Códice de Xicotepec from the imperial province of Quauhchinanco to the northeast of the Valley of Mexico, and in two cartographic-historical manuscripts, the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca and the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 2. 60. It is employed as an adornment of warriors in the Códice de Huichapan. 61. Nicholson (1967, 77) notes its appearance in the Codex Nuttall, but he suggests their wearers could have been foreign leaders. 62. Nevertheless, it is striking that these insignia are lacking in such Tlaxcalan manuscripts as the Códice de Huamantla, Tonalamatl Aubin and Lienzo de Tepeticpac (in the latter,

161

162

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

however, white headbands are worn). Nicholson explains that phenomenon by the possible Otomi affiliation of these manuscripts (Nicholson 1967, 82). This may actually be the case, considering the style of these manuscripts, divergent from the “typical” Tlaxcalan style, seen in numerous genealogies and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (see chapter 4). 63. “Ypan in ye ypan quecholli yn inmetztlapohual catca huehuetque. ynic çacatla quiquiçaya mexica çan quinmotetzanhuiaya yn intzoncuetlax quitlalia mexica yn chachalca.” (“At this time, in Quecholli in the month count of the ancient ones, when the Mexica kept going forth into the grasslands, they brought a bad omen to the people of Chalco because of the leather headband that the Mexica put on”; Chimalpahin 1997a, I, 88–89). A version in the Crónica mexicayotl is similar: “ipanin yepan quecholli inin metztlapohualcatca, huehue­ tque, inic zacatla quiquizaya Mexica zan quinmotetzanhuiayan in intzoncuetlax quitlalia mexica in chachalaca” (Tezozomoc 1975, 46). 64. This place is more commonly known as Cuauhtinchan, but I follow standard sixteenth-­ century ortography also in this case. 65. According to Seler, the quetzalmiahuayo imitated the male efflorescence of the maize plant, miahuatl, with the long, green feathers of the quetzal bird, particularly diagnostic of fertility deities (Seler 1902–23, II: 459). 66. In the extant copy of the lienzo, quetzal-feather crests are left unpainted, but their identification seems secure. 67. Examples can be found in the Códice en Cruz, Codex Mendoza, Codex TellerianoRemensis, and Codex Azcatlitlan. 68. FC II, 70; He wore the aztaxelli quetzalmiahuayo, like his divine patron, attached to the tzotzocolli hairstyle associated with young warriors who managed to take their first captive. However, the same passage states he wore a tuft of hair over his forehead “like that of a seasoned warrior” (“iuhqujnma iautequjoa”). 69. It seems meaningful that Mocteucçoma Xocoyotzin, as represented in the Hackmack Box, also wears a jaguar costume, linking him to Tezcatlipoca in spite of Quetzalcoatllinked imagery present on the same monument. See the discussion in chapter 4. 70. The same term, however, was employed in reference to battle devices, discussed within the tlahuiztli group. According to the Florentine Codex, the aztatzontli headdress was an adornment of Tlaloc and his priests (FC I, 7; II, 87), as well as other gods linked to fertility: Ometochtli, Opochtli, Tezcatzoncatl (FC I, 37, 51; FC II, 209, 213), and Tepeme, “mountain deities” closely linked to rain gods and venerated during the feast of Tepeilhuitl (FC II, 132). 71. The aztatzontli of Tlaloc (PM, fol. 261v) is depicted as the white-feather “crown” topped by a small quetzal-feather tuft, while that of Totochtin is an identical “crown” but topped by several long, yellow feathers. In the image of Opochtli (PM, fol. 263r) the azta­ tzontli quetzalmiahuayo is depicted as a headdress of white feathers of equal length over a green base and topped by a quetzal-feather tuft tied with a red ribbon. The same version is

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

worn by Yauhqueme (fol. 263v) and Tomiyauhteuctli (fol. 264v), while Totoltecatl is adorned with the aztatzontli itentlapal, “the heron-feather headdress with a red border” (fol. 265r). 72. “Quetzalaztatzontli, çã moca quetzalli, motqujtica quetzalli, iuhqujn xoxoqujvi, xoxoqujhtimanj” (FC XII, 12). 73. “Quetzalaztatzontli, teucujtlaio, quetzalxixilquj: auh in jcuecuetlacacaio mjiec quetzalli” (FC VIII, 35). This item belonged to the quetzaltonatiuh (quetzal sun) royal war costume. According to Seler (1902–23, II: 613), it was worn together with the ocelotlachiccomitl and both represented the feather crown of the pulque gods and their pot. 74. “Yoan iquauhtzon, tzoncalli in jtech tlavipantli in quauhivitl, çan mjxcavia in tzõtli, tlamalintli, tlavipantli, tlavipanalli, itech tlatzontli, tlanetech itzontli: in tzõcalli, mjtoaia, tzompilinalli” (“And her eagle hairgear was a hairdress/wig, in which were arranged eagle feathers; only they were the hair. They were twisted, arrayed, disposed, sewn to it, sewn to each other. The hairdress/wig was called tzompilinalli” (FC II, 155–56). The term tzompilinalli is composed of tzontli and pilinalli, a deverbal noun related to pilihui given by Molina (“arrugarse o marchitarse, o pegarse los cabellos unos con otros”—“for the hair to crease or wither, or stick to each other”) and pilinqui, “guedejudo” (“having coarse, long hair, mane”; Molina, Nah., fol. 81r). 75. “Ocatlitique in tonatiuh in tlaltecutli” (FC VI, 106). 76. FC VIII, 33. In the Nahua world the xiuhtototl was closely linked to Xiuhteuctli; this bird also appears in the Maya images of this god in the Dresden Codex (Taube 1994, 234–35). 77. “Xiuhtototzontli, coztic teucujtlaio, quetzalli in jcuecuetlacacaio, in jtzontecon conmaquja tlatoanj” (“the ruler placed upon his head a blue cotinga feather headdress which was set off with gold, and had quetzal feathers flaring [from it]”). 78. In fact coming from the reign of Axayacatl (Graulich 1992). It is possible that the same kind of headdress was intended on the Stone of Tiçoc, but the depicted bird cannot be securely identified as a xiuhtototl. 79. It is possible that this headdress is closely related to the tlauhquecholtzoncalli, the headdress of roseate-spoonbill feathers, depicted and mentioned in the Primeros Memoriales as an attribute of the god Xochipilli (fol. 266r). 80. “Tlauhquecholtzontli tlaçotlanquj coztic teucujtlaio: cenca mjiec in quetzalli icuecuetlacacaio” (FC VIII, 33). 81. “Llegados, bístese con un cuero de persona y [en] la trançadera de la cabeça con plumería de abe (tlauhquechol) y una beçolera de esmeralda, orexeras de oro y un braçalete de oro y en las gargantas de la mano y pie collarejos de cuero dorado y colorado su sonajera (omichicahuaz), y unas cuentas de chalchihuitl muy rrico, y a todos los corcovados bestidos y con sartales de muy rrico chalchihuitl, y todo con plumas como amoxqueadores para que paresçiesen todos ante el rrey Huemac de la gran cueba ynfernal, y todos los criados con asentaderos de hojas de çapote y solo Monteçuma en el asiento [que] llaman quecholycpalli (asentadero de rrica pluma)” (Tezozomoc 2001, 461).

163

164

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

82. “Benidos [que] fueron [los canteros], les mandó que hiziesen [en] su nombe y labrasen la figura del dios llamado Totec, [que] fue dios mançebo murió malogrado en el mundo antes [que] fuese al rreyno del ymfierno, que a de estar en pie parado con una rrodela y [en] la mano unas sonajas de hueso, [que] llaman omichicahuaz, y trançado con un trançado de preçiada plumería, [que] llaman tlauhquecholtzontli, y les dio pintado de manera que abía de ser, [que] buscasen la mejor peña [que] ubiese en Chapultepec.”; “Pintáronle como él era de cuerpo baxo, bien hecho, buen rrostro, con una cabellera trançado de pluma de tlauhquechol y [en] la nariz le pintaron un cañuto de oro muy sotilmente y una orexera de esmeralda [que] llaman xiuhtezcanacochtli y beçolera de oro muy sotilmente, [en] las muñequeras del braço derecho y pie derecho collarexos de cuero de tigueres, con su rrodela y una sonaxa [que] llaman omichicahuaz asentado [en] un estrado, tiguereado el asiento y silla de las grandes espaldares de cuero de tiguere, mirando con mucha grabedad” (Tezozomoc 2001, 358, 451). See also Nicholson 1959. 83. PM, fol. 263r; FC I, 40. The yopitzontli is mentioned and illustrated as the headpiece of Xipe in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 263r) and in the Florentine Codex (I, 40). The Nahuatl text describes it as maxaliuhquj, or “bifurcated.” According to Anderson and Sullivan, this reference must refer to the strips with “swallow-tail” ends that hang from the yopitzontli (Sahagún 1997a, 102). 84. “Llevaban todos en las cabezas una hechura de cabelleras que ellos llaman yopitzontli, que quiere decir “cabellera del dios Yopi.” Las cuales cabelleras hoy en día las usan” (Durán 1984, II: 277). 85. Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 52; Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 136; Durán 1984, II, 228; Tezozomoc 2001, 282. 86. FC VIII, 74; Tezozomoc 2001, 171. The Florentine Codex also lists an item called çaquantzontli among war insignia of rulers and noblemen (FC VIII, 34), so it possible it was in fact a device on a frame carried on the back. 87. “Pluma del papagayo amarillo”; “plumas del pecho y la barriga son amarillas oscuras” (Sahagún 1997b, 631). 88. “Coztic teucujtlaquacalalatli, iquetzalquaquauh, ioeaio coztic toçeoatl” (“The golden hood had horns of quetzal feathers; its shirt was of yellow parrot feathers”; FC VIII, 34). 89. FC VIII, 28. It has been translated by Dibble and Anderson as “quetzal bird as headdress.” 90. “Guirnalda de flores para la cabeça” (Molina, Nah., fol. 33v). 91. “El modo que tenían en la jura y la coronación de los emperadores chichimecas era coronarlos con una yerba, que se dice pachxóchitl, que se cría en las peñas, y ponerles unos penachos de plumas de águila real encajados en unas ruedecillas de oro y pedrería que llaman Cocoyahualol, juntamente con otros dos penachos de plumas verdes que llaman Tecpilotl; que lo uno y lo otro ataban en la cabeza con unas correas coloradas de cuero de venado” (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, II, 26).

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

92. “Estaba un tribunal, que era el supremo, a quien llamaban Teoicpalpan que es lo mismo que decir asiento y tribunal de Dios, demás de estar más alto y encumbrado que el otro, la silla y la espalda era de oro engastado en piedras turquesas y otras piedras preciosas, delante de la cual estaba uno como a manera de sitial, y en él una rodela y macana y un arco con su aljaba y flechas, y encima de todo una calavera y sobre ella una esmeralda piramidal, en donde estaba hincado un plumaje o plumero que se llama tecpilotl, que atrás queda referido, y unos montones de piedras preciosas; a los lados servían de alformbra unas pieles de tigres y leones y mantas hechas de plumas de águila real, en donde asimismo estaban por su orden cantidad de brazaletes y grebas de oro. . . . El otro tribunal que llamaban del rey, tenía su silla y asiento más llano, y asimismo otro dosel hecho de plumería con las insignias del escudo de armas que solían usar los reyes de Tetzcuco; . . . y cuando determinaban las causas graves y de entidad o conformaban algunas sentencias de muerte, se pasaban al tribunal que llamaban del dios, poniendo la mano derecha sobre la calavera, y en la izquierda una flecha de oro que les servía de cetro, y entonces se ponían la tiara que usaban, que era como media mitra; asimismo estaban las tres tiaras en el sitial referido, la una era de pedrería engastada en oro, la otra de plumería, y la tercera tejida de algodón y pelo de conejo de color azul” (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, II, 93). 93. White feather down was given in tribute by the province of Tochpan (Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 15v; Codex Mendoza, fol. 52r). 94. A noun derived from the verb yahualoa (“to go around something”). The original Nahuatl name is attested in many cases in the sources, usually as coçoiaoalolli (incoçoiaoalol, their coçoyahualolli, icoçoiaoalol/ycoçoyaoalol/icuçuyavalo, his cozoyahualolli) in the Primeros Memoriales and the Florentine Codex. According to Thelma Sullivan (1980, 234) coçoyahualolli was a symbol of fire, because “cozo- is the same root as cozol-, which, in turn, is the same as cuezal-. . . . Cuezalin also means ‘flame’ and Cuezaltzin was one of the names of Xiuhtecuhtli, God of Fire.” 95. They include the Primeros Memoriales, the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc, the Codex Telleriano-­ Remensis, the Tira de Tepechpan, the Florentine Codex and the account by don Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl. 96. Coçoyahualolli is depicted also in two central Mexican manuscripts whose exact provenience is unknown: Genealogía de Tetlamaca y Tlametzin and Genealogía de Pitzahua. Although their style is very late, the presence of this head adornment could indicate a Valley of Mexico or a closely neighboring place of origin. 97. “Y [en] lugar de corona le ponen una guirnalda [que] llaman oçeloconpilin” (Tezozomoc 2001, 264). However, despite the fact that he implies it took the place of the royal crown, the royal diadem, supposedly the xiuhhuitzolli is enumerated in the beginning of the list of items adorning the ruler’s bundle. 98. One of them is shown fighting with a warrior from Cuetlaxtlan (fol. 37r) and another with an opponent from Icpatepec (fol. 42v).

165

166

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

99. Other copilli versions listed by the Florentine Codex include the bicolored conical headpiece (chictlapanqui copilli), part of the chictlapanqui cuextecatl costume (FC VIII, 35). It was half blue and half yellow, decorated with a golden frontal disk and quetzal feathers. Coztic cuextecatl copilli (“a yellow, Huastec conical cap”) belonged to the coztic cuextecatl; it too had a golden disk and was ornamented with quetzal feathers (FC VIII, 35). 100. These include Macuiltochtli, Macuilxochitl, Omacatl, and Tezcatlipoca (PM, fols. 265v–66v; FC I, 32, 34; XII, 11). 101. The headdress of Otenteuctli was also referred to as the amatzontli itzpapalotl. It was a paper headpiece with obsidian butterflies (PM, fol. 262r). Interestingly, this headdress has been identified by Xavier Noguez in the Tira de Tepechpan, who also noted that it appears in the Codex Borbonicus, in the section referring to the feast of Xocotl huetzi celebrated in honor of Otonteuctli (Noguez 1978, 79–80). In the Tira de Tepechpan it is worn by four Tepanecs shown killing Tencoyotzin, the ruler of Tepechpan. Its ritual significance in this context is confirmed by the presence of priestly attributes, including a bag or sash carried on the back by the Tepanecs. 102. The text of the Primeros Memoriales contains several varieties of the amacalli headdress. In the description of the array of Ixcoçauhqui (fol. 262v), the headdress is defined as “ychalchiuhtetel . . . yamacal quetzalmicoayo” (“paper crown with a band of greenstone disks; it has a quetzal-feather crest”). In the description of the array of Yauhqueme (fol. 263v), the paper crown is the color of the sweet-scented marigold (yauhpalli amacalli). In the case of the costume of Tzapotlatenan, the paper crown appears not only with the quetzal-feather crest but also is covered with rubber (fol. 264r). 103. “[En] la mano yzquierda una rrosa pintada [que] llaman ychcaxuchitl, rrosa blanca como de algodón” (“in his left hand a painted rose that they call ichcaxochitl, white rose as if made of cotton”) 104. Such a listing of royal attributes appears in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 60r), while the nacochtli are enumerated in different speeches associated with the election rites contained in Book VI of the Florentine Codex (e.g., FC VI, 19, 44, 57). 105. PM, fols. 56r, 56v; FC VIII, 27, 47, 56. 106. According to Tezozomoc, Neçahualcoyotl adorned Tiçoc with precious earplugs during his coronation ceremony (Tezozomoc 2001, 248). 107. E.g., PM fol. 55v, Codex Ixtlilxochitl fols. 106r, 108r; Genealogía de Zolin. 108. Tezozomoc also mentions golden earplugs as prestigious gifts to elite members of the enemy invited to Tenochtitlan, but he does not quote a corresponding Nahuatl term (Tezozomoc 2001, 417). 109. “Teucuitlanacaztepoztli, in innacaztlan, pipilcatiuitz: uel papatlaoac, imacolpan oallaci” (“golden ear pendants which hung from their ears, each extending very wide, reaching their shoulders”; FC IX, 3).

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

110. “Ynic tlachiuhtlj. xiuhtica tlatzacutlj ca motquitica” (“the turquoise earplugs. They are made in this manner: turquoise is glued to them all over”; PM, fol. 68r). 111. Some evidence could suggest that golden earplugs were instead employed in this context (e.g., Tezozomoc 2001, 248). 112. FC II, 164; According to Tezozomoc, the turquoise earplugs were worn by Moteuc­ çoma Xocoyotzin during sacrificial ceremonies commemorating the military conquest and the dedication of the temple of Coatlan; he does not quote, however, an original Nahuatl name for this item (Tezozomoc 2001, 418). 113. Blue earplugs are also worn by Mexica warriors on the polychromed bench relief discovered in the Templo Mayor and in the Codex Telleriano-Remensis. An exception to their association with lords and warriors are images of a female priest in the Codex Tudela (fol. 50r) and a midwife in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 57r). We know, however, that cheaper imitations of the xiuhnacochtli were in use, like wooden ones painted blue (FC II, 164). 114. “Coyolnacochtli teoxihuitl in tlachihualli tlaxiuhçalolli” (“earplugs with bells, made of turquoise, turquoise mosaic”). It is possible that these earplugs worn by Huitzilopochtli and Xiuhteuctli were in fact xiuhcoanacochtli, the “fire-serpent earplugs” associated with Xiuhteuctli (FC I, 32). It is probable that precisely these earplugs are depicted on images of Coyolxauhqui, the mythical sister of Huitzilopochtli dismembered by his fiery weapon, the Xiuhcoatl fire serpent. Her ear adornments are identical to the conventional tail ending of the Xiuhcoatl. 115. Derived from champochtli, “zarcillo de oreja” (Molina, Nah., fol. 19r). 116. This has been convincingly argued for the Classic Maya culture (Moholy-Nagy 1999) and seems to have been the case also in the Postclassic period, when the access to many commercial goods, including even exotic ones, was undoubtedly greater. Indeed, according to the Florentine Codex, obsidian earplugs were adornments of commoners: “Auh in çan maceoalti intech monequi: iehoatl in itznacochtli, amochitl, ioan itztlaeoalli neximaloni, ioan uitzauhqui itztli, ioan tochomitl, ioan vitzmallotl, ioan coiolli” (“and the things used by the common folk were obsidian earplugs, [or] tin, and obsidian razors with leather handles, and pointed obsidian blades, and rabbit fur, and needles for sewing, and shells”) (FC IX, 8); “Auh in çã macehoalti intech monequia: itznacochtli, tepoznacochtli: ioan itztlaeoalli neximaloni: ioan vitzauhqui ioan coiolli, ioan vitzmallotl: nocheztli, tlalxocotl, tochomitl, tlacopatli, xuchipatli” (“But those who were only commoners used obsidian earplugs, copper earplugs, and razors of obsidian with leather handles, and pointed obsidian blades, and shells, and needles; [and] cochineal, alum, rabbit fur, birthwort, [and] cosmos sulphureus”) (FC IX, 17). 117. Mayatl xoxocti: Hallorina dugestii (Sahagún 1997a, 260); “mayanacochtli ynic tlachiuh­ tli tlatzacutli yca ỹ mayatl xoxocti” (“green june beetle earplugs. Thus are they made: green june beetles are glued to . . .”; PM, fol. 68r).

167

168

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

118. It appears as an adornment of slaves sacrificed by Aztec merchants during the festival of Panquetzaliztli. It is described as “shaped as arrows” (mitl mochihua) or having the form of a broad piece of obsidian (itzpatlactli ipan quizaya; FC II, 142; IX, 60). 119. It is also an attribute of Painal (PM, fol. 261r; FC I, 3) and of Huitzilopochtli. In his account of the sacrifice of Huastecs captured in war, Tezozomoc provides the description of the deitiy figure adorned, among other things, with the nose rod called yacaxihuitl: “Y al dios le pusieron lo propio, con un cobertor [en] la cabeça como bonete o sombrero con señal de pluma negra (xiuhhuatzolli), y [en] la nariz del ydolo le pusieron como çarçillo de color berde, [que] llaman yacaxihuitl” (Tezozomoc 2001, 160–61). 120. Seler was probably the first to suggest that the Chichen nose bead is also a turquoise nose ornament (Seler 1902–23, V: 280). 121. “Y luego le aguxeran la ternilla de la nariz y le pusieron un pequeño y delicado pedaço de esmeralda muy delgada” (Tezozomoc 2001, 248); “[en] la nariz una piedra pequeña [que] llaman xihuitl” (Tezozomoc 2001, 262). The same insignia was probably referred to in the description of the coronation of Quetzalacxoyatl in Tetzcoco (Tezozomoc 2001, 443–44). 122. “Y luego le ponen [en] la ternilla de la nariz una piedra rrelunbrante delgada que llaman yacaxihuitl.” 123. “Yoan contlalia iacaxivitl in muchinti” (“and all put on turquoise nose rods”). 124. “Le aguxeran la ternilla de la nariz dentro de las bentanas de la nariz y luego le ponen lo que llaman teoxiuhcapitzalli, una piedra muy sutil, delgada, pequeñita, en la nariz” (Tezozomoc 2001, 269). Although Tezozomoc gives the name teoxiuhcapitzalli, it should be reconstructed as teoxiuhyacapitzalli, derived from teoxihuitl, yacatl, and pitza/pitzahua, which conveys the sense of narrowing something, making something thin (Simeón 2002, 387). 125. “Y [en] la nariz, [que] tenía aguxerada, una piedra [que] llaman yacaxihuitl” (Tezozomoc 2001, 264). 126. FC VIII, 28. Tezozomoc mentions yet another nose ornament, acapitzactli, that, according to his account, was inserted in Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin’s nose during his coronation ceremony: “le aguxeraron la ternilla de la nariz y le pusieron un muy sotil y delgado cañutillo de oro, [que] llaman acapitzactli” (Tezozomoc 2001, 362–67). The Crónica mexicana also lists it among gifts received by this ruler during his coronation from the rulers of Tlaxcala, Cuextlan, the Huastec region, Metztitlan, and Michoacan, referring to them as “cañutillos pequeños de oro baxo, [que] llaman acatlapitzalli (Tezozomoc 2001, 383). This term probably means “thin, long reeds/rods” (compare acapitzactli mentioned in FC II, 149). It is also possible that the original term yacapitzalli (“thin nose thing”) was garbled in the text of the Crónica mexicana, however, the term acapitzalli also makes good sense here. 127. E.g., Museo Nacional de Antropología, Mexico, 10-220922. 128. The term quaztli is unclear.

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

129. However, according to Seler (1902–23, II: 535), this was probably the ornament depicted on the Tezcatlipoca figures and on the pottery head from Teotitlan del Camino— that is, a trapeze-shaped plate attached to a nose peg that hung down over the mouth. 130. E.g., FC V, 158; VI, 14, 19, 44, 57, 72, 106 131. FC IX, 23; FC VIII, 44; FC IX, 6; FC IX, 24; FC X, 177. In the account by Tezozomoc, the term beçoleras de oro, which I identify with teocuitlatentetl, figures also as one of the gifts to Axayacatl in the ceremony of receiving his army in Tenochtitlan after the conquest of Toluca (Tezozomoc 2001, 219), gifts to the enemy elite invited to Tenochtitlan (Tezozomoc 2001, 417), or even the lip ornament depicted in the portrait of Moteucçoma in Chapultepec (Tezozomoc 2001, 451). Golden lip-plugs are actually worn by Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina, shown being given a royal crown by Neçahualcoyotl in one of Durán’s illustrations (Durán 1984, II: illus. 15), by a Tetzcocan noble Tocuepotzin in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 105r), and by some Tlaxcalan warriors in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. 132. PM, 73r; FC VIII, 2; Regarding an accompanying image of a tiacauh warrior contained in the Primeros Memoriales, according to Anderson and Sullivan, the temalacatentetl seems to be depicted (Sahagún 1997a, 277). 133. Saint Louis Art Museum, Gift of Morton D. May, 275:1978; Museo Civico di Arte Antica, Palazzo Madama, Turin, 732. 134. PM, fol. 68v; FC VIII, 27. Quauhtentetl is also mentioned as an attribute of the ruler of Quauhtitlan, Tecocoatzin, hiding in Huexotzinco during the Tepaneca war (Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 42) and as one of the attributes of the Otomi-rank warriors (Tezozomoc 2001, 171). 135. Depicted in the Tovar Manuscript, it actually illustrates this ruler as wearing the turquoise labret during his coronation ceremony. It is also worn by Neçahualcoyotl in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 108r) as well as by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin on sacrificial occasions (Tezozomoc 2001, 418, 461) 136. FC IX, 23; FC VIII, 74; Tezozomoc 2001, 171. 137. FC VIII: 27. A related term was probably temalacatetl, mentioned by Tezozomoc (2001, 171) as one of the attributes of the Otomi warriors. Although he gives the name temalacatetl, it should be probably identified with temalacatentetl. 138. E.g., PM, fol. 56r, 72r, 72v; FC VIII, 28, 56, 74; X, 177; Tezozomoc 2001, 99. 139. From a verb mooquichitoa, to “be called valiant”; FC IX, 4, 22, 24. 140. They are glossed as “beçotes de ambar claro guarneçidos con oro” (Codex Mendoza, 46r, 47r, 49r). Berdan and Anawalt suggest they are also worn as adornments by several state dignitaries on folios 64r and 65r (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 196). 141. “Iztac teçacatl, xiuhtototica tlamjntli, iztac teujlotl in jntenco caquia, coztic teucuj­ tlatl in jcallo” (“a long, white labret, shot through with blue cotinga feathers, of white crystal in a gold setting, which he inserted in his lip”), belonged reportedly to the dance adornment of rulers (FC VIII, 27).

169

170

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

142. Sammlung Becker, 59.989. 143. These items are also listed among costume items of Otomi rulers (FC X, 177). 144. Less clear are two other terms referring to labrets: tlanitentetl (“lower [lip] labret”), mentioned in the Florentine Codex (FC VIII, 74) as one of the precious items given by a ruler to brave warriors, while the tentecomachoc was reportedly worn by Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina (Tezozomoc 2001, 170). 145. Códice en Cruz (year 7 Reed, 1499), Codex Mendoza (fol. 42r), or Codex TellerianoRemensis (fol. 43r). 146. “Chalchiuhteçacanecujlli, coztic teucujtlatl ic tlatzincallotilli” (“A long, curved, greenstone labret, fitted at the base in a gold setting”; FC VIII, 27); 147. FC VIII, 74. It is also mentioned as an attribute of Mexica governors (FC IX, 23). 148. “Cuzcatl. Joya, piedras preciosa labrada de forma redonda, o cuenta para rezar” (Molina, Nah., fol. 27v). 149. PM, fol. 56r; FC VIII, 56. The Primeros Memoriales also list chalchiuhcozcatl as part of the war costume of a nobleman in the upper half of folio 72v. However, although he is glossed as wearing a chalchiuhcozcatl, he actually sports a turquoise necklace. 150. E.g., Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 52; Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 7; Matrícula de Tributos, fols. 9r, 12r, 13r, 14r, 15v; Codex Mendoza, fols. 37r, 43r, 46r. 151. On this role of Aztec rulers, see Townsend (1992), Read (2000) and Olko (1999). 152. “Chalchiuhcozcapetlatl nepantla mantiuh teucujtlacomalli” (“a greenstone wideband necklace, in the middle of which was a golden disk”); FC VIII, 56, FC XII, 11. Also FC II, 103, XII, 12, 15. 153. “Collar ancho de oro” (Molina, Nah., fol. 27v). 154. FC III, fol. 34r, Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fols. 37r, 37v, 38v, 42r–43r; Codex Mendoza, fols. 63r, 64r, 67r. 155. PM, fol. 261v; FC I, 9; VIII, 28. As observed by Seler (1902–23, II: 543) it is designated as gold, so it is perhaps to be assumed that snail shells were gold imitations. 156. Tlapitzalli also means “flute” or “wind instrument.” 157. The difference between the Primeros Memoriales and the Codex Ixtlilxochitl versions of this ornament is that the first one has the greenstone disk in the middle, while the second one is made completely of gold, both versions fully corresponding with the Nahuatl descriptions of this item, implying either an entirely golden neckpiece, or a golden one with a greenstone central pendant. 158. Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fols. 33r, 33v, 43r; Yet another related term seems to have been tlachayahualcozcatl, described as worn by the pulque deity Totochtin (PM, fol. 261v). However, he does not seem to be wearing the chayahuac necklace version known from other contexts: it is a long, loose necklace apparently composed of grass or other material with “pendants.” Sullivan identifies it with the chayahuac cozcatl and considers it a prime diagnostic of the octli gods (Sahagún 1997a, 97, note 17), even if it appears to be a distinct item.

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

However, if the identification by a native commentator is correct, then this term is applied to a neckpiece made of a material other than gold or greenstone, and the basic link with the chayahuac cozcatl seems to be the notion of radiating, dispersed “pendants.” Indeed, the chayahuac cozcatl is listed among attributes of the Tentzontotochtin in the Florentine Codex (FC I, 51). 159. PM, fols. 68r, 75v; as noted by Seler (1902–23, II: 550), this illustration depicts a necklace composed only of globular beads, none in the shape of the beetles, although the reference on folio 68r clearly describes beetle-like forms. 160. The Primeros Memoriales also lists xopilcozcatl, or a “toe-shaped necklace” (fols. 262v, 265v), an ornament of deities Ixtlilton and Macuilxochitl (see also: Sahagún 1997a, 101, note 44). 161. While some scholars identify the latter as the funeral of a ruler, it is also possible that the accompanying written text suggesting such attribution is erroneous (Batalla Rosado 2002, 106, 293). 162. According to Anawalt (1981, 30) the usual style was to tie the knot of the cape over the right shoulder, but certain nobles and priests apparently were allowed to tie it in the front. However, there are no pre-Hispanic images of frontally tied capes and, afterwards, in the postconquest iconography (and perhaps also reality), the capes were sometimes tied frontally, probably because of their visual similarity to Spanish coats. An interesting confirmation of the pre-Hispanic custom can be found in the Florentine Codex, which says that the knot of the cape was placed centrally under the neck during prayers, but when somebody moved to the “position of a man,” the knot was placed in the usual position over the shoulder (FC VI, 45). 163. The word for larger capes or pieces of cloth, especially those given in tribute, was quachtli, which sometimes seems to be used interchangeably with tilmatli. 164. Examples from the Valley of Mexico encompass lords depicted in the Codex Cozcatzin, the Codex Florentino, the Codex Mendoza, and Durán’s illustrations; the appearance outside the core of the Aztec area is meaningful. These mantles are worn by elite personages in the conquered areas of Guerrero (Codex Azoyú 1 and 2, Lienzo 1 de Chiepetlan) and rulers in southern Puebla (Codex Tulane, Codex Dehesa, Lienzo de Quetzpalan)—some of these images being somewhat misshaped “local” versions or imitations of the Aztec “border of eyes” motif. 165. See Martínez Baracs 2000. 166. However, although the primary meaning of the root xiuh- (from xihu[i]tl ) in complex nouns is a “turquoise [thing],” sometimes it is clearly used to indicate a blue or turquoise color, as can be explicitly observed, for example, in the term xiuhcoyotl, the battle suit made not of turquoise stone but of the blue feathers of the cotinga bird (PM, fols. 68r, 75r). 167. Starting with the actual term xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli, Anawalt (1996a, 190) quotes Molina in that tlalpilli is a “thing tied, or knotted, or prisoner of another,” but in another place (Anawalt 1996a, 200) she writes: “the verb [sic] tlalpilli, “to tie, to knot” is a part of the

171

172

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

compound word xiuhtlalpilli.” However, the verb (i)lpiā (“to gird oneself, to tie something or someone up”; Karttunen 1992, 105; or “ceñirse, atar alguna cosa, atar a alguno o prenderlo y encarcelarlo”; Molina 2001, 37) should be differentiated from its derivative noun form, tlalpilli (“something tied”). 168. Moreover, Anawalt thinks that xiuh in the term xiuhtlalpilli is derived from xiuhtic, defined by Molina as “the color turquoise,” and she writes that “it must be emphasized that the term xiuh is not to be confused with the word xiuitl, defined by Molina as turquoise, meaning the actual stone” (Anawalt 1996a, 190). Needless to add, xiuh is precisely the root of xiuitl (xihuitl ) given in this form by Molina. Aguilera provides broad evidence that the primary meaning of xihuitl is “turquoise stone” and that other terms are usually employed to refer to the color “blue” or even describe the color of the turquoise stone itself (Aguilera 1997, 6–7). Nonetheless, it is difficult to agree with her statement that “the word xiuitl . . . has other meanings, but blue is not one of them” (Aguilera 1997, 6), for, as has already been pointed out, it is sometimes used to denote the “turquoise color,” and the interpretation in a given case has to be grounded in additional contextual knowledge. 169. Seler translated it as “cape having blue knots” (Seler 1902–23, II: 519). Sullivan followed him in her translation as “cape with blue knots” (Sahagún 1997a, 205), while Dibble and Anderson proposed “blue knotted cape” (FC VIII, 24). 170. Moreover, exactly the same motif of diagonally outlined rectangles or rhomboids with smaller squares in the middle adorns the back of the sandals of an Atlantean figure from Nuevo Museo de Jorge Acosta ( Jiménez García 1996, fig. 3), possibly representing the turquoise mosaic. 171. “Estar ensartada la cuenta o cosa semejante” (Molina, Nah., fol. 25v). 172. “Tlaxiuhçalolmantli. cosa labrada o enlosada de arte mosaica.” 173. As will be argued below, deities related to Tezcatlipoca, including Huitzilopochtli and Yacateuctli, were associated with the turquoise capes also worn by Mexica rulers, but Tezcatlipoca and his manifestations also wore netted, see-through garments. 174. “Y cúbrenle una manda de muy galana de labor, apegado de piedra menuda de esmeralda (xiuhtlalpilli).” 175. Of course the correct identification cannot be conclusively established only on the basis of Tezozomoc’s work, and his testimony must be counterchecked against other data. While in numerous cases he provides unsurpassed data on the pre-Hispanic reality, sometimes he indeed makes obvious errors in translating Nahuatl terms. For example, in his description of the coronation of Tiçoc, he states that “Nezahualcoyotl . . . desenboluió lo que para tal rrey pertenesçía, que fue un xiuhhuitzolli, que es una xaqueta azul, y se la bistieron [sic]” (Tezozomoc 2001, 248). Obviously, the royal diadem is confused with a blue jacket, although in other places he did not have any problem with a correct identification of this badge of office. In another place he describes nacazminqui tilmatli as “unas mantas betadas de negro [que] llaman nacazminqui (orejas muertas)” (Tezozomoc 2001, 255), associating

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

this term with nacaztli (ear) and micqui (dead), although this name referred to diagonally divided cloaks. 176. “Manta delgada de algodon o de maguey.” 177. Although Dibble and Anderson translate it as “the netted maguey fiber cape,” the maguey fiber item seems to have been decorated with quetzal feathers, while the term coxoli perhaps corresponds with coxolitli, or pheasant. 178. “Aiatl, itoca aiauhquemjtl, anoço aoachquemjtl, tzitziuhio” (FC II, 84). The related xicolli jackets attributed to Tlaloc are listed as ayauhxicolli and ahuachxicolli (PM, fol. 261v; FC I, 70; II, 87). 179. “Ynjn chalcaiatl tlamalintli in jcpatl, tlatlalpitl, iuhqujn matlatl cillo, in tlatoque teucujtlacillo in jnchalcaaiauh, in quaquachicti inchalcaiauh mjtoa xoxocoio, ynjc mjtoa xoxocoio, veveypupul in itech qujpipiloa icpatetl.” 180. “Auh çan ycuechin in qujquentiuh, iuhqujn xoujlmatlatl ic cocoiaoac, tochiacatl ynic tentlaiaoalo” (FC II, 69). 181. Sometimes, probably due to the careless execution by colonial painters, the design is more like a “netted” surface, as in the case of the cape worn by Yacateuctli in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 262r), glossed as “xiuhtlalpilli yn itilma.” However, it is more probable that the textile cape was intended here, for it resembles royal capes with the turquoise design and has the “border of eyes” typical for cotton mantles. 182. Offering 102, Museo del Templo Mayor, inv. 265944. See also: López Luján and Chávez Balderas 2010, 315–16. 183. “Xiuhtlalpilnacazminqui tlacochquauhtli oncan icac”; it was translated by Dibble and Anderson as “the cape of blue knots diagonally divided, on which a spear-eagle stood.” A neighboring cape in this list of elite capes is “chicoiapalli nacazminqui iitic icac itzquauhtli” (“the cape of dark green diagonally divided, in the middle of which stood an obsidian eagle”; FC VIII, 23), which indicates a cotton garment with a similarly spaced design. 184. Anawalt identifies all the occurrences of the term with capes. Crucial in her interpretation is the identification of the xiuhtlapilli mentioned in the description of Toltec clothing (FC X, 169) with the royal cape. Also, Anderson and Dibble translate it as the cape (ibid.) though in other places they render the xiuhtlalpilli as a “rich sash” (FC IX, 60). 185. Dibble and Anderson translate it as “tied on the back” (FC XII, 12). 186. “Centetl tilmatli, xiuhtlalpilli, motocaiotiaia, tzitzilli, qujoalnacazvitzana injc mocujtlalpia; no ipan mantiuh tezcacujtlapilli” (FC XII, 12). 187. “Ic conxillancujtlalpique in tezcacujtlapilli, no ic contzinapanque in tilmatli in jtoca tzitzilli” (FC XII,15). Although in this fragment the term xiuhtlalpilli does not appear, the earlier indication that it was also called tzitzilli secures its identification in this context. 188. “Especie de turquesas de inferior calidad, resquebrajadas y manchadas. Son blandas por lo que los indios las utilizaban para hacer mosaicos” (Simeón 2002, 732).

173

174

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

189. An additional argument is perhaps to be found in the term colotlalpilli tilmatli, also containing the word tlalpilli and associated by scholars with knots or a netlike form (unfortunately identified only in written contexts). Seler translated it as “the cape having scorpion knots” (Seler 1902–23, II: 519), followed by Sullivan (“cape with scorpion knots”; Sahagún 1997a, 203), whereas to Anderson and Dibble (FC IX, 4) colotlapilli tilmatli means “netted cape” but can also be translated as “the cape with twisted knots.” Being probably derived from colotl (“scorpion”) and tlalpilli (“something tied or knotted”), it could indeed mean “the cape with scorpion knots” or “the knotted cape with a scorpion [design].” The existence of capes with “a scorpion [design]” is confirmed by the term colotlaxochyo tilmatli, “the cape with the scorpion stripe [design]” (FC VIII, 24). However, as in the case of the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli, there existed a separate term colotlalpilli (“the hip cloth with the scorpion [design]”). It appears in the description of the array of Totochtin (PM, fol. 261v) and is pictured as a red textile loin garment, resembling a simple maxtlatl. Thus, it is possible that both the term colotlapilmaxtlatl (FC IX, 4) and colotlalpilli tilmatli were derived from the name of this particular apron. 190. Tezozomoc 2001, 160–61, 269, 304–7, 362–67; It belongs also to the regalia of the Tetzcocan ruler Quetzalacxoyatl coronated by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin (Tezozomoc 2001, 443–44), but this probably represents Mexica rather than Tetzcocan conventions. The turquoise cape is also pictured in the same context in the Tovar Manuscript (fol. 109). 191. For example, it is mentioned as a gift received by Axayacatl from the rulers of Tetzcoco and Tlacopan during the celebrations of the victory over the Matlatzinca (Tezozomoc 2001, 220–21) or as the gift of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin to Neçahualpilli on the occasion of the redistribution of goods during the coronation ceremony (Tezozomoc 2001, 382–85). 192. Her principal arguments are that xiuhtlapilli capes were derived from Toltecs, who venerated Quetzalcoatl, while the Aztec rulers were considered direct descendants of Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl, and hence this cape must have been associated with that deity. Accordingly, “to the Mexica, the symbolism of the tie-dyed cloak and its blue color evoked a millennium of previous Quetzalcoatl imagery” (Anawalt 1996a, 198). On the other hand, Carmen Aguilera believes that the xiuhtlalpilli hip cloth “was a deliberate Toltec allusion, while at other times it seems to be characteristic of major Mexica gods,” but the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli was a totally different garment, called also xiuhayatl, which had its origin in the mecaayatl-fiber cape and other humble maguey cloaks associated with the Chichimecs (Aguilera 1997, 17). Thus, in her opinion, the purpose of this cape “was to communicate a dual message. . . . Its very components embodied the fusion of these two symbolic elements— turquoise and the rough, netted mantle—to convey and instill Mexica pride in their Toltec and Chichimec roots” (Aguilera 1997, 18). As has been argued, the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli was neither a tie-dyed garment nor a netted cape but rather the imitation of the turquoise mosaic with turquoise beads and plaques attached to the cloth in the most prestigious versions of this mantle. As a “garment of antiquity,” it did not carry Chichimec associations.

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

193. The turquoise hip cloth is worn twice by Tezcatlipoca (as well as several other deities, including the sun god) in the Codex Borgia and belongs to this deity’s costume as described in the Florentine Codex (FC XII, 12, 15). In addition, in the Panquetzaliztli festival the turquoise hip cloth was reportedly worn by Painal, a manifestation of Huitzilopochtli, while the turquoise cape was worn by Yacateuctli, the god of merchants. Merchants performed important rituals during that feast, and the captives sacrificed by them are described as wearing the xiuhtlalpilli (FC IX, 60; Sahagún 1997b, 512). This association seems independent of an already-discussed relationship between Tezcatlipoca/warriors and netted capes; it seems tempting, however, to identify the xiuhayatl cloth covering the bundle of Tezcatlipoca (Anales de Quauthitlan, fol. 14) as the turquoise cape and not a netted garment. 194. It is listed in the Anales de Tlatelolco (1999, 38) and appears as a gloss in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 53v) describing the cape of Tlaçolyaotzin, who wears a white tenixyo cape with a blue crisscross design. 195. They are worn by Mexica rulers in several Valley of Mexico manuscripts, but also by provincial elites in local documents from Puebla, Tlaxcala, Hidalgo, and Guerrero. This imagery includes the Primeros Memoriales, Codex Mexicanus, Codex Aubin, Codex Florentino, Plano en Papel de Maguey, Titres de Propriete Mexico Tenochtitlan (Bibliotèque nationale de France Ms. Mex. 114), Historia de las Indias de Nueva España by fray Diego Durán, Tovar Manuscript, Codex Azcatitlan, and Codex Cozcatzin from the Valley of Mexico; the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec and Lienzo de Quetzpalan from Puebla; the Genealogía de Tepeticpac, and Genealogía de Zolín from Tlaxcala; the Códice de Huichapan from Hidalgo and the Codex Azoyú 2 from Guerrero. 196. A similar “crisscrossing” with dots within fields, resembling the design of the “turquoise-­mosaic” cape, is found on red mantles worn by Mexica judges in Book VIII of the Florentine Codex and by several rulers in the Códice de Huichapan (fols. 14, 26, 34, 35, 57). This is not a turquoise mosaic but, again, an imitation of this design made by quilting, dyeing or weaving. 197. The gloss of ehuatilmatli (“yyeoatilma,” “his leather cape”) appears in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 51r) in the section illustrating skin capes worn by early Mexica rulers. 198. For example, the Primeros Memoriales list it among the costume items of rulers (fol. 55v), together with other animal-hide garments. 199. Another, though less likely, possibility is that the word tlapaqui, meaning “something dyed,” was intended—with n for the glottal stop in pa, which would give the meaning “cape dyed with a jaguar [design].” It is mentioned among the gifts of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin to the elite of enemy states (Tezozomoc 2001, 417). 200. “Ocelotentlapalli [tilmatli] iitic icac ocelotl,” or a “red-bordered ocelot cape, in the middle of which stood an ocelot” (FC VIII, 23); Seler translated it as a “jaguar cloak with a red border, with jaguar (skin) marking within” (Seler 1902–23, II: 525), but it is more probable that its design contained the whole image of a jaguar, as the description implies, perhaps like a

175

176

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

jaguar cape depicted in the Codex Tudela (fol. 87v). Just like the ocelotilmatli, it figures among accouterments of rulers and noblemen (FC VIII, 23; Sahagún 1997b, 456–58). Other jaguardesign cape varieties include the ocelotzontecomayo tilmatli and the oceloxicacoliuhqui tilmatli. 201. They were also used outside the Valley of Mexico, for they appear in the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca and the Codex Dehesa. 202. The maçaehuatilmatli mentioned in the glosses accompanying the images of early rulers of Tetzcoco and Huexotla (PM, fols. 52r–53r) does not seem to be reflected in the accompanying drawings because the garments of Tetzcocan rulers are clearly of jaguar fur, while those of the members of Huexotla dynasty have black parallel lines. 203. These terms were translated by Dibble and Anderson as “coyote fur” items, but there seems to be no reason to translate ichcatl in this context as an animal fur, for its primary meaning is cotton, and it is not found otherwise in reference to animal skins or furs. 204. “Aço quappachtilmatli, anoço coioichcatilmatli” (“either the tawny cape or the coyote-­cotton cape”; FC II, 165). 205. A cape bearing a similar design, including not only bones but also severed body parts, was called the tlaquaqualo tilmatli; it was an attribute of Huitzilopochtli. The same design decorated this god’s xicolli called tlaquaqualo (FC II, 72). 206. This cape has been identified by Batalla Rosado (2002, 371) as the cape of “Xoxouhcan Tonatiuh” or “Tliltic Tonatiuh.” 207. “Wind” was also written ehecatl and eecatl, to mark the glottal stop, but there is no consistency even in the dictionary of Molina; the most common sixteenth-century version ecatl is used in this book. 208. These capes are illustrated in tribute lists in the Matrícula de Tributos, fols. 15v, 16r and the Codex Mendoza, fols. 34r, 52r, 53r. The Codex Mendoza (fol. 34r, Ocuillan tribute section) combines the ecacozcayo design with ornamented bands of the Ocuilteca design. The ecacozcayo tilmatli is worn by one of the highest state dignitatries in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 65r) and is mentioned among prestigious gifts (FC XII, 6; Tezozomoc 2001, 291). 209. FC VIII, 23; Seler 1902–23, II: 525; Codex Mendoza, fols. 54, 55, 66. Like many other capes bearing religious motifs, it is pictured in the Codex Tudela (fol. 85v). Seler (1902–23, II: 529) identifies the capes in the Codex Magliabechiano, copied from the capes section in the Codex Tudela, as “manta de fuego,” “manta de conejo,” “manta del ayre,” and “manta del agua,” corresponding according to him to the four elements—fire, earth, air, and water— and their divinities. 210. The pictorial section of the capes in the Codex Tudela was copied between 1540 and 1553 to the Libro de Figuras, now lost but reproduced in the Codex Fiestas with glosses. As far as images are concerned, the Magliabechiano Group contains the section of capes, which are copies from the Codex Tudela to the Libro de Figuras, Códice Ritos y Costumbres, and Codex Magliabechiano. On the other hand, in the case of glosses, a reverse process is implied, because the Codex Tudela only contains glosses for two objects, and the codices Libro de

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

Figuras/Fiestas and Ritos y Costumbres/Magliabechiano provide Nahuatl terms or translations for most of the capes (Batalla Rosado 2002, 274). 211. Some of the capes in this section can be hypothetically identified with otherwise known terms (like tonatiuhyo tilmatli, quauhtilmatli, ocelotilmatli, and, perhaps, ecahuitequi tilmatli and teoatl tlachinoltilmatli) as a result of comparison with mantles mentioned and illustrated in other sources, but in many cases it is difficult to find comparative data. 212. “Y así, en señal de buena boluntad, le [en]biaua un arco para su contento y unas plumerías bastardas y estas mantas de nequén y pañetes y cotaras, [en] señal que es gente serrana, chichimeca yntitulado” (Tezozomoc 2001, 383–84). 213. Berdan and Anawalt (1997, 77) propose “the cape with wealthy painting,” associating it with the verb ixnextia, but such a derivation seems little probable in linguistic terms. On the other hand, ixnextli (“ashen eyes”) were an attribute of several deities, while Ixnextli was a female goddess linked to Tamoanchan and corporeal pleasure. 214. Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 15v; Codex Mendoza, fols. 46r, 52r; see also: Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64; Tezozomoc 2001, 142. 215. Anawalt identifies this kind of cloak as made with a tie-dye technique, the same that was purportedly used in the manufacture of xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli (Anawalt 1992, 131; 1996a). However, as has been argued, they were probably dyed or woven imitations of the prestigious design of turquoise-studded royal mantles, while a related diamond-shaped design is glossed as cacamoliuhqui (“quilted”) in the Matrícula de Tributos. 216. PM, 261v; FC I, 70; II, 87; 217. Examples can be found in pictorial sources from the Valley of Mexico, Tlaxcala, Guerrero, Puebla, Morelos, and Hidalgo: Codex Xolotl, Codex Mendoza, Codex TellerianoRemensis, Códice en Cruz, Primeros Memoriales, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, Lienzo de Tepeticpac, Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 3, Codices Azoyú 1 and 2, Lienzo de Aztactepec y Citlaltepec, Lienzo 1 de Chiepetlan, Códice de Huichapan, and Codex Moctezuma. 218. The Primeros Memoriales place it among accouterments of rulers, noblemen, and captains (fols. 68r, 72r). It is actually worn by rulers in battlefield contexts illustrated in the Codex Xolotl (fols. 4, 8), Codex Azcatitlan (fols. 16, 19), Códice en Cruz (e.g., the year 7 House, 1473), or Codex Mendoza (fol. 10r). 219. Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r–69v, 72r–73r, 76r; FC VIII, 34–35; Durán 1984, II: fig. 21; Códice de Xicotepec, fol. 10; Codex Ixtlilxochitl, fol. 106r; Chimalpahin 2003b, 164. 220. The ichcahuipilli is attested in sources associated with Tenochtitlan, Tlatelolco, Tetzcoco, and other Acolhua localities, as well as Chalco. Considering its wide incidence in different parts of the Valley of Mexico, and especially its appearance in such sources as bench reliefs from Templo Mayor, the Florentine Codex, the Codex Telleriano-Remensis, or the Codex Saville, I do not see any special association of this garment with Tetzcoco as suggested by Anawalt (1992, 126). Beyond the Valley of Mexico, this garment figures in manuscripts bearing imperial influence: Códice de Xicotepec and Codices Azoyú 1 and 2.

177

178

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

221. A similar term is the xoxouhqui ehuatl (“blue/green tunic”), but the tunic is listed in the same section as the xiuhtotoehuatl, so it may have been a different item. 222. The xiuhtotoehuatl is also enumerated as one of the precious costumes conquered by the pochteca during their “war” in Quauhtenanco and subsequently brought to Ahuitzotl as conquest booty and the rightful due of the Mexica ruler (FC IX, 3, 5). 223. “Tlauiztli: armas o insignias” (Molina, Nah., 145r). In the sixteenth century armas rarely meant “weapons,” having a broader meaning referring to armor and heraldic devices, and Molina follows this use. For example, he translates “armas de algodon” as the ichcahuipilli, an upper-body protective garment (Molina, Sp., fol. 13v). 224. “Nican tlami yn pillatquitl yn tlaviztli” (PM, fol. 75v). 225. In one instance the Florentine Codex lists “the insignia, the shields” as a separate category from war clubs, capes, and loincloths: “in nepapan tlaviztli, in chimalli, yoan in macquavitl yoã tilmatli, yoan maxtlatl” (“and different insignia, the shields, and war clubs, and capes, and loincloths”; FC II, 123). 226. Or, metaphorically, “those carried on the back,” children, people, or an entire altepetl (FC VI, 2, n. 2), and such uses are frequent through Book VI of the Florentine Codex. 227. It is used in the possessed form itlahuiz, itlatqui, (“his insignia, his gear”; PM, fols. 68r, 68v, 72r–73r), or as yn pillatquitl yn tlaviztli (“noble gear, insignia”; PM, fol. 75v). 228. In one case, only yn itlaviz is used (PM, fol. 72v). Significantly, the gloss “nican vmpeva yn quauhtlaviztli” (“here start insignia of the quauhtin [warriors]”) on folio 76r introduces the section illustrating back devices, starting with the chamolehuatl, or an upper-body tunic, followed by devices on wooden frames. This implies that all costume items worn in war were classified as tlahuiztli, not only the back insignia or entire battle suits that follow. 229. The meaning of the word tlatquitl is costume or clothes: “tlatquitl: hazienda o vestidos” (Molina, Nah., fol. 142r). 230. “Insignias de honra: tetlahuizmactli, tlauiztli,” “insignias de vencimento: tiyacauhtlatquitl, oquich tlatquitl” (Molina, Sp., fol. 75v). 231. Tlahuiztli is probably a shortened form of tlahuiliztli; “tlahuilli claridad, luz de candelas,” “tlahuillotl lumbrera o claridad,” “tlahuizcalli resplandor de alua,” “tlahuia alumbrar la candela; alumbrar a otros con candela o hacha” (“for a candle to give light or to light the way for people with tapers or torches”; Molina, Nah., fols. 144v, 145r). 232. “Teixpan qujnextia in tlauiztli, cenca veca in motonameiotia, cenca mihiiotia in tlauiztli” (FC II, 124). 233. Chamolcoyotl (red, but pictured as brown in the Primeros Memoriales), coztic coyotl (“yellow coyote”), citlalcoyotl (“star-studded coyote”), iztac coyotl (“white coyote”), tlecoyotl (“fire coyote”), tlapalcoyotl (“red coyote”), tliltic coyotl (“black coyote”), tozcoyotl (“yellow coyote,” decorated with yellow parrot feathers), and xiuhcoyotl (“the turquoise coyote,” covered with cotinga feathers).

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

234. The tlapalcoyotl and tozcoyotl are described in the Primeros Memoriales as constructed on wooden frames (fols. 68r, 68v) although they are illustrated without such frames and clearly as body garments. Considering that all other descriptions of coyote suits lack this reference and that many other insignia attached to frames are listed in this section of the Primeros Memoriales, this association of coyote tlahuiztli with back insignia is most probably erroneous. 235. A coyote warrior helmet can be seen, for example, on the tripod vessel from the late Xolalpan phase (Berrin and Pasztory 1993, fig. 139) showing an individual wearing a coyote headdress. 236. “Auh in tiiacauh Coiovevetzin: in onaquuj tlaviztli quauhtlocelutl: cectlapal quauhtli cectlapal ocelutl.” 237. In the Lienzo de Tlaxcala a jaguar costume clearly serves to identify warriors from Tenochtitlan (e.g., fol. 45), but it is also worn by a member of a Tlaxcalan group on folio 72. In much the same way, one of the leaders from Quauhquechollan wears an eagle costume in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. 238. According to Seler, the “hawk scratches” or tlotlohuitequi mentioned by Sahagún are wavy, curved lines intended as a picture of blazing flames. He notes that the pronged copper plates, being the special attribute of Otonteuctli, are designated itlotloma, or “his hawk hands,” and are probably also intended as the likeness of blazing fire (Seler 1902–23, II: 598–99). 239. Seler 1902–23, II: 609; Anawalt 1992, 116; Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 184. 240. Although this term does not appear in extant sources, Seler reconstructed it as the cicitlallo cuextecatl (Seler 1902–23, II: 609–10). 241. All its varieties, except for chictlapanqui cuextecatl, are pictured in the Matrícula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza, and many of them are also in the Florentine Codex. 242. This would help to explain the absence of this costume in the Primeros Memoriales’s list of military insignia worn by the members of nobility. 243. A skeletal head forms a helmet as it is depicted in the Codex Telleriano-Remensis (fol. 39v); the Primeros Memoriales refers to its quetzal-feather variety as constructed on a special frame (fol. 68r) and hence its probable use as a back insignia. Nonetheless, the only pictorial example in the latter source (fol. 73v) is not accompanied by a frame, but its skull-head form is difficult to imagine as worn as a simple headdress, for it must have covered the face if actually used as a headpiece. 244. The identified varieties resembling the tzitzimitl costume include yellow, white, green, blue, and jaguar versions (coztic tzitzimitl, iztac tzitzimitl, quetzaltzitizmitl, xiuhtototzitzimitl, ocelotzitzimitl ). The Florentine Codex also lists xoxouhqui tzitzimitl, or green/ blue tzitzimitl (FC VIII, 34), and although the name could imply an identity with the xiuhtototzitzimitl made of blue cotinga feathers, this term is probably synonymous with quetzal­ tzitizmitl because the Nahuatl text mentions it was decorated with quetzal feathers.

179

180

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

245. FC VIII, 33. Seler first identified these references as descriptions of the Xipe Totec dress. He considered the second costume listed by Sahagún as only a variant of the first Xipe costume. The third one, ocelototec, is according to him also a Xipe costume, which is confirmed by the appearance of a drum and a short sapote skirt. In his interpretation, the three costumes would represent three sides of the god’s nature, which are also shown on his tripartite shield. In the case of the shield on the Cuernavaca relief, the red rings occupying the whole right half of the object correspond to the tlauhquechol device (Seler 1902–23, II: 594–98). 246. “Con una diuisa de muy rrica plumería y [en]sima una abe, la pluma dél muy rrica, rrelumbrante, [que] llaman tlauhquecholtontec, ya puesta que paresçía [que] iba bolando y debaxo un atanborçillo dorado muy resplandeçiente, trançado con una pluma arriba de la abe arriba d[ic]ha” (Tezozomoc 2001, 373). In another place he calls it “una diuisa de oro llamado teocuitlatontec, con una abe ençima dél, tlauhquechol” (Tezozomoc 2001, 401). 247. Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 85v; Codex Cozcatzin, fols. 13v, 14r. 248. As has been already pointed out, the same term also referred to headpieces having a conical shape and topped by quetzal feathers. 249. Matrícula de Tributos, Codex Mendoza, or Lienzo de Tlaxcala; Seler 1902–23, II: 581–84. 250. The varieties, figuring as prestigious devices of rulers, captains, and noble warriors, include the itzpapalotl (“obsidian butterfly [insignia]”), quetzalpapalotl (“quetzal feather butterfly [insignia]”), xochiquetzalpapalotl (“butterfly of [the goddess] Xochiquetzal [insignia]”), xolopapalotl (“dark-yellow parrot-feather butterfly [insignia]”), çacuanpapalotl (“[black and yellow] troupial-feather butterfly [insignia]”), and the tlilpapalotl (“black-­ butterfly [insignia]”), covered with crow feathers. This last version is possibly referred to in the account of Tezozomoc as one of the gifts redistributed by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin during his coronation (Tezozomoc 2001, 382–85). 251. Although Berdan and Anawalt follow Clark in using the name toxicocolli (“winding navel string”) in reference to the illustration of this standard on folio 43r in the Codex Mendoza, noting that this device may imitate an umbilical cord (Clark 1938, I: 78; Anawalt 1992, 121; Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 104), this interpretation cannot be justified linguistically; in addition, the Primeros Memoriales give the term tozcololli in folio 68v but another term (tozcocolli) in another folio (77v), the same as Tezozomoc (2001, 341, 384). 252. Its variant was made of troupial-bird feathers (çaquantonatiuh) as pictured in the PM (fol. 74r). 253. An obvious candidate would be aztatototl (“heron bird”), but perhaps it should be identified with the aztapanitl (“heron banner”) mentioned in the Anales de Quauhtitlan (fols. 3, 54). 254. The back frame is visible in the examples illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales, the Florentine Codex, the Codex Cozcatzin, or the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. 255. With the exception of the momoyactli.

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

256. PM, fols. 8r, 72r; FC VIII, 27, 34, 74; Codex Xolotl, fols. 3, 4, Códice de Tlatelolco; Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 58r; Tezozomoc 2001, 259; Chimalpahin 1997a I, 133–45; Chimalpahin 1997b, 176–78; Codex Cozcatzin, fols. 13v, 14r; Tezozomoc 2001, 341; 257. Anawalt (1992, 118), however, notes the similarity between the patzactli and momo­ yactli insignia. 258. Seler 1902–23, II: 413; the identification of Quetzalcoatl with this headdress, referred to as the apanecayotl, is also confirmed by the Anales de Quauhtitlan (fol. 6). 259. According to Aguilera, the quetzalapanecayotl symbolizes, among other things, a military victory (Aguilera 1983, 181), and she identifies it as a “headdress of Motecuhzoma” (Aguilera 2003, 76). However, while the identification as a headdress of Quetzalcoatl seems convincing, I do not find any direct evidence of its association with or its use by the Aztec rulers. The example of the Stone of Tiçoc is untenable, for the ruler clearly wears a typical quetzalpatzactli back device. This was already observed by Seler, who notes that the feathered device worn by the Aztec ruler on the Stone of Tiçoc bears “little similarity to quetzalapanecayotl” (Seler 1902–23, II: 410). The only exception is the image of Axayacatl in the Codex Cozcatzin, but there the feathered device (with a protruding frontal part that makes it similar to quetzalapanecayotl) is borne on a frame as a back insignia, similarly to patzactli devices. 260. The known varieties include aztapanitl (“heron banner”) mentioned in the Anales de Quauhtitlan (fols. 3, 54); precious coztic/iztac teocuitlapanitl quetzaltzontecomayo or “golden/silver banners with a spray of quetzal feathers held in a cup at the top” (FC VIII, 34), probably identical to the teocuitlapanitl, a “golden banner” described by the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68r) as made of beaten gold in two pieces like banners with quetzal-feather tufts, belonging to the war costume of rulers; ixtlapalpanitl (“the transverse banner”); macuilpanitl (“the five banners”), consisting of five separate flags; quetzalpanitl (“the quetzal-feather banner”); and çaquanpanitl, or the banner made of black and gold troupial feathers. An important emblem was a red banner, probably made of red-spoonbill feathers and associated with the god Xipe Totec (Seler 1902–23, II: 570). This device, distinguished by white Greekcross motifs on a red background, was pictured on the so-called Chimalli Stone and in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, where it is worn by high-ranking leaders. 261. According to Anawalt, the total volume of luxuries in the tribute rolls is rather small considering the high demand for such goods in the capitals, so it is likely that most of the precious status-linked goods reached the Valley of Mexico elites through trade and market channels (Anawalt 1992, 145). 262. Thus, I cannot agree with Anawalt (1992, 145) that what emerges from the distribution maps of different tribute items “is not state standardization but rather archaic substructure,” because—according to her—judging by the distribution of certain elite capes, “their Aztec display constituted a form of charter, an attempt at legitimization aimed at linking the nouveaux Aztecs not only to their Acolhua, Tepanec and Gulf coast predecessors, but also, more importantly, back to the revered Toltecs.” As has already been pointed out, there

181

182

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

is only a partial correspondence between “regional” cape designs and their supposed regions of “origin.” Significantly, no similar correspondence is apparent for the battle gear, which suggests other general strategies in creating the tribute patterns. 263. According to Anawalt, “it is surprising that the Mexica did not adopt much of nearby Tepepolco’s impressive warrior gear,” and, in contrast, “Tlaxcalans took full advantage of the Tepepolco martial styles” for “some of the same costumes and insignia appear in both Primeros Memoriales and Lienzo de Tlaxcala” (Anawalt 1992, 126). 264. Seler identified four examples of feathered insignia in the contemporary museum collections: two in the Austrian collections (one of them, the shield, now in the Vienna Museum), and shields in Stuttgart and Mexico (Seler 1902–23, II: 546). 265. As pointed out by Seler (1902–23, II: 556–57) the term tentlapilolo referred to a hanging-feather decoration on the lower edge of a shield, whereas the word teçouhqui designated a uniform feather-trimming around the whole periphery, sometimes with a bit longer, radiating tufts. 266. Examples can be found in Hidalgo (Códice de Huichapan) and in Guerrero (Codex Azoyú 1). 267. Dibble and Anderson leave this term untranslated (FC XII, 53), whereas Sullivan (Sahagún 1997a, 94, n. 5) proposes a tentative translation as the “people-destroyer shield.” Morphological composition of this word is unknown; perhaps from tetl (“rock”) and huehuelli (possibly “something destroyed or torn down”). 268. He may be also right in associating it with the quauhpachiuhqui or quappachiuhqui chimalli, the shield with an imprint of the eagle’s foot associated with Chantico and related goddesses of the chinampas area in Xochimilco. 269. “Xiuhtica tlatzacutli, tlaxiuhçalolli” (FC XII, 11). 270. It was probably synonymous with the xiuhtototl chimalli (Sahagún 1997b, 460–62). 271. In an interpretation of Seler (1902–23, II: 598), this shield design is a graphic representation of the Aztec metaphor atl tlachinolli, or “war.” 272. A specifically “Chichimec” kind of weapon was the tzihuacmitl (“cactus arrow”; Seler 1902–23, II: 452–53), forming part of the array of Otonteuctli, and the tzihuatlacochtli (“cactus spear”) held by Amimitl—both major hunting/stellar “Chichimec” deities (PM, fols. 262r, 264v). 273. Tezozomoc 2001, 70–71, 319, 443–44; During the ceremony of receiving Ahuitzotl in Malinalco, he was seated on a jaguar seat over a mountain-wolf mat with the symbols of his power, including “su arco con flechas en el suelo a manderecha, señal de su justiçia” (Tezozomoc 2001, 319). After the death of Neçahualpilli, Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin chose Quetzalacxoyatl (Cacama) as his successor, and the cihuacoatl conducted the coronation ceremony in Tetzcoco. The electee was painted black, his hair was cut in the same manner as highly ranked warriors, his nose was perforated, and he was given a turquoise nose rod; he was seated on a jaguar seat next to the cihuacoatl. He was clad in a blue cape and a turquoise

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

crown and received a bow and a quiver with arrows: “Y de allí lo lo traen [en] una silla baxa, [que] llaman tepotzoycpalli, aforrado de cuero de tiguere, y estrado de otro cuero de tiguere y lo asientan de la propio mano de Çihuacoatl en la silla y de su mano le pone la corona o frentalera azul cuaxado de pedrería, y al braço derecho puesto en el estrado un arco con un carcax de flechas, significando la justiçia que a de tener y mantener” (Tezozomoc 2001, 443–44). 274. “Al lado de la mano derecha un arco y flechas, que era justiçia suya, que al que él sentençiaua le arroxaua una flecha de aquellas y luego los capitanes le lleuauan fuera de su palaçio y allí le acabauan de matar“ (Tezozomoc 2001, 169–70). 275. For example, in his description of the coronation ceremony of Tiçoc, Tezozomoc states that the electee was attended by Neçahualcoyotl who gave him the royal insignia, including the headdress, and he was subsequently seated on the jaguar-skin mat and jaguarskin seat, and to its right a bow and a quiver with golden arrows were placed as symbols of justice: “al lado derecho un carcax y con flechas doradas y un arco, significa la justiçia [que] ha de guardar” (Tezozomoc 2001, 248). The same golden weapons are enumerated among gifts presented to the mortuary bundle of Axayacatl (Tezozomoc 2001, 241). 276. “Cuando confirmaban algunas sentencias de muerte, se pasaban al tribunal que llamaban del dios, poniendo la mano derecha sobre la calavera, y en la izquierda una flecha de oro que les servía de cetro, y entonces se ponían la tiara que usaban, que era como media mitra, asimismo estaban tres de estas tiaras en el sitial referido, la una era de pedrería engastada de oro, la otra de plumería, y la tercera tejida de algodón y pelo de conejo de color azul” (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, II: 94). 277. E.g., Códice en Cruz, Codex Azcatitlan, Codex Cozcatzin, Codex Ixtlilxochitl, Códice de Xicotepec, and Códice de Huichapan. 278. It is limited to high-ranking personages, like the Mexica ruler Chimalpopoca in the Codex Xolotl (fol. 4) or war captains in the Codex Vaticanus A (fols. 57v, 58r). 279. “una macana [en] la mano derecha, diferente de las [que] se usa, que era esta muy libiana, pintada de color de fuego, [que] salen della çentellas y llamas de fuego, le llaman tlapetlanilcuahuitl” (Tezozomoc 2001, 243). 280. Bronze axes appear as tribute items from the provinces of Tepequacuilco and Qui­ yauhteopan, located in the present area of Guerrero (Matrícula de Tributos, fols. 9r, 11r). 281. Anales de Quauhtitlan, fols. 52, 53; FC VIII, 27, 29–30; XII, 49; Tezozomoc 2001, 382–85, 461. 282. E.g., Codex Ixtlilxochitl, fol. 108r; Tovar Manuscript, fol. 109. 283. Museo Nacional de Antropología, Mexico, 10-393455. 284. The red-spoonbill feather is mentioned as one of precious gifts to the rulers invited for the feast of Tlacaxipehualiztli (FC IX, 7). 285. Examples include the image of Neçahualcoyotl in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 108r), images of local rulers contained in the Codex Azoyú 1 from Guerrero, and images in the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec from the region of Puebla.

183

184

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

286. Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec (Puebla), a pictorial document from Huitzila in Morelos (AGN, Tierras 1535, exp. 3, f.1), and Lienzo 2 de Chiepetlan (Guerrero). 287. To mention only one example, the Florentine Codex describes the merchants’ feast: “niman ic quincenmana in ça ic nemi mitotitinemi: aoquic quicahoa in suchicozcatl, in icpacsuchitl, in chimalsuchitl in ietl cecemilhuitl in mosuchitia: çan ic nemi in tlanecutinemi, in tlachichintinemi” (“Then he assembled them. He did nothing but make them continue dancing. Now they nevermore abandoned the flower necklaces, the garlands of flowers, the shields of flowers, the tubes of tobacco. Every day they were decked with flowers. They did nothing but continue to smell [the flowers], to smoke [tobacco tubes]”; FC IX, 60). 288. “Xuchitl, ietl, ineiscaujl tlatoanj.” 289. E.g., FC II, 215; this term also appears in Nahuatl poems and songs. 290. E.g., in the Codex Xolotl or Mapa de Quauhtinchan no 2. 291. E.g., Códice de Huichapan from Hidalgo and the Codex Azoyú 2 from Guerrero. 292. E.g., the ocelomaxtlatl, quauhtetepoyo maxtlatl, quauhmaxtlatl, or tzicoliuhqui maxtlatl. 293. It seems to be also worn by Neçahualcoyotl taking Chalca captives in the Codex Azcatitlan (fol. 18). 294. This kind of hip cloth seems to be worn also by a warrior in the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 1. 295. Examples can be found in the Primeros Memoriales, the Florentine Codex, the Codex Ixtlilxochitl, the Codex Cozcatzin, the Codex Azcatitlan, and the Códice de Tlatelolco; it is also worn by a high noble in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 105r). 296. It is possible that the term may be related to tecuechoa (“golpear, batir, moler, machacar en extremo algo”; Simeón 2002, 131, 452) and thus teocuitlaicxitecuecuechtli would mean “anklets of beaten gold”; the te- in both forms could refer to using a stone in pounding. 297. “Ordenóse que solo el rey y su coadjutor Tlacaeletl pudiesen traer zapatos en la casa real y que ningún grande entrase calzado en palacio, so pena de la vida, y que sólo ellos pudiesen traer zapatos por la ciudad y ningún otro, so pena de la vida, excepto los que hubiesen hecho alguna valentía en la guerra, a los cuales, por su valor y señal de valientes, les pudiesen permitir traer unas sandalias, de las mas comunes y baladíes, porque las doradas y pintadas sólo los grandes las podían traer.” 298. E.g., FC VIII, 29; Tezozomoc 2001, 160, 219, Codex Azcatitlan, fol. 19. 299. They were called iztac huipilli, as confirmed by the description of the array of the goddess Coatlicue (PM, fol. 264v). 300. This shift is probably illustrated on the same folio as a garment covered with red and black stylized flowers and decorated with a flowery border. Besides, it bears some resemblance to numerous shifts with flowery designs pictured as worn by noblewomen and as tribute items in the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc.

T he R epertory of E lite A pparel and I nsignia of R ank

301. There are two synonymous terms for shifts decorated with dahlias: the acocoxochimoyahuac huipilli (“shift overspread with dahlias”; FC VIII, 47) and the acocoxochyo huipilli (“shift of dahlia [design]”; PM, fol. 56r). The cacaloxochyo huipilli (“shift of plumeria flower [design]”), listed in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 56r) as the adornment of noblewomen, can be identified among the tribute items paid to the encomendero Gonzalo de Salazar in the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (fols. 16v, 17r). 302. E.g., Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 6r; PM, fol. 56r; FC VIII, 47; Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64; these varieties are depicted in the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc and Florentine Codex. 303. This is seen in the term tolpepechtli (e.g., FC II, 90), similar to the tolpetlatl. 304. Few cases where the tolpetlatl is depicted alone include the mat in the Mapa Quinatzin on which Techotlalatzin is seated, or mats that serve as Europeanized beds on which dead rulers rest, instead of traditionally seated mummy bundles, as in the Historia Totleca-Chichimeca. 305. Oceloehuapepechtli (“jaguar skin base”), mizehuapepechtli (“mountain-lion-skin base”), ocotochehuapepechtli (“ocelot-skin base”), coyoehuapepechtli (“coyote-skin base”); FC VIII, 31; the Primeros Memoriales list similar kinds of mats, though the term petlatl, more common for this context, is used instead of pepechtli (fol. 57v). 306. Possible examples of the tepotzoicpalli tlacuilolli can be found in the Lienzo de Tepe­ ticpac and Genealogía de Tetlamaca y Tlametzin. 307. Oceloehuatepotzoicpalli (“jaguar-skin seat with backrest”), mizehuatepotzoicpalli (“mountain-lion-skin seat with backrest”), cuetlachehuatepotzoicpalli (“wolf-skin seat with backrest”), and ocotochehuatepotzoicpalli (“ocelot-skin seat with backrest”). 308. “Iehoatica quauhpetlapan, vel iehoatl in quauhtli, tlaxipeoalli in jpan eoatica, yoan ocelotepotzoicpalli in jpan motlaztica, vel ie in ocelotl yieoaio, injc tlaqujmjlolli icpalli” (FC II, 123). 309. “Ocelopetlatl, quappetlatl: qujtoznequj: in vncan nemj chicaoaque, in oapaoaque in aiac vel qujnpeoa, ic mjtoa: vncan onoc in quappetlatl, in ocelopetlatl” (“The jaguar mat, the eagle mat. It means, there live the strong, the brave, those whom no one can defeat. Thus it is said: there lies the eagle mat, the jaguar mat”; FC VI, 244); “To be on eagle mat, on jaguar mat” (quauhpetlapan, ocelotlapan) probably meant to “be in military command” (FC VI, 198, 214). It also referred to victory in war, for it was said to a woman who had just delivered a child “now our lord has placed you upon the eagle mat, upon the jaguar mat” (“axcan quauhpetlapan, ocelopetlapan mjtzmotlalilia in totecujo”; FC VI, 179). 310. E.g., Lienzo 1 de Chiepetlan, Codex Azoyú 2, Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca. 311. They are found in the Códices Azoyu 1 and 2, Humboldt Fragment 1, Lienzos de Chiepetlan, Lienzo de Aztactepec y Citlaltepec, Lienzo de Totomixtlahuaca, or Palimpsesto Veinte Mazorcas from Guerrero; the Códice Moctezuma, Lienzo de Tetlama, Mapa de Coatlan del Rio, and Códices del Marquesado del Valle de Oaxaca from Morelos; as well as the Lienzo de Coacoatzintla and Mapa de San Antonio Tepetlan from Veracruz.

185

3 Images of Rank by Region

The Nahuatl-speaking altepetl and other communities of central Mexico have left a particularly rich and notable body of pictorial renderings of their native nobility in different media. Among these, precontact sculptures and postcontact manuscripts have survived as a significant corpus essential for understanding both the traditional iconography of rank of the Nahuas and their neighbors before the Spanish conquest and the form it took on through the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Such imagery was surely recorded also in other materials and with other techniques (e.g., wall paintings) that have not survived as well, so it remains debatable whether the picture we have is fully representative. Status markers of both indigenous and European origin are a particularly conspicuous component of these visual records, conveying a variety of messages and meanings based on pictorial conventions that employed the relatively uncomplicated repertory of attributes. Also, assemblages of insignia not infrequently display noticeably regional traits. Moreover, even if only a small part of the exuberant collection of high-status insignia is reflected in conventional representations of the indigenous nobility, these items tend to form meaningful sets obeying specific rules, conventions, and cultural or political strategies. In addition, they tend to reflect not only local repertories but also the characteristics of particular genres in which the images were recorded. While the extant body of pre-Hispanic works of art sheds considerable light on the conventions employed in the Aztec period, the bulk of the pictorial record comes from postconquest times, both replicating the traditional ways and DOI: 10.5876_9781607322412.c003

187

188

I mages of R ank by R egion

absorbing new, highly attractive status markers. As challenging as it is to try to trace the subtleties of European impact, it is more so to attempt to differentiate between the survival of the preconquest iconography of rank and its colonial transformations. In addition to foreign borrowings, changes may have entailed the inclusion of certain indigenous elements that were not necessarily part of local conventions before the onset of the colonial era. Insignia that were most widely recognized by Europeans as native status items could have been employed in documents intended for a Spanish audience. Yet in spite of these difficulties and limitations, I believe the extant pictorial corpus makes it possible to reconstruct the core of regional conventions of royal imagery, exploring the meaning of the symbols of rank they employ. The area studied reaches beyond the Valley of Mexico into other central Mexican Nahua communities and multiethnic regions subject in precontact times to Aztec political and cultural impact, encompassing many of the former imperial provinces located in the present states of Hidalgo, Guerrero, México, Morelos, Puebla, Tlaxcala, and Veracruz.1 The Imperial Core: Mexico-Tenochtitlan and Surroundings

Preconquest Sculpture Monuments

The sources for studying Mexica royal iconography seem particularly propitious; the sculptural corpus associated with Tenochtitlan accounts for a great part of extant elite precontact imagery from central Mexico, especially if compared to other Nahuatl-speaking communities. This body of material frequently provides a unique point of reference for images in native manuscripts produced in later times. Falling into several categories, these works of art convey different kinds of elite images, depending on the function of the artifact and the contexts and roles that are emphasized. Links between Mexica lords and supernatural patrons, expressed through a careful choice of appropriate insignia, emerge as a major thrust of this imagery, reflecting complex identities attributed to the huei tlatoque. Not surprisingly, these relationships disappear from postconquest depictions of the Nahua nobility, or at least become much more camouflaged and conventionalized, tending to employ regalia that are easy to identify as “secular” status symbols as well as skillfully adapting intended messages to new political and cultural strategies. A good example of pre-Hispanic imagery proclaiming the divine affinity of the leaders of Tenochtitlan are the sculptured panels known as the Bench Relief, one of the earliest extant Mexica monuments. Commissioned during the first phase of imperial expansion, probably between 1430 and 1469, they originally formed the sloping base of a bench, and were later reused during a periodic rebuilding of the Great Temple (Pasztory 1983, 144–46). The images highlight war duties of an

I mages of R ank by R egion

anonymous leader, probably one of the Mexica rulers, accompanied by other males in military outfits, who converge on a sacrificial grass ball with ritual implements for autosacrifice. Significantly, as betrayed by a serpent leg with volutes and a smoking mirror on the side of his head, the main personage is represented in the guise of Tezcatlipoca, “Smoking Mirror,” an omnipotent god of destiny, divination, sorcery, enmity, and war. These divine attributes are combined with the insignia of rulership—the xiuhhuitzolli diadem and a nose bar—but they by no means overshadow the importance of the relationship with Tezcatlipoca declared by the monument. His role as a special patron of the rulers of Tenochtitlan was well established, being probably paralleled in other Nahua altepetl and having a prototype among the Classic Maya, who worshipped K’awiil as a supernatural protector of their royal dynasties. Close links between Tezcatlipoca and the huei tlatoque of Tenochtitlan seem especially manifest during installation rites and in the feast of Toxcatl when a substitute, or ixiptlatl, of this god was sacrificed in place of the king himself (Olivier 2004, 140–54, 397–402). In the pictorial language of Tenochtitlan, attributes of Tezcatlipoca, possibly even alluding to some form of identity between the ruler and his supernatural patron, served to create a military image of the huei tlatoani as an invincible war leader, which indeed was a chief requisite for assuming this most influential post in the Aztec world. This style of royal portrait was further developed in other state monuments proclaiming the military prowess and political superiority of the Mexica: the Stone of Tiçoc commissioned about 1484–85 and a similar, more recently discovered sculpture labeled the Quauhxicalli of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina (or the SánchezNava Monolith), but probably dating to the reign of Axayacatl (1473–80).2 Both of them—designed for public view, though closely approachable probably only by the nobility—combined the form of a sacrificial vessel, quauhxicalli, and the gladiatorial stone, temalacatl, sharing a disklike shape covered by relief decoration with a concave recipient on its upper surface. On the Stone of Tiçoc, the victorious tlatoani of Tenochtitlan alludes to the royal patrons, Huitzilopochtli and Tezcatlipoca, by sporting a hummingbird helmet, a distinctive attribute of the first of these gods, and displaying the smoking mirror of Tezcatlipoca set at his temple (figure 3.1). An unequivocal link to this deity is that the ruler’s missing foot is replaced by two sinuous curls of smoke. Undoubtedly, this mixture of attributes reflects an ideological shift in the religious system of the Mexica, where their “ethnic” god was to certain degree assimilated to or placed alongside the more ancient Mesoamerican deity Tezcatlipoca. This tendency was not impeded by an ongoing process of the solarization of Huitzilopochtli and his taking the place of Tezcatlipoca’s traditional counterfigure, Quetzalcoatl—a movement that was fostered in the last decade before the Spanish

189

190

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.1. Stone of Tiçoc (drawing courtesy of Emily Umberger).

conquest (Tomicki 1990, 150).3 In fact, the leg of each of the ruler’s companions— featured in conquering postures, grasping captives by their hair in the traditional pan-Mesoamerican gesture—ends in a smoke volute, and all of them bear a smoking mirror, but only Tiçoc himself has the right to wear the hummingbird helmet of the patron god Huitzilopochtli. It is also the ruler alone who wears a magnificent quetzalpatzactli back device in addition to other attributes. The latter are, for the most part, highly diagnostic for Toltec iconography: a butterfly breast plate, circular ear pendants, a necklace with round beads, a bracelet, a triangular hip cloth, leg bands, and sandals. As has already been pointed out (Umberger 1981, 136; 1996a, 100; Pasztory 1983, 147–48), these archaic outfits worn by victor figures, closely paralleling accouterments found on the Atlantean figures and other personages at Tula, highlight the civilized position of the conquerors and affirm Mexica claims of Toltec heritage. A kindred iconographic convention was employed in the reliefs on

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.2. Reliefs in Tepetzinco (drawing courtesy of Emily Umberger).

the hill of Tepetzinco featuring triumphant Aztec warriors, one of whom grasps a tree rather than a captive’s hair in a symbolic act of subjugation of an enemy community (Umberger 1999, 83; see also figure 3.2).4 It seems noteworthy, however, that the authors of the two monumental stones glorifying the rulers of Tenochtitlan did not limit themselves to borrowing specific elements from the Toltec art but combined them with insignia of particular importance to the Mexica, such as the headdress of Huitzilopochtli5 or the quetzal­ patzactli back device. Likewise, on the Sánchez-Nava Monolith the victors wear feathered headdresses with a small bird protruding in the front, most likely a blue cotinga, evoking similar items in the art of Tula and Chichen Itza, identified with this bird species. In addition, the presence of a large feather crest matches the written descriptions of the xiuhtototzontli, or “cotinga bird headdress,” which indeed may have been depicted here. If this hypothesis is correct, this imagery hints at yet another essential aspect of the concept of royalty: the right to don the turquoise insignia of the god of fire and time, Xiuhteuctli, including both the turquoise diadem and the cotinga-bird headdress, a creature symbolically linked to this deity. Thus, more than mere assertions of affinity with the Toltec tradition, the public

191

192

I mages of R ank by R egion

images of the huei tlatoque accentuated their links with divine patrons central for the state rituals celebrated in Tenochtitlan. The imagery proclaiming the victorious nature of Mexica rulership does not exhaust its divine affiliations. A strikingly different convention of representation, emphasizing ritual duties of the rulers of Tenochtitlan, can be found on the Dedication Stone commemorating the rebuilding of the Great Temple of Tenoch­ titlan in 1487 (Townsend 1979, 40–42). The monarchs Tiçoc and Ahuitzotl face each other in the scene, possibly referring to the symbolic transfer of power, but their stance is also linked to penitence and bloodletting, as signaled by the sacrificial grass ball with ritual implements (figure 3.3a). Both of the rulers are engaged in ritual bloodletting, as they display wounds on their legs and perforate their ears with bone awls. Thick streams of royal blood flow from their ears, over the heads, down into the open jaws of the earth monster receiving the sacrifice. Their costumes correspond to these ritual commitments, for both rulers are clad in the xicolli jackets and carry bags of copal incense, as well as special back pouches decorated with folded paper—all of these items being distinctive attributes of priests. Also, double-heron head devices (aztaxelli) forming part of their headgear carried strong ritual and military associations in the Valley of Mexico (see pp. 58–59). The inclusion of this item in the royal penitential dress is additionally confirmed by the so-called Ahuitzotl Bone,6 where it forms part of the headgear of an individual depicted, probably the ruler Ahuitzotl himself. The same sacrificial convention is represented by the so-called Acuecuexatl Stone commissioned in 1499, possibly for the inauguration of an aqueduct (Umberger 1981, 130–31). It features two images of tlatoani Ahuitzotl adorned with an elaborate feathered headdress and holding an incense bag as he engages in ritual bloodletting. In both cases he is accompanied by a feathered serpent, perhaps to imply a direct relationship with the god Quetzalcoatl as a royal patron, and in contrast to earlier monuments accentuating links with Tezcatlipoca and Huitzilopochtli (Quiñones Keber 1993, 150–52). Indeed, the “priestly” looks of Mexica huei tlatoque may allude to the conventional representation of this god or his manifestation, an exemplary priest, such as the image in the reliefs of Cerro de Malinche.7 Associations with the god Quetzalcoatl are present in yet another astonishing work of art, known as the Hamburg Box, dating from the reign of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin and displaying motifs associated with Quetzalcoatl (figure 3.3b). It has even been speculated that it was a private stone object made to contain this ruler’s sacrificial implements (Pasztory 1983, 255). One of the figures, whose headdress glyph probably identifies it with Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin, draws blood from his ear and is paired with an individual linked to a glyphic name 1 Reed (Ce Acatl), in all likelihood the mythical Ce Acatl Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl (Umberger 1981, 99–100).8 A

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.3. (a) Dedication Stone; (b) Hamburg Box (drawing courtesy of Emily Umberger).

recurring association of the huei tlatoque of Tenochtitlan with this deity may allude to a broader Mesoamerican concept of a ruler recreating or imitating the role of Quetzalcoatl, an exemplary monarch and priest. Whereas such intepretations remain hypothetical, what is quite clear is the existence of a broader iconographic convention concerning the theme of autosacrifice by elite personages. An additional attestation is the imagery on another stone box

193

194

I mages of R ank by R egion

supposedly from Tenochtitlan (Pasztory 1983, 246–47, pl. 252), where a cross-legged elite individual draws blood from his ear, strongly evoking the already-­discussed penitential representation of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin. He is equipped with priestly attributes, including an incense bag and what seems to be a paper vestment covering his chest,9 while his striped body paint alluding to sacrifice is also found in the depictions of Quetzalcoatl (e.g., PM, fol. 261v). Considerable time depth of the autosacrificial imagery is attested by works of art that go back to Preclassic times, including Olmec traditions, and that were further developed by the Classic Maya. Aztec elaborations on that theme bear strong similarity to roughly contemporaneous illustrations in Mixtec codices featuring personages engaged in similar acts (e.g., Codex Nuttall, fol. 25), but the pan-regional nature of this convention in Late Postclassic times is implied by its ocurrence on a Huastec conch shell (Miller and Taube 1993, 47). The traits of the latter, including the stream of blood over the head and costume details, are in fact closer to the Dedication Stone from Tenochtitlan than their supposed Mixtec prototypes. Summing up, typical for the ritual imagery of Mexica rulers were standing or seated cross-legged postures, drawing blood by ear-piercing, and displaying priestly attributes, including feathered headdresses (e.g., aztaxelli), xicolli jackets, incense bags, back gourds, paper devices, and implements for drawing blood. In accordance with an older Mesoamerican tradition, particularly conspicuous in the Maya area, the Nahuas displayed autosacrificial images of their rulers both in public and more private contexts. It is very likely that the huei tlatoque of Tenochtitlan indeed put on priestly accouterments during specific religious celebrations and when performing rituals. For example, in the extant illustration (PM, fol. 253r; see also figure 3.4) of the feast of Izcalli, dedicated to the fire god and entailing a direct participation of the highest lords, their representative, perhaps a ruler himself, is shown clad in the xicolli jacket and carrying both an incense pouch and a tobacco gourd. He also wears a turquoise diadem signaling in this context an attribute of the patron god of this feast, Xiuhteuctli, rather than merely the headdress of Mexica rulers. Some of these priestly accouterments are reiterated in the monument known as the Teocalli or Temple Stone that commemorates the New Fire Ceremony celebrated in 1507 and combines in its innovative form elements of a temple, a royal throne, and a year bundle (Umberger 1981, 191; Pasztory 1983, 165; see also figure 3.5). The sense of novelty extends also to its iconographic content, introducing elements apparently unseen before in the royal imagery. Of special interest for us is the backrest of the Temple Stone, showing a sun disk bearing the glyph 4 Movement and flanked on the left by Huitzilopochtli or a priest wearing his attributes (combined with a snake-smoking foot of Tezcatlipoca) and by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin on the right. This pairing implies a close identification of the huei tlatoani of Tenochtitlan

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.4. Participants of the feast of Izcalli, Primeros Memoriales, fol. 253r, fragment (Real Biblioteca, Palacio Real, Madrid; drawing by Justyna Olko).

with his patron god Huitzilopochtli, echoing the association we have already seen on the Stone of Tiçoc. Both protagonists carry priestly attributes: incense pouches, pointed bones for drawing blood, and sacrificial knives. The ritual symbolism is strengthened by the presence of a grass ball (çacatapayolli) on the top of the monument and thus of limited visibility, flanked by two torches with paper strips used in the New Fire Ceremony. Once again the ritual role of the Mexica ruler seems to prevail over his military duties, but in fact both aspects were deeply interwoven in the Aztec world. Thus, in addition to typical sacrificial attributes, atl tlachinolli speech scrolls, a graphic rendering of the Nahuatl metaphorical expression referring to war, issue from the two figures depicted on the Temple Stone. The costume details of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin are striking. Instead of a traditional turquoise diadem or the double heron-feather ornament, he displays the coçoyahualolli headgear made of feathers and sticks, identified with Chichimec ancestors. Apparently, unlike his predecessors who recreated an ancient Toltec costume, this ruler reasserts a quite distinct tradition: that of the humble beginnings of the Mexica as nomad incomers to the Valley of Mexico (Umberger 1981, 176; Pasztory 1983, 168–69). The coçoyahualolli device worn by Moteucçoma is combined with balls of down that, in addition to being common sacrificial attributes, were also typical adornments of “early” Mexica leaders and other Chichimec rulers, as attested in the Tira de Tepechpan, the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, Durán, and the Codex Azcatitlan. The ruler is also clad in an animal skin visible through a border with animal paws and a head just behind Moteucçoma’s neck. While it has been viewed as a link to Tepeyollotl-Tezcatlipoca (Umberger 1981, 177), its pairing with the Chichimec-affiliated headgear suggests that we are dealing with an animal-hide cape, or the ehuatilmatli, a conventional component of “Chichimec” dress. The hints in the direction of the historical tradition of the Mexica are highlighted by the year date 2 House placed beneath the sacrificial grass ball, a likely reference to the year 1325, a date traditionally given for the founding of Tenochtitlan. Thus, the whole scene may in fact represent a tutelary god and a Mexica leader, embodied by

195

196

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.5. Temple Stone, an upper part (drawing courtesy of Emily Umberger).

a current ruler, at this crucial historical moment, combined with a more contemporary message focusing on their religious duty of accompanying the sun (Umberger 1981, 184–85),10 nourished through the war of conquest and sacrifice. Instead of making claims to Toltec ancestry or to the direct patronage of Quetzalcoatl as seen in earlier monuments, the Temple Stone highlights the special rights of the Mexica as proud inheritors from their Chichimec forerunners. Such an identification seems congruent with the prestige attached to the Chichimec heritage in preconquest times, still untouched by its colonial transformations resulting from a widespread identification of the term Chichimec with “savage pagans” populating the northern perimeters of New Spain. Interestingly, this complex message was encoded in the image, creatively borrowing from different existing iconographic types such as the priestly/sacrificial imagery or conventional representations of Chichimec rulers. Among the most intriguing royal portraits recorded on a monumental scale are relief sculptures on the cliff in Chapultepec that have not survived to our days except for hardly recognizable remains (Nicholson 1967; Umberger 1981, 147–48). According to descriptions in the sixteenth-century sources, they featured Mexica rulers in the dress of Xipe Totec, the patron of warriors and god of nature’s renewal, to whom sacrifices of flayed human victims were made during the spring festival of Tlacaxipehualiztli (figures 2.19, 3.5a).11 Indeed, the costume of the “flayed god” was worn by the huei tlatoque of Tenochtitlan on specific occasions such as war campaigns. Several images of this dress show an actually worn, flayed human skin (e.g., Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 85v; Codex Cozcatzin, fols. 13v, 14r; see also figure 3.6),

Figure 3.6. Xipe Totec dress: (a) Xipe Totec in the Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 43r; (b) Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin wearing the costume of Xipe Totec, Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 85v; (c–d) Axayacatl wearing the costume of Xipe Totec, Codex Cozcatzin, fols. 13v, 14r (drawings by Justyna Olko)

198

I mages of R ank by R egion

which is also mentioned by Tezozomoc in his description of the Xipe outfit put on by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin for his “trip” to Cincalco, the mythical realm of Huemac (Tezozomoc 2001, 461).12 The practice is indirectly corroborated also by Motolinía (1973, 33), who states that the ruler of Tenochtitlan danced clad in the skin of a victim sacrificed during Tlacaxipehualiztli, and thus probably embodied the flayed god himself. The wearing of a human skin as part of the conventional costume associated with this deity is not confirmed by the relevant Nahuatl accounts, such as the detailed listing of its specific components in the Florentine Codex, arranged in three separate sets (FC VIII, 33). Even though only one of them uses the term totec, they have been identified as three different versions of the Xipe dress (Seler 1902–23, II: 407; Dyckerhoff 1993, 142). The first one consists of a red-spoonbill headdress (tlauhquecholtzontli), a tunic made of the same material, a sapote skirt, and a skin drum upon a carrying frame. The second, blue version contains a cotinga-feather headdress (xiuhtototzontli, associated with Xiuhteuctli rather than with Xipe), a shirt of blue cotinga feathers, a blue skin-drum fashioned on a frame, and a sapote skirt ornamented with flint knives. Finally, the ocelototec outfit is made of jaguar skin and decorated with golden flints; to it belongs also a sapote skirt, an ocelot drum, and a shield covered with blue cotinga feathers. In all cases the sapote skirt (tzapocueitl) was in fact made of costly quetzal feathers, but the leaves of the sapote tree were widely associated with Xipe.13 Other typical components of this costume included a rattle stick (chicahuaztli) and flags or banners with a red cross. The drum insignia carried on the back is referred to as the “drum of the Yopes” (yopihue­huetl; Chimalpahin 1997a II, 48; 2003b, 164; Tezozomoc 2001, 217, 388), a “golden drum” (teocuitlahuehuetl; Tezozomoc 2001, 373) or a blue one (xoxouhqui hue­huetl, part of the “blue Xipe” costume; FC VIII, 33; see also figure 2.45).14 In addition, Tezozomoc lists the tlauhquecholtotec as an insignia with a “flying bird” placed over the drum and a golden device, teocuitlatontec, “with the tlauhquechol bird over it” (Tezozomoc 2001, 373, 401), both of these references designating perhaps a back device decorated with red-spoonbill feathers and combined with the drum. A headdress belonging to the Xipe costume could take two different forms: one was a conical cap in red and white with bifurcated streamers (yopitzontli) at the sides, common for strictly religious contexts (including the Tlacaxipehualiztli feast; see figure 3.6a) and images of the god himself. The second form associated with the royal dress was made of red-spoonbill feathers (tlauhquecholtzontli; see also figure 2.19).15 The latter is worn by Axayacatl during the campaign in Xiquipulco (Códice en Cruz) and by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in the conquest scene together with the flayed human skin, green skirt, red-white-drum back insignia, red-cross banners, and a chicahuaztli staff (Codex Vaticanus A, fol. 85v; see also figure

I mages of R ank by R egion

3.6b). Also, the descriptions of the Chapultepec relief portraits explicitly mention the tlauhquecholtzontli (Tezozomoc 2001, 358, 451).16 As pointed out by Ursula Dyckerhoff (1993, 140) these two types of Xipe-related headdress were associated with distinct shield designs. The yopitzontli was paired with a shield with red circles (tlauhtehuilacachiuhqui; FC I, 40), whereas the shield accompanying the red-spoonbill headdress was called teocuitlaanahuacayo, “the golden one in coastal style” (FC IX, 69), recognizable by the tripartite design, one section decorated with the red and white circles found on the other shield, and the two remaining sections showing a jaguar skin and water signs.17 The exact relationship and possible differences between Xipe associated with the tlauhquecholtzontli and Xipe with the yopitzontli are not entirely clear (Dyckerhoff 1970, 362).18 The Xipe Totec costume of the huei tlatoque of Tenochtitlan is usually reported as a battlefield outfit, including apparel worn during coronation wars (e.g., Tezozomoc 2001, 217–18, 373, 388); the tlauhquecholtzontli itself is also listed among dance accouterments of rulers (FC VIII, 28) or as part of the “costume of Yohualahua” placed, together with a bone rattle staff, on the mortuary bundle of Axayacatl during his funeral rites (Tezozomoc 2001, 243–44). The latter is a likely reference to the Xipe dress, for Yohuallahuan is identified as a priest of this god participating in the feast of Tlacaxipehualiztli (Sahagún 1997b, 102). It has been speculated that this costume of Mexica rulers was introduced in the times of Axayacatl, because references seem to start with this monarch (Nicholson 1959, 403). On the other hand, according to Dyckerhoff, rather than being a special insignia of the rulers of Tenochtitlan, it was a hereditary lineage insignia, because Tlacahuepan is mentioned to have worn the Xipe dress of his father Axayacatl (Tezozomoc 2001, 401), which would also explain its use by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin, the son of Axayacatl (Dyckerhoff 1993, 143). Nevertheless, the available data make it clear enough that military insignia were earned by individual achievements and did not pass from father to son; when a warrior died, his insignia were cremated and buried with him (Hassig 1988, 42), including the personal devices of the highest lords.19 According to the Crónica mexicana (Tezozomoc 2001, 401), the brother of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin, Tlacahuepan, received Xipe accouterments when he was given command in the war against Huexotzinco and Atlixco.20 Rather than granting “hereditary lineage insignia,” this episode can be seen as the bestowal of the royal badge on Tlacahuepan because he was to represent the huei tlatoani on the battlefield. Even more arguments can be found in favor of viewing the Xipe outfit as a military emblem of special importance for the rulers of Tenochtitlan, not limited to the descendants of Axayacatl. The latter, in fact, reportedly lost his Xipe insignia when he was individually attacked and wounded by a local warrior during the

199

200

I mages of R ank by R egion

conquest of Toluca (Tezozomoc 2001, 217–18).21 This piece of information is fully congruent with a detail mentioned in the account of the preparations for the subsequent military campaign in Michoacan, when Axayacatl received new insignia, the quetzalpatzactli, from Neçahualcoyotl, the allied ruler of Tetzcoco (Tezozomoc 2001, 227–28).22 Furthermore, Ahuitzotl, the brother of Axayacatl and the ruler of Tenochtitlan directly before Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin, was portrayed in Xipe dress in Chapultepec (Tezozomoc 2001, 358) and reportedly wore it during his expedition to Tziuhcoac. According to the account by Chimalpahin, Ahuitzotl’s apparel consisted of the xiuhtotoehuatl shirt and the yopihuehuetl (Chimalpahin 2003b, 164). The references provided by Chimalpahin are of special interest here if we consider that Chalco was his primary focus and that his accounts belong to the annals genre derived from native pictorial manuscripts. Thus, whenever he offers more details than those that could have been potentially contained in an abbreviated “year-count” prototype, these had to be derived either from iconographic details of pictorial accounts or from the oral tradition. At any rate, in either case only the most significant data tended to be included, which implies that the detailed description of the dress of Mexica rulers were considered to be of considerable importance or symbolic meaning. Thus, Chimalpahin centers his attention in discussing the war insignia worn by Axayacatl during his attack on Tlatelolco on the fact that they included the yopihuehuetl, teocuitlaanahuacayo shield, and the chicahuaztli staff, all of which belonged to the Xipe costume (Chimalpahin 1997a II, 48). It even seems likely that this was the royal costume identified with Mexica huei tlatoque beyond the metropolis. Did this prestigious attire have a special meaning? Why did it become a royal badge in Tenochtitlan? Did it mark a specific relationship to the flayed god or carry other symbolic associations? One possible meaning to be explored is the agricultural role of this deity associated with nature’s renewal through the flaying of captives during Tlacaxipehualiztli, corresponding with the removal of an “old skin” and rebirth. The maintenance of agricultural fertility was among the important responsibilities of Aztec rulers, who actively participated in ceremonies of the passage from the dry to rainy season and during harvest time (Townsend 1992; Olko 1999). No doubt, military functions of this deity also played a role, for Xipe was the patron of warriors’ ritual, an inherent part of Tlacaxipehualiztli. He also guarded access to the ancestral realm of Cincalco, the Otherworld residence of deceased rulers (Tomicki 1990, 254–314). Considering the “merging” and overlapping of central Mexican deities conceived as closely related manifestations of divine energy (López Austin 1973, 1994), it is well worth recalling that the text of the Florentine Codex equates the god Totec with Tlatlauhqui (“red”) Tezcatlipoca (FC X, 187). Durán, for his part, mentions a deity called Tlatlauhqui Tezcatl (“red [or burning] mirror”)

I mages of R ank by R egion

as the patron of gladiatorial sacrifice during Tlacaxipehualiztli (Durán 1984, II: 277). The identification of Xipe Totec and Red Tezcatlipoca is widely accepted (e.g., Olivier 2004, 84, 107, 198). It is therefore possible that the association with Xipe implied by the adoption of his insignia by the rulers of Tenochtitlan was understood as closely related and complementary to their strong relationship with the powerful royal patron Tezcatlipoca. This association between the flayed god and royalty is widely attested also beyond the Valley of Mexico, perhaps accounting for its appropriation by Tenochtitlan. According to extant sources, his costume was put on lords (teteuctin) in the final phase of the investiture rite in the Puebla-Tlaxcala area (Carrasco 1966, 138), but possible links reach beyond the Nahua world, suggesting that its use by Mexica rulers may be viewed as a conscious assertion of foreign or pan-regional affiliations. In Tenochtitlan proper, Xipe Totec was recognized as a god of foreign origin, reportedly linked to the Pacific coast, Yope/Tlapaneca, Zapotecs, or Tzapotlan in Jalisco.23 The association of Xipe with the Zapotecs is also implied by the head insignia of their rulers, resembling a pointed cap, yopitzontli, represented in local pictorial manuscripts (Seler 1902–23, II: 466), whereas the term Yopi or Yobi reflects the Zapotec form of the widely known Nahuatl title “Our Lord the Flayed One” (Byland and Pohl 1994, 165–66). Archaeologically, Postclassic images of Xipe are frequent in western Mexico, Oaxaca, and among the Yope-Tlapaneca of the Oaxaca-Guerrero border region. Regarding his earlier roots, substantial evidence for prototypical Xipe comes from Proto- and Early Classic Monte Albán, and the number of figures with Xipe insignia increases by the Late Classic, especially in Oaxaca, with the Early Postclassic evidence becoming widespread (Nicholson 1972, 214–15). Place names associated with Xipe abound in the Tlapanec region of Guerrero (Vié-Wohrer 2002), confirming the existence of a broad Xipe cult area correctly traced by the informants of Sahagún. In addition, certain attributes of the flayed god were employed by Mixtec lords (Byland and Pohl 1994, 178). By the time of the Spanish conquest his worship had become largely pan-Mesoamerican, but its significance in the Nahua world may have been related to merging, to some extent, with Tezcatlipoca (Nicholson 1972, 216). Thus, even if possible claims of the panregional affiliations of Xipe’s cult and its close links with elites could have played a role in the adoption of his dress by the rulers of Tenochtitlan, it is noteworthy that, rather than simply borrowing, they seem to have developed their own set of insignia identified with this ancient deity. The details of this outfit appear to form a specifically Mexica ensemble. Extant imagery portraying Mexica rulers is strongly conventionalized: their postures and gestures convey a definite meaning, identifying unequivocally the nature of an intended activity, and costume details follow appropriate conventions.

201

202

I mages of R ank by R egion

Sometimes these are modified by what seems to be a more creative inclusion of meaningful elements, resulting in a greater complexity of messages adjusted to current political and religious needs. Common to all of these manifestations, however, was the identification with distinct divine patrons, not only reflecting their ritual roles, political strategies, or concepts of power, but also alluding to the complex identity attributed to the huei tlatoque, who were believed to share the divine essence to a greater degree than ordinary mortals. Such an interpretation is corroborated by an interesting reference to the costumes of different gods placed in turn on the mortuary bundle of the huei tlatoani during his funeral, probably symbolizing (or assuring) his transformation, along with the complex identity that he developed through the performance of his office. A dead ruler was reportedly adorned with the apparel of Huitzilopochtli, Tlaloc, Yohuallahuan (Xipe), and Quetzalcoatl (Durán 1984, II: 298), all of whom, except for the rain god Tlaloc, match the divine patrons alluded to in sculptural images of Mexica rulers. In a similar way, lords undergoing investiture rites in Puebla-Tlaxcala were clad in the capes associated with distinct deities, including Camaxtli, Tezcatlipoca, and Xipe (Carrasco 1966, 135–38), no doubt bolstering their transformation as part of the passage to a new status. Individualized references to monarchs and their personal deeds are difficult to find in Aztec art, especially if compared with Classic Maya records or Mixtec historical screenfolds. More personalized hints are perhaps the date 1 Cipactli in the Chapultepec representation of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin, possibly designating the date of his coronation day (Nicholson 1959, 409–10). Likewise, Ixtlilxochitl alludes to the sculptures in Tetzcotzinco and Acatelco that—although destroyed after the conquest—reportedly commemorated the death of the ruler of Huexotzinco as well as the personal achievements of his close ally and friend, Neçahualcoyotl (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, II: 115, 150). Ixtlilxochitl also describes special concerns of this Tetzcocan ruler to create a faithful and lasting portrait of himself (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, II: 115, 133), which strongly evokes European concepts. It is difficult to say how much this factor affected Ixtlilxochitl’s descriptions of personalized content, for in pre-Hispanic works of art recognition through realistic portraiture was not the method of identifying individuals. This holds true both for stone sculpture and pictorial manuscripts, which employed name glyphs, attributes, and gestures as reliable ways of identification. Even if sharing some graphic conventions on the general level, these two groups of sources also reveal important differences in the pictorial renditions of royalty. First, in terms of timing, they are separated by the dividing line of the Spanish conquest, and second, the iconographies may diverge to a certain extent as a result of their being distinct media, intended for different groups of viewers and performing different functions.

I mages of R ank by R egion

Mexica Royal Imagery in Colonial Pictorial Manuscripts

A good point of departure for the discussion of colonial images of the Mexica nobility are two manuscripts known today as the Primeros Memoriales and the Florentine Codex, both compiled by fray Bernardino de Sahagún. The first of the two can probably be associated with his stay in Tepepolco, a community just to the northwest of Tlaxcala, between 1558 and 1561. It was there that the Franciscan interrogated a group of knowledgeable local informants, whose oral information was recorded in the form of pictorial and textual materials. These then served as the basis of illustrations in the Nahuatl work known as the Primeros Memoriales, forming part of a larger set of manuscripts, the Códices Matritenses, preserved in the libraries of the Palacio Real and the Real Academia de la Historia in Madrid (Nicholson 1997, 6, 13; 2001, 107). The exact provenience of the informants and sources is still a matter of discussion, but it has long been suggested that the drawings of the Primeros Memoriales were the work of the Tepepolco painters (Dibble 1968, 146–47; Glass 1975a, 14; Quiñones Keber 1997, 34; 1988, 200).24 In fact, it seems noteworthy that in the section of special interest for us—rulers’ lists—discrepancies between the textual annotations and the images are numerous. They are of two kinds: either the alphabetic part is not complete, or the written terms do not correspond fully to the associated images. It therefore seems plausible to assume that the painters and the scribes were distinct persons, possessing varying degrees of familiarity with the preconquest tradition. Also, we must admit the possibility that not only pictorial prototypes but also at least some of the textual data were gathered in Tepepolco, as is implied by terminological differences between the Primeros Memoriales and texts created in Tenochtitlan or Tlatelolco (e.g., the use of xiuh­ tzontli for xiuhhuitzolli). Even so, the images of pre-Hispanic rulers of Tenochtitlan, Tetzcoco, and Huexotla contained in the Primeros Memoriales (figures 3.7, 3.8, 3.9) closely correspond to the pictorial conventions employed in Tenochtitlan. This section presents a unified version of the apparel of “Chichimec” or “early” leaders of the three entities. They are all seated on “grass seats” without backrests (xiuhicpalli), although they differ in some other details. All the rulers are associated with bows and arrows, standard Chichimec weapons, but those of Teztcoco have theirs placed in front of them while the first two rulers of Huexotla brandish theirs in their outstretched hands. All wear the coçoyahualolli feather head-ornaments and fur capes tied over the left arm, both being accouterments consistently associated with the Chichimecs in Aztec iconography. Several rulers of Huexotla, however, wear a unique combination of “nomad” and “civilized” attributes: three of them are adorned with the coçoyahualolli but at the same time sit on reed thrones while clad in cotton mantles, which may refer to their “intermediate” status. The rulers of Tetzcoco are adorned

203

204

I mages of R ank by R egion

with jaguar-skin capes and those of Huexotla with striped-fur capes, perhaps intended as the maçaehuatilmatli, or deerskin capes, as indicated by accompanying glosses. The tilmatli worn by the first members of the Mexica royal line, from Acamapichtli to Chimalpopoca, stand out from the hide capes just discussed. Although they too were meant to be animal-skin garments, the depicted items are anything but fur. Instead, they bear a “knotted” or “mosaic” design, closely following the most prestigious royal capes with the turquoise-mosaic pattern (xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli), except that they are colored brown to indicate the kind of material used. This rendering makes them direct counterparts of actual Mexica royal capes, even if marked by their color as belonging to Chichimec times. The parallel is even more striking if we realize that the xiuhtlalpilli timatli tenixyo cape appears in this manuscript as an exclusive attribute of the dynasty of Tenochtitlan. The rulers of Tetzcoco and Huexotla are pictured wearing capes that seem pale reflections of Mexica royal garments or at best modest versions of them. This applies even to the plain blue capes bordered with eyes (tenixyo) worn by the two most important Tetzcocan rulers, Neçahualcoyotl and Neçahualpilli, and by Itlacauhtzin of Huexotla. The capes of the other non-Mexica rulers make no allusion to the turquoise royal cape: they are either white with a red-checked design and a blue border or multicolored with a checked design. This may seem strange if we assume that the authors of these images were provincial painters of Tepepolco in the Acolhua region. A possible implication of privileging the Mexica rulers by their exclusive association with the most prestigious royal insignia is that Sahagún’s collaborators, derived from the MexicaTlatelolca nobility, might have participated actively at least in this important section of the Primeros Memoriales. More insights are provided by the comparison of this list with corresponding imagery in the Florentine Codex, a massive and lavishly illustrated work with Nahuatl and Spanish text in double-column format, compiled under Sahagún’s direction between 1578 and 1580. It is one of the versions of the now-lost encyclopedic Historia general originally completed between 1561 and 1569 in the Colegio de Santa Cruz in Tlatelolco and later in the convent of San Francisco in Tenochtitlan (Nicholson 1997, 3–4; 2001, 108–9). Among images identified as redrawn from the Primeros Memoriales manuscript are the rulers’ lists included in Book VIII of the Florentine Codex (Quiñones Keber 1988, 208). However, they were strongly modified, further removed from the preconquest pictorial tradition not only in terms of style but also in their iconographic content. In addition, unlike in the earlier Sahaguntine manuscript, the images of rulers in the Florentine Codex serve as pictorial adjuncts to the texts, adopting conventions typical for European books.25 Importantly, the text accompanying the rulers’ section of the Florentine Codex is

I mages of R ank by R egion

not derived from the corresponding section of the Primeros Memoriales but seems to be an exact copy of the Nahuatl text that appears in folios 2r–5v of the Real Academia de la Historia manuscript, forming part of the Códices Matritenses (Ruz Barrio 2013b, 19–20).26 The rulers of Tenochtitlan—including the founder and other early tlatoque— appear in complete “imperial” apparel: seated on reed thrones and clad in turquoise diadems and capes (figure 3.7). This contrasts with the corresponding section of the Primeros Memoriales, which features the first three rulers as not fully legitimate monarchs, wearing the Chichimec costume. The latter imagery alludes to their dependent status, marking the change introduced by the rule of Itzcoatl, the first independent huei tlatoani, who gained sovereign status after the Tepanec war. By choosing not to follow the Primeros Memoriales prototype, but by insisting on presenting the fully legitimate and paramount dynasty starting already with its founder, the authors of the rulers’ list section of the Florentine Codex reveal their affiliation with the Mexica nobility and its strategies. Thus, if the rulers of Tenochtitlan seem to be privileged in the Primeros Memoriales, they are much more so in the later version of the royal lists, where the impact of authors sharing the historical tradition of the Mexica is beyond question. This local focus is even more manifest in the images of the rulers of Tlatelolco, absent in the Primeros Memoriales but present in the Florentine Codex doubtless as a result of the Tlatelolcan bias of its indigenous authors. It should not be surprising, therefore, that except for the first monarch, Quaquauhpitzahuac, all subsequent precolonial Tlatelolca rulers up to don Pedro Temilo wear the same complete turquoise regalia as their Mexica counterparts. Considering that in the fifteenth century this altepetl was secondary in rank to Tenochtitlan, followed by the supposed abolition of the office of tlatoani there after the defeat at the hands of the Mexica, this imagery seems controversial, bespeaking strong local patriotism based on historical manipulation. The way the Tetzcocan dynasty is represented is no less informative (figure 3.8). Chichimec costumes are similarly omitted, while reed thrones, turquoise diadems, and different capes take their place. However, there is also an important divergence from the iconography of rank associated with Tenochtitlan: except for Ixtlilxochitl, certainly not as important in the Tetzcocan historical tradition as his two successors, none of their rulers was given the privilege of wearing the royal turquoise cape; plain blue, flowered, and striped mantles replace it. These important details seem to make a deliberate distinction between the Acolhua tlatoque and the Mexica leaders. Such a reading seems even more justified if we consider that the cape designs associated with Tetzcocan rulers in this section of the Florentine Codex appear in the same book as adornments of nonrulers, including persons labeled as judges and state officials. Thus, by picturing the rulers of Tetzcoco in nonroyal capes, Sahagún’s

205

Figure 3.7. Precontact and postcontact rulers of Tenochtitlan in the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 51r–52r) and Florentine Codex (Bk. VIII, fols. 1r–4v) (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid, and Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited).

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.8. Precontact and postcontact rulers of Tetzcoco in the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 52r–53r) and Florentine Codex (Bk. VIII, fols. 7r–8v) (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid, and Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited).

painters may have tried to signal their lower status not only with respect to Mexica sovereigns but perhaps also to the rulers of Tlatelolco, who are rendered in the same way as the huei tlatoque of Tenochtitlan. The section devoted to the rulers of Huexotla also sheds interesting light on the imagery of the Florentine Codex (figure 3.9). The costumes of the early leaders depicted in Chichimec dress do not vary significantly from the prototype. Interestingly enough, the accompanying text suggests that for the native authors of the Florentine Codex, this costume did not necessarily imply a lower political status. The first five “Chichimec” rulers are described as those who “fully held the rulership

207

208

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.9. Precontact and postcontact rulers of Huexotla in the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 53r–53v) and Florentine Codex (Bk. VIII, fols. 9r–10r) (courtesy of the Real Academia de la Historia, Madrid, and Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited).

[of Huexotla and] paid tribute to no one; it was for three hundred years that they fully held its rulership” (FC VIII, 13).27 A certain change comes with the image of Yaotzinteuctli, who still wears a Chichimec coçoyahualolli head device and also sports the turquoise cape and a reed seat. In the images that follow, changes in respect to the prototype occur in cape designs. The blue, blue checked, red checked, and multicolored garments of the Primeros Memoriales were exchanged for striped and flowered capes, and in three cases the capes were royal turquoise capes. Some of these changes seem to result from the participation of different hands in this section, but it seems clear that transformation beyond mere copying from the earlier source was involved as well. This process is directly confirmed by the image of Itlacauhtzin, who is mistakenly depicted with both the xiuhhuitzolli and coçoyahualolli, the latter clearly derived from the prototype in the Primeros Memoriales.

I mages of R ank by R egion

However, it is striking that this Huexotla section reveals overall much less intervention in respect to the Primeros Memoriales than the preceding two. As a matter of fact, it is the only one that borrows directly from the iconographic content of the earlier Sahaguntine illustrations. A possible reason is that, in the perspective of Tenochtitlan-Tlatelolco, Huexotla was not particularly significant, either currently or historically. Thus, whether the details of the prototype were followed or not, did not matter, for there was no need for any new bias or political rhetoric.28 In contrast, both the Mexica and Acolhua lists were thoroughly modified: in the first instance to show a fully legitimate and paramount royal line clad in the most prestigious regalia right from its establishment, and in the second case to mark the inferior status of the rulers of Tetzcoco with respect to the huei tlatoque of Tenochtitlan. Even if Chichimec-style costumes are omitted in the case of Tetzcoco, in contrast to the Mexica rulers, the full royal costume including the turquoise cape is not included. Additional differences between the royal lists of the two manuscripts appear in their postconquest sections. In all three dynasties depicted in the Primeros Memoriales, their colonial members are markedly distinguished from earlier antecedents by the lack of turquoise diadems and in wearing less-prestigious capes. Thus, the passage from pre-Hispanic dynastic tlatoque to early colonial governors implies a degradation of status. The pictorial rhetoric of the corresponding section of the Florentine Codex, however, reflects an entirely different perspective or strategy on the part of its authors. These diverging ways of representation seem to reveal varying views of Spanish-introduced offices as well as currently occurring changes in the status of the native nobility. In the case of Tenochtitlan, the Primeros Memoriales introduce an abrupt change with the first governor, don (?)29 Andrés de Tapia Motelchiuh, clad in a simple white cape and without the xiuhhuitzolli, though with a forelock whose shape evokes the pointed diadem. He assumed his office after don (?) Juan Velásquez Tlacotzin— omitted in the list—the first to succeed after Quauhtemoc was executed by Cortés on his way to Honduras. Tlacotzin died before the return to Tenochtitlan, whereas his successor, Motelchiuh, served as the quauhtlatoani for five years. After his death during the expedition led by Nuño de Guzmán, the office was taken in 1532 by another non-dynastic governor, don (?) Pablo Xochiquentzin, a noble from San Pablo Teopan, formerly acting as the calpixcapilli (Gibson 1964, 168; Castañeda de la Paz 2008a, 409), who held it until his death in 1536. Both Xochiquentzin and other subsequent governors are pictured in the same simplified way as Motelchiuh, except that the last two lack the hair forelock. This means that the manner of representation is not changed even in view of the restoration of the legitimate dynasty in the late 1530s. It happened with the accession of don Diego Huanitzin (Panitzin), a grandson of Axayacatl, who ruled until about 1540 and who was not only the

209

210

I mages of R ank by R egion

gobernador but also the tlatoani. After the death of his successor, don Diego de San Francisco Tehuetzquititzin, a grandson of Tiçoc, in 1554 the juez de residencia don Esteban de Guzmán from Xochimilco took over the rule. His status was probably perceived as even more inferior, for he was entirely omitted from the list. At any rate, all native governors belonging to the royal line and also holding a tlatoani title, including the latest one here, don Cristóbal de Guzmán Cecetzin (the son of don Diego Huanitzin, ruling between 1557 and 1562), are deprived of royal attributes in much the same way as non-dynastic officers. As has already been signaled, the message transmitted by the native painters of the corresponding section of the Florentine Codex is quite distinct. The change in attire from the way precontact rulers are depicted comes with Quauhtemoc, directly following Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin (with Cuitlahuac missing), dressed in a white-gray cape with horizontal red and black stripes instead of the turquoise mantle of his pre-Hispanic forerunners. Even if this implies some decrease in status, it seems much more subtle than in the Primeros Memoriales, for all the colonial governors continue to wear the principal royal insignia, the xiuhhuitzolli. It is difficult to explain, however, why only Motelchiuh, merely a quauhtlatoani, is the privileged one also wearing the turquoise cape, while others are clad in red, blue, and flowered mantles, including Quauhtemoc himself, an unquestionable Mexica tlatoani. While the meaning of the details remains obscure, these images seem to signal only a slight, if any, drop in status of colonial rulers of Tenochtitlan, keeping the right to the traditional status items. A similar convention can be seen in the list for Tlatelolco missing in the Primeros Memoriales but included in the Florentine Codex. All colonial rulers continue to wear royal crowns, usually combined with less-prestigious capes (figure 3.10). Interestingly enough, however, don Pedro Temilo, the first colonial governor of Tlatelolco installed when this office was established there by the Spaniards, wears the complete preconquest royal apparel, including both the turquoise diadem and the turquoise cape. According to the Florentine Codex, he restored the dynastic rule, the tlatocayotl (FC VIII, 7), for after the 1473 war Tlatelolco was ruled by a series of quauhtlatoque dependent on Tenochtitlan (Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 37). Significantly, for the Tlatelolca themselves these officials were in fact equivalent to dynastic rulers, because in spite of calling them quauhtlatoque, the Anales de Tlatelolco also state that “they were made tlatoque.”30 Thus, in the case of don Pedro Temilo, the claim to full tlatoani status—expressed here through the appropriate combination of insignia—is not surprising, considering the participation of the Tlatelolcan nobility in the production of this Sahaguntine manuscript. The significance of this ruler and the recuperation of his altepetl’s prestige at the expense of defeated Tenochtitlan is also alluded to in the accompanying text: “When don

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.10. Precontact and postcontact rulers of Tlatelolco in the Florentine Codex (Bk. VIII, fols. 5r–7r; courtesy of the Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited).

Pedro Temilo assumed rule in Tlatelolco, he was the one who again began the rulership (tlatocayotl), when the Spaniards had captured and conquered the altepetl of Mexico. He went along accompanying the Spaniards everywhere to distant places when they conquered Cuextlan, Honduras, and Guatemala.”31 Thus, by featuring don Pedro Temilo as a fully legitimate pre-Hispanic ruler, local painters were declaring and trying to bolster the prestige of their own altepetl. In the case of Tetzcoco, the Primeros Memoriales mark a decrease in status by the lack of the xiuhhuitzolli, starting with Tecocoltzin, but colonial rulers continue to wear multicolored capes like those already found with Cacama and Coanacochtzin, making the change less abrupt than in the case of Tenochtitlan. No shift can be seen in the corresponding part of the Florentine Codex, for only one pre-Hispanic

211

212

I mages of R ank by R egion

ruler has the turquoise cape, whereas different styles of garments worn by colonial personages are paralleled by those of the preconquest tlatoque. In fact, the only colonial member of the Acolhua list clad in the full royal costume is the last one, don Hernando Pimentel, governing between 1545 and 1564, who, according to the accompanying text, was ruling Tetzcoco when this paragraph was written.32 Possibly, then, the first version of the picture may have been made at the same time as the original text, when Pimentel was in power, and his accouterments emphasize his influential position. Finally, regarding the colonial governors of Huexotla, in the Primeros Memoriales they wear the same style of capes as their immediate preHispanic predecessor but they lack royal diadems. The equivalent material in the Florentine Codex was not copied from the earlier manuscript; the images of postconquest rulers are not differentiated from preconquest personages; moreover, the last one wears the cape with turquoise design, used only twice with earlier members of the royal line. Concluding, it is not unreasonable to assume that dissimilarities between the two Sahaguntine manuscripts result from different aims, strategies, and views of their native painters. The imagery of pre-Hispanic tlatoque of Tenochtitlan and Tetzcoco was profoundly modified in the Florentine Codex to convey the political and historical perspective of its indigenous authors, and their perspective was additionally strengthened by the inclusion of the royal line of Tlatelolco. As a matter of fact, dependence on the prototype is found only with the dynasty of Huexotla, which should probably be explained by the small importance this altepetl had for Sahagún’s collaborators from Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco. They were primarily interested in stressing the paramount status of their own rulers already before the Tepanec war—and these historical claims were even more dubious in the case of Tlatelolco—as well as their superiority versus the line of Tetzcoco. This claim of supremacy over the Acolhuaque seems to have been an important part of Mexica policy during the imperial expansion of the Triple Alliance. Yet another important implication is how the transformation of the native system of rule was understood. The native authors of the Primeros Memoriales explicitly differentiate the postconquest governors from the preconquest tlatoque, signaling the reduction of their status. Much more weight is attached to the colonial rulers by the Florentine Codex, entitling them to almost the same royal insignia as the pre-Hispanic monarchs. Sometimes virtually no drop in rank and importance is implied, since certain personages, whose importance was apparently recognized by the informants of Sahagún, follow their fully legitimate predecessors in every detail. Both Sahaguntine manuscripts convey what seems to be a typically Mexica convention of royal imagery, also attested in other pictorial sources from Tenochtitlan. By no means surprising in the case of the Florentine Codex, its presence in the

I mages of R ank by R egion

Primeros Memoriales of supposed Tepepolcan flavor is more difficult to account for if we assume that this manuscript should primarily reflect local traditions. Closely similar images, in both iconographic and stylistic terms, are found in the Plano parcial de la Ciudad de México (figure 3.11), whose list of tlatoque, added to a map of parcels of land, was probably painted during the reign of don Luis de Santa María Cipac between 1563 and 1565, in the context of a prolonged legal dispute with the rulers of Tlatelolco over lands (Castañeda de la Paz 2008a, 412–21). All the Mexica tlatoque are seated on reed thrones with backrests, wearing turquoise diadems and turquoise capes, pictured either with the turquoise-mosaic design and red borders (xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli tentlapal), or plain blue with white fur or fringed borders. The latter are associated with the latest addition to the document, including the figures of Axayacatl, Ahuitzotl with a person facing him, and a second image of Teçoçomoc of Azcapotzalco (Castañeda de la Paz 2008a, 400). Some of the preHispanic rulers emit speech scrolls and point with their index fingers in a gesture of command, wearing turquoise bracelets visible on their outstretched wrists. Beyond doubt, their turquoise insignia are the elements most important in unambiguously identifying Mexica rulers in this pictorial manuscript. Certain nuanced changes of status are carefully marked in the case of early colonial governors of Tenochtitlan. Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin (figure 3.11a), Cuitlahuac (figure 3.11b), and Quauhtemoc (figure 3.11c), enjoying fully traditional apparel, are followed by don (?) Pablo Xochiquentzin (figure 3.11d), as we have seen, only a gobernador and not a dynastic ruler of Tenochtitlan. Accordingly, his different status is expressed by a reed seat without a backrest and a European hat instead of the royal diadem. His only royal attribute is the blue cape, though it is a plain one, lacking the turquoise-mosaic design of the dynastic tlatoque. Pre-Hispanic royal insignia are fully restored in the images of subsequent rulers with a dynastic background—don Diego Huanitzin (figure 3.11e) and don Diego de San Francisco Tehuetzquititzin (figure 3.11f )—but an important change is again signaled by the representation of don Esteban de Guzmán, acting as the juez de residencia between 1554 and 1557 (figure 3.11g). The nature of his function is expressed through a Spanish hat, a striped cape, and a vara de justicia. At the same time, he is seated on the reed seat with the backrest that was used by native rulers but was also associated with pre-Hispanic judges—as suggested by the imagery of the Florentine Codex and the Codex Mendoza—which probably accounts for its appearance as an attribute of don Esteban, a judge by Spanish nomination but also a member of the native nobility.33 Thus, rather than being an allusion to rulership, the reed throne here may be a sign of a high-ranking judge. Such an interpretation is corroborated by other images of don Esteban contained in a set of economic and legal documents known as the Codex Osuna, commissioned

213

214

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.11. Mexica rulers in the Plano parcial de la Ciudad de México: (a) Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin; (b) Cuitlahuac; (c) Quauhtemoc; (d) don (?) Pablo Xochiquentzin; (e) don Diego Huanitzin; (f ) don Diego de San Francisco Tehuetzquititzin; (g) don Esteban de Guzmán; (h) don Cristóbal de Guzmán Cecetzin; and (i) don Luis de Santa María Cipac (Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología, Mexico, drawing by Justyna Olko)

as a response to an inquiry by the visitador Valderrama in 1565 and associated with Mexico-Tenochtitlan, Tlatelolco, and Tacuba. In much the same way as in the Plano parcial, don Esteban de Guzmán is represented not as a native ruler but in the way emphasizing his function as a judge, derived both from preconquest and Spanish legal traditions (figure 3.12). This convergence is expressed through a combination

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.12. Don Esteban de Guzmán, Codex Osuna, fol. 500r (Biblioteca Nacional de España).

of attributes belonging to the two worlds, fused in a consistent pictorial convention repeatedly employed in Mexica colonial manuscripts. Thus, in the Codex Osuna the indigenous attributes of the juez-gobernador in Tenochtitlan include a reed-throne tepotzoicpalli, a blue speech scroll, and a pointed-finger gesture of command; his native white red-bordered cape, however, is worn in the manner of a Spanish-style coat over a European shirt and trousers. This set of status items is completed by a vara de justicia held by don Esteban. It is very likely that this combination reflects the costume and attributes actually employed by native judges in the second half of the sixteenth century when performing their function in public. Returning to the Plano parcial and its list of native governors, it should be pointed out that after don Esteban the office comes back again to the last dynastic rulers of Tenochtitlan. Don Cristóbal de Guzmán Cecetzin (figure 3.11h) and don Luis de Santa María Cipac (figure 3.11i), the grandson of Ahuitzotl, are represented in exactly the same way as their preconquest antecedents. Summing up, then, in the view of the native authors of this pictorial document, the colonial successors of the royal dynasty were conceived, or at least presented, as tlatoque equated with pre-Hispanic monarchs. Spanish-nominated governors lacking dynastic legitimacy,

215

216

I mages of R ank by R egion

however, had no right to the native insignia of rulership; moreover, the way they were represented suggests that their rank was perceived as inferior. These pictorial conventions are shared by other early-colonial pictorial manuscripts associated with Tenochtitlan, and especially by native annals. The distinctive insignia identifying the status of their wearers are an important part of the imagery of the year-count genre, even if it is often simplified and reduced to the barest essentials. A good example is the Codex Saville, a vertical tira containing pictorial annals spanning the years 1407–1535 and picturing the succession of the rulers of Tenochtitlan from Huitzilihuitl through Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin and on past the Spanish conquest. Mexica rulers are typically seated on tepotzoicpalli thrones and are clad in turquoise diadems and the capes bordered with eyes (tenixyo) that sometimes replace turquoise mantles in iconographic conventions. Typically for native annals, this preconquest royal apparel continues into postconquest times. Similar in many respects is the pictorial content of two other annals, the Codex Aubin and the Codex Mexicanus, although their style bears stronger European impact. The Codex Aubin, adapted to the format of European book and accompanied by alphabetic transcriptions, covers the years 1168–1591 and consists of two parts, one of them apparently later than the other (Glass 1975b, 89). The first part (fols. 15v–59r) conveys the standard Mexica version of the iconography of rank, featuring the rulers of Tenochtitlan on reed thrones and wearing the xiuhhuitzolli and blue capes with red borders (xiuhtilmatli tentlapal), probably a colonial pictorial convention referring to the mantles decorated with the turquoise design (figure 3.13a). The first two postconquest governors, don (?) Juan Velázquez Tlacotzin and don (?) Andrés de Tapia Motelchiuhtzin, are again differentiated from their predecessors by wearing simple brown capes. However, the next governor similarly lacking dynastic legitimacy, don (?) Pablo Xochiquentzin, wears a royal blue cape, appearing in the same way as the real tlatoque, don Diego Huanitzin, don Cristóbal de Guzmán Cecetzin, and don Luis de Santa María Cipac, all sharing their attire with pre-Hispanic ancestors (figure 3.13b). This continuity is even more striking if compared with municipal officials, such as alcaldes, wearing simple white capes and carrying Spanish varas. Moreover, in much the same way as in the Plano parcial, the juez gobernador is also carefully distinguished: don Antonio Valeriano (fol. 58v; see also figure 3.13c) preserves the native diadem but wears a modest brown cape and holds a Spanish staff. Perhaps his appearance with the xiuhhuitzolli was based on its preconquest association with high-status judges, probably of teuctli rank. In the second part of the Codex Aubin, pre-Hispanic tlatoque are shown in an identical way, except that the predynastic status of Tenoch is marked by his brown cape. In fact the xiuhtilmatli tentlapal starts not with the founder of the Mexica

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.13. Native rulers and officials of Tenochtitlan in the Codex Aubin, fols. 32r, 53v, 58v, 79r (a–d, Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

dynasty, Acamapichtli, clad in a white cape with a red border, but with his successor Huitzilihuitl, and ends with Quauhtemoc. The painter changed at the folio opening the colonial section (fol. 76r), bringing a different style, with different proportions of the figures. Although Tlacotzin, Motelchiuhtzin, and Xochiquentzin all wear less-prestigious brown capes, their remaining attributes are fully traditional. Moreover, they issue flowered speech-scrolls depicted in a very pre-Hispanic way. The hand changes again on folio 76v, simplifying the flowered speech-scrolls but at the same time restoring the Mexica royal imagery, which continues up to don Luis de Santa María Cipac, the last colonial governor of Tenochtitlan who was also a legitimate tlatoani. The status of other officials is again precisely indicated by their apparel. Native judges are shown in Spanish hats and shirts and wielding varas, in accordance with the common and well-established convention already discussed. The same applies to don Antonio Valeriano, here deprived of any attributes of a native ruler and the last governor of Mexico-Tenochtitlan depicted, ruling between 1597 and 1599, rests on a simple seat, wearing a white cape over a Spanish shirt and holding a staff of justice (figure 3.13d). Even so, maintaining a historical link with his prestigious antecedents, he is depicted with the turquoise diadem on his head. As the example of the Codex Aubin shows, the exact rendering and set of attributes depended to a certain degree on the particular artist; hence royal portraits can vary even in a single manuscript. However, although native painters associated with Mexico-Tenochtitlan seem to have enjoyed a certain liberty within existing pictorial conventions, they acted according to relatively well-established iconographic patterns, which defined the imagery of both preconquest tlatoque and colonial officials, signaling differences in rank and function by appropriate combinations of status items. Many of these traits persist in spite of an ongoing Europeanization and deterioration of the overall pictorial style. This can be seen in the Codex Mexicanus, where

217

218

I mages of R ank by R egion

the annals section features pre-Hispanic tlatoque wearing royal diadems and capes, but the early leaders lack the reed thrones introduced with the rule of Itzcoatl, the first paramount tlatoani. Interestingly, this late manuscript, although quite removed from the preconquest pictorial style, seems to convey a view of the differences in status of members of the dynasty of Tenochtitlan similar to that found in the much earlier Primeros Memoriales, both of them possibly reflecting traditional imagery that was intentionally suppressed in the Florentine Codex. In spite of the late date of the execution of this manuscript, there is not even the slightest reflection of Spanish costume in its representations of colonial governors. This widespread convention is also confirmed outside the annals genre. A good example is an economic document known today as the Titres de Propriété Mexico Tenochtitlan (BNF 114; see also figure 3.14), coming from the district of Santa María Redonda Cuepopan in Mexico-Tenochtitlan and traditionally dated about 1574 (Glass 1975b, 166).34 The map of a property is not only accompanied by its owners but also by native rulers and municipal officials. The latter are shown according to the same convention that we have already seen in the Codices Aubin and Mexicanus. Don Diego Huanitzin rests on a reed throne, issues speech scrolls, and wears a blue diadem and a red cape. Don Diego Tehuetzquititzin is pictured the same way except that his mantle is blue, a color alluding to preconquest royal capes. Also, images of municipal officers follow conventions found in historical annals from Tenochtitlan: they wield varas, emit speech scrolls, and wear European shirts. It becomes clear that standardized ways of representing colonial officials were not strictly limited to a specific kind of manuscript but were shared between different genres. It should be made clear that this “simplified” imagery of native rulers and officials, employing only a relatively limited set of attributes—such as reed thrones, turquoise diadems, and (frequently plain) capes—is not limited to sources showing heavy Spanish influence. Equally abridged, rudimentary versions of royal images are attested in the most traditional pictorial sources, almost unaffected by European influence, such as the Tira de la Peregrinación. Made in preconquest linear style, the iconographic details of its imagery are reduced to an absolute minimum. As we have seen, within the rich body of colonial pictorial manuscripts from Tenochtitlan, the most diagnostic status symbols forming part of precontact iconography were consistently employed to express the continuity of native rulership or, combined with European attributes, to convey current ideas and understanding of shades of status between different contemporary officials. Although this assemblage of native insignia of rank forms in many respects a specifically Mexica repertory, some common features and trends, however, are to be found also in other communities of the Valley of Mexico and beyond.

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.14. Titres de Propriété Mexico Tenochtitlan (BNF 114; Bibliothèque Nationale de France, drawing by Justyna Olko).

Tlatelolco

Although informants from Tlatelolco probably had considerable impact on the images of native rulers in the Sahaguntine corpus, the pictorial evidence on this altepetl is very limited. It can be assumed, however, that the Mexica and Tlatelolca conventions were closely related, even if the scarcity of available sources does not clarify the issue. The only relatively early manuscript of unquestionable Tlatelolcan provenience is the Códice de Tlatelolco, a long strip of paper usually referred to with a Spanish term tira, spanning the period from 1542 to 1560 (Noguez 1998, 23–24)35 and probably made around 1562 (Valle 1994a). This period corresponds roughly with the rule of don Diego de Mendoza Imauhyantzin Huitznahuatlailotlac (1549– 62), an influential tlatoani and governor of Tlatelolco depicted at least three times in the document (Noguez 1998, 25–26). Accordingly, he is very likely the person

219

220

I mages of R ank by R egion

who commissioned and supervised the manuscript and its royal imagery. By drawing heavily upon pre-Hispanic tradition, it highlights the status and place of native rulers in the new political order. Telling of recent historical events and public ceremonies, it was, unlike other early colonial pictorial documents, not based on set indigenous prototypes but rather composed of elements of mixed origin. This composite background is manifest in an image probably of don Martín Tlacateccatl, a postconquest ruler of Tlatelolco (1542–48) and participant in the Mixton war (Valle 1994a, 60). His elaborate costume is a hybridizing synthesis of pre-Hispanic and Spanish elements, though the former prevail. Don Martín wears a turquoise diadem, whose use is confirmed in military contexts (see pages 44–45), but it is accompanied by a tlalpiloni hair-binder, a combination otherwise not attested in native sources. His prestigious attributes include a golden labret and earplugs, as well as a garment resembling a jaguar-skin ehuatl, though having sleeves in the European style. Short tight Spanish trousers, calzones, replace a pre-Hispanic loincloth, but golden leg bands and sandals again evoke preconquest lordly dress. This traditional flavor is further accentuated by the quetzalpatzactli insignia carried on the back, a tehuehuelli shield, and a war club, which, however, resembles a Spanish sword more than a native macquahuitl. In much the same vein, a following image featuring don Diego de Mendoza Imauhyantzin unites elements of both traditions. The turquoise diadem is combined with a white cape placed over a Spanish shirt, and yellow sandals, perhaps ornamented with gold. Although he is depicted on a curule seat, a Spanish symbol of rank, it rests on a traditional place sign of Tlatelolco, which may have been a preconquest iconographic convention. A quintessential attribute of a tlatoani, the speech scroll, traditionally depicted as a blue volute alluding to turquoise and expressing the exceptional status of royal speech, is painted yellow to designate gold in accordance with its European connotations. The whole gives the impression of an intentional fusion of status symbols of different origin, smoothly merged in the image of a personage whose status derived from a power base both local and foreign. We learn more about the strategies of the ambitious leader of Tlatelolco in a later section of the manuscript, commemorating the ceremonies of swearing allegiance to King Philip II that took place in June 1557, almost a year and a half after his accession to the throne of Spain (Valle 1998, 33). According to the Actas de cabildo of Mexico-Tenochtitlan, among the participants in this fiesta real were the viceroy don Luis de Velasco, the judges of the Royal Audiencia and other high secular officials, the archbishop fray Alonso de Montúfar and church functionaries, as well as the indigenous rulers of Tlatelolco, Tenochtitlan, Tlacopan, and Tetzcoco. As in other similar events, the celebrations were enhanced by native dances and plays, all in accordance with the pictorial content of the Códice de Tlatelolco (Valle 1998, 33–35).

I mages of R ank by R egion

This part features the native tlatoque in a way quite different than the hybridizing convention of the first section. Don Diego de Mendoza is here shown together with the rulers of Tenochtitlan, Tlacopan, and Tetzcoco and in the direct vicinity of key Spanish officials (figure 5.3). Whereas in his first eclectic image he sat on a Spanish chair, here he rests upon a native reed-throne placed over the toponym of Tlatelolco, wearing the turquoise diadem and a white cape decorated with black stripes and circles. His companions—don Cristóbal de Guzmán Cecetzin, the ruler of Tenochtitlan (also represented in the upper part of this section of the manuscript); don Antonio Cortés Totoquihuaztli, the ruler of Tlacopan; and don Hernando Pimentel, the ruler of Tetzcoco—are also seated on the tepotzoicpalli thrones and adorned with the xiuhhuitzolli diadems, but all wear white capes with fur or fringed borders.36 Thus, they are dressed in their native costumes during an important colonial feast, and it is very probable that they indeed dressed in preconquest style on this occasion (see pp. 346–347). The iconography of rank based upon the pre-Hispanic tradition appears to have been consciously employed here to express the status and role of native rulers in an event of historical importance and perhaps also in the whole colonial arrangement. A great deal is being asserted here about the role of the principal protagonist, don Diego de Mendoza. It is no mere coincidence that he is represented in the same row with the three rulers of the former capitals of the Triple Alliance. It must be recalled that, at least according to Tenochca partisan history, the post of tlatoani was restored in Tlatelolco only after the Spanish conquest. Here he not only assumes an equal position with the former sovereigns in the confirmation ceremony that reiterated the submission of the indigenous population to the Spanish crown, because his attire—a more elaborate cape design—distinguishes him from the three other rulers. In accordance with this message, the authors of the manuscript manipulated the scale of images to emphasize the supremacy of don Diego: he is notably bigger than the other tlatoque. Thus, although before the conquest the status of Tlatelolcan rulers was by no means equal to those of Tenochtitlan and the other capitals of the Triple Alliance— much less superior—don Diego de Mendoza affirms his position through the conscious exploitation of the pre-Hispanic iconography of rank and manipulation of the relationship with the other tlatoque. As has been signaled, the use of preconquest dress in important public ceremonies like the fiesta real is well attested and accounts for the imagery of this section of the Códice de Tlatelolco, including the traditional costumes worn over European clothes by the dancers and the numerous quetzalpatzactli back insignia displayed on such occasions. Even figures of Spanish officials are accompanied by images of the quetzalpatzactli, but it should be emphasized that these devices, as such, were not symbols of power in preconquest

221

222

I mages of R ank by R egion

iconography, though they were carried as prestigious items to war even by the rulers themselves. Thus, the display of such preconquest emblems in colonial contexts entails an important change of meaning of the traditional insignia, assimilated to European-style heraldic devices. In these new roles they were often exploited simply to highlight the position of the postconquest nobility in the general context of that time. The emphasis on the importance of the ruler of Tlatelolco, expressed by the traditional insignia and allusions to his superiority over the tlatoque of the former capitals of the Triple Alliance, is quite overt. Exploiting this special opportunity, don Diego constructs for himself the image of a powerful personage. His efforts here were part of a general campaign to strengthen both the position of his altepetl and his personal status, attested to by the falsification of a royal cédula (decree) and subsequently having it legalized by the viceroy. Unfortunately, most of the data we have on this important personage are posterior reworkings of history. Even so, it seems probable that don Diego also had land disputes with the nobility of Tenochtitlan, who finally accused him of the appropriation of lands that Itzcoatl had assigned to their ancestors; because of this conflict he was apparently put in jail, where he died in 1562 (Castañeda de la Paz 2008a, 416–18; 2008b, 29–31). Moreover, don Diego may have been responsible for the striking difference between his large eclectic image in the initial section of the Códice de Tlatelolco and his preconquest-style representations in the part illustrating the fiesta real. It is possible, even if speculative, that the large image displaying the fusion of native and European status items was added later and by a different painter, to emphasize the special position and deeds of this governor of Tlatelolco (Castañeda de la Paz, personal communication 2011). However, there is also another possible explanation of the disparities between the two conventions of representation within the same document, although it by no means excludes the above hypothesis. The first portrait, where don Diego wears preconquest garments over Spanish clothes, may reflect the customary appearance of native rulers in the mid-sixteenth century, at least in public contexts. The other two images, picturing this personage as an important participant in the fiesta real, follow an unaltered preconquest style that was indeed part of such spectacles. At any rate, this imagery—combining traditional iconography of rank with political claims manipulating relationships rooted in the precontact past—forms the core rhetoric of this native manuscript commissioned to aggrandize an early-colonial ruler of Tlatelolco. Tetzcoco

No pre-Hispanic images of Tetzcocan rulers have survived to our times, but much about local pictorial conventions can be retrieved from early-colonial manuscripts.

I mages of R ank by R egion

Tetzcoco, a dominant altepetl in the eastern Valley of Mexico, ruled the vast region of Acolhuacan, and as the principal ally of Tenochtitlan, enjoyed considerable territorial, economic, and political gains from imperial expansion. Judging by the sixteenth-century evidence, the cartographic-historical genre enjoyed a special popularity in the area, and although this genre was also part of the Mexica tradition (as attested by the Tira de la Peregrinación and the Mapa de Sigüenza), Tetzcocan manuscripts represent a separate phenomenon in many respects. Their distinctiveness is visibly reflected in the iconography of rank. Representative of the Tetzcocan style are early colonial pictorial documents known today as the Codex Xolotl, Mapa Quinatzin, and Mapa Tlotzin, strongly based on pre-Hispanic prototypes and forming a stylistically consistent group. The style and content of the Codex Xolotl is very traditional, making it perhaps earlier in date than the remaining manuscripts (Robertson [1959] 1994, 135, 142–43). Containing a detailed history of the Acolhua groups from the arrival of Xolotl through the Tepanec war, this cartographic-historical manuscript presents in detail genealogical and political relationships of the eastern side of the Valley of Mexico, occupying the space between the geographic features and toponyms with actions and short genealogies. All this reveals a strongly Tetzcocan perspective as well as the emphasis on the political legitimacy of the ruling dynasty (Spitler 2000, 619–30). The images of native leaders fall into two basic categories, following the native concepts of dual historical roots. The first group encompasses leaders and other persons of Chichimec origin: long-haired, they have animal-hide capes, leather hand-bands, and bows and arrows. The second category is identified with the sedentary “Toltec” background: males wear their hair short and don white cotton capes. The two kinds of persons are much alike in their poses and gestures: they are often shown seated and, depending on their status, emit speech volutes and outstretch their hands with an index finger pointing. This gesture is employed in native pictorial conventions in reference to specific actions associated with high rank, such as giving commands or assigning land, and as an attribute of power. In addition, both categories of protagonists share a similar kind of seat: in the case of the “Toltecs” this is a typical reed throne with a backrest (tepotzoicpalli), and its Chichimec counterpart is almost identical except for a darker color and the lack of the mat design. In fact, the tepotzoicpalli must have been conceived as the sign of rulership in Tetzcoco, for it is attached to the name glyph of Ixtlilxochitl in the scene referring to his royal accession (fol. VII). In much the same way as in the rulers’ lists pictured in the Primeros Memoriales, the “Chichimec” costume in the Codex Xolotl figures as a close conceptual counterpart of the Toltec one. Its constituent parts are strikingly similar; the only difference is the material they were made of, alluding to “uncivilized” nomadic

223

224

I mages of R ank by R egion

life. It is worn by all the newcomers who upon their arrival at Acolhuacan meet the sedentary Toltec descendants. Their entirely Chichimec dress is maintained for two or three generations.37 Nevertheless, we know very little about how this complex manuscript was made, so it is premature to consider costume change within it as a consistent, chronological process.38 It would be erroneous, however, to think that the Chichimec style was understood as inferior. The Codex Xolotl devotes much space to principal political players—the Acolhua founders Xolotl and Nopaltzin and their immediate descendants—always represented in their “nomad” costumes. What we see is a considerable persistence of signs of Chichimec identity. According to Ixtlilxochitl, Techotlalatzin, the ruler of Tzinacanoztoc, was the hegemonic ruler of the entire valley, but a critical examination of extant sources implies that his state was rather small and limited to the eastern part of the basin (Offner 1979). In spite of being credited with acquiring fluency in Nahuatl as the first ruler of Xolotl’s line and making it the principal language within his realm, this supposed “Nahuatlization” is not reflected in the Codex Xolotl, at least in terms of clothing. Techotlalatzin wears an animal-skin cape as he faces his wife Tozquentzin, who is adorned with cotton garments, as are their offspring and almost all the other personages around, including the chiefs of subject towns depicted along the margin (fol. 5; see also figure 3.15). On the same page he is shown again, below Tetzcoco and over the glyph of Oztoticpac, clad in an animal-skin cape and receiving chiefs of four migrating groups—Colhuaque, Tepaneca, Huitznahuaque, and Mexica—all wearing white capes. Similarly, although on a preceding folio the rulers of Chalco, Tlatelolco, and Tenochtitlan have cotton garments, Acolhua leaders Quinatzin and his successor Techotlalatzin are still depicted in Chichimec dress. The latter appears to be a special attribute of Tetzcocan rulers, worn even when all others have already adopted Toltec ways. This special meaning given to Chichimec roots in the Tetzcocan tradition is also alluded to in the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 60–61), where Acolhua Chichimecs were the first to come out from Chicomoztoc and are referred to as the “tecpilchichimeca,” that is, noble Chichimecs, belonging to a clearly superior group (Lesbre 2000, 492–93). Similar ideas can be found in the writings of Ixtlilxochitl, sustaining the idea of “the Chichimec empire” of the Acolhuaque and affirming the importance of their royal title chichimecateuctli. This appellation expressed the Acolhua claims to political superiority (Lesbre 2000, 493). Fully congruent with these ideas is the message of the Codex Xolotl. It also implies that the labels of “Chichimec/ nomad” and “Toltec/sedentary” were not understood as a simple opposition between the “uncivilized” and “civilized,” or “humble” and “noble,” even if such an understanding pervades the modern historiography.

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.15. Techotlalatzin wearing a fur cape, while his wife and children appear in cotton garments, Codex Xolotl, fol. 5 (Bibliothèque Nationale de France, drawing by Justyna Olko).

In addition to supporting the prestige of Chichimec identity, the Codex Xolotl makes it clear that the two conventions were not always strictly separated. In several combat scenes between “Toltec” and “Chichimec” warriors, the differences in their outfits are rather discreet, consisting mainly in the Chichimecs being equipped with bows, arrows, and quivers. Sometimes, however, “Toltec” warriors happen to carry quivers and bows, while the descendants of the Chichimecs wield spears. The mixing of attributes is also seen in the image of Pochotl (fol. 4), who wears a brown cape but is seated on a reed seat with a backrest and emits a speech scroll. Likewise, similar combinations can be found in other Tetzcocan sources such as the Mapa Tlotzin discussed below. The repertory of status items employed in the Codex Xolotl is not particularly ample, but specific attributes tend to form meaningful combinations to convey different identities, functions, and shades of rank. They may be expressed through the presence of reed thrones, speech scrolls, or even bracelets on hands of rulers making conventionalized gestures of command. Some of the protagonists, perhaps of the

225

226

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.16. Investiture of Ixtlilxochitl, Codex Xolotl, fol. 7 (Bibliothèque Nationale de France, drawing by Justyna Olko).

teuctli rank, carry digging sticks in their hands, not implying that they are cultivators but to indicate their status as vassals who deliver tribute (Dibble [1981] 1996; Corona 1989, 64–65). An interesting set of attributes appears in the scene of the investiture of Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 7; figure 3.16), who is seated on the reed throne and is accompanied by priests and his son and successor, Neçahualcoyotl. Ixtlilxochitl has the tepotzoicpalli reed throne attached to his name glyph, indicating his accession. This implies, as we have seen before, that this royal seat was employed in Tetzcocan pictorial conventions as the symbol of rulership. In contrast, the name sign of his son is accompanied by the image of the coçoyahualolli feathered headgear, an adornment associated with the Chichimecs (see p. 67). Thus, it has been suggested that in addition to stressing his Chichimec ancestry, this item designates Neçahualcoyotl as a “legitimate successor” (Dibble [1981] 1996, 92); he reappears later, still not as a tlatoani of Tetzcoco, in association with this feathered device (fol. 10). Neçahualcoyotl differs from his father only by the lack of speech scrolls, which indeed may indicate he is not yet in power.39 In addition, both Ixtlilxochitl and his son wear a distinctive enclosing headgear, consistently associated with priests in the Codex Xolotl. It may allude to the penitential apparel of future rulers during ritual fasting in coronation rites. It is also noteworthy that this head adornment is similar to that of many representations of bodies prepared for funeral rites throughout this manuscript. Hence, its possible association is with persons undergoing a change of status or in the rites of passage, such as the assumption of an office (Offner 2010a, 263). Thus, by employing a relatively simple set of elements within well-defined pictorial conventions, the authors of the Codex Xolotl were able to recount crucial

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.17. Tetzcocan rulers in the Mapa Tlotzin (Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

episodes from the political history of Acolhuacan, highlighting the special position of Neçahualcoyotl as the main founder of Tetzcocan power, the prestige of its Chichimec roots, its superiority over other altepetl, and the legitimacy of the transfer of power. Although Aztec pictorial manuscripts genres entail considerable standardization of representations, this Tetzcocan manuscript goes further, showing how activities and nuances of rank can be indicated by appropriate arrangements of elite insignia, postures, and gestures. Similar conventions in the iconography of rank can also be traced in the Mapa Tlotzin (figure 3.17). Painted before 1550 on a skin tira, it shows the establishment of the Chichimecs in the eastern Valley of Mexico as well as local genealogies, including

227

228

I mages of R ank by R egion

those of Tetzcoco, Huexotla, and Coatlichan (Glass 1975b, 219).40 Bringing the succession of Tetzcocan rulers from the time of semimythical founders up to their colonial descendants—ending here with don Pedro Tetlahuehuetzquitzin—it does not mark any striking borderline between the pre- and postconquest epochs. It was surely important for the colonial Tetzcocan nobility; even if it is possible to trace the manuscript back only as far as its ownership by don Diego Pimentel, a descendant of the Tetzcocan ruling dynasty, it seems likely that the previous owners and original patrons were also royal descendants (Spitler 1998, 72). The story of the Mapa Tlotzin has been seen as an illustration of “the process by which they [Acolhuaque Chichimecs] learn Toltec ways and become civilized” as seen through the replacement of their animal-skin garments by the white cloaks that mark the accession of the first legitimate tlatoani, Neçahualcoyotl (Boone 2000, 186–87). Such readings could have been influenced by the drawing of this document published originally in 1885 by Aubin, who assigned hide capes to all the predecessors of Neçahualcoyotl in accordance with the modern tendency to simplify the Nahua conception of their own historical evolution. In the original document, however, although animal-skin garments are indeed worn by incoming Chichimecs and some of the founding couples, a considerable portion of “Chichimecs” are pictured wearing cotton capes. The borderline between the “barbarians” and the “civilized” is by no means clear-cut; white cotton clothes are already worn by the couple in the cave of Tzinacanoztoc, while in the cave of Oztoticpac the first seated couple—Tlotzin and his wife—are adorned with what appear to be animal-hide garments. Also, his successor Quinatzin was probably intended to wear a skin cape, even if it appears somewhat intermediate. All the subsequent members of the royal line, starting with Techotlalatzin, display white cotton capes, whereas their female companions have cotton shifts and skirts. It cannot go unnoticed that attributing cotton garments to the early members of Acolhua royal lines sets this imagery apart from the Codex Xolotl, with its emphasis on the persistence of the Chichimec costume. Even so, there are also important points of convergence with the message of the Codex Xolotl. Above all, the two conventions, “nomad” and “sedentary,” are not presented as radically separate or mutually exclusive, and the endurance of “Chichimec” attributes in the iconography of rank is noteworthy. Continuing the imagery of their Chichimec ancestors, both Neçahualcoyotl and Neçahualpilli carry bows with arrows as tlatoque. In fact, the only details that distinguish them from their predecessors in this document are the tepotzoicpalli reed thrones, golden earplugs, and the hair arrangement (long hair tied with a red ribbon). These were not only the historical roots, however, that mattered for the authors or patrons of the Mapa Tlotzin. The imagery makes Tetzcoco the paramount

I mages of R ank by R egion

political center of Acolhuacan, with other regional centers such as Huexotla and Coatlichan as its subordinates. It is not a coincidence that the rulers of these two places are deprived of reed thrones, which remain an exclusive privilege of the rulers of Tetzcoco and two other important altepetl, Tenochtitlan and Colhuacan (Spitler 1998, 75–78). Again, the tepotzoicpalli seat is the essential symbol of rulership, and the lack thereof signals either the absence of tlatocayotl or at least a visibly inferior status. The Mapa Tlotzin probably alludes to early colonial litigation between Tetzcoco and Huexotla, where both sides struggled over the definition of their status going back to the preconquest times.41 Moreover, the colonial native nobility made major efforts to establish unquestionable descent from preconquest tlatoque as the source of legitimacy, something that spurred the production of numerous sixteenth-century genealogies. This concern stands out clearly in the Mapa Tlotzin. Its political significance is patent, for, as has been pointed out by Elizabeth Boone (2000, 190), “Texcoco is the only polity whose ruler list is complete and brought up to the present, continuous and ongoing,” whereas other polities, like Huexotla, Coatlinchan, Tenochtitlan, and Colhuacan are either “frozen in the past” or presented at a single historical moment. The imagery of the postconquest representatives of the Tetzcocan dynasty deserves a closer inspection. According to Susan Spitler, “although the final six Texcocan rulers are pictured as Colonial, visually they are not distinguished in any way from Texcoco’s pre-conquest nobility”; she adds: “perhaps the greatest fiction of the painter of the Mapa Tlotzin is the representation of these final rulers with the clothing and accouterments of Pre-conquest tlatoque” (Spitler 1998, 74, 78). However, whereas it is true that the extension of precontact paraphernalia to postcontact governors is a salient feature of the manuscript, there are also subtle differences that set them apart from their predecessors. Thus, they diverge from Neçahualcoyotl and Neçahualpilli in the lack of bows, arrows, and long hair; the simple short hair of the colonial nobles distinguishes them even from the transitional ruler, Cacama, who displays a traditional temillotl hairstyle associated with high military rank. This detail can be taken as a widespread Tetzcocan convention for representing rulers and lords, for the temillotl hairdo is worn by Neçahualcoyotl and Itzcoatl in the Boban Aztec Calendar Wheel (figure 3.18a)42 and by Tepiquatzin, the son of Neçahualcoyotl in the early-colonial genealogy known as the Genealogía circular de los descendientes de Neçahualcoyotl. Returning to the images of colonial rulers in the Mapa Tlotzin, their reed thrones, white capes, and loincloths (the latter entirely anachronistic in this context) affirm their sustained association with pre-Hispanic predecessors. As we have seen, this convention of representation was by no means unusual in the sixteenth century, expressing perceived identity of colonial officials with their preconquest counterparts. Direct analogies can be found in

229

230

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.18. Boban Calendar Wheel: (a) Neçahualcoyotl and Itzcoatl; and (b) don Antonio Pimentel Tlahuitoltzin (courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University).

other pictorial documents from the Tetzcocan region such as the fully traditional image of don Antonio Pimentel Tlahuitoltzin in the Humboldt Fragment 6 or in the Boban Aztec Calendar Wheel (figure 3.18b).43 The Mapa Quinatzin, painted on native paper around 1541–4844 and probably copied from a preconquest model (Offner 1984, 79), shares basically the same conventions of royal imagery, attesting to their precontact nature. Like the Codex Xolotl and Mapa Tlotzin, it is remarkable for the delicacy of the frame line and numerous traditional traits (Robertson [1959] 1994, 137–39). Indeed, it is very difficult to assess the actual degree of its Europeanization, which seems very subtle and impossible to separate from the local preconquest style, known to us only through early-colonial works (Lesbre 2008, 173–93). This manuscript consists of three leaves, one depicting historical events in the time of early rulers Quinatzin and Techotlalatzin, the second showing the palace of Neçahualcoyotl, and the third illustrating laws and punishments established by him. As a whole it forms a visual presentation of the historical

I mages of R ank by R egion

tradition and complex sociopolitical organization of Tetzcoco. The supreme rulers, Neçahualcoyotl and Neçahualpilli, clad in white capes and emitting speech scrolls, are differentiated from subordinated tlatoque only by their seats, for they are the only ones to rest on the tepotzoicpalli thrones; the vassals are seated on reed seats without backrests. Once again, it is a reed throne that appears as the principal royal attribute distinguishing the Tetzcocan tlatoque. In a similar way, in the Genealogía circular, the tepotzoicpalli serves as a graphic substitute for the images of Neçahualcoyotl, Neçahualpilli, and the Mexica ruler Itzcoatl. Instead of actual human figures, they are represented by their name glyphs placed over empty reed thrones. The tepotzoicpalli is also the principal element designating the highest rank in yet another Acolhua manuscript, the Códice en Cruz, an example of the annals genre probably produced in Chiauhtla about 1549–69 (Dibble [1981] 1996, 59–60).45 Its content reflects the political and kingship ties between Tetzcoco and its dependencies, Chiauhtla and Tepetlaoztoc. As in other pictorial documents from the Tetzcocan region, the status of the tlatoani is expressed by presence or absence of the reed throne. Thus, in the year 13 Reed (1427), Neçahualcoyotl is not yet seated on the tepotzoicpalli because he was still not installed as ruler, but he receives this status symbol when the imagery registers his accession in the year 4 Reed (1431). An additional element in this manuscript is an incense pouch depicted over the arm of rulers (figure 3.19a). Although unparalleled in the extant early colonial imagery of native rulers in the Valley of Mexico, this element, as we have seen, figures prominently in the preconquest sculpture of Tenochtitlan. It is therefore probable that in the Códice en Cruz, too, it was meant to signal the priestly functions of the tlatoque, which explains its absence in the images of colonial rulers (figure 3.19b). The latter are only subtly distinguished from their pre-Hispanic antecedents, in much the same manner as in other Nahua manuscripts—and especially rulers’ lists and annals—emphasizing the unbroken continuity of native altepetl and their royal lines. Taken as a whole, the Códice en Cruz follows the Tetzcocan iconography of rank, even if coming from a provincial Acolhua locality. The same can be said of another manuscript from the region, the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (also known as the Codex Kingsborough), painted probably in Tepetlaoztoc, an altepetl subordinate to Tetzcoco, by various hands around 1554 (Valle 1994b, 11). Although made for a lawsuit between the natives of Tepetlaoztoc and the encomendero Juan Velásquez de Salazar (Glass 1975b, 151), in addition to parts documenting Spanish abuses, it also contains the imagery of the indigenous nobility of this entity. The first five rulers of Tepetlaoztoc are pictured according to the Chichimec convention, congruent with the imagery contained in the Tetzcocan cartographic-historical manuscripts already discussed, but enriched by numerous details. They wear animal-hide capes and grass crowns together with the

231

232

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.19. (a) Precontact and (b) postcontact rulers in the Códice en Cruz (Bibliothèque Nationale de France, drawings by Justyna Olko).

coçoyahualolli devices and sandals (whenever standing), and they carry quivers, bows, and arrows. In fact, this set of attributes evokes the images of Chichimec rulers included in the Primeros Memoriales, pointing to possible Acolhua inspiration for this part of the Sahaguntine manuscript. In the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc the change in costume comes with the ruler named Cocopin, shown—in accordance with the Tetzcocan convention—seated on the reed throne in a white cape decorated with a colorful striped design, but with no special headdress. This set of attributes implies he was the first ruler of Tepetlaoztoc to have achieved tlatoani status, and indeed this local vision is confirmed by the Tetzcocan historian Ixtlilxochitl, who lists Cocopin among subordinate rulers established by Neçahualcoyotl during the organization of his regional state (Ixtlilxochitl 2000, 146). In the Códice en Cruz, however, Coco­pin is not represented as a fully legitimate ruler, for he lacks the seat of authority that is given only to his immediate successor (Dibble [1981] 1996, 12–13). The latter, named don Diego Tlilpo­tonqui, is in fact the only one emitting speech scrolls, the attribute of a tlatoani (figure 3.20a). Significantly, although his rule continued after the arrival of Spaniards, we will not find the slightest trace of European influence in his way of dressing. This preconquest style is maintained in the image of his successor, don Luis Tejeda, most probably the one who inspired the creation of this manuscript adhering to the traditional iconography of rank (figure 3.20b). Its close links with the Tetzcocan pictorial style surely go back to preconquest times, when Tepetlaoztoc was part of an Acolhua state based on a shallow political hierarchy, in which regional rulers immediately below the high tlatoani of Tetzcoco enjoyed elevated political status and a considerable degree of independence. In spite of the political strategies of the rulers of Tetzcoco, not all altepetl in their domain were interested in emphasizing the relationship with their overlords.

I mages of R ank by R egion

Clear evidence of conscious disassociation from the ruler of Tetzcoco is available for the community of Tepech­ pan, one of the 11 altepetl on the eastern side of the Valley of Mexico which constituted the Tetzcocan state in the larger sense. Its ruler, Tencoyotzin, was reportedly appointed by Neçahualcoyotl between 1430 and 1434 (Ixtlilxochitl 2000, 146; Hodge 1996, 34) and, as a result, according to the Mapa Quinatzin, he became a member of the advisory council of the Tetzcocan ruler and provided support for his palace (Hodge and Blanton 1996, 232). Surprisingly enough, in spite of being located in the political domain of Tetzcoco, this small polity declared a certain relationship with powerful Tenochtitlan. These links were probably not entirely fictional, for the rulers of Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco claimed an outlying settlement (estancia) called Calco within the territory of Tepechpan (Hodge and Blanton 1996, 232). This altepetl also appears Figure 3.20. Rulers of Tepetlaoztoc, in the group of Acolhua localities that, Códice de Tepetlaoztoc, fol. 4v: (a) don Diego Tlilpotonqui; and (b) don Luis according to the Codex Mendoza (fol. Tejeda (British Museum, drawings by 21v), had tributary obligations toward Justyna Olko). Tenochtitlan. According to Tetzcocan sources, some of these towns, including Tepechpan itself, also owed tribute to Tetzcoco, so their obligations may have been divided between the two overlords (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 38–39). It is difficult to say whether this relationship was somehow related to the marriage between Quaquauhtzin, one of the rulers of Tepechpan, and Xochtzin, a woman of royal blood of Tenochtitlan, signaling an allegiance to this hegemon in accordance with a common pattern of royal hypergamy that often entailed a form of political loyalty or veiled submission in the Nahua world (Carrasco 1984). By providing a wife for the Tepechpan ruler, Tenochtitlan perhaps attempted to appropriate an altepetl in the Tetzcocan sphere through marriage alliance rather than

233

234

I mages of R ank by R egion

conquest (Diel 2007, 8); at any rate, the arrangement would have been a source of prestige and autonomy for Tepechpan. The tactics proved ultimately unsuccessful because Neçahualcoyotl terminated the marriage (or only an engagement, according to Tetzcocan sources), taking the Mexica noblewoman as his own wife. As a disloyal vassal, Quaquauhtzin soon met a violent death arranged by the Tetzcocan tlatoani himself, who then installed his daughter as the principal wife of the next Tepechpan ruler (Noguez 1978, 90–92; Offner 1984, 229–30; Diel 2007, 4–8). This marriage alliance is given considerable importance in the pictorial annals known as the Tira de Tepechpan, constructing the local vision of the relationship of this lesser altepetl with mighty Tenochtitlan. Tira de Tepechpan was done by four early-colonial painters who continued the account till 1596; it covers the precontact history of Tepechpan, too, including the Chichimec past of its founder and the foundation itself. The events are spaced above and below the line of the continuous year count, the layout and iconography of the document remaining very close to the preconquest tradition. This is especially true for the first and probably the earliest painter, responsible for the section running up to the year 1553, whereas later portions reveal an increasing departure from the quality and characteristics of the pre-Hispanic pictorial style (Noguez 1978, 16; Diel 2008, 16–18). Very few, if any, Tetzcocan traits or references to Tetzcoco can be identified in this manuscript from a town in the Acolhua area. In spite of belonging to the Tetzcocan zone, the tira pictures all of the preconquest rulers of Tenochtitlan and some of their colonial governors, ignoring those of Tetzcoco. The history of Tenochtitlan runs in the lower register of the document, being chosen as an essential point of reference for local events. Whereas this strategy was not exceptional, for a similar political background is given for the events presented in the Códice en Cruz, in the Tira de Tepechpan the link goes beyond mere references to Mexica personages, adopting the entire Tenochtitlan convention for the manuscript genre, stylistic features, and the iconography of rank. Thus, in spite of documented Tetzcocan efforts to bind Tepechpan to its political and economical domain, the manuscript does not reflect this situation at all, at least in the postconquest era (Olko 2005, 401–04). The local strategy is overtly manifest already in the initial section of the tira. The Chichimec newcomer and future founder of Tepechpan, Icxiquauhtli, is shown arriving in the year 1324, bearing typically nomad attributes—a bow and arrows— uniquely combined with a white cotton cape and the turquoise diadem. The cape indicates sedentary status, and an imperial emblem of the Mexica is used to convey high political rank. The Mexica are shown at the same historical moment, during their stay in Chapultepec, but lacking this prestigious attribute. Even more telling is a subsequent foundation scene, where the first ruler of Tepechpan rests on a reed

I mages of R ank by R egion

throne placed directly over the glyph of his altepetl, with a cave pictured traditionally as the open mouth of the earth monster behind him (figure 3.21). The latter places him in the pathway between his town and the underworld, signaling that the foundation of Tepechpan and the rule of the founder had been divinely sanctioned (Diel 2008, 43). Surprisingly enough, this convention evokes an old panMesoamerican concept of rulership going back to Olmec times—expressed by pairing the monarch and the cave—that alluded to the ruler’s role as an intermediary with the supernatural. Icxiquauhtli wears the xiuhhuitzolli and a white cape with a red border, also emitting blue speech scrolls; all these details attest to his recently acquired status as a legitimate tlatoani. Thus, in spite of his Chichimec identification, the founder of Tepechpan is pictured in this local manuscript in the way typical for imperial Tenochtitlan (Olko 2005, 401). At the same time, it is difficult to resist the close analogy with the rulers’ list in the Florentine Codex, where not only paramount rulers but also Chichimec leaders are represented as fully legitimate huei tlatoque. The dialogue with Tenochtitlan exceeds the simple appropriation of its iconography of rank: it entails a profound renegotiation of the status of Tepechpan versus the powerful sovereign, often resorting to historical manipulation. The latter was facilitated by the introduction of the parallel story of the Mexica in the lower register of the tira, developed alongside the local events presented in the upper row. Meaningfully, the founder of Tepechpan appears in his royal costume much earlier than the Mexica leaders; moreover, when he is enthroned over his altepetl’s place sign, the Mexica are still wanderers. In a clear effort to represent their establishment as earlier, the tira locates the founding of Tepechpan in the year 11 Rabbit (1334), while placing the establishment of Tenochtitlan either in 4 Tochtli (1366) or in 7 House (1369), instead of 2 House (1325), a standard date for this event in the historical tradition (Noguez 1978, 66; Boone 1998, 187; see also figure 3.22).46 In other words, Tepechpan is presented as being culturally superior to and politically more advanced than Tenochtitlan, for it became an autonomous altepetl at the time when the Mexica were still living in a subject state and lacked their own establishment. This perspective is additionally strengthened by picturing the Mexica settlers in Tepechpan after the expulsion from Chapultepec, shown submitting their cult objects in a possible act of allegiance (Diel 2008, 36, 45, 49). All subsequent preconquest rulers of Tepechpan are represented in the same way as the powerful monarch of Colhuacan, Coxcoxtli, and the tlatoque of Tenochtitlan: seated on tepotzoicpalli, wearing xiuhhuitzolli diadems and white capes with red borders. Nobles or lords who had not yet acceded to the throne, as in the case of Quaquauhtzin depicted in the year 1440, are usually seated on reed

235

236

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.21. Foundation of Tepechpan, Tira de Tepechpan (Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

seats without backrests, also in full accordance with the standardized iconography of rank attested in pictorial manuscripts from Tenochtitlan.47 All this makes local rulers equal in rank to the imperial overlords, and the already-mentioned alliance with the Mexica through the marriage between Quaquauhtzin and Xochtzin substantiates their mutual relationship. Rather than admitting the subordinated status implied by royal hypergamy, it signals a conscious break in ties with Tetzcoco as the political hegemon of Tepechpan (Diel 2008, 61), although we have to admit a possibility that this attitude received additional emphasis in postconquest times when the document was made. Local political and cultural strategies build up in the colonial section. The first tlatoani whose rule continued into the early colonial period is don Hernando Teyahualohuatzin, who naturally continues his preconquest appearance, but an abrupt change comes with don Diego Yolloxochitl, ruling between 1530 and 1539, who rests on a European status marker, the curule chair. His mortuary bundle is

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.22. Accession of Caltzin in Tepechpan (upper register) and the foundation of Tenochtitlan (lower register), Tira de Tepechpan (Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

adorned with the Spanish crown,48 hereafter the obligatory insignia of all subsequent rulers of Tepechpan (figure 3.23). His successor, don Cristóbal Maldonado, enthroned in 1540, combines a Spanish chair and crown with a white cape. He no longer preserves his Nahuatl name but adopts a prestigious Spanish surname in accordance with the widespread tendency among the native nobility in the decades after the conquest (Lockhart 1992, 123–24). The native iconography of rank undergoes the most profound transformation in the image of the leader who took the office in 1559, which is reduced to the mere sign of a European crown. Thus, this foreign symbol of royal power is exploited by a native painter in a way closely following the preconquest conventions, that is, as the graphic sign standing for the event of accession. Interesting implications can be deduced when comparing the imagery of the colonial native leaders of Tepechpan with those of Tenochtitlan in the same manuscript. Omitting the non-dynastic governors, the local painter uses the Spanish insignia only with don Diego de San Francisco Tehuetzquititzin, making this innovation

237

238

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.23. Colonial rulers of Tepechpan: the mortuary bundle of don Cristóbal Maldonado and don Bartolomé de Santiago seated on the curule seat and wearing the Spanish crown; Tira de Tepechpan (Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

considerably later than in the case of Tepechpan. This pictorial maneuvering probably conveyed a message typical for early colonial rhetoric adopted by native communities: these leaders of Tepechpan accepted Spanish political authority much earlier than the Mexica, whose resistance to the new overlords may have been additionally highlighted by the scene of the execution of Quauhtemoc, accused by Cortés of plotting against the Spaniards on their way to Honduras in 1525. No less meaningful is the image of a speaking eagle between the death of Quauhtemoc and the accession of the next legitimate tlatoani, don Diego Huanitzin, a visual reference to the office of quauhtlatoani during this time (Noguez 1978, 124–25). Thus, in contrast to the unbroken continuity of Tepechpan’s own ruling line, the portrayal of the Mexica communicates a delegitimizing dynastic rupture in Tenochtitlan (Diel 2008, 76, 80–81). Negotiating the position of their subject altepetl, the authors of the Tira de Tepechpan manipulated both remote and recent past. As has been correctly pointed out by Diel, “because of the similar underlying structures of the Aztec and Spanish empires, the patrons of and contributors to the Tira could rely on pre-conquest strategic precedents to ensure Tepechpan’s survival as it transitioned from being an Aztec subject to a Spanish one” (Diel 2008, 125). However, were they indeed “caught in an ambivalent struggle, negotiating between assimilation and autonomy” (Diel 2008, 10)? In the Nahuatl world these attitudes were by no means opposing or contradictory, for any novelty could be appropriated to strengthen local pride, position, self-government, identity, or claims thereto. In other words, borrowing did not entail allegiance and change of identity, while adopted elements, be they material things or ideas, rather than persisting as something foreign, tended to be identified with precontact antecedents (Lockhart 1991, 5). Thus, though the Tira de Tepechpan is, to my knowledge, the only sixteenthcentury native manuscript that employs a European crown as an attribute of indigenous rulers,49 it is extremely skillful in applying entirely native rules to the Spanish

I mages of R ank by R egion

borrowings and smoothly combining them with the traditional pictorial language. This is done with the same aptitude as the adoption of the imperial style and iconography of Tenochtitlan to lay claims for autonomy and emancipation within the political domain of Tetzcoco. As a whole, this manuscript reflects salient strategies of the local nobility: first to show their past rulers as equal in rank with the imperial rulers and even more advanced in some political accomplishments, and, second, after the conquest, entirely adapting the insignia of the new overlords more quickly than anybody else. Whereas they were not isolated in such attempts (an image of an entirely Hispanized native governor appears, for example, in the Códice de Santa Cruz Tlamapa no. 3, also a pictorial manuscript from the Valley of Mexico), the claim to the royal crown is still stunning at the time when the document was made, for, unlike the folding chair, this object was not among the European status items adopted by the native nobility. On the other hand, the nobility’s ownership of swords, horses, and all sorts of prestigious Spanish attire is underrepresented in the pictorial sources, leading us to imagine native leaders as using only their traditional attributes, rooted in the past, as an essential source of legitimacy. As we have seen, when foreign items were incorporated into this imagery, these were usually associated with Spanish-introduced functions such as those of municipal officials. It is then clear that the authors and supervisors of the Tira de Tepechpan in their concern with the unbroken continuity and survival of their altepetl, constructed a “conceptual imagery” of their rulers that was based on insignia quite unrivaled in their prestige. An interesting document also comes from another community of the Acolhua state, Cempoallan (Zempoala), located in the present state of Hidalgo, farther to the north from Tepechpan. Its map accompanying the local Relación geográfica betrays strong Mexica influence and only vague links with Tetzcocan manuscripts (Robertson [1959] 1994, 187–89).50 Animal-skin capes of the founders could be accepted as a link to the Acolhua migration stories, but images of local rulers follow Mexica conventions: they are shown on low reed seats without backrests and wear xiuhhuitzolli diadems as well as white capes (figure 3.24). Glosses identify them as postconquest rulers, attesting to the continuous association of the local nobility with preconquest attributes. Similarities with the Tenochca style seem congruent with the fact that this altepetl became a tribute-paying dependency of Tenochtitlan as early as during Itzcoatl’s reign (Hodge and Blanton 1996, 229), but Tetzcocan sources claim Cempoallan as one of its tributaries (Offner 1984, 100–4). The evidence discussed above, with all its limitations, permits us to outline the general characteristics of Mexica and Tetzcocan conventions of the iconography of rank. Royal imagery associated with Tenochtitlan typically employs turquoise diadems (xiuhhuitzolli), capes with the turquoise design (xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli) or

239

240

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.24. Mapa de Cempoala (courtesy of the Benson Latin American Collection, University of Texas at Austin).

their simplified blue versions, and reed thrones with backs (tepotzoicpalli). The main attribute of a tlatoani in Tetzcoco, however, is the tepotzoicpalli. Also common for Acolhua manuscripts are Chichimec attributes that are continued into the “sedentary” period, such as the coçoyahualolli feather head-adornment or bows and arrows. In spite of the widely accepted modern interpretation, however, these items

I mages of R ank by R egion

were not equated with a barbarous state of existence but were accorded considerable prestige in the Tetzcocan tradition and probably also by other altepetl sharing the Chichimec identity. There is some overlap between the imagery of Tetzcoco and Tenochtitlan, for example, in the use of reed thrones or coçoyahualolli devices. However, the turquoise diadem, the paramount symbol of royalty in Tenochtitlan, is almost entirely absent from Tetzcoco, except for serving as an adornment indicating the high status of foreign war captives in the Códice en Cruz and appearing in the Tira de Tepechpan in a conscious exploitation of the iconography of power of the Mexica. The same holds true for the turquoise royal cape attested in only one pictorial source linked to the Acolhua region, the Codex Ixtlilxochitl, where it forms part of detailed and heavily Europeanized images of Tetzcocan leaders (figure 2.31). This absence is even more surprising if we consider the surviving examples of the adoption of this status item in imperial provinces. Does it imply an intentional Tetzcocan strategy of rejecting the symbols of rank associated with Tenochtitlan and adhering to their own prestigious repertory, at least in the pictorial conventions? Even if sources associated with Tenochtitlan reveal a well-established canon of elite imagery, due to the paucity of evidence we know very little about the extent to which it was shared by other important altepetl of the Valley of Mexico, except those in the Acolhua region. One of the few images of native rulers that is very similar to those found in Mexica manuscripts is contained in the Mapa catastral de Tepoztlan, Panhuacan, Ayapango y Tlanahuac (Nationalbibliothek, Vienna) from the Amaquemecan region in the southern part of the Valley. In this economic document, local lords are seated on reed thrones with backrests, wearing turquoise diadems and decorated capes. Similarly, the royal cape of the Mexica, the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli, together with the prestigious quetzallapiloni hair binder, is worn by a native lord depicted in the Codex Valeriano (1574) in possibly the same region, for most of the personages depicted are linked to the greenstone glyph that may designate the place sign of Chalco. The presence of these status items signals either Mexica inspiration or simply the sharing of a similar iconography of rank that may have predated the political dominance of Tenochtitlan. Similarly, it is difficult to reconstruct other local conventions of manuscript painting that could have existed in the Valley of Mexico. Furthermore, we cannot be entirely sure that traits belonging to the core repertory of Tenochtitlan, but found in imperial provinces and in other areas involved in cultural or political interaction with the Aztec state, indeed reflect Mexica impact. At times the ambiguity can be reduced when additional data on the relationship with the Aztec state, including archaeological evidence, are available. Another serious difficulty is the postconquest date of the majority of available sources that reveal strategies of local nobility, which may not always be reliable when attempting a reconstruction of preconquest trends.

241

242

I mages of R ank by R egion

Beyond the Valley of Mexico: Northern Regions

The area extending north of the Valley of Mexico, inhabited mainly by Otomi and Nahuatl speakers, was organized into tributary provinces encircling the independent territory of Metztitlan to the northeast and extending westward along the frontier with the Tarascan domain in Michoacan. Earlier, much of this territory probably formed part of the Toltec and after that Tepaneca states. Extant pictorial sources come from the former tributary provinces of Xilotepec, Axocopan, and Atotonilco de Pedraza as well as the supposedly strategic territory of Chiapan. Their integration into the Aztec empire was particularly early, for many conquests in this region are attributed to Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina and were continued by his successors (Smith and Berdan 1996b, 266–67), which helps to explain the imagery found in colonial pictorial documents. Perhaps the most telling example of a Mexica-influenced manuscript from this region are the Anales de Tula, coming from a historically important place—the modern state of Hidalgo—that houses the ruins of ancient Tollan, the object of special esteem and reverence for the Nahuas because of their claims to Toltec heritage. The links between Late Postclassic Tula and Tenochtitlan were particularly strong: the huei tlatoani Axayacatl married the daughter of a ruler of Tula, and the son from this union inherited the throne there. In turn, his daughter married Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin himself, becoming the mother of don Pedro Moctezuma (Davies 1980, 8). No wonder that the rulers of Tula are shown seated on tepo­tzo­ icpalli thrones and wearing capes and turquoise diadems, in accordance with the Mexica style, appreciable also in the precision and quality of line in the imagery of this manuscript. Possible affinity with the iconography of rank of Tenochtitlan is also manifest in the Mapa de Atenco-Mizquiahuala, coming from the former province of Axocopan and accompanying a local Relación geográfica (figure 3.25). Local rulers depicted in front of the principal churches of Mizquiahuala, Tezontepec, and Santa María de Atengo, perhaps personages ruling before the Spanish conquest (Glass 1964, 56; Rodríguez Cano and Torres Rodríguez 2001, 109–11), are seated on reed thrones, wearing royal diadems and tlalpiloni hair binders. Reinforcing even more the correspondence with Tenochca imagery is one of the capes, evoking the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli with a red border. Similar conventions can be found in the cartographichistorical document known as the Códice de Nicolás Flores and coming from the region of Iztactlachco to the north of Ixmiquilpan, in the northern limits of the province of Axocopan. Depicted rulers sport blue diadems and red tilmatli bordered with blue, probably representing a local trait, for red capes seem uncommon in the imagery of the Valley of Mexico.

I mages of R ank by R egion

Local painters also employed conventions of representing colonial officials similar to those developed in the Valley of Mexico. The Códice de Otlazpan, an economic manuscript from a community belonging to the province of Atotonilco before the Spanish conquest, pictures governors and the members of municipal government according to preconquest patterns (though turquoise diadems are absent), but uses certain attributes of Spanish-introduced functions, like varas in the case of judges or a key held by a mayordomo. A wider presence of basically the same conventions is confirmed by the content of the Códice de Santa María Nativitas Atengo from the already-mentioned locality of Santa María de Atengo, where the staff of office is held by an alcalde, while a key is an attribute of a steward (mayordomo). Created in connection with establishing tribute obligations, this document, in other details as well, fully matches the imagery typical for central Mexico. The governor of Atengo, don Martín de Porras, lacks any Spanish status markers but rests on a reed throne, wearing a white red-bordered cape and a loincloth, rather anachronistic considering that the manuscript was painted around 1569 (Sterpone 2001, 65–69). Preconquest iconography of rank evinces considerable longevity in a much later document, the Códice de Huichapan, made in the first half of the seventeenth century in the area of the former imperial province of Xilotepec, conquered repeatedly by several Mexica rulers (Smith and Berdan 1996b, 266). Xilotepec, the major town in the region, was the head of an Otomi kingdom in the frontier area between Nahua communities to the south and Chichimec populations to the north. The Códice de Huichapan is composed of several parts, including alphabetic annals of the convent of San Mateo in Huichapan (Hueichiapan) and a traditional regional pictorial year-count narrative spanning the years 1403 through 1528, accompanied by an alphabetic text in Otomi with brief insertions in Nahuatl and Spanish (Wright Carr 1997, 446). It has been proposed that the pictorial annals section betrays the characteristics of the genre and pictorial style of Tenochtitlan (Boone 1996, 186) and indeed, in spite of the late date of the entire manuscript, this part was surely copied from an earlier prototype. These probable inspirations notwithstanding, a local style visible in the crude line and the canon of human figures is a salient feature of the document. The content of the annals evokes strategies similar to those that we have already seen in the Tira de Tepechpan and its deliberate association with Tenochtitlan. References to the Mexica capital and historical developments taking place in the Valley of Mexico are intertwined with local events, whereas the huei tlatoque of Tenochtitlan appear along with the rulers of Xilotepec. Thus, an episode of crucial importance is the Tepanec war, depicted over the 1428 year sign, which also marks the change of status of the rulers of Tenochtitlan from vassals to sovereigns. These things are expressed through the meaningful combination of status items, bringing

243

Figure 3.25. Mapa de Atenco-Mizquiahuala (courtesy of the Benson Latin American Collection, University of Texas at Austin).

I mages of R ank by R egion

to mind conventions employed by the painters of the Primeros Memoriales. The winner in this military conflict, Itzcoatl, receives the right to wear the prestigious royal cape with the turquoise design (xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli) and the royal diadem, painted yellow in accordance with postconquest trends. He is accompanied by two other lords, similarly clad, one of whom may be the cihuacoatl Tlacaellel (figure 3.26). Other rulers, including those of Xilotepec, are seated on jaguar-skin thrones, the same as those associated with the Mexica huei tlatoque, and wear the prestigious temillotl hairstyle expressing high military rank, as well as red capes with the quilted design resembling that of the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli or, in one case, with the border of eyes (tenixyo), typical for Tenochca costume repertory. The message of this pictorial document seems transparent: the local account of the past stems from the history of a powerful sovereign, Tenochtitlan, and is structured around events of both domestic and pan-regional importance. This seems to lend legitimacy and prestige to local leaders whose autonomy and high status are expressed through their eminent insignia. Beyond the Valley of Mexico: Southern Regions

Moving southward along the western perimeters of the domains controlled by the Triple Alliance, we reach the Toluca Valley, with its major center of Tollocan. In the fifteenth century it became the head of an imperial province forming a buffer zone in relation to the Tarascan state, destined to play a significant role in the empire’s western frontier strategy. This area received settlers from the Valley of Mexico and housed military garrisons and the lordly estates of Aztec lords as well as their tribute collectors, and this imperial influence has been detected by scholars in material remains, especially in the important center of Calixtlahuaca (Smith and Berdan 1996b, 268–69; Umberger 1996b, 154–67). It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that in this site, often viewed in the past as the diagnostic example of imperial impact in the Toluca Valley, the widespread distribution of “Aztec” architectural and sculptural forms and styles either precedes the Mexica conquests or reveals local features and prototypes (Umberger 2007, 188–94; Smith 2008, 54). The Toluca Valley was a multilingual region with numerous speakers of Nahuatl, Matlatzinca, Otomi, and Mazahua languages. This composite ethnic background is reflected in a pictorial document from the community of Tlacotepec in this region. The Códice de Santiago Tlacotepec, dated 1565, was used in a legal dispute and betrays little European influence in either style or content. What survives is a copy made for the court and consisting of two documents provided by the litigants, Pablo Ocelotl of Matlatzinca origin and a Nahua named Alonso Gonzáles (Ruiz Medrano and Noguez 2004, 29). Indeed, although both seem to reveal local style

245

246

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.26. Códice de Huichapan, fol. 26: (a) Itzcoatl and his wife; and (b) Itzcoatl with two other rulers (Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico; drawings by Justyna Olko).

(with possible affiliations with the pictorial traditions of the Puebla region), the one brought by the Nahuatl speaker shows a possible inspiration by the conventions typical for the Valley of Mexico, suggesting that iconographic differences reflect the ethnic affiliations of the persons who commissioned them. They both have their ancestors pictured in the convention typical for noble persons, clad in white capes and seated on low seats or pillows next to their residences, rendered according to the typical convention for representing “lordly houses” (teccalli or tecpan). These immediate predecessors of the litigants legitimize their rights to the disputed parcels of land that, together with their owners, occupy the central space of both documents and are surrounded by year signs painted on the outer border. Although no similar arrangement is known in the manuscripts coming from the Valley of Mexico, the use of the year-count may relate to the latter’s pictorial traditions. Especially striking is the simplified version of the year signs, reduced to simple dots in the testimony of Alonso Gonzáles, which bears similarity to several Nahua manuscripts (Ruiz Medrano and Noguez 2004, 52). It is in this document that we also find images of colonial rulers, seated on reed thrones and clad in standard white capes (figure 3.27). The lack of the xiuhhuitzolli raises serious doubt about possible Mexica influence, suggesting instead that we are dealing with panregional conventions shared by the Nahuas (and probably also other groups) across the broad area of central Mexico. Details of this imagery follow general patterns that we have already seen elsewhere. The first ruler emits the speech volute, possibly identifying him as a tlatoani according to the preconquest convention, but is followed by governors lacking such volutes and, in the case of the last two, holding Spanish varas. Thus, even if foreign attributes are not immediately adopted for native rulers, the ongoing change is visualized by the replacement of speech scrolls, a traditional sign of tlatoque, by staffs of office reflecting the new base of their role.

I mages of R ank by R egion

From the few images of the Códice de Santiago Tlacotepec, it is very risky to make deductions about either local pre-Hispanic iconography of rank or its response to the Aztec imperial impact. However, more obvious evidence bespeaking possible links with Tenochtitlan is found in a neighboring tributary province having its main center of Malinalco located in the southern end of the Toluca Valley. This zone was conquered by Axayacatl around 1476; his successor Ahuitzotl ordered the construction of a ritual compound on the rocky hill overlooking the town (Smith 2008, 63). It is distinguished by the famous cavelike temple cut in live rock, guarded by sculptures of jaguars at its entrance, and with an interior alluding to the symbolism of eagles and jaguars, the metaphoric exemplary warriors in the ideology of Tenochtitlan (Townsend 1982). No preconquest images of local or imperial elites have survived in this place, but possible survivals of the local iconography of rank can be found in the poorly known Códice de Malinalco, made on deerskin and kept in this community. In this complex manuscript, combining cartographic, genealogical, and historical presentations, rulers are shown resting on reed thrones, wearing xiuhhuitzolli diadems and white capes bordered with red. Those lacking the prestigious headdress are probably of lower ranks, while in several cases the sign of xiuhhuitzolli is attached to their names or titles, also in accordance with the graphic conventions attested in Tenochtitlan. In spite of its relatively late and uncertain date, perhaps the end of the sixteenth or beginning of the seventeenth century, the pictorial content reveals striking analogies with the imagery typical for the Valley of Mexico. At the same time, however, it evokes characteristics of a manuscript genre popular in the neighboring areas of Morelos and Puebla, and based on the combination of the map format with elements of genealogies and historical events. Close analogies in terms of general conventions and the way of representing the personages can be found in the Lienzo de Tetlama in Morelos, traditionally dated to the sixteenth century, but the Códice de Malinalco gives a general impression of following the preconquest style more closely. Farther to the east lay populous tributary provinces corresponding to the areas of a local conquest state, Quauhnahuac, and several lesser altepetl forming the province of Huaxtepec. Quauhnahuac, modern Cuernavaca, was one of the more powerful Early Aztec states, possibly subordinated by the Tepanec polity of Azcapotzalco and subsequently conquered by Tenochtitlan. The nobility of this center strictly interacted with the Mexica elite through marriage alliances, gift exchange, and common participation in ceremonies, resulting in its close integration with the Aztec state (Smith and Berdan 1996b, 270–71; Smith 2008, 33–34). The extant modest sample of pictorial manuscripts from this area probably does not reflect the richness of its preconquest traditions. The major surviving group of local documents

247

Figure 3.27. Códice de Santiago Tlacotepec (BNF 32), document presented by Alonso Gonzáles (Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.28. Códices del Marquesado del Valle de Oaxaca, native rulers depicted in the documents from Tezoyuca and Taquitenango (courtesy of Archivo General de la Nación, Hospital de Jesús, Leg. 276, Exp. 79).

is known as the Códices del Marquesado del Valle de Oaxaca (Santiago Sánchez 2003). Most of these documents are property plans, but some are accompanied by representations of nobles from various localities in the Cuernavaca region, who presented these documents in 1549 in the legal dispute against don Martín Cortés, accused of illegal appropriation of their lands. Local leaders are usually seated on reed thrones and clad in plain capes, except for the documents from Tezoyuca, where a ruler rests on the reed throne while sporting the xiuhhuitzolli diadem and holding a Spanish staff, and from Taquitenango with its protagonist—probably a native governor mentioned in the text of the petition—similarly seated on the tepotzoicpalli, wearing native clothes and grasping the vara (figure 3.28). He also emits the speech scroll, which may have been intended as an attribute of his office or a sign of conversation with a Spaniard facing him across the disputed field and emitting the volute in the same way. These images, and especially the use of the xiuhhuitzolli, closely resemble colonial representations of rulers and nobles in the sources from the Valley of Mexico. It is noteworthy that although Spanish varas de justicia were usually pictured with colonial judges, sometimes, as in the Códice en Cruz from the Tetzcocan region, they may appear as an attribute of colonial gobernadores as also seems to be the case with the document from Taquitenango. In spite of these iconographic correspondences, the style of images from the Marquesado differs considerably from Aztec canons. We note similar pictorial conventions in the Mapa del Coatlan del Río, in fact probably coming from Chontalcoatlan in Guerrero (BNF 102; Barreto Mark 1986, 336–41), not far from Coatlan del Río in Morelos. According to an accompanying text, this manuscript was presented by a local gobernador (don Juan) and nobles, but it is possible it was made before that, for the ruler who appears on the map is glossed as don Gabriel (Barreto Mark 1986, 339). The main focus of this cartographic-­historical document are pre-Hispanic rulers depicted in a continuous line that seems to affirm the smooth transfer of power across generations,

249

250

I mages of R ank by R egion

apparently legitimizing the present order and affirming the continuity of the local government (figure 3.29). Again, the style has little in common with Aztec pictorial traditions, and the iconography is a standardized version found both in the Valley of Mexico manuscripts and locally, especially evoking the images of the nobility in the Códice de Malinalco just discussed. The rulers of Chontalcoatlan are seated on the tepotzo­icpalli thrones, wearing turquoise diadems and white capes with red borders. However, unlike many traditional native documents, the postconquest governor is shown in a hybrid costume; while preserving a native cape, he rests on a curule chair and displays a Spanish hat. Thus, even if accentuating the continuity seems to be an important purpose of this pictorial record, the complete perpetuation of the preconquest iconography of rank was apparently not desirable. The transformations of this imagery across the sixteenth century can be appreciated in a legal document from the region of Huaxtepec and dated between 1592 and 1604 (AGN, Tierras, vol. 1535, exp. 3, fol.1; see also figure 3.30). It was presented by Juan Rodríguez Vega and his wife doña María de Guzmán in a claim for lands in nearby Huitzillan. Whereas females depicted in this manuscript wear entirely traditional costumes, an interesting mixture of native and Spanish attributes was employed to create the images of two bearded noblemen. They are seated on low stools belonging to the regional tradition as confirmed by manuscripts from the nearby state of Puebla; their European hats, shirts, and shoes are combined with indigenous status markers such as flowered capes, tobacco tubes, and huacalxochitl flowers held in their hands. It would be tempting to imagine that this synthetic costume was actually worn by local nobles of that time. Farther to the south and southwest, in the area corresponding with the present state of Guerrero, extended other imperial provinces of which Tlapan stands out for its remarkable pictorial record. This region received strong Aztec influence in the last decades of the fifteenth century. Tlapanec was the main language spoken here, but Nahuatl, Mixtec, and Yope were also in use. Ethnically mixed communities formed numerous little states, many of which were dominated by Tlachinollan before the establishment of Mexica control, formalized by the creation of the tributary province of Tlapan. Apart from a calpixqui official residing in the head town of Tlapan, sources report tribute collectors at Amaxac and Tetenango (Smith, Berdan 1996b, 276–77). In addition to documented imperial conquests carried out in the region, there is evidence of resettlements of groups originating in the Valley of Mexico and the founding of new communities (Dehouve 1972; Jiménez Padilla, Villela 1998, 44). Accounts of these events are contained in the pictorial Lienzos de Chiepetlan (Galarza 1972, 26),51 revealing numerous traits of the iconography of rank typical for the Valley of Mexico and especially Tenochtitlan. They include images of rulers seated on reed seats with backrests, adorned with xiuhhuitzolli

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.29. Mapa del Coatlán del Río (BNF 102; Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

diadems and capes bordered with eyes (tenixyo), as well as emitting speech volutes. Other protagonists have the prestigious temillotl hairdo associated with high military rank; some of the warriors even wear jaguar and eagle costumes expressing the ethos of the Mexica and probably other Aztec groups. At the same time, however, the Lienzo de Chiepetlan 1 seems to betray a local trait, not attested in the available pictorial evidence from the Valley of Mexico: trophy heads displayed by the victors. The same convention is found in the Codex Azoyú 2 from the region, and a possible variant of this imagery can be seen in the representations of captives tied by ropes in yet another local document known as the Palimpsesto Veinte Mazorcas (both of them discussed below), also paralleled by the figure of a bound captive shown in the Lienzo de Chiepetlan 1. In view of the limited pictorial evidence from localities in the core area of the Aztec empire (other than Tenochtitlan and Tetzcoco), the

251

252

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.30. Litigio sobre tierras en el pueblo de Huitzila, Morelos (courtesy of Archivo General de la Nación, Mexico, Tierras, vol. 1535, exp. 3, fol.1).

origin of this feature is not entirely clear, but merging with a local tradition remains one of the possible explanations. One of the most interesting pictorial records associated with that area is known today as the Palimpsesto Veinte Mazorcas,52 a complex document painted by at least three hands and still eluding a comprehensive interpretation. Closely following the preconquest style, it features numerous rulers displaying bound captives as a tangible sign of their military achievements, in accordance with an old Mesoamerican convention that disappeared quickly in postconquest times (figure 3.31). In addition, by picturing local leaders resting on reed thrones and wearing xiuhhui­tzolli diadems, this manuscript establishes clear links with the imagery typical for Tenoch­titlan. This similarity nothwithstanding, we can also see typically local status items such as copper or bronze axes—weapons commonly used in Guerrero, bordering on the metallurgical Tarascan region—wielded by members of the nobility. Another local feature is the small shields pictured beside some personages, paralleled by other images from the Tlapan region. In spite of these local flavors, similarities with the repertory of status items typical for the Valley of Mexico crop up in most of the extant pictorial documents from this part of Guerrero. Two later cartographic-historical manuscripts, the Lienzo de Aztatepec y Citlaltepec and Lienzo de Totomixtlahuaca, although made in a simplified style,53 continue basically the same elements of the iconography of rank, including reed thrones and diadems.54 Among good examples are also tribute records from the region of Ohuapan in the

I mages of R ank by R egion

former imperial province of Tepequaquilco to the northwest of Tlapan. Known as the Códice de Ohuapan and the Códice de Tecuiciapan, they feature early-colonial native officials in a way strikingly similar to the standardized conventions developed in Nahua manuscripts and again equipped with diadems and reed thrones. The sharing of Mexica conventions of the iconography of rank may have originated in the conquest of the local state of Tlapan-Tlachinollan by the Mexica ruler Ahuitzotl in 1486. We learn about the history and nature of this political relationship from the Codices Azoyú 1 and 2, manuscripts conveying the perspective of the kingdom of Tlapan-Tlachinollan and its nobility. In addition to relating the dynastic succession and local events in the convention of the annals genre, the reverse of the Codex Azoyú 2 contains a list of tributes paid to Tenochtitlan. The year-count genre itself could have been adopted as an effect of imperial influence, for this kind of pictorial presentation may have been particularly favored by the Mexica to accommodate their official history (Boone 1996, 186–87; 2000, 198). However, as we have seen, the iconographic links with the Valley of Mexico are by no means limited to the examples of local annals but show up also in economic and cartographichistorical documents. Local political history is traced back to the foundation of the polity of TlapanTlachinollan in 1300 in the Codex Azoyú 1 and to the beginning of its expansion in the early fifteenth century in the Codex Azoyú 2, and continues into postconquest times, up to 1565 and 1564, respectively. In spite of sharing important stylistic features and pictorial conventions, these two manuscripts reveal important differences in the imagery of local rulers. In the Codex Azoyú 1 they rest on low stools, wear white capes, and hold fans as well as incense pouches; the latter are pictured the same way as the xiquipilli in the imagery known from the Valley of Mexico. Some of the personages, especially in the earlier section, also carry tobacco gourds (known as yetecomatl among the Nahuas) on their backs. Both an incense bag and a tobacco gourd were typical priestly attributes, closely associated with the rulers of Tenochtitlan in their “sacrificial” images. In fact, tobacco gourds figure in the reverse of the Codex Azoyú 2 as attributes of Mexica tribute collectors assigned to the province of Tlapan. It is therefore possible that the content of the Codex Azoyú 1 was inspired by the Tenochca imagery, or at least identified as such, even if low stools and fans of the rulers of Tlachinollan follow what appears to be a local style. Also, images of Tlapan rulers depicted in the Codex Humboldt Fragment 1—a manuscript long considered to continue the list of tribute on the reverse of the Codex Azoyú 2, but most recently argued to be a separate document (Oudijk 2012, 154)— are in Mexica style (fig. 3.32). It has been suggested that the commissioners of the Codex Azoyú 1 represented the Tlapanec division of Tlachinollan, hence its more local style, whereas the authors of the second manuscript were linked to the Nahua

253

Figure 3.31. Palimpsesto Veinte Mazorcas (BNF 391; Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.32. Codex Humboldt Fragment 1, fol. 25, fragment (courtesy of the Staatsbibliothek in Berlin).

subdivision of Tlapan and its nobility (Oudijk 2012, 169). However, despite the fact that the Codex Azoyú 1 indeed follows local conventions much more closely than the Codex Azoyú 2, many of its elements seem to be nevertheless directly inspired by the style of the Valley of Mexico. A significant change is seen in both manuscripts in the period between 1461 and 1467, marking the beginning of the Mexica influence in Tlachinollan. New political circumstances are signaled by the meeting between an important personage from Tenochtitlan and a local ruler identified by a rain name-sign (and a Nahuatl gloss “Quiyauhtzin” in the Codex Azoyú 2). Thanks to additional information provided by the Lienzo de Tlapa and the reverse of Codex Azoyú 2, his name can be identified as 4 Rain (Oudijk 2012, 136). The representative of the Aztec state is accompanied by a name glyph consisting of an insect (fly or bee) placed over water.55 The ruler of Tlapan-Tlachinollan is shown in an extended version of the formerly used costume. Unlike his predecessors, 4 Rain is seated on the reed throne wearing the turquoise diadem as well as a white cape bordered with eyes (tenixyo), following his interlocutor from Tenochtitlan. He still preserves attributes of earlier rulers, such as an incense bag and a fan. The same scene is recorded in the Codex Azoyú 2, which provides more clues for its interpretation (figure 3.33). The sequence of earlier rulers is lacking in this manuscript but the iconography of rank seems even more Mexicanized, since certain attributes, such as the turquoise diadem or the reed throne, already make their appearance before the memorable meeting with the representative of Tenochtitlan.

255

256

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.33. Quiyauhtzin, the ruler of Tlapan, shown wounded and meeting the representative of Tenochtitlan, possibly Axayacatl, Codex Azoyú 2 (Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico; drawing by Justyna Olko).

In this very scene, 4 Rain is seated on the tepotzoicpalli and displays a Mexica royal blue cape, the turquoise diadem, as well as a pouch tied over his arms. This last detail is strikingly similar to pouches carried by rulers in the Códice en Cruz from Acolhuacan, which again suggests a link with the Valley of Mexico. The local leader is shown in exactly the same way as the representative of Tenochtitlan (except that the pouch is missing in the latter’s image), identified by the fly or bee glyph similar to that pictured in the other manuscript. Moreover, the xiuhhuitzolli diadem sign is attached to his name glyph to mark the new status based on the relationship with the powerful polity. The new role of the ruler of Tlachinollan is also implied by an accompanying gloss “quiyauhtzin tlacatecuhtli,” for in accordance with the Nahua glyphic convention, the turquoise-diadem sign could be employed to indicate both the word teuctli and the title of tlacateuctli (Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 1v; Codex Mendoza, fols. 17v, 18r) given to governors assigned to imperial provinces.

I mages of R ank by R egion

It is not clear what kind of relationship between powerful Tenochtitlan and the local kingdom alluded to by the Codices Azoyú was established at that point: a form of alliance or political clientship. It seems probable that the initial relationship goes back to around 1460, when Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina subjugated the northern province of Quiyauhteopan, and Tlachinollan apparently managed to enter some sort of alliance with Tenochtitlan, avoiding direct subordination as an imperial province (Gutiérrez Mendoza, König, Brito 2009, 51). The “meeting scene” seems to refer to such an alliance or veiled dependency. Moreover, the pan-regional importance of this event is additionally confirmed by the presence of the same episode in the Lienzo de Chiepetlan 1 (Gutiérrez Mendoza, Medina Lima 2008, 104). In the rhetoric of the Codices Azoyú, the acceptance of an external affiliation clearly augments the prestige of local rulership. It is meaningful that the arrival of Mexica influence is expressed in the pictorial record through a change in costume and adoption of foreign insignia of rank. After this episode, followed later by an actual military conquest of Tlapan-Tlachinollan in 1486, the Tenochca repertory of status symbols enters the imagery of both manuscripts permanently but is more salient in the Codex Azoyú 2. On one of the following folios, a local ruler wears the complete costume of rulers of Tenochtitlan, including both the turquoise diadem and the most prestigious royal cape, the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli tenixyo, depicted in a surprisingly faithful way. The same Mexicanized dress of the rulers of Tlapan-Tlachinollan is shown on the reverse, which presents the list of tributes paid to the sovereign. It seems significant that prior to the Mexica conquest the painter of the Codex Azoyú 2 employed the toponym of Tlapan-Tlachinollan, whereas the image of the conquest only includes the toponym of Tlachinollan, as if it were only this division that was subjugated. If this interpretation is correct, the faction of Tlapan, possibly of strong Nahua compostion and contrary to the Tlapanec affiliation of Tlachinollan, could have been seen as the base of the alliance with Tenochtitlan (Oudijk 2012, 138, 141–142). Thus, the manuscripts from Azoyú seem to reveal local conventions in the iconography of rank as well as the conscious adoption of the Mexica styles.56 Indeed, an important strategy of the Aztec state was aimed at encouraging conquered provincial elite groups to participate in a broader “elite culture” and cooperation with the empire. This inclusion could have been based on the spread of particular kinds of elite status items like codices, jewelry, and apparel. For the local nobility the emulation of prestigious foreign symbols of power or the actual right to don them played a role in highlighting their own status. Local strategies were also aimed toward quite tangible benefits. Interestingly enough, in 1511 Atepec was annexed to the province, followed in 1515 by the conquest of Hueycatenango and Alcozauca, resulting in the political and spatial growth of the jurisdiction of Tlapan (Gutiérrez Mendoza, König, Brito 2009, 88–89). Is this evidence of local expansion and

257

258

I mages of R ank by R egion

prosperity under the auspices of the Aztec state? Such cases have been documented for Quauhnahuac and Yauhtepec in Morelos, centers that benefited from the affiliation with the Triple Alliance (Smith 2001, 140–41, 148–51; 2003, 251). All this evidence seems to imply that attitudes detectable in Tlapan correspond to more general models of provincial strategies (Chance, Stark 2007, 207–11, 222–23). More insights into local strategies are provided by postconquest sections of the two manuscripts. The Mexica-influenced costume was maintained after the introduction of Spanish rule. In the Codex Azoyú 1 all the postcontact rulers of TlapanTlachinollan are seated on tepotzoicpalli thrones and wear capes bordered with eyes (tenixyo). Similarly, in the Codex Azoyú 2 the full version of the Mexicanized apparel is worn by the first postconquest ruler, whereas his successors maintain their preconquest status items, including reed thrones and xiuhhuitzolli diadems, except that turquoise capes are replaced by white garments. A native judge from Xochimilco wields a Spanish staff while still preserving the turquoise diadem, a native cape, and a reed seat (icpalli), evoking images of colonial officials, including jueces-gobernadores, in pictorial sources made about the same time in the Valley of Mexico (figures 3.34a–b). A striking exception to this pattern is the series of images depicting the last ruler of Tlapan-Tlachinollan, who is identified by the rabbit name-glyph in both manuscripts and additionally the gloss “don Domingo Cortés Quapoltochin” in the Codex Azoyú 2. He first appears in 1544 facing the native judge from Xochimilco (identified by the gloss as augustin ticoctzin), and is associated with entirely traditional status items, including the turquoise diadem and the reed throne (figure 3.34a–b). This scene illustrates investigation into the accusations of don Domingo presented by his local opponents. Having apparently lost temporarily his governorship, he was able to come back to office in 1550 as shown on the next page of the Codex Azoyú 2 (fol. 15; Oudijk 2011, 160–162). Don Domingo Cortés Quapoltochin continues his fully preconquest appearance while his accession is witnessed by local rulers also wearing entirely native apparel. This image contrasts with a corresponding scene recorded in the Codex Azoyú 1 (fol. 36; see also figure 3.34c), where this personage rests on the curule chair and wears a Spanish hat and a sort of red coat resembling both European garments and native capes, though not tied in a traditional way. In addition, he is shown sniffing a flower, no doubt alluding to the preconquest tradition, even if flowers did not figure as noble attributes earlier in this particular manuscript. This Spanish stylization of don Domingo continues up to the last folio of the document. The last page records the death of don Domingo and introduces the ruler of Tlapan-Tlachinollan (identified by an arrow name glyph) shown in the preconquest style, which makes it clear that we are not dealing with an overall change of pictorial convention. Considering that the accussations against don Domingo are much more elaborate in the Codex Azoyú 1 than in the Azoyú 2, which tends to show him in a

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.34. Don Domingo Cortés Quapoltochin in the Codex Azoyú 1 (a, c) and 2 (b, d) (Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico; drawings by Justyna Olko).

favorable light, it seems probable that the former manuscript was commissioned by the faction of political opponents of this Tlapan ruler. It is therefore possible that the Spanish stylization was a deliberate strategy to reinforce the negative image of this personage: by accusing him of “Hispanization,” they might have questioned his status as a traditional, fully legitimate local ruler (Oudijk 2012, 162, 168).57 However, the imagery of don Domingo also undergoes a profound transformation in the last section of the Codex Azoyú 2, corresponding to the period 1557– 1564 and apparently representing the view of the faction supporting this ruler. He assumes a fully Spanish look, not limited to clothes and a curule chair, for he has grown a beard and assumes postures and gestures typical in European art. Whereas this dramatic change in his appearance in the Codex Azoyú 2 is most probably explained by a change of painter with respect to the preceding folios, it is nevertheless significant that the Hispanized presentation of don Domingo also figures in the document apparently associated with his political camp and not with that of his opponents. Hence, it seems doubtful that the meaning of this European appearance was intended as defamatory.

259

260

I mages of R ank by R egion

Indeed, the imagery contained in the last folio of the Codex Azoyú 2 deserves more attention (figure 3.34d). Don Domingo Cortés Quapoltochin, with his European attributes, faces a similar-looking official, with the place sign of Tenochtitlan between them. While it is possible that this place is associated with the interlocutor of the Tlapan ruler, it is more probable that the whole event actually takes place in Mexico-Tenochtitlan where don Domingo tried to resolve the legal dispute, perhaps before the judge of the Real Audiencia (Oudijk 2012, 163). This scene evokes a memorable event that took place in the past, namely the meeting between the ruler of Tlachinollan, 4 Rain, and the representative of imperial Tenochtitlan (figure 3.33). It is striking that the episodes are shown in an almost identical way, except that the Mexica insignia of rank are replaced by Spanish status items. This correspondence does not seem coincidential. In both cases native painters emphasize the prestigious association or negotiations with the remote center of power and legitimacy, a relationship that highlights the status of local leaders in spite of positing some form of political dependence. In each case, in spite of different historical circumstances, highlighting this important point of reference also entails the adoption of foreign symbols of rank, eliciting the association with native strategies that we have seen in the Tira de Tepechpan, whose authors first appropriated the imperial language of Tenochtitlan, later switching to the acceptance of Spanish ways and point of reference. It is also noteworthy that, for the early postconquest peripheral nobility, Mexico-Tenochtitlan remained a presitigious source of power and legitimacy, even if control by the Triple Alliance ceded to that represented by the Spanish Crown. In practical terms, the most obvious base for this continuity were tribute obligations and juridical procedures established by Spaniards. At the same time, the Codices Azoyú convey an intriguing and not easily explicable testimony of the profound transformation of the power base and visual status markers occurring, at least in pictorial rhetoric, within the lifespan of a single ruler of TlapanTlachinollan. Whereas in the case of the Codex Azoyú 1 this change in stylization should perhaps be explained in purely political terms and understood as carrying negative overtones, the same phenomenon in the second of the Tlapan manuscripts cannot be explained in these terms. Don Domingo Cortés Quapoltochin held his office in the very decades that witnessed the intensification of contacts with Spaniards and the firm establishment of their modes of organization and administrative control. Unfortunately it remains conjectural whether or not the complete change of status items from pre-Hispanic to European in the imagery relative to don Domingo Cortés Quapoltochin was based on an actual change in his way of dressing. At any rate, however, in the native view such an attitude had an obvious precedent in preconquest history: the prestigious affiliation with imperial Tenochtitlan based on the acceptance of its superiority and expressed through the adoption of its status markers.

I mages of R ank by R egion

Beyond the Valley of Mexico: Southeastern Regions

A strategically important region for the empire of the Triple Alliance lay to the southeast of the Valley of Mexico, encompassing the modern state of Puebla and bordering Tlaxcala to the east and northeast. From this area comes a remarkable sample of early-colonial pictorial records containing numerous images of the native nobility and revealing the strength of the local tradition of manuscript painting. Present Puebla encompasses several Aztec provinces: its northern part includes the former territories of Tetela, Tlatlauhquitepec, and Tlapacoyan, and its core part, located directly south of Tlaxcala, Cholula, and Huexotzinco, roughly corresponds with a politically and ethnically diverse province Tepeyacac and a much smaller Ahuatlan. Tepeyacac, conquered successively by several Aztec rulers, contained numerous altepetl, such as Tepeyacac, Tecamachalco, Quauhquechollan, Quauhtinchan, and Tecalco, where the rule of multiple tlatoque was very common. Both areas were strategically located along the southern border of the Tlaxcalan state and controlled major routes toward the south, which explains the presence of Mexica officials in Tepeyacac as well as in Texalocan within the province of Ahuatlan (Smith and Berdan 1996b, 284–85). Other neighboring altepetl, such as Huexotzinco, though preserving considerable autonomy, were also subject in certain moments to some form of dependence on Tenochtitlan. Of particular importance for local communities were cartographic-historical manuscripts and genealogies. Among the most traditional in style and content are the sixteenth-century Mapas de Quauhtinchan, conveying the preconquest historical tradition that played a vital role for the altepetl of Quauhtinchan and whose importance continued into the postconquest period (Reyes García 1988; Yoneda 1989, 32–36). Merging the map format with historical narrative, these native accounts relate Chichimec origins of future settlers of Quauhtinchan, their emergence from the mythical Chicomoztoc, the migration story leading to the foundation of their own altepetl, relationships with other ethnic groups, and fifteenth-century events of regional importance (Yoneda 1991, 53). Another related pictorial manuscript, known today as the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, was made between 1545 and 1563 (Leibsohn 2009, 170); in addition to the alphabetic account in Nahuatl it contains drawings functioning more like illustrations in a European book than like native pictorial genres, though they draw heavily upon them. Quauhtinchan was a composite state that in the sixteenth century comprised as many as seven distinct rulerships (referred to, though, as teccalli, not altepetl or tlayacatl), seven being an ideal number going back to the seven caves of the origin story, with their appropriate titles. As these units were divided between two major ethnic groups, the Nahuas and the Pinome, the latter affiliated with the groups of the Valley of Coixtlahuaca, it is clear that ethnicities retaining a sharp

261

262

I mages of R ank by R egion

sense of distinction became accommodated within the complex altepetl (Lockhart 1992, 20, 24). These internal divisions and ethnic focus are manifest in pictorial documents, whose stories are told from the point of view of a specific group (Reyes García 1988). Thus, the seven teccalli formed two rival factions, four belonging to the Nahua and three to the Pinome, the latter retaining some preeminence in the mid-sixteenth century that probably dated back to the Tlatelolca conquest of Quauhtinchan in the fifteenth century (Leibsohn 2009, 21). Conflicts rooted in the preconquest past continued into colonial times, when arguments based on remote historical-­mythological tradition were often evoked. It is therefore not surprising that the Historia Tolteca Chichimeca was owned and probably also commissioned by a descendant of the preconquest Nahua rulers, don Antonio de Castañeda Tezcacoacatl (Reyes García 1988, 37–41; Leibsohn 2009, 8, 19–22), whereas the Mapas are commonly attributed to the Pinome nobility (Reyes García 1988, 119; Wake 2007, 231–40). However, while the Nahua viewpoint is quite overt in the Historia, the rhetoric of the Mapa 2 is less obvious, for the representatives of the Nahua faction seem as prominent as the Pinome group of the Mixteca-Popoloca affiliation, which implies Nahua authorship or the combined role of the two principal ethnic groups (Asselbergs 2007, 140–42). In relating their story, the nobility of this composite state gave much importance to their Chichimec roots, in much the same way as did different Nahua groups of the Valley of Mexico, and especially the Acolhuaque, with whom Quauhtinchan shared the cartographic-historical genre of manuscript painting. They also had in common the Chichimec costume consisting of an animal-hide cape and nomad weapons. Just as Chichimec rulers in the Primeros Memoriales, in the Mapa 1 the founders are seated on green seats, clearly made of plants instead of dried reeds. It would be groundless to consider them uncivilized barbarians, though. The forefathers of the people of Quauhtinchan participate in religious celebrations and in complex rituals of investiture and foundation; they also share their place of origin with the high-ranking Tolteca Chichimeca who, after their stay at Tollan, grasped control of Cholula, another manifestation of the Place of Reeds (Tollan Cholollan). In fact, the mixed background of the Tolteca Chichimeca is signaled by their apparel. In the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, the leaders Quetzaltehueyac and Icxicoatl wear a headdress consisting of a red headband and a short tuft of feathers over the forehead and show up in the scene of the emergence of the Chichimeca from Chicomoztoc-Colhuacan in elaborate attire that includes splendid head and back feathered insignia. At the same time, however, they wear animal-skin capes, typical for their other images where they also carry nomad weapons (figure 3.35). The differences between the Tolteca Chichimeca and more recent arrivals fade even further: in the scene of ritual sacrifice (fol. 28r) Icxicoatl and Quetzaltehueyac

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.35. Icxicoatl and Quetzaltehueyac in Chichimec dress, Historia ToltecaChichimeca, fol. 2r (Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

are not shown with their typical headbands but share the head adornment of the newcomers. On the other hand, a particularly important Chichimec ancestor, Moquihuix, the leader of the Quauhtinchantlaca and a remote founder of don Alonso de Castañeda’s lineage, is set off from his companions already inside Chicomoztoc, because he is unique in wearing a prestigious jaguar headgear instead of the standard headdress of the rest of the group (Leibsohn 2009, 45). Thus, the future Chichimec founder is given one of the insignia that at the time of the Spanish conquest enjoyed the highest prestige among the Nahuas, both in Tenochtitlan and beyond, the jaguar costume alluding to the military ethos of high-ranking warriors. This martial association is strengthened by an accompanying image of an eagle forming the name glyph of the entire group led by Moquihuix. From his beak the bird issues the atl tlachinolli sign, the metaphor of the war of conquest. The ancestors of the inhabitants of Quauhtinchan are distinguished in this manuscript by what seems to be a typical Chichimec headdress, found also in pictorial documents from the Valley of Mexico: a red headband topped by white feather down (figure 2.22c). Both items are attributes of the Chichimec deity Mixcoatl, identified with hunting, war, and ritual sacrifice. The balls of feathers are sacrificial attributes symbolizing the duty of valiant warriors, who may become both providers of captives and victims themselves. On the other hand, the headband was probably called tzoncuetlaxtli (“hair leather [band]”) and is listed as an attribute of the migrating Mexica (Chimalpahin 1997a I, 88–89) and as the array of Amimitl, a

263

264

I mages of R ank by R egion

manifestation of Mixcoatl (PM, fol. 264v), whose image indeed has a red headband tied at the back. In the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca the Chichimecs appear with this headgear only in the earliest stages of their history, because another variety of headdress turns up in the scene illustrating the Toltec rulership in Cholula (fols. 26v–27r). The future Chichimec founders rest on stone seats and wear traditional fur capes but also acquire at this stage white puffy headbands with a prominent white-black double-feather tuft, topped by two green feathers.57 This headgear becomes henceforward an attribute of the newcomers in Quauhtinchan, as can be seen, for example, in the foundation scene (fols. 32v–33r) and continues into much later times. A red headband with a feather adorns several Chichimec warriors in the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 1, and a similar head device appears in the Mapa 2, except that the striped feather is attached to a simple white headband and no green tuft appears; it, too, persists into the later period, being worn by lords clad in white capes and seated on reed seats next to their palaces. Thus, this particular headdress was an insignia of the nobility in the region of Quauhtinchan; we are dealing with yet another example of the continuity of a Chichimec-related badge in times well after the migration period, evoking similarities with the already-discussed imagery from Tetzcoco. It is through costume change, even in its subtle modifications, that we can make deductions about intended ritual and political messages, shifts in status, or historical developments. In the Mapa 2 such transformation is signaled on the road from Chicomoztoc to Cholula, where animal-skin garments are enriched by the headdress consisting of a headband and a feather, given to the migrants after a series of supernatural events (Asselbergs 2007, 125). As has already been discussed, this headdress became the badge of the Chichimec founders of Quauhtinchan and their descendants. Changes of costume are even more manifest in the Historia ToltecaChichimeca as it relates to an event of primary importance: nose-perforation of the founders taking place in Cholula, the place of legitimacy. In a preceding fasting scene they receive the sacrificial attributes of their divine patron, Mixcoatl, including striped body painting, paper ornaments, and a headdress of feather down. By donning these attributes and assuming a reclining posture on white mesquite trees, they embody the sacrificed mimixcoa; the symbolical sacrificial death of future rulers is part of the rite of passage, expressed also by the nose perforation itself, on their way to an entirely new status (Olivier 2008). In the nose-perforation scene the Chichimec leaders receive nose plugs, the insignia of legitimate teteuctin, that persist as regalia of local rulers later on. Further transformations of the founders are alluded to in following sections of the manuscript. An important transition takes place during their way from Cholula to Quauhtinchan and is again marked by the change of costume (Leibsohn 2009, 142): white cotton capes replace animal-skin

I mages of R ank by R egion

garments of valiant ancestors, even if one of them still holds a bow and an arrow, bespeaking the importance of his Chichimec identity. The final set of attributes typical for the Late Postclassic nobility shown in the pictorial imagery from Quauhtinchan includes white cotton capes, reed seats (tolicpalli) or low stools, as well as an indispensable association with the lordly house (teccalli), attesting to their importance as fundamental components of the sociopolitical life of the altepetl in the Puebla-Tlaxcala region. Also reed thrones (tepotzo­ icpalli) were quite common, as attested by other sixteenth-century pictorial manuscripts from Puebla, as well as elite objects held in hands such as flower bouquets or smoking tubes. Rulers depicted in the Lienzo de Quetzpalan, featuring the territory and borders of this community, are seated on reed thrones, wearing capes with decorated borders (at least in some cases clearly “bordered with eyes,” tenixyo), and making a pointed-finger gesture. Several personages, perhaps of lower rank, are also represented resting on low stools. The figural style and costume details reveal much affinity with the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec painted on deerskin and associated with the altepetl of Quauhquechollan. In addition to capes pictured in a Europeanized way as sleeved garments, they hold smoking tubes and circular objects, either fans or simplified flower bouquets, attributes of the native nobility, and point with their fingers in a traditional preconquest gesture. Colonial noblemen are represented in the same way as their antecedents, with no change of status implied. Basically the same conventions of elite imagery are seen in yet another document from Quauhquechollan, its Mapa Circular, also painted on a piece of deerskin and ordering the territory of the altepetl in a circular arrangement, with a church building in the middle and local nobles as well as the place sign in an emblematic rendering occupying the central space (figure 3.36). The members of the local nobility are represented as if they were pre-Hispanic personages, seated on reed tepotzoicpalli thrones, wearing red capes, and making pointed-finger gestures. The way their capes are depicted evokes strongly the imagery of the Lienzo de Quetzpalan. In addition to native-looking personages, the prominent place before the Quauhquechollan’s place glyph is occupied by a bearded man of European appearance, resting on a curule seat, and wearing a red cape or coat, a hat, trousers, and shoes. This Spanish exterior is nevertheless quite misleading. Identified by an accompanying gloss as “don martyn cortes,” he is the native ruler and governor don Martín Xochitlahua, mentioned in the text inscribed in the Mapa Circular and other documents from the mid-sixteenth century (Asselbergs 2004, 67). What we are dealing with is the same strategy of highlighting the position of native leaders by using prestigious foreign status markers that we have already seen in the Tira de Tepechpan and Códice Azoyú 2. However, except for this example of a postconquest strategy resulting in an

265

266

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.36. Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan, fragment (A.N.L., picture archives, Vienna).

entirely Hispanized image of a local leader, all the pictorial evidence points to the existence of uniform local conventions in the iconography of rank. In spite of the conquest of this area by Tenochtitlan, Mexica influence is difficult to detect. Turquoise diadems are very rare in Pueblan imagery, whereas reed thrones probably predate the Triple Allliance impact, belonging to a wider central Mexican tradition. The xiuhhuitzolli headdress does appear in the Lienzo of the Heye Foundation, a cartographic-historical-genealogical document from the region of Izúcar de Matamorros (preconquest Itzyocan). In addition to showing the local nobility, this manuscript relates the migration of the founders from Chicomoztoc

I mages of R ank by R egion

through Tollan and probably also Tenochtitlan (Doesburg, n.d.). It is meaningful that the nobles of Itzyocan are all seated on reed thrones, clad in red or white capes, holding flower bouquets, and pointing with their fingers, and only two rulers in supposed Tenochtitlan wear the xiuhhuitzolli diadems (though painted yellow) and red capes bordered with eyes (tenixyo), in a clear reference to what was identified as the foreign, Mexica insignia. A slightly different variant of the iconography of rank is attested in native manuscripts from the region of Tecamachalco. In the Lienzo de Tecamachalco, referred to as “a curious pictographic document executed in a mixed Mixtec-Nahuatl style” (Doesburg and van Buren 1997, 131), local rulers are seated on low stools placed over reed thrones and these, in turn, on reed mats. They wear the xiuhhuitzolli and tenixyo capes. This combination of local stools with the tepotzoicpalli might seem hybridizing, but the same convention appears in the Códice de la Cueva, a cartographic-historical manuscript probably from the same region (Glass 1964, 45; 1975b, 122–23), as well as in several images of rulers contained in the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca from Quauhtinchan (fols. 39v–41v). The same combination of items, a reed throne and a low stool, supposedly belonging to two different traditions, is found in a very traditional native manuscript from the neighboring region of Tlaxcala, Lienzo de Tepeticpac. All this confirms the existence of a local convention, probably of preconquest origin, crossing political borders between different altepetl. There seem to exist certain affinities between the imagery associated with Tecamachalco and that attributed to the Chocho-Popoloca groups to the south, especially from the Valley of Coixtlahuaca, linked through political-genealogical ties to the area of Puebla, including Tecamachalco and Quauhtinchan. The nobility of Coixtlahuaca married into one of the royal houses of Quauhtinchan, and these relationships are illustrated in extant pictorial manuscripts from both regions (Reyes García 1988, 56–61; Asselbergs 2007, 133). The Chocho-Popoloca ruling dynasties that established themselves in the Valley of Coixtlahuaca between AD 800 and 950 also claimed descent from ancestors inhabiting the Valley of Mexico and the region of Cholula (Wake 2007, 221). Thus, the similarities in the iconography of rank between these groups and the Nahua tradition may not only result from a late Mexica conquest of the Valley of Coixtlahuaca, but probably reflect much earlier interactions. In the lienzos from this region it is very common to find reed thrones and mats, temillotl hairdos, and occasionally even headdresses alluding to the xiuhhuitzolli or Chichimec bows and arrows. Affinities with pictorial traditions of the Nahuas are quite patent also in the region of Mixteca Baja in the part corresponding to the Triple Alliance tribute province of Acatlan, located to the south of the province of Tepeyacac. A good

267

268

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.37. Codex Tulane, fragment (courtesy of the Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University).

example of these similarities is the Codex Tulane, which, in addition to its numerous traits typical of Mixtec imagery, features local rulers seated on tepotzoicpalli thrones and wearing turquoise diadems and white tenixyo capes (whose rendering differs considerably from depictions known from the Valley of Mexico), whereas

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.38. Matrícula de Huexotzinco: (a) fol. 687r; and (b) fol. 711r (Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

their female consorts assume poses typical for the Nahua conventions (figure 3.37). It has been suggested that this influence results from the participation of a foreign artist educated in the style of the Valley of Mexico and then active in the southern Puebla region (also responsible for the Codex Dehesa) and that this “Nahuatlization” is a predominantly postconquest phenomenon (Smith 1991, 11, n. 9). Yet “Aztec” traits are too widely dispersed in colonial native manuscripts of the Mixteca Baja region to explain this phenomenon by the activity of a particular painter. It is difficult to judge whether the desire of the local nobility to be represented in the prestigious Mexica style betrays a preconquest strategy or an early colonial rhetoric.58 It is noteworthy, however, that the Codex Tulane is not an isolated example of such imagery in the area. Similar iconography of rank is to be found in the Mapa de Xochitepec from San Juan Bautista Suchitepec (evoking, in its graphic arrangement, the Mapa de Coatlán del Río from Guerrero) or in the Lienzo de San Vincente Palmar originally from San Juan Ihualtepec and San Pedro Atoyac (Doesburg 2008). Local rulers seated on reed thrones are adorned with turquoise diadems that in the imagery of the Lienzo de San Vincente Palmar are indeed covered with turquoise mosaic, closely following depictions known from the Valley of Mexico, quite rare in postconquest sources. Thus, instead of viewing this iconography of rank as a result of a hybridizing colonial production, it should probably be seen as a survival of local pre-Hispanic conventions that adopted certain external influences, possibly resulting from political dependence on the Triple Alliance, but that was also fostered by intense regional interactions between various ethnic groups, including the Nahuas. The present area of Puebla served as a sort of corridor facilitating cultural exchange, formation of political alliances, and the spread of Nahua traits toward the Mixtec zone. Coincidences with Mexica pictorial conventions are particularly striking in the Cholula and Huexotzinco region, located much closer to the Valley of Mexico

269

270

I mages of R ank by R egion

and to the north of the former province of Tepeyacac, which, as we have already seen, reveals depth and tenacity of local traditions in manuscript painting. Also, in this case our knowledge is limited to postconquest imagery. An interesting document shedding some light on local iconography of rank comes from the altepetl of Huexotzinco, which in Aztec times had received considerable political impact from Tenochtitlan.59 Known today as the Matrícula de Huexotzinco, it is a population census made in 1559–60 (Warren 1968, 157–71; Carrasco 1974, 6–8). As they appear with their subjects and dependents, the members of the Huexotzinco nobility share xiuhhuitzolli diadems with the Mexica (figure 3.38a). In the Matrícula these headdresses figure in several versions, depending on the painter: uncolored, covered with crosshatching alluding to the mosaic, and framed by a red border; painted blue and framed by a red border; and uncolored, with crosshatching and a “border of eyes” (tenixyo) running along the red borders. The last version is the most hybridizing one, having little in common with the original characteristics of this insignia. Apparently, knowing the prestigious associations of the preconquest “border of eyes,” a native painter considered it fully appropriate to add it to the royal headdress; in addition, it seems he had little familiarity with the diadem itself.60 In the Matrícula, turquoise diadems are also employed as graphic signs referring to the teuctli title, in accordance with the preconquest practice. In fact, the popularity of the xiuhhuitzolli in the area is also attested by its presence in another local manuscript, Confirmation des elections de Calpan. Other native elements in the Matrícula de Huexotzinco reveal more affinities with pictorial traditions of the Puebla region than with the Valley of Mexico. Thus, local lords are seated on low stools in front of their palaces (teccalli), attesting to the importance of this unit of sociopolitical organization. Differences in status are implied by the fact that some of the lords are not associated with the teccalli building even if they wear turquoise diadems. Also, naming patterns seem informative: while most have mixed Spanish-Nahuatl names, some personages are identified by Spanish appellations only, including noble surnames, a practice restricted in that time to the highest nobility (Lockhart 1992, 118–27). Although the noble apparel is standardized, in one case a more individualized costume makes allusion to the survival of preconquest war insignia, a phenomenon widely attested in written sources (see chapter 5). Thus, don Cristóbal de Guevara, the ruler in Santa Maria Asunción Almoyahuacan (fol. 711r), wears a coyote helmet belonging to a common battleoutfit style before the Spanish conquest (figure 3.38b). However, this traditional insignia, combined with a dark cape and native sandals, is used together with a Spanish shirt and trousers. In a like manner, all other lords wear their native capes over European garments, in a syncretic combination of two clothing repertories, probably reflecting the native noble costume worn in those days.

I mages of R ank by R egion

Toward the Gulf Coast: Eastern Regions

Areas to the east of the Valley of Mexico encompassed several important provinces subject to the Triple Alliance. To the northeast lay Quauhchinanco, inhabited by Totonac, Nahuatl, and Otomi groups, a strategic location on the way to the Huastec and northern Totonac areas. Major centers included Quauhchinanco and Xicotepec, a locality associated with native pictorial annals known as the Códice de Xicotepec. Both Tenochtitlan and Tetzcoco claimed to have subjugated this area, suggesting that it was conquered by a joint Triple Alliance venture during the reign of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina. In spite of certain links with Tenochtitlan,61 the Acolhua presence seems to have been the stronger one. Xicotepec, whose rulers were reportedly appointed by the tlatoque of Tetzcoco, also housed its tribute collectors and provided service to its royal palace (Smith and Berdan 1996b, 290; Hodge 1996, 34). This relationship seems to be confirmed by the pictorial imagery, constituting a rare example of the possible impact of Tetzcoco beyond Acolhuacan, even if both Tenochca and Tetzcocan rulers appear in the manuscript from Xicotepec. It is Neçahualcoyotl who figures prominently in local history, whereas the first reference to Tenochtitlan belongs to the much later rule of Ahuitzotl (Offner 2010b, 79). Despite the fact that year-count accounts are more directly associated with Tenochtitlan, the iconography of rank in the Códice de Xicotepec does not reveal any obvious affinities with Mexica conventions. In terms of figural style too, it bears little relationship to the elegant pictorial style of Tetzcoco, but its possible influence is to be traced in certain iconographic details such as the reed thrones (tepotzoicpalli) and temillotl-style hairdos, common for Acolhua imagery (Olko 2005, 440). Also, other affinities with Tetzcocan manuscripts, including its general content and composition, have been recently pointed out (Offner 2010b, 80). Turquoise diadems, the insignia associated with Tenochtitlan, are entirely lacking (except for the name glyph of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin), whereas the beginning of the imperial control is signaled by the replacement of local white headbands, commonly associated with Chichimec ancestors in Puebla and Tlaxcala to the south, by the military temillotl coiffure worn both by Mexica and Tetzcocan lords and local nobles. As in numerous other local histories, especially annals-structured pictorial manuscripts, there is no differentiation between local rulers and imperial sovereigns, which emphasizes the high status and autonomy of the former. Farther to the south were mixed Totonac- and Nahua-speaking regions comprising the strategic Aztec provinces of Cempoala and Xalapa, in the present-day state of Veracruz. Judging by numerous remains revealing imperial inspiration, the Triple Alliance had much interest in establishing firm links with this area. Its efforts probably included the creation of colonies in central Veracruz and, indeed,

271

272

I mages of R ank by R egion

Aztec-style sculptures have been found in Castillo de Teayo, Cotaxtla, Xico Viejo, Tlacotlalpan and Tuxtepec (Umberger 1996a, 158–59). A fascinating testimony of elite strategies constructed in response to both pre-Hispanic heritage and challenges associated with the introduction of the Spanish rule is found in a cartographic-historical document from the neighboring region of Xalapa, the Lienzo de Coacoatzintla from the Archivo General de la Nación. It was reused in an early eighteenth-century lawsuit between Coacoatzintla and Santa María Magdalena on the one hand and San Pedro Tonayan and San Pablo Coapan on the other,62 being perhaps a copy of an earlier, sixteenth-century original. By illustrating in a very articulate way the intertwined system of native “rulers” and Spanish-imposed “governors” (“caciques y gobernadores”), the lienzo visualizes their different power bases expressed through their own attributes, even if both of them seem equally incorporated into the native world. Numerous indigenous actors take part in activities together with Spanish officials, including the corregidor and encomendero. At a simple glimpse, the document features several distinct groups of native personages, differentiated by their apparel: lords in pre-Hispanic costumes and identified by name glyphs; nobles wearing preconquest elite costumes, dealing with Spaniards, and identified by alphabetic glosses; males—also identified by written names—wearing Spanish-style shirts, trousers, hats, and shoes, combined with native capes. The analysis of names written on small pieces of paper glued to the lienzo provides some direct clues to the interpretation of the document. The scenes depicted refer to the delimitation of lands carried out in 1555 in the presence of the corregidor of Xalapa, don Juan García Galleja, identified by the glosses that also state that he “established boundary markers [mojoneras] here in Quaquauhtzintlan” (“nicã quaquauhtçintlan oquitlali mojon[er]as”; see figure 3.39). The native noble shown in a traditional manner and seated in the front of Spanish officials can be identified as “Don Joā Manxilla” (don Juan Mansilla), the ruler of Quaquauhtzintlan (figure 3.40a). A person of the same name is mentioned in a document from the Archivo General de la Nación as gobernador of Quaquauhtzintlan, assigned this title in 1575 for the period of one year,63 which confirms his authenticity. Don Juan’s attributes in the Lienzo de Coacoatzintla include a prestigious red-checked cape; a flower bouquet that can be identified as the xiloxochitl, the species often associated with the preconquest nobility; a reed throne covered with jaguar skin (oceloehuaicpalli); and a reed mat. In addition to these native insignia, he wears a beard. His companion, identified by the gloss as “Don Francisco tlauhquechol,” is dressed in a white cape and rests on a reed throne. Surprisingly, one of the personages represented in another section of the lienzo, wearing a Spanish shirt and trousers topped by a native cape and holding a hat in

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.39. Lienzo de Coacoatzintla, delimitation of borders and meeting with Spanish authorities (courtesy of Archivo General de la Nación, Mexico, Tierras, vol. 685, exp. 1, cuad. 3, fol. 99).

his hand, is referred to as “Don Juā de mē(n)xilla governador chane,” that is, “don Juan de Mansilla, local governor,” the same as the native ruler seated on a jaguar throne elsewhere in this document (figure 3.40b). His fully Spanish name serves as a confirmation of his high status among the local nobility, especially other nobles who keep their Nahuatl surnames. Mansilla is a well-confirmed Spanish surname from the province of León, attested among the conquerors of Mexico (Díaz del

273

274

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.40. Lienzo de Coacoatzintla: (a) don Juan de Mansilla and don Francisco Tlauhquechol in traditional apparel; and (b) don Juan de Mansilla in Hispanized costume (courtesy of Archivo General de la Nación, Mexico, Tierras, vol. 685, exp. 1, cuad. 3, fol. 99).

Castillo 1972, 393, 396), which explains its adoption by the native elite. In addition, a noble identified as “Don . . . tlauhquechol,” a companion of Mansilla represented in traditional apparel below the church of Quaquauhtzintlan during the meetings with Spaniards, reappears as don Francisco Tlauhquechol, alcalde of Tonayan (“Don francisco tlauhquechol allde y tonayan”) in the group of bearded males in mixed Spanish-indigenous costumes (figure 3.41). Accompanying him are native rulers of Naolinco, Xalapa, and Tlacuilollan, also witnesses to the visit of Spanish authorities in Quaquauhtzintlan and the establishment of local boundaries. Thus, both native leaders are represented for the second time not as preconquest rulers but more like municipal officials, wearing Europeanized dress typical for that time and performing functions introduced by the Spanish crown. There is no doubt that both kinds of images refer to the same event of historical importance for local communities, the delimitation of boundaries. Sitting on a preconquest jaguar throne and adorned with traditional insignia, don Juan de Mansilla holds a rope whose second end rests in the hands of another local ruler depicted in an entirely preconquest stylization. The second rope is sustained by two other nobles also fully equipped with pre-Hispanic attributes and glyphic names, which implies that in spite of their preconquest appearance they participate in the same colonial event. It seems tempting to view in this imagery an

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.41. Lienzo de Coacoatzintla, native officials in Hispanized costume, don Francisco Tlauhquechol is the first one on the left (courtesy of Archivo General de la Nación, Mexico, Tierras, vol. 685, exp. 1, cuad. 3, fol. 99)

intention of an indigenous author to convey—through two different conventions of representing the local elite, based on distinct kinds of attributes of rank and separated in space—the concept of “double role-playing” of native rulers in earlycolonial times. In other words, what seems to be alluded to is a native understanding of the title “cacique y gobernador” as a requirement, common in this period, of acting both in the capacity of the dynastic ruler (tlatoani)—legitimized by royal descent and the right to don pre-Hispanic status symbols—and in the new office as a chief of the municipal government (cabildo) that justified the adoption of garments of Spanish origin. The two offices remain in the hands of the same persons, who, naturally enough for an indigenous painter, appear with the two sets of attributes.64

275

276

I mages of R ank by R egion

A Case of Resistance: Tlaxcala and its Iconography of Rank

The preconquest Tlaxcalan state remained independent from the Triple Alliance in spite of numerous conquest attempts, often disguised under the propaganda of “flowery wars.” It was already Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina who conquered Tepeyacac and other altepetl along the southern edge of Tlaxcala, as well as areas to the north and east, beginning the process of encirclement that continued under subsequent huei tlatoque. As a result, Tlaxcalans became cut off from external trade, experiencing shortages in various resources including both luxury goods and utilitarian items (Smith 1996, 140). Sharing much cultural and historical heritage as well as forms of sociopolitical organization with other Nahua groups, they also employed a similar costume repertory, and especially battle suits (see pages 131–132). They remained, however, markedly distinct in their iconography of rank. Extant Tlaxcalan manuscripts reveal the existence of two different pictorial styles, one less “polished” and little Europeanized, manifest in the Lienzo de Tepeticpac or the Códice de Huamantla, and the second operating with a very elegant and precise thin line closely linked to the tradition of local wall painting that continued to flourish in the early colonial period. In some of these manuscripts affinities with neighboring Pueblan imagery are quite conspicuous, as is the case of the Lienzo de Tepeticpac, presenting ancestors associated with their particular noble houses and carrying netted capes and feathers in their hair. The main leader, Maçatzin, wears a headband with the aztaxelli device, the military tunic ichcahuipilli, and sandals. He carries a quiver and is shown shooting arrows, but he is also seated on a low stool, the attribute of “settled” rulers. We have seen similar mixtures of “Chichimec” and “sedentary” attributes in pictorial records, such as Tetzcocan and Pueblan accounts, that reflect the prestige of the Chichimec background. Similarity to the pictorial content of the Mapas de Quauhtinchan from Puebla cannot go unnoticed in the Códice de Huamantla, its specific style resulting perhaps from the Otomi affiliation of this manuscript (Wright Carr 1997, 443). Once again common features include the association of seated lords with “noble houses” and the use of low stools. The garments of local rulers are limited only to red loincloths. In their outstretched hands, however, they also hold flowers, elite attributes throughout central Mexico but enjoying a special importance in the pictorial conventions of Tlaxcala. Aguilera identified flower species in this manuscript as xiloxochitl, cacaloxochitl, and yolloxochitl (Aguilera 1984, 21–22).65 As we have already seen (see page 142), in the Nahua tradition at least two of these species were believed to relieve the royal fatigue associated with the performance of rule. Bouquets are among the most noticeable links between the elite imagery in the Códice de Huamantla and Tlaxcalan genealogies drawn in an “elegant” style.

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.42. Tlaxcalan lords greeting Cortés, Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 5 (after Lienzo de Tlaxcala 1892).

Thus, bunches of precious flowers figure in the pictorial conventions both as static status markers and respectful greeting gifts. In accordance with courtly protocol, sophisticated bouquets were also given to Spaniards as part of their welcome, as can be seen in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and in its possible prototype, a manuscript closely following preconquest style and illustrating the reception of Cortés by the Tlaxcalan nobility, now in the Benson Latin American Collection.66 Tlaxcalan lords depicted in this document are distinguished by a well-defined set of status items: they wear local red-white twisted headbands with double heron-feathers (azta­ xelli) and elaborate capes whose designs do not resemble patterns typical for royal mantles in the Valley of Mexico. A particular prestige was attached to a cape with the design of red knots—worn by the ruler of Tiçatla, Xicotencatl—also figuring

277

278

I mages of R ank by R egion

in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (figure 3.42) and closely resembling a cape illustrated in the Codex Tudela (fol. 85v) that additionally bears the design of a “wind-jewel” associated with Ehecatl-Quetzalcoatl. A similar imagery of the Tlaxcalan nobility is found in the famous but now-lost Lienzo de Tlaxcala, whose original was made around 1550 to glorify the alliance of Tlaxcala with the Spaniards and its participation in the conquest of New Spain. It could have been commissioned in the atmosphere of fighting for the recognition of privileges, which intensified after 1535 and culminated around 1550. Among its possible prototypes were wall paintings depicting the history of the Spanish conquest, especially those originally decorating the rooms of the Cabildo of Tlaxcala (Martínez Marín 1989, 149–56). In addition to numerous scenes relating their participation in war episodes, the importance of the local nobility is highlighted in the main scene of the Lienzo envisaging the quadripartite structure of the altepetl of Tlaxcala within the new colonial context. The visual accent rests on the coat of arms granted by Charles V in 1535 and the image of the Virgin of the Assumption, the patroness of Tlaxcala, placed in an architectural setting embraced, in turn, by the hill symbolizing the altepetl. Newly introduced emblems are completed by traditional war standards associated with particular constituent sub-altepetl, whereas the most important Spanish officials and legal bodies are accompanied by native tlatoque and teteuctin. The latter betray not the slightest foreign impact in their appearance. They continue to wear the Tlaxcalan version of the royal badge, the red-white twisted headband combined with the aztaxelli feather device, its more elaborate version enriched by a longer feather tuft being restricted to the tlatoque proper. This preconquest noble costume is enhanced by precious earplugs and labrets as well as lavish capes, loincloths, and sandals. Besides, their most typical attributes are flower bunches held in outstretched hands. This apparel, as well as figural style, corresponds closely to the pictorial conventions of numerous Tlaxcalan genealogies. However, the lack of personal glyphic names, even in the depictions of the local nobility, is a symptom of increasing Europeanization. Essentially the same conventions in the iconography of rank are to be found in genealogical documents from this region (figure 3.43). This variety played in Tlaxcala a comparable role to that of cartographic-historical presentations among the communities in the area of Puebla. Although no preconquest examples are known, the consistency within this genre of manuscript painting, flourishing in the sixteenth century, implies pre-Hispanic roots for local genealogical presentations, whose production was fostered by colonial needs (Olko 2012b). Most Tlaxcalan genealogies share a downward descent order, usually from the head of the noble house acting as the family founder. One of the most traditional is the Genealogía de Zolin, where the forebear rests on a low reed seat within his palace (although

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.43. Tlaxcalan nobles in the genealogical document (BNF 104; Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

low stools are more common for the region), adorned with the red-white twisted headband topped by the aztaxelli device, golden earplugs, a red cape, and sandals (figure 3.44). In accordance with local canons, he also holds a flower bouquet, a persisting attribute continued by some of his male descendants almost to the last generation. Female members of the family are shown kneeling, wearing the axtlacuilli hairdo and elaborate shifts and skirts with the cacamoliuhqui design, a set of attributes that was also common for the imagery from the Valley of Mexico. All individuals are identified by glyphic names, and the lack of alphabetic glosses makes it unclear which of these persons belong to the postconquest period. In any case, no costume change is signaled, and hence no drop in status between pre-Hispanic ancestors and their colonial descendants is implied. Such a perspective may

279

Figure 3.44. Genealogía de Zolín (Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico; drawing by Justyna Olko).

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.45. Códice de las posesiones de don Andrés, fragment (Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico; drawing by Justyna Olko).

have been intended: the purpose of this document was to prove rights to a certain territory, because plots of land are schematically depicted along the right side and bottom of the genealogy. Similarly refined native apparel can be seen in the Genealogía de Tlatzcantzin, which features the founder sitting on a low stool in the red-white headband with the aztaxelli, a red cape, a white loincloth, and a flower in his hand. Although his male descendants share the same costume, the presence of the headband and a flower is limited to only one male, who appears three rows below the founder and probably marks his special status. Other descendants do preserve the aztaxelli and other precontact costume elements, even when these are already colonial nobles. Indeed, the passage from pre-Hispanic to colonial individuals is marked only by the appearance of Spanish-style names indicated by glosses. This pattern is shared by other Tlaxcalan genealogies where, nevertheless, certain progressive “impoverishment” of preconquest costume is a frequent feature. In the Genealogía de Quauhtli it is only the founder who appears with a complete set of traditional attributes, whereas his descendants wear simplified versions, even if entirely pre-Hispanic. Similar simplification of noble costume was signaled by a painter of the Genealogía de Tepeticpac, where only lords belonging to the earlier generations wear headbands with heron feathers. It seems possible that the emphasis on the continuation of complete apparel could be crucial when the latest personages depicted were functionaries of high rank themselves or there was a special need to claim their distinguished status. Sometimes these genealogical presentations became subject to stronger European influence, as in the Fragmento de las mujeres, where certain details such as postures or beards, are considerably removed from the native tradition. But

281

282

I mages of R ank by R egion

even here preconquest accouterments survive among the latest family members, though they lack flower bouquets, a privilege of earlier generations. It is therefore important to emphasize that none of the Tlaxcalan genealogies employs elements of Spanish costume as such, in spite of certain modifications of the original lordly dress identified with past greatness. This applies also to other genres, as attested by an economic document known as the Códice de las posesiones de on Andrés, where a local noble, glossed as don Andrés, figures in traditional costume, including a low stool, the twisted headband with the aztaxelli, a cape, and a loincloth (figure 3.45). It would be tempting to conclude that the general conservatism of Tlaxcalan pictorial conventions was associated with an actual survival of native costume well into the colonial era, at least in certain contexts. Nonetheless, disparity between imagery and social practice surely did exist, true in both directions, as when native nobles were shown with inaccessible Spanish status items. However, this Tlaxcalan emphasis on the continuity of traditional elite attributes may have been related to the pre-Hispanic era, based on what seems to have been a conscious strategy of rejection of Mexica royal insignia, even if they shared the Mexica repertory of military apparel. It is significant that none of the Tlaxcalan manuscripts features the Tenochca-associated xiuhhuitzolli, although it is represented—with different intensity—in all other areas of central Mexico, even including traditional Mixtec screenfolds. Instead, the nobility of Tlaxcala stuck to their own royal badge, not attested beyond this region: the twisted headband with the double heron-feather, symbolically associated with prestigious Chichimec roots. The same can be said of the reed throne (tepotzoicpalli), another most important symbol of royal power typical for the Nahua altepetl of the Valley of Mexico. Within the available sample of Tlaxcalan manuscripts, I have identified only one example of the tepotzoicpalli, in the Códice de Huamantla, where it is identified as a nonlocal item, for it figures as an attribute of a foreign ruler from the region of Teotihuacan. One more example appears in the Códice de Tepeticpac, where it is combined with a low stool in accordance with a widespread convention typical for the imagery of Puebla, especially for the region of Tecamachalco. A similar combination of a low stool with the tepotzoicpalli persists in local imagery as late as the eighteenth century, when we find its reminiscence in the Genealogía de don Francisco Aquiyahuateuctli, following the traditional pattern of early-colonial genealogies from this region (figure 3.46).67 This pictorial document was employed in the litigation between the native barrio of Calapan of the town San Dionisio Yauhquemecan and the districts Atencingo and Ocotochco of the town Santa María Atlihuetzian in 1776. Depicted in the document are the ancestral rulers Aquiyahuateuctli and his son don Pablo de Castilla, who reportedly assigned land and a prestigious device, tlauistle (tlahuiztli), in the form of the xiuhtototl bird

Figure 3.46. Genealogía de don Francisco Aquiyahuateuctli (courtesy of Archivo General de la Nación, Mexico, Tierras, vol. 914, exp. 2).

284

I mages of R ank by R egion

(Cotinga amabilis) to one of the barrios, Calapan.68 Don Francisco Aquiyahualcatl assumes the position of the founder, seated within the teccalli, and wears a typical twisted headband (recognizable even if it is not colored red and white) combined with the aztaxelli device and quetzal feathers, an obligatory set for Tlaxcalan rulers. He is also adorned with ear and nose plugs, a labret, a cape tied under the neck, leg bands, and sandals, and is holding such pre-Hispanic attributes as a flower bouquet and the macquahuitl sword in what is a surprisingly adequate eighteenth-century rendering of a pre-Hispanic-style Tlaxcalan noble. The roots of this longevity of the local iconography of rank can be probably traced back to the preconquest resistance to Mexica expansion. The latter attitude is noticeably reflected in the repertory of status items that defined the power base of Tlaxcalan elites and expressed their successful political and military independence, resulting in a sense of identity that persisted through the sixteenth century and beyond. Regional Conventions and Imperial Impact

Although extant preconquest manuscripts are very limited both in number and geographic distribution, the core of pre-Hispanic iconography of rank can be retrieved from the colonial sample, provided that the reconstructions are attempted on the basis of a wide spectrum of regional sources. This comprehensive approach does reveal consistent local conventions and their subvarieties, as well as affinities between different regions. In spite of the postconquest date of this corpus, the broad distribution of certain elements and the coherence of regional styles mean that in many cases we can salvage the core of preconquest pictorial traditions. Also revealed are discrete strategies undertaken by both metropolitan and peripheral elites as well as different possibilities of conveying information about rank and identity by using appropriate visual codes. Judging by the uniquely privileged case of Tenochtitlan, where both preconquest sculptures and postconquest manuscripts are available, it is becoming increasingly clear that conventions of royal imagery differed between basic genres—sculptural record and manuscript painting—and not all disparities can be attributed to the temporal gap. Obvious differences also come to light when Mexica and Tetzcocan sources are carefully compared. Turquoise diadems and capes are among the essential markers of the Tenochca nobility and are identified as their insignia far beyond the Valley of Mexico. As has been argued, Acolhua rulers adhere instead to a slightly different repertory of status items, giving special importance to Chichimec-affiliated costume and insignia, but also sharing with the Mexica the royal reed throne (tepotzo­icpalli). Although a status item of pan-regional importance among Nahua groups, and also beyond the core area of the Aztec empire, the reed throne receives

I mages of R ank by R egion

special focus in Acolhua imagery as the paramount symbol of royalty. Turquoise diadems are strikingly absent in extant sources associated with Tetzcoco in spite of their wide adoption across central Mexico. Is this a sign of rejection of the insignia identified with Tenochtitlan by its principal ally, a manifestation of distinctiveness and independence of Tetzcocan rulers? While this assumption remains hypothetical, the absence of the principal insignia of the Mexica brings to mind the imagery of Tlaxcala, revealing the complete rejection of anything identified with the imperial power of Tenochtitlan. Obviously, the Tetzcocan situation was markedly distinct, but they too had to defend their autonomy and strive for political importance within the Triple Alliance. It suffices to recall the case of the “rebellious” subject altepetl of Tepechpan, which in its strategy of emancipation and renegotiation of status appropriated the highest insignia of the Mexica in its pictorial record. As has already been pointed out, the “Aztec manuscript painting style,” and especially the annals tradition that characterized the imperial core zone, ranged over the imperial territory in places where the Triple Alliance exercised control, especially in the province of Tochpan in northern Veracruz, the province of Xilotepec in Hidalgo, and the province of Tlapan in Guerrero (Boone 1996, 205–6; 2000, 198). Indeed, as has been shown, imperial influence manifest in the adoption of elite imagery can be traced in numerous local sources beyond the Valley of Mexico. However, considering the important differences existing between the iconography of rank of the two key players in the Aztec state, Tenochtitlan and Tetzcoco, it seems inappropriate to speak of “imperial influence” in general terms. Thus, in the above analysis, rather than speaking of a more vague “Aztec” impact, I employ the term Mexica or Tenochca, referring primarily to the influence of Tenochtitlan and differentiating it from possible, and indeed much more difficult to trace, signs of Tetzcocan inspiration. The extant sources also seem to reveal that, rather than directly adopting and recreating the formal Mexica style, the imperial imprint is often manifest in the borrowing of manuscript genres and iconographic conventions, in which elite imagery played a special role. Even when the pictorial content shows a strong external influence, it tends to merge with local stylistic features, as is especially conspicuous in native manuscripts from Guerrero and Hidalgo. The postconquest date of these sources is an additional factor, making such reconstructions even more difficult to achieve. Affinities with the Mexica iconography of rank can be identified in local documents from imperial provinces of Xilotepec, Axocopan, Atotonilco de Pedraza, Chiapan, Malinalco, Huaxtepec, Tlapan, Tepeyacac, Acatlan, and Cempoala; spanning wide portions of the present states of Hidalgo, Guerrero, Morelos, and Puebla; and bordering parts of Oaxaca and Veracruz. A marker of influence associated with Tenochtitlan is the adoption of the turquoise diadem (xiuhhuitzolli) and, much less

285

286

I mages of R ank by R egion

frequently, the cape with the turquoise design (xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli) in peripheral localities; indeed, its distribution conforms to the geographic zones under imperial control, including areas to the north, southwest, south, southeast, and east of the Valley of Mexico. The reed throne, another important status item in Nahua communities, is much less diagnostic, for in many cases it appears to have been part of local repertories of status items independently of Mexica influence, as was clearly the case with centers in the present area of Puebla. In certain areas, however, it was adopted together with the turquoise diadem and other elements associated with the specifically Mexica repertory, which implies its identification as a symbol of power originating in Tenochtitlan. This eager acceptance of foreign insignia, at least in the visual language, reveals that provincial elites saw advantages in a friendly association with the Triple Alliance and tried to emulate their overlords. This phenomenon is manifest in both tributary and strategic provinces, but it should be expected to be more salient in the areas whose integration with the empire was based on a political clientship. In such cases, a deliberate strategy of collaboration allowed the maintenance of considerable autonomy on the local level and the strengthening of one’s own position through prestigious affiliation. Thus, it is not surprising that the adoption of Mexica costume by the ruler of Tlapan-Tlachinollan coincides with forging an alliance long before the actual conquest of this state by the military force of Tenochtitlan. The spread of elite subculture, including the right to share important status symbols, was surely part of the political strategy of the Mexica in their attempts to foster cooperation among subordinated elites (Berdan and Smith 1996, 210–11; 2003, 70–71). And as numerous postconquest local documents tend to reveal, it was a well-aimed and effective endeavor. Equally important, however, was the local desire to give signs of similarity to, and association with, the Tenochca.69 What emerges from the analysis of numerous local pictorial manuscripts, emanating from both the core and periphery of the domain controlled by the Triple Alliance, is the preeminence—if not the exclusiveness—of the Mexica impact. The Tetzcocan influence in the iconography of rank is limited to its closest subordinate altepetl, such as Tepetlaoztoc. The case of Tepechpan is highly informative here: in spite of its dependence on Tetzcoco, it follows Mexica conventions and manuscript genre, making a long-term political strategy of its claimed relationship with Tenochtitlan. Beyond the Valley of Mexico the only possible examples of the Acolhua imprint—by no means necessarily an overt impact—are limited to the province of Quauhchinanco adjacent to the area of Acolhuacan, as is suggested by certain details of the Códice de Xicotepec. Can this situation be taken as illustrative of the configuration of power and influence within the imperial structure? Much ink has been spilled over the internal hierarchy within the Triple Alliance, the nature

I mages of R ank by R egion

of the relationship between Tenochtitlan and Tetzcoco and its evolution over time, the possible hegemony of Tenochtitlan, and the underestimation of the position of Tetzcoco due to being obscured by Mexica propaganda. While it is not my objective to take a position in this complex dispute, whose dimension is far beyond the scope of the present study, I must stress that, judging by the pictorial evidence alone, the disparity between the external impact of Tenochtitlan and Tetzcoco is indeed compelling. As this observation is grounded in a wide range of native sources originating in different regions of central Mexico, it provides an argument not to be ignored in the discussion of power relations within the Triple Alliance and the degree of impact exerted by particular allies. In spite of numerous traces of the spread of imperial inspirations that survived in local painting traditions into the colonial period, postconquest pictorial manuscripts also attest to the strength of regional styles. These mingle with borrowings from Mexica sources, as is conspicuous, for example, in the Palimpsesto Veinte Mazorcas and the Codices Azoyú from the province of Tlapan or in the Matrícula de Huexotzinco or Lienzo de Tecamachalco from the present state of Puebla. The latter, corresponding in large part to the former imperial province of Tepeyacac, is an excellent example of maintaining a strong and consistent regional tradition manifest both in the inclination toward certain manuscript genres (cartographic-historical, genealogies) and the iconography of rank exalting prestigious Chichimec roots, but also in sharing some status items, such as reed thrones, with the Nahuas of the Valley of Mexico. Thus, in all likelihood, certain Nahua traits, which entered into the “imperial” iconography of Tenochtitlan, were of much broader distribution and their presence beyond the Valley of Mexico at least in some cases probably predated the establishment of imperial control. Indeed, as has been observed on a more general level, some elements of the Late Postclassic art styles and iconographic repertories were adopted in many areas of Mesoamerica long before the rise of the Aztec empire, although its expansion contributed to their further spread (Boone and Smith 2003, 192).70 This could have also been the case with Nahua inspirations that leaked into the Mixtec area, and especially the Valley of Coixtlahuaca, apparently much earlier than the military thrust of Tenochtitlan in the second half of the fifteenth century. An intriguing case is the presence of Mexica-affiliated traits, such as turquoise diadems, in the imperial province of Acatlan in the Mixteca Baja, which crop up in a large sample of colonial documents even though they are very rare in the Nahua-Popoloca communities to the north, much closer to the Valley of Mexico. Apparently, in spite of its distance from Tenochtitlan, the elites of Mixteca Baja were more prone to the adoption of its iconography of rank than the nobility of Nahua altepetl in Puebla, sticking to their own pictorial styles.

287

288

I mages of R ank by R egion

Postconquest Strategies in Images of Rank

The flourishing of native manuscript painting in the sixteenth century fostered the creation of numerous images of the indigenous nobility that served a variety of purposes, often depending on specific pictorial genres. The pictorial medium became an important space for the development of the iconography of rank that could accommodate traditional functions as well as new challenges and goals of changing political, economic, and cultural circumstances. Native genres managed to survive for a considerable time because they continued to serve much the same needs as in preconquest times (land and tribute records, maps, annals, genealogies), but important adaptations were inevitable, speeding up the occupation of new niches in the postconquest world by indigenous documents. It was possible not only by virtue of the continuing significance of pictorial records among native communities but also because of Spanish recognition of their documentary and legal power. The wide spectrum of functions—among which judicial utility was of particular importance—performed by native pictorial genres in the sixteenth century and beyond is mirrored by possible targets of the iconography of rank developed in these visual records. This imagery, a salient feature of many different kinds of documents, is in itself a response to colonial challenges, relating to ongoing sociopolitical changes in the system of rule on the level of particular altepetl and in the status of the indigenous nobility and potential threats to their economic positions or sources of legitimacy. Encoded in representations of the postconquest elites are also references to the preconquest past and attitudes toward cultural novelties. Among the fundamental pivots of the postconquest iconography of rank is its degree of conservatism, or, in other words, the degree of continuity of preconquest models versus the adoption of European status symbols. As we have seen, there was no single dominant strategy or unified response on the part of the colonial Nahua nobility toward these two different points of reference. Nor was there a uniform native view of the status of colonial descendants of pre-Hispanic rulers and the question of its possible reduction compared to the precontact situation. These differing perspectives and ideas were usually conveyed by means of well-defined pictorial conventions, within which coherent sets of attributes were of primary importance. On a general level, taking into account the currently available sample of sixteenth-century sources from the Nahua world, it is more common to find traditional imagery, which implies that the legitimacy of status was identified with preconquest markers of rank and not with Spanish attributes, even if the latter were in fact introduced in daily life. Thus, ignoring profound changes in costume repertory occurring through the sixteenth century, postcontact nobles are often featured as if they were pre-Hispanic lords. This conveys an intentional affirmation of an unbroken continuity and legitimacy of native rule rooted in the past. While this

I mages of R ank by R egion

strategy is found in many pictorial manuscripts in the Valley of Mexico and beyond, meaningful details were sometimes employed to raise doubts about the equivalency between preconquest tlatoque and their colonial counterparts, not to mention Spanish-introduced offices. One can sense such ambiguity while comparing images of rulers contained in the Primeros Memoriales and the Florentine Codex that reflect the differing views of their native painters (or the persons who commissioned them). Whereas in the first of these manuscripts colonial leaders are deprived of the prestige attached to the preconquest tlatoque as expressed by the lack of the most important royal insignia, the second manuscript does declare the continuity of the earlier status, while at the same time, through appropriate combinations of symbols of rank, it transmits political allusions and aspirations representing the point of view of its native authors. Crucial for the development of postconquest conventions was the differentiation between dynastic rulers, whose right derived from pre-Hispanic ancestors, and municipal governors or other functionaries (such as alcaldes and regidores), whose offices were introduced by Spaniards as part of native cabildos. Although the role of the gobernador was conceived as, in many respects, similar to that of the tlatoani and absorbed much of its lore in the course of the sixteenth century, numerous native sources put considerable emphasis on careful differentiation between the two positions. Often only hereditary rulers received the right to don the traditional regalia, whereas those ruling under the Spanish mandate were identified by European status markers, such as the vara del mando, combined with native items that could be associated with similar preconquest functions: for example, reed thrones shared by Aztec judges and colonial native jueces-gobernadores or alcaldes. By the same token, indigenous governors who were at the same time hereditary tlatoque were shown as pre-Hispanic rulers, appearing superior to the lower-ranking group of functionaries lacking dynastic legitimacy. Among native insignia continuing to define postcontact functionaries are turquoise diadems, capes (sometimes with lavish designs), reed thrones, low stools, flower bouquets, and even smoking tubes. Adopted European status markers encompass staffs of office, curule seats, beards, and garments such as hats, shirts, jackets, trousers, and shoes. Both of these sets became an inherent part of indigenous pictorial conventions, having acquired, often in nuanced combinations, precise associations permitting an identification of a specific category of person. Even if the visual code depended to a certain degree on the individual painter, the imagery from the Valley of Mexico and some communities beyond reveals common pictorial conventions for representing the native elite and officials of New Spain, in which the juxtaposition of attributes from the two traditions was not uncommon. An enlightening example is that of a pictorial document from Iztacmaxtitlan

289

290

I mages of R ank by R egion

illustrating Indians armed with sticks and stones attacking a Franciscan friar, and native officials represented with both turquoise diadems and Spanish staffs (BNF 75).71 We do not know whether in this case such pairing signaled that the persons depicted had both the tlatoani or teuctli background and performed municipal offices, or merely that they belonged to the high-ranking native nobility. It is worth accentuating that the xiuhhuitzolli diadem appears here in a narrative scene, not as part of the “formal” imagery of native rulers. It is clear then that this preconquest attribute was often employed by sixteenth-century painters to define certain categories of persons whose status also needed to be complemented by the presence of Spanish signs of office. A similar combination—the xiuhhuitzolli diadem and the vara del mando—appears in the Codex Azoyú 2 in the portrayal of a native judge visiting a local community, implying that the preconquest royal headdress was retained as an essential attribute of high-ranking nobles, not necessarily tlatoque themselves, perhaps in accordance with its wider original association with the position of teuctli, or the head of a noble lineage. Images of native officials, codified to a considerable degree, were thus based on a combination of traditional and foreign status items that together conveyed adequate information on the status and functions of persons depicted, also signaling their relationship with possible preconquest precedents. Such syncretic portraits of the native nobility were not infrequent in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. However, they did not always imply that those depicted were performing as municipal officers, attesting also to ongoing costume change and the appeal of European status items. This broader convention was probably affected by actual current customs of dress. The constant interplay—and, often, fusion—between tradition and novelty and between the pre-Hispanic power base and the acceptance of the Spanish legal order becomes especially apparent in the Lienzo de Coacoatzintla, where we find double images of the local nobility, in both traditional and Hispanized guise, staged within a single event of much significance for local communities. In some cases, however, pictorial manuscripts attest to yet another strategy, strikingly different from the preconquest stylization of the colonial Nahua nobility. As we have seen in the Tira de Tepechpan, Códice de Santa Cruz Tlamapa no. 3, final folios of the Codices Azoyú, and the Mapa circular de Quauhquechollan, in the visual rhetoric indigenous elites resorted to the total appropriation of Spanish symbols of rank, including not only garments but even rather unrealistic attributes such as Europeanized physical appearance or royal crowns. Conveying essential messages on the construction of identity as well as on the cultural and political strategies of its protagonists and commissioners, native manuscript painting should be seen as an elite enterprise defending the status of indigenous noble groups and serving a variety of needs related to their survival under

I mages of R ank by R egion

Spanish rule. Together with other native sources, and especially texts written in local languages, this medium helps us to understand how the Nahuas saw the relationship between pre-Hispanic and Spanish cultural markers, how they adapted to new forms of organization and, on a more general level, to what degree they were able to assure the continuation of elements of their own culture. Only rarely, however, did the survival mean the perpetuation of a frozen and intact preconquest feature. Much more often, a lasting result was achieved through convergence with a Spanish counterpart or the nearest equivalent, especially when either the external form or content seemed to coincide. Convergence of For m and Meaning

The ongoing convergence of meanings between the two worlds is manifest in all aspects of life in early New Spain and can also be traced in the Nahua iconography of rank. The popularity of some of the most common elements of pictorial convention is not to be explained by mere coincidence. One of them is the vara del mando, repeatedly depicted in association with both Spanish and native officials, especially those performing judicial duties. The Nahuas identified it with the term topilli, probably designating native staffs already before the conquest, whereas a possibly new term topile (“he who has a staff ”) came to refer to officials associated with this attribute, especially constables. Even if, for the preconquest Nahuas, staffs did not have the same importance as for the Mixtecs, who placed them among their highest insignia, the use of such objects can be traced in extant sources. The relevant Nahuatl names usually contain the word topilli, and the prevailing association is with deities and their impersonators. In a few cases, including a pre-Hispanic monument known as the Stone of Warriors, staffs are also found in association with nobles, warriors, and even rulers. Tezozomoc mentions the use of staffs by the rulers of Tenochtitlan during grief ceremonies, whereas the coatopilli, or “serpent staff,” is listed as one of the attributes of the mortuary bundle of Tiçoc (Tezozomoc 2001, 421, 265). This context is confirmed by the imagery in the Codex Xolotl, where all persons attending the funeral of Teçoçomoc, the famous ruler of Azcapotzalco, are holding staffs. On other occasions protagonists of this account appear with long spears decorated with feathers, a frequently depicted native object in colonial sources (figure 3.47a). Also, merchants’ staffs were decorated with feathers and called ihuitopilli, “feathered staffs” (FC IX, 53). Interestingly, Bernal Díaz mentions two golden staffs “as if of justice” among the precious gifts presented by the messengers of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin to the Spaniards (Díaz del Castillo 1972, 66).72 There is no firm evidence, however, that staffs were recognized as royal insignia among the Nahuas of the Valley of Mexico before the Spanish conquest.

291

292

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.47. Spears and walking sticks: (a) Codex Xolotl, fol. 9; (b) Codex Mexicanus, fol. 33; and (c) Codex Azcatitlan, fol. 5 (Bibliothèque Nationale de France; drawings by Justyna Olko).

There are good grounds to think that the Nahuas saw Spanish varas as close equivalents of these precontact objects. The perceived affinity could have been even stronger if it is considered that varas were granted to native functionaries in special ceremonies that probably evoked preconquest investiture in Tenochtitlan. In the sixteenth century newly elected indigenous officers traveled to MexicoTenochtitlan to receive viceregal confirmation of their positions, replicating the pattern of earlier tlatoque who had traveled to the same place for sanction by the powerful huei tlatoani (Gibson 1964, 179). The importance of this ceremony for the Nahuas is attested by an inclusion of the scene of viceregal investiture of native officials in the Codex Osuna (fol. 471v; see also figure 3.48). While describing preconquest reality, toward the end of the sixteenth century, fray Juan de Torquemada identifies a native teuctli with the contemporary post of regidor, projecting the vara, a European sign of office, into the indigenous past. By doing this, he also affirms a widely perceived affinity between pre-Hispanic and Spanish offices: “En cada pueblo había un tecuhtli, que era regidor, y traía en su mano izquierda una vara, y en la derecha un ventalle ó aventador, en señal, que era oficio real” (“In each town there was a teuctli, who was a regidor, and he carried a staff in his left hand and a fan in his right, as a sign that this was a royal office”; Torquemada 1977, IV: 334). Much as the Spanish vara was reinterpreted as an attribute of a pre-Hispanic lord, in postconquest native imagery other local objects are often assimilated to European-style staffs. For example, in the Codex Mexicanus walking sticks of precontact personages resemble Spanish varas (figure 3.47b). Spears, an attribute of the Mexica god Huitzilopochtli, are pictured in late sources, such as the Codex Azcatitlan, in a way evoking colonial varas (figure 3.47c). In the migration account of this manuscript, native spears decorated with feathers figure as walking sticks, sometimes simply rendered as sticks or staffs without the sharpened end. The sense

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.48. Investiture of native officials, Codex Osuna, fol. 471v (Biblioteca Nacional de España).

of similarity could be strengthened further, considering that arrows were reportedly used as the insignia of royal justice in Tetzcoco, serving to point toward the head of an accused person in trials presided over by the ruler himself (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, II: 94). If this evidence is credible, it provides a direct link between native weapons and the vara as symbols of judicial power. This association seems additionally corroborated by pictorial sources. In the Tira de Tepechpan, Tencoyotzin, the ruler of Tepechpan, points with a long dart toward a rectangle signifying parcels of land, a scene that has been linked to a legal act (Noguez 1978, 93–94). This image probably refers to the division or assignment of land, for we find similar depictions in the Codex Xolotl, where the Chichimec leaders Xolotl and Nopaltzin are shown dividing the land by pointing with spears in their outstretched hands. While in these images the possible confluence of the two traditions is only subtly manifest, if present at all, elsewhere it becomes much more explicit. In the Tovar Manuscript, made in the 1580s, the rulers of Tenochtitlan, while preserving their traditional pre-Hispanic insignia, also wield spears, a combination to be looked for in vain in earlier sources (figure 3.49; Tovar 1972). Spears continue in their importance as a royal attribute in seventeenth-century native manuscripts. In the Codex García-Granados, for example, tlatoque also hold long arrows or spears, whereas in the first section of the Codex Azcatitlan the rulers of the Triple Alliance are seated and hold spears or lances, but, characteristically, these long weapons traditionally decorated with feathers are assimilated to staffs or varas, for no blades are shown (figure 3.50). Later on in the same manuscript, the monarchs of Tenochtitlan

293

Figure 3.49. Motecucçoma Xocoyotzin, Tovar Manuscript, fol. 117 (courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University).

Figure 3.50. Spears-varas held by precontact rulers, Codex Azcatitlan, fol. 3 (Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.51. Investiture scene, Tira de Tepechpan (Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

wield spears along with preconquest royal attributes. What again draws our attention is that although feathered decoration is preserved, these objects are depicted without their pointed ends, which makes them identical to Spanish varas. This identification was also made on linguistic grounds, because the colonial Nahuatl term for European-style thrusting spears or lances, tepoztopilli, includes the notion of topilli, or staff, designating Spanish varas. This term probably entered native vocabulary early after the Spanish conquest together with other numerous neologisms based on the use of the word tepoztli (originally “copper”) for “iron” (Lockhart 1992, 272–73) and, indeed, preconquest spears equipped with obsidian or flint blades were usually referred to as tlacochtli. Thus, the identification of a

295

296

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.52. Pointed-finger gesture, pre-Hispanic examples: (a) Codex Nuttall, fols. 56 and 57; and (b) wall painting in Teotihuacan (drawings by Justyna Olko).

Figure 3.53. Finger-pointing in postcontact sources: (a) Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fol. 29v; (b) Codex Cozcatzin, fol. 1v; and (c) Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fol. 46v (Bibliothèque Nationale de France; drawings by Justyna Olko).

foreign attribute of power with its closest pre-Hispanic counterparts was based on visual, terminological, and, to certain degree, also functional similarity, resulting in images of preconquest personages outfitted with the equivalents of Spanish varas. This association apparently worked also in the other direction, for in the Codex Telleriano-Remensis (fol. 25v), varas held by Spanish officials take the form of native staffs with flowery decoration. In a similar way, in the scene of investiture represented in the Tira de Tepechpan, Hernando Cortés holds a lance, whereas a native noble facing him, probably don Hernando Cortés Ixtlilxochitl, the son of Neçahualpilli (Noguez 1978, 112), has a native spear, both of them being engaged in an act consisting normally in the handover of the vara del mando (figure 3.51). Another exemplification of this phenomenon in the iconography of rank is the postconquest use of the “pointed-finger” gesture. This element was employed as

I mages of R ank by R egion

Figure 3.54. Native diadems transformed: (a) archbishop Alonso de Montufar, Codex Aubin, fol. 49r (Bibliothèque Nationale de France); and (b) yellow “turquoise” diadem (courtesy of Archivo General de la Nación, Mexico, Tierras, vol. 55, exp. 5, fol. 16r).

an attribute of rank in pre-Hispanic art (figure 3.52), but its presence intensified in colonial pictorial sources (figure 3.53). Finger-pointing is one of the most elementary, universal human gestures and, as such, was also common in European iconography. This probably did not go unnoticed by native painters, while indigenous counterparts were probably also recognizable by Spaniards. Thus, the confluence of both traditions and the sensation of familiarity on both sides could have contributed to the popularity and wide use of this gesture in pictorial sources after the conquest. Its transcultural identity was, to a certain degree, only apparent. In European art, depending on context and genre, finger-pointing could be done by a person of any rank, for its basic function was to communicate the actual activity of pointing something out. In the native tradition it was a more symbolic gesture, employed for giving orders, making assignments, or even electing a ruler, becoming an attribute of power and conveying information on status and rank in pictorial conventions.73 Obviously, for the Nahuas and Spaniards it did not always mean the same, even though it appeared to be the same. The same applies to the postconquest memory of the royal diadem, the xiuhhuitzolli. This pre-Hispanic term was extended to refer to bishops’ miters, called xiuhuitzolli mitra (Chimalpahin 2003b, 323–24), an equivalence based again on visual similarity. This affinity is also seen in the imagery of the Codex Aubin, for example in its folio 49r showing fray Alonso de Montufar (figure 3.54a), archbishop of Mexico, or two bishops on folio 64v. Not by coincidence, their miters

297

298

I mages of R ank by R egion

take the form of the xiuhhuitzolli, including the traditional back ties. Moreover, in this manuscript bishops’ miters stand for the phonetic value tec in the sign of tecpan, instead of the turquoise diadem usual in this place (Batalla Rosado 1997, 78). This phenomenon is also manifest in numerous images of diadems in native sources dating from the late sixteenth through the eighteenth centuries, shown in the visibly rounded form of a bishop’s miter. A parallel change was to paint preconquest diadems yellow, and not the traditional blue, to approximate European golden crowns, attested as early as in the 1560s native document (AGN, Tierras, vol. 55, exp. 5, fol. 16r; see also figure 3.54b) and abounding in numerous later sources.74 All of these transformations of the native iconography of rank fall under a wider category of colonial phenomena identified and discussed originally by James Lockhart (1985, 477; 1990; 1991, 21–22) as “double mistaken identity.” Although Nahua-Spanish similarities fostered adoption and change, “Spanish elements which the Nahuas were able to take over because of a perceived affinity with things already current in indigenous culture immediately veered from the Spanish model, or rather never fully embodied that model from the beginning” (Lockhart 1990, 112–13). The manifestations of “double mistaken identity,” or partial convergence of meaning and form of indigenous and Spanish phenomena, pervade many aspects of postcontact native culture, because it was precisely under the cover of the mutual incomprehension that preconquest traditions could survive, even if in a transformed shape. Visible in the forms of sociopolitical organization, beliefs and religious celebrations, community rituals, and legal procedures, and even in forms of writing, these indigenous-European convergences are especially salient in sixteenth-­ century artistic expressions (e.g., Peterson 1995; Reyes-Valerio 1989; Wake, Stokes 1997). As a result, the native attitude toward cross-cultural transfers was not limited to simple borrowing of foreign elements but, above all, attempted to treat them as if they belonged to their own world. An illustrative example is the adoption of Spanish coats of arms, not entirely foreign to the Nahuas, who had their own tradition of decorated shields, feathered crests, and banners, and who also recognized the importance of emblematic graphic representations. Coats of arms, granted or fabricated, became assertions of corporate autonomy of native towns (Haskett 1996, 98–110; Wood 2003, 57). In much the same vein, when foreign objects were being incorporated into native iconography of rank—curule chairs, staffs of office, European garments, or priestly attributes—they immediately became an integral part of the same visual language, just like native attributes conveying necessary information on identity, rank, or function, and making it clear that distinguishing the native from the European is primarily our own concern, not that of the indigenous people of that time.

I mages of R ank by R egion

Notes

1. This study omits the rich corpus reflecting Mixtec and Zapotec traditions, which deserves a separate study and betrays much weaker Nahua impact than other communities subject to the Triple Alliance. Certain data from these regions, however, are brought into the discussion, especially while mentioning the complex imagery of “transitional” areas located between major Nahuatl- and Mixtec-speaking regions, such as southern portions of Puebla. 2. According to Umberger and other scholars it was made between 1455 and 1469 in the reign of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina (Umberger 1996a, 97–98), while Graulich presents convincing evidence that the monument pertains to the reign of Axayacatl, which would better fit the conquests alluded to (Graulich 1992, 5–9). 3. This is explicitly reflected in mythical accounts, like those relating the conflict between Quetzalcoatl from Tula and his malevolent enemy, Tezcatlipoca, in some versions replaced by Huitzilopochtli (Sahagún 1997b, 196). 4. These reliefs were destroyed at the beginning of the twentieth century, but the nineteenth-century drawings of these images show the victors in the act of conquest wearing the same Toltec apparel with attributes of Tezcatlipoca as those represented on both sacrificial stones. The date 1 Flint should probably be identified with 1428 and the Tepanec war that initiated the process of the formation of the Triple Alliance. 5. The use of attributes of Huitzilopochtli by Mexica rulers is also implied by an image of Chimalpopoca in the Codex Xolotl (fol. 8): he seems to be wearing a hummingbird back device, similar to the huitzilnahualli listed among the adornments of Painal in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 261r). 6. I would like to thank Dr. Emily Umberger for providing me with her unpublished drawing of this object. 7. The reliefs from Cerro de Malinche, a hill near the site of Tula, executed in late Aztec times, probably depict an archetypal Toltec ruler, Quetzalcoatl, for 1 Acatl is carved near his head (Umberger 1981, 157; Quiñones Keber 1993, 153). Sharing a convention similar to those found in several royal images, Quetzalcoatl is clad in a xicolli with a stepped-fret pattern, carrying an incense pouch, and drawing blood from his ear. 8. Umberger suggests that the date of the execution could be either 1506 or 1519, considering the occurrences of 1 Reed during Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin’s reign (Umberger 1981, 105), but Pasztory prefers the later date, proposing that the specific concern with Quetzalcoatl was triggered by the arrival of Cortés and that the implements stored in this special container served for propitiatory sacrifices (Pasztory 1983, 257). As a matter of fact, upon the arrival of strangers, Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin undertook penitential activities preparing himself for the departure to the Otherworld or ritual suicide by means of which he could avoid humiliating death at the hands of feared intruders (Tomicki 1990, 254–314), but, even

299

300

I mages of R ank by R egion

so, the identification of the stone box with this context remains entirely conjectural. The grounds for the identifiation with the year 1519 are very weak, especially since 1 Acatl more likely refers here to Quetzalcoatl’s name than a date. 9. It is similar to an accouterment worn by a priest depicted over the tzompantli on folio 269r of the Primeros Memoriales. 10. This religious symbolism is also implied by the tezcacuitlapilli, or mirrors carried on the back by the two individuals, and symbolizing back solar disks (Umberger 1981, 185; Taube 1994). 11. It has been proposed that iconographically related to the destroyed Chapultepec reliefs is the so-called Chimalli Stone from Cuernavaca, with Xipe Totec war insignia of Aztec rulers, possibly commemorating the death of Moteucçoma I and/or the accession of Axayacatl in 1469 (Seler 1902–23, II: 597–98; Umberger 1981, 167). 12. This episode, described in several extant sources, has been convincingly interpreted as an attempt at royal suicide, or ritualized escape to the Otherworld realm of prosperity and abundance (Tomicki 1990, 254–314). 13. For example, when preparing his “trip” to Cincalco, Moteucçoma is said to have ordered his servants to prepare a place with sapote seats and sapote leaves strewn on the floor: “Yd y hazed con breuedad un lugar en Tlachtonco en medio de la laguna honda donde está aquel lugar, con dos asentaderos de el çapote y sembrado todo el suelo de hoja de çapote, que presto yremos allá” (Tezozomoc 2001, 461). 14. The back drum was apparently also used by rulers on the battlefield in combination with other costumes, as suggested by the image in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl, folio 106r. 15. Seler was the first to propose that the rulers wore the tlauhquecholtzontli headdress as part of their Xipe dress (Seler 1902–23, II: 401–3). 16. According to Tezozomoc (2001, 451), the image of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in the rock of Chapultepec, apart from the headdress of red-spoonbill feathers, included a thin golden nose-rod, a turquoise-mirror earplug, a golden lip-plug, jaguar-skin bands, a bone rattle staff, and a jaguar-skin seat. In addition, Nicholson noted that the fragmentarily preserved carved figure may have worn on the upper left arm the quetzalmachoncotl, mentioned by Durán (Nicholson 1959, 404). 17. Seler interprets these two sections of the shield as expressing the Aztec metaphor of atl tlachinolli. He also notes that this shield design appears on the Chimalli Stone (Seler 1902–23, II: 597–98). 18. Dyckerhoff suggests that it is the name Totec, not Xipe, that is associated with the tlauhquecholtzontli apparel. She notes, however, that both aspects are present simultaneously at gladiatorial sacrifices depicted in the Codex Tudela (fol. 12); few examples show a mingling of these, which she explains as “examples of Aztec syncretism” (Dyckerhoff 1970, 362; 1993, 142). It is therefore possible that the proposed distinction between Xipe and Totec is superflous or artificial.

I mages of R ank by R egion

19. Tezozomoc seems to leave no doubt about this issue, stating that during the funeral of Tlacahuepan and other warriors: “tras ello quemaron todas las rropas de bestir y calçar [que] tenían y sus armas y diuisa y piedras preçiosas [que] tenían cada uno” (Tezozomoc 2001, 404). 20. “Díxole su he[rma]no Monteçuma: ‘Pues que ansí lo queréis, tomá estas armas [que] fueron del rrey Axayacatl, n[uest]ro primo hermano: una diuisa de oro llamado teocuitlatontec, con una abe ençima dél, tlauhquechol.’ ” 21. “Y llegados a Tlacotepec, estauan allí mucha gente de rrefresco de los de Toluca aguardando a los mexicanos para darles por las espaldas. Y en esto llegó Axayaca con su poder y en biéndolos començó a tocar su tanboril de alegría, [que] llaman yopihuehuetl, puesto su gran plumaxe, y yba con tanta priesa y corría [que] hazía estremeçer de su ardimiento a sus enemigos. Y a esta sazón estaua soterrado junto a un mague un prençipal tuluqueño baliente llamado Cuetzpal, y en un prouiso salió al pasar de Axayaca y de ynprouiso le hirió [en] un muslo, [que] le hizo arrodillar una rodilla. Y el Cuetzpal porfiando a le quitar la deuisa del páxaro [que] traía [en] la cabeça, que era tlauhquechol, y la rrica plumería. De otro cabo salió una biexa detrás de otro mague y le quitó Axayaca la deuisa del aue rrica [que] traía por su debisa, y con esto arrancó la biexa dando alarido y con la deuisa [en] la mano. . . . Y le hallaron peleando balerosamente con Cuetzpal, que el uno al otro no se podían bençer y estaua todo lleno de poluo el cuerpo y cabeça y rrostro y muy cansado y le andaua rrodeando el Tlilcuezpal y le dezía a boces: ‘¿Cómo te llamas, [que] serás grande señor?’ y él rrespondía: ‘Llámome Tlilcuetzpal.’ Díxole Axayaca: ‘Mirá, bellaco, si me acabáis la bida buestro será Mexico Tenuchtitlan.’ Y bisto Cuetzpal benían los mexicanos [en] su busca, huyó a gran priesa y tomaron los mexicanos Axayaca, limpiáronle el rrostro, y díxoles: ‘Dexadme descansar’ ” (Tezozomoc 2001, 217–18). 22. “Y con esto, despedidos los mensajeros, el rrey Neçahualcoyotzim les dio que diesen al rrey Axayaca unas armas y deuisa, [que] hera un quetzalpatzactli, debisa muy rrica de preçiada plumería, una rrodela aforrada en cuero de tiguere la mitad, otra mitad un sol de oro, a la rredonda della puntas de agudas nabanjas, armas preçiadas de rreyes, macana de nabaxajones agudos. Y con esto, binieron los mesmos señores a oyr la enbaxada de los señores mexicanos. Oyda la rrazón, fuéro[n]se cada uno a su pueblo adereçar y aperçibir toda la más gente que pudieron llegar armados” (Tezozomoc 2001, 227–28). 23. In the Florentine Codex, Xipe is designated as anahuatl itec (“lord of the coast”) and anahuatl iteouh, tzapoteca inteouh (“god of the coast or seashore, god of the Zapotecs”; FC I, 39). In another place the informants of Sahagún state that Totec or Tlatlauhqui was the god of the Yopes from Guerrero (FC X, 187). In the Spanish version of his work, Sahagún mentions that Xipe Totec was venerated by inhabitants of the coast and that he originated in “Tzapotlan, pueblo de Jalisco,” identified with Ciudad de Guzmán (Sahagún 1997b, 45). It has also been proposed that the cult of Xipe may have been accepted in Tenochtitlan along with the rituals of arrow sacrifice and gladiatorial combat performed during the feast of Tlacaxipehualiztli after military conquests in Oaxaca (Boone 2003, 213).

301

302

I mages of R ank by R egion

24. According to an alternative hypothesis, the group of people most likely to have shared the characteristics of the pictorial part of the Primeros Memoriales and to have been available to Sahagún were not his Tepepolco informants but the young gramáticos who served as his assistants. In this scenario, the informants at Tepepolco may have brought their preconquest or preconquest-style manuscript(s) that were glossed by them and after that copied (at least in part) by Sahagún’s assistants (Baird 1988, 226–27). It is highly improbable, however, that whole sections of the Primeros Memoriales were copied directly from already existing prototypes. 25. The artists of the Florentine Codex were working in an eclectic way, combining both native pictorials and European illustrated books and engravings available in the library of the Colegio de Tlatelolco (Peterson 1988, 278). Donald Robertson seems correct in identifying at least two different styles (with many “shades” and not always with clear-cut distinctions): the “Aztec Revival style,” alluding to preconquest traditions, and a Europeanized manner, betraying the facility of adaptation of the native painters to new stylistic and iconographic conventions (Robertson [1959] 1994, 178). 26. It is generally accepted that the folios 51r–53v were prepared first, followed by folios 2r–5v of the RAH manuscript, while the rulers’ section of the Florentine Codex (Book VIII, fols. 1r–10r) is the most recent one (Ruz Barrio 2013b, 19). 27. “Y chichimeca tlatoque in uel qujpiaia in jtlatocaio in acampa tequjtia caxtolpoalxiujtl in uel qujpix in jtlatocaio” 28. It remains conjectural whether the presence of three turquoise capes in the dynasty of Huexotla in the Florentine Codex reflects the unusual status of their wearers, or if the painters simply did not mind reproducing them because no political message was attached. 29. In several cases extant sources do not make it entirely clear if a particular individual enjoyed the title of don (especially if his status was somewhat ambiguous). 30. “Yn izquitin i mochiuhque tlatoque” (Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 37). 31. “Don pedro temjlo icoac omotlatocatlali in tlatilulco, iehoatl ie no compeoalti in tlatocaiotl, in oiuh conaçique compeuhque Españoles in altepetl mexico, noujian qujuicatinen in vêca españoles injc tepeuhque in cuextlan, hunruras, quauhtemallan” (FC VIII, 7–8). 32. “Iehoatl in axcan tlatoanj don hernando pimentel” (FC VIII, 11). The word axcan (“present,” “current”), which seems to be struck out in the manuscript, may have been copied from an earlier version, made before 1564, and later corrected. 33. María Castañeda de la Paz suggests the possibility that don Esteban de Guzmán was a great-grandson of Axayacatl and the son of his grandson don Francisco de Guzmán Omacatzin, tlatoani-gobernador of Olac in the altepetl of Xochimilco (Castañeda de la Paz 2008a, 411–12). 34. The native drawings are for part of a larger set of documents in Spanish and Nahuatl that contain land titles with dates encompassing 1574–1709. Thus, it is difficult to establish

I mages of R ank by R egion

an exact date for the pictorial part. However, in view of the presence of only two early rulers, it is possible that the pictorial part is a copy of an earlier drawing or is an earlier document reused for the purposes of later litigation. 35. According to the reconstruction of Noguez, the account starts in 1542 and from that point relates participation of Tlatelolcas in various events, such as an expedition to New Mexico (1540–42) under Francisco Vásquez de Coronado and struggles under the direct command of don Antonio de Mendoza and his native allies against Chichimec groups in the so-called Mixton war (1541–42) in the area between Jalisco and Zacatecas. Noguez created the chronological sequence that ends in 1560, and this correlation has only minor problematic points (Noguez 1998, 23–24). 36. Native officials—possibly alcaldes or judges—were also depicted in the section corresponding to 1558–59. According to the already-discussed early-colonial native convention, they retain native attributes (such as reed thrones, diadems, capes, and speech scrolls) combined with Spanish-style staffs. 37. For example, on folio 3, Pochotl, the son of Amitzin and Xiuhnenetzin, wears a white cape while his father still sports an animal-hide garment. On the same folio the son of Huetzin, Tlaltepantzin, and his offspring switch to cotton capes and even Toltec-style bracelets. 38. The Codex Xolotl is likely a composite of many earlier documents; thus, it is possible that its painters followed, to certain degree, differences among these various manuscripts ( Jerome Offner, personal communication 2011). 39. Jerome Offner notes a similarity to a possible joint investiture scene in the Mapa de Metlatoyuca, where one of the personages also wears the coçoyahualolli, and discusses its presence in the Códice de Xicotepec, perhaps related to assigning specific tribute obligations (Offner 2010a). 40. According to Robertson ([1959] 1994, 141), the upper part of the Mapa Quinatzin and the whole of Mapa Tlotzin were originally parts of the same cycle, if not actually copied from the same manuscript. 41. Huexotla tried to achieve the status of an independent cabecera, and Tetzcoco claimed the relationship between itself and Huexotla as one of cabecera to sujeto, based on an analogous relationship in the preconquest times (Gibson 1964, 51–52). Spitler views this as a Tetzcocan attempt to redefine the pre-Hispanic situation, when Huexotla enjoyed its independent status (Spitler 1998, 78). However, even though Huexotla seems to have been a full-fledged altepetl with a tlatoani, it was also part of the Acolhua state and paid tribute to Tetzcoco (Hodge, Blanton 1996, 231). 42. John Carter Brown Library Codex Ind. 42. 43. If the 1866–67 reproduction of this very deteriorated document is correct, then, in addition to wearing a native cape and a loincloth, issuing a speech scroll, and being seated on the reed throne, don Antonio also has a Spanish hat and a vara de justicia.

303

304

I mages of R ank by R egion

44. According to Robertson, the dating of glosses (1542, 1546, 1548) gives the terminus ante quem for the composition of the painted stage of the manuscript (Robertson [1959] 1994, 139), but some authors prefer to date it around 1542 (Lesbre 2008, 173). 45. Robertson admits a date prior to 1557 for the manuscript as a whole, with the addenda dating in their respective years (1568, 1569; Robertson [1959] 1994, 146). 46. The foundation of Tenochtitlan in the Tira de Tepechpan is not explictly linked to any year sign. Noguez prefers the date 1366, and indeed this is the year sign placed directly over Tenochtitlan’s place sign, whereas Boone prefers the 1369 date. 47. Though standardized, I consider this version slightly simplified because the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli is missing. However, Mexica annals employed simplified versions of royal capes too. Therefore, there is no doubt that the Tepechpan imagery falls within the general convention associated with Tenochtitlan-Tlatelolco, rather than with Tetzcoco. The links with Tenochtitlan are confirmed also by another important detail: white feathers or feather down inserted in the hair. As has been discussed in chapter 2, apart from sacrificial contexts, this element is found in the depictions of “early” Mexica. In the Tira de Tepechpan it appears in the image of Caltzin, in the depictions of the Mexica in the final part of their peregrination, and in the foundation scene of Tenochtitlan. 48. Although the image of the accession of don Diego in the Tira de Tepechpan is severely damaged, Picardo’s copy shows that he probably also wore a European crown at his installation (Diel 2008, 77). 49. The image of a crown also appears in the Confirmation des elections de Calpan but as a sign and not an object actually worn by native rulers, who continue to use the xiuhhuitzolli. 50. Some scholars, however, view it more as an Acolhua document (Ballesteros García 2001, 105). 51. According to the written Relación de Chiepetlan, forty-five individuals arrived around 1490 from Xochimilco to found Chiepetlan under the command of four captains ( Jiménez Padilla and Villela 1998, 44). 52. Its style was traditional enough for Barlow to judge it pre-Hispanic in its original content, modified by later additions (Barlow 1961, 100-103). 53. Their figural style is reminiscent of late additions to the Palimpsesto Veinte Mazorcas and is thus perhaps indicative of the seventeenth century in spite of the 1572 date, traditionally ascribed to the Lienzo de Aztatepec y Citlaltepec (Glass 1964, 184) and 1570 or even 1554 given to the Lienzo de Totomixtlahuaca (Glass 1975b, 222–23; Ramírez Celestino 1993, 143), these being merely the dates appearing in the glosses that probably refer to events depicted rather than the date of manufacture. 54. The only exception to this Mexica-inspired elite costume is the Lienzo de Tlapan where preconquest couples are represented in a simplified way reminiscent of Mixtec genealogies, while the most recent generation combines native garments and low seats with Spanish hats.

I mages of R ank by R egion

55. Tentative readings, such as Xicotli or Pipiyollin, have been proposed (Gutiérrez Mendoza, Medina Lima 2008, 104). It might also refer to the future tlatoani Axayacatl who acceded in 1469, but had probably already fulfilled important military and political functions during the rule of his predecessor Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina. The name Axayacatl means both “water face,” most commonly depicted as his name glyph, and “marsh fly.” However, in the pictorial conventions Axayacatl was usually depicted with a watery face name glyph. 56. It is difficult to decide whether the insignia from Tenochtitlan figure in the Codices Azoyú merely as part of the pictorial conventions or were indeed worn by the local nobility. 57. For example, don Domingo’s return to the throne is elaborated much more in the Codex Azoyú 2. The accession of his opponent, ruler “Reed,” is not recorded here, but it is given great emphasis in the Codex Azoyú 1 (Oudijk 2012, 163). 58. It evokes remotely the aztaxelli, a forked heron-feather ornament common in neighboring Tlaxcala and sometimes combined with a headband, but usually pictured in a different way; as a matter of fact, examples of the aztaxelli can be found in the Mapa de Quautinchan no. 3, following the standard manner of its depiction. 59. The Codex Tulane was probably in the possession of the native rulers of Acatlan in the early colonial period because the annotations in European script on the back of the manuscript in a sixteenth-century hand refer specifically to the first seven rulers of Acatlan painted on the front (Smith and Parmenter 1991, 86). 60. Contacts between Huexotzinco and Tenochtitlan varied from hostilities to friendly collaboration, including military help and refuge in the Mexica capital. 61. Also, the outstretched hand in some of the images seems to be the deformation of a preconquest pointed-finger gesture, a typical royal attribute in native pictorial conventions, especially in the area of Puebla. 62. A form of dependence on Tenochtitlan is implied by Durán’s reference that the ruler of Quauhchinanco allied with Ahuitzotl in his campaign against the Huaxtecs (Durán 1984, II: 328; Smith and Berdan 1996b, 290). 63. John Glass dates it to 1555 because this date appears on the document (Glass 1975b, 108). This date, however, refers to the events represented in the lienzo. Judging by style and iconographic details, the map was painted at a later time. It seems very probable that the map in the Archivo General de la Nación is a copy of an earlier original that, on the basis of pictorial conventions, could have been made in the second half of the sixteenth century. 64. AGN, General de parte, vol.1, exp. 145, fol. 28v. 65. That the double images of protagonists—shown in their respective localities and taking part in particular events—could have been a more common regional convention is suggested by another cartographic-historical document from Veracruz, the Mapa de San Antonio Tepetlan, that reveals some stylistic links with the Lienzo de Coacoatzintla. 66. Aguilera suggested these varieties may denote different lineages. However, the distribution of flowers does not seem to reflect any clear spatial pattern. Sometimes person-

305

306

I mages of R ank by R egion

ages within one locality hold different species, or several places are associated with the same flower. 67. University of Texas in Austin; see: Kranz 2007. 68. AGN, Tierras, vol. 914, exp. 2. 69. The painter of the manuscript was probably the same artist who did the Códice de Santo Toribio Xicotzinco used in the litigation in 1720, so it is possible that the genealogy in question precedes the litigation by at least several decades. The testimony contained in the associated dossier reveals that, around the time when the litigation took place, the authorities of Atlihuetzyan accused a native painter, Gaspar Miguel, of falsification of documents and that the testimony presented by the people of Calpan was also “false.” However, it turns out upon closer inspection that the personages depicted are not fictitious, because, according to the extant cédula real, don Pablo de Castilla, the son of “don Francisco Aquiyaualcatl techutel,” received his coat of arms in 1563 (Reyes García 1993, 204–6). 70. Chance and Stark (2007) provide a systematic classification of strategies undertaken by provincial elites under both Aztec and Spanish rule. 71. This picture becomes even more complex when considering that certain ideas and traits moved also in the opposite direction, from the provinces to the center (Boone 2003, 207). 72. For the historical and sociopolitcal context of the scene, see: Ruiz Medrano 2005, 48–53. 73. “Dos varas como de justicia, de largor de cinco palmos; y todo esto que he dicho de oro muy fino y de obra vaciadizo” 74. Molina lists in his dictionary mapilhuia as “mostrar, o señalar a otro con el dedo, o escoger, o elegir a alguno” (“show or indicate something to someone with the finger, or choose or elect someone”), and mapiloa as “mostrar algo con el dedo” (“show something with the finger”; Molina, Nah., fols. 52r, v). Passages from Book VI of the Florentine Codex suggest a clear identification of mapiloa with electing. Thus, according to traditional Nahua rhetoric, noblemen are chosen by the supreme god to serve the altepetl: “Perhaps, however, the lord of the near, of the nigh, would have selected them [literally: pointed with his finger at them], and the city would have taken one of them” (FC VI, 108). In much the same vein, a midwife says in her speech: “how indeed can you have chosen me [literally: you pointed your finger at me], who am imprudent . . . ?” (FC VI, 153). This semantic field linked to finger-pointing closely corresponds with meanings deduced from the iconographic content of the Codex Xolotl, where this gesture signals both an act of indicating and of assigning certain rights or titles, including the right to rule. This meaning is further corroborated in the early colonial text of the Crónica mexicana (Tezozomoc 2001, 189, 247, 363) and in the election/investiture ceremony in the Codex Azcatitlan. 75. A similar phenomenon is attested in viceregal Peru, where one of the most popular garments worn by the colonial nobility was derived from a native tunic or uncu with the

I mages of R ank by R egion

“chessboard” design. The latter, although used in preconquest times, also had close Spanish analogies as an important heraldic motif and must have been recognized as such. The visual and functional similarity between the two traditions seems to have favored the confluence of both items (Cabello Carro 2003, 26–27) in much the same way as it occurred with attributes of power in the early colonial central Mexico.

307

4 Functions and Meanings of Precontact Costume and Status Items

The Nahuas and other Mesoamerican groups were not exceptional either in the importance they gave to dress and insignia or in their use of them to convey sophisticated symbolic messages. Just as in numerous traditional and modern cultures worldwide, garments and other status items served to transmit information on social and political rank, gender, occupation, and ethnic affiliation. Depending on the context, such objects were used as economic commodities and tribute items, valued gifts in social exchange, instruments of political power, and spiritually charged insignia in ritual. Potentially, all components of dress could communicate information about rank and identity, but certain kinds of items, especially headdresses, had much more weight and symbolic content than others. The importance of sophisticated status items in pre-Hispanic Mesoamerica can be traced back to the Preclassic period (2000 BC–AD 150–250); both art and archaeological remains attest to their role in political spectacles, ritual, and long-distance trade. Even more can be learned about elite status markers among the Classic Maya, whose records reveal a conceptual lore surrounding hereditary objects endowed with spiritual energy; some of the precious materials used for the manufacture of elite insignia, like jade, themselves had symbolic value (Taube 2005). Such objects were sometimes perceived as living entities, like the royal mosaic helmet from Palenque that was born on a very specific day (Grube 2000, 96–97). Mesoamerican symbols of rank played essential roles in mythical accounts, as revealed by the Postlassic Mixtec screenfold, the Codex Vaticanus B, where the DOI: 10.5876_9781607322412.c004

309

310

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

most important insignia are credited with divine origin and belong to the sacred ordering of the world (Furst 1978, 11, 102). Prestigious objects of ritual significance are well documented in the social reality and political life of the Mixtecs: they were often used in reciprocal exchange of honors, to strengthen political alliances, or as funerary offerings and awards for personal achievements (Pohl 1994, 5–11). These roles are mirrored in the functions of status items among the Postclassic Nahuas, whose texts also allow us to explore other concepts related to costume, of which no records survive for other Mesoamerican groups. Especially sophisticated lore surrounded royal insignia in Tenochtitlan. Early postcontact sources extol the richness of the attire of its huei tlatoque as well as the refinement of dressing customs, affirming, for example, that “Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina . . . changed his clothes and precious stones each day, except for the capes, which he put on only once and would not wear again” (Tezozomoc 2001, 169).1 Even if the sumptuousness of the ruler of Tenochtitlan was unsurpassed, other lords followed him closely in their costume repertories. Serving as an important marker of nobility, certain categories of garments and adornments were restricted by sumptuary laws. One of the most detailed references to Mexica sumptuary laws is provided by Durán (1984, II: 211–13). In addition to mentioning regulations on the use of the royal headdress and sandals in the royal palace, he states that specific varieties of precious capes were restricted to rulers, whereas other prestigious garments were appropriately assigned to various dignitaries, nobles, and warriors, according to their rank. In much the same way, only rulers, including those of conquered provinces, and “great lords” were permitted to display jewelry and adornments of precious feathers. The commoners were reportedly forbidden, on pain of death, to wear cotton capes and, in the case of males, garments reaching below the knee. Similar references to sumptuary laws are also found in the accounts of Tezozomoc (2001, 172, 181–82, 300) and Ixtlilxochitl (1975–77, II: 101). It has been suggested these regulations were exploited as an effective means of imperial control (Anawalt 1980), but we know very little about practices among particular Nahua altepetl beyond Tenochtitlan, or how strictly these laws, known only as reported from a later time, were enforced. An essential process that has to be taken into account is the conversion of former prestige goods into commercial luxury goods in the Postclassic Mesoamerican world. Even if still used more heavily by elites, these items and materials also became available to commoners through the market system (Smith and Berdan 2003a, 7–13). Indeed, the archaeological record challenges the strict enforcement and far-reaching extent of sumptuary laws within the Aztec empire. Commoners in both urban and rural settings enjoyed access to a wide range of imported exotic goods, including beads and ornaments of greenstone, rock crystal, or shell (Smith 2003, 255–57; 2005, 95–97). This situation is also

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

reflected in written sources attesting to at least one obvious exception to reportedly strict regulations of sumptuary laws: privileges of merchants officially permitted to use certain prestigious garments and attributes (FC IX, 5–6). In addition, as implied by the analysis of available sources referring to the preconquest costume repertory (chapter 2), the use of certain garments or insignia could be shared by rulers, nobles, and high-ranking warriors, though certain items seem to have been restricted to members of the royalty. Nevertheless, even though some doubts can be raised as to the rigidity or effective enforcement of sumptuary laws in the Aztec empire, there is no doubt about the deep social prestige and religious symbolism of insignia and status items shared by the Nahuas and other ethnic groups. This significance was crucial in defining and supporting an elite class and found expression in their political and economic policies. In addition to reinforcing the division between nobles and commoners, an essential function of sumptuary laws was to express and perpetuate social promotion through military merit. This sociocultural practice, deeply ingrained in Mesoamerica and beyond, was given considerable emphasis in the state strategies of Tenochtitlan. It was through battle achievements that brave warriors could don prestigious insignia and adornments of the nobility, eat in the royal palace, take part in special dances, and enjoy high status and recognition—all these privileges being assigned for personal deeds (Tezozomoc 2001, 181–82, 254). Doubtless, costly military devices, costume items, and jewelry that could be won from the enemy were among the pragmatic objectives of military campaigns. Adornments awarded to valiant warriors are even referred to explicitly as tlatocatlatquitl, “royal vestments” or “royal gear,” an appellation that affirms the high value attached to them. Moreover, attaining these precious items by brave warriors “was worth their life” (Sahagún 1997a, 245). Here used in reference to items bestowed for military accomplishments, the term tlatocatlatquitl referred in its primary sense to royal garments, as attested among the postconquest Nahua nobility (VBO II, 191; see page 344). The survivals of this preconquest terminology crop up also in later colonial Nahuatl texts, where royal adornment is called itlatocanechichihual, “his royal costume” (NT III, 103), and such terms as tlatocatilmatli, “royal cape,” continue to be used (VBO III, 287; NT III, 129). In traditional Nahuatl speech, costume items were frequently employed as metaphorical expressions designating the nobility and its special position. A good example is provided by the Spanish text of the Crónica mexicana, directly based on a Nahuatl prototype. In this account, Tlacaellel, holding the important position of cihuacoatl, often seen as the “second” after the king, allegedly rejected the opportunity of assuming the highest office, saying in effect that he was already the equal of the tlatoani. His manner of expressing this equivalence is most interesting, for

311

312

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

it emphasizes that he is already displaying the external royal attributes: “Am I not ruling, ordering, wearing [royal garments], donning [sandals], carrying with me my insignia, arms, putting on precious labrets, earplugs and [enjoying] the varieties of food, roses, flowers, smoking tubes, judging, and do I not issue sentences in this head court?” (Tezozomoc 2001, 266).2 It was not uncommon to refer to rulers as “a necklace, quetzal feather” (e.g., Tezozomoc 2001, 234) or to describe an esteemed noble as “a precious green stone, a bracelet of fine turquoise, a precious feather” (FC X, 16). This preconquest language referring to the upper class survived in colonial speeches, as attested in the Bancroft Dialogues, written up in the second half of the seventeenth century but based on an original dated to the second half of the sixteenth century (Karttunen and Lockhart 1987, 2–13): “Oh our lord, oh personage, oh ruler, oh youngest one, oh precious one, oh bracelet, fine turquoise, emerald, plume, oh ruler of the altepetl, we have been so fortunate that you have tied on the precious bracelet, have placed at your throat the precious necklace with radiating pendants, and on your head you have raised the wide plumes; you have brought together the nobility and dignity to which your altepetl looks up” (Karttunen and Lockhart 1987, 98). The most prestigious turquoise royal insignia were believed to derive from the Toltecs, admired as unsurpassed craftsmen and inventors. Although much of this lore survived till the contact period, some of it was thought to have disappeared: “All the precious things there are now—necklaces, arm bands—were known to them. Others, however, have been forgotten and lost” (FC X, 168).3 Interestingly, a recurring term designating the right to highly valued status items is the obligatorily possessed word -tonal. In particular, the apparel decorated with turquoise mosaic and originating with the Toltecs is said to be their -tonal (FC X, 169).4 The same word is used in the list of valuable things, including precious stones and feathers, food, and clothes belonging to a ruler that expressed his status, power, and legitimacy. Thus, quetzaliztli, emerald-green jade, is once called “tetonal intonal in tlatoque” (FC XI, 222), and here -tonal seems to be basically synonymous with -tlatqui, “someone’s property,” or, more specifically, what belongs to the noblemen. Thus, greenstone is also called “intlatquj in pipilti,” “the property of the noblemen,” and is explicitly described as a sign of nobility and source of respect (FC XI, 223). According to Molina, tetonal was “the ration of someone or a thing assigned to another” (Molina, Nah., fol. 110v),5 and thus “ytonal yn tlacatl Moteucçoma,” designating the adornments of the ruler of Tenochtitlan (Tezozomoc 2001, 170),6 should be understood as “the property of the lord Moteucçoma” or “what is special to the lord Moteucçoma.” Other scholars have rendered this term as “privilege” (Dibble, Anderson; FC X, 169), “one’s lot, the lot of [the rulers]” (Dibble, Anderson; FC XI, 222), and “the rightful due” and “patrimony” (Sullivan and Anderson in Sahagún

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

1997a, 224–26). I believe, however, that these renderings do not exhaust the ramifications of this term. The unpossessed form of -tonal is tonalli, referring to one of the basic concepts in Nahua beliefs. Deriving from the verb tona, to be hot, it originally referred to the sun and by extension to a day. It was basically imagined as a hot essence associated with the sun and reaching humans during their life on earth. Divine influences carried by portions of tonalli could be revealed by particular signs of the tonalpohualli, the 260-day ritual-calendar cycle, and of special importance was one’s day of birth or of a naming ceremony. According to López Austin, the allotment of hot essence received by an individual at that important moment, accumulating during the exposure to solar rays through his life, formed part of that person’s identity as one of the spiritual entities located in the head (López Austin 1996, I: 223–53). Of the esoteric concept of tonalli, only the basic association with solar heat was recorded by Molina, who translated it as “heat of the sun or summer time” (Molina, Nah., fol. 149r).7 Is there a semantic and conceptual affinity between tonalli in the esoteric sense and -tonal referring to lordly attributes? Clues leading to such an association are provided by Molina, who, in addition to explaining tetonal as “someone’s ration,” links -tonal to the day of birth and spiritual essences, in accordance with the conceptual framework of tonalli. His entry (Molina, Nah., fol. 74r) is complex and a bit irregular, but the thrust of it is that “notonal yn ipan nitlacat” (“my -tonal on which I was born”) means “the sign in which I was born,” and plain “notonal” means “my soul, or my portion and ration.”8 The close association of these three meanings in a single entry can be seen as implying a certain equivalence or interrelationship between them and, as a result, deeper ramifications of -tonal designating someone’s exclusive property. This reading is further corroborated by the entry totonal (“our -tonal”), translated as “the sign in which one is born, or the soul and spirit” (Molina, Nah., fol. 150v)9 as well as the recurrent use of the possessed form of tonalli in reference to one’s day sign in the Florentine Codex10 and especially in Book IV, dealing with the art of divination based on the tonalpohualli cycle. The same source employs totonal (“our -tonal”) and intonal (“their -tonal”) to designate human souls, or spiritual components, sent into newborn bodies by the gods of heaven, Ometeuctli and Omecihuatl (FC X, 169). By showing that the possessed word -tonal preserves the deeper sense linked to its etymology and going beyond the mere notion of one’s portion or an exclusive possession, it is possible to suggest its more enlightening meaning in reference to royal status items. In accordance with the concept of tonalli, when designating lordly attributes, -tonal seems to relate to the primary senses of “destiny” and “spiritual entity,” forming the identity of an individual. In other words, -tonal designates things entirely special and immanently belonging to rulers and nobles, being part

313

314

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

of their individuality as well as adding to their status and destiny. Thus, precious accouterments not only created an external appearance of nobility but were also conceived as repositories of spiritual essence. This exquisite possession was not limited to costly garments but also encompassed rights to other status symbols and commodities. Thus, tetonal also designates lordly food that “is the property [imaxca] that belongs to our lords, the rulers” (FC VI, 95),11 or a particular tree species, teocotl, that emits a pleasant fragrance: “its smell is pleasant, fragrant. It is the wood of the noblemen, someone’s lot. It is made someone’s possession, it is appropriated by someone, it is made someone’s property, it is assigned to someone” (FC XI, 110).12 This interpretation is backed up by references to supernatural qualities of costly insignia and the materials they were made of. Nahuatl speech contained in the Florentine Codex not only emphasizes the importance of adornments and pieces of jewelry as showing the honor and grandeur of the nobility and brave warriors, but it identifies the greenstone, turquoise, gold, and precious feathers as freshness (-itzmolinca ), greenness (-celica ), sweetness (-tzopelica ), and fragrance (-ahuiyaca ) that come from the body (FC VI, 14). These qualities result from the ability to attract spiritual essences, associated with both the humid forces of growth and sprouting (-itzmolinca, -celica; López Austin 1994, 174–75, 186) and the celestial heat that is often referred to as -totonca, the “heat” of the creator god. Thus, the spiritual components sent by the supreme deity, Tloque Nahuaque, appear to be the combination of both cold and hot essences: “his freshness, his greenness, his heat, his softness” (FC VI, 51).13 These complementary supernatural qualities were accumulated in precious stones and in other material forms. In wider Mesoamerican beliefs, greenstone, and especially jade, were linked to water, sprouting, life-essences, and the breath spirit (Taube 2005, 30–47). The Nahuas shared similar concepts. According to Sahagún’s informants, precious stones “were breathing, giving off vapor” (FC XI, 221).14 This was especially the quality attributed to the greenstone: when there was one hidden on the ground, “there is always sprouting, [plants] grow green. They say this is the breath of the greenstone, its breath is very fresh” (FC XI, 222).15 Thus, fine jade “attracts moisture, attracts breath” (FC XI, 222, 223),16 becoming a reservoir of spiritual essences. Turquoise, on the other hand, was primarily associated with celestial fire and heat. In the Florentine Codex it is repeatedly described as the stone that “smokes” (popoca; FC XI, 222, 224)17 and, indeed, in Mesoamerican lore both obsidian and turquoise seem to have been closely identified with shooting stars and meteorites (Taube 2000, 289–301). Turquoise was a primary attribute of the god of fire and time, Xiuhteuctli, “Turquoise lord,” and his manifestation Xiuhcoatl, a fire serpent. These supernatural beings were identified with both celestial and earthly fire, for in

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

ancient central Mexican thought, fire drilling was closely linked to fiery meteors, the fire of celestial origin. Xiuhcoatl—sometimes displaying a series of stars on his snout, probably representing a shower of meteors—was himself conceptualized as a supernatural, celestial spear-thrower (Taube 2000, 294–97). He also appears as a supernatural weapon of the Mexica god Huitzilopochtli, in accordance with the Mesoamerican concept of war influenced by belligerent stars. Strongly associated with these divine beings, turquoise was probably conceived as the material emanation of a supernatural substance linked to heat and fire, a medium capable of accumulating fiery essences originating in an upper part of the cosmos. Also, another lordly attribute, precious feathers, served as a means through which the divine essence could manifest itself in the body of sacrificial victims, assuring their transformation, which explains references to them as “shadows” (i.e., tonalli) of nobles and rulers (Russo 2002, 234–36). This conceptual meaning of feathers in the Nahua world is alluded to in the writings of Chimalpahin (1991, 52–54), where costly plumes figure as the “sign of a divine person, the sign of dignity.”18 Equally informative is the testimony provided by Ixtlilxochitl, who, while describing the Spanish takeover of Moteucçoma’s treasure, quotes the following words of the Mexica ruler: “let them not touch the feathers, for this is the treasure of the gods” (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, II: 220).19 No less esoteric symbolism surrounded fragrant flowers, also seen as capable of attracting spiritual essences (López Austin 1996, I: 236). Smelling flowers as well as odoriferous incense was considered a privilege of nobles. These fragrances were also given in offering to the gods (FC IV, 78) and to the dead (Houston, Stuart, and Taube 2005, 149). Thus, when the priests offered the god a copal of good quality, “not dirty, not dusty, very pure, it was said it was his spiritual essence (itonal)” (FC IX, 37).20 This association with spiritual forces carried by fragrance became transmitted into Christian contexts, as attested by a Nahuatl prayer to the Virgin Mary: “Let us sniff the sacred precious breezes that come precious and fragrant. Let the precious quetzal torch flowers that are our bracelet of fronds be divided up in our hands . . . Let our spirits sprout with colored heart flowers and colored bone flowers.” (NT II, 206–07)21 Insignia as Vehicles of Transfor mation

Rites of passage associated with the Nahua nobility provide additional substantiation for viewing precious materials employed in the manufacture of elite dress, and the costume itself, as containers of spiritual essences. Costumes worn by central Mexican tlatoque, and especially by the rulers of Tenochtitlan, manifested numerous links with their divine patrons (see chapters 2 and 3). Some of them were priestly garments worn in ritual and penitence, others were used in

315

316

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

battle, religious spectacles, and ceremonies of the court. Among these sophisticated outfits, the greatest prestige was attached to the royal costume decorated with turquoise mosaic and with designs imitating this pattern. These primarily Mexica attributes were believed to have derived from the Toltecs and, indeed, most of them figure in works of art from Terminal Classic-Early Postclassic Mesoamerica. As has been argued, the remote origins of the royal diadem, xiuhhuitzolli, go back to Early Classic times, from the onset symbolizing the fire/war serpent, an ancestor of Xiuhcoatl and Xiuhteuctli, even if at that early time the materials used were not yet the turquoise that entered the Mesoamerican repertory toward the end of first millennium AD. The association with celestial fire, probably already present in the early symbolism of the war serpent, was strengthened by the earlier-discussed symbolism of turquoise. It was this esoteric connotation that became crucial for the essential role that turquoise insignia came to play during royal investiture and performance of the office of tlatoani. Coronation ceremonies of Mexica rulers were staged as complex rituals encompassing several distinct phases, including preparatory rites and purification, the investiture, the coronation war, and the confirmation, each fulfilling a specific symbolic role (Townsend 1987). All of them also required appropriate costumes and attributes that were not merely conceived as material, visual markers of an ongoing transformation of an electee but that fostered these profound changes themselves. Initiating his metamorphosis, the future tlatoani appeared clad in the priestly fasting costume, signaling the rituals of purification and sacrifice (e.g., Motolinía 1970, 151–52). This stage evokes investiture scenes identified in pictorial manuscripts, including an event depicted in the Codex Xolotl (fol. 7; see also Figure 3.16), where both the new ruler, Ixtlilxochitl, and his successor, Neçahualcoyotl, wear priestly attire, as well as the ritual in the Codex Tudela (fol. 54r; Batalla Rosado 2002, 287– 90; see also Figure 4.1), where a future tlatoani is squatting naked in the reverential pose, while his priestly apparel is shown in front of him. The representation of the Codex Tudela closely follows the account of the Florentine Codex in describing a coronation held in Tenochtitlan. After being undressed, the electee and his four high-rank companions headed to the temple of Huitzilopochtli, where the future ruler received a blue-green sleeveless jacket (xoxouhqui xicolli), a blue-green fasting cape decorated with bone motifs to veil his head (neçahualquachtli xoxoctic omicallo), and such priestly attributes as a tobacco gourd, blue-green cotton incense bag decorated with motifs of bones, an incense ladle painted with skulls, and foam sandals with green toes (FC VIII, 62; see also Figure 4.2). The wearing of a fasting cape and other items painted with skulls and bones, also reported by Motolinía (1970, 151–52), transformed the electee into a sacred bundle, or tlaquimilolli, for he was covered with the clothes that wrapped the

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

Figure 4.1. Royal accession, Codex Tudela, fol. 54r (courtesy of the Museo de América, Madrid).

sacred bundles of Huitzilopochtli and Tezcatlipoca, patrons of the huei tlatoque of Tenochtitlan. He performed fasting and penitence during a ritual seclusion that lasted four days, leaving only at midday and midnight clad in his fasting cape, to burn incense and carry out self-sacrifice in front of the image of Huitzilopochtli in his temple. The transitional transformation into the sacred tlaquimilolli also assimilated a future king to a mortuary bundle, signaling his symbolic death during the rite of passage. Later on, abandoning his retreat after a ritual bath and change of clothes, the future huei tlatoani manifested his rebirth as a new sun, announcing the onset of a new era (Olivier 2006, 208–11; 2008, 264–67). And indeed, in the Nahua rhetoric the election of a new king was likened to the appearance of the new sun, and his death to a solar eclipse. Likewise, the tlatoani was also compared to a torch and light that was extinguished when he was departing from the world of the living (FC VI, 22, 57). Interestingly, the building that housed the fasting ruler, referred to as the tlacochcalco or tlacatecco, has been recently identified within the sacred precinct of the Tenochtitlan Huei Teocalli (Templo Mayor) complex during the excavations of what had been previously assumed to be “the house of eagles.” Thus, the

317

318

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

Figure 4.2. Royal accession, the penitential phase, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 46r (Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219; permission from the Ministry of Cultural Heritage and Activities, Italy; further reproduction in any form is prohibited).

northern wing of the edifice would correspond to the tlacochcalco, a place linked to the underworld, whereto an electee descended during his symbolic death, while the eastern section should be probably identified with the tlacatecco, the place of rebirth of the ruler, who, upon leaving the building, made his appearance before his subjects as the newborn sun (López Luján 2006, 257–93). Thus, the combination of textual, pictorial, and archaeological data helps us to envision the splendid rituals elevating the imperial huei tlatoque to their office and placing them not only within a symbolic framework but also within architectural settings whose remains have survived to our days. The ceremonial way to the throne led the electee to the quintessential rite of transformation into the royal person: the septum perforation followed by the insertion of a nose rod made of turquoise. This part of the Mexica ritual drew upon an old tradition. During the Late Postclassic, nose-piercing was an essential part of investiture in the Puebla-Tlaxcala region, including Tlaxcala, Huexotzinco, and Cholula (Motolinía 1970, 13; Muñoz Camargo 2002, 95–96). It was especially in this last place—an ancient center of power and a manifestation of the Place of Reeds (Tollan Cholollan)—where it acquired prestigious, pan-regional meaning as a rite constituting the essence of the investiture of lords (teteuctin) and symbolizing sacrificial death in the royal rite of passage. The mythical prototype was the sacrifice of the Chichimec deities, the Mimixcoa, immolated to nurture the sun and the earth.

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

Figure 4.3. Coronation of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina, Tovar Manuscript, fol. 109 (courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University).

Thus, in Mixtec screenfolds the famous ruler of Tilantongo, 8 Deer, is shown resting on a sacrificial stone as he undergoes the nose-piercing, whereas in the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, the Chichimec leaders who experience the transformation into legitimate teteuctin through the nose perforation in Cholula wear the adornments of Mixcoatl and attributes linked to the sacrifice of warriors (Olivier 2007, 290–91; 2008, 267–75). It must be emphasized, however, that nose-piercing in Tenochtitlan was not limited to rulers but was also part of the ceremonies of the assignment of rank to distinguished warriors, marking their passage to a new status or rank (e.g., Tezozomoc 2001, 98–99, 132). The highlight of the coronation rites staged in imperial Tenochtitlan goes beyond the symbolism of ritual death in the rite of passage. Crucial for the royal transformation was the embellishment with the turquoise insignia that, in addition to the turquoise nose-rod, included the royal diadem (xiuhhuitzolli), the cape with the turquoise-mosaic design, and similarly decorated loincloth and sandals (Figure 4.3). The monarch was also seated on the jaguar-skin mat and throne (e.g., Tezozomoc 2001, 248, 269), one of the paramount symbols of royalty among the preconquest Nahuas. It is debatable whether other altepetl, and especially Tetzcoco, shared the

319

320

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

ritual scenario of coronations held in Tenochtitlan. After the death of Neçahualpilli, his successor was reportedly invested in the Mexica capital and followed Mexica ways, including nose-piercing and donning turquoise regalia (Tezozomoc 2001, 443–44). We do not know, however, if any of these elements were retained in the rites staged in Tetzcoco proper, where the turquoise regalia, identified so strongly with Tenochtitlan, are absent from extant royal imagery. A possible Acolhua flavor mentioned in this account was a bow with a quiver full of arrows given to the new ruler as the sign of justice. Still, this important attribute of Tetzcocan rulers was also shared by other groups claiming Chichimec ancestry, including the Tenochca themselves (e.g., Tezozomoc 2001, 341). An act of primary importance was the placement of the turquoise diadem on the electee’s head, though it is also possible that the emphasis given to this part of the ceremony in postconquest imagery was influenced by a close analogy with coronations in the European style. Be that as it may, the essence of the adornment with turquoise garments is to be understood as filling the ruler with the divine fire identified with Xiuhteuctli. Undeniably, the lordly insignia were to convey a clear visual message. Thus, according to the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, the regalia received by Chichimec rulers after their nose-piercing ceremony were “the sign and indication that they established themselves as rulers” (fol. 21r).22 As has already been argued, however, the Mesoamerican notion of royal attributes was far more complex. The Tenochca were not unique in this respect, but their records provide us with particularly insightful clues. More than just symbolic links with the god of fire, time, and creation, the insignia of their huei tlatoque seem to have been conceived as physical reservoirs of the divine essence passed on to the Mexica ruler. In accordance with this symbolism, Mexica coronation rites involved the direct participation of Xiuhteuctli, implying that the acquisition of celestial fire made up the nucleus of the ceremony. Thus, according to an account that accompanies the investiture scene in the Codex Tudela (fol. 54r), “they went to the house of him whom they had elected or who was to be the lord and put before him a costume, and this happened before the fire god. . . . And they took him with a great dance before Xutecle, the fire god” (fols. 54r–54v).23 The transformations of the teuctli and tlatoani were equated with the increase of the divine fire and personal “heat” resulting from an extraordinary accumulation of the tonalli. In an oration directed to the ruler, he is said to be no longer an ordinary human being, for he communicates in an incomprehensible language directly with the creator god, who gave him fangs and claws (FC VI, 52). In another speech preceding the royal accession and directed to Tezcatlipoca, a priest asked the deity to fill a tlatoani with fire, transforming him into a fierce animal (FC VI, 24).24 As has been argued by Alfredo López Austin, this concept is expressed by the verb tleyotia,

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

signifying “to ennoble someone,” and by tleyotl, “fame,” a notion strongly related to, if not synonymous with, tonalli (López Austin 1996, I: 231, 460). In fact, tleyotia is probably derived from tleyotl, literally meaning “something having the quality of fire,” to which is added the verbing suffix -ti (“to have something”) and the causative suffix -a, thus meaning “to provide someone with tleyotl.” Whereas tle- in tleyotl and related words could derive either from tletl (“fire”) or tle(h) (meaning "something"), some hints seem to bolster the assumption that its semantic field was linked to fire and heat. According to the informants of Sahagún, it was believed that the tonalli of a huei tlatoani could be made stronger by the sacrifice of captives (FC IV, 42).25 Increasing in that way his spiritual entity, he “became famous” (“motleiotia”), “achieved honor” (“momaujzçotia”), “became brave” (literally, “like a wild beast,” “motequantlalia”), “provoked fear” (“motlamauhtilia”), which implies a possible affinity between the accumulation of tonalli and the accrual of “fame” (tleyotl). As in the above examples, the increase of tonalli and “honor” is also compared to the ruler’s transformation into a fiery animal as a result of concentration of the supernatural substance, setting him apart from ordinary humans. Even more illuminating is a passage referring to a negligent sorcerer who was seized and had his hair cut from the crown of his head, resulting in the reduction of his spiritual entity, which was concentrated in this part of the body: “they deprived him of his reputation [‘qujtleiocujlia’], they impaired his tonalli ‘qujtonalitlacoa’]” (FC IV, 102; López Austin 1996, I: 231). A link between tonalli and tleyotl is also implied by an association of the phrase “the fame, the glory” (in tleyotl, in mahuizçotl ) with supernatural fragrant essences bestowed on the new ruler by the creator god, and among these different qualities is “his heat, his softness, which come from him” (FC VI, 52).26 All this seems to imply that beyond the established meanings of tleyotia (“make famous, dignify, and make illustrious or magnify someone”) and tleyotl (“honor, fame and being illustrious”) recorded by Molina (Nah., fol. 147r)27 was the concept of nobility as an exceptional increase of divine heat. The reverence paid to the fire god is also mentioned as part of investiture in the Puebla-Tlaxcala region (Carrasco 1966, 135–38), confirming that we are dealing with a concept of royalty widely present in the Nahua world. In addition to the nose-perforation and penitential ceremonies shared with the Mexica, the protagonists of these rites were adorned in the capes of several gods, including Camaxtli, Tezcatlipoca, and Xipe Totec. This change of divine costumes probably signals and fosters lordly metamorphoses during the rite of passage, making it possible to acquire a new identity. A surprising analogy that seems to corroborate the association with the ritual of transition is found in funeral rites of the huei tlatoani of Tenochtitlan, who, before burning his mortuary bundle, was sequentially clad in the

321

322

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

costumes of Huitzilopochtli, Tlaloc, Yohuallahuan (Xipe Totec), and Quetzalcoatl (Durán 1984, II: 298; Tezozomoc 2001, 243–45; 264–65). Probably not by coincidence, these gods (except for the rain god Tlaloc) correspond with divine protectors whose outfits adorn the Mexica rulers in preconquest imagery (see pp. 189–202). In much the same way as in religious ceremonies proper, attributes and rituals assured the gradual transformation of gods’ impersonators (teteo imixip­tla­huan) into living receptacles of divine essence; appropriate costumes were conceived as the vehicles of transformation, enabling Nahua rulers to share the nature of their supernatural patrons. Clothes and the Notion of Civilit y

The notion of inheritance of precious status items from the Toltecs relates directly to the Nahua understanding of a certain type of dress as the mark of civilized status. Important insights elucidating this concept are provided by the text of the Florentine Codex, derived from statements of native informants of Sahagún, where different ethnic groups are presented and evaluated through their clothing. The right way of dressing becomes the main criterion for having achieved a civilized status:“These Otomi have a civilized way of life. The men wear capes and clothe themselves; they wear loincloths and sandals. The women wear skirts and shifts. The clothing, the capes, the sandals of the men are good; the skirts, the shifts of the women are good” (FC X, 176).28 Much the same is said about the Totonacs and Huastecs, whose ethnic identification is expressed primarily in terms of their clothes and accessories, while customary wearing of basic categories of garments acquires the sense of living in a civilized manner: “These people have a very civilized life. The men dress themselves; they put on capes and loincloths, they wear sandals, armbands, necklaces, quetzal feather devices; they bear fans, they wear anklets. They cut their hair, arrange their hairdress well, watch themselves in mirrors. The women wear skirts, shifts—embroidered skirts, embroidered shifts, [they are] very exquisite” (FC X, 184).29 In these descriptions the notion of beauty or elegance is primarily associated with a good quality and design of clothes as well as the appropriate way of wearing them, often compared with Nahua modes as the point of reference. Nahuatl texts also reveal an indigenous concept of bad taste, alluded to in the descriptions of the Otomi who are “show-offs” and, although they put on everything, they “do not wear their capes well,” while their women “do not wear their skirts and shift well” (FC X, 178–79).30 In much the same vein, the Tlalhuica who are considered “uneducated” and “cowardly” (“amo mozcaliaia, vel mauhque catca”) also “appear ostentatious” (“mototopalquetza”) in the manner of using garments and status items (FC

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

X, 186–89). Thus, although the notion of the “bad way of dressing” is not always paired with wearing low-quality garments, this criterion nevertheless seems important. Chimalpahin describes the poverty of incipient Tenochtitlan and its economy during the rule of Huitzilihuitl in terms of the poor clothing (Chimalpahin 1997a I, 118), making it clear that dress was understood as a marker of both civility and economic prosperity: “cotton did not reach the Mexica, for they were very poor. Only a few of the poor Mexica commoners wore it [i.e., cotton], and some wore loincloths of marsh plants that grew by the water.”31 Low-quality, rough clothes made of maguey fiber also were looked down upon, as revealed by the famous Tepaneca gift of maguey-fiber skirts and shifts to the Mexica (Chimalpahin 1997a I, 230). The offense was especially great because the items presented to the Tenochca warriors were female garments. Similarly, clothes are used to convey a message in the account of the 1473 war between Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco. Axayacatl, the Mexica ruler, gave garments as a gift to some Tlatelol­ can messengers but, upon discovering that these clothing items were not of good quality and design, the Tlatelolca fled in fear (Chimalpahin 1997a II, 48). It seems clear then that the kind and quality of garments presented to someone was a standard way of conveying information about the donor’s intentions. However, the message conveyed by poor clothes in the Nahua world was not always truly negative. Marking symbolic sociopolitical distance and lowered status was, for the Nahuas, an obligatory element of polite and respectful behavior, an indispensable part of courtesy communicated by appropriate gestures, postures, speech figures, and items associated with social status and position. Thus, even high lords who found themselves in the presence of a ruler were symbolically equated with commoners, wearing cloaks made of agave fiber, walking barefoot, and expressing humility in their body language. According to Sahagún’s informants, when surrendering to the Spaniards upon the fall of Tenochtitlan (FC XII, 123), the rulers Quauhtemoc, Coanacochtzin, and Tetlepanquetzaltzin wore maguey-fiber capes. It has been suggested that this dress of the defeated rulers signaled their lowered status (Umberger 1996a, 102). I believe, however, that this passage can be read two ways. Rather than the loss of status, these clothes could express the humility of their wearers, an attitude appropriate for both the context of submission and the courtly ceremonial mentioned above. Another possibility is that the intention was simply to stress the poverty and suffering of vanquished native leaders. Obviously then, not all poor clothes were considered “uncivilized.” Rather, it was the lack of basic categories of garments in the apparel repertory or low quality that signaled the “incivility” of a category of wearers. For example, the absence of certain established types of dress, such as loincloths or shifts, is described as a “defect” in certain ethnic groups (“jmjtlacauhca,” literally “something they do wrong”). This is

323

324

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

true above all of the inhabitants of Michoacan who, instead of wearing loincloths, covered themselves with local shifts called cuicuilli (FC X, 189). The Michhuaque, possessing a costume repertory distinct from that of the Nahuas, were even believed, in folktale at least, to have lost this most essential garment as a result of their excessive haste during the peregrination. They were imagined to have used their loincloths to tie wooden timbers into rafts to cross a water barrier, and in order to cover their nudity after the passage, they took the shifts from their women, leaving them only their skirts. Those who came behind the Michhuaque were the “Mexicans” and Tepaneca, who “did not lose any item of their dress, and they and their women were always dressed and adorned in clothes made of cotton, palm, and maguey” (Muñoz Camargo 2002, 73–74).32 It is quite common among modern scholars to associate the native notion of barbarism expressed in clothing and other cultural artifacts with native conceptualizations of their Chichimec past, conceived in terms of “cultural evolution.” However, as has been pointed out (see pp. 195–196, 223–228), the Chichimec costume, identified with mythical ancestors and early Nahua leaders, was no by no means unambiguously “barbarian.” Its distinguishing elements included animal-skin capes and nomad weapons. Some of the Chichimec attributes, principally in Tetzcoco but also in Tenochtitlan, continued in the iconography of rank of “legitimate” tlatoque or, like an arrow, were in ceremonial use. Proud references to the esteemed Chichimec ancestry are found in the famous pre-Hispanic monument known as the Temple Stone from Tenochtitlan, whereas Chichimec emblems reportedly marked houses of distinguished and valiant persons (Tezozomoc 2001, 172). On the other hand, it cannot be denied that sometimes these “nomad” attributes, paired with imperial turquoise insignia and other status items, convey the sense of an earlier, lessadvanced phase of existence. Even so, this imagery gives an irresistible impression that the division between the “barbarous” (or Chichimec) and “civilized” (Toltec) phases does not seem to have been understood as abrupt and definitive: it is blurred, while continuities revealed by ways of dressing are numerous and, in some cases, surprisingly long-lived. Inspiring Terror and Pride: Battle Costumes

A special place in the Nahua costume repertory was reserved for battle outfits and insignia (tlahuiztli), which communicated a variety of messages. Although their wearing was to a certain degree regulated by law, a much more important force behind their use seems to have been the award and promotion system controlled by rulers, a practice maintained on a large scale in Tenochtitlan (e.g., FC VIII, 73–74) but probably also present in other altepetl. Those who dared to use the insignia

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

of rulers could reportedly expect the death penalty,33 whereas outfits and devices granted to particular warriors corresponded to their place in a well-defined military hierarchy linked to individual battle achievements. Social status must have played a role, too, though it is not clear how much noble birth affected military promotion. The brave warriors who “violently hurled themselves against the enemy” (“teujc mopetlatiuj”) and went to battle for their tlatoani deserved the appellation of the itlahuicecahuan, or “his standard-bearing [warriors],” becoming thus “the supports of the altepetl, its hearts, its foundations”34 (FC IV, 91; XII, 40–41). However, the prestigious garments and insignia could be taken back, together with the high rank, from an elite warrior for cowardly behavior on the battlefield (FC VIII, 88). Certain costly outfits were surely reserved for the pipiltin and lords, as were the highest ranks and offices. But even the nobility had to prove prowess on the battlefield. The ruler of Tenochtitlan himself, Ahuitzotl, reportedly gained his prestigious insignia in victorious campaigns and displayed them while acting as a supreme judge (Tezozomoc 2001, 341). As told by Chimalpahin, Quauhcececuitzin, a valiant tlatoani of Panohuayan, from whom colonial descendants traced their roots in the early seventeenth century, gained his battle insignia in Atlixco while capturing a high-ranking adversary (Chimalpahin 2003a, 160–64). In reward he received other prestigious standards, including a golden banner (teocuitlapanitl) and “the offering of darts” (tlacochtlamanalli) from Neçahualpilli, the ruler of Tetzcoco. The ruler of Teotihuacan, Mamalitzin, reportedly saved the life of Axayacatl, the huei tlatoani of Tenochtitlan; in recognition for his deed he received a special insignia with the image of a leg and flames emerging from it. It alluded to the duel of the Mexica ruler in Xiquipilco, where he was severely wounded in his thigh and avoided death thanks to the help of his ally. Other Acolhua lords were also rewarded with costly devices on this occasion (Ixtlilxochitl 2000, 199–200). It was during this encounter that the brave adversary of Axayacatl, Tlilcuetzpalin, may have seized his prestigious Xipe Totec insignia, because in one of following campaigns the Mexica ruler appears with a new device, presented to him by the tlatoani of Tetzcoco (Tezozomoc 2001, 217–18, 227–28). The public distribution of insignia and clothing in Tenochtitlan was an integral part of rituals of the state, when the ruler, in a display of power and wealth, not only rewarded those who merited it or showed willingness to cooperate but also attempted to lure independent elites into future collaboration (Brumfiel 1987; Smith 1986; Umberger 1996a, 103). War devices were presented on many occasions, including religious feasts and celebrations of successful military campaigns when conquered insignia were redistributed as war prizes (Tezozomoc 2001, 446; see also Figure 4.4) or upon calling vassals to war (Durán 1984, II: 227–28). Important occasions for generous gift-giving were the royal accession and massive religious

325

Figure 4.4. Awards to brave warriors, Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 56v (Biblioteca Laurenziana, Firenze, ms. Laur. Med. Palat. 219).

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

spectacles, such as temple dedications, accompanied by numerous external elites participating of their own will or by force under more or less veiled threat. A new ruler was obliged to present numerous goods to his allies during his coronation ceremony, confirming political relationships with his vassals (Townsend 1987), but gift-giving was not limited to allies (Tezozomoc 2001, 282–84, 417). Among bestowals on this occasion were the most prestigious Mexica royal capes presented to the rulers of Tetzcoco and Tlacopan (Tezozomoc 2001, 259, 260, 382). At such important moments as royal investiture, vassals and independent rulers also sent gifts to Tenochtitlan, including “local” items laden with profound symbolic messages related to the identity of the givers.35 Symbolic gifts, consisting of the featherdown headdress and weapons, were delivered by imperial messengers during negotiations on the terms of dependence carried out with independent polities. These items signaled the future fate of their adversaries as sacrificial victims who would have lost in the confrontation with the Triple Alliance, whereas weapons presented were meant to indicate their chances in a future battle, helping to present imperial activities in terms of “just wars” (Olko 2004). Within the altepetl of Tenochtitlan, the distribution of war insignia was crucial for maintaining the military hierarchy and raising the war spirit, while also encouraging a positive response to the expectations of the state and its ideology through palpable economic and social gains. Thus, during the feast of Ochpaniztli, falling in the time of harvest, “those who did not care about their heads, about their breasts, the fearless of death, who indeed threw themselves against our enemies”36 stepped out in order before the huei tlatoani. The latter, seated on the eagle mat and jaguar-skin seat, attributes that alluded to his military power, handed out costly gifts—battle devices, weapons, and garments—in accordance with the warriors’ rank and probably also their social status. Thus, “great seasoned warriors” (“in vevei tiacaoan”) received “costly decorated insignia,”37 whereas the commoners were given only low-ranking Huastec-style outfits. This was followed by the display of their insignia. Rewarded warriors started the hand-waving dance, “moving like flowers” (“iuhqujn suchitl mantiuh”) in different rows around the temple, they “went in splendor” (“maviçotivi”; FC II, 123). This ritualized parade was part of the religious feast celebrating the sacred marriage of Toci and Huitzilopochtli as well as the subsequent birth of the maize god; but at the same time it commemorated an important past event. According to the Mexica tradition, this episode entailed the sacrifice of the Toci impersonator, the princess of Colhuacan, leading to an open conflict with that entity’s sovereign, and, as a result, to the foundation of a proper altepetl, Tenochtitlan (Olko 1999). In addition to serving in public displays of military achievements, battle insignia also performed other important communicative functions. Raising a device was the

327

328

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

sign to start fighting (FC VIII, 34), whereas grasping the battle standard of a ruler or commanding general signaled defeat in the Nahua military code (López de Gómara 1966, 412). The Spaniards saw the disastrous effects of taking the insignia of a military leader by the enemy during the famous battle of Otumba in 1520. Tlahuiztli were also reportedly used as emblems marking the royal presence: the golden quaxolotl insignia was placed over the royal tent as “the sign that the ruler Ahuitzotl was and resided there” (Tezozomoc 2001, 345). Specific standards were recognized as proper attributes of specific ethnic groups. The best-known example is that of the Tlaxcalans, who identified themselves with their heron device, but similar associations are found with other groups. According to the Anales de Quauhtitlan (fol. 54), for example, the Totonacs displayed a heron banner “that guided them and was their sign.” Such insignia, despite their affiliations, were not ethnically exclusive and could be adopted and used by another group, as was the case with the quetzal­pa­ tzactli, allegedly originating in the region of Tehuantepec. However, “the appropriation and display of such ethnically linked regalia and clothing could be interpreted as a demonstration of power, a conscious and advantageous manipulation of ethnic symbols” (Berdan 2008, 112), especially in imperial Tenochtitlan. Its elite attempted in various ways to mark at the center of their domain the Mexica dominance over the peripheries. Even so, the specific origin of certain costumes or sets of attributes was recognized, especially when songs and dances in the style of foreign groups were performed (e.g., FC VIII, 45). According to the Anales de Quauhtitlan (fol. 42), a ruler of this place put on the Huexotzinca costume while fasting during his investiture rites, as did his companions, who even talked to each other “like the Huexotzinca.” Although the exact meaning of this ethnic disguise escapes us,38 it is clear that regional differences in dressing customs were carefully distinguished, and such ethnically alien sets of attributes were borrowed, or “quoted,” by other groups in ritualized contexts and with different meanings. Particular insignia carried specific symbolic associations, alluding to the transformations of dead warriors or to their divine patrons, but the general meaning of the tlahuiztli related to the shining and glowing qualities of military apparel (see p. 111). Native accounts, too, emphasized the shimmering, gleaming appearance of battle outfits (e.g., FC II, 124; XII, 92) that were conceived as particularly powerful: the terrifying figures of the tzitzimitl, quaxolotl, coyotl, or ocelotl spread terror among the enemy, whereas their exuberance and brilliant colors aimed to impress. These mighty effects of specific varieties of tlahuiztli are alluded to in numerous traditional speeches recorded in the Crónica mexicana. Thus, the warriors of Tenochtitlan are encouraged to wear adornments made of the skins of felines or eagles or imitating big serpents, “to sow fear and fright among the enemy” (Tezozomoc 2001, 158).39 In addition to his technical military abilities, a valiant warrior is expected

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

to intimidate his adversaries: “The good valiant warrior is a sentinel, a strategist, a tracker, a reconnoitrer, a fighter, a captor. He intimidates, he instils fear, he spreads fear, he startles, he takes prisoners, he is heedless” (FC X, 24).40 Tenochca warriors were not the only ones who inspired terror. They themselves were susceptible to the psychological effects of insignia employed in military contest. In a speech reported by Tezozomoc, Mexica warriors get warmed up for battle by hearing that their opponents “were not demons, visions, jaguars, lions, eagles, tzitzimitl (phantoms), or coleletli (ghosts), they are people like us; they carry weapons in their hands like us” (Tezozomoc 2001, 140–41).41 Another time they were told much the same, but alluding to the visual effects of particular outfits: “those who come at us are neither lions, nor jaguars, nor living phantoms, which is the tzitzimitl, descending from the clouds, nor a ghost (coleletli), nor a preying eagle that will fly down upon us; they are what we are” (Tezozomoc 2001, 216).42 According to a native account of the Spanish conquests, Europeans were also vulnerable to the visual aspects of terrifying insignia. During the siege of Tenochtilan, Quauhtemoc had one of the great warriors dressed in a quetzal-owl costume: “Quauhtemoctzin said, ‘This was the device of my progenitor, my father Ahuitzotl. Let him wear it, let him die in it. Let him dazzle people with it, let him show them something; let our enemies see and admire.’ When they put it on him he looked very frightening and splendid. . . . When our enemies saw him, it was as though a mountain had fallen. Every one of the Spaniards was frightened; he intimidated them, they seemed to respect him a great deal” (Lockhart 1993, 238–40; FC XII, 117–18). Even in very dramatic circumstances, such as final moments of the siege of Tenoch­ titlan and Tlatelolco in 1521, the Nahua nobility did not forget the importance of their precious insignia and noble garments. According to the Anales de Tlatelolco, the Mexica royal refugees were greeted with appropriate gifts upon seeking refuge in Tlatelolco, the last line of defense against the assault of the Spaniards and their allies (Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 136). The insignia presented to them on that occasion are called amocococauh, alluding to the already-discussed concept of status items as an innate property of the nobility. Cococatl is rendered by Molina as “goods or subsistence,” whereas its possessed forms are nocococauh (“my thing, my goods”) and nitecococauh (“to be one’s slave”; Molina, Nah., fols. 23v, 72v, 23r).43 However, uses of this term by Sahagún’s native informants reveal other connotations and meanings. The term -cococauh crops up in an account describing rewards and privileges granted by the ruler of Tenochtitlan, Ahuitzotl, to valiant pochteca, long-distance

329

330

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

merchants acting as royal reconnoitrers, for their alleged conquests in remote regions. They attained these prestigious status items risking their lives in much the same way as valiant warriors. Prestigious garments and status items bestowed on them are called “your possessions [amocococauh], which are the price for your breasts and your heads. No one will take it from you, because this is truly your property, your gear that you went to gain” (FC IX, 5).44 Additional clues are provided by those passages in the Florentine Codex that associate this term with goods, favors, and prosperity conceded by the supreme deity to people. The word -cococauh is sometimes paired with other terms designating someone’s property, such as -axca and -tlatqui, pointing to a more general concept applying to all the main “property” terms: “Here it is with which our lord, the Master of the Earth, the Lord of the Close and the Near has favored you, his property [icococauh], his possessions, his goods”(FC IX, 33).45 The “property” of the creator god bestowed on people should be understood not only in terms of material prosperity but also as the spiritual sustenance necessary for the life of earth and especially for carrying the burden of rulership: “And the property/sustenance [icococauh] of our lord who gave us bones, who gave us flesh, strength, do not take it solely for yourself, for truly it is said, uneasy is the lordship, the rulership” (FC VI, 54).46 In a similar way to -tonal, this term also entails flowers and food labeled “the property of the Ipalnemohuani” (“By whose grace people live”; FC IV, 122).47 However, the affinity with -tonal goes much deeper, for -cococauh refers here explicitly to divine favors associated with a particular day in the tonalpohualli count. Thus, the goods that merchants brought on their favorable day, One House, were considered “the property” (-cococauh) of the creator god (FC IX, 27).48 Similarly, a woman born on a favorable day-sign (tonalli) “will guard favors and property [icococauh] of our lord” (FC IV, 59).49 It seems thus justified to view that kind of divine “property” in terms of a supernatural influence on a particular tonalli, as an essence proper to the divinity and shared with humans, materializing in both material goods and spiritual favors. Not surprisingly then, the blood offering made to the god is called his property (-cococatzin), his possession (-axcatzin), as the substance conveying divine essences originating in the supernatural world (FC IX, 11). A final argument in favor of this interpretation is provided by an oration where -cococauh directly designates spiritual essences identified with both cold forces of growth and hot celestial energy. Perceived by humans as smell, they are provided by the Lord of the Close and the Near: “Let him smell your property [maxcatzin], your possession [mocococatzin], which have come from you, which is sweet, fragrant, something hot, softness, the freshness, the greenness” (FC VI, 9).50 Likewise, the spiritual essences qualified as -cococauh of the supreme god and manifested as fragrance are among the powers bestowed upon a ruler to help him

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

carry the burden of rulership. However, in the case of a bad and negligent monarch “the property [maxcatzin], the possession [mocococatzin] which you [the god] let him smell” becomes a dangerous force leading to his perverseness and craziness (FC VI, 26).51 Hence, exceeding the simple notion of “property,” the term -cococauh— often paired with -axca and sometimes also with -tlatqui—designating essences proper to the divinity and bestowed on people, seems to reveal a conceptual affinity with -tonal. As such, it illuminates the special meaning attached to lords’ attributes as carriers of their status, identity, and spiritual powers. The use of this term continued among the descendants of preconquest nobles: in his 1563 will, don Francisco Verdugo Quetzalmamaliztzin, the tlatoani of San Juan Teotihuacan, refers to the patrimony of his wife inherited from her ancestors, the rulers of Tetzcoco: “the royal land that was his property (icococatzin)” (VBO II, 137).52 Notes

1. “Motecuhzoma Ilhuicamina . . . cada día mudaua bestido y piedras preçiosas, saluo [en] las mantas [que] una bez bestía, [que] otra bes no se la abía de poner.” 2. “¿Yo no mando, ordeno, bisto, calço, traigo comigo mi diuisa, armas y me pongo preçiadas beçojeras, orejeras y los generos de comidas, rrosas, flores, perfumaderas, jusgo, sentençio en esta cabeça de audiençia?” 3. “Mochi iehoantin intlaiximach, in axcan nemj cozcatl, macuextli, in tlein tlaçotli: iece oc cequj ilcauh, oc cequj poliuh.” 4. “In intlaquen catca, vel itonal catca, i(n) xiuhtlalpilli, in jncac tlaxivicujlolli, xoxoctic, xoxouhquj: çanno xoxouhquj in jncacmecaiouh” (“Their clothing was entirely special to them: the turquoise knotted cape; their sandals painted blue, light blue, sky blue; likewise their blue sandal thongs.”) 5. “Racion de alguno o cosa diputada para otro.” 6. “Y así que estas cosas que eran a él dedicadas le llamaron los biexos ytonal yn tlacatl Montecçuma.” 7. “Calor del sol, o tiempo de estío.” 8. “El signo enque naci, el alma, o laporcion y racion mia”; the second two glosses are meant to apply to notonal alone, without the other words. 9. “El signo, en que alguno nace, o el alma y espiritu.” 10. E.g., “ca atle itonal, ca atle itoca,” (“indeed nothing was his day sign, indeed nothing was his name”; FC II, 172). 11. “Tetonal: inin ie iehoatl in jmaxca, in jntech pouhquj in totecujoan, in tlatoque, injc mjto moteneuh, tetonal.” 12. “Velic, aviac in jiaca: tecpilquavitl, tetonal tetonaltilo, netechtilo, netonaltilo, tetechpoalo.” 13. “In jtzmolinca in jcelica in jtotonca in jiamanca.”

331

332

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

14. “Mjhiotitica, maiauhiotitica.” 15. “Muchipa tlacelia, tlacecelia, qujlmach inin chalchivitl ihiio; auh in jhiio cenca cecec.” 16. “Mjtonjanj, tlaihioananj.” 17. These references literally describe physical qualities of certain pieces of turquoise, but a recurrent association with the verb popoca also seems to characterize turquoise as a hot stone that emits “smoke.” 18. “Yn iteotlacanezca tlacanezca [sic] catca yn imahuiznezca” (literally, “his sign as a divine person, his sign of fear”). 19. “Que no tocasen a la pluma, porque aquel era el tesoro de los dioses.” 20. “Amo tlaçollo, in amo teuhio, in uel chipaoac, mitoaia itonal.” 21. “Ma ticinecuican in teoyotica in tlazoixtihuiz [tlazoixtihuitz], ahuiaxtihuitz in tlazoeeecatl. Ma tomac onxexelihuiti in tlazo in quetzalcoxochitl, in toxiuhmacopil. . . . Ma tlapalyeloxochitica, ma tlapalomixochitica in ceceliya, in toyolia.” 22. “Yn machiyotl ynezcayotl ynic motlatocatecaque.” 23. “E yban acasa del que avian elejido o avia de ser señor y ponianle delante una vestidura y esto era delante del dios del fuego” (fol. 54r); “y le llebavan con gran areyto y bayle ante xutecle dios del fuego” (fol. 54v). 24. “Auh ma xicmotleiotilli, ma xicmotequaiotili” (“ennoble him, make him a wild beast”). 25. “No iehoan in mamaltin, cequjntin vncan mjquja. Mjtoa: ca iehoan inca mozcaltiaia in motecuçoma, inca motonalchicaoaia, inca moquetzaia, inca moqujxtiaia, iuh mjtoa: iuhqujn oc ceppa inca mopilqujxtiaia, ynjc vecaoaz, inca motleiotia, momaujzçotia, motequantlalia, ic motlamauhtilia” (“Also of the captives some died. It was said that it was through them that Moteucçoma was nourished, through them his tonalli was strengthened, through them he was dignified, through them he performed [the rule]. It was said: it was as if through them he was once more rejuvenated, that way he could live a long time, through them he was ennobled/became famous, achieved honor, became a fierce animal, thus he provoked fear”). 26. “Aço çan mjxtlan conqujxtia in in jtleio in jmavizio: auh aço çan mjtzonjnecujtia, aço çan motentlan conqujxtia in ijtzmolinca in jcelica, in jtzopelica in javiaca, in jtotonca in jiamanca in jtechcopa vitz jnecuitonol ipalnemoanj” (“perhaps he released his fame, his honor before your face; perhaps he made you sniff, perhaps he emitted before your lips his freshness, his greenness, his sweetness, his fragrance, his heat, his warmth, which come from him, the wealth of him by whose grace people live”). 27. “Afamar, dignificar y esclarecer, o engrandecer a otro”; “honra, fama, esclarecimiento.” 28. “Injque y, otomj, intech ca tlacanemjliztli in oquichti: motlalpilia, motlaquentia, maxtleque caqueque: in cioa cueieque, vipileque: in oqujchti qualli in jntlaquen, in jntilma, in jncac: in cioa qualli in jncue, in jnvipil.”

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

29. “Totonaque Injque in, vel intech ca n tlacaiotl, in tlacanemjliztli: motlaquentia in oqujchtli motlapiliaia, momaxtlaiaia, mocactia, momacuextia, mocozcatia, moquequetzaltia, êcaceoaceque, tecuecuexeque: moxima, qujiectlalia in jnnexin, motezcavia: in cioa cue­ ieque, vipilque tlamachcueie, tlamachvipile, vel mjmati” 30. “In otomj: cenca topalme, xacanme. .  .  . mochi qujcuj, mochi intech qujtlalia injc xacanme, amo moiectlalpilia. . . . No iuhque in cioa . . . amono moieccuetia, amo moiecvipiltia.” 31. “Ychcatl amo yntech huallacia yn mexica ynic cenca motoliniticatca çan yehuatl yn cequintin macehualtzitzinti mexica yn quimoquentiaya yhuan cequintin quimomaxtlatiaya yn amoxtli yn atitlan mochihua.” 32. “No perdieron ninguna pieza de sus trajes y siempre ellos y sus mujeres fueron gentes vestidas y adornadas de ropas de algodón y de palmas y de maguey. . . . Llamaron los mexicanos tarascos a estos de la provincia y reino de Michoacan, porque traían los miembros genitales de pierna a pierna y sonando, especialmente cuando corrían.” 33. “Tenía pena de muerte y de perdimiento de bienes y otras muy graves penas el Señor ó principal que en algún baile ó fiesta ó guerra sacaba alguna divisa que fuese como las armas y divisas de los Señores de México y Tezcuco y Tacuba, que eran los tres reyes principales, y algunas veces había guerra sobre ello” (García Icazbalceta 1886–1892, 312). Also Ixtlilxochitl 2000, 157. 34. “In jtlaxilloan altepetl, in jiolloan, in jtetzonoan” (FC XII, 41). 35. This was, for example, the case of gifts from Maxixcatzin, the ruler of Tlaxcala, to Moteucçoma, encompassing a bow, feathers, maguey-fiber capes, loincloths, and sandals, signs of Chichimec identity: “en señal de buena boluntad, le [en]biaua un arco para su contento y unas plumerías bastardas y estas mantas de nequén y pañetes y cotaras, [en] señal que es gente serrana, chichimeca yntitulado” (Tezozomoc 2001, 283). 36. “In amo qujtlaçotla in intzontecon, in jmelchiqujuj, in amo mjqujzmauhque, in vel inca momotla in toiauoan” (FC II, 123). 37. These items are referred to as in tlaçotlanqui (FC II, 123); later on, tlaçotlanqui is used as an adjective, “cenca tlaçotlanquj in tlauiztli, cenca teucujtlaio” (FC II, 124). 38. Possibly the Huexotzinca dress could allude to the sacrificial symbolism of royal fasting dress appropriate for this phase of coronation rites (with Huexotzinca playing a role similar to that of the Huastecs: adversaries and exemplary providers of human sacrificial victims). Another possible explanation could link this costume to the alliance with Huexotzinco during the impending Tepanec war. 39. “Adereçar los cueros de tigueres, leones, águilas, culebras grandes, muy bien adobados los cueros de ellos, para poner temor y espanto a los enemigos.” 40. “In qualli tequioa iaotlachiani, tlanemiliani, tlacxitocani, hutemoani, micalini, tlamani, tlamauhtia, mauiztli quitlaça mauiztli quiteca, tlaiçauia tlama atlatlamati.” 41. “Diziéndoles más, que los contrarios no eran demonios ni bisiones ni tigueres ni leones ni águilas ni fantasmas del tzitzimitl, coleletli (duende), que gentes son como nosotros; traen armas [en] las manos como nosotros.”

333

334

F unctions and M eanings of P recontact C ostume and S tatus I tems

42. “Y tened por çierto que los [que] bienen a nosotros que no son leones ni tigueres ni es tanpoco fantasma biua, que es el tzitzimitl baxado de las nubes, ni tanpoco es duende (coleletli), tanpoco es águila de rrapiña que a de benir bolando sobre bosotros, [que] lo somos, son ellos.” 43. “Hacienda o sustenacion de la vida”; “mi cosa, o mi hazienda”; “ser esclavo de otro.” 44. “Ca izcatqui in amocococauh, in amelchiquiuh, in amotzontecon ipatiuh omuchiuh: aiac amechcaoaltiz ca nel amasca, amotlatlqui ca ooanquimacehoato”; also: “Auh ca izca in tocococauh, in oticmaceuhque: in telchiquiuh, in totzontecon ipatiuh omochiuh” (“Here is our property that we have merited, which is the price/reward for our breasts and heads”; FC IX, 4). 45. “Ca izcatqui, in onechmotlaocolili in tetecuio, in tlalticpaque, in tloque naoaque: in icococauh in iascatzin in itlatquitzin”; also: “ca nican ticmoiahoa in icococauh inic omitzicnoittac” (“you scattered the property of the Lord of the Close and the Near”; FC IX, 29); “ca oconmomoiauh in icococauh in totecuio” (“our lord has spread his possessions”; FC IX, 42); as the “property” of Huitzilopochtli: “in icococauh, in iaxcatzin, in itlatquitzin”; FC IX, 55. 46. “Auh in jcococauh totecujo, in techomjoti, in technacaioti, in chicavacaiutl: ma toconmjxcavi, ca nel ic mjtoa in aivian tecujotl tlatocaiutl.” 47. “Yn jcococauh ipalnemoanj” 48. “Çan ic tlapoiahoa in oalaci: No ipan in qualli tonalli, i ce calli, anoço chicome calli, inic motonalpouiliaia, ipampa in contocaia in ce calli: quioaia ca ie ic cencalaqui in icococauh, in tloque, naoaque, in tlalticpaque, in ioalli, in ehecatl.” (“It was dark when he arrived, also on a favorable day sign, One House or Seven House. That way the day signs were read for them because when he followed [the day] One House it was said that what they brought on it was the property of the Lord of the Close and the Near, Master of the Earth, the Night, the Wind”). 49. “Qujpiaz in jtecneliliz, in jcococauh totecujo” 50. “Ma oc xoconmjnecujltili in maxcatzin, in mocococatzin, in motechcopatzinco vitz: in tzopelic, in aviac, in totonquj, in iamanquj, in motzmolinca in mocelica.” See also: FC VI, 8. 51. “In maxcatzin, in mocococatzin in otoconmjnecujltili”; the same concept of spiritual essences granted by the supreme deity is mentioned in reference to a mischievous ruler who makes the bad use of his powers (“in maxcatzin, in mocococatzin, in motzmolinca, in mocelica in motzopelica, in maviaca”; “your property, your possession, your freshness, your greenness, your sweetness, your fragrance”; FC VI, 25). 52. “Yn tetzotlatocatlalli ynn icococatzin”

5 Postcontact Survivals and Adaptations

Changes in Costume Repertory

Even if preconquest apparel continued to play a crucial role in early colonial imagery of the native nobility, the change in dressing customs took place relatively quickly, mirroring the quick adoption of numerous elements of Spanish material culture. The European shirt (camisa) with a collar and buttons is well attested already about 1550; at this date its native manufacture and trade are widespread, whereas the word camisa rapidly entered the Nahuatl vocabulary as camixatli. A text from Tullantzinco (Tulancingo) in 1584 reveals that even an unemployed thief wore a camixatli in addition to his indigenous loincloth and cape (Lockhart 1992, 199). Trousers were apparently slower in entering the native repertory, becoming normal wear first among higher-ranking persons, but they too started to be used in the second half of the century. The first type to have been introduced were the zaragüelles, long and wide, gradually replaced in native vocabulary by the term calzones that normally designated narrower trousers. The latter are attested in the imagery of the Matrícula de Huexotzinco (figure 5.1), implying they were in use before 1560, but many native persons appear still without them. Also attested among the Nahuas after the mid-sixteenth century are jackets (jaquetas), doublets (jubones), hats (sombreros), and shoes (zapatos)—all of them becoming very common by the seventeenth century. Female clothing remained more conservative than men’s, because it had already more closely resembled European garments, but even men continued to use certain preconquest items, combining them with the new repertory. The main DOI: 10.5876_9781607322412.c005

335

Figure 5.1. A native person wearing a cape, a Spanish shirt, and trousers, Matrícula de Huexotzinco, fol. 484v (Bibliothèque Nationale de France).

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

native garment type to have survived well into the colonial period was the cape (tilmatli), placed over a Spanish shirt (Lockhart 1992, 199–200). An important though not immediate change in the use of preconquest capes was to tie it over the center of the chest and not over the shoulder, as in the traditional way. This should be probably seen as a response to European-style cloaks. Evidence about changes occurring in the native costume repertory is provided by alphabetic texts in Nahuatl, with mundane genres being particularly useful; information on the introduction of Spanish clothes among different indigenous groups can also be found in the Relaciones geográficas (Wood 2003, 54). In addition, valuable insights can be gathered from pictorial sources, which sometimes provide illustrations that shed light on the actual use of specific garment types. One of the earliest and also most interesting pieces of evidence is the Codex Cuetlaxcohuapan, dated about 1531–32. It shows lords of the four constituent altepetl of Tlaxcala— Tepeticpac, Ocotelolco, Tiçatla, and Quiyahuiztlan—dealing with Spanish authorities, including fray Martín de Valencia (Estrada de Gerlero 1983, 32–36). At this early date, high-ranking nobles wear traditional tilmatli worn over Spanish shirts and, in only one case, trousers, which confirms their early but not yet widespread use among the native elite. Notably, the lords’ capes are still tied over their shoulders, implying that tying under the neck was a later, no doubt gradual change. It is also striking that the Tlaxcalan lords continue to wear an important local pre-Hispanic status marker, the twisted headband with the aztaxelli device and a quetzal-feather tuft. The nature of change can be seen three decades later in the Matrícula de Huexotzinco. Although the imagery of local lords contained in this census document is conventional, it nevertheless seems informative about the way of dressing, even if some emphasis is placed on association with preconquest insignia of rank, such as turquoise diadems, no longer represented in a correct way. They wear shirts, jackets, and trousers, but topped by native capes and accompanied by indigenous sandals. Some of the native officials also appear with European hats. An important change, though apparently incipient, can already be noticed: although almost all their capes are still tied in a traditional manner, in one case the tilmatli is knotted over the chest, similarly to Spanish cloaks (fol. 529v). It is also clear that both fulllength trousers and shorter ones reaching to the knees were in use, whereas some of the commoners are still without any pants but are wrapped with native hip cloths (fols. 482v–487r; see also figure 5.1). All these must have been common ways of dressing in this epoch, varying considerably between different social groups. The twofold manner of tying the native cape is still present some two decades later, in the late 1570s, when the illustrations of the Florentine Codex were painted. Whereas the traditional way of wearing the tilmatli still seems dominant among

337

338

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

native craftsmen and representatives of different professions pictured in Books IX and X, its new arrangement is present there too, becoming increasingly frequent in later sources. The imagery of the Florentine Codex also reveals that typically Spanish ruffled collars, puffed sleeves, and buttoned shirts were introduced into the native repertory. As time went on, only a cape placed over European clothes, and sometimes also traditional sandals, set the indigenous male costume apart from an entirely Spanish way of dressing. This change can be seen in the imagery of the Mapa de Coacoatzintla from the region of Xalapa, where native nobles are pictured as bearded males wearing hats, shirts, and trousers in addition to bordered tilmatli. In addition to accepting foreign clothes types as their daily dress, the indigenous nobility was strongly attracted by Spanish status markers, although the ordenanzas reales issued in 1529 and 1531 prohibited the use of horses and European weapons to the members of native society.1 Many local nobles, however, were successful in gaining access to the new status symbols through special grants. This phenomenon was occurring on a considerable scale by the end of the sixteenth century, but already during the conquest Spaniards had assigned individual privileges to particularly deserving allied native nobles. And these acts were carefully accentuated by indigenous writers. One such case was a short-term governor of Tetzcoco, Tecocoltzin, the brother of Cacama and son of Neçahualpilli, to whom Cortés gave the office as an obedient ally: “he went from Mexico to Tlaxcala serving him; the captain appointed him governor, and had him baptized, naming him don Fernando; he was the first Christian in Tetzcoco, whom the captain and other Spaniards treated very well, and gave him some of what they had, and the captain gave him clothes of Castile, and weapons, and a horse.”2 Similarly, Chimalpahin (1997a, I: 168) describes the case of don (?) Juan Velásquez Tlacotzin, installed as governor of Tenochtitlan by Cortés in 1525. It happened during the march to Honduras and after the legitimate Mexica tlatoani Quauhtemoc had been executed, accused of plotting against the Spaniards. On the occasion of the installation, Tlacotzin was given Spanish attributes of rank, including European clothes, a sword, a dagger, and a white horse.3 These were not isolated cases even in the first decades after the conquest. Chimalpahin also mentions that his great-grandfather—don Diego Hernández Moxochintzetzeloatzin, referred to as a tlatocapilli (“royal noble,” noble of the dynastic line)—outfitted himself as a Spaniard (“mespañolchichihuaya”); that is, he probably not only wore European clothes but also possessed the privilege of carrying a sword and dagger, and riding a horse (Schroeder 1991, 16–17). Notably, the adoption of Spanish ways did not contradict the full continuity between preconquest and colonial native rule so essential to the vision of Chimalpahin; even if vaunting the foreign privileges assigned to his noble ancestor, he continues to call

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

the local nobility by their preconquest titles, reporting their deaths and successions according to the same conventions that he employs in respect to older times.4 As will be further discussed, this attitude was common among the postconquest native nobility, placed between the two worlds with their respective repertories of status symbols, titles, or offices, and successfully manipulating both of them to defend and promote their position in the postconquest arrangement. The numerous favors granted to the noblemen of New Spain, intensifying in the second half of the sixteenth century, usually included carrying swords or firearms, riding horses or mules with saddles and bridles, and using Spanish clothes. A good example is that of don Juan de Guzmán Itztlolinqui, whose lifestyle and position illustrate the degree of power that could be accumulated in the hands of an indigenous noble. Installed as ruler in Coyoacan by Cortés in 1526, he held this position until his death in 1569, marrying a descendant of the royal house of Tetzcoco and receiving enormous tributes and services. Royal cédulas were issued to him in 1534, 1545, and 1551, granting him a coat of arms and confirming his private properties. In addition, viceroy don Antonio de Mendoza authorized him to carry a sword (Gibson 1964, 158–59; Horn 1997, 46–48). While probably not too many could compete with the position and resources achieved by don Juan de Guzmán, numerous members of the native nobility were capable of skillfully combining and exploiting the Spanish system and preconquest traditions. Gaining access to the new symbols of rank frequently played an important part in their strategies. The number of granted licenses identified in extant sources exceeds 200, which reveals that it became very common for native lords to enhance their position with Spanish status markers (Rojas 2010, 263–68). In the early-colonial period these privileges remained limited to an upper noble class, but with time restrictions loosened.5 The degree of isolation of particular communities probably played some role, though. The number of extant licenses for the use of a sword and a mount is much smaller in Oaxaca if compared with other regions of central Mexico, the earliest being issued in 1575 for several Zapotecs, a Mixe, and two Chinantecs. Later licenses often included permission to dress in Spanish clothes, invariably granted to individuals identified as “caciques” through the seventeenth century till as late as 1719 (Chance 1989, 126). At any case, at least in some communities, by the end of the seventeenth century formerly restricted status markers were no longer an individual privilege: parading on horseback, for example, became a common element of festivities for numerous members of indigenous municipal governments and the nobility (e.g., Zapata y Mendoza 1995, fols. 96r, 97r). Inasmuch as by the seventeenth century the overall Hispanization of material culture was extensive, displaying attributes that were originally extraneous lost its sense of novelty and foreignness. Building their houses in Spanish style and

339

340

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

adopting the full range of equipment of everyday life, including commodities, tools, and furnishings, or even possessing Negro slaves, “caciques and principales became thoroughly Hispanic in their material culture while they retained their status as privileged Indians” (Gibson 1964, 156). This assertion, however, does not tell the whole truth about the nature of change and adoptions. Once all these borrowed items, including garment types, became part of the indigenous world, “there was no longer any awareness of them as something foreign. Indeed, elements of Spanish origin were soon capable of becoming a badge of local pride and self-identity” (Lockhart 1991, 4–5). This attitude made it possible to retain numerous elements of preconquest origin that became part of colonial life along with newly integrated borrowings; among them, some space was also left or created for the survival of traditional insignia and status markers. Survival of Native Dress and Status Symbols

In spite of the widespread adoption of European clothes and the appeal of Spanish status markers among the Nahuas, pre-Hispanic attributes continued in use in postcontact contexts, mainly in the sixteenth through seventeenth centuries. One of the earliest pieces of evidence attesting to the possession of native status items is a pictorial document accompanying the proceedings against a native leader, Martín Ocelotl, convicted for witchcraft in 1536–37, and containing a list of his personal goods confiscated by the Inquisition (figure 5.2).6 In addition to Spanish coins, the document illustrates numerous accouterments of pre-Hispanic origin, such as capes, loincloths, and a feathered fan, among other items. Notably, two of these capes can be identified as the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli, the most prestigious Mexica royal cape, though probably with a painted imitation of the turquoise design. Another early confirmation of continued possession of ancient symbols of power, and, what is more, of their actual use in a fight against Spaniards, comes from the Codex Telleriano-Remensis (fol. 15r). While describing the image of the death god Mictlanteuctli, the annotator of this manuscript comments that he saw the same kind of “crown”—the turquoise diadem worn by the deity—on the heads of indigenous leaders in the war of Coatlan in Oaxaca. This brief reference can be identified with a local rebellion that broke out in May 1547, involving the natives of Coatlan and other communities (Roulet 2008, 123). Whereas indigenous people in Oaxaca were certainly less exposed and susceptible to Spanish influence compared with those of the Valley of Mexico and the Puebla-Tlaxcala region, the persistence of traditional military paraphernalia can also be found among the closest allies of the Spaniards. Don Francisco de Sandoval Acacictli from Tlalmanalco, a participant in the campaign of the viceroy don

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

Figure 5.2. Joyas de Martín Ocelotl (courtesy of Archivo General de la Nación, Mexico, Inquisición, vol. 37, fol. 79).

Antonio de Mendoza in the Chichimec lands, wore the prestigious native insignia quetzalpatzactli, a shield, a golden labret, a stone necklace, and the traditional ichcahuipilli tunic, combined with Spanish garments, including trousers, shoes, and a hat (Conquista y pacificación 1996, 13, 14, 18). According to the imagery of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala relating numerous episodes from the conquest of large portions of New Spain, extending from Guatemala to northern Mexico and lasting many years after the fall of Tenochtitlan, Tlaxcalan warriors still wear their traditional battle outfits and carry prestigious back insignia and weapons. Although in the final scenes some of the native allies allegedly wield Spanish swords, this can probably be attributed to the rhetoric of this source that glorifies Tlaxcalan participants and highlights their deeds and status.7 A later use of preconquest accouterments in war may be reflected in the famous murals of Ixmiquilpan, where native warriors, pitted against centaurs and nomad barbarians, display turquoise diadems and other prestigious pre-Hispanic battle insignia. It has been proposed that in addition to its symbolic

341

342

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

dimension, this violent encounter may depict real struggles with “Chichimecs” in the turbulent area not far from Ixmiquilpan itself (Peterson 1995, 21). References to native insignia scattered in sources of different genres are frequently vague, without clear hints on the contexts of their use. Only by reading between the lines, for example, it is possible to extract bits of information about the survival of certain important items from the late-sixteenth-century writing of don Hernando de Alvarado Tezozomoc, a descendant of the royal family of Tenochtitlan. While describing the insignia worn in preconquest times, he comments that the natives “carried loads of feathers that today they call quetzalpatzactli,” or he elaborates on a royal throne that was “a chair that was [made] of a jaguar skin, low, in the ancient style, and today is used among all the natives.”8 Firmer evidence comes from indigenous written sources, of which Nahuatl wills and historical annals are of special importance. They shed light on the material goods in the possession of the native nobility, contexts of their use in the colonial world, and the degree of survival of older terminology referring to ancient status markers. A large body of native texts produced by different communities of central Mexico permits tracing these survivals across the early and middle colonial period, in different regions, and in association with persons whose status, ancestry, titles, and political functions are at least partially readable to us. In addition to attesting to the possession of certain objects, native wills provide interesting data on their donation and continued manufacture. Among the testators who declare this kind of property are native rulers (tlatoque), lords (teteuctin), and governors, the latter in most cases also with a dynastic background. Preconquest accouterments enjoyed considerable popularity among the colonial tlatoque of Quauhtinchan, who between 1576 and 1597 possessed highly prized necklaces of radiating pendants (chayahuac cozcatl), fans (ecacehuaztli), arm bands decorated with precious feathers (machoncotl), hair binders (tlalpiloni), and capes with an eagle design and traditional seats (Reyes García 1988, 20, 105)—all of these items being well-known attributes of pre-Hispanic royalty. Similar objects are listed in the will of don Pedro de San Francisco Tlaquixtecatl, gobernador of San Francisco Tlahuililpan, who in 1586 owned a precolonial-style bracelet (machoncotl), three fans of quetzal feathers (quetzalecacehuaztli), and three quetzallamamalli, back devices decorated with feathers of the same bird (VBO II, 265–66). However, at the same time, he complemented his repertory of status markers with a new Spanish chair, which shows that the coexistence and simultaneous display of symbols of rank belonging to the two cultures, indigenous and European, was an important facet of the cross-cultural dialogue in which the Nahua nobility of that time participated. Don Pedro passes the bracelets and one of the fans to his son don Diego, attesting to their hereditary status within noble families. He bestows one of

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

the quetzallamamalli to “nobles and commoners” as insignia to be used in festivities (see the discussion below). The same happens with another prominent lord, don Julián de Rosa, a lord (teuctli) and head of a lordly house (teccalli), associated with a subdivision of Ocotelolco called San Pedro Tecpan, Tlaxcala (Lockhart n.d.). In 1566 he had important assets, including land parcels of the type held only by great nobles. Among his possessions were also traditional accouterments, such as fine capes, one of them decorated with the pre-Hispanic design of a philodendron (huacalxochyo tilmatli),9 a species considered a royal attribute and a frequent motif on pre-­ Hispanic elite garments. Don Julián also kept complete war suits, among them the costume of a monkey covered with feathers accompanied by a device with a pheasant head; a suit with the head of a coyote and a compressed feather insignia;10 and a shield ornamented with 200 quetzal feathers (Lockhart 1992, 198–99; n.d.). All of these objects were prestigious tlahuiztli in the pre-Hispanic Nahua world. The coyote suit figures prominently in the military repertory of Tenochtitlan and in its tribute lists. The monkey costume, even if absent from the lists of pre-Hispanic insignia contained in primary sources from central Mexico,11 is mentioned as worn in native feasts taking place in Tenochtitlan in the 1560s, that is, precisely the time when the will of don Julián was made. These celebrations were described in the Anales de Juan Bautista (fols. 19v, 40v), a Nahuatl account belonging to the annals genre and composed by anonymous native authors from the district of San Juan Moyotlan of Mexico-Tenochtitlan in the second half of the sixteenth century. This source relates events between 1519 and 1569 (with a detailed account starting in 1564), but the extant copy (or compilation) was made in 1582 or a little later (Reyes García 2001, 28). The text employs numerous pre-Hispanic terms designating military insignia, including the tlahuiztli and tlamamalli in the specific meaning of something carried on the back, also listed in the already-discussed will of don Pedro de San Francisco Tlaquixtecatl. Coming back to the possessions of don Julián de la Rosa, another interesting item is a cape made of European domestic duck feathers (patosihuitl ), revealing how a foreign material was incorporated into an entirely native garment based on a preconquest technology of manufacture. One of his military outfits was to remain in the hands of a noble of the teccalli, Bautista Cuicuitlapan, probably a younger brother and a future successor of the testator, and Diego Amiztlato, his cousin (it seems that don Julián did not have a direct heir), who are also named as the persons who will assume the joint responsibility for taking care of the teccalli headquarters (calpolli) and will together be served by dependents (Lockhart n.d.). It seems significant that the same individuals who are to head the teccalli also receive the status items directly associated with the pre-Hispanic nobility.

343

344

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

It is also meaningful, however, that the destiny of other insignia of don Julián’s was very different. The feathers of one of the warrior’s outfits were to be removed and sold to buy candles for the church of San Pedro Tecpan. In a similar way, don Julián ordered the capes of nobility, including the huacalxochyo tilmatli and the cape of duck feathers, to be sold to say masses. Thus, in spite of the prestige of these objects in preconquest style, what counted more than their preservation was the Christian devotion of the testator. Perhaps the most surprising evidence of the degree of continuation of the pre-Hispanic tradition is the will of don Miguel Alejandrino, the governor of Tullantzinco, dated 1577. He was probably a tlatoani at the same time, and the governorship stayed within his family, for he mentions his father, don Julián de San Francisco, also a governor, and refers to his son, don Diego Alejandrino, as his successor with the title of tlatoani (VBO II, 193). Moreover, in the final annotation to the document (also in Nahuatl) his son figures as “señor don Diego Alexandrino” (VBO II, 199), being also mentioned in an inquiry undertaken in 1579 to recognize him as “the heir of the cacicazgo and of the property of his father.”12 Among his possessions don Miguel Alejandrino lists two macopilli, or “bracelets of precious feathers” (Molina, Nah., fol. 51r), which he orders sold for the substantial amount of 46 pesos. As we have seen, this adornment figures in the primary sources as the quetzalmacopilli, a band worn on the arm, decorated with a conical element called copilli and a crest of quetzal feathers, or as the xiuhmacopilli, its turquoise-mosaic version, both of them prestigious dance accouterments of Aztec rulers (PM, fol. 56r; FC VIII, 28). They were doubtlessly attributes of royalty par excellence. It is worth mentioning that don Miguel states they are new: not old objects inherited from the ancestors, but manufactured in preconquest style and used at that time. This interesting piece of information implies the continued existence of native workshops specializing in the production of traditional items. Likewise, the testator bestows on his son, as his main successor, what he calls “royal vestments/accouterments” (tlatocatlatquitl): “and my child don Diego is to keep the quetzal bird and five greenstones because they are royal accouterments.” It was don Diego’s obligation to keep them as the tlatoani, whose duty was to protect his subjects (VBO II, 191–93).13 As is well known, considerable prestige and symbolic meaning attached to greenstone before the conquest, whereas the term quetzaltototl designated a military device worn on the back, mentioned and illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales (fols. 68r, 74r), the Codex Mendoza (fol. 46r), and the Códice de Tlatelolco as an insignia of rulers and nobles. In addition, don Miguel Alejandrino seems to employ the term tlatocatlatquitl in full accordance with its pre-Hispanic meaning of prestigious military insignia (PM, fol. 65r). He places the inheritance of status items in a broader context of bequest of power,

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

giving appropriate instructions to his son and perhaps even alluding to an entirely traditional concept of rule. Don Miguel’s adherence to the preconquest heritage is also seen in his employment of an ancient metaphor referring to rulership, in petlatl in icpalli (“the mat, the seat”), in relationship to what belongs to his lordly palace, or tecpan (VBO II, 191). Accordingly, he appears to be a conscious descendant of the pre-Hispanic nobility who not only knows the language of royalty but also recognizes the value and meaning of the traditional insignia of rank. As revealed by wills produced by the Nahuas, in the second half of the sixteenth century many rulers and nobles owned capes decorated with feathers in preconquest style,14 featherwork (ihuitl ),15 fans of quetzal feathers (quetzalecacehuaztli) as well such feathers alone,16 bracelets (macuextli),17 and precious stones of symbolic value such as chalchihuites and turquoise18—all of them known as elite attributes before the Spanish conquest. It has to be emphasized that an important facet of this survival was the knowledge their owners had about the correct terminology referring to these status items. Although the strength of this tradition fades with time, some evidence of the continuity of ancient status items and of the appropriate terminology can also be found in the seventeenth century. According to a will dated 1650, the ruler of Tepetenchi in Xochimilco, don Martín Cerón de Alvarado, was the owner of a chimalli cuextecatl, probably a typical outfit of preconquest origin, the Huastec suit (cuextecatl) with an accompanying shield (VBO III, 235–52). This battle costume enjoyed great popularity in Aztec times and was manufactured in several color varieties, in its costly versions decorated with gold and precious feathers (see pp. 117 ). It is perhaps significant that don Martín calls himself a tlatoani and bequeaths his estate, referred to as in tlatocayotl in cacicazgo, to his son don Diego Juárez, who held the office of governor. Yet another example is the will of a woman of high status, doña Petronila de Turcio of Amaquemecan, in 1625 bequeathing to her heirs blue cotton capes decorated with embroidery (texotlamach[y]o, tetlamach[y]o; VBO III, 165), in accordance with a long tradition of prestigious garments of nobility, among which blue accouterments played a special role. Even more astonishing evidence comes from the will of another noblewoman, doña María Jacoba from San Bartolomé Actopantonco, who as late as in 1673 lists capes described as “tlatocatocatilmanti”— no doubt tlatocatilmatli (“royal capes”)—including the quauhtilmatli and the ocelotilmatli, the capes with eagle and jaguar designs, respectively (VBO III, 287). The names of these garments appear in the lists of the most prestigious accouterments of nobility contained in Nahuatl sources about preconquest times, such as the Primeros Memoriales and the Florentine Codex. Beyond question, the persistence of an old symbolism of eagles and jaguars—alluding to the military ethos in

345

346

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

Figure 5.3. Fiesta real in the Códice de Tlatelolco, fragment (Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico; drawing by Justyna Olko).

preconquest times, and given a special significance in imperial Tenochtitlan—in the second half of the seventeenth century attests to the strength of this tradition among indigenous elites. It is difficult to say, however, to what degree these prestigious status items, often charged with symbolic meaning, remained in everyday use by native elites, for example in their performance of municipal functions. The survival of pre-Hispanic insignia is best documented in colonial festivities and ceremonies, both secular and religious, with broad participation of the native population. This practice dates back to the first decades after the conquest when religious and historical spectacles performed by indigenous actors, including splendid “royal festivities” (fiestas reales), were celebrated in the Spanish colonies to confirm the vassalage of local subjects to a new king upon his accession; these were special occasions for the display of ancient costumes. New Spain was not unique in this respect. Similar presentation of local objects of rank and power was part of fiestas reales in colonial Peru, where local nobles made use of paintings, heraldic blazons, textiles, and other traditional status markers—and, in one of the documented cases, even displaying the vestments of ancient monarchs and asking the Indians to adore them (Espinoza 1995, 85–88). One of the earliest native descriptions of this kind of public ceremony in the Nahua world is contained in the Códice de Tlatelolco, illustrating the oath of native elites to Philip II in 1557 (Valle 1998; see also figure 5.3). Participating indigenous rulers of Tlatelolco, Tenochtitlan, Tlacopan, and Tetzcoco are seated on reed thrones and dressed in traditional garments of rank, including turquoise diadems and fancy capes, to emphasize their pre-Hispanic identity and prestigious roots. They are

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

accompanied by native dancers wearing illustrious eagle and jaguar costumes, and carrying fans and huacalxochitl (philodendron) flowers, noble attributes themselves, in their hands. That we are dealing with a realistic rendering here is implied by the fact that these dance accouterments are placed over European garments such as shirts and trousers. Such celebrations honoring Spanish monarchs and confirming their overlordship could also be an opportunity for the self-promotion of native leaders, as was probably the case with the ruler of Tlatelolco, don Diego de Mendoza Imauhyantzin Huitznahuatlailotlac, who highlights his position in the Códice de Tlatelolco by showing himself equal to, if not more important than, the accompanying rulers of Tenochtitlan, Tetzcoco, and Tlacopan, former imperial capitals. It is not improbable that the rhetoric of this pictorial manuscript indeed reflects real strategies employed by one of the native leaders—although probably not him alone—in a framework propitious for confirmation or renegotiation of existing relationships. These celebrations continued in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries with a growing refinement and exuberance. The display of costumes recreating pre-­ Hispanic garments, military insignia, and weapons was an inherent part of these celebrations, especially in mock combats performed by indigenous participants. On the one hand, carefully staged native performance reflected the Spanish concept of the colonial world as consisting of “Indian republics” and “Spanish towns,” united in their loyalty to the Crown. The submission of the natives, often presented as vassals whose ancestors had been subjugated during the conquest, could contain direct allusions to the original encounter and to historical figures of that time, such as Moteucçoma. On the other hand, probably not without manipulation by Nahua leaders themselves, their performance in traditional costumes served to reaffirm their cultural distinctiveness, historical identity, and high status, whereas the presentation of ancient emblems hinted at the origin of their authority in the glorious preconquest past. These heraldic devices could take a form like the eagle seated on a cactus placed on a special arch that the Indians built in 1640 to celebrate the entry of a new viceroy, who had to pass under this construction on his way to the main triumphal arch erected by the city councilmen. Going even further, during oath ceremonies native leaders could strengthen their position and traditional power relationships by having representatives of indigenous communities of Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco publicly pay homage to them as their overlords (Curcio-Nagy 2004, 41–52). Though certainly not paralleling metropolitan spectacles in scale, similar celebrations were also held beyond the capital, in the towns of New Spain, where such ceremonies acquired local flavor. An interesting description is provided by the late seventeenth-century Nahuatl annals from Tlaxcala that mention the festivities

347

348

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

honoring King Charles II’s reaching the age of majority in 1675 after his formal succession as a child in 1665 and the ten-year regency of his mother. This event was celebrated in Tlaxcala in January of 1677, with a great parade of local nobles who, mounted on horses, accompanied a carriage with a boy representing the Spanish monarch (Zapata y Mendoza 1995, fol. 97r). Among the crucial actors of this spectacle were the tlatoque of the four constituent altepetl, adorned with “the aztaxiloh imitating the ancient ones,”19 that is, probably the pre-Hispanic red-white twisted headbands with double heron-feathers and a quetzal tuft constituting a distinctive royal insignia among the Tlaxcalans, distinguishing them from other Nahua groups and, above all, from the Mexica and other communities of the Valley of Mexico. This emblem continued to be recognized as an important status item in the sixteenth century and further on, as can be seen, for example, in the eighteenthcentury Genealogía de don Francisco Aquiyahuateuctli (figure 3.46).20 The participants in the royal festivity progressed in a processional movement, passing through the subsequent divisions of the complex altepetl. At each of the four parts—Tepeticpac, Quiyahuiztlan, Ocotelolco, and Tiçatla—their inhabitants set special platforms or stages where they “intoned ancient songs” (“huehue­ cuicaque”), no doubt an allusion to chants of preconquest origin. Both songs of the past and the processional movement evoked pre-Hispanic rituals that often united in a rotational passage constituent parts of an altepetl, emphasizing its internal stucture. With the help of preconquest insignia and songs, Tlaxcalan tlatoque also highlighted the ancient structure of their composite altepetl and its power relationships, transferring the rotational, spatial dimension of traditional celebrations into the new context.21 Thus, they acted as members of the colonial governmental system whose authority derived from the preconquest past, whereas the ceremony honoring a distant Spanish monarch served in fact to gain political prestige and bolster their position within the altepetl and in relation to their subjects. Another context in which native costumes were often displayed were mock battles between Moors and Christians, well documented since at least 1539 and recreating specific historical events, such as the conquest of Rhodes or of Jerusalem, but almost right from the beginning incorporating numerous pre-Hispanic elements and allusions of a political nature representing the indigenous point of view. The fact that mock combats were equally prominent in European festivals and in ritual celebrations of the preconquest Nahuas facilitated the incorporation of native content into colonial spectacles. Thus, the Turks were frequently replaced by “wild men” or Chichimecs, and since indigenous actors often chose to dress as northern barbarians, rarely putting on a Spanish disguise, it has been proposed that posing as the Chichimeca was a safe guise under which to express resistance to Spanish rule (Harris 2000, 117–57).

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

Mock battles between “civilized Indians” and Chichimecs became an important part of flamboyant celebrations focusing on the cult of the Virgin of Guadalupe. As rendered on the painting titled The Transfer of the Image of the Virgin of Guadalupe to the First Shrine and the First Miracle,22 composed by an anonymous artist in 1653, such spectacles provided an excellent frame for showcasing lavish costumes and traditional insignia that imitated and recreated pre-Hispanic accouterments. Although celebratory festivals for Guadalupe recorded in 1566, 1585, and 1595 are possible sources for this work of art, more likely inspirations include the 1622 inauguration of the first basilica at Tepeyacac or the solemn return of the Virgin of Guadalupe to her sanctuary in 1634 after she was said to have stopped the disastrous floods in Mexico City. At any case, however, the “First Miracle” painting seems to be a composite of remembered and recurrent ceremonies (Peterson 2007, 363). Numerous Indian participants, no doubt including members of nobility, are pictured wearing fancy capes as well as battle suits and insignia rendered in accurate detail. In spite of the temporal removal of this painting from preconquest times, its imagery makes it possible to identify such items as the quetzallapiloni hair binders, a loincloth with the step-fret design (xicacoliuhqui maxtlatl), banners (pamitl ), feathered fans, and jaguar costumes. Equally ornate traditional costumes are worn by native dancers taking part in another Guadalupan festival commemorated in a painting by Manuel Arrellano (1709), The Transfer of the Image and Dedication of the Sanctuary of Guadalupe.23 But even more tangible evidence comes from the 1680 ritual spectacle held to celebrate the dedication of a new image of the Virgin of Guadalupe in the city of Querétaro. The eyewitness of this fete, don Carlos de Sigüenza y Góngora, who wrote a detailed account of the event, describes an inauguratory mock battle with the participation of Chichimecs characterized by Moorish features, followed by a splendid parade of pre-Hispanic monarchs, reportedly including Xolotl and later rulers of Tetzcoco, Azcapotzalco, and Tenochtitlan, a very detailed list probably inspired by a particular source or sources available to the author.24 “All of them went dressed following ancient clothes that appear in the paintings and are perpetuated by memory,” displaying royal diadems (xiuhhuitzolli) ornamented with precious stones, hair binders with quetzal feathers (quetzallapiloni), elaborate headdresses of quetzal, red-spoonbill and heron feathers, bracelets, leg bands with bells, and royal capes, including the xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli (Sigüenza y Góngora 1803 [1680], 100).25 Sigüenza carefully provides the full set of old Nahuatl names for the status items allegedly showcased during the celebration held in this peripheral town. However, rather than correctly identifying the items reproduced and exhibited in the feast, he probably quotes familiar terms from written and pictorial sources available to him. It is noteworthy that the varieties reported by Sigüenza entirely match

349

350

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

the insignia repertory contained in the sources associated with Tenochtitlan. Even if details provided by him cannot be taken as a reliable description of the spectacle in Querétaro, his account can still be accepted as testimony to the continued use of recreated insignia identified with the pre-Hispanic past in what was the northern periphery of central New Spain, colonized by the Nahuas from central Mexico at the time of the “Chichimec war” in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. This probably accounts for the sharing of essentially the same tradition of public performance with all its historical and cultural baggage. Native insignia were in use not only within the splendid framework of the fiestas reales and great spectacles enhanced by mock combats, but also in religious festivities celebrated on a much smaller scale within particular indigenous communities, starting in the first decades after the Spanish conquest. Many of them are mentioned in the Anales de Juan Bautista; in fact the role of preconquest attributes attracted considerable attention on the part of its indigenous authors, attesting to the symbolic dimension of these objects. For example, on the occasion of the arrival of the new viceroy don Gastón de Peralta, they focus on different kinds of shields, some of which can be easily identified with older styles, such as the cuextecatl, or Huastec shield (fol. 1r). Among the most frequent elements in festive contexts were battle insignia, both entire outfits and back devices. Thus, during the feast of Saint Francis (fol. 6v), the Amanalca presented themselves with the tlamamalli tlachiccomitl, the back device in the form of a jar, no doubt an item related to the insignia known as the ocelotlachiccomitl (“jaguar jar [insignia]”), mentioned in the Florentine Codex as an accouterment of rulers and nobles (FC VIII, 35). Among other examples of traditional items identified with their correct names in this account are the insignia of the god Xipe Totec (yopichimalli, yopihuehuetl), a starry butterfly (citlalpapalotl ), dance costumes taking the forms of the jaguar, coyote, and wolf (ocelotl, coyotl, cuitlachtli), the aztatzontli (“heron hair [insignia]”), the tepozpamitl (“metal banner,” —perhaps a combination of a pre-Hispanic element with material of European origin), and the tototenpilolli (“bird lip pendant,” probably similar to labrets known as the quauhtentetl or quauhtenpilolli)—all of these items appearing in the lists of preconquest ornaments.26 In one case the account mentions a “tlahuiztli casco” (Anales de Juan Bautista, fol. 58r), possibly referring to the quacalalatli, or head adornment in the shape of a helmet (FC VIII, 74). In addition to wearing ancient insignia, the participants of the feasts dressed up as members of prestigious preconquest groups, such as the quachichictli warriors, appearing with their typical outfits and particularly a head adornment called quachictzoncalli (Anales de Juan Bautista, fol. 7r). What deserves further attention is not only the survival of pre-Hispanic items and terminology but also certain specific contexts and circumstances of their use. Merchants, who participated in one of the feasts, displayed the prestigious insignia

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

quetzalapanecayotl, associated with Quetzalcoatl, that was put on a portable platform bearing Saint Francis (Anales de Juan Bautista, fol. 58r). This tradition of a ritual role of the former pochteca and their links to Quetzalcoatl goes back to precontact times and apparently survived the arrival of the Spaniards. But it was often in the religious sphere that preconquest items were employed in new ways, entailing the transformation of their original meanings as well as more or less subtle forms of cross-cultural syncretism. One of the most intriguing examples comes from a short description of the feast of Saint Sebastian celebrated in 1564 (Anales de Juan Bautista, fol. 16r). The ceremony was accompanied by the ritual of the palo volador sponsored by an important personage of royal descent, don Pedro Tlacahuepan, son of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin. According to the Nahuatl account, the Atzaqualca flew in the guise of “two red spoonbills [tlauhquechol], a butterfly, and a xillanehuatl,” that is, clad in pre-Hispanic outfits representing these styles.27 It should be added that the danza de los voladores, or the “dance of the flyers” clad in elaborate native costumes, was a frequent colonial performance, sometimes staged together with spectacles of purely Spanish origin, such as the bullfight (e.g., Zapata y Mendoza 1995, fol. 95r). The ritual of voladores was enacted with four flyers and the fifth one playing a flute, who climbed atop a bare tree trunk. Tied by the waist to a revolving wooden spool placed on the top of the pole, they cast themselves twirling around it upside down, as if flying; indeed, originally the dancers were probably equipped with feathered wings. They were followed by the musician dancing on the small platform on the top of the tree, who descended sliding down one of the ropes. This dance is believed to have survived almost intact well into colonial and modern times as a ritual retaining some of its symbolic meaning, because the Spaniards took it for a merely acrobatic display, unaware of its religious dimension (Harris 2000, 113). Coming back to the Atzaqualca dancers described in the Anales de Juan Bautista, it seems noteworthy that two of them wore the feathered adornment of the tlauhquecholtototl (red spoonbill), which was one of the most recognizable attributes of the god Xipe Totec in precontact times. The headdress made of feathers of this bird and called the tlauhquecholtzontli was worn by Mexica rulers as part of their military costume identified with Xipe. It is also possible that a mysterious garment referred to as the xillanehuatl alluded to this god as the patron of the flaying of human victims: the word ehuatl (“skin”) may refer to a feathered tunic forming part of a high-ranking battle suit, but also, in its primary sense, to a skin or dress including human skin, whereas the word xillantli means stomach or side of the body, which conveys the sense of “the skin of abdomen” or “the skin of the side.” Before the Spanish conquest the common forms of sacrifice for Xipe included a ritual of shooting with arrows and a gladiatorial combat. Are we dealing perhaps

351

352

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

with a hidden allusion to this god during the feast of Saint Sebastian, who was likewise smitten with arrows? Is this an example of the survival of preconquest religious symbolism extended to the cult of a Christian saint? While the answer to these questions remains hypothetical, the use of the attributes of Xipe Totec in colonial contexts is additionally attested by Durán. While describing pre-Hispanic dancers adorned with the yopitzontli, the headdress of this god, he says that these headpieces were still worn as dance accouterments at the time he was writing (Durán 1984, II: 277), continuing their role from ritual dances of the past. Additional evidence of the survival of pre-Hispanic objects in colonial festivals is provided by wills of native nobility. The already-mentioned governor of San Francisco Tlahuililpan, don Pedro de San Francisco Tlaquixtecatl, in 1586 bequeaths an ancient device, the quetzallamamalli (“quetzal-feather back device”), to the nobles of his town to use in dances performed on festive days.28 Don Juan Jiménez, a noble and ex-governor of Cuernavaca, in 1579 bestows on his wife doña Bárbara three small shields that serve in dances (“chimaltotontin nehtotiloni”), traditional drums (teponaztli, huehuetl, tlalpan huehuetl), and four headpieces made of feathers (ihuitzoncalli), probably for the same purpose. At the same time, don Juan owns Spanish gear such as a horse, saddle and bridle, three tables, and eight European-style chairs (Haskett 1985, 669). Another representative of the native nobility, a ruler of Yanhuitlan in the Mixtec area, don Gabriel de Guzmán, in his will made in 1591 declares among his possessions “two jewels which are golden bells for dancing belonging to the community of Achiutla, as the security deposit for 45 pesos and 2 reales that they owe me” (VBO I, 150).29 Achiutla formed part of his rulership through his marriage to doña Isabel de Rojas, and, outliving his wife, don Gabriel remained in control of her patrimony until his own death (Terraciano 2001, 175). According to his will, by the end of the sixteenth century the ruler of Yanhuitlan owned numerous items that reflect the confluence of both traditions, forming an interesting repertory that combines pieces of jewelry in preconquest style with Christian devotional objects such as images of Christ, Saint Mary, and Santiago. Standing out in the first group is “a big jewel of gold that has twelve bells and a figure of an eagle” or “an alligator with ten golden bells and some greenstones,” ornaments alluding to important symbols of rank in the preconquest world, with well-established meanings in native beliefs. Also, wills of later lords attest to the customary use of traditional costumes within indigenous communities. It is interesting that in 1686 the Spanish translation of the already-mentioned testament of don Martín Cerón de Alvarado describes the military outfit of cuextecatl owned by this ruler as “a figure that they call quistecal that they take out in their dances,” which implies this must have been a widespread practice in the end of the seventeenth century.30

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

It is debatable, however, to what degree such figures as don Gabriel de Guzmán, an influential native ruler educated by the Dominicans and an exemplary Christian (Terraciano 2001, 280–81), and later nobles, supposedly even more Europeanized, could have been aware of the ancient symbolism of items they continued to own. This question relates to the broader issue of the nature of survival of ancient paraphernalia in colonial contexts: did their use become fully conventional or was their symbolism still transparent by the late sixteenth century and beyond? Or perhaps the situation was more complex than that, given that a mixture of convention, partial remembrance of preconquest roles and meanings, and new identities and connotations of “historical costumes” developed throughout the colonial period. In view of changing threats and challenges, even if dim and blurred, the past remained an important point of reference for the Nahuas, along with the constant necessity of highlighting their ethnic and historical identity in a Hispanized world where numerous adoptions and borrowings were no longer viewed as something foreign. This phenomenon is particularly striking in the way the natives viewed and used emblematic devices, including European-style coats of arms. Even where a thread of continuity is noticeable, the change is striking enough. Pre-Hispanic insignia were showcased in new ways and combined with European symbols, as in the alreadymentioned case of merchants who displayed the quetzalapanecayotl put on a platform carrying Saint Francis (Anales de Juan Bautista, fol. 58r). Another example is found in the scene of the fiesta real illustrated in the Códice de Tlatelolco, which is accompanied by the display of a similar quetzal-feather compressed insignia, the quetzalpatzactli. Thus, in addition to being worn by festive participants, ancient tlahuiztli were transformed into European-style emblems, closely paralleling royal standards, banners, or coats of arms. On the one hand, as late as in the eighteenth century, the term tlahuiztli may be used in reference to insignia in preconquest style, as confirmed by the document accompanying the Genealogía de don Francisco Aquiyahuateuctli from Tlaxcala and stating that one of the ancestral rulers depicted in the genealogy granted a bird device to the community (Reyes García 1993, 206). On the other hand, already earlier its meaning had been extended to emblematic objects of European origin, including coats of arms. Thus, according to native annals, in 1539 “the coat of arms [tlahuiztli] was displayed” in Tlaxcala (“tlahuiznextiloc”; Zapata y Mendoza 1995, fol. 11r). In fact, numerous pre-Hispanic insignia were often incorporated as prestigious motifs in composite heraldic imagery and coats of arms, real or fabricated (e.g., Castañeda 2009). Despite their European background, such emblems became not only desirable graphic representations of the Spanish monarch’s patronage but also assertions of corporate autonomy and even expressions of resistance (Haskett 1996, 101–10; Wood 2003, 57).

353

354

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

By employing preconquest insignia in festive celebrations and colonial heraldry, the Nahuas seemed to declare their historical importance even if such items were no longer part of the everyday repertory. In a way, this phenomenon tallies with transformations undergone in the same time span by native titles of rank and offices that were eventually fitted into the Spanish political organization, originally transforming it, but in the end suffering profound changes themselves. Certain titles of primary importance for preconquest rulership, such as the tlatoani, while playing important transitional roles, eventually became merely political formulas or appellations of courtesy, reflecting also inevitable reductions of the political base and status of hereditary rulers (Lockhart 1992, 130–40). In a similar way, the ancient symbols of rank became gradually conventionalized and frozen in their new roles, even if helping to maintain historical identity and ethnic distinctiveness. Yet the longevity of certain items, and above all the survival of the correct terminology referring to them among the colonial nobility, seems noteworthy. Furthermore, as revealed by indigenous texts, this was not always a superficial continuity devoid of traditional meanings; in at least some cases, such as that of don Miguel Alejandrino of Tullantzinco, this attitude entailed the survival of native concepts linked to rulership, even if operating in a new reality and undergoing various assimilations to their Spanish equivalents. Thus, at least among some members of the early colonial nobility, usually direct descendants of precontact rulers, the traditional insignia continued to be associated with the bestowal of power and the inheritance of status deeply rooted in the past. In much the same way as the double title “cacique y gobernador” reflected the coexistence of the dual power-base of native elites of early New Spain, they were attracted by the prestige of European clothes and status markers while at the same time using traditional attributes to legitimize their position. It is difficult to overestimate the fact that high-status holders of ancestral insignia were among the indigenous persons most susceptible to European influence and most Hispanized, especially in terms of language and material culture. Surely changes and survivals were not happening at the same pace and with the same intensity within the whole upper class. It is within this group, however, that certain items were reportedly preserved and passed to subsequent generations, and that persistence of the memory of ancient vocabulary is attested. The members of this group were probably also mostly responsible for choreographing colonial fetes almost obligatorily employing the display of native symbols of rank and smuggling in historical accents or current political messages under colorful masquerades. And even if these spectacles could be accused of superficiality in reference to ancient insignia, or to the past in general, merely “quoting” them as part of theatrical conventions, it should not be forgotten that this employment of exuberant costumes and attributes fully accords with their pre-Hispanic roles.

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

Notes

1. “Cauallos y mulas y armas, a los yndios no se den: so pena de muerte ni se consientan mulas” (Puga 1945, fols. 23, 42). 2. “Fue desde México a Tlaxcala sirviéndole, al cual el capitán lo hizo señor, y lo hizo bautizar llamándolo don Fernando, que fue el primer cristiano en Tezcuco, al cual el capitán y demás españoles trataban muy bien, y le daban de lo que tenían, y el capitán le dio vestidos de Castilla y armas y un caballo” (Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, I: 390–91). 3. “Vmpa quimomaquilli yn intlaq˜ españoles yhuan espada daga yhuan ce cauallo yztac” (“there [in Huei Mollan] the Spaniards gave [Tlacotzin] their [kind of ] clothing and a sword, a dagger, and a white horse”; Chimalpahin 1997a, I: 168). 4. The installation of a new chichimecateuctli is mentioned by Chimalpahin as late as 1591, but, at the same time, his frequent mention of the office of governor suggests he saw this office, to certain degree, as a counterpart of tlatocayotl (Schroeder 1991, 185–86). However, he rarely calls a governor a tlatoani unless he actually was a ruling dynast at the same time, which is fully congruent with the pictorial conventions of that time. 5. For example, in 1640 the Audiencia of Guatemala allowed those who spoke Spanish, even commoners, to mount horses and to own mules (Megged 1991, 499). 6. The proceedings are contained in the Archivo General de la Nación, Mexico: AGN, Inquisición 61, vol. 38, exp. 4; on the pictorial document see also Barlow 1990, 233–41; Glass 1975b, 149. 7. It was not impossible that individual members of the highest elite were permitted to use swords, but on a wider scale this was certainly out of the question. The same rhetoric, combined with the white skin of native allies, can be found in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, which pictures the participation of the Quauhquecholteca in the conquest of Guatemala. 8. “Traían cargas de plumería [que] llaman el día de oy quetzalpatzactli” (Tezozomoc 2001, 259); “la silla, [que] hera de un cuero de tiguere, baxo, al uso antiguo y oy se usa [en]tre todos los naturales” (Tezozomoc 2001, 248). 9. A variant of this term, huacalxochiyo, is used in the will. 10. “Oçomahtli ytlacayo yuan coxcox ytzontecon,” “coyotl ytzontecon yuan patzactli” 11. The monkey suit is illustrated in the Codex Dehesa from the Mixtec region. 12. AGN, Tierras 2723, exp. 2. 13. “Auh yn quetzaltohtotl yuan chalchiuitl mahcuiltetl uel vquimopiyaliz yn nopiltzin don Diego yehica ca tlahtocatlatquitl. Auh cenca nicnotlatlauhtilia ypaltzinco yn totecuiyo yn Dios yn tlahtohuani macamo yhca mocacayauaz yn inantzin yuan yn mochintin nopilhuan yhuan noteyccauan yuan nomachua yuan yn ixquichtin ynma yn magnificos señores ma cenca quinmomahuiztililiz yuan calpolleque yniquintlan uel monemiltiz yuan inic quinpiaz yn maceualtin yn tecpantlaca” (VBO II, 191) (“And my son don Diego is to keep the quetzal bird and five greenstones because they are royal accouterments. I ask him, the ruler,

355

356

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

by our Lord God, not to take advantage of his mother, and all my children, my younger siblings, my nephews and nieces, and all the magnificent lords [cabildo members?]; he is to respect them and the officials very much in order to live well among them, and to take care of the commoners and the people of the tecpan.” 14. E.g., the will of Martín Lázaro Pantecatl, from the barrio of Moyotlan, year 1551 (VBO II, 91); the will of María Xocoyotl, from the barrio of Tepetenchi, city of Xochimilco, year 1569 (VBO II, 153); and the will of Francisco Xochpanecatl, from the barrio of Apanohuayan in Mexico-Tenochtitlan, year 1576 (VBO II, 177, 179). 15. The will of don Francisco Verdugo Quetzalmamalictzin, the governor of San Juan Teotihuacan, year 1563 (VBO II, 139). 16. The will of Ana Tiacapan, from the barrio of Tepetenchi, city of Xochimilco, year 1566 (VBO II, 147); quetzal feathers: VBO II, 323. 17. The will of María Xocoyotl, from the barrio of Tepetenchi, city of Xochimilco, year 1569 (VBO II, 153). 18. E.g., the will of don Miguel Alejandrino, governor of Tullantzinco, year 1577 (VBO II, 197); the will of Juana Francisca, from the barrio of San Sebastián, in the district of Tzaqualco, Mexico-Tenochtitlan, year 1576 (VBO II, 175); the will of doña Ana de Santa Bárbara, the main cacica of Santo Domingo Tepexi de la Seda, 1621 (VBO III, 119); the will of doña Ana de Guzmán, a noblewoman from the head town of Olac, Xochimilco, 1577 (VBO II, 211, 213); the will of Juan Rafael Tlacochcalcatl, 1581, Colhuacan (TC, fol. 67v); the will of Mariana, a widow of Juan Rafael Tlacochcalcatl, 1581, Colhuacan (TC, fol. 64v); and a document relating to the estate of Simón Moxixicoa, 1581, Colhuacan (TC, fol. 72r), annotations in Nahuatl (TC, fols. 48r). 19. “Nahui tlatoque quitlalique ym aztaaxiluh quitlamachcuique y huehuetque” 20. AGN, Tierras vol. 914, exp. 2. 21. Whereas the order of the four altepetl as it appears in the annals does not correspond exactly with their internal ranking (originally: Tepeticpac, Ocotelolco, Tiçatla, Quiyahuiztlan; later Ocotelolco, Tiçatla, Quiyahuiztlan, Tepeticpac; Lockhart 1992, 22), the way they are mentioned in this account is not entirely clear, because two appear in the annotations in the margins, so it is possible that the celebration reflected the existing hierarchy. 22. Traslado de la imagen de la Virgen de Guadalupe a la primera hermita y presentación del primer milagro 23. Traslado de la imagén y dedicación del santuario de Guadalupe 24. It is striking, for example, that the list of rulers he gives on that occasion evokes personages represented in the Codex García Granados, which could perhaps serve as a source for this listing. At any rate, Sigüenza y Góngora had access to numerous native sources, probably through don Juan de Alva Ixtlilxochitl, a descendant of the royal dynasty of Tetzcoco. 25. “Todos iban vestidos segun las antiguas galas que se manifiestan en las pinturas y que se perpetúan en la memoria…Llevaban todos adornadas las cabezas con el Xiuhzolli, que era

P ostcontact S urvivals and A daptations

divisa propia del Señorío, estando cada uno de ellos primorosamente esmaltado de riquísimas joyas de piedras preciosas y todo género de perlas: llevaban también la estimable trenzadera del Quetzaltlalpiloni, y los vistosos plumeros con que se hacia mas primorosa su gala como son el Malacaquetzalli, Tlauhquecholtontec y Aztatzontli, con ésto todos uniformes en la preciosidad de las plumas y todos singulares en lo exquisito de su admirable disposición lucieron en pies y manos el Icxitecuecuextli, Icxipepetlachtli y Matzopetztli, y sobresalieron las extraordinarias costosísimas Mantas, que solo servian a la Magestad en el Trono, que llamaban Xiuhtlalpiltilmatli y Netlaquechilloni” (Sigüenza y Góngora 1803 [1680], 100–101). 26. Anales de Juan Bautista, fols. 7v, 10v, 11r, 16r, 17v. 27. “Axcan jueves a 20 de henero de 1564 a[ñ]os yquac ylhuitzin quiz in Sant Sebastia[n] auh yquac quauhpatla[n]que yn atzaqualca yn ipa[n] quauhpatla[n]que o[n] tetl tlauhquechol ce[n]tetl papalotl ce[n]tetl xillanehuatl auh in quahuitl yquauh in do[n] P[edr]o Tlacahuepa[n] ytlacohual yn itech quauhpatla[n]que.” 28. “Auh centetl quetzallamamalli yntech nicpouhtiuh yn pipilti yc macehuazque yn iquac mitotizque yn iquac ilhuitl quiztiuh” 29. “Dos joyas que son dos cascabeles de oro para bailar, de la comunidad de Achiutla, en prenda de los cuarenta y cinco pesos y dos tomines que me deben” 30. The original text, “ome pancocolli nahui maçohualoni ce chimalli cuextecatl,” was translated in 1686 in the following way: “dos abanicos de pluma y un broquel de pluma y una figura que llaman quistecal que sacan en sus bailes” (VBO III, 242–43).

357

6 Summation

Those who study the Nahua world may feel particularly fortunate in having available to them a huge corpus of extant preconquest and postconquest sources for numerous aspects of native life and culture. This material, though certainly not exhaustive, permits us to address a whole range of research topics. Nevertheless, the very size and diversity of the corpus make it very difficult to achieve an overall perspective that addresses broader phenomena across the whole temporal and geographical range, while at the same time paying the necessary attention to detail and tangible evidence. In the past the solution has often been to restrict studies in scope and in regard to source material. Having already defined my topic as the study of Nahua elite costume and status markers, I did not wish to restrict it further. I have attempted to combine perspectives, types, and genres of information, and consequently kinds of expertise, that are often separated in modern research. The project includes both philological research and pictorial analysis, sources with both precontact and postcontact emphasis, and as wide a regional range as the materials permit. This enterprise of mine on the one hand has produced a mass of evidence, needing systematic presentation; on the other hand it has suggested a variety of interpretations of that evidence. Thus I have operated at different levels simultaneously, combining close analysis with attention to broader phenomena: cultural patterns, attitudes, strategies, concepts. The volume is both a detailed research monograph and an interpretive study; it can also serve as a reference work, and I have been very much aware of that function as well. DOI: 10.5876_9781607322412.c006

359

360

S ummation

Chapters 2 and 3 are large-scale topical surveys in which the factual aspect provides the organization, though it is intertwined with analytical commentary and conclusions. Taking this evidence to a different level, chapter 4 is thematic and interpretive, attempting to achieve a more contextualized reading of essential concepts and meanings attached to status items. Chapter 5 shares some of the qualities of both of the other types, both bringing up new data for discussion and outlining related results. In a word, the nature of the sources and the research method has called for weaving the type of material that might form a large-scale conclusion into the body of the book. Thus, what is needed at this point is not a conclusion in the usual sense but a brief recapitulation of some main points and some remarks to guide the reader in finding their full expression at various points in a work whose organization is of necessity more than usually complex. My basic original aim was to reconstruct the core of the repertory of elite dress and insignia among the preconquest Nahuas, being especially concerned to locate, assemble, and analyze the original terminology referring to status items. The results are presented discursively in the voluminous chapter 2, with the items organized from head to foot. To make comparative use by researchers easier, the bulk of these data are systematized in the Appendix, together with translations, references, and contextual information. The reconstruction of this repertory draws on textual sources, pictorial evidence, and, to a lesser extent, on available museum objects. It is based not only on widely explored sources such as the works compiled by Sahagún, but also on lesser-known native texts, including annals and documents in mundane genres. Whenever possible and relevant, I have attempted a more profound examination of the meanings and functions of particular items. This was especially the case with the turquoise diadem, one of the most important symbols of power in Tenochtitlan and beyond. Enveloped in esoteric symbolism, this insignia predated the establishment of the Triple Alliance, but during the Alliance’s expansion, the diadem became a source of prestige for local elites subordinate to it. I have argued that the material form of the Aztec xiuhhuitzolli derived from the stylized head of the fire serpent, conveying a strong link to the god of fire and time. In their use of the mosaic diadem, the Postclassic Nahuas, and especially the Mexica, based themselves on an ancient tradition, inherited from and reminiscent of the most important Mesoamerican centers of power of the Classic and Early Postclassic periods. As has been shown, the development, the ways of use, and the conceptual meanings of this item need to be viewed as aspects of a long-term interplay between central Mexican and Mayan traditions, going back to the Early Classic period in the fourth century AD. I have also brought into focus other components of the “turquoise dress” of the rulers of Tenochtitlan, encompassing turquoise noserods, earplugs, and bracelets, as well as loincloths, sandals, and, above all, the royal

S ummation

cape with the turquoise-mosaic design that, at least in its most sophisticated version, might have been decorated with actual pieces of this stone. In much the same way as the royal headdress, these turquoise regalia were conceived as items inherited from antiquity, some of them indeed appearing in Early Postclassic art. As we have seen, many additional lordly headpieces, falling into several basic categories distinguished by form and materials, were employed in Tenochtitlan and other Nahua altepetl. Among such objects were diadems made of plaited gold, reflecting an appropriation of foreign status items as a result of trade and military conquest. Other types include headbands and their ornaments, feathered hairbinders, numerous headdresses made of precious feathers of exotic birds, enclosing helmets, conical copilli caps, as well as Chichimec-associated head adornments. A great variety of jewelry was in use—from earplugs made in different materials and forms through nose ornaments and labrets—figuring among the highest insignia of nobility and rulership bequeathed to the members of an upper group. A close analysis of this repertory and associated terminology reveals that a restricted number of main forms and materials were used to produce many possible combinations. Exquisitely ornamented cotton capes made up an indispensable component of this noble costume, embracing both garments of regular weave (tilmatli) and those of loose thread (cuechintli or ayatl). It has been possible to highlight the symbolic associations and functions of different categories of capes by the joint analysis of their terminology, forms, and designs as well as their contextual use as revealed by references in extant sources. Even if in many cases we lack information on the ritual contexts in which specific tilmatli were used, their decorative patterns suggest profound symbolic meaning, conveying essential information on the identities and functions of their wearers. Some of these garments were closely linked to war and warlike deities; some were worn on sacrificial and fasting occasions; others became identified with semibarbarian Chichimec ancestors and values crucial for the Nahua understanding of their past and identity; and yet others served as badges of foreign ethnic groups. Textile production came to play an important role within the perimeters of the Triple Alliance, for cotton capes were among the primary tribute assessments of subordinate communities. Tribute patterns followed local traditions only to some extent, for specific mantles laden with ethnic associations—such as, for example, the ixnextlacuilolli and ometochtecomayo—were also demanded from regions lying far beyond their probable areas of origin, reflecting perhaps an intentional imperial policy of stimulating exchange of these and other tribute goods between conquered zones. Just as high-quality textiles and other garments were restricted to the noble class, so, too, were jewelry and battle insignia important aspects of both elite culture and specialized manufacture in all Nahua altepetl. Huge amounts of these prestigious items were needed in political and

361

362

S ummation

ritual spectacles as adornments of the participants and as lavish gifts and rewards for favored recipients. As imperial tribute lists tend to reveal, not all such items could be acquired through the networks of formal tribute payment; the most prestigious status symbols were probably made in specialized workshops in Tenochtitlan and other Nahua towns, while certainly some exotic objects were transported by longdistance merchants to satisfy elite demand. This manufacture also embraced elaborate versions of battle suits and standards that fell into a broad category of tlahuiztli, a term alluding to the brilliant, shiny qualities of war apparel destined to impress and intimidate the enemy. Nahua warriors also employed protective shirts made of thick cotton (ichcahuipilli), while high nobles wore precious tunics decorated with colorful feathers (ehuatl). War accouterments were produced in numerous varieties and worn in different combinations, assigned according to the rank of the wearers, starting from commoner warriors, through the simple members of the nobility, and ending with lords and rulers, who also had to prove their courage and skills on the battlefield. The same variety of tlahuiztli could be apparently made in more costly and modest versions, depending on the materials and ornaments used. Whereas certain costumes were especially linked to the military ethos highlighted in the ideology of Tenochtitlan, there existed a considerable uniformity in war costumes between the Nahua altepetl of the Valley of Mexico and those of the Puebla-Tlaxcala region. In addition, local pictorial documents from localities beyond the basin leave no doubt that certain “Mexica” suits, such as jaguar or eagle costumes, were worn by the nobility of other altepetl, attesting to a wider Nahua “military culture.” Certain sets of accouterments formed what was conceived as ethnic battle suits, as for example the cuextecatl outfit, widely used in the Valley of Mexico and beyond at the time of contact. It is noteworthy, however, that it was not a borrowed set in its entirety but a conventional assemblage put together by the Nahuas out of several elements they credited with Huastec origin. Some of these items, as the cuexyo design present on garments and shields, are found in Mesoamerican art several centuries before the rise of Tenochtitlan and its allies, attesting once more to the Nahua adoption of older Mesoamerican traditions. Noble dress was not complete without adornments for the lower body, including leg bands, made of different materials and in various forms, as well as footwear, also serving as markers of nobility. The female repertory was apparently more modest, consisting primarily of shifts and skirts, enriched by pieces of jewelry, but certain designs worn by noblewomen mirrored patterns found on prestigious male garments. As elsewhere in the world, much importance within the repertory of central Mexican insignia of rank was given to seats, a wide category embracing woven reed and animal-skin mats, thrones with backrests, and low stools, often combined

S ummation

with animal hides carrying no less-prestigious associations than reeds and reed mats, closely identified with legitimate power from the very beginnings of Mesoamerican civilization in Preclassic times. Much can be learned about native status items by viewing them as an essential part of the iconography of rank developed across the macroregion both before and after the arrival of the Europeans on the scene (chapter 3). The analysis of different kinds of royal portraits recorded in distinct media reveals not only various pictorial conventions but also how attributes of rank were capable of encoding cultural and political strategies. Taking precontact imagery as the necessary point of departure, it is possible to see how traditional ways of representation were exploited and adapted in postconquest pictorial manuscripts to convey the vision of the past as well as certain contemporary claims of the native nobility. Particularly illuminative is the comparison of rulers’ images contained in two Sahaguntine manuscripts, the Primeros Memoriales and the Florentine Codex, reflecting different aims, strategies, and views of their native painters (Sahagún 1950–1982, 1993). An important implication of this analysis is how the transformation of the native system of rule was understood by the sixteenth-century Nahuas and how these ideas were reflected in pictorial conventions developed to serve the current need of producing adequate imagery of past and contemporary lords and nobles. Native attitudes varied from the claims to unbroken preconquest heritage, to questioning the full continuation of the traditional power base into the colonial era, and even to the enthusiastic acceptance of Spanish offices and associated status items. Although indigenous painters seem to have enjoyed a certain liberty within existing pictorial conventions, they nevertheless acted according to relatively wellestablished iconographic codes typical for particular regions and defining different shades of status, both pre- and postcontact. The regional focus has made it possible to discuss dispersed local evidence within a unified approach, sweeping from the area adjacent to the north of the Valley of Mexico, through those lying to the south and southeast in the present states of Guerrero, Morelos, and Puebla, toward eastern regions embracing Tlaxcala and some portions of Veracruz. Thus, within the scope of my research not only were Nahua communities broadly present in this wide central Mexican area, but also Otomi, Matlatzinca, Tlapaneca, Popoloca, and Totonaca groups, closely interacting with the speakers of Nahuatl, often preserving their distinctive traditions in pictorial styles and iconography of rank but at the same time attesting to a common spectrum of responses to external influence and change that transcended ethnic divisions and different historical experience. By embracing, with this kind of study, not only the metropolitan zone and its “primary” sources but also pictorial documents from various communities beyond the Valley of Mexico, I have been able to distinguish local styles as well as probable

363

364

S ummation

interregional influences and inspirations. Such influences are manifest in (but not limited to) the role of the Triple Alliance and especially Tenochtitlan, whose impact on the iconography of rank in the imperial provinces seems much more substantial than that of Tetzcoco. Quite often, however, we have to contemplate the strength of local traditions that override the Mexica imprint, as in the case of the altepetl in the area of Puebla, or a total rejection of imperial status symbols in the case of Tlaxcala, which I view as a conscious and long-term assertion of independence and autonomy, surviving well into postconquest times. It is therefore not surprising, but nevertheless important to emphasize, that the responses to imperial impact, ranging from strong assertions of local identity to appropriations of external affiliations, later served as models for strategies undertaken vis-à-vis Spanish control and the challenges of postconquest times. What the broad reconstruction based both on written and pictorial evidence seems to reveal with considerable clarity is that even slight differences in form or material could make vital distinctions and convey distinct messages about the meaning of a given item or about a wearer, whose apparel constituted a code in itself. This costume language is particularly striking when attributes are viewed through their role in ceremonies and other contexts closely associated with the display of insignia of rank, or through conventional circumstances in which the members of the nobility played well-defined symbolic and ritual roles (such as fasting, coronations, religious feasts, battles, war parades, and rewarding brave warriors or allies, to name just a few). As has been shown throughout this book, both the general nature and the slightest detail in one’s apparel could potentially allude to particular divine patrons, concepts, or even ethnic groups. Certain outfits were carriers of meanings linked to specific conceptual frameworks. This is, for example, the case of the royal battle costume of Xipe Totec, the flayed god, which, like the much less prestigious and common “Huastec” war suit, seems to have been a conceptual construct of the Nahuas, who merged diagnostic components into new wholes. Conveying specific religious or ethnic symbolism, these assemblages also displayed prestigious external affiliations, preserving the memory of their foreign ethnic origin, whether true or imagined. The ethnic dimension of dressing customs is further explored in chapter 4, which brings into focus communicative roles of clothing, especially as the marker of civilized status qualifying other ethnic groups, with Nahua modes as an obligatory point of reference. Among the principal criteria of evaluation were the quality and design of garments as well as the ways of wearing them, thus revealing both native ethnocentrism and the use of dress to convey precise cultural and political messages, especially through the conventional redistribution of gifts. No less enlightening for the reconstruction of preconquest concepts attached to the insignia of ranks is their role in royal rites of passage such as investiture. As

S ummation

has been argued, the insignia involved in these ceremonies were conceived by the Nahuas not merely as external signs of rank and office but as vehicles bringing about the change of status. Certain accouterments, such as the regalia made of turquoise— the precious stone believed to accumulate celestial fire—fostered the transformation of the royal persona, which differed from ordinary mortals by an exceptional accumulation of divine essences, increasing with performance as a ruler. Closely related to this esoteric symbolism of garments was the notion of dress and other elite attributes as -tonal, denoting in its primary sense someone’s exclusive property. The analysis of attestations of this term in reference to status items, together with additional hints provided by fray Alonso de Molina, imply its wider ramifications alluding to the concept of tonalli. The latter referred to the solar heat forming the spiritual entity of an individual and thus becoming the driving force behind his “destiny.” Designating things immanently belonging to rulers and nobles, -tonal qualified status symbols as the material repositories of spiritual force that constituted part of their owners’ identity and fate. A similar concept has been traced behind other Nahuatl terms referring to the “property” of rulers and nobles and describing not only their attributes of rank but also essences proper to the divinity that could materialize in both material goods and spiritual favors. As these concepts are mainly studied through extant postconquest sources, it seemed essential to probe into ideas and the use of status items among the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Nahuas. This issue is a salient dimension of chapter 3, which deals with both precontact and postcontact iconographies of rank, and is further developed in the final part of the book. Although the Hispanization of an upper group is well attested throughout the sixteenth century and beyond, the increasing ownership of swords, horses, and all sorts of prestigious Spanish attire seems underrepresented in native pictorial sources, leading us to imagine Nahua leaders as relying mainly on their traditional attributes, rooted in the past, as an essential source of legitimacy. But such would have been a misleading picture, for even if Europeanized representations of local elites are much less numerous than renderings based on pre-Hispanic status items, they are quite telling. Whereas it is quite common to find foreign items incorporated into the native world in association with Spanish-introduced functions, such as those of municipal officials, in some cases the change goes much further than that. This occurs with some of the personages depicted in the Tira de Tepechpan, the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan, or the Códices Azoyú. The last case is particularly intriguing as the testimony of the profound transformation of the power base and visual status markers within the lifespan of a single ruler. This pictorial rhetoric makes us aware of disparities between imagery and social practice occurring in both directions, when native nobles appear untouched by

365

366

S ummation

European inspirations and when they display inaccessible Spanish status items. As has been pointed out, there was no single and unified response on the part of colonial Nahua elites toward these two opposing points of reference, nor was there a uniform view of the status of colonial descendants of preconquest rulers vis-à-vis newly introduced offices and ranks. The Nahuas and other Mesomaerican groups became engaged in constant interplay between tradition and novelty, between legitimacy rooted in the past and the acceptance of the Spanish legal order, such that continuity and change thus became complementary forces shaping native attitudes in new sociopolitical and cultural circumstances. It is therefore natural and justified to broaden the research on pre-Hispanic insignia of rank by attempting to explore their postcontact survival, not only in pictorial rhetoric but also in social practice. As discussed in chapter 5, even if by the seventeenth century the overall Hispanization of material culture was extensive, the longevity of certain objects and concepts associated with them in the early and middle colonial period seems remarkable. Although ancient symbols of rank became gradually conventionalized and frozen in their new and narrower roles, they continued to maintain the historical identity and ethnic distinctiveness of the Nahuas, both in their internal, family use and in public display. Behind this prolonged use of traditional items as well as of the correct preconquest terminology referring to them in native texts, one can also sense the survival of certain concepts of power and rank. Placed between the two worlds with their distinct repertories of status symbols, and increasingly affected by inevitable adjustments to the Spanish system and cultural challenges of their time, indigenous leaders were able to successfully manipulate both repertories. Rather than reinforcing traditional views about their profound acculturation under Spanish rule, the present book builds up a different view of the Nahua world congruent with what has been emerging from more recent research based on native sources. Exploring an aspect of indigenous culture hitherto largely neglected in scholarly research, I have ventured an experimental approach cutting across traditionally divided epochs and sources, trying to embrace a complex phenomenon that can be understood more fully only in its entirety.

Appendix Dictionary of Insignia and Accouterments

Table A.1. References to the royal turquoise diadem in written sources Context description

Quotation

Huitzilihuitl and Itzcoatzin participated in the election of Chalca rulers. Even if different terms are listed, probably one and the same item is meant.

Ytoca yn cihuapilli Tlacocihuatzin contallilique yn Chimalpahin teuhctzontli yhuan yn xihuitzolli yhuan yn ixquich 1997b, 118–19 tlamantli tlahtocayotl conmamacaque yn cihuapilli. (“On a noblewoman named Tlacocihuatzin they placed the teuctzontli and the xiuhhuitzolli, and all things of the tlatocayotl they gave to the noblewoman.”) Auh conmacaque yn Aoquantzin yn tlahtocayotl, yn teuhctzontli yhuan yn xihuitzolli, conaquique ynin ontlamantli yuhqui corona ypan pohuia, yhuan yn ixquich ynic netlahtocatlalliloya, yxquich comamacaque. (“And they gave Aoquantzin the tlatocayotl, the teuctzontli, and the xihhuitzolli, they put on him these two things which counted as a crown, and they gave him everything with which a ruler was installed.”)

Term xiuhhuitzolli used in reference to the miter of Catholic bishops.

yhuan yn intlahtocayotzin, xihuitzolli mitra quiChimalpahin maaquitzinotiaque yn imicpactzinco . . . yn ixihui­ 2003b, 323 tzoltzin mitra quihualmaquitzinotia (“and they put on his head his rulership, the miter-xiuhhuitzolli . . . he came wearing his miter-xiuhhuitzolli”)

Source

continued on next page

DOI: 10.5876_9781607322412.c007

367

368

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.1.—continued Context description

Quotation

Source

Oration to a ruler elected to office.

Ca axcan tiqujmacocujlia, tiqujnveililia in tecujotl, in tlatocaiutl: auh ticvecapanoa in tetepeiotl, in xivitzolli, in matemecatl, in cotzeoatl, in nacochtli, in tentetl, in tlalpilonj. (“Now you lift, you aggrandize the lordship, the rulership: you raise the peaked headdress, the pointed turquoise thing [diadem], the arm band, the leg band, the earplug, the labret, the hair binder.”)

Florentine Codex VI, 57

Dance of lords performed every four years.

ocontlali xiuhvitzolli, in tlatocaiotl (“he put on the pointed turquoise thing, the rulership”)

Florentine Codex VI, 164

Oration to Tezcatlipoca made on the occasion of the election of a new ruler.

ca oconcujc in tepeiotl, in xiuhvitzolli (“he put on the peaked headdress, the pointed turquoise thing”)

Florentine Codex VI, 19

Oration of a ruler to Tezcatlipoca after his installation: the turquoise diadem is mentioned among precious insignia with which the gods reward the rulers.

Auh in vncan tiqujnmotlamamaqujlia, in vel tiqujnmocencavilia, in jntech timotlatlatlalilia in tiqujnmoveililia, in tiqujnmovecapanjlvia in tetepeiotl, in xivitzolli: auh in nacochtli, in tentetl, in tlalpilonj, in matemacatl, in cotzeoatl, in cozcatl, in quetzalli. (“And you bequeath them, you array them, you place on them, you honor them, you aggrandize them [with] the peaked headpiece, the turquoise pointed thing [diadem], and the earplug, the labret, the hair binder, the bracelet, the leg band, the necklace, the quetzal feathers.”)

Florentine Codex VI, 44

Description of personal treasures of Moteucçoma seized by Spaniards.

in xiuvitzolli tlatocatlatqujtl (“the pointed turquoise thing, royal vestment”)

Florentine Codex XII, 49

Description of the coronation ceremony of Tiçoc.

un xiuhhuitzolli, que es una xaqueta azul, y se la bistieron . . . y le ponen su media mitra azul, senbrado en él mucha pedrería, toda de esmeraldas muy sotilmente apegadas y puestas

Tezozomoc 2001, 248

Description of the dance performed by Tiçoc in the final part of his coronation ceremony.

en la cabeça o frente lleuaua el xiuhhuitzolli, que es la media mitra serbía de corona rreal, esmaltado de piedras de esmeraldas, diamantes, ánbar senzillo muy menudo, muy sutilmente hecho y labrado, que rrelunbraua

Tezozomoc 2001, 260

Adornment worn by Tiçoc during the dance in the final part of his coronation ceremony.

la corona llaman xiuhhuilzolli

Tezozomoc 2001, 262

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.1.—continued Context description

Quotation

Source

Coronation of Ahuitzotl.

la corona, que es azul, de pedrería rrica, como media mitra, le llaman xiuhtzolli

Tezozomoc 2001, 269

Costume of Ahuitzotl during the final part of his coronation ceremony.

E luego adornan al rrey Ahuitzotl, pónenle la corona de oro con mucha pedrería, que es la media mitra, llaman xihuitzolli.

Tezozomoc 2001, 304–7

Description of the election ceremony of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin.

y la corona llaman xiuhhuitzolli, que es una media mitra se pone desde la frente y detrás del colodrillo se ata con una sotil trença, ba rrematando en delgado como el corte de un escarpín de lienço

Tezozomoc 2001, 362–67

Greeting gift of the immigrants from Quauhnahuac who settled in Mexico.

in yuhqui xiuhtzontli catca amo quimati in tlein tlazalolli in azo chalchihuitl in anozo xihuitl (“it was like turquoise hair, it is not known what was glued [to it]: maybe jade, or perhaps turquoise”)

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 28

Image of Ahuitzotl.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51v

Image of Axayacatzin.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51r

Image of Cacamatzin.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 52v

Image of Coanachochtli.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 52v

Image of Quauhtemoc.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol.51v

Image of Cuitlahuac.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51v

Image of Cuitlahuatzin.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 53v

Image of Itzcoatzin.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51r

Image of Moteucçoma I.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol.51v continued on next page

369

370

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.1.—continued Context description

Quotation

Source

Image of Moteucçoma II.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51r

Image of Neçahualcoyotl.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 52r

Image of Neçahualpilli.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 52r

Image of Tiçoc.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 51v

Image of Tlaçolyaotzin.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 53v

Image of Tzontemoctzin.

ixiuhtzon (“his turquoise hair”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 53v

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.2. References to the tlalpiloni in written sources Nahuatl name

Context

Quotation

Source

tlalpiloni

Precious insignia bestowed by a ruler on others.

tetlauhtiaia, qujtemacaia, tetech qujtlaliaia in tilmatli, in maxtlatl, in tlalpilonj, inteçacatl, in nacochtli (“he gave favors to people, he bestowed upon and laid before them capes, loincloths, hair binders, labrets, and earplugs”)

Florentine Codex IV, 7

tlalpiloni

Precious item gained for military achievements.

ic much vncan, qujmaceoaltia in tlalticpac paqujliztli, neiollaliliztli: in xochitl, in jietl, in netlamachtilli: in tilmatli, in tençacatl, in tlalpilonj (“thus he then gained earthly happiness and contentment: flowers, tobacco, riches; capes, labrets, hair binders”)

Florentine Codex V, 158

tlalpiloni

Precious insignia gained by brave warriors.

˜ auh in qujtimaloz in chimalli, in tlaviztli, in tençacatl, in tlalpilonj (“and he will enjoy the shield, the insignia, the labret, the hair binder”)

Florentine Codex VI, 14

tlalpiloni

Precious insignia with which the god Tezcatlipoca rewards the rulers, mentioned in the oration of a ruler after his installation.

Auh in vncan tiqujnmotlaFlorentine mamaqujlia, in vel tiqujnmoCodex VI, 44 cencavilia, in jntech timotla­ tlatlalilia in tiqujnmoveililia, in tiqujnmovecapanjlvia in tetepeiotl, in xivitzolli: auh in nacochtli, in tentetl, in tlalpilonj, in matemacatl, in cotzeoatl, in cozcatl, in que­ tzalli (“and you bequeath them, you array them, you place on them, you honor them, you aggrandize them [with] the peaked headpiece, the turquoise pointed thing [diadem], and the earplug, the labret, the hair binder, the bracelet, the leg band, the necklace, the quetzal feathers”) continued on next page

371

372

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.2.—continued Nahuatl name

Context

Quotation

Source

tlalpiloni

Royal adornment mentioned in the oration to a ruler elected to office.

ca axcan tiqujmacocujlia, Florentine Codex VI, 57 tiqujnveililia in tecujotl, in tlatocaiutl: auh ticvecapanoa in tetepeiotl, in xivitzolli, in matemecatl, in cotzeoatl, in nacochtli, in tentetl, in tlalpilonj (“now you lift, you aggrandize the rule, the rulership: you raise the peaked headdress, the pointed turquoise thing [diadem], the arm band, the leg band, the earplug, the labret, the hair binder”)

tlalpiloni

Rewards and honors to be gained by brave warriors.

auh yn ijlvil in jmaceoal, in chi- Florentine malli, in tlaviztli, in nacochtli, Codex VI, 72 in tentetl, in tençacatl, in tlalpilonj (“and his due reward, his merit is the shield, the insignia, the earplug, the labret, the lip pendant, the hair binder”)

tlalpiloni

Rewards and honors to be gained by successful nobles.

auh in oqujtimaloco in Florentine chimalli, in tlaviztli, in teçacatl, Codex VI, in tlalpilonj, in nacochtli, in 106 tentetl (“and they came to enjoy the shield, the insignia, the lip plug, the hair binder, the nose plug, the labret”)

tlalpiloni

Insignia granted to a brave warrior who took five prisoners, huei tiacauh.

tlalpiloni aço iztac teucuitlatl in itecpaio (“a hair binder, perhaps its flint knives are of silver”)

Florentine Codex VIII, 77

tlalpiloni (quetzallalpiloni depicted)

Tribute item from the province of Coixtlahuacan.

centetl tlalpilloni (“one hair binder”)

Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 12r

tlalpiloni (çacuantlalpiloni is depicted)

Tribute item from the province of Cuetlaxtlan.

centlamantli tlapilloni (“a kind of hair binder”)

Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 14r

quauhtlalpiloni

Insignia given to a brave warrior who took four captives.

quauhtlalpiloni inic ontlalpiloque (“eagle-feather binders, with which they bound [their hair]”)

Florentine Codex VIII, 77

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.2.—continued Nahuatl name

Context

Quotation

Source

quauhtlalpiloni

Insignia carried by seasoned warriors; the eaglefeather binder possibly refers here to ornaments attached to a back device as implied by the verb mama.

Auh in tequjoaque, quauh­ Florentine tzontli in qujmamaia, excan Codex II, yetiuh quauhtlalpilonj, 100 ocelueoatica in tlaquimilolli: auh in itzintla excan in chichilicpatica tlacujxtli. (“And the seasoned warriors carried upon their shoulders eagle-feather devices. In three places there were eagle-feather clusters bound with ocelot skin. And at the base they were wound in three places with red cotton thread.”)

quauhtlalpiloni

Adornment put on by an Otomi-rank warrior.

˜ auh in qmanjan injc mjxpoloa cõmaqujaia ihuitzoncalli quatzone quauhtlalpilonj icuexcochtlampa tentiuh, ic tlalpitiuh (“and sometimes in order to disguise himself he put on a feather headdress with a wig, with eagle-feather hair binders, which went tied at the back of his head”)

Florentine Codex XII, 92

quauhtlalpiloni

Description of the “elders” who received the Aztec army in the triumph ceremony.

lleuaron los biexos . . . y detrás de los colodrillos atados los cauellos con cuero colorado, [que] llaman cuauhtlalpiloni

Tezozomoc 2001, 136

quauhtlalpiloni

Description of the insignia of the Otomi-rank warriors.

Y los trançados eran cuauh­ tlalpiloni y çacuantlalpiloni, xolotlalpiloni.

Tezozomoc 2001, 171–72

quauhtlalpiloni

Gift to enemy elite invited to Tenochtitlan.

mandó Monteçuma darles . . . trençaderas de cauello [que] llaman cuauhtlalpiloni, trançados de los balientes

Tezozomoc 2001, 417

continued on next page

373

374

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.2.—continued Nahuatl name

Context

Quotation

Source

quetzallalpiloni

Adornment of rulers in dance.

Jnic. vi. parrapho ypan mitoa in izquitlamantli in inechichi­ oaya tlatoque in iquac maçeva. quetzalalpiloni (“Sixth paragraph, in which are told the kinds of ways of adornment of the rulers when they danced. Quetzal-feather hair binder”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56 r

quetzallalpiloni

Vestments of nobility and of valiant warriors assigned when a warrior captured four prisoners.

iquac quicui in tlatocatlatquitl in quetzalalpiloni yn inacoch tevxivitl yn itenteuh quetzalchalchivitl (“then he took the royal gear: the quetzal-feather hair binder, his turquoise earplugs, his labret of precious greenstone”)

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 65 r

quetzallalpiloni

Adornment a ruler put on in dance.

Auh in ie icoac maçeoa tlatoanj, Florentine in tlein ilhujtl ipan mocencaoa, Codex VIII, mochichioa quetzallalpilonj 56 coztic teucujtlaio, injc qujlpia itzon. (“And when there was dancing, the ruler [chose] on which day. He prepared himself, he adorned himself with the quetzal-feather binder with gold, with which he tied his hair.”)

quetzallalpiloni

Precious costume item granted by a ruler to brave noble warriors.

njman ic quetzallalpilonj teucujtlatica tecpaio, ioan teucujtlatl in jpepeiocio, anoço çaquan tlalpilonj (“and then quetzal-feather hair binders with golden flint knives and with golden pendants, or troupial-feather hair binders”)

Florentine Codex VIII, 74

quetzallalpiloni

Gift of Moteucçoma I to messengers from Chalco.

auh in Moteuczomatzin / inquixtlauhti/ in quintlauhti quetzallalpilloni cecen tozcatl chalchiuhcozcatl (“and Moteucçoma rewarded them, bequeathed them with a hair binder each, with a necklace each, a greenstone necklace”)

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 52

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.2.—continued Nahuatl name

Context

Quotation

Source

quetzallalpiloni

Gift to warriors and allied rulers.

El rey . . . a los reyes mandó poner en la cabeza unas cintas de oro, que se las ceñían a manera de coronas, con unas ricas plumas, al colodrillo, con que aquella cinta hacía remate, que ellos llaman quetzaltlalpiloni.

Durán 1984, II: 228

quetzallalpiloni

Description of the funeral [Neçahualcoyotl] començó of Axayacatl and gifts a presentar al cuerpo muerto given to the mortuary . . . trançaderas con preçiada bundle. plumería (quetzaltlalpiloni)

quetzallalpiloni

Gift presented to the rulers of Tetzcoco and Tlacopan.

luego los ponen trançaderas y Tezozomoc plumas rricas trançado con ello, 2001, 282 [que] llaman quetzaltlalpiloni

quetzallalpiloni

Gift of the Tlatelolca to the Mexica during the siege of Tenochtitlan.

yz catqui amocococauh yn Anales de tlauiztli yn oamechpieliaya Tlatelolco yn amvtlatocah yn chimalli 1999, 136 tlauiztli in tecuecuextli yn quetzallapilonj yn teucuitlanacochtli (“this is your property, the insignia that your ruler guarded for you, the shield, the insignia, wrist/ankle bands, the quetzal-feather hair binder, the golden earplugs”)

çaquantlalpiloni

Precious costume item granted by a ruler to brave noble warriors.

anoço çaquan tlalpilonj (“or troupial-feather hair binders”)

Florentine Codex VIII, 74

çaquantlalpiloni

Description of the insignia of the Otomi-rank warriors

Y los trançados eran cuauh­ tlalpiloni y çacuantlalpiloni, xolotlalpiloni

Tezozomoc 2001, 171–72

çaquantlalpiloni

Tribute item from Cuetlaxtlan.

trançaderas de cauello con plumería rrica, trançadera de abes, de áquila la plumería, trançaderas de abes doradas [que] llaman çacuantlalpiloni

Tezozomoc 2001, 299– 300

xolotlalpiloni

Description of the insignia of the Otomi-rank warriors.

Y los trançados eran cuauh­ tlalpiloni y çacuantlalpiloni, xolotlalpiloni

Tezozomoc 2001, 171–72

Tezozomoc 2001, 241

375

376

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.3. Varieties of earplugs in written sources (nacochtli) Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

acanacochtli

“Reed earplugs”; mentioned as one of the costume items of the Otomi people.

Florentine Codex X, 178

amanacochtli

“Paper earplugs”; adornment of the god Tezcatzoncatl.

Florentine Codex I, 51

apoçonalnacochtli

“Amber earplugs”; adornment of women and trade item.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47; IX, 80

chalchiuhchampochtli “Greenstone ear pendants”; attributes of the Huastecs.

Florentine Codex X, 186

coanacochtli/ “Greenstone serpent earplugs”; part of chalchiuhcoanacochtli the divine costume presented to Cortés by the messengers of Moteucçoma in 1519; worn by warriors during the feast of Huei Tecuilhuitl; another version is described as “icoanacoch xivitl tlaçalolli” (“his serpent earplugs of glued turquoise mosaic”); it was the adornment of the image of Huitzilopochtli prepared for the feast of Toxcatl.

Florentine Codex II, 99; XII, 15, 52

çoquinacochtli

“Pottery earplugs”; costume item of the Otomi people.

Florentine Codex X, 178

coyolnacochtli teoxihuitl in tlachihualli tlaxiuhçalolli

“Earplugs with bells, made of turquoise, turquoise mosaic”; adornment of the impersonator of Tezcatlipoca in the feast of Toxcatl.

Florentine Codex II, 69

coztic “Golden palm earplugs”; made of beaten teocuitlaçoyanacochtli gold; military accouterment of rulers and captains.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 75v

cuetlaxnacochtli

“Leather earplugs”; awards to brave warriors.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74, 77; IX, 45, 59

itznacochtli

“Obsidian earplugs”; probably commonly worn; adornment of the Otomi and Aztec noblewomen as well as of the goddess Cihuacoatl.

Florentine Codex I, 11; VIII, 47; X, 178

mayanacochtli

“Green june-beetle earplugs”; covered with a mosaic of green june-beetle; accouterment of “rulers and captains”; also attributed to the Otomi.

Florentine Codex X, 178; Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72r

itzacatl nacochtli [itzacanacochtli]

Etymology and meaning obscure, perhaps “obsidian reed earplugs” or “thin obsidian earplugs”; attribute of the Otomi warriors.

Tezozomoc 2001, 171

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.3.—continued Nahuatl name ohuaquauhnacochtli

Characteristics “Earplugs of dried maize stalks”; term derived from ohuaquahuitl, “caña de mayz seca” (Molina 2001, 78); costume item of the Otomi.

Textual references Florentine Codex X, 178

pilolli coztic teocuitlatl “Golden ear pendants, with quetzal-feather imamalacaquetzal spindles”; belonged to the costly version of the Huastec (cuextecatl ) battle suit.

Florentine Codex VIII, 35

quauhnacochtli

“Wooden earplugs”; painted in many colors (tlatlatlapalicuilolli); adornment of slaves sacrificed by merchants.

Florentine Codex IX, 60

quetzalcoyolnacochtli

“Green earplugs with bells” (or “earplugs with quetzal feather and bells”); gained by the merchants in recompense for their “conquest” of Quauhtenanco; “the symbols of conquest” of the pochteca.

Florentine Codex IX, 4, 22

quetzalitznacochtli

“Emerald earplugs.”

Codex Cozcatzin, fol. 17r

tecciznacochtli

“Seashell earplugs”; costume item of the Otomi-rank warriors.

Florentine Codex X, 177

tehuilonacochtli

“Rock crystal earplugs”; trade item and adornment of noblewomen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47; IX, 8, 18, 80

teocuitlacoyolnacochtli “Golden bell earplugs”; adornment of Tezcatlipoca.

Florentine Codex XII, 12

teocuitlaepcololli

“Curved golden-shell pendants”; ear ornaments of the impersonator of Tezcatlipoca during the feast of Toxcatl; also described as hanging from the turquoise-mosaic earplugs in the costume attributed to Quetzalcoatl and presented to Cortés.

Florentine Codex II, 69; XII, 12

teocuitlanacaztepoztli

“Metal ear [pendants] made of gold”; reportedly worn by warriors in Quauh­ tenanco captured by the pochteca.

Florentine Codex IX, 3, 5

teocuitlanacochtli/coz- “Golden earplugs”; attributes of rulers, Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. tic teocuitlanacochtli lords, noblewomen, and high-ranking 53r; Anales de Tlatelolco warriors (also of the Otomi and of the 1999, 136; Florentine Otomi-rank warriors); prestigious gift and Codex I, 11, 40, 44; II, 91, trade item; adornment of deities and their VIII, 27, 28, 30, 44, 47, 56, impersonators. 58; IX, 8, 18, 69, 79, 85; X, 177, XI, 234; XII, 92; Primeros Memoriales, fols. 56r, 56v continued on next page

377

378

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.3.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

teonacochtli

“Divine earplugs”; attributes of the Otomirank warriors.

Tezozomoc 2001, 171–72

teotenacochtli

“Jet earplugs”; made of jet, black and highly Primeros Memoriales, fol. polished; insignia of brave warriors. 68v

tepoznacochtli

“Copper earplugs”; adornment of commoners and of brave warriors of the Otomi.

Florentine Codex IX, 18; X, 177

tezcanacochtli

“Mirror-stone earplugs”; costume item of brave warriors of the Otomi.

Florentine Codex X, 177

tiçanacochtli

“Chalky earplugs”; attribute of the god Omacatl and of Tiçahua, god of the amanteca.

Florentine Codex I, 34; IX, 84

tzicoliuhcanacochtli

“Curved earplugs”; attribute of the god Quetzalcoatl.

Florentine Codex I, 9

xiuhcoanacochtli

“Fire-serpent earplugs”; attribute of the god Xiuhteuctli.

Florentine Codex I, 32

xiuhnacochtli/teoxihuitl nacochtli

“Turquoise earplugs”; associated with the fire god Xiuhteuctli and other deities, especially the goddess Chalchiuhtlicue; worn by rulers, lords, and high-ranking warriors; “inacoch teoxihuitl” (“his earplugs of turquoise”) are listed as the adornment of brave warriors who took four prisoners (tequihuaque).

Florentine Codex I, 22; II, 164, 239; III, 56; VIII, 43; X, 177; XII, 12; Primeros Memoriales, fols. 65r, 68r, 72v, 73r

xiuhtezcanacochtli

“Turquoise-mirror earplugs”; part of the attire of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in his sculptured portrait in Chapultepec.

Tezozomoc 2001, 451

xiuhtotonacochtli

“Cotinga-bird earplugs”; adornment of the god Huitzilopochtli.

Florentine Codex I, 2

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.4. Varieties of lip plugs in written sources Nahuatl term

Characteristics

Textual references

ahuictempilolli coztic teocuitlatl

“Golden lip-plug in the form of a boating pole”; royal dance adornment.

Florentine Codex VIII, 27

apatlactempilolli coztic teocuitlatl

“Lip pendant of gold, in the form of a broad-leafed water plant”; royal dance adornment.

Florentine Codex VIII, 28

apoçonaltencololli

“Curved lip-plug of amber”; adornment of governors (quauhtlatoque).

Florentine Codex IX, 23

apoçonaltentetl

“Amber lip-plug”; gained by Mexica merchants for their military merits; adornment of captives sacrificed by merchants.

Florentine Codex VIII, 27; IX, 4, 22, 24, 45

apoçonaltençacatl

“Amber lip-plug”; adornment of governors (quauhtlatoque).

Florentine Codex IX, 23

atototempilolli coztic teocuitlatl

“Golden lip-pendant in the form of a pelican”; royal dance adornment.

Florentine Codex VIII, 27

chalchiuhquauhtentetl

“Greenstone lip-plug in the form of an eagle”; royal dance adornment.

Florentine Codex VIII, 27

chalchiuhtençacanecuilli

“Greenstone curved lip-plug”; royal dance adornment.

Florentine Codex VIII, 27

chalchiuhtencololli

“Greenstone curved lip-plug”; precious royal gift to brave warriors; attribute of governors (quauhtlatoque).

Florentine Codex VIII, 74; IX, 23

chalchiuhtentetl

“Greenstone lip-plug”; adornment of the high nobility; royal gift to brave warriors; one of the precious item rulers wagered in ballgames; item associated with Otomi rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 56r, 72r, 72v; Florentine Codex VIII, 27, 28, 30, 44, 56, 58, 74; X, 77, 177; Tezozomoc 2001, 99

coztic tençacatl in apozonalli “Yellow lip-plug of amber”; made with elements of gold; dance adornment of rulers.

Florentine Codex VIII, 27

coztic tencololli

Florentine Codex VIII, 74

“Yellow curved lip-plug”; probably made of gold; prestigious adornment assigned to brave warriors.

continued on next page

379

380

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.4.—continued Nahuatl term

Characteristics

Textual references

iztac tençacatl xiuhtototica tlamintli iztac tehuilotl

“White lip-plug of clear crystal, shot through with blue cotinga feathers”; royal dance adornment.

Florentine Codex VIII, 27

itztentetl

“Obsidian lip-plug”; adornment of the Otomi.

Florentine Codex X, 178

metztempilolli coztic teocuitlatl

“Crescent-shaped lip pendant of gold”; royal dance adornment.

Florentine Codex VIII, 27

nextecuiltentetl

“Lip plug of the crazy ones” or “lip plug shaped like a worm”; attribute of the Otomi-rank warriors.

Tezozomoc 2001, 171

quauhtempilolli coztic teocuitlatl

“Golden lip-pendant in the form of an eagle”; royal dance adornment.

Florentine Codex VIII, 27

quauhtentetl

“Eagle-shaped lip plug”; Huastec labret; adornment of highranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 68v; Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 42; Tezozomoc 2001, 171

quetzalchalchihuitl tentetl

“Quetzal-feather green lipplug” or “precious greenstone lip-plug”; classified among the tlatocatlatquitl, or “royal vestments”; given in reward to valiant warriors who managed to take their fourth captive.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 65r

tapachtentetl

“Coral shell lip-plug”; adornment Tezozomoc 2001, 171 of the Otomi-rank warriors.

tecçiztenzacatl

“Curved lip-plug made of shell”; adornment of the Otomi-rank warriors.

tehpochtentetl

“Lip plug of smoky stone”; Florentine Codex X, 178 adornment of the Otomi people.

tehuilotentetl

“Lip plug made of rock crystal”; Florentine Codex X, 178 adornment of the Otomi people.

temalacatentetl teoxihuitl

“Disk-shaped turquoise lip-plug”; it had a gold setting (“coztic teocuitlatl icallo”); royal dance adornment.

Tezozomoc 2001, 171

Florentine Codex VIII, 27

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.4.—continued Nahuatl term

Characteristics

Textual references

tençacanecuilli

“Curved lip-plug”; Huastec labret, worn also by the Nahua, e.g., tiacauh-rank warriors; it is described as made of a white conch-shell cut in a curve.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 73r; Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 42

tentecomachoc

“Decorated with cups on the borders”; reportedly adornment of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina.

Tezozomoc 2001, 170

teocuitlaquauhtentetl

“Golden eagle lip-plug”; military insignia and accouterment of rulers and captains.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 68r

teocuitlatempilolli

“Golden lip-pendant”; insignia of tiacauh warriors and royal dance adornment.

Primeros Memoriales, 73r; Florentine Codex VIII, 2

teocuitlatentetl

“Golden lip-plug”; attributes of governors (quauhtlatoque); reward assigned in a special lippiercing ceremony to merchants acting as royal reconnoiterers, special insignia of merchants; trade item; insignia of the Otomi rulers.

Florentine Codex IX, 23; VIII, 44; IX, 2, 6, 23, 24; X, 177

tlanitentetl

“Lower lip-plug (?)”; reward to brave warriors; attribute of warriors with which merchants adorned their slaves for sacrifice.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74; IX, 45

xiuhcoatempilolli coztic teocuitlatl

“Golden lip-pendants in the form of a fire serpent”; royal dance adornment.

Florentine Codex VIII, 27

xiuhtentetl

“Turquoise lip-plug”; accouterment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 72r

xoxouhqui tencololli

“Blue-green curved lip-plug”; possibly made of turquoise; item assigned to brave warriors.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74

xoxouhqui tençacatl

“Blue-green lip-plug”; possibly made of turquoise; attributes of governors (quauhtlatoque); item assigned to brave warriors; attribute of the Otomi-rank warriors.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74; IX, 23; Tezozomoc 2001, 171

381

382

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.5. Varieties of necklaces (cozcatl) in written sources Nahuatl name

Translation

Textual references

amacozcatl

“Paper necklace”; adornment of figures of warriors who died on the battlefield and ornaments provided to high-ranking warriors by merchants during the banquet they sponsored; in the latter context it is described as “in amacozcatl xiuhtezcaio,” or “the paper necklace with turquoise mirror [mosaic?].”

Florentine Codex IV, 69; IX, 38

cacahuacincozcatl

“Cacao-pod necklace”; flower garlands offered by Moteuccçoma to the image of Huitzilopochtli.

Florentine Codex IV, 78

chacalcozcatl

“Shrimp necklace”; listed among items sold by a seller of cast-metal objects (tlapitzalnamacac), hence probably made of gold.

Florentine Codex X, 61

chalchiuhcozcatl

“Greenstone necklace”; royal dance adornment and military apparel of rulers, especially as part of Xipe Totec dress; valuable gift; wagered by rulers in ballgames; apparel of Tlaloc and Chalchiuhtlicue.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 56r, 72v, 263v, 265v; Florentine Codex I, 7, 22; VIII, 28, 33, 44, 56, 58; Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 52

chalchiuhcozcapetlatl

“Greenstone necklace mat” or “greenstone Florentine Codex XII, 11, plaited necklace”; described as “chalchiuh- 12, 15; Codex Ixtlilxochitl, cozcapetlatl nepantla mantiuh teucujtlafol. 108r comalli” (“a greenstone wide-band necklace, in the middle of which was a golden disk”); apparel of Quetzalcoatl and Tlaloc.

chalchiuhcozcatl ololiuhqui

“Necklace of round greenstone beads”; ornament of a tlatoani pilli and royal dance apparel.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72v; Florentine Codex VIII, 28, 33

chayahuac cozcatl

“Necklace of radiating pendants”; made of gold and greenstone beads and having a greenstone disk with round gold bells placed in the center; also referred to as the coztic teocuitlachayahuac cozcatl or teocuitlachayahuac cozcatl; royal dance apparel and ornament of royal mummy bundles; lordly vestment assigned to a valiant warrior when he captured four prisoners; tribute from Gulf Coast and Huexotzinco, merchants’ trade item; possibly an attribute of pulque gods, though apparently in this case not made of gold.

Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 34, 38; Primeros Memoriales, fols. 55v, 65r, 72r, 261v; Florentine Codex I, 51; IX, 2,8; XII, 43, 49, 72; Tezozomoc 2001, 360

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.5.—continued Nahuatl name

Translation

Textual references

chimalcozcatl

“Shield necklace”; listed among items sold by a seller of cast-metal objects (tlapitzalnamacac), hence probably made of gold.

Florentine Codex X, 61

chipolcozcatl

“Necklace of snail shells”; adornment of the Primeros Memoriales, fols. impersonator of Tezcatlipoca in Toxcatl 68v, 72r, 266r; Florentine and part of the costume of this deity Codex II, 69; XII, 12 presented to Cortés in 1519; insignia of the tiacauh-rank warriors.

cozcapetlatl

“Necklace mat” or “plaited necklace”; this term probably embraced varieties made of greenstone and sometimes also decorated with turquoise, combined with golden elements, and sometimes only of gold (teocuitlacozcapetlatl); at least in some cases this term was synonymous with chalchiuhcozcapetlatl. According to the Primeros Memoriales, this piece of jewelry was cast of gold, cut into strips, and laid out in three interlocking rows like a fine mat decorated with an edge of bells; adornment of Xilonen and Chalchiuhtlicue; royal apparel; ornaments worn by lords greeting Spaniards in 1519; military accouterment of rulers and captains; the golden version is listed as the property of long-distance merchants; adornment of the Olmeca, Huixtotin, and Mixteca peoples.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72r; Florentine Codex I, 21; II, 103; IV, 45; VIII, 56; X, 188; XII, 43; Torquemada 1977, IV: 329

huehuei cozcatl

“Great necklace”; adornment of the tiacauh-rank warriors; according to the Primeros Memoriales, it was made of large, polished shells.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 68v

itzcozcatl

“Obsidian necklace”; item sold by a seller of necklaces (cozcanamacac), probably adornment of the commoners.

Florentine Codex X, 86

pitzahuac teocuitlacozcatl

“Thin golden necklace”; trade item.

Florentine Codex IX, 18

quetzalitztli cozcatl

“Emerald necklace”; this term probably Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, refers to a greenstone necklace; gift of 38 the people of Acallan to the nobility of Tlatelolco during the expedition of Cortés to Honduras. continued on next page

383

384

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.5.—continued Nahuatl name

Translation

Textual references

teocuitlachipolcozcatl

“Necklace of golden small shells” (or spiral shells/snail shells); either a combination of golden beads and shells, or a golden imitation of small shells.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 56v, 72v; Florentine Codex VIII, 28

teocuitlacozcatl

“Golden necklace”; royal dance adornment Florentine Codex VIII, and jewelry in their pleasure time or lordly 27, 29–30, 58; IX, 18; XII, apparel in general; wagered by rulers in 31, 44 ballgames; prestigious gift; property of merchants.

teocuitlacozcapetlatl

“Golden plaited necklace”; property of merchants; see: cozcapetlatl.

Florentine Codex IX, 18

teocuitlacozcatl temoltic

“Golden beetle-like necklace”; military insignia of rulers and captains.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 75v

teocuitlacoztic aquechcozcatl

“Necklace of golden seashells”; ornament of Quetzalcoatl and a royal dance adornment.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 261v; Florentine Codex I, 9; VIII, 28

teocuitlaehuacozcatl

“Golden hide necklace”; prestigious gift to foreign messengers.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fols. 52, 53

teocuitlatlancozcatl

“Golden tooth necklace”; highly valued trade item.

Florentine Codex IX, 18

teocuitlatlapitzalcozcatl “Golden cast necklace”; highly valued trade item.

Florentine Codex IX, 18

xochicozcatl

“Flower necklace”; garlands of flowers given to guests invited to banquets; offerings made during banquets; dance ornament.

Florentine Codex IV, 117; IX, 37, 59; XI, 214

xolocozcatl

“Xolotl necklace”; a neck piece with a dog-shaped pendant; royal apparel worn as part of the fire-god dress in the special dance during the feast Izcalli devoted to Xiuhteuctli.

Florentine Codex II, 164

xopilcozcatl

“Toe-shaped necklace”; adornment of the gods Ixtlilton and Macuilxochitl.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 262v, 265v; Florentine Codex I, 36

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6. Varieties of capes (tilmatli) in written sources Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

acocoxochyo tilmatli

“Cape with the dahlia [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 55v–56r; Florentine Codex VIII, 24

ahuitzoyo tilmatli

“Cape with the ahuitzotl (otter) [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 55v–56r

amanepaniuhqui tilmatli

“Cape of plaited paper [ornaments]”; precious gift.

Florentine Codex IX, 47

amanepaniuhqui tempapaloyo tilmatli

“Cape of plaited paper [ornaments] bordered with butterflies”; capes assigned to the pochteca.

Florentine Codex IX, 5

apalecacozcayo tilmatli

“Light blue cape with the wind jewel [design]”

Florentine Codex VIII, 23

axayacayo tilmatli

“Cape with the water-face/water fly [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 55v–56r

ayatlacuilolli

“Net-like/thin/maguey painted cape”; Tlaxca- Tezozomoc 2001, 416 lan costume item.

cacaloxochyo tilmatli

“Cape with the plumeria flower [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 55v–56r; Florentine Codex VIII, 24

cacamoliuhqui tilmatli

“Quilted cape”; tribute item in the Matrícula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza (fols. 21v, 23r, 27r, 37r, 43r, 44r, 49r); capes woven by the Otomi women.

Florentine Codex X, 180; Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64; Matrícula de Tributos, fols. 3r, 3v, 4r, 9r, 12r, 12v, 14r

camopalecacozcayo tenihuiyo tilmatli

“Orange-purple cape with the wind jewel [design] and a feathered border”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 23

camopaltenhuahuanqui “Orange-purple cape with a striped border”; although Molina (fol. 12r) defines camopalli tilmatli as dark purple, it means “camote-colored” and refers to the orange-purple color of a sweet potato (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 192). Adornment of rulers and nobles; gift to leaders of youths and brave warriors; possibly the cape of the two-captive warrior and state officials in the Codex Mendoza (fols. 64r, 65r); probable images have been identified in the Genealogía de Tlatzcantzin, the Genealogía de Zolín, and the Mapa de Atenco-Mizquiahuala.

Florentine Codex VIII, 23, 26, 87

continued on next page

385

386

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

canahuac tilmatli

“Narrow cape”; tribute item, precious gift.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fols. 64, 65, Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 7r; Codex Mendoza, fol. 21r; Florentine Codex IX, 47

canahuactene tilmatli

“Narrow, bordered cape” or “cape with a narrow border”; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64

centlacolli yztac tlacpacpa tlanipa tliltic tilmatli

“Cape with a white upper half and a black lower half ”; adornment of Tlacaellel cihuacoatl.

Chimalpahin 1997a I, 144

chalcaayatl

“Thin/netted cape in the Chalco style”; netted cape with balls of thread, worn on ritual occasions by chief warriors; its symbolism alluded to Otonteuctli, the god patronizing the transformation of dead warriors.

Florentine Codex III, 56

chalchiuhtilmatli

“Greenstone cape”; adornment of lords.

Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 34

chicoiapalli nacazmin- “Dark green diagonally divided cape, in the qui iitic icac itzquauhtli middle of which stands an obsidian eagle”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 23–26

coatilmatli

“Snake cape”; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 65

coatzontecomayo tilmatli

“Cape with the snake-head [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

coaxayacayo tilmatli

“Cape with the serpent-face [design]”; cosFlorentine Codex X, tume item of the Huasteca; royal adornment; 186; XII, 6; Tezozomoc gift to brave warriors and Spaniards. 2001, 169, 170, 408

coaxayacayo tilmatli tenixyo

“Cape with the serpent-face [design], and bordered with eyes”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 23; Sahagún 1997b, 456–58

colotlalpilli tilmatli

“Cape with the tied/knotted scorpion [design]” or “cape with scorpion knots”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; capes gained by merchants in recompense for their “conquests.”

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 55v–56r; Florentine Codex IX, 4

colotlaxochyo tilmatli

“Cape with the scorpion stripe [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

coyoehuatilmatli

“Coyote skin cape”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

coyoichcatilmatli

“Coyote-colored cotton cape” or “coyote-fur cape”; gift distributed during the feast of Izcalli; capes put on sacrificial victims of the merchants for Yacateuctli, described as “in coioichcatl, tetecomaio, ihuitica tenchilnaoaio” (“the coyote cotton [cape], with the feathered-cup [design], and the red eye border”).

Florentine Codex II, 165; IX, 51

coyoichcacanahuac tilmatli

“Thin coyote-colored cotton cape” or “thin coyote fur cape”; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 65

coyoichcatentlayahualo “Coyote-colored cotton cape with a spiral tilmatli border” or “coyote fur cape with a spiral border”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VI, 24

cozhuahuanqui tilmatli “Yellow striped cape”; pictured as a cape with red-orange stripes; tribute item; pictured in the Matrícula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza; worn by rulers in the Codex Cozcatzin (fol. 15r) and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 29).

Matrícula de Tributos, fols. 10r, 10v, 15v; Tezozomoc 2001, 159

cuechintli

“Netted cape”; this kind of cape was especially associated with Tezcatlipoca (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 150); pictured in the Codex Mendoza (fols. 57r, 61r, 62r, 63r), the Lienzo de Tepeticpac, the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 2, and the Codex Vaticano A (fol. 59r).

Florentine Codex II, 69, 99; III, 56; XII, 53

cuetlachehuatilmatli

“Wolf-skin cape”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; costume item of a ruler of the Teochichimeca.

Primeros Memoriales fol. 55v; Florentine Codex X, 172

cuetlaxxochyo tilmatli

“Cape with the poinsettia [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex VIII, 24

cuetlachixyo tilmatli

“Cape with the wolf face [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

cuetlachtilmatli

“Wolf cape”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24 continued on next page

387

388

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

ecacozcayo tilmatli

Matrícula de Tribu“Cape with the wind jewel [design]”; cape with the four-shell design or with a motif of tos, fols. 15v, 16r; cross-sections of a shell; the wind-ornament Florentine Codex XII, design associated with Ehecatl Quetzalcoatl; 6; Tezozomoc 2001, tribute item; prestigious gift; illustrated in 291; Codex Fiestas, fol. the Codex Mendoza (fols. 34r, 52r, 53r, 64r, 57r; Codex Magliabec65r), Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (fol. 21r), and the chiano, fol. 3v Codex Tudela (fol. 85v).

ecahuitequi tilmatli

“Cape with the wind-struck [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

ehuatilmatli

“Skin cape”; apparel of Chichimec leaders and warriors; illustrated in many pictorial manuscripts, e.g., Codex Telleriano-Remensis (fols. 25v, 26v, 27r), Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (fols. 3v, 4r), Mapas de Quauhtinchan, Codex Xolotl, Mapa Tlotzin, Mapa Quinatzin, Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca (fols. 2r, 21r, 26v, 27r, 29v), and others.

eloxochyo tilmatli

“Cape with the magnolia flower [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

huacalxochyo tilmatli

“Cape with the basket flower (philodendron) [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex VIII, 24

huehuei tilmatli nehuatzaloni

“Large cape used to keep oneself dry”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

huitzilxochyo tilmatli

“Cape with the loeselia flower [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

huitztecollaxochio tilmatli

“Cape with brazilwood dye stripes”; precious gift.

Florentine Codex IX, 47

ichayatl

“Maguey fiber/netted/thin cape”; a general term; item worn in Tlatelolco in the reign of Tlacateotl; sold by a vendor of maguey-fiber capes.

Florentine Codex IX, 1; X, 73

ichcatilmatli

“Cotton cape”; a general category; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fols. 64, 65

ichpetztli tilmatli

“Pyrite/shiny maguey cape”; sold by a vendor of maguey-fiber capes; cape woven by the Otomi women.

Florentine Codex X, 73, 180

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

ichtilmatli

“Maguey-fiber cape”; a general term; cape woven by the Otomi women; gift of foreign rulers to Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin.

Florentine Codex X, 180; Tezozomoc 2001, 383–84

ihuitemalacayo tilmatli

“Cape with the feathered disk [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

ihuitica tenhuahuanqui “Cape with feathered striped borders”; also tilmatli called tenihuihuahuanqui; gift of the captors of the victims sacrificed in the feast of Tlacaxipehualiztli; trade item.

Florentine Codex II, 58; IX, 8

ihuitica tetecomayo tilmatli

“Cape with the feathered earthen jars [design]”; gift to brave warriors and Spaniards; trade item.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74, 87; IX, 8; XII, 6

ihuitilmatli

“Feathered cape”; a general term; according to Florentine Codex X, 27, the Florentine Codex these capes were made 35; Tezozomoc 2001, of white-fronted goose (tlalalacatl ) and 345 canvas-back (quacoztli) feathers; tribute item.

ilacatziuhqui tilmatli

“Cape of twisted weave or spiral design”; tribute item; precious gift; trade item that appeared in Tlatelolco during the reign of Moquihuixtli; cape of poor quality woven by the Otomi women (probably a terminological coincidence and this mention refers to another kinds of cape); cape sold by vendors of maguey capes (ilacatziuhqui ichtilmatli).

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 65; Florentine Codex VIII, 74; IX, 2, 47; X, 73, 180; Torquemada 1977, IV: 329–30

itichicoyo in yollo tilmatli

“Cape with a diagonal central motive”; cape woven by the Otomi women.

Florentine Codex X, 180

itzcoacoliuhqui tilmatli “Cape with the twisted obsidian serpent [design]”; tribute item; illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 6r) and the Codex Mendoza (fol. 31r); possibly identical or related to itzcoayo tilmatli.

Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 6r

itzcoayo tilmatli tenixyo

“Cape with the obsidian-serpent [design] and bordered with eyes”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; prestigious gift redistributed by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin at his coronation.

Florentine Codex VIII, 23; Sahagún 1997b, 457; Tezozomoc 2001, 382–85

itzmicoatilmatli

“Cape with the obsidian arrow serpent [design]”; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64r

itzmixicalcoliuhqui tilmatli

“Cape with the obsidian arrow step-fret [design]”; royal gift to brave warriors.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74 continued on next page

389

390

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

itznepaniuhqui tilmatli “Cape with the crossed obsidian knives [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

ixnextentlapallo tilmatli “Cape with ashy face/eyes and a red border”; royal gift to brave warriors.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74

ixnextlacuilolli tilmatli

“Cape painted with an ashen surface” or “cape painted with ashen face/eyes”; it is pictured as a red and white cape with the tenixyo border design and swirls, lines, circles, and an eye on the body of the cloak; adornment of rulers and noblemen; tribute item; gift redistributed by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin at his coronation; costume item of the Huastec people; illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza (fols. 34r, 36r); the information provided by Sahagún that this was a Huaxtec cape (FC X, 186) is only partially confirmed by the Matrícula de Tributos, which reports it as a tribute item from Cuetlaxtlan on the Gulf Coast, though in the southern part (14r); the other two provinces paying tribute of these capes, Ocuillan and Tlachco, are located to the west of the Valley of Mexico. Ixnextli (“ashy eyes” or “ashy face”) was the goddess of blindness, lust, and weavers, perhaps also associated with the Huastec region, so the name of the cape along with the information that this was a Huastec cape could perhaps imply its association with this deity.

Matrícula de Tributos, fols. 8v, 9v, 14r; Florentine Codex X, 186; Sahagún 1997b, 455–58; Tezozomoc 2001, 382–85

iztac ihuitilmatli

“White feathered cape”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

iztac xomoihuitilmatli

“White duck-feather cape”; lordly attribute.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 55v, 60r

iztac xomoihuitilmatli cuetlachixyo

“White duck-feather cape, with the wolf face [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

iztac xomoihuitilmatli nacazminqui

“White duck-feather cape, diagonally Florentine Codex divided”; adornment of rulers and noblemen. VIII, 24 continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

iztac xomoihuitilmatli tenixyo

“White duck-feather cape, bordered with eyes”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; probably pictured in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 55v).

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

maçaehuatilmatli

“Deerskin cape”; adornment of Chichimec leaders.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 53r

matlaltic ihuitilmatli

“Blue-feather cape”; lordly attribute.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60r

micehuatilmatli

“Mountain lion–skin cape”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; costume of a ruler of the Teochichimeca.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex X, 172

nacazminqui tilmatli

“Diagonally divided cape”; a cape with a Matrícula de Tributos, multicolored border and a diagonally divided fols. 3v, 3r, 4r, 4v, 5r, 5v, design; this general term designates all diago- 6r, 6v, 9r; Florentine nally divided mantles, which, depending on Codex II, 58; Tezozotheir design, also carry more specific names; moc 2001, 255 tribute item; costume of the elders in triumph ceremonies and gift of the captors of sacrificial victims in the feast of Tlacaxipehualiztli; illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos, the Codex Mendoza (fols. 20r, 21v, 23r, 24v, 27r, 28r, 29r, 30r, 31r, 32r), the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (fol. 21r), the Codex Tudela (fol. 87v), and the Florentine Codex (VIII, fol. 56v); it also has the tenixyo version, illustrated, e.g., in the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 9r) and the Codex Mendoza (fols. 37r, 64r).

nextlacuilolli tilmatli

“Ash painted cape”; gift.

Tezozomoc 2001, 403–4, 408

neçahualquachtli tliltic omicallo

“Black fasting cape with the bone repository [design]”; adornment of lords accompanying an elected ruler during fasting in his coronation rites; illustrated in the Florentine Codex (VIII, fol. 46v) and the Codex Tudela (fol. 50r).

Florentine Codex VIII, 63

neçahualquachtli xoxoctic omicallo

“Green fasting cape with the bone repository [design]”; adornment of an elected ruler during fasting in his coronation rites; illustrated in the Florentine Codex (VIII, fol. 45r).

Florentine Codex VIII, 62

continued on next page

391

392

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name nochpallaxochyo tilmatli

Characteristics

Textual references

“Cape with carmine-colored stripes”; assigned Florentine Codex IX, to the pochteca merchants by Ahuitzotl and 5, 47, 61 gift of the pochteca to the priests; possibly illustrated in the Florentine Codex (VIII, fols. 10r, 37r).

nochpaltilmatli tenixyo “Carmine-colored cape, bordered with eyes”; illustrated in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 64r) and the Códice de Huichapan (fol. 53).

Florentine Codex VIII, 23

nopalayatl

Florentine Codex X, 180

“Thin/netted nopal cape”; cape woven by the Otomi women.

oceloquauhtlatlapanqui “Half-jaguar, half-eagle cape”; adornment of tilmatli rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

oceloehuatilmatli

“Jaguar-skin cape”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; costume item of a ruler of the Teochichimeca.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex X, 172–73

ocelotentlapalli iitic icac ocelotl

“Red-bordered jaguar cape, in the middle of which stands a jaguar”; a cotton cape with a jaguar design; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Sahagún 1997b, 456–458; Florentine Codex VIII, 23, 87

ocelotilmatli

“Jaguar cape”; a cotton cape with jaguar-skin markings; adornment of rulers and noblemen; tribute item; prestigious gift; pictured in the Matrícula de Tributos, Codex Mendoza (fol. 31r), and the Codex Tudela (fol. 87v); the maguey-fiber version is mentioned as sold by the vendor of maguey capes.

Florentine Codex VIII, 23–26; X, 73, 180; Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 6r; Tezozomoc 2001, 382–85, 409

ocelotlapanqui tilmatli

“Cape with the split jaguar [design]”; gift of Moteucçoma to the nobility of enemy states.

Tezozomoc 2001, 417

ocelotzontecomayo tilmatli

“Cape with the jaguar-head [design]”; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64

oceloxicacoliuhqui tilmatli

“Cape with the ocelot step-fret [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; pictured in the Codex Tudela (fol. 87r).

Florentine Codex VIII, 23; Codex Fiestas, fol. 58r

ocotentehuitl tilmatli

The etymology is unclear, perhaps derived from ocotl (pine), tentli (border), and tehuilotl (crystal), or tetehuitl (banner or streamer); reportedly a cape put on the mortuary bundle of Axayacatl.

Tezozomoc 2001, 243

ocotochehuatl tilmatli

“Cape of bobcat skin”; Seler translated it as “wildcat-skin covering” (Seler 1902–23, II: 518).

Florentine Codex X, 172 continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

ocuiltecayo tilmatli

Matrícula de Tributos, “Cape in the Ocuillan style”; the design consisted of two ornate stripes of red alternating fols. 8r, 8v, 7r with black and white curlicues; in the case of Tolocan and Xocotitlan provinces, these capes lack the central stripes; the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 7v) names it as huitzitzilla tlacohuitectli, that is “the cape of uncompressed weave with a hummingbird [design]”; tribute item; illustrated in the Codex Mendoza (fols. 33r, 34r, 35r).

olinteccizyo tilmatli

“Cape with the movement/olin conch [shell design]”; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64

olintilmatli

“Cape with the movement/olin [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Sahagún 1997b, 458

ometochtecomayo tilmatli tenixyo

“Cape with the pulque-god jar [design] and bordered with eyes”; the design of the cape consists of the octli vessel, the symbol of the god of pulque, Ometochtli; inside the central pot figure is the curled yacametztli nose-ornament symbol. Seler (1902–23, II: 524) identified its design with the pulque vessel, ometochtecomatl or piaztecomatl, which appears also in the battle standard, ometochtlahuiztli. The Matrícula de Tributos annotation is suggestive that these capes were identical to those referred to by Alvarado Tezozomoc as the tochpanecayotl (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 133); tribute item; adornment of rulers and noblemen, including war leaders; pictured in the Matrícula de Tributos, Codex Mendoza (fols. 46r, 52r, 65r), as well as in the Codex Tudela (fol. 87r); identified as ometochtli by the gloss in the Codex Fiestas (fol. 58r).

Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 15v; Florentine Codex VIII, 23; Sahagún 1997b, 456

omixochyo tilmatli

“Cape with the polianthes flower [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

papalotilmatli

“Cape with a butterfly [design]”; priestly costume; probably identical to the “manta de mariposa,” mentioned by Durán as an attribute of Quetzalcoatl, in which a dead ruler was clad during his funeral ceremony (Durán 1984, II: 289).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 268r

continued on next page

393

394

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

papaloyo tilmatli tenixio

“Cape with a butterfly [design] and bordered with eyes”; Sahagún describes this style of cape as having a brown background with butterfly figures made of white feathers that bore a human eye in the center and were placed in a row from corner to corner; Seler (1902–23, I: 524) identified this design in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 49r) as the tribute from Cue­ tlaxtlan and Mictlanquauhtla; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 251v; Florentine Codex VIII, 23; Sahagún 1997b, 456

quappachatocayo tilmatli

“Tawny cape with the water spider [design]”; lordly attribute; this kind of cape was identified by Seler with three capes depicted in the Codex Tudela (fols. 85v, 87r) on the basis of the gloss “agua de araña” contained in the Codex Magliabechiano (fol. 5v) (Seler 1902–23, II: 526); according to Batalla Rosado (2002, 368), however, the name “agua de araña” is a misunderstanding of teçacatl in the Códice Fiestas (fol. 58v), probably transcribed as tocalatl or atocatl in the Códice Ritos y Costumbres; on the other hand, “agua de araña” can also be a mistaken reversal of atocatl, “araña de agua.”

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

quappachyo tilmatli

“Tawny cape”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; possibly illustrated in the Codex Aubin (fols. 45r, 45v, 58v, 70r, 76r), Genealogía de Tlatzcantzin, Genealogía de Tepeticpac, and Genealogía de Zolín.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

quappachixcoliuhqui tilmatli

“Tawny cape with a scroll [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

quappachtentlayahualo “Tawny cape with a spiral border”; adornment tilmatli of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

quappachtilmatli

“Tawny cape”; gift distributed during the feast of Izcalli.

Florentine Codex II, 165

quappachtlalpilli tilmatli

“Tawny, knotted cape” or “tawny tied cape”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

quappachtlaxochyo tilmatli

“Cape with tawny stripes”; adornment of noblemen; its possible version with the tenixyo border is pictured in the Codex Cozcatzin (fol. 1v).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

quappapaloyo tilmatli

“Tawny butterfly cape” or “cape with an eagle butterfly [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

quauhahuitzoyo tilmatli

“Cape with the eagle wings [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

quauhpapatlacyo tilmatli

“Cape with a flying eagle [design]” or “wide cape with an eagle [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

quauhtetepoyo tilmatli

“Cape with the eagle foot [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; possibly depicted in the Códice de Huichapan (fols. 62, 63).

Florentine Codex VIII, 23

quauhtilmatli

“Eagle cape”; used by rulers in mourning; this cape is possibly pictured in the Codex Tudela (fol. 88r).

Tezozomoc 2001, 421–22

quauhtzontecomayo tilmatli /quauhtzonteconyo tilmatli

“Cape with the eagle head [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex VIII, 24

quaxoxotilmatli

“Cape with a bare/shining head [design] (?)”; meaning uncertain; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

quetzalichayatl

“Fine maguey/thin/netted cape”; sold by the vendor of maguey capes.

Florentine Codex X, 73

quetzalichayatl coxoli

“Fine maguey/thin/netted cape with pheasant feathers”; precious item received by the pochteca in Tochtepec.

Florentine Codex IX, 22

quetzalichpetztli tilmatli

“Fine maguey pyrite/shiny cape”; sold by the vendor of maguey capes.

Florentine Codex X, 73

quetzalichpetztli quap- “Fine maguey pyrite/shiny wide cape with patlacyo tilmatli a wide eagle/reversed eagle [design] (?)”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

quetzalichtilmatli ocelocuitlapillo

Florentine Codex VIII, 23

“Fine maguey cape, with an ocelot tail”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

continued on next page

395

396

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

teccizyo tilmatli tenixyo “Cape with the conch-shell [design] and bordered with eyes”; according to the Spanish text by Sahagún, the cape was decorated with a design of whirlpools and the shells were made of rabbit hair; this description matches the capes depicted in the Codex Mendoza (fols. 46r, 52r); a similar cape design appears in the Codex Tudela (fol. 85v) and the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 107r); adornment of rulers and noblemen; tribute item.

Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 15v; Florentine Codex VIII, 23; Sahagún 1997b, 456

teoizquixochyo tilmatli “Cape with the [fine] popcorn flower [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

temalacayo tilmatli

“Cape with the stone-disk [design]”; costume item assigned to the pochteca by Ahuitzotl, the ruler of Tenochtitlan.

Florentine Codex IX, 5; XII, 6

temalacayo tilmatli tenixyo

“Cape with the stone-disk [design] and bordered with eyes”; perhaps this design was related to the sacrificial stone temalacatl; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 23; Sahagún 1997b, 456

tençacanecuilli tilmatli

“Cape with a curved labret ornament”; the reconstruction of its name is based on the glosses in the Codex Fiestas (fol. 57r); tribute item; adornment of lords; illustrated in the Codex Tudela (fols. 85v, 87r, 87v) and the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (fol. 21r).

Codex Fiestas, fols. 57r, 58v

tenchapanqui tilmatli

“Cape with a hanging border”; depicted as capes with black and white borders, illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza (fols. 26r, 27r, 28r, 29r, 49r) and probably also in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 51v) and the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (fols. 2v, 4r, 40v, 41r); tribute item; apparel of nobles, including colonial personages.

Matrícula de Tributos, fols. 8r, 9r

tenchilnahuayo tilmatli “Cape with a border of red circles”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; probably synonymous with tenixyo tilmatli.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

tenizquixochyo tilmatli “Cape with a border of popcorn flowers”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; possibly a variant of the teoizquixochyo tilmatli.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25 continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

tentecomayo tilmatli

“Cape with a border of jars” or “cape with jars”; gift of Moteucçooma Xocoyotzin to the messengers from Huexotzinco; probably identical with the tetecomayo tilmatli.

Tezozomoc 2001, 428

tentlapalo tilmatli

“Cape with a red border”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

teoatica tliltzotehuilaca- “Cape with the wound black sweat and divine chiuhqui tilmatli water [design] (?)”; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol.64

teoatl tlachinoltilmatli

“Cape with the war sign [divine water-burned thing]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; illustrated in the Codex Tudela (fol. 88r).

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

teocomitl tilmatli

“Cape with the melon cactus [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

teoxiuhayatl

“Turquoise thin/netted/maguey cape”; described as a netted cape with turquoise stones; perhaps a reference to the royal turquoise cape but more probably an item related to other ayatl garments; reportedly put on the mortuary bundle of Ahuitzotl and worn by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin during sacrifice.

Tezozomoc 2001, 360, 418

tetecomayo tilmatli

“Cape with jars”; cape given to invited rulers; costume item assigned to the pochteca.

Florentine Codex IX, 2, 5, 7

tetixiuhcoayo tilmatli

“Cape with the fire-serpent/xiuhcoatl [design]”; the meaning of the component teti is uncertain; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Tezozomoc 2001, 170

tezcapocyo tilmatli

“Cape with the smoking mirror”; gift.

Florentine Codex XII, 6

tlacalhuaztilmatli

“Cape with the blowgun [design]”; worn by the Mexica ruler when he entered gardens to hunt birds with a blowgun.

Tezozomoc 2001, 170

tlachquauhyo tilmatli

“Cape with the ballcourt eagle/tree [design]”; adornment of lords and war leaders.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Torquemada 1977, IV: 330

tlacoxochyo tilmatli

“Cape with the bouvardia flower [design]; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

tlacuilolli tilmatli

“Painted cape”; a general term; tribute item; gift of the captors of victims sacrificed in Tlacaxipehualiztli.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64; Florentine Codex II, 58 continued on next page

397

398

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

tlatocatilmatli

“Royal cape”; adornment of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 65r

tlatocatilmatli itzcoayo

“Royal cape with the obsidian serpent [design]”; royal gift to brave warriors.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74

tlalecahuazyo tilmatli

“Cape with the earthen ladder [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

tlamachcoatilmatli

“Cape with the embroidered serpent [design]”; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64

tlamachmoyahuac tilmatli

“Cape with an embroidered, radiating design”; Florentine Codex adornment of rulers and noblemen. VIII, 24

tlamachtilmatli

“Embroidered cape”; a general term; cape woven by the Otomi women.

Florentine Codex X, 180

tlamohuipalli ihuitilmatli

“Dark blue-feather cape”; apparel of nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60r

tlalpiltilmatli

“Tied/knotted cape” or “cape with knots”; precious gift; apparel of nobles; the gloss in the Codex Fiestas, tlaolpile, probably referring to tlalpil-, designates a cape with the design of knots illustrated in the Codex Tudela (fol. 87r); a similar design but with red knots is illustrated on the fol. 85v of the Codex Tudela, in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 8), and in the Tlaxcalan manuscript from the Benson Latin American Collection.

Florentine Codex IX, 47; Codex Fiestas, fol. 58r

tlapalcoliuhqui tilmatli “Red twisted cape”; decorated with a vertical red band in the step-fret design; tribute item; pictured in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 31r).

Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 6r

tlapalecacozcayo tilmatli

“Red cape with the wind jewel [design]”; cape that reportedly appeared in Tlatelolco during the reign of Moquihuixtli.

Florentine Codex IX, 2

tlapalihuitemalacayo tilmatli

“Cape with red feather circles”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

tlapalihuitilmatli

“Cape of red feathers”; apparel of nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60r

tlapalihuitilmatli tlamachyo

“Cape of colored feathers, with embroidery”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

tlapalihuitl tençacanecuilo ihuitilmatli

“Cape of colored feathers with a twisted straw [design] border/with the curved labret [design]”; apparel of nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60r continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

tlapalocuiltecayo tilmatli

“Red cape in the Ocuilan style”; cape with two red and white vertical stripes; tribute item; pictured in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 43r).

Matrícula de Tributos, fol.12r

tlapalteucxochyo tilmatli

“Cape with the red lordly flower [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex VIII, 24

tlatehuaicuilolli tilmatli “Cape with a [?] painted design”; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64

tlatlapalquachtli

“Varicolored [large] cape”; probably identical or similar to tlatlapaltilmatli; tribute item.

Tezozomoc 2001, 142

tlatlapaltilmatli

Primeros Memoriales, “Varicolored cape”; a cape with green, blue, red, and yellow stripes illustrated in the fols. 52v, 53r, 53v; Primeros Memoriales, the Matrícula de Tribu- Anales de Quauhtitlan, tos, and the Codex Mendoza (fols. 52r, 55r); fols. 64r, 65r; Matrícula de Tributos, fol.15v adornment of rulers and noblemen; tribute item; possibly a variant name of tlatlapalquachtli mentioned by Tezozomoc (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 133).

tlatocatilmatli

“Royal cape”; a general term designating royal mantles; adornment of rulers, also assigned to high-ranking valiant warriors; trade item.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 65r; Florentine Codex VIII, 74, 83; IX, 7, 8, 17

tlatzcallotl tilmatli

“Cape with a spiral [design] (?)”; precious gift.

Florentine Codex IX, 47

tlauhtemalacayo tilmatli

“Cape with the red disk [design]”; gift of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin to the elite of enemy states.

Tezozomoc 2001, 409

tlauhtonatiuhyo tilmatli

“Cape with the red sun [design]”; adornment of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina; one of the gifts of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin to the elite of enemy states; probably pictured in the Tovar Manuscript in the scene of the coronation of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina.

Tezozomoc 2001, 170, 409, 417

tlaxochyo tilmatli

“Striped cape”; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64

tlaxochyotentlapalli tilmatli

“Striped cape with a red border”; tribute item.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 65

tlaztalehualli ihuitilmatli

“Pink feather cape”; adornment of lords.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60r continued on next page

399

400

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

tleçahuallayatl

“Thin/see-through/maguey-fiber cape with the fire spider web [design]”; priestly costume.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 268r

tlilpapatlahuac tilmatli

Matrícula de Tributos, “Cape with wide black lines/stripes”; a cape fols. 9r, 12r, 14r, 14v, decorated with three black vertical stripes; 15r; Anales de Quauhin both the Matrícula de Tributos and the titla, fol. 64r; Florentine Codex Mendoza the initial cape figure Codex X, 73 has an attached symbol, a yellow lip-plug (tentetl); it is possible that the tentetl glyph indicates tentia, “to attach a ribbon, border, fringe, fringe trimming, or stripe of clothing” (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 130); tribute item; adornment of nobles and colonial rulers; the maguey version of this cape is mentioned among the items sold by the vendor of maguey-fiber capes; pictured in the Matrícula de Tributos, the Codex Mendoza (fols. 37r, 39r 43r, 49r, 50r, 51r), the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 3, the Mapa Catastral de Tepoztlan, Panhuacan, Ayapango, and the Plano en Papel de Maguey.

tliltic ihuitilmatli

“Black-feather cape”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; perhaps pictured in the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 3.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 55v, 60r

tochomiyo tilmatli

“Rabbit-fur cape”; adornment of lords.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60r

tochpanecayotl tilmatli “Cape in the Tochpan style”; tribute item; Florentine Codex IX, 6; cape assigned to the pochteca; probably iden- Anales de Quauhtitlan, tical to the ometochtecomayo tilmatli. fol. 64; Tezozomoc 2001, 142 tonatiuhyo tilmatli

“Cape with the sun [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; gift of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin to Spaniards; trade item; probably pictured as the cape with the blue-red sun design in the Codex Tudela (fol. 88r).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex X, 63; XII, 6; Codex Fiestas, fol. 57r

tonatiuhyo tilmatli tenixyo

“Cape with the sun [design] and bordered with eyes”; version of the tonatiuhyo tilmatli and tlauhtonatiuhyo tilmatli; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

tolecyo tilmatli

Meaning uncertain, possibly from the unattested patientive noun tolectli (“something hard and ripe”); gift to Spaniards.

Florentine Codex XII, 6

totolitipetlayo tilmatli

“Cape with the turkey entrail and mat [design] interior”; cape of the Otomi.

Florentine Codex X, 180

tzanaton tilmatli (?)

“Cape of small grackle feathers”; reportedly one of the gifts from Michoacan for Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in his coronation ceremony.

Tezozomoc 2001, 383

ocotochehuatilmatli

“Bobcat-skin cape”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

xahualquauhyo tilmatli “Cape with the painted eagle”; trade item; gift to invited rulers for the feast of Tlacaxipe­ hualiztli; gift to Spaniards.

Florentine Codex IX, 7, 8; XII, 6; Tezozomoc 2001, 382–85, 408

xahualquauhyo tilmatli “Cape with the painted eagle and bordered tenixyo with eyes”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; possibly pictured in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 49r; Clark 1938 1, 82).

Florentine Codex VIII, 23; Sahagún 1997b, 458

xicacoliuhqui tilmatli

“Cape with the step-fret [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen; pictured in the Codex Tudela (fol. 87v) and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 7).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

xiuhayatl

“Turquoise [blue] thin/netted/maguey-fiber cape”; probably synonymous with teoxiuhayatl; one of the costume items worn by Tiçoc during his coronation ceremony; cloth that enveloped the sacred bundle of Tezcatlipoca.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 14; Tezozomoc 2001, 248

xiuhtilmatli

“Turquoise [blue] cape”; royal apparel; the term is perhaps synonymous with xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli but can also refer to plain blue capes; the latter are depicted as royal or noble garment in the Primeros Memoriales, the Florentine Codex, the Plano en Papel de Maguey, the Codex Azoyú 2, the Titres de Propriété Mexico Tenochtitlan Ms.Mex.114, the Codex Mexicanus (fols. 16, 17), the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, the Lienzo de Quetzpalan, the Genealogía de Tepeticpac, and the Codex Valeriano.

Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 38–39; Primeros Memoriales, fol. 53v; Torquemada 1977, IV: 329–30; Codex Azca­ titlan, fol. 10

continued on next page

401

402

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

xiuhtilmatli tenchilnahuayo

“Turquoise [blue] cape bordered with red circles”; the term is synonymous with xiuh­ tlalpilli tilmatli tenixyo; royal apparel.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 51r, 51v, 52r, 53v

xiuhtilmatli tentlapal

“Turquoise [blue] cape with a red border”; the term is possibly synonymous with xiuhtilmatli tenchilnahuayo and xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli tenixyo, but this is uncertain in view of the lack of images of this cape; the gloss in the Primeros Memoriales does not match the picture showing a multicolored striped cape; plain blue capes with red borders are depicted in the Codex Aubin, the Codex Mexicanus, the Tira de Tepechpan, the Plano en Papel de Maguey, the Genealogía de Zolín, the Genealogía de QuauhquechollanMacuilxochitepec, the Tovar Manuscript, the Códice de Huichapan, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Codex Cozcatzin, and illustrations in the work by Durán, but it is difficult to say whether they are generic blue capes with red borders or simplified images of the capes with the turquoise-mosaic design.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 52v

xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli

“Turquoise knotted/tied cape [with the turquoise mosaic design]” or “cape like the turquoise hip cloth”; cape with the turquoisemosaic design; this term has been variously translated: “cape with blue knots” (Seler 1902–23, II: 519; Sullivan in Sahagún 1997a, 205), while Dibble and Anderson (in FC VIII, 24) proposed “the blue knotted cape”; the most prestigious royal cape worn by the rulers of Tenochtitlan and possibly also other rulers within the empire; it was possibly decorated with real turquoise stones that imitated the mosaic, but also painted imitations of this design were in use; pictured in numerous sources, including the Primeros Memoriales and the Florentine Codex, the Mapa de Atenco-Mizquiahuala, the Códice de Huichapan (fol. 26), the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 108r), and the Codex Azcatitlan (fol. 9).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex X, 169, XII, 6; Tezozomoc 2001, 160–61, 169–70, 220, 269, 304–7, 362–67, 382–85, 443–44

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.6.—continued Nahuatl name xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli tenixyo

Characteristics “Turquoise knotted/tied cape [with the turquoise mosaic design] and a border of eyes” or perhaps “cape like the turquoise hip cloth, with a border of eyes”; the most prestigious variant of the royal cape worn by the rulers of Tenochtitlan; this version is pictured in Durán, the Codex Saville, the Codex Azoyú 2, the Plano en Papel de Maguey, and the Codex Azcatitlan (fols. 22, 24).

Textual references Primeros Memoriales, fols. 54r, 55v; Florentine Codex VIII, 24

xiuhtlalpilnacazminqui “Diagonally divided turquoise knotted/tied cape [with the turquoise-mosaic design], on tlacochquauhtli oncan icac which a spear eagle stands”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 23

xochayatl/xochiayatl

Florentine Codex X, 73

“Thin/netted/maguey-fiber cape with a flower [design]”; item sold by the vendor of maguey capes.

xomoihuitentlapalo til- “Duck-feather cape with a colored/red bormatli/xomoihuitilmatli der”; adornment of rulers and noblemen. tentlapallo

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex VIII, 24

xomoihuitilmatli

“Duck-feather cape”; lordly attributes; capes present in Tlatelolco since the reign of Moquihuixtli.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60r; Florentine Codex VIII, 29, 58; IX, 2

xomoihuitilmatli quappatlacyo/ quauhpatlacyo

“Duck-feather cape with a wide/spread eagle [design]”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 24

xomoihuitilmatli elotic “Duck-feather cape, with [a design of ] fresh ears of maize”; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

yolotlacatecolotl tilmatli

Codex Fiestas, fol. 57v

“Cape with the demon-heart [design]”; a cape pictured in the Codex Tudela (fol. 86r) and identified by the gloss in the Codex Fiestas (Batalla Rosado 2002, 362).

403

404

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.7. Varieties of warrior shifts (ehuatl) in written sources Term

Characteristics

Textual references

aztaehuatl

“White heron-feather tunic”; war costume of rulers, noblemen, and tiacauh-rank warriors; precious tlahuiztli made by the amanteca artisans.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 73r; Florentine Codex IX, 89

cectlapal xoxouhqui cectlapal coztic ehuatl

“Half-blue and half-yellow tunic”; war costume of rulers and noblemen; part of the red cuextecatl costume.

Florentine Codex VIII, 35

chamolehuatl

“Red-parrot [feather] tunic”; war costume of high-ranking warriors; chamolli was probably red parrot as “red bird” (Sahagún 1997b, 489; Dibble and Anderson, FC IX, 1, n. 2), but a dark green tunic worn by a warrior on fol.76r of the Primeros Memoriales is identified as the chamolehuatl by the gloss; precious tlahuiztli made by the amanteca artisans.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 76r; Florentine Codex IX, 89

chichiltic ehuatl

“Bright-red tunic”; war costume of rulers paired with the bright red quaxolotl insignia.

Florentine Codex VIII, 34

cochoehuatl

“Green-feather tunic”; made of feathers of the white-fronted Amazon parrot; precious tlahuiztli made by the amanteca artisans.

Florentine Codex IX, 89

cuitlatexoehuatl

“Blue parrot-feather tunic”; precious tlahuiztli made by the amanteca artisans.

Florentine Codex IX, 89

iztac ehuatl

“White tunic”; war costume of rulers and noblemen paired with the white quaxolotl insignia.

Florentine Codex VIII, 34

pilihuiehuatl

“Princely-feather tunic” or “tunic of chick feathers”; war costume of rulers and noblemen.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72r

tlapalihuiehuatl

“Red-feather tunic”; costume of tiacauh-rank warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 72v

totolihuiehuatl

“Turkey-feather tunic”; costume of tiacauhrank warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 68v

tozehuatl

“Yellow parrot-feather tunic”; war costume of rulers and noblemen; precious tlahuiztli made by the amanteca artisans; part of the quetzalpapalotl war costume of rulers, it was decorated with “golden hawk scratches” (tlotlohuitecqui); this version was also called tozehuatl motlotlohuitec and belonged to the coztic cuextecatl suit.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72v; Florentine Codex VIII, 34, 35; IX, 89

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.7.—continued Term

Characteristics

Textual references

tzinitzcanehuatl

“Tunic of trogonorus feathers”; item brought by the pochteca to Ahuitzotl; costumes of warriors of Quauhtenanco captured by the pochteca.

Florentine Codex IX, 3, 5

xiuhehuatl

“Turquoise [blue] tunic”; made of cotinga feathers; war costume of rulers and noblemen; identical to the xiuhtotoehuatl.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72r

xiuhtotoehuatl

“Cotinga [feather] tunic”; war costume of Mexica rulers, part of their Xipe Totec dress worn in war, also worn with the quetzalpatzactli device; war costume of warriors from Quauhtenanco and booty of Aztec merchants; identical to the xiuhehuatl.

Florentine Codex VIII, 33, 34; IX, 3, 5; Chimalpahin 2003b, 164

xoxouhqui ehuatl

“Blue tunic”; war costume of rulers and noblemen, paired with the blue quaxolotl insignia.

Florentine Codex VIII, 34

405

406

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8. Varieties of war insignia (tlahuiztli) in written sources Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

ananacaztli

“Water ears [insignia]”; it is classified as tlahuiztli in the Anales de Quauhtitlan; insignia of high-ranking warriors and rulers; Torquemada described this device as a special insignia of the Chichimec rulers of Tetzcoco.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 75r; Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 49; Torquemada 1977, IV: 330

aztacopilli

“Heron [feather] conical headpiece [insignia]”; in spite of the fact that the copilli was a headpiece, this emblem is pictured as a copilli-shaped form on a wooden frame; insignia of high-ranking warriors; illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 77r) and possibly in the Florentine Codex (Bk. VIIII, fol. 33v).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 77r

aztapanitl

“Heron banner”; this term refers to an insignia carried by Chichimecs, Huastecs, and Totonacs; insignia manufactured by feather workers; it appears as aztapanitl in the Florentine Codex.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fols. 3, 54; Florentine Codex VIII, 92

aztapatzactli

“Compressed heron [feather] insignia”; insignia of tiacauhrank warriors; possibly depicted in the Codex Azoyú 1 (fol. 32).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 73

aztatzontli

“Heron [feather] headdress” or “heron [feather] hair [insig- Primeros Memonia]”; insignia of tiacauh-rank warriors; the same term riales, fols. 68r, refers to the head adornment, but the tlahuiztli version 77r was fastened on a frame—it was covered with feathers, white on top, and with a quetzal-feather tuft; as noted by Seler (1902–23, II: 589), this device is also pictured in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 37) and constituted the standard headdress of pulque and rain gods.

çacacalli

“Grass hut [insignia]”; a hut-like back insignia constructed on a frame and covered with feathers; insignia of highranking warriors; pictured in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 78r) and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 75).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 78r

cacalpatzactli

“Compressed crow [feather insignia]”; a back insignia made of crow feathers and pictured as a black variety of the patzactli device; insignia of tiacauh-rank warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 76v

çacatzontli

“Grass hair [insignia]”; it is not clear whether this was Sahagún 1997b, a head insignia or a device carried on the back; it is 462 described in the Spanish version of the work by Sahagún as a device of yellow feathers paired with a yellow-feather jacket; Çacatzontli was a name of a merchant god or a god of the road (FC IX, 10–13). continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

caltzaqualli

“The masonry house [insignia]”; according to the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68v) it was an insignia of tiacauh-rank warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 78r

çaquanpanitl

“Troupial [feather] banner”; it is depicted as a yellow banner with small parts in red and two quetzal-feather tufts (Primeros Memoriales, fol. 73v); war insignia of rulers and nobles, insignia gained in Tehuantepec; Seler (1902–23, II: 568) suggested that a version of it might be carried by the warrior from Xiquipilco in the Codex TellerianoRemensis (fol. 37v).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 73v; Florentine Codex IX, 3, 5

çaquanpapalotl

“Troupial [feather] butterfly [insignia]”; a variety of the butterfly back device made of troupial feathers; it is depicted as a yellow-and-black butterfly with a red mouth and a quetzal-feather tuft (Primeros Memoriales, fol. 74v); war insignia of rulers and nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 74v

çaquantonatiuh

“Troupial [feather] sun [insignia]”; back device in the shape of the sun, decorated with troupial feathers; it is depicted as the sun with red rays on a yellow-and-green background, attached to a carrying frame (Primeros Memoriales, fol. 74v); illustrated also in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 55); war insignia of rulers and nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 74r

çaquantzontli

“Troupial [feather] hair”; insignia made of çaquan feathers; Florentine Codex it is not clear whether this term designated a head gear (as VIIII, 34 could be implied by the word tzontli) or a device carried on the back; it is listed among the war tlahuiztli of rulers and nobles in the Florentine Codex.

chamolcoyotl

“Brown/red coyote [costume]”; it is pictured as an encasing body suit; war insignia of nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 74v

chichiltic quaxolotl

“Bright-red Xolotl head [insignia]”; back device with an umbrella-shape topped by the doglike Xolotl head; adorned with quetzal feathers and gold; war insignia of rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex, VIII, 34

chictlapanqui cuextecatl

“Bicolored Huastec [costume]”; the Florentine Codex Florentine Codex, describes it as having a half-blue and half-yellow tunic, a VIII, 35; Sahagún bicolored conical cap with quetzal feathers girt at the base, 1997b, 460–62 a golden disk at the front, a golden crescent-shaped nose plate, and ear pendants; it is listed among war insignia of rulers and noblemen although Huastec costumes were often worn by commoners. continued on next page

407

408

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

chimallahuiztli

“Shield insignia”; as Seler (1902–23, II: 592) recognized, it consists of a shield with a feather fringe that features a kind of en face grotesque visage; it is similar to the decoration on the shield carried by the second tiacauh on folio 73r in the Primeros Memoriales, where it is termed texaxacalo; pictured in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 40).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 79r

citlalcoyotl

“Starry coyote [suit]”; according to the Primeros Memoriales, it was completely covered with black feathers and had spots of white feathers; insignia of tiacauh-rank warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 69r, 79v

copilli

“Conical headpiece [insignia]”; a general term referring to a back insignia consisting of a conical headpiece device fastened to a frame; manufactured in several color varieties, of which not all are attested with their Nahuatl terms; one of them was possibly the citlalcopilli (?), a conical headpiece insignia with a starry design, pictured in the Florentine Codex, Bk. VIII, fol. 34r; probably pictured in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 17, 18, 37, 39, 41, 50, 55, 58, 59, 70, 74, 79).

coztic cuextecatl “Yellow Huastec [costume]”; encasing body suit with a conical headpiece, ornamented with a gold and quetzalfeather tuft, decorated with “hawk scratches,” and having a golden disk at the front, a golden crescent-shaped nose plate, and ear pendants; examples are found both with and without “hawk scratches”; it is listed among war insignia of rulers and noblemen although Huastec costumes were often worn by commoners; pictured in the Matrícula de Tributos (fols. 3r, 3v, 5v, 9v, 10v, 14v, 15r), the Codex Mendoza (fols. 19r, 23r, 36r, 30r, 39r, 50r, 51r), and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 14, 17).

Florentine Codex VIII, 35

coztic teocuitla- “Golden banner tufted with quetzal heads”; war insignia of panitl quetzal­ rulers and noblemen. tzontecomayo

Florentine Codex VIII, 34

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references Florentine Codex II, 123

cuextecatl

“Huastec [costume]”; a general term encompassing different varieties but not all versions are attested with their Nahuatl terms; it was an encasing body suit with a conical headpiece, usually decorated with “hawk scratches” and paired with the crescent-shaped nose plate and other attributes identified with Huastec mother goddesses; one of the versions not attested with a Nahuatl term was possibly called the citlalcuextecatl (?), “starry Huastec [costume]”; Seler first identified its circular spots on a black background with stars on the night sky (Seler 1902–23, II: 609–10); pictured in the Florentine Codex (Bk. VIII, fol. 32r) and the Codex Mendoza (fol. 65r); a red version of the Huastec suit is pictured in the Matrícula de Tributos (fols.7r, 9r, 11v), Codex Mendoza (fols.20v, 33r, 37r, 41r, 64r), and Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 74, 79).

cueçalpatzactli

Matrícula de “Compressed macaw [feather insignia]”; a variety within Tributos, fol. a broader patzactli category pictured in the Primeros 4r; Primeros Memoriales (fol. 76v) as a red-orange version; insignia of high-ranking warriors; Seler (1902–23, II: 584) identified Memoriales, fols. 68v, 76v; it in the Matrícula de Tributos (fols. 3r, 4r, 4v, 5r, 6v); it occurs on the cognate folios of the tribute section of the Codex Mendoza (fols. 22r, 24v, 26r, 28r, 32r) and possibly also in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 64, 68).

ezpanitl

“Blood banner”; insignia of Huitzilopochtli in the feast of Panquetzaliztli, back insignia placed on the figure of Huitzilopochtli during the feast of Toxcatl; it is described as a paper device “painted with blood,” and decorated with a bloody flint knife, also of paperwork.

Florentine Codex II, 176; XII, 53

huexolotl

“Turkey cock [insignia]”; a figure of the bird covered with feathers and placed on a wooden frame to be carried on the back; insignia of high-ranking warriors; the text of the Codex Cozcatzin (fol. 14r) mentions also the quetzalhuexolotl (“quetzal turkey-cock”) insignia.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 78v

huitzilnahualli

“Hummingbird sorcerer [insignia]”; an attribute of Painal, a manifestation of the god Huitzilopochtli; in addition to the Primeros Memoriales, it is possibly depicted in the Codex Xolotl as an insignia of a ruler (fol. 8).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 261r; Florentine Codex I, 3

continued on next page

409

410

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

itzpapalotl

“Obsidian butterfly [insignia]”; constructed on a circular frame that carried two sheets of beaten copper and a butterfly on top; its symbolism alluded to the goddess of war and human sacrifice, Itzpapalotl, Obsidian Butterfly, a patroness of warriors, whereas the cruciform elements of sheet copper that tip the butterfly’s legs are attributed to the deity Otonteuctli (Seler 1902–23, II: 586–87), linked to fire and war, a prototypical warrior who met a glorious death and was subsequently transformed by fire (Graulich 1989, 59–62); insignia of rulers and high-ranking warriors; gift; illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 78v) and Florentine Codex (VIII, fol. 56v).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 78v; Florentine Codex VIII, 34, 74; Sahagún 1997b, 461

ixtlapalpanitl

“Transverse banner [insignia]”; according to the image contained in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 79r), a colorful flag hanging loosely on a frame and decorated with a tassel on each side; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 79r

iztac copilli

“White conical headpiece [insignia]”; this item has been included in the tlahuiztli category according to the classification of the Primeros Memoriales, where it is described as a frame (tlatlalili) rather than the conical headdress also known under this name; this insignia imitating the shape of a conical cap was constructed on a special frame covered with heron feathers and was decorated with que­ tzal feathers; insignia of high-ranking warriors; probably synonymous with aztacopilli.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 68v

iztac coyotl

“White coyote [costume]”; an encasing body suit covered with white feathers and ornamented with a quetzalfeather tuft on the head; insignia of high-ranking warriors and nobles; illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 75r) and possibly in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 12, 14).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 75r

iztac cuextecatl

“White Huastec [costume]”; a white version of the Huastec battle suit, in its costly version ornamented with gold and quetzal feathers; insignia of rulers and noblemen; one of the items given to Ahuitzotl in the ceremony celebrating his victory; tribute item; illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 5r) and Codex Mendoza (fols.19r, 29r).

Florentine Codex VIII, 35; Sahagún 1997b, 462; Tezozomoc 2001, 341

iztac ihuitelolohtli

“White feather ball (down) [insignia]”; it was fashioned entirely of white feathers and had a quetzal-feather tuft on top; insignia of high-ranking warriors; illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 77r).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 77r

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name iztac quaxolotl

Characteristics

Textual references

“White Xolotl head [insignia]”; it was covered with white heron feathers and ornamented with gold and quetzal feathers; insignia of high-ranking warriors, rulers, and nobles; illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 76r).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 76r; Florentine Codex VIII, 34

iztac teocuitlapa- “Silver banner tufted with quetzal heads”; war insignia of nitl quetzaltzon- rulers and noblemen. tecomayo

Florentine Codex VIII, 34

iztac tzitzimitl

“White stellar demon [costume]”; a battle suit consisting of an encasing outfit with a sacrificial slit over the chest area and a head-encasing helmet in the form of a skeletal monster; this white version of the tzitzimitl costume was ornamented with gold and quetzal feathers; war insignia of rulers and noblemen; tribute item; pictured in the Codex Mendoza (fols. 20r, 27r, 67r); an upper part of this costume is possibly illustrated in the Codex TellerianoRemensis (fol. 39v).

Florentine Codex VIII, 35; Sahagún 1997b, 462

macpanitl

“Hand banner”; mentioned among dance accouterments used after the Spanish conquest; it is not certain that this category was classified as tlahuiztli; however, it is listed in the Florentine Codex among fans and the tlahuiztli proper.

Florentine Codex IX, 92

macuilpanitl

“Five banners [insignia]”; according to an image and text of the Primeros Memoriales, the device consisted of five banners placed on a wooden frame, covered with feathers and decorated with quetzal-feather tufts; insignia of highranking warriors; Seler (1902–23, II: 585–86) noted various occurrences of this device in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 38, 47, 50, 54, 69).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 77r

malpanitl

“Captive banner”; war insignia mentioned as part of funeral accouterments of dead warriors; this term is not attested in other sources and it is possible that the term intended was macpanitl, a banner carried in the hand.

Tezozomoc 2001, 128

matlaxopilli

“Net toe [insignia]”; probably synonymous with xopilli; mentioned by Ixtlilxochitl as the back device captured in the battle of Otumba from a Mexica leader.

Ixtlilxochitl 1975–77, II: 233

metzxayacatl

“Thigh-skin mask [insignia]”; according to the image contained in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 78v), it was shaped like the head with a curved headdress of Itztlacoliuhqui, the god of coldness and the Morning Star; it was white with black stripes; the link with Itztlacoliuhqui was pointed out by Seler (1902–23, II: 592) and Sullivan (1976); insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 78v

continued on next page

411

412

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

momoyactli

Matrícula de “Dispersed/radiating [insignia]”; this device appears only in the Matrícula de Tributos, where the glosses provide its Tributos, fols. name, and was redrawn in the Codex Mendoza; pictured 3v, 4r as a rich feather crest placed on a wooden frame and composed of combinations of red, white, and black feathers, sharing with the patzactli proper a huge fan of tightly packed feathers; the feathers of the momoyactli appear to be shorter and less compact, giving the impression of being a modest version of the more elaborate and prestigious patzactli; it is pictured in red and red-white variants; tribute item illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos (fols. 3r, 3v, 4r, 4v, 5r, 6v) and the Codex Mendoza (fols. 20v, 23v, 24v, 26r, 27r, 28r, 32r).

ocelotl

“Jaguar [body costume]”; warrior body costume in the form of a jaguar with a quetzal-feather crest on the head; the term ocelotl probably designated both the costume itself and warriors who wore it; often given in tribute; it is illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos (fols. 3r, 3v, 4r, 5r, 6r, 9r, 10r, 15r, 16v), the Codex Mendoza (fols. 20r, 21v, 23v, 25r, 29r, 31r, 37r, 39r, 51r, 54r, 64r), the Florentine Codex (VIII, fol. 34r), Durán, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 45, 72), the Codex Azcatitlan (fol. 9), the Codex Cozcatzin (fol. 14r), the Códice en Cruz, the Lienzo 1 de Chiepetlan, and the Mapa de Popotla.

ocelotlachiccomitl

“Jaguar pulque jar”; a back device imitating a jar with Florentine Codex foaming alcoholic beverage; it was decorated with quetzal VIII, 35; Sahagún feathers; war insignia of rulers and nobles. 1997b, 462

ocelototec

“Jaguar [Xipe] Totec [costume]”; a battle outfit made of a jaguar skin, decorated with golden flint knives, and consisting of several components, including a skirt made of quetzal feathers and a drum worn at the back; war insignia of rulers and nobles.

ocelotzitzimitl

“Jaguar stellar demon [insignia]”; a battle suit consisting Tezozomoc 2001, of an encasing outfit with a sacrificial slit over the chest 341 area and a head-encasing helmet in the form of a skeletal monster insignia; no images of this particular variety are known, but it was probably made of a jaguar skin or decorated with a design imitating it; mentioned by Tezozomoc as one of the items given to Ahuitzotl in a ceremony celebrating his victory.

Matrícula de Tributos, fols. 3v, 4r; Florentine Codex II, 51; XII, 115;

Florentine Codex VIII, 33; Sahagún 1997b, 461

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

ometochtlahuiztli

Primeros Memo“Two Rabbit insignia”; according to the description and image in the Primeros Memoriales, a frame was given riales, fols. 68r, the shape of a pot for an alcoholic beverage (octli, called 74r pulque in colonial times) covered with heron and chick feathers, as well as tufts of quetzal feathers and quetzalfeather spikes on top; the god Ome Tochtli was linked to the cult of pulque; war insignia of rulers and nobles; probably illustrated in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 33, 57, 76, 79).

panitl

“Banner [insignia]”; a general name for colorful banner devices carried on the back on a special pole attached to a wooden frame; depending on the variant, the panitl could include from one to three tall poles; costly versions were ornamented with gold (teocuitlapanitl); banner insignia are illustrated in pre-Hispanic sculptures (Templo Mayor Bench Relief ) and numerous colonial pictorial manuscripts, e.g., Florentine Codex (VIII, fol. 34r), Codex Mendoza (fols. 64r, 65r, 67r), Codex Telleriano-Remensis (fols. 25v, 33v, 37r, 37v, 38v, 39v, 42v, 42r), Lienzo de Tepeticpac, Lienzo de Tlaxcala (a yellow banner on fol. 36 and other varieties), Códice de Huichapan (fols. 48, 61), Lienzo 1 de Chiepetlan, Codex Moctezuma, Codex Azcatitlan (fol. 10), and Mapa de Popotla; a specific variety was associated with the god Xipe Totec and formed part of the battle outfit linked to him; this banner was made of red-spoonbill feathers; red banners in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala are decorated with white “Greek cross” motifs (fols. 40, 41, 43, 48, 51, 56, 58, 70, 72, 75, 78); a red banner is depicted in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 72v), but it is glossed teocuitlapanitl, or “golden banner”; a banner with jaguar-skin motif is illustrated in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 65, 68).

papalotl

“Butterfly [insignia]”; a general term for the back device in the form of a butterfly; not all color varieties are attested with their Nahuatl terms; a red-white and red-yellow version is pictured in the Matrícula de Tributos (fols. 3r, 3v) and Codex Mendoza (fol. 22r); possibly illustrated in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 21).

Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 3v

continued on next page

413

414

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

quauhtli

“Eagle [costume]”; a battle suit decorated with eagle feathers and including a headpiece in the form of an eagle’s head; a prestigious outfit in Tenochtitlan but used also beyond the Valley of Mexico; the term quauhtli probably designated both the costume itself and warriors who wore it; illustrated in the Florentine Codex (e.g., VIII, fol. 33v), Durán, and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Florentine Codex II, 51; XII, 115, 116

quauhtli ocelotl

“Eagle jaguar [costume]”; a battle suit consisting of eagle and jaguar halves; prestigious battle outfit mentioned in the account of the Spanish conquest.

Florentine Codex XII, 110

quaxolotl

Florentine Codex “Xolotl head [insignia]”; a back device with an umbrella IX, 89; Tezozoshape topped by the doglike Xolotl head; as pointed out moc 2001, 341, by Seler (1902–23, II: 581), this term is also given as 345, 382–85 the name of Chantico, the fire goddess of Xochimilco, called Quaxolotl Chantico (FC II, 184); tribute item; war insignia of rulers and noblemen; prestigious gift; item manufactured by amanteca feather workers; it was manufactured in different colors, but not all the versions are attested with their Nahuatl terms, for example, yellow and green varieties are listed in tribute lists (yellow, in the Matrícula de Tributos, fols. 3r, 3v, 4r, 4v, 11r, 15v and the Codex Mendoza, fols. 21v, 24v, 26r, 40r, 52r; green in the Matrícula de Tributos fol. 7r and the Codex Mendoza, fols. 23r, 29r, 33r).

quetzalapanecayotl

“Quetzal device in the Apaneca style”; a feather crest Anales de Quauhwith a protruding frontal part; images bearing similartitlan, fol. 6; Floity to this feathered adornment appear in several Aztec rentine Codex I, manuscripts, while their identification with the term 3; III, 22; VI, 163; quetzalapanecayotl is confirmed by a few glyphs in the XII, 11, 15, 48 Tira de Peregrinación (Seler 1902–23, II: 417); Seler also pointed out that this headdress was associated with Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl; it is also an attribute of the setting sun (Graulich 1989, 60); mentioned as an insignia of the Toltecs (FC III, 22) and an adornment of Painal, manifestation of Huitzilopochtli (FC I, 3); the main difference with respect to the typical patzactli devices is that it has a protruding frontlet with dots missing in known quetzalpatzactli examples, and it appears to be a headpiece; there are also examples where the quetzalapanecayotl is also worn as a back device, as in the image of Axayacatl in the Codex Cozcatzin (fols. 13v, 14r) or of a dancer during the Xocotl huetzi feast illustrated in the work by Durán (Seler 1902–23, II: 398–401, 409–19). continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

quetzal­azta­ tzontli

“Headdress of quetzal and heron feathers”; a headdress made of heron and quetzal feathers and also ornamented with gold (teocuitlayo); a headpiece mentioned as an adornment of the rain god Tlaloc and his priests but also included among the tlahuiztli worn by rulers and noblemen.

Florentine Codex II, 87; VIII, 35; XII, 12

quetzalcopilli

“Quetzal [feather] conical headpiece [insignia]”; a device in the form of a conical Huastec cap decorated with quetzal feathers was attached to a wooden frame; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 75r

quetzalmacpanitl “Quetzal [feather] hand banner”; a banner made of quetzal Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r; feathers and carried in the hands; according to the descriptions additionally decorated with troupial feathers; Florentine Codex VIII, 28; IX, 92 dance accouterment; it is not certain that this category was classified as tlahuiztli; however, it is listed in the Florentine Codex among dance attributes, including fans and the tlahuiztli proper. quetzalmanalli

“Quetzal [feather] offering/bundle” mentioned among costume items of the Huastecs and people from the region of Tehuantepec.

Florentine Codex X, 185; Tezozomoc 2001, 334

quetzalpanitl

“Quetzal [feather] banner”; a banner made of quetzal feathers and decorated with quetzal-feather tufts; insignia of rulers and nobles; raised as a sign to start a battle and was one of the precious items given by a ruler to brave warriors (FC VIII, 35, 74); illustrated in the Florentine Codex (fol. 56v) and possibly also in the Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 58r), the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 40, 59, 62, 63), Codex Azoyu 2, and the Códice de Huichapan (fol. 38).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 73v; Florentine Codex VIII, 35; IX: 3, 5; Codex Aubin, fol. 22r; Ordenanza del Señor Quauhtemoc, fols. 10r, 12r

quetzalpanitl tlacochcayotl

“Spearing quetzal-feather banner”; insignia of rulers and nobles.

Florentine Codex VIII, 34

quetzalpapalotl

“Quetzal [feather] butterfly [insignia]”; a butterfly ornamented with quetzal feathers was constructed over a wooden frame, and it had a quetzal-feather tuft attached to the top; Florentine Codex (VIII, 34) describes it as a back insignia worn together with a yellow parrot-feather tunic decorated with golden “hawk scratches”; insignia of rulers and nobles; tribute item; pictured in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 72r) and Codex Mendoza (fols. 20v, 22r, 23v, 64r).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72r; Florentine Codex VIII, 34

continued on next page

415

416

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

quetzalpatzactli

“Compressed quetzal feathers [insignia]”; a back device constructed on a frame and having a panache-like form with a wide, expansive crest of plumes; it was worn both on the head framing the face of a warrior and as a back device; it is also possible that an enclosing wig topped by a magnificent panache of these insignia was to be worn hovering immediately over the head or even actually resting on it; dance and war costume adornment of rulers; gift to high-ranking warriors and members of nobility; tribute item; insignia of the altepetl of Quiyahuiztlan in Tlaxcala; illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos (fols. 5r, 5v, 9r, 8v, 11r, 12r, 14r, 15v, 16v), the Codex Mendoza (fols.10r, 30r, 34r, 37r, 40r, 43r, 44v, 45r, 49r, 52r, 54r), the Florentine Codex (VIII, fol. 34r), Códice de Tlatelolco, Codex Xolotl (fols. 3, 4), the Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 58r), and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 14, 18, 52, 53, 56, 77, 80).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72r; Florentine Codex VIII, 27, 34, 74, fol.34r, IX: 3, 5, 6; Muñoz Camargo 2002, 130; Tezozomoc 2001, 259, 227–28, 341; Chimalpahin 1997a I, 133–45; II, 48–49; Chimalpahin 1997b, 176–78

quetzalquaquahuitl

“The quetzal-feather horns [insignia]”; an encasing cap or helmet covered with feathers and decorated with two tufts of quetzal feathers resembling horns; despite the fact that it was worn on the head, it was classified as a tlahuiztli; insignia of high-ranking warriors, rulers, and noblemen; pictured in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 73v) and Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 66).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 56r, 68r, 73v; Florentine Codex VIII, 28

quetzalquatlam- “Quetzal-feather bestrewn head [insignia]”; a head adornoyahualli ment classified within the tlahuiztli category in the Primeros Memoriales; it is described as made of yellow parrot feathers with quetzal feathers stuck in it, but is pictured as a headpiece having a large, dense “hair” of green feathers; war insignia of rulers and nobles; a similar item is worn by a war leader in the Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 58r).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 73v

quetzaltonameyotl

“Quetzal-feather sun ray/light [insignia]”; war insignia mentioned as a gift of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin to the valiant captive Tlahuicole; feathered image of a shining sun; probably identical to the quetzaltonatiuh.

Tezozomoc 2001, 432

quetzaltonatiuh

“Quetzal-feather sun [insignia]”; it is described as a golden sun with a circle of quetzal feathers in the middle; war insignia of rulers and noblemen; illustrated in the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 1 and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 29).

Florentine Codex VIII, 35

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name quetzaltototl

Characteristics

Textual references

“Quetzal bird [insignia]”; a back device in the form of an entire quetzal bird constructed on a frame and covered with feathers; war insignia of rulers and noblemen; tribute item; this standard is also probably illustrated on folio 46r of the Codex Mendoza as tribute from Tochtepec; it is pictured here with a yellow body suit; it also appears in the Códice de Tlatelolco and the Mapa de Popotla.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 74r

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 68r, 73v

quetzaltzitzimitl “Quetzal-feather stellar demon [costume]”; a battle suit consisting of an encasing outfit with a sacrificial slit over the chest area and a head-encasing helmet in the form of a skeletal monster; this version of the outfit was covered with quetzal feathers; war insignia of rulers and nobles. teocuitlacopilli

Florentine Codex “Golden conical cap [insignia]”; a back insignia in the VIII, 74; possibly form of a Huastec conical cap carried on a frame; the also: VIII, 35, XII, same term was possibly used in reference to conical caps worn on the head and ornamented with gold, so it is not 13, 125 clear which designate back devices, but in one place it is listed among other tlahuiztli; precious gift, given by a ruler to brave warriors (FC, VIII, 74); possibly pictured in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 79).

teocuitlahuehuetl

“Golden drum [insignia]”; a back device fashioned like a drum fastened on a frame and decorated with gold and a quetzal-feather crest; Seler (1902–23, II: 566) identified it as a part of the Xipe costume worn by Aztec rulers; war insignia of rulers and nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 74v; Tezozomoc 2001, 333;

teocuitlapanitl

“Golden banner [insignia]”; a golden banner fastened to a pole and carried as a back device; made of beaten gold with quetzal-feather tufts (PM, fol. 68r); raised as a sign of battle (FC VIII, 35); war insignia of rulers and nobles; gift to brave warriors; insignia manufactured by feather workers; according to the Nahuatl text, worn by Painal, manifestation of Huitzilopochtli on folio 261r of the Primeros Memoriales, but a white-blue banner is depicted; it also appears as the teocuitlapanitl quetzaltzontecomayo (“golden banner tufted with quetzal heads”; FC IX, 92).

Primeros Memoriales, fols.6 8r, 72v; Florentine Codex VIII, 35, 74; IX, 92; Chimalpahin 2003a, 60, 146, 160, 162, 164

tlacochpatzactli

“Compressed dart [insignia]”; according to the image in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 76r), it consisted of a helmet-like cap placed on a wooden frame, and darts were attached to the cap in a radial arrangement; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 76r

continued on next page

417

418

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name teocuitlaquacalalatli

Characteristics

Textual references

“Golden hood [insignia]”; an insignia falling into a broader variety of the quacalalatli, or helmet-like headgear; precious item given by a ruler to brave warriors; Seler (1902–23, II: 602) identified it with the quetzalquaquahuitl.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74

tlacochtlamanalli “Offering/bundle of darts [insignia]”; war insignia of noblemen.

Chimalpahin 2003a, 164

tlapalcoyotl

“Red coyote [insignia]”; probably a red variety of an encasing coyote outfit decorated with red feathers; although the text of the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68v) states it was made on a frame; the image (fol. 79r) as well as additional data on the coyote suit imply it was a body costume; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 79r

tlapalquaxolotl

“Red Xolotl head [insignia]”; a red version of the quaxolotl Primeros Memoback device having an umbrella shape topped by the dog- riales, fols. 68v, 76r like Xolotl head; was ornamented with quetzal feathers; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

tlapalihuitelolohtli

“The red feather ball [insignia]”; a back insignia consisting of a ball of red feathers placed on a frame and topped by the quetzal-feather tuft; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

tlapalitzmitl

“Red obsidian-pointed arrow [insignia]”; according to Primeros Memothe image in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 77v) this back riales, fols. 68v, insignia consisted of a figure in the shape of an arrowhead, 77v diagonally divided into red and white halves covered with feathers, all fastened to a carrying frame; insignia of highranking warriors.

tlaquimilolli

“Bundle [insignia]”; a back insignia shaped like a tied Primeros Memobundle attached to a frame and topped by a small banner; riales, fols. 68v, its symbolism probably alluded to sacred bundles, the 78r tlaquimilolli, containing relics and paraphernalia of deities and ancestors; insignia of high-ranking warriors; illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 78r) and probably in the Mapa de Popotla.

tlauhque­ choltotec

“Red-spoonbill Totec [costume]”; this name probably does not refer to a separate back insignia but to a complete battle outfit consisting of several components and associated with the god Xipe Totec; part of it was probably a red-spoonbill (roseate spoonbill) headdress, or tlauhquecholtzontli; Tezozomoc describes it as a “golden device,” but it may refer to a back drum ornamented with gold and mentioned in the Florentine Codex (FC VIII, 33) as part of the red version of the Xipe war dress; battle costume of the rulers of Tenochtitlan.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68b, 76v

Tezozomoc 2001, 373, 401

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

tlaximalhuapalli “[Maguey fiber] pulling board [insignia]”; this back insignia consisted of a frame in the shape of a plank, carried on the back; it represented an instrument used in the preparation of the fiber of the maguey (Sahagún 1997a, 274, note 70); insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 78v

tlecocomoctli

“The crackling fire [insignia]”; feathered device attached to a carrying frame, with bright-red macaw feathers imitating the flames on top; insignia of high-ranking warriors; pictured in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 76v); a variant of this insignia is possibly depicted in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 55).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 76v

tlecoyotl

“Fire coyote [insignia]”; a variety of the coyote encasing battle suit, decorated with long, bright-red feathers imitating the flames; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 79r

tlilpapalotl

“Black butterfly [insignia]”; a black version of the butterfly back standard; it was covered with crow feathers; according to the text of the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68v), it had a quetzal-feather crest, but it is actually depicted with an orange tuft (fol. 77v); it is probably this device that is mentioned in the Crónica mexicana as one of the gifts of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin to the Yopes (Tezozomoc 2001, 384); insignia of high-ranking warriors; illustrated in the Codex Mendoza worn by a warrior who took his second captive (fol. 64r).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 77v; Tezozomoc 2001, 384 (?)

tliltic coyotl

“Black coyote [insignia]”; a black version of the encasing coyote battle suit; it was covered with black turkey-hen feathers; insignia of high-ranking warriors; gift to brave warriors and nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 69r, 79v; Florentine Codex VIII, 51

tozcololli

“Bent yellow parrot [feather insignia]”; a back device shaped like a long, twisted frame covered with yellow parrot feathers; the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68v) gives the term tozcololli, while in another folio (fol. 77v) tozcocolli, the same as Tezozomoc (2001, 341, 384); Seler (1902–23, II: 587–88) registered its occurrence also in the Matrícula de Tributos, the tribute section of the Codex Mendoza, and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, noting that its form and wavy contour resemble the flayed and wrinkled human skin in which Xipe was clad; insignia of high-ranking warriors; illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 77v), the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 12r), the Codex Mendoza (fol. 43r), the Florentine Codex (FC VIII, figure 80), and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 16, 34, 48, 53, 57, 76).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 77v; Tezozomoc 2001, 341, 384

continued on next page

419

420

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

tozcoyotl

Primeros Memo“Yellow parrot [feather] coyote [costume]”; a yellow version of the coyote encasing outfit; although the text riales, fols. 68r, of the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68r) states it was made 73r; Matrícula de Tributos, fols. on a frame, the image (fol. 73r) as well as additional data on the coyote suit imply it was a body costume; insignia 3v, 4r of high-ranking warriors; tribute item; pictured in the Matricula de Tributos (fols. 3r, 3v, 4r, 4v), the Codex Mendoza (fols. 21v, 23r, 25r, 26r, 27r, 29r, 65r), and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 14, 15, 16, 21, 25, 34, 45, 50).

tozmiquiztli

“Yellow parrot-feather death [insignia]”; one of the gifts redistributed by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin during his coronation ceremony; probably synonymous with tozquaxolotl because either Xolotl heads or skulls appear on the top of umbrella-shaped devices.

tozquaxolotl

Primeros Memo“Yellow parrot-feather Xolotl head [insignia]”; a yellow version of the quaxolotl back device; insignia of highriales, fol. 72v; ranking warriors, rulers, and nobles; gift to brave warriors; Florentine Codex illustrated in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 72v), the FloVIII, 34, 74; rentine Codex (VIII, fol. 56v), and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala Sahagún 1997b, (fols. 51, 62, 78). 462

toztzitzimitl

“Yellow parrot-feather stellar demon [costume]”; a yellow version of the battle suit consisting of an encasing outfit with a sacrificial slit over the chest area and a headencasing helmet in the form of a skeletal monster; war insignia of rulers and nobles; pictured in tribute lists: the Matrícula de Tributos (fols. 3r, 3v, 5r, 9v, 14r, 14v) and the Codex Mendoza (fols. 9v, 23r, 36r, 50r).

tzatzaztli

“Warping/weaving frame [insignia]”; according to the Primeros Memodescription and image in the Primeros Memoriales it was riales, fols. 68r, made as a wooden frame with feather yarn extended on 74v its upper part and decorated with a small banner with a quetzal-feather tuft; Seler (1902–23, II: 575) describes it as a frame of rods used either in making thread or in weaving, noting that the quauhtzatzaztli was the wooden framework on which the offering to the earth goddess was shot with spears; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

tzipitl

“Fretful child [insignia]”; a back insignia with a wooden figure of a child placed on a frame holding a tortilla in his hand; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Tezozomoc 2001, 384

Florentine Codex VIII, 34

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 78r

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

tzitzimitl

“Stellar demon [costume]”; a general term for the battle suit consisting of an encasing outfit with a sacrificial slit over the chest area and a head-encasing helmet in the form of a skeletal monster; it was made in several color varieties, but not all of them are attested with their Nahuatl names; one of them was a red version illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 5v) and the Codex Mendoza (fol. 30r).

xacalli

“Straw hut [insignia]”; a back device in the form of a house or hut covered with feathers and placed on a carrying frame; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 77v

xiloxochi­ patzactli

“Young maize flower compressed [insignia]”; the exact form of this insignia is uncertain; it is described as shaped like the young maize flower crest with quetzal feathers imitating leaves and decorated with golden flint knives, but its name suggests it belonged to a broader patzactli category; war insignia of rulers and nobles.

Florentine Codex VIII, 35; Sahagún 1997b, 462

xiuhananacaztli

“Blue water ears [insignia]”; a blue version of the ananacaztli insignia or a synonymous term because the ananacaztli pictured in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 75r) is partly blue; it was a headgear decorated with cotinga feathers and streams of gold; war insignia of rulers and nobles; probably illustrated in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 106r).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 68r

xiuhcoyotl

“Turquoise coyote [insignia]”; a blue version of the Primeros Memoencasing coyote outfit, covered with cotinga feathers and riales, fols. 68r, decorated with a quetzal-feather crest; war insignia of 75r rulers and nobles; pictured in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 75r); a green coyote costume appears in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 60).

xiuhtezcatl

“Turquoise mirror”; war insignia mentioned by Tezozomoc in the description of the people from the coast of Oaxaca; probably a back device.

Tezozomoc 2001, 334 continued on next page

421

422

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

xiuhtoto­ tzitzimitl

Matrícula de “Starry demon of cotinga feathers [insignia]”; a blue version of the tzitzimitl battle costume; however, the glossed Tributos, fols. 4r costume is green rather than turquoise blue (Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 4r); another green example is painted on folio 4v of the Matrícula de Tributos, while blue versions are illustrated on folios 5v, 7r, 11r and in the Codex Mendoza (fols. 21v, 24v, 26, 28r, 33r, 41r); curiously enough, the xoxouhqui color is attributed by another gloss on the same folio of the Matrícula to an identically painted green version of the Huastec suit (xoxouhqui cuextecatl, fol. 4r), so it is possible that terms xiuhtototl and xoxouhqui were used as synonyms; on the other hand, the xoxouhqui tzitzimitl, apparently a blue-green version of this costume, is mentioned in the Florentine Codex (VIII, 34), and blue varieties in the Matrícula are distinct enough from two images of green tzitzimitl outfits.

xochiquetzalpapalotl

“Flowery quetzal butterfly [insignia]”; a war insignia probably associated with the goddess Xochiquetzal; made of precious feathers and with horns of gold and quetzal feathers; war insignia of rulers and nobles.

xolopapalotl

“Dark-yellow parrot [feather] butterfly [insignia]”; a dark- Primeros Memoyellow version of the butterfly insignia carried on a back riales, fols. 68r, frame; in the Primeros Memoriales this insignia is pictured 74v green with a yellow contour and is topped by a quetzalfeather tuft; war insignia of rulers and nobles.

xopilli

“Toe [insignia]”; a back device recognized by its elongated droplet-like shape topped by a feather crest, figuring prominently in Mexica tribute lists and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala; manufactured in yellow, green, and red varieties, in tribute lists it appears together with a corresponding body suit; insignia of high-ranking warrriors; tribute item; in the Matrícula de Tributos the color of this device matches a corresponding outfit (yellow fol. 3r; green fol. 4r; red fol. 3v); in the Codex Mendoza, however, the same device consisting of yellow, green, and red parts and topped by a quetzal-feather crest is matched with several colors of body suits (red, fol. 23v; blue fol. 25r; green fols. 20v, 22r, 64r); Ixtlilxochitl mentions the term matlaxopilli (“net toe [insignia]”) captured from the Mexica in the battle of Otumba; it is also depicted in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 25, 28, 64, 80) and the Mapa de Popotla.

Florentine Codex VIII, 34; Sahagún 1997b, 461

Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 4r

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.8.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

xoxouhqui cuextecatl

“Green-blue Huastec [costume]”; a green-blue version of the Huastec battle suit covered with the “hawk scratches” pattern and accompanied by a conical cap; gloss in the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 4r) refers to a green-painted version, but probably also blue-painted Huastec suits fell within this category; tribute item; one of the gifts presented to Ahuitzotl in the ceremony celebrating his victory; a blue version is pictured in the Matrícula de Tributos (fols. 6r, 6v, 8v, 11r) and Codex Mendoza (fols. 20r, 22r, 24v, 25r, 28r, 31r, 34r, 40r, 44r), whereas a green version appears in the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 4r) and Codex Mendoza (fol. 32r); a blue Huastec suit is also illustrated in the Florentine Codex (fol. 34r).

Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 4r, Tezozomoc 2001, 341

xoxouhqui quaxolotl

“Blue-green Xotlotl head [insignia]”; a blue-green version of the back device in an umbrella shape topped by the doglike Xolotl head, reportedly ornamented with quetzal feathers and gold; tribute item; war insignia of rulers and noblemen; the green version of the quaxolotl is depicted in the Matrícula de Tributos (fols. 5r, 7r) and the Codex Mendoza (fols. 23r, 29r, 30r), whereas the blue one is depicted in the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 5v) and the Codex Mendoza (fols. 20r and 30r).

Florentine Codex VIII, 34

xoxouhqui tzitzimitl

“Blue-green starry demon [costume]”; insignia of rulers Florentine Codex and nobles; tribute item; according to the Florentine VIII, 34; Sahagún Codex, it was ornamented with quetzal feathers and gold; 1997b, 462 blue versions are illustrated on Matrícula de Tributos (fols. 5v, 7r, 11r) and the Codex Mendoza (fols. 21v, 24v, 26, 28r, 33r, 41r), whereas the green variety is glossed in the Matrícula (fol. 4r) as xiuhtototzitzimitl; it is thus possible the two terms were synonymous and could refer to both the blue and the green versions of this outfit; an additional confirmation is found in the Spanish version of the work of Sahagún, who describes the xoxouhqui tzitzimitl as made of green feathers.

423

424

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.9. Varieties of hand adornments Nahuatl name chalchiuh­ macuextli

Characteristics

Textual references

“Greenstone bracelet”; lordly attribute; Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56v; precious gift; adornment of other ethnic Florentine Codex VIII, 44; X, groups, such as the Olmeca-Huixtotin, 185, 188 Mixtecs, and Huastecs; possibly illustrated in Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 108r) and Tovar Manuscript (fol. 109).

coztic teocuitla- “Golden bracelet”; although the descripmatemecatl tion by Tezozomoc suggests it was a wide band, the term itself implies a bracelet made of beads on a cord; adornment of rulers, e.g., used in dance; precious gift; the same as the teocuitlamatemecatl.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fols. 52, 53; Florentine Codex VIII, 27, 29–30; XII, 49; Tezozomoc 2001, 382; Torquemada 1977, IV: 329–30

machoncotl

“Armband”; bracelet for the upper arm with sprays of precious feathers; associated with high-ranking warriors in pre-Hispanic monuments and colonial sources; reportedly attributes of warriors from Quauhtenanco gained by the Aztec pochteca and among those brought from Tabasco and Tehuantepec.

Florentine Codex IX, 3, 5, 92, 96; XII, 49; Tezozomoc 2001, 170, 173

macuextli

“Bracelet”; a general term referring to both precious and less costly, more commonly worn bracelets; lordly adornment.

Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 34; Florentine Codex IV, 88, 133; VIII, 56; IX, 80; X, 61, 91,165, 168, 176, XI, 223, 229, 233; XII, 53

macuextli quetzaliztli

“Emerald bracelet”; lordly attribute.

Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 38

matemecatl

“Bracelet”; a general term; although descriptions provided by Tezozomoc (2001,160, 219, 283) suggest that this item could be made of leather, the term itself, temecatl (“stone cord”), implies beads specifically, as possibly opposed to other types of bracelets; lordly attribute.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 65r; Florentine Codex VI, 14, 19, 44, 57, 72; X, 185; Tezozomoc 2001, 160, 219, 248, 283, 305

matlapilolli

“Hand pendant”; a kind of hand adornment mentioned as one of the gifts for Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in his coronation ceremony.

Tezozomoc 2001, 383

matzopetztli

A general term for bracelet or wristband; it could be decorated with greenstones or turquoise; royal adornment.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56v, Florentine Codex VIII, 29, 30, 58; XII, 49; Tezozomoc 2001, 137, 248, 269; Torquemada 1977, IV: 329–30 continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.9.—continued Nahuatl name matzopetztli in cuetlaxtli

Characteristics “Wristband of leather”; dance adornment of rulers; it is possible that the term matzopetztli alone designated wristbands made of leather.

quetzalmachon- “Quetzal-feather armband”; a bracelet for cotl the upper arm with a spray of quetzal feathers; it is also referred to as the quetzalmachoncotl tlaçotlanqui (“finely wrought quetzal-feather armband”); mentioned as a dance adornment of rulers; Seler identified this ornament in the depictions of the mummy of Ahuitzotl and of Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in his coronation ceremony in Durán’s illustrations; he also notes that the ring in which the bunch of feathers is inserted has a conical extension, which suggests that the quetzalmachoncotl must be the same as quetzalmacopilli (Seler 1902–23, II: 542); illustrated also in the Tovar Manuscript (fols. 109, 127, 128) and the Codex Cozcatzin (fols. 13v, 14r).

Textual references Florentine Codex VIII, 27

Florentine Codex VIII, 28, 29

quetzalmacopilli “Quetzal-feather arm conical thing”; an Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r armband with a conical shape on its side and a spray of quetzal feathers; possibly closely related to or identical with the quetzalmachoncotl and quetzalmapancatl; royal dance adornment. quetzalmapancatl “Armband with [a spray of ] quetzal feathers”; mentioned as an adornment of Huitzilopochtli; possibly closely related to or identical with the quetzalmachoncotl and quetzalmacopilli.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 261r

teocuitla­ macuextli

“Golden bracelet”; a general term referring to bracelets or armbands made of or decorated with gold.

Florentine Codex X, 61; XI, 234

teocuitla­ matemecatl

“Golden bracelet”; a general term referring to bracelets made of or decorated with gold, possibly of beads; lordly attribute; dance adornment of rulers; precious gift; synonymous with coztic teocuitlamatemecatl.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fols. 52, 53; Florentine Codex II, 69; VIII, 27, 29, 56 ; XII, 48, 92, 125; Tezozomoc 2001, 241, 382, 461

continued on next page

425

426

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.9.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

tlaçomacuextli

“Precious bracelet”; a general term probably referring to the costly versions of macuextli; precious gift of the ruler of Tenochtitlan to foreign lords.

Florentine Codex II, 191

xiuhmacopilli

“Turquoise arm conical thing”; an armband with a conical shape on its side, decorated with turquoise.

Florentine Codex VIII, 28

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.10. Varieties of shields (chimalli) Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

chimalli teocuitla­ tica itixapo teocuitla­ papalotl

“Shield ornamented with gold, perforated in the center and with a golden butterfly”; mentioned among the tlahuiztli worn by rulers and nobles; possibly illustrated in the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (fol. 8r).

Florentine Codex VIII, 34

chimalli teocuitlatl in tlatzotzontli imanahuayo tlaçoihuitl tentlapilollo

“Shield covered with beaten gold and with a hanging border of precious feathers [?]”; war costume of rulers; part of the outfit associated with Xipe Totec.

Florentine Codex VIII, 33

chimalxopilli

“Shield with a toe [design]”; an attribute of the god Macuil­ xochitl; possibly illustrated in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fol. 106r) as worn by Neçahualcoyotl because his shield is decorated with a shape evoking the xopilli back device.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 265v

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 79v

citlalo chimalli “Starry shield”; covered with crow feathers and with stars made of white feathers; insignia of high-ranking warriors; in addition to the image in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 79v), probably illustrated in the Codex Xolotl (fol. 7). cuexyo chimalli

“Huastec shield”; one of the most popular shields, in its basic version decorated with four lunar yacametztli nose ornaments, the motif linked to the gods of pulque and the Huastec region (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 175); numerous examples illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos, the Codex Mendoza, the Florentine Codex, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Códice en Cruz, the work of Durán, the Códice de Huichapan, the Mapa de Popotla, and other native manuscripts; the Huastec shield was manufactured in several variants (Anawalt 1992; Berdan and Anawalt 1997); with curling waves and circles symbolizing water that accompany the four yacameztli crescents (e.g., Codex Telleriano Remensis, fol. 39v, Códice de la Cueva, Códice de Huamantla, Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 3); with “hawk scratches” identical to those on the Huastec outfit (cuextecatl ) and a triangular shield (e.g., Florentine Codex VIII, fol. 34r; Codex Telleriano-Remensis, fols. 37r, 37v, 39r, 42r, 43r; Codex Mendoza, fols. 19r, 64r; Códice de Xicotepec, fol. 15); the version with vertically placed “hawk scratches” (e.g., Matrícula de Tributos, fols. 4r, 8v, 9r; Codex Mendoza, fols. 20v, 25r, 34r, 37r, 64r); remaining, apparently much-lesscommon variants include a shield with a black volute design with white spots (e.g., Codex Mendoza, fol. 65r), a shield with two circles placed on a central band and two crescents above and below it (e.g., Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fol. 46), and a shield with centrally placed crescent and horizontal “hawk scratches” to the sides (e.g., Lienzo de Tlaxcala, fols. 46, 47). continued on next page

427

428

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.10.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

ihuitençouhqui chimalli

“Shield with an extended feather border”; it is also referred to and pictured as a black shield with a central ring and white dots around it, and long feather tufts decorating the border; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 80r

ihuiteteyo chimalli

“Shield with feather borders”; this shield is pictured in the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 80r) as decorated with several feather balls spaced around a central one; thus, the term probably did not refer to the design of the interior of the shield; it is probable that the shield variety with the pattern of several feather balls was known as the tehuehuelli chimalli.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 80r, 262r

ixcoliuhqui chimalli

“Shield with the curved eye [design]”; it is pictured (Primeros Memoriales, fol. 79v) as a green shield with a red curving shape with an eye on it and a decorative, hanging feathered border; insignia of rulers, nobles, and highranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 79v; Tezozomoc 2001, 77

macpalo chimalli

“Shield with the palm of a hand [design]”; a shield decorated with the motif of a palm of a hand; insignia of high-ranking warriors; Seler noted that a similar hand, though containing also an arm, is carried by the Tenochca ruler Axayacatl as part of his Xipe Totec battle costume in the Codex Cozcatzin (fols. 13v, 14r; Seler 1902–23, II: 404,579); also pictured in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 43).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 80r

ocelotetepoyo chimalli

“Shield with the jaguar leg or claw [design]”; a shield pictured with a feline foot on a red background and a decorative, hanging feathered border; insignia of nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 75v

poztequi chimalli

“Cleft shield”; a shield with one-half covered with yellow parrot feathers, the other with quetzal feathers and a feather border; possibly depicted in the Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 58r); insignia of rulers and nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 68r

quauhtetepoyo “Shield with the eagle foot [design]”; a shield ornamented Primeros Memochimalli with eagle feathers and with the design of an eagle’s foot riales, fols. 68r, with claws shown upright; Seler (1902–23, II: 554–55) 75v noted that this shield occurs in tribute lists exclusively with the butterfly back device; according to him it was closely related to the quauhpachiuhqui/quappachiuhqui chimalli, a shield with the imprint of the eagle’s foot associated with female goddesses Chantico, Cihuacoatl, Coatlicue, and Tzapotlan tenan; tribute item; insignia of rulers and nobles; illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos (fols. 3r, 3v), the Codex Mendoza (fols. 20v, 22r, 23v, 65r), and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 47). continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.10.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

quetzalcuexyo chimalli

“Huastec quetzal-feather shield”; a costly version of the Huastec shield, ornamented with quetzal feathers, bearing typical crescent motifs, and decorated with a hanging feathered border; insignia of rulers and nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72r

quetzalpoztequi chimalli

“Cleft quetzal-feather shield”; a costly version of a bicolored shield, decorated with quetzal feathers; insignia of nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 75v

quetzalxicacoli- “Quetzal feather shield with the step-fret [design]”; a costly uhqui chimalli version of the shield decorated with the step-fret motifs, ornamented with quetzal feathers; insignia of rulers and nobles; adornment of the god Yacateuctli; mentioned as one of the insignia exhibited after the military victory of the ruler of Tenochtitlan.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72r; Florentine Codex I, 44; Tezozomoc 2001, 341

tehuehuelli chimalli

Morphology unclear, perhaps from tetl (“rock”) and Primeros Memohuehue­lli (possibly “something destroyed or torn down”); riales, fol. 261r; a shield decorated with down balls arranged in a quincunx Florentine Codex pattern, a design linked to Huitzilopochtli; it seems to XII, 52; Chimalhave had a special importance for the Mexica; its symbolic pahin 2003b, 104, dimension is also confirmed by its frequent appearance as 106 part of the Mexica symbol of war and conquest, combining a war club or a spear-thrower with a shield; Seler (1902–23, II: 428) associated it with the Centzonhuitznahua, enemies defeated by Huitzilopochtli; abundantly illustrated in the Codex Mendoza and present in numerous pictorial manuscripts, including the Codex Telleriano-Remensis (fols. 27r, 29r, 33v, 36v, 37r, 37v, 42v), the Codex Xolotl, the Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 57v), the Códice en Cruz, the Códice de Tlatelolco, the Códice de Huamantla, the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 1, and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 32, 37, 54, 76, 79).

tençacanecuilo “Shield with the curved labret [design]”; a shield with a chimalli motif of a curved labret, pictured as a white element on a dark background (Primeros Memoriales, fol. 80r); insignia of high-ranking warriors; illustrated also in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 50).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 80r

tenxaxacalo chimalli

Primeros Memoriales, fol.73r

“Shield with the thick lips [design]”; a shield bearing the design of a stylized face with thick lips; insignia of highranking warriors; Seler (1902–23, II: 579–80) pointed out its similarity to the design of the back device chimallahuiztli; in addition to the glossed image in the Primeros Memoriales, it is illustrated in the Florentine Codex (VIII, fol. 34r), the Códice de Huichapan (fol. 62), the Códice de Huamantla, and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 40).

continued on next page

429

430

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.10.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

teocuitlachimalli

“Golden shield”; royal attribute.

Codex Cozcatzin, fol.17r

teocuitlaanahuacayo chimalli

“Golden shield in the Anahuac style”; it is mentioned as the Florentine Codex IX, 69; Chimalshield of the god Xipe Totec and as part of the Xipe outfit of Mexica rulers; Seler identified it with the shield pictured pahin 1997a, II, in the so-called Chimalli Stone and with the design divided 227–28; 2003a, 146; 2003b, 60 into three fields, one-half or one-third bearing red and white circles or rings running around the entire diameter of the shield, while the two remaining sections show a jaguar skin and a water sign (Seler 1902–23, II: 598); Xipe was called, by the Aztecs, Anahuac iteouh (“the god of Anahuac”), so the shield in the style of Anahuac could be understood as his attribute; Xipe was frequently associated with shields decorated with a disk in the center, e.g., the teocuitlaxapochimalli (“shield with a golden disk”); the Primeros Memoriales also pictures the tlauhtehuilacachiuhqui chimalli (“the shield with a red circle”) as his insignia (Primeros Memoriales, fol. 263r); the tripartite shields are pictured as part of the Xipe attributes in the Chimalli Stone, the Codex Tudela (fol. 12r), the Codex Vaticanus A (fol. 85v), and the Códice en Cruz.

teocuitlateteyo “Shield with the golden stones [design]”; a shield with five chimalli “golden” circles in the quincunx pattern, made of yellow parrot feathers on a red background, decorated with a hanging border of feathers; insignia of rulers and nobles.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 75v

teocuitla­ xapochimalli

“Shield with a golden disk”; according to the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68r), it was covered with precious feathers, with a gold disk in the center and a hanging border of feathers; attribute of the goddess Teteoinann; insignia of rulers, nobles, and high-ranking warriors; its design is similar to that carried by Xipe Totec in Durán’s illustrations (Berdan and Anawalt 1997, 213), but Xipe’s disk is usually red (tlauhtehuilacachiuhqui chimalli; Primeros Memoriales, fol. 263r); possibly illustrated in the Codex TellerianoRemensis (fol. 43r).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72v, 263r

tepachiuhqui chimalli

“Flattened shield”; according to the description contained in the Primeros Memoriales, it was covered with feathers and beaten copper and had a border of feathers around the edge; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 68v

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.10.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

texoxapochimalli

“Shield with a blue disk”; pictured as a white shield with a blue central disk and a streamer hanging from it; insignia of high-ranking warriors; a related shield, with a green circle, is illustrated in the Codex Mendoza (fol. 67r).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 80r

tlaahuitectli chimalli

“Whitewashed shield” or “whitened shield”; reportedly a shield covered with chalk; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68v, 80r

tlapalxapochimalli

“Shield with a red disk”; according to the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 68v), it was covered with yellow parrot feathers and had a red disk in the center; insignia of high-ranking warriors; possibly related to Xipe Totec’s shield with a red-disk design called tlauhtehuilacachiuhqui chimalli (Primeros Memoriales, fol. 263r); pictured in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 45); a shield with a red circle on a blue background is pictured in the Codex Telleriano-Remensis (fol. 43r).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 68v

tliltehuilacachi- “Shield with a black disk”; gift to valiant warriors; Tezozouhqui chimalli moc lists it as the tliltecuilacachiuhqui, but it should probably be reconstructed as the tliltehuilacachiuhqui.

Tezozomoc 2001, 417

tlilxapochimalli “Shield with a black disk”; insignia of high-ranking warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 73r

tozehuatl chimalli

“Shield of yellow parrot skins”; gift of a ruler to brave warriors.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74

tozmiquizyo chimalli

“Shield with the yellow parrot-feather death [design]”; a shield covered with yellow feathers and decorated with an image of a skull in the middle made of cotinga feathers; war insignia of rulers and nobles; mentioned as one of the items given to Ahuitzotl in the ceremony celebrating his victory; Seler (1902–23, II: 553) identified it in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fol. 51).

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 68r, 72v; Tezozomoc 2001, 341

xicacoliuhqui chimalli

“Shield with the step-fret [design]”; one of the most commonly used shields, frequently given in tribute; illustrated abundantly in the Matrícula de Tributos, the Codex Mendoza, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, and other pictorial manuscripts.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 262r

continued on next page

431

432

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.10.—continued Nahuatl name xiuhchimalli

Characteristics “Turquoise shield”; a shield covered with a mosaic of turquoise according to the Primeros Memoriales (fol. 261r) and the Florentine Codex (XII, 11); insignia of the Toltecs; attribute of Painal, a manifestation of Huitzilopochtli and of Xiuhteuctli; royal insignia; one of the precious items received by the pochteca in Anahuac and given to Ahuitzotl; attributes of the people from the coast of Oaxaca; probably conceived as part of the “turquoise dress” of Mexica rulers.

Textual references Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 104; Primeros Memoriales, fol. 261r; Florentine Codex I, 3; III, 22; IX, 3, 5, 18; Codex Aubin, fol. 22r; Tezozomoc 2001, 334; Codex Cozcatzin, fol. 14r

xiuhtotoehuatl “Shield of cotinga skin”; gift of the ruler of Tenochtitlan to chimalli brave warriors.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74

xiuhtototica chimalli

Florentine Codex VIII, 33, 34; Sahagún 1997b, 461

“Shield with cotinga feathers”; insignia of rulers and nobles; part of the royal war costume of a “jaguar Xipe Totec” (ocelototec); probably identical to the xiuhtototl chimalli.

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.11. Varieties of loincloths (maxtlatl) in written sources Nahuatl name

Characteristics

acaihuitemalacayo maxtlatl

“Loincloth with feathered disks at the ends” Florentine Codex VIII, 25 or “narrow loincloth with feathered disks”; presumably aca is for yaca, for omission of initial y was frequent; adornment of rulers and noblemen.

acapapaloyo maxtlatl

“Loincloth with the butterfly [design] at the ends” or “narrow loincloth with the butterfly [design]”; presumably aca is for yaca, for omission of initial y was frequent; adornment of rulers and nobles.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

acatlamachmoyahuac maxtlatl

“Loincloth with radiating embroidery at the ends” or “narrow loincloth with radiating embroidery”; presumably aca is for yaca, for omission of initial y was frequent; adornment of rulers and nobles.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

amamaxtlatl

Primeros Memoriales, fols. “Paper loincloth”; worn by deities, their impersonators, and priests, but also by rul- 263v–265r; Florentine Codex I, 36, 37, 46, 79; II, 73, 75, 112, ers in their ceremonial dance during the feast of Izcalli; their paper loincloths were 113, 164; VII, 5, 47; X, 188; painted with black stripes (“acaxilqui inic XII, 52 tlacuilolli, auh çan tlilli inic tlacuilolli”); ritual adornment; adornment of the Olmeca, Huixtotin, and Mixteca.

ayacaichcayo maxtlatl

“Loincloth with cotton at the ends (?)”; gift Florentine Codex VIII, 74 to brave warriors.

çalitli maxtlatl

“Glued loincloth (?)”; dance adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56v

canahuac maxtlatl

“Thin loincloth”; a general term referring to tribute items.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 65

cempoalçotl acecacozcayo

“Loincloth made of twenty lengths, with the wind jewel [design] at the ends”; adornment of rulers and nobles.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

centzonmaxtlatl “Loincloth striped in many colors”; adorntlatlatlapalpohualli/ ment of rulers and nobles. tlatlapalli

Florentine Codex VIII, 25, 76

colotlalpilmaxtlatl

“Loincloth with scorpion knots” or “loincloth with the tied/knotted scorpion [design]”; an item gained by the pochteca.

Florentine Codex IX, 4

coyoichcamaxtlatl quauhtzontecoyo

“Coyote-colored cotton loincloth, decorated with an eagle head” or “coyote-fur loincloth decorated wth an eagle head”; adornment of rulers and nobles; gift.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25; IX, 47

continued on next page

433

434

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.11.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

ihuitemalacayo maxtlatl

“Loincloth with the disk [design] in feathers”; dance adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56v

iztac maxtlatl

“White loincloth”; a common variety of cotton loincloth; often given in tribute and illustrated in pictorial manuscripts.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56v, 65r; Florentine Codex IX, 47

nochpalmaxtlatl

“Carmine-colored loincloth”; used by rulers in dance; gifts to brave warriors; item assigned to the pochteca by Ahuitzotl.

Primeros Memoriales fol. 56v; Florentine Codex VIII, 72, 76; IX, 5

nochpalmaxtlatl ocelotzontecoyo

“Carmine-colored loincloth with the jaguar Florentine Codex VIII, 25 head [design]”; adornment of rulers and nobles.

nochpalmaxtlatl yacecacozcayo

“Carmine-colored loincloth with the wind jewel [design] at the ends”; gifts to the leaders of the youth.

Florentine Codex VIII, 87

ocelomaxtlatl

“Loincloth with the jaguar [design]”; dance adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56v

oceloxicalcoliuhqui “Loincloth with the jaguar step-fret maxtlatl [design]”; adornment of rulers and nobles.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

poztequi maxtlatl

“Cleft loincloth”; dance adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56v

quappachmaxtlatl

“Tawny loincloth”; as an adornment of rulers and noblemen it was also decorated with embroidered ends; gifts.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25; IX, 47

quauhmaxtlatl

“Eagle loincloth”; adornment of tiacauhrank warriors.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 72v, 73r

quauhtetepoyo maxtlatl

“Loincloth with the eagle’s foot [design]”; adornment of rulers and nobles; the same design is found on capes, sandals, and shields.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

quaxoxoacatlamachyo maxtlatl

“Loincloth with a bare/shining head [design] embroidered at the ends (?)”; meaning uncertain; adornment of rulers and nobles.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

quayahualiuhqui maxtlatl

“Loincloth with a round head [design]”; one of the gifts redistributed by Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin during his coronation ceremony.

Tezozomoc 2001, 384

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.11.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

teocuitlamaxtlatl

“Golden loincloth”; one of the precious gifts given by the ruler of Tenochtitlan upon his arrival from a victorious military campaign.

Tezozomoc 2001, 219

te[m?]poçoqui maxtlatl

“Loincloth with a filigree border” or “loincloth with a pierced border (?)” (Seler 1902–23, II: 519); dance adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56v

tianquizyo maxtlatl “Loincloth with the market place [design]”; Florentine Codex VIII, 25 adornment of rulers and nobles. tlalpilmaxtlatl

“Knotted/tied loincloth”; gift.

Florentine Codex IX, 47

tlamachyo maxtlatl “Embroidered loincloth”; trade item; pre/tlamachmaxtlatl cious gift.

Florentine Codex IX, 2; Tezozomoc 2001, 168

tlatocamaxtlatl

“Royal loincloth”; a general term; precious reward and gift; trade good.

Florentine Codex VIII, 83; IX, 8 17

tlaçomaxtlatl

“Precious loincloth”; a general term referring to high-quality, ornamented loincloths.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 65r, 72r, 72v, 73r, 262r; Florentine Codex I, 44; VIII, 29, 44, 56, 58, 65, 67, 74, 88; IX, 7, 45, 46, 47, 55

tlepiazyo maxtlatl

“Loincloth with a torch-holder [design]”; dance adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56v

tzicoliuhqui maxtlatl

“Loincloth with a twisted [design]”; reward to brave warriors.

Florentine Codex VIII, 74

tzohuaçalmaxtlatl

“Loincloth with loops/knots”; royal adornment; precious gift.

Tezozomoc 2001, 170, 384

xiuhtezcayo maxtlatl

“Loincloth with the turquoise [mosaic] mirror [design]”; adornment of rulers and nobles.

Florentine Codex VIII, 25

yacahualiuhqui maxtlatl

“Loincloth with concave/hollowed ends” (?); meaning uncertain; royal adornment.

Tezozomoc 2001, 170

yacahuiyac maxtlatl “Loincloth with long ends”; a general term referring to the form of a loincloth; precious gift.

Florentine Codex VIII, 76; IX, 47, 51, 61

yacatlamachyo maxtlatl

“Loincloth with embroidered ends”; dance adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56v

yaocamaxaliuhqui maxtlatl

“Loincloth with a forked war mouth [?]”; meaning unclear, possibly given in a wrong way; royal adornment.

Tezozomoc 2001, 170

yopimaxtlatl

“Loincloth of the Yopes”; precious gift.

Tezozomoc 2001, 384

435

436

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.12. Varieties of leg ornaments in written sources Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

cotzehuatl

“Calf skin”; leg band, a general term.

Florentine Codex, VI, 19, 44, 57, 72; VIII, 29; X, 96, 185; XII, 92; Torquemada 1977, IV: 329–330

coyoltecuecuextli

“Anklet or wrist band of beaten [copper] with bells”; product of a copper caster.

Florentine Codex X, 87

icxipepetlactli

“Shiny thing for the feet”; part of the war attire of Ahuitzotl.

Tezozomoc 2001, 333

icxitecuecuextli

“Anklet of beaten [metal]”; lordly adornment, worn by Tiçoc and Ahuitzotl during their coronation ceremonies; possibly synonymous with the tecuecuextli.

Tezozomoc 2001, 248

tecuecuextli

“Anklet or wrist band of beaten [metal]”; lordly adornment; gift presented to Axayacatl upon his return from the war campaign; possibly synonymous with icxitecuecuextli.

Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 136;Tezozomoc 2001, 219

teocuitlacotzehuatl “Golden calf-skin”; leg-band ornamented with gold; lordly attribute; dance adornment of rulers; royal costume used in the coronation; reward to brave warriors; adornment of noble high-ranking warriors; prestigious gift; precious adornment seized by Spaniards; illustrated in the Codex Ixtlilxochitl (fols. 105r, 106r, 108r), the Codex Azcatitlan, and the Tovar Manuscript (fol. 117).

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 52; Primeros Memoriales, fols. 56r, 65r; Florentine Codex VIII, 28; XII, 48, 92, 125; Tezozomoc 2001, 305; Codex Cozcatzin, fol. 17r

teocuitlaicxitecuecuextli

“Anklet of beaten gold”; lordly attribute; precious adornment seized by Spaniards.

Florentine Codex XII, 49

tzicoyolli

“. . . bells (?)”; probably a leg ornament with bells; one of the gifts for Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin in his coronation ceremony.

Tezozomoc 2001, 383

xopepetlactli

“Gleaming anklet”; dance adornment of rulers; probably synonymous with icxipepetlactli; possibly the same as yoxipepetlactli reported by Tezozomoc.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r; Tezozomoc 2001, 299–300 (?)

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.13. Varieties of sandals (cactli) in written sources Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

cacamoliuhqui cactli

“Sandals with the quilted design”; adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60v

canahuac catli

“Thin sandals”; adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60v

chimalcozcayo cactli

“Sandals with the shield jewel [design]”; product of a sandal seller.

Florentine Codex X, 74

cuetlachcactli

“Wolf-skin sandals”; adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60v

cuetlaxcactli

“Leather sandals”; adornment of rulers, product of a sandal seller.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60v; Florentine Codex X, 74

cuetlaxcactli tlamachyo

“Leather sandals with embroidery”; dance adornment of rulers.

Florentine Codex VIII, 28

ecacozcayo cactli

“Sandals with the wind jewel [design]”; product of a sandal seller.

Florentine Codex X, 74

ichcactli

“Maguey-fiber sandals”; product of a sandal seller.

Florentine Codex X, 74

icçotl cactli

“Sandals of palm leaves”; costume item of the Teochichimeca.

Florentine Codex X, 172

ihuiyo cactli

“Feathered sandals”; product of a sandal seller.

Florentine Codex X, 74

itzcactli

“Obsidian sandals”; sandals decorated with Primeros Memoriales, fols. the design of obsidian serpents (tlaitzcoai- 259r, 260v, 261r; Florentine cuilolli; Florentine Codex IX, 79); attribute Codex II, 70, 103, 210, 215; of Tezcatlipoca and other deities, at least IX, 60, 79; XII, 11, 15 some of them being manifestations of this god; worn by impersonators of Tezcatlipoca; it is not certain whether they were also used by members of the nobility.

iztac cactli

“White sandals”; most commonly depicted Primeros Memoriales, fols. in pictorial sources; attributes of several 261v, 262r, 264v, 265r, 265v, gods, including Quetzalcoatl, Otonteuctli, 266r; Florentine Codex X, 74 and Cihuacoatl; product of a sandal seller.

nacazminqui cactli

“Diagonally divided sandals” or “sandals with punched sides”; adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60v

nochpalcactli

“Carmine-colored sandals”; sandals of the goddess Xilonen; it is not certain whether this variety was also used by members of the nobility.

Florentine Codex II, 103

ocelocactli

“Jaguar-skin sandals”; dance adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60v; Florentine Codex VIII, 28 continued on next page

437

438

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.13.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

ocelotetepoyo cactli

“Sandals with the jaguar leg or claw [design]”; product of a sandal seller.

Florentine Codex X, 74

olcactli

“Rubber sandals”; adornment of child victims for the rain god Tlaloc; attributes linked to the rain god; costume item of the Olmeca, Huixtotin, and Mixteca peoples.

Florentine Codex II, 44; VI, 39; X, 188

poçolcactli

“Foam sandals”; sandals covered with white down; attribute of numerous deities, especially those linked to fertility and the consumption of pulque; priestly attributes; worn in Tenochtitlan by an elected ruler and lords accompanying him during fasting rituals.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 259r, 260r, 260v; Florentine Codex II, 92, 209, 213, 214; VIII, 62, 63, 64; IX 63, 80, 84; XII, 12

popolcactli

Meaning uncertain, perhaps “sandals from afar” (Sahagún 1997a, 226, note 22) or “deteriorated sandals” (from the root popol-); adornment of rulers.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60v

quappachtli cactli

“Tawny sandals”; product of a sandal seller.

Florentine Codex X, 74

quauhtetepoyo cactli

“Sandals with the eagle foot [design]”; product of a sandal seller.

Florentine Codex X, 74

tecpilcactli

“Lordly sandals”; a general term; adornment of rulers and gods, including Huitzilopochtli, Chicomecoatl, and Yacateuctli.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 60v, 61r, 72r, 72v, 261r, 262r

texotli cactli

“Blue sandals”; product of a sandal seller.

Florentine Codex X, 74

tlaçocactli

“Precious sandals”; a general term for costly or high-quality sandals.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 72r, 73r; Florentine Codex IX, 46

tlacuilolli cactli

“Sandals with painted designs”; adornment of rulers and gods.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 61r

tlamachcactli

“Embroidered sandals”; dance adornment of rulers; product of a sandal seller.

Florentine Codex X, 74

tlalpiloniyo cactli

“Sandals with streamers”; product of a sandal seller.

Florentine Codex X, 74

tlaxiuhicuilolli cactli

“Blue-painted sandals”; described as sandals painted light blue with light blue thongs; precious garment of the Toltecs; perhaps synonymous with xiuhcactli.

Florentine Codex X, 169

continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.13.—continued Nahuatl name

Characteristics

Textual references

tliltic cactli

“Black sandals”; product of a sandal seller.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60v; Florentine Codex X, 74

tochomyo cactli

“Rabbit fur sandals”; dance adornment of rulers; product of a sandal seller.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 60v; Florentine Codex X, 74

xiuhcactli

“Turquoise [blue] sandals”; adornment of rulers; perhaps synonymous with tlaxiuhicuilolli cactli.

Anales de Tlatelolco 1999, 38; Tezozomoc 2001, 269

xoxouhqui cactli

“Blue-green sandals”; product of a sandal seller.

Florentine Codex X, 74

439

440

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.14. Varieties of female shifts (huipilli) in written sources Term

Characteristics

Textual references

acollamachyo huipilli

“Shoulder-embroidered shift”; adornment of noblewomen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r

cacallo huipilli

“Shift with a shell [design]”; adornment of women during the lordly feast of Tecuilhuitl.

Florentine Codex II, 99

cacaloxochyo huipilli “Shift with the plumeria flower [design]”; adornment of noblewomen; possibly illustrated in the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (fols. 16r, 17v).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r

cacamoliuhqui huipilli

“Quilted shift”; tribute item; illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 14r) and the Códice de Huamantla.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64

coyoichcayo huipilli

“Coyote-colored cotton shift” or “shift of coyote fur”; adornment of noblewomen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47

ehuahuipilli

“Leather shift” or “animal-hide shift”; adornment Florentine Codex X, 172 of the wife of a ruler of the Teochichimeca; illustrated as the adornment of “Chichimec” women in pictorial manuscripts, including the Mapa Tlotzin, the Codex Xolotl, and the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 2.

huehuei tlamachtli “Cut reed [design] shift with large embroiitozqui toltzayanqui dered figures at the throat”; adornment of huipilli noblewomen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47

huitztecolcuitlalpic huipilli

“Brazilwood dye-colored shift gathered at the waist”; adornment of noblewomen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47

ipiloyo huipilli

“Shift with pendants (?)”; meaning uncertain; adornment of noblewomen; probably identical to the huipilli piloyo mentioned as an adornment of three goddesses (Primeros Memoriales, fols. 263r, 264r, 266r).

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r

ixquauhcallo huipilli “Shift with the eagle head in a setting”; precious gift to women.

Florentine Codex IX, 47

ixquauhcallo poton- “Shift with the eagle head in a setting, decorated Florentine Codex cayo huipilli with feathers”; adornment of noblewomen; VIII, 47 probably the same as or a variant of the ixquauhcallo huipilli. maipiloyo huipilli

“Shift with hand pendants [?]”; meaning uncertain; tribute item.

Tezozomoc 2001, 300

mimichcho huipilli

“Shift with a fish [design]”; adornment of women during the lordly feast of Tecuilhuitl.

Florentine Codex II, 99 continued on next page

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.14.—continued Term pochuipilli

Characteristics “Smoky colored shift”; adornment of noblewomen; adornment of women during the lordly feast of Tecuilhuitl.

Textual references Florentine Codex II, 99; VIII, 47

poto[n]catlaconepa- “Feathered shift with a crossed design in the niuhqui huipilli middle (?)”; adornment of noblewomen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r

potoncapipilcac huipilli

“Shift with feathery pendants/streamers”; precious gift to women.

Florentine Codex IX, 47

potoncayo huipilli

“Feathered shift”; adornment of noblewomen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47

quappachpipilcac huipilli

“Shift with tawny pendants/streamers”; adornment of women during the lordly feast of Tecuilhuitl.

Florentine Codex II, 99

quappachyo huipilli

“Tawny shift”; adornment of noblewomen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r; Florentine Codex VIII, 47

quechnenecuilhuazyo huipilli

“Shift with stamps at the neck”; adornment of noblewomen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47

tenmalinqui huipilli

“Shift with a twisted border”; precious gift to women.

Florentine Codex IX, 47

texicalicuiliuhqui huipilli

“Shift with the painted stone vases [design]”; precious gift to women.

Florentine Codex IX, 47

tlaçohuipilli

“Precious shift”; a general term for high-quality or costly shifts.

Florentine Codex IX, 17, 18, 46

tlamachhuipilli

“Embroidered shift”; trade item; shifts woven by the Otomi women.

Florentine Codex IX, 2, 17; X, 180

tlapaltochomitica huipilli

“Shift with dyed rabbit fur”; adornment of noblewomen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47

xochimoyahuac huipilli

“Shift overspread with flowers”; adornment of noblewomen; adornment of female slaves sacrificed by merchants.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47; IX, 51

xochitenyo huipilli / xoxochitenyo huipilli

“Shift with a border of flowers”; adornment of noblewomen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r; Florentine Codex VIII, 47

xomoihuihuipilli

“Duck-feather shift”; adornment of noblewomen. Primeros Memoriales, fol. 56r; Florentine Codex VIII, 47 continued on next page

441

442

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.14.—continued Term xoxoloyo huipilli

Characteristics

Textual references

“Shift with yellow parrot feathers”; adornment of Florentine Codex VIII, noblewomen; trade item; adornment of female 47; IX, 51; Tezozomoc slaves sacrificed by merchants. 2001, 300

yapalpipilcac huipilli “Shift with dark green/black streamers/pendants”; adornment of women during the lordly feast of Tecuilhuitl.

Florentine Codex II, 99

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.15. Varieties of female skirts (cueitl) in written sources Term

Characteristics

Textual references

cacamoliuhqui cueitl

“Quilted skirt”; adornment of noblewomen; adornment of women during the lordly feast of Tecuilhuitl; tribute item; adornment of Chicomecoatl; depicted in the Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (fols. 3r, 16r, 17v, 24r, 28r, 29r, 30r, 31r, 32r, 33r, 34r), the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (fols. 6, 7), and the Genealogía Zolin.

Anales de Quauhtitlan, fol. 64; Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex II, 65, 99; VIII, 47

chicocueitl

“Skirt with an irregular/twisted design”; in the Matrícula de Tributos, a chicocuetil is depicted as a half-quilted skirt; adornment of noblewomen; trade item; adornment of female slaves sacrificed by merchants; illustrated in the Matrícula de Tributos (fol. 6r) and the Codex Mendoza (fol. 31r).

Matrícula de Tributos, fol. 6r; Florentine Codex VIII, 47; IX, 17, 45, 51; Tezozomoc 2001, 300

coatlaxipehuallo cueitl

“Skirt with the serpent skin [design]”; adornment of noblewomen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47

coyoichcapipilcac cueitl

“Coyote-colored cotton skirt with pendants”; adornment of noblewomen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47

ehuacueitl

“Leather/hide skirt”; costume item of women of the Teochichimeca; pictured as an adornment of Chichimec women in the Codex Xolotl, the Mapa Tlotzin, the Mapa de Quauhtinchan no. 2, and other pictorial manuscripts.

Florentine Codex X, 172

iztac cueitl

“White skirt”; commonly worn adornment of noblewomen; frequently depicted in pictorial manuscripts.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

ilacatziuhqui cueitl “Skirt with the spiral [design]”; adornment of women during the lordly feast of Tecuilhuitl; precious gift to women.

Florentine Codex II, 99; IX, 47

miahuacueitl

“Skirt with the maize flower [design]”; adornment of noblewomen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

ocelocueitl

“Skirt with the jaguar [design]”; adornment of noblewomen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex VIII, 47

quappachpipilcac cueitl

“Skirt with tawny pendants”; adornment of noblewomen.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47

quappachyo cueitl

“Tawny skirt”; adornment of noblewomen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v continued on next page

443

444

A ppendix : D ictionary of I nsignia and A ccouterments

Table A.15.—continued Term tenacazyo cueitl

Characteristics “Skirt with the corner stone [design]”; adornment of noblewomen; probably identical to the tetenacazyo cueitl.

Textual references Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v

Florentine Codex VIII, 47; IX, tetenacazyo/tetena- “Skirt with the corner stone [design]”; 51; Tezozomoc 2001, 300 cazço cueitl adornment of female slaves sacrificed by merchants; probably identical to the tenacazyo cueitl; the term “tetenacacocueitl” mentioned by Tezozomoc as a tribute item from Cuetlaxtlan should be probably identified with the tetenacazyo cueitl. tlaçocueitl

“Precious skirt”; mentioned as a trade good and valuable garment.

Florentine Codex IX, 17, 18, 46

tlaçocueitl tlamachyo tetenacazyo

“Precious embroidered skirt with the corner stone [design]”; trade good.

Florentine Codex IX, 17

tlamachcueitl

“Embroidered skirt”; trade item; costume item of the Otomi and Totonac women.

Florentine Codex VIII, 67; IX, 2, 8; X, 179, 180, 184

tlatzcallotl cueitl

“Shift with a spiral [design] (?)”; adornment of women during the lordly feast of Tecuilhuitl; precious gift to women.

Florentine Codex II, 99; IX, 47

tlilpipitzahuac cueitl

“Skirt with thin, black lines”; adornment of noblewomen; probably identical to the tlilpitzahuac cueitl.

Florentine Codex VIII, 47

tlilpitzahuac cueitl

“Skirt with thin black lines”; adornment of noblewomen; adornment of the cihua­ ipiltin/mocihuaquetzque, deified women (given as tlalpipitzauac); probably identical to the tlilpipitzahuac cueitl.

Primeros Memoriales, fols. 55v, 266r

totolitipetlayo cueitl

“Skirt with the turkey entrail mat [design]” (?); adornment of women during the lordly feast of Tecuilhuitl.

Florentine Codex II, 99

xicacoliuhqui cueitl “Skirt with the step-fret [design]”; adornment of noblewomen.

Primeros Memoriales, fol. 55v; Florentine Codex VIII, 47

yollo cueitl

Florentine Codex II, 99; IX, 47

“Skirt with a heart [design]”; adornment of women during the lordly feast of Tecuilhuitl; precious gift to women.

Abbreviations Used

AGN

Archivo General de la Nación, Mexico

BNAH

Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico

BNF

Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris

CEMCA

Centro Francés de Estudios Mexicanos y Centroamericanos

CIESAS

Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología

FC

Florentine Codex, see: Sahagún 1953–70

INAH

Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia

Molina, Nah. Molina 2001, Vocabulario en lengua mexicana y castellana Molina, Sp.

Molina 2001, Vocabulario en lengua castellana y mexicana

NT

Nahuatl Theater

PM

Primeros Memoriales, see: Sahagún 1993

UNAM

Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico

VBO

Vidas y bienes olvidados, see: Rojas Rabiela et al.

445

References

Aguilera, Carmen. 1983. “Identificación de Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl de Tula.” Estudios de cultura náhuatl 16:165–82. Aguilera, Carmen. 1984. El Códice de Huamantla: Estudio iconográfico, cartográfico e histórico de Carmen Aguilera. Colección Códices y Manuscritos de Tlaxcala, núm. 2. Mexico: Instituto Tlaxcalteca de Cultura. Aguilera, Carmen. 1997. “Of Royal Mantles and Blue Turquoise: The Meaning of the Mexica Emperor’s Mantle.” Latin American Antiquity 8 (1): 3–19. http://dx.doi.org /10.2307/971589. Aguilera, Carmen. 2003. “El penacho de Motecuhzoma.” Arqueología mexicana 11 (64): 76–79. Anales de Juan Bautista. See: Luis Reyes García 2001. Anales de Quauhtitlan. Paléographie: Marc Thouvenot, http://www.sup-infor.com/navigation.htm Anales de Tlatelolco. 1999. Anales de Tlatelolco: Los manuscritos 22 y 23bis de la Bibliothèque de France. Transcription and translation by Susanne Klaus. Markt Schwaben: Verlag Anton Saurwein. Anales de Tula. 1979. Anales de Tula, BNAH Cod.35–9, with the study by Rudolph A. M. van Zantwijk. Graz: Fontes Rerum Mexicarum 1, Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt. Anawalt, Patricia R. 1976. “Xicolli: Godly Jackets of the Aztecs.” Archaeology 29:258–65. DOI: 10.5876_9781607322412.c009

447

448

R eferences

Anawalt, Patricia R. 1979. “Mixtec-Aztec Xicolli: A Comparative Analysis.” In Proceedings of the International Congress of Americanists (42 session, Paris, 1976), vol. 7, 147–60. Paris. Anawalt, Patricia R. 1980. “Costume and Control: Aztec Sumptuary Laws.” Archaeology 33 (1): 33–43. Anawalt, Patricia R. 1981. Indian Clothing before Cortés: Mesoamerican Costumes from the Codices. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Anawalt, Patricia R. 1984. “Memory Clothing: Costumes Associated with Aztec Human Sacrifice.” In Ritual Human Sacrifice in Mesoamerica: A Conference at Dumbarton Oaks, October 13th and 14th, 1979, edited by Elisabeth Hill Boone, 165–93. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Anawalt, Patricia R. 1990. “The Emperor’s Cloak: Aztec Pomp, Toltec Circumstances.” American Antiquity 55 (2): 291–307. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/281648. Anawalt, Patricia R. 1992. “A Comparative Analysis of the Costumes and Accouterments of the Codex Mendoza.” In Codex Mendoza, edited by Frances Berdan and Patricia Anawalt, 1:103–51. Berkeley: University of California Press. Anawalt, Patricia R. 1993. “Riddle of the Emperor’s Cloak: The Design Motif on the Robes of Aztec Rulers May Well Represent a Claim of Political Legitimacy with Roots Deep in the Toltec Past.” Archaeology 46 (3): 30–6. Anawalt, Patricia R. 1996a. “Aztec Knotted and Netted Capes: Colonial Interpretations versus Indigenous Primary Data.” Ancient Mesoamerica 7 (2): 187–206. http://dx.doi .org/10.1017/S0956536100001401. Anders, Ferdinand, Marteen Jansen, and Peter van der Loo. 1994. Códice Cospi. Calendario de pronósticos y ofrendas. Graz and Mexico: Akademische Druck- u.Verlagsanstalt, Fondo de Cultura Económica. Anderson, Arthur J. O., Frances F. Berdan, and James Lockhart. 1976. Beyond the Codices: The Nahua View of Colonial Mexico. Berkeley: University of California Press. Asselbergs, Florine. 2004. Conquered Conquistadors: The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, A Nahua Vision of the Conquest of Guatemala. Leiden: Research School of Asian, African and Amerindian Studies, Leiden University. Asselbergs, Florine. 2007. “A Claim to Rulership: Presentation Strategies in the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2.” In Cave, City, and Eagle’s Nest. An Interpretative Journey through the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2, edited by Davíd Carrasco and Scott Sessions, 121–46. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Aubin, Joseph Marius Alexis. 1885. “Mappe Tlotzin.” In Memoires sur la peinture didactique. Paris. Baird, Ellen Taylor. 1988. “The Artists of Sahagun’s Primeros Memoriales: A Question of Identity.” In The Work of Bernardino de Sahagún, edited by Jorge Klor de Alva, Henry B. Nicholson, and Eloise Quiñones Keber, 211–27.

R eferences

Baird, Ellen Taylor. 1993. The Drawings of Sahagún’s Primeros Memoriales: Structure and Style. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Ballesteros García, Víctor. 2001. “Pinturas de Zempoala, Epazoyucan y Tetliztaca.” In Códices del Estado de Hidalgo, edited by Laura E. Sotelo Santos, Victor. M. Ballesteros García, and Evaristo Luvián Torres, 101–7. Pachuca: Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Hidalgo en coedición con el INAH, Pachuca. Baquedano, Elizabeth. 2005. “El oro azteca y sus conexiones con el poder, la fertilidad agrícola, la guerra y la muerte.” Estudios de cultura náhuatl 36: 259–381. Barlow, Robert. 1945. “La Crónica X: Versiones coloniales de la historia de los Mexica tenochca.” Revista mexicana de estudios antropológicos 7: 65–87. Barlow, Robert. 1949. “Anales de Tula, Hidalgo, 1361–1521.” Tlalocan 3 (I): 2–13. Barlow, Robert. 1961. “El Palimsesto de Veinte Mazorcas.” Revista mexicana de estudios antropológicos XVII:99–110. Barlow, Robert. 1990. “Las joyas de Martín Ocelotl.” In Obras de Robert H. Barlow: Los Mexicas y la Triple Alianza, edited by Jesus Monjarás Ruíz, Elena Limón, and María de la Cruz Paillés H., 3:233–41. Mexico: INAH. Barreto Mark, Carlos. 1986. “El Mapa ¿Coatlán del Río?” In Primer Coloquio de Arqueología y Etnohistoria del Estado de Guerreo, edited by Roberto Cervantes-Delgado, 332–42. Mexico: INAH, Gobierno del Estado de Guerrero. Batalla Rosado, Juan José. 1992. El arte de escribir en Mesoamérica: El Códice Borbónico. Memoria de Licenciatura directed by D. José Luis de Rojas y Gutiérrez de Gandarilla, defended in the Departamento de Antropología y Etnología de América de la Facultad de Geografía e Historia de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 2 vols. Madrid. Batalla Rosado, Juan José. 1994a. “Los tlacuiloque del Códice Borbónico: Una aproximación a su número y estilo.” Journal de la Société des Americanistes 80 (1): 47–72. http://dx.doi .org/10.3406/jsa.1994.1525. Batalla Rosado, Juan José. 1994b. “Teorías sobre el origen Colonial del Códice Borbónico: Una revisión necesaria.” Cuadernos Prehispánicos 15: 5–42. Batalla Rosado, Juan José. 1994c. “Datación del Códice Borbónico a partir del análisis iconográfico de la representación de la sangre.” Revista española de antropología americana 24: 47–74. Batalla Rosado, Juan José. 1997. “El palacio real mexica: Análisis iconográfico y escriturario.” In Códices, caciques y comunidades, Cuadernos de historia latinoamericana, edited by Maarten Jansen and Luis Reyes Garcia, 65–100. Leiden: Asociación de Historiadores Latinoamericanistas Europeas. Batalla Rosado, Juan José. 2002. El Códice Tudela y el Grupo Magliabechiano: La tradición medieval europea de copia de códices. Madrid: América, Colección Thesaurus Americae.

449

450

R eferences

Batalla Rosado, Juan José. 2007. “The Scribes Who Painted the Matrícula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza.” Ancient Mesoamerica 18 (01): 31–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ S0956536107000077. Berdan, Frances F. 1980. Matrícula de Tributos (Códice de Moctezuma). Commentaries. Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt. Berdan, Frances F. 1992. “Glyphic Conventions in the Codex Mendoza.” In The Codex Mendoza, edited by Frances Berdan and Patricia R. Anawalt, 1:93–102. Berkeley: University of California Press. Berdan, Frances F. 1996. “The Tributary Provinces.” In Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances Berdan, et al., 115–35. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Berdan, Frances F. 2006. “The Role of Provincial Elites in the Aztec Empire.” In PreColumbian States and Empires, edited by Christina Elson and R. Alan Covey, 154–65. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Berdan, Frances F. 2007a. “Continuity and Change in Aztec Culture: From Imperial Lords to Royal Subjects.” In Globalization and Change in Fifteen Cultures, edited by George Spindler and Janice Stockard, 1–23. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Berdan, Frances F. 2007b. “En la periferia del imperio: Provincias tributarias aztecas en la frontera imperial.” Revista española de antropologia americana 37 (2): 119–38. Berdan, Frances F. 2008. Ethnic Identity in Nahua Mesoamerica: The View from Archaeology, Art History, Ethnohistory, and Contemporary Ethnography. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Berdan, Frances F., and Patricia R. Anawalt. 1992. The Codex Mendoza. 4 vols. Berkeley: University of California Press. Berdan, Frances F., and Patricia R. Anawalt. 1997. The Essential Codex Mendoza. Berkeley: University of California Press. Berdan, Frances F., and Russel J. Barber. 1988. Spanish Thread on Indian Looms: Mexican Folk Costume. San Bernardino, CA: University Art Gallery. Berdan, Frances F., Richard E. Blanton, Elizabeth H. Boone, Mary G. Hodge, Michael E. Smith, and Emily Umberger, eds. 1996. Aztec Imperial Strategies. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Berdan, Frances F., and Michael E. Smith. 1996. “Imperial Strategies and Core-Periphery Relations.” In Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances Berdan, et al., 209–17. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Berdan, Frances F., and Michael E. Smith. 2003. “The Aztec Empire.” In The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, edited by Michael E. Smith and Frances F. Berdan, 67–72. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.

R eferences

Bernis, Carmen. 1962. Indumentaria española en tiempos de Carlos V. Madrid: Instituto Diego Velazquez del Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas. Berrin, Kathleen, and Esther Pasztory, eds. 1993. Teotihuacan: Art from the City of the Gods. New York: Thames and Hudson. Beyer, Hermann. 1965. “El origen natural del dios mexicano Xiuhtecuhtli: Un ensayo mitológico.” El México antiguo 10 (1): 309–12. Beyer, Hermann. 1969a. “La diadema de los reyes aztecas.” Obras de Hermann Beyer, El México antiguo 11: 406–10. Beyer, Hermann. 1969b. “Sobre el antiguo adorno de plumas mexicano momoyactli.” Obras de Hermann Beyer, El México antiguo 11: 411–20. Bierhorst, John. 1992. History and Mythology of the Aztecs: The Codex Chimalpopoca. Translated from the Nahuatl by John Bierhorst. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Bierhorst, John. 2001. “Codex Chimalpopoca.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Mesoamerican Cultures, edited by David Carrasco, 1:198–200. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Boone, Elizabeth Hill. 1996. “Manuscript Painting in Service of Imperial Ideology.” In Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances Berdan, et al., 181–206. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Boone, Elizabeth Hill. 1998. “Pictorial Documents and Visual Thinking in Postconquest Mexico.” In Native Traditions in the Postconquest World, edited by Elisabeth Hill Boone and Tom Cummins, 149–99. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Boone, Elizabeth Hill. 2000. Stories in Red and Black: Pictorial Histories of the Aztecs and Mixtecs. Austin: University of Texas Press. Boone, Elizabeth Hill. 2003. “A Web of Understanding: Pictorial Codices and the Shared Intellectual Culture of Late Postclassic Mesoamerica.” In The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, edited by Michael E. Smith and Frances F. Berdan, 207–21. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Boone, Elizabeth Hill, and Michael E. Smith. 2003. “Postclassic International Styles and Symbol Sets.” In The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, edited by Michael E. Smith and Frances F. Berdan, 186–93. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Broda, Johanna, David Carrasco, and Eduardo Matos Moctezuma. 1988. The Great Temple of Tenochtitlan: Center and Periphery in the Aztec World. Berkeley: University of California Press. Brumfiel, Elizabeth M. 1987. “Elite and Utilitarian Crafts in the Aztec State.” In Specialization, Exchange and Complex Societies, edited by Elizabeth M. Brumfiel and Timothy K. Earle, 102–18. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bueno Bravo, Isabel. 2007. Guerra en el imperio Azteca: La expansión, ideología y arte. Madrid: Editorial Complutense.

451

452

R eferences

Bueno Bravo, Isabel. 2008. “El trono del águila y del jaguar: Una revisión a la figura de Moctezuma II.” Estudios de cultura náhuatl 39:137–66. Byland, Bruce E., and John M. D. Pohl. 1994. In the Realm of 8 Deer: The Archaeology of the Mixtec Codices. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Cabello Carro, Paz. 2003. “Pervivencias funerarias prehispánicas en época colonial en Trujillo del Perú: Nueva interpretación de los dibujos arqueológicos de Martínez Compañon.” Anales del Museo de América 11:9–56. Calnek, Edward E. 2001. “Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Meso­ american Cultures, edited by David Carrasco, 2:62–63. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Carrasco, Pedro. 1966. “Rango de tecuhtli entre los Nahuas tramontaños.” Tlalocan 5 (2): 133–60. Carrasco, Pedro. 1971. “Social Organization of Ancient Mexico.” In Handbook of Middle American Indians: Archaeology of Northern Mesoamerica, edited by Gordon F. Ekholm and Ignacio Bernal, 10:349–75. Austin: University of Texas Press. Carrasco, Pedro. 1974. “Introducción – la Matrícula de Huexotzinco como fuente sociológica.” In Matrícula de Huexotzinco (Ms. mex. 387 der Bibliothèque Nationale Paris), edited by Hanns Prem. Graz: Edition-Kommentar-Hieroglyphenglossar, Akademische Druk- u. Verlagsanstalt. Carrasco, Pedro. 1984. “Royal Marriages in Ancient Mexico.” In Explorations in Ethnohistory: Indians of Central Mexico in the Sixteenth Century, edited by H. R. Harvey and Hanns J. Prem, 41–81. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Carrasco, Pedro. 1996. Estructura político-territorial del imperio tenochca: La Triple Alianza de Tenochtitlan, Tetzcoco y Tlacopan. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Castañeda de la Paz, María. 2008a. “El Plano parcial de la ciudad de México: Nuevas aportaciones con base en el estudio de su lista de tlatoque.” In Símbolos de poder en Mesoamérica, edited by Guilhem Olivier, 393–426. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas, UNAM. Castañeda de la Paz, María. 2008b. “Apropiación de elementos y símbolos de legitimidad entre la nobleza indígena: El caso del cacicazgo tlatelolca.” Anuario de Estudios Hispanoamericanos 65 (1): 21–47 1. Castañeda de la Paz, María. 2009. “Filología de un corpus pintado (siglos XVI–XVIII): De códices, techialoyan, pinturas y escudos de armas.” Anales del Museo de América 17:78–95. Chance, John K. 1989. Conquest of the Sierra: Spaniards and Indians in Colonial Oaxaca. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Chance, John K., and Barbara L. Stark. 2007. “Estrategias empleadas en las provincias imperiales: Perspectivas prehispánicas y coloniales en Mesoamérica.” Revista española de antropologia americana 37 (2): 203–33.

R eferences

Charlot, Jean. 1931. “Bas-reliefs from the Temple of the Warriors.” In The Maya of Middle America, 133–36. Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington. Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin, Francisco de San Antón Muñón. 1991. Memorial breve acerca de la fundación de la ciudad de Culhuacan. Edited by Victor M. Castillo F. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, UNAM. Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin, Francisco de San Antón Muñón. 1997a. Codex Chimalpahin: Society and Politics in Mexico Tenochtitlan, Tlatelolco, Texcoco, Culhuacan, and Other Nahua Altepetl in Central Mexico. 2 vols. Edited and translated by Arthur J. O. Anderson, and Susan Schroeder. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin, Francisco de San Antón Muñón. 1997b. Primer Amoxtli Libro: Tercera relación de las Differéntes histoires originales. Edited by Victor M. Castillo F. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, UNAM. Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin, Francisco de San Antón Muñón. 2003a. Primera, segunda, cuarta, quinta y sexta relaciones de las Différentes histoires originales. Edited by Josefina García Quintana, Silvia Limón, Miguel Pastrana y Victor M. Castillo F. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, UNAM. Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin, Francisco de San Antón Muñón. 2003b. Séptima relación de las Differéntes histoires originales. Edited by Josefina García Quintana. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, UNAM. Clark, James Cooper. 1938. Codex Mendoza: The Mexica Manuscript Known as the “Collection of Mendoza” and Preserved in the Bodleian Library Oxford. 3 vols. London: Waterflow and Sons. Clavijero, Francisco Javier. 1964. Historia antigua de México. Mexico: Editorial Porrúa. Codex Azoyú 1. 1993. Códice Azoyú. Comentarios de Constanza Vega Soza. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Codex Aubin. 1963. Historia de la nación mexicana: Reproducción a todo color del Códice del 1576 (Códice Aubin). Edited by Charles E. Dibble. Madrid: José Porrúa Turanzas. Codex Badianus. 2000. An Aztec Herbal: The Classic Codex of 1552. Translation and commentary by William Gates. New York: Dover Publications, Mineola. Codex Borbonicus. 1974. Codex Borbonicus: Bibliothèque de l’Asemblée Nationale, Paris (Y120). Edited by Karl Nowotny. Graz: Akademische Druck-u, Verlagsanstalt. Codex Cozcatzin. 1994. Códice Cozcatzin. Edited by Ana R. Valero de García Lascuráin. Mexico: INAH, Benémerita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla. Codex Ixtlilxochitl. 1979. Codex Ixtlilxochitl. Fontes Rerum Mexicanarum 9. Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt. Codex Magliabechiano. 1996. Codice Magliabechi. Codices Mexicanos 12. Graz, Mexico: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Fondo de Cultura Económica. Codex Mendoza. See: Berdan and Anawalt 1992.

453

454

R eferences

Codex Osuna. 1976. Pintura del gobernador, alcaldes y regidores de México: Códice Osuna. Vicenta Cortés Alonso, estudio y transcripción. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, Dirección General de Archivos y Bibliotecas. Codex Telleriano-Remensis. See: Quiñones Keber 1995. Codex Tudela (Códice del Museo de América). See: Batalla Rosado 2002. Codex Tulane. 1991. Codex Tulane. Study by Mary E. Smith and Ross Parmenter. Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz; Middle American Research Institute, Tulane University, New Orleans. Codex Vaticanus A. 1979. Codex Vaticanus 3738; Codex Vaticanus A; Codex Rios. Reihe Codices Selecti 65. Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt. Codex Xolotl. See: Dibble 1996. Códice de Huichapan. 2001. Códice de Huichapan. Paleografía y traducción de Lawrence Ecker, Yolanda Lastra y Doris Bartholomew. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Estéticas, UNAM. Códice de Otlazpan. 1967. Codex Mariano Jiménez: Nómina de tributos de los pueblos Otlazpan y Tepexic. Mexico: INAH. Códice de Tepetlaoztoc. 1994. Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (Códice Kingsborough). Edited by Perla Valle. Toluca: Estado de México. Códice de Tlatelolco. 1994. Códice de Tlatelolco. Estudio preliminar de Perla Valle. Puebla: INAH, Univeridad Autónoma de Puebla. Códice en Cruz. 1981. Codex en Cruz. Edited by Charles E. Dibble. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Códices del Marquesado del Valle de Oaxaca. See: Santiago Sánchez 2003. Conquista y pacificación. 1996. Conquista y pacificación de los indios chichimecas, Francisco de Sandoval Acacitli. Paleografía y comentario José María Muriá. Zapopan: El Colegio de Jalisco. Conrad, Geoffrey W., and Arthur A. Demarest. 1984. Religion and Empire: The Dynamics of Aztec and Inca Expansion. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Corona, Eduardo S. 1989. “La tenencia de la tierra en el Códice Xolotl.” In Coloquio de documentos pictográficos de tradición náhuatl, edited by Carlos Martínez Marín, 53–70. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, UNAM. Cortés, Hernando. 1993. Cartas de relación. Edited by Ángel Delgado Gómez. Madrid: Editorial Castalia. Curcio-Nagy, Linda A. 2004. The Great Festivals of Colonial Mexico City: Performing Power and Identity. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Davies, Claude Nigel. 1974. The Aztecs: A History. London: Macmillan.

R eferences

Davies, Claude Nigel. 1980. The Toltec Heritage: From the Fall of Tula to the Rise of Tenochtitlan. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Dehouve, Danièle. 1972. “Dos relatos sobre migraciones nahuas en el Estado de Guerrero.” Estudios de cultura náhuatl 12:137–54. Díaz del Castillo, Bernal. 1972. Historia verdadera de la conquista de Nueva España. Mexico: Editorial Porrúa. Díaz Migoyo, Gonzalo. 2001. “El manuscrito #117 de la colección Hans P. Kraus.” In Alvarado Tezozomoc, Crónica mexicana, 7–27. Dibble, Charles E. 1968. “Sahagún and His Informants.” In Proceedings of the International Congress of Americanists (37 session, Buenos Aires, 1966), 3:145–54, Buenos Aires. Dibble, Charles E. [1981] 1996. Códice Xolotl. Edición, estudio y apéndice de Charles E. Dibble, Serie Amoxtli 1. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, UNAM. Diel, Loori Boornazian. 2007. “Till Death Do Us Part: Unconventional Marriages as Aztec Political Strategy.” Ancient Mesoamerica 18 (02): 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017 /S0956536107000181. Diel, Loori Boornazian. 2008. The Tira de Tepechpan: Negotiating Place under Aztec and Spanish Rule. Austin: University of Texas Press. Doesburg, Sebastián van. 2008. “Documentos pictográficos de la Mixteca Baja de Oaxaca: El Lienzo de San Vicente del Palmar, el Mapa No. 36 y el Lienzo Mixteco III.” Desacatos 27:95–122. Doesburg, Bas van. n.d. “Lienzo of the Heye Foundation.” http://132.248.101.214/wikfil /index.php/Heye_Foundation%2C_Lienzo_of_the. Doesburg, Sebastián van, and Olivier van Buren. 1997. “The Prehispanic History of the Valley of Coixtlahuaca, Oaxaca.” In Códices, caciques y comunidades, Cuadernos de historia latinoamericana, edited by Maarten Jansen and Luis Reyes García, 104–60. Leiden: Asociación de Historiadores Latinoamericanistas Europeas. Durán, Fray Diego. 1984. Historia de las Indias de la Nueva España e islas de la tierra firme. 2 vols. Mexico: Editorial Porrúa. Dyckerhoff, Ursula. 1970. Die “Cronica Mexicana” des Hernando Alvarado Tezozomoc: Quellenkritische Untersuchungen. Hamburger Reihe zur Kultur- und Sprachwissenschaft, vol. 7. Hamburg. Dyckerhoff, Ursula. 1993. “Xipe Totec and the War Dress of the Aztec Rulers.” In The Symbolism in the Plastic and Pictorial Representations of Ancient Mexico, A Symposium of the 46th International Congress of Americanists, edited by Jacqueline de Durand-Forest and Marc Eisinger, 139–48. Berlin: Holos Verlag. Dyckerhoff, Ursula. 1998. “La jerarquía militar y las órdenes militares mexica según las fuentes primarias.” In 50 años de estudios americanistas en la Universidad de Bonn:

455

456

R eferences

Nuevas contribuciones a la arqueología, etnohistoria, etnolingüística y etnografía de las Américas, edited by Sabine Dedenbach-Salazar Sáenz et al., 397–408. Markt Schwaben: Verlag Anton Saurwein. Espinoza, Carlos. 1995. “Colonial Visions: Drama, Art and Legitimation in Peru and Ecuador.” In Native Artists and Patrons in Colonial Latin America, edited by Emily Umberger and Tom Cummins. Tempe: Arizona State University. Estrada de Gerlero, Elena Isabel. 1983. “El Códice Cuetlaxcoapan.” In Estudios acerca del arte novohispano: Homenaje a Elisa Vargas Lugo, 30–41. Mexico: UNAM. Fash, William. 1993. Scribes, Warriors and Kings: The City of Copán and the Ancient Maya. London: Thames and Hudson. Furst, Jill. 1978. Codex Vindobonensis Mexicanus I: A Commentary. Albany: Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York at Albany. Galarza, Joaquín. 1972. Lienzos de Chiepetlan: Manuscrits pictographiques et manuscrits en caractères latins de San Miguel Chiepetlan, Guerrero, Mexique. Études Mesoamericaines, vol. I. Mexico: Mission Archeologique et Etnologique Française au Mexique. García Icazbalceta, Joaquín. 1886–1892. Nueva colección de documentos para la historia de México, 3 vols. Mexico. Gibson, Charles. 1960. “The Aztec Aristocracy in Colonial Mexico.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 2 (2): 169–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0010417500000657. Gibson, Charles. 1964. The Aztecs under Spanish Rule: A History of the Indians of the Valley of Mexico 1519–1810. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Glass, John B. 1964. Catálogo de la colección de códices. Mexico: Museo Nacional de Antropología e Historia, INAH. Glass, John B. 1975a. “A Survey of Native Middle American Pictorial Manuscripts.” In Handbook of Middle American Indians, Guide to Ethnohistorical Sources, edited by Howard F. Cline, 14(part 3): 3–78. Austin: University of Texas Press. Glass, John B., in collaboration with Donald Robertson. 1975b. “A Census of Native Middle American Pictorial Manuscripts.” In Handbook of Middle American Indians, Guide to Ethnohistorical Sources, edited by Howard F. Cline, 14(part 3): 81–250. Austin: University of Texas Press. Graulich, Michel. 1989. “Miccailhuitl: The Aztec Festivals of the Deceased.” Numen 36 (1): 43–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156852789X00153. Graulich, Michel. 1992. “On the So-Called Cuauhxicalli of Motecuhzoma Ilhuicamina: The Sánchez-Nava Monolith.” Mexicon 14: 5–11. Graulich, Michel. 1997. “Chasse et sacrifice humain chez les Aztèques.” Bulletin des scéances de l’Académie royale des sciences d’outre-mer 43 (4): 433–46. Grube, Nikolai. 2000. “Die Insignien der Macht.” In Maya: Gottkönige im Regenwald, edited by Nikolai Grube, 96–7. Köln: Köneman.

R eferences

Gutiérrez Mendoza, Gerardo, and Constantino Medina Lima. 2008. Toponimia náhuatl en los codices Azoyú 1 y 2: Un estudio crítico de los nombres de lugar de los antiguos señoríos del oriente de Guerrero. Mexico: CIESAS. Gutiérrez Mendoza, Gerardo, Viola König, and Baltazar Brito. 2009. Códice Humboldt Fragmento 1 (Ms. amer. 2) y Códice Azoyú 2 reverso: Nómina de tributos de Tlapa y su provincia al Imperio Mexicano. Mexico and Berlin: CIESAS, Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz. Harris, Max. 2000. Aztecs, Moors, and Christians: Festivals of Reconquest in Mexico and Spain. Austin: University of Texas Press. Haskett, Robert. 1985. A Social History of Indian Town Government in the Colonial Cuernavaca Jurisdiction. PhD Dissertation, Los Angeles: University of California. Haskett, Robert. 1991. Indigenous Rulers: An Ethnohistory of Town Governments in Colonial Cuernavaca. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Haskett, Robert. 1996. “Paper Shields: The Ideology of Coats of Arms in Colonial Mexican Primordial Titles.” Ethnohistory (Columbus, Ohio) 43 (1): 99–126. http://dx.doi.org /10.2307/483345. Hassig, Ross. 1988. Aztec Warfare: Imperial Expansion and Political Control. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Hermann Lejarazu, Manuel. 2005. Códices y señoríos: Un análisis sobre los símbolos de poder en la Mixteca prehispánica. PhD Dissertation, Mexico: Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, UNAM. Heyden, Doris. 1983. Mitología y simbolismo de la flora en el México prehispánico. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas, UNAM. Hicks, Frederic. 1984. “Rotational Labor and Urban Development in Prehispanic Tetzcoco.” In Explorations in Ethnohistory: Indians of Central Mexico in the Sixteenth Century, edited by Herbert R. Harvey and Hanns J. Prem, 147–76. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Hicks, Frederic. 1986. “Prehispanic Background of Colonial Political and Economic Organization in Central Mexico.” In Supplement to the Handbook of Middle American Indians, vol. 4, Ethnohistory, volume editor Ronald Spores, 35–54. Austin: University of Texas Press. Hicks, Frederic. 1992. “Subject States and Tributary Province: The Aztec Empire in the Northern Valley of Mexico.” Ancient Mesoamerica 3 (01): 1–10. http://dx.doi.org /10.1017/S095653610000225X. Hodge, Mary G. 1994. “Polities Composing the Aztec Empire’s Core.” In Economies and Polities of the Aztec Realm, edited by Mary G. Hodge and Michael E. Smith, 73–102. Studies on Culture and Society, 6. Albany: Institute of Mesoamerican Studies, State University of New York.

457

458

R eferences

Hodge, Mary G. 1996. “Political Organization of the Central Provinces.” In Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances Berdan, et al., 17–45. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Hodge, Mary G. 1998. “Archaeological Views of Aztec Culture.” Journal of Archaeological Research 6 (3): 197–238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1022876304931. Hodge, Mary G., and Richard Blanton. 1996. “Data on Political Organization of the Aztec Empire’s Central Provinces.” In Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances Berdan, et al., 229–41. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Horn, Rebecca. 1997. Postconquest Coyoacan: Nahua-Spanish Relations in Central Mexico, 1519–1650. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Houston, Stephen, David Stuart, and Karl A. Taube. 2005. The Memory of Bones: Body, Being, and Experience among the Classic Maya. Austin: University of Texas Press. Isaac, Barry L. 1983a. “Aztec Warfare: Goals and Battlefield Comportment.” Ethnology 22 (2): 121–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3773575. Isaac, Barry L. 1983b. “The Aztec ‘Flowery War’: A Geopolitical Explanation.” Journal of Anthropological Research 39:415–32. Ixtlilxochitl, Fernando de Alva. 1975–1977. Obras históricas. 2 vols. Edited by Edmundo O’Gorman. Mexico: UNAM. Ixtlilxochitl, Fernando de Alva. 2000. Historia de la nación chichimeca. Edited by Gérman Vázquez Chamorro. Madrid: Editorial Dastin. Jansen, Maarten. 1997. “Símbolos del poder en el Mexico antiguo.” Anales del Museo de America 5 (73): 73–102. Jiménez García, Elisabeth. 1996. Iconografía de Tula: El caso de la escultura, Colección Científica 364. Mexico: INAH. Jiménez Padilla, Blanca M., and Samuel L. Villela 1998. Historia y cultura tras el glifo: Los códices de Guerrero. Mexico: INAH. Karttunen, Frances. 1992. An Analytical Dictionary of Nahuatl. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Karttunen, Frances, and James Lockhart 1987. The Art of Nahuatl: The Bancroft Dialogues. Nahuatl Studies Series 2. Los Angeles: UCLA Latin American Center. Katz, Friedrich. 1972. “The Ancient American Civilizations.” Past & Present 13:14–25. Kirchhoff, Paul, Odena Güemes, and Luis Reyes, eds. 1976. Historia tolteca-chichimeca. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Klaus, Susanne. 1999. “Introducción, transcripción y traducción de los manuscritos de los Anales de Tlatelolco.” In Anales de Tlatelolco: Los manuscritos 22 y 23bis de la Bibliothèque de France, 5–68. Markt Schwaben: Verlag Anton Saurwein. Kranz, Travis Barton. 2007. “Sixteenth-Century Tlaxcalan Pictorial Documents on the Conquest of Mexico.” In Sources and Methods for the Study of Postconquest Mesoamericna

R eferences

Ethnohistory, Provisional Version, edited by James Lockhart, Lisa Sousa, and Stephanie Wood. Wired Humanities Projects, University of Oregon, Eugene. http://whp.uoregon .edu/Lockhart/index.html. Kristan-Graham, Cynthia. 1989. Art, Rulership and the Mesoamerican Body Politic at Tula and Chichen Itza. PhD diss. Los Angeles: University of California. Kristan-Graham, Cynthia. 1993. “The Business of Narrative at Tula: An Analysis of the Vestibule Frieze, Trade, and Ritual.” Latin American Antiquity 4 (1): 3–19. http://dx.doi .org/10.2307/972134. Lacadena, Alfonso. 2008. “Regional Scribal Traditions: Methodological Implications for the Decipherment of Nahuatl Writing.” The PARI Journal 8 (4): 1–22. Leibsohn, Dana. 1995. “Colony and Cartography: Shifting Signs on Indigenous Mapas of New Spain.” In Reframing the Renaissance: Visual Culture in Europe and Latin America, 1450–1650, edited by Claire Farago, 264–81. New Haven: Yale University Press. Leibsohn, Dana. 2009. Script and Glyph: Pre-Hispanic History, Colonial Bookmaking and the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. León-Portilla, Miguel. 1999. Bernardino de Sahagún: Pionero de la antropología. Serie Cultura Náhuatl, Monografías: 24. Mexico: UNAM/El Colegio Nacional. Lesbre, Patrick. 2000. “Primeros Memoriales de Tepepulco: Parágrafo 14 (ff. 60–61).” In Fray Bernardino de Sahagún y su tiempo (Congreso Internacional), edited by José Pariagua Pérez and Maria I. Viforcos Marinas, 491–509. León: Universidad de León. Lesbre, Patrick. 2008. “¿Influencias occidentales en el Mapa Quinatzin?” Revista Española de Antropología Americana 38 (2): 173–97. Lienzo de Tlaxcala. 1892. Alfredo Chavero, Lienzo de Tlaxcala: Antigüedades mexicanas. Mexico: Oficina Tipográfica de la Secretaría de Fomento. Lienzo de Totomixtlahuaca. 1974. Lienzo Totomixtlahuaca, 1570: Códice Condumex. Nota introductoria por John B. Glass. Mexico: Centro de Estudios de Historia de México, Condumex S.A. Lockhart, James. 1985. “Some Nahua Concepts in Postconquest Guise.” History of European Ideas 6 (4): 465–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0191-6599(85)90086-5. Lockhart, James. 1990. “Postconquest Nahua Society and Concepts Viewed through Nahuatl Writings.” Estudios de cultura náhuatl 20:91–115. Lockhart, James. 1991. Nahuas and Spaniards: Postconquest Central Mexican History and Philology. Nahuatl Studies Series no 3. Stanford, Los Angeles: Stanford University Press, Latin American Center Publications, University of California. Lockhart, James. 1992. The Nahuas after the Conquest: A Social and Cultural History of the Indians of Central Mexico, Sixteenth through Eighteenth Centuries. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

459

460

R eferences

Lockhart, James. 1993. We People Here: Nahuatl Accounts of the Conquest of Mexico. Repertorium Columbianum 1. Berkeley: University of California Press. Lockhart, James. 1998. “Three Experiences of Culture Contact: Nahua, Maya, and Quechua.” In Native Traditions in the Postconquest World, edited by Elizabeth H. Boone and Tom Cummins, 31–53. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Lockhart, James. n.d. “Introduction to Document 1: The Testament of Don Julián de la Rosa of Tlaxcala, 1566.” In Beyond the Codices, edited by Arthur J. O. Anderson, Frances Berdan, and James Lockhart, 2nd ed. (1976). Unpublished manuscript. López Austin, Alfredo. 1973. Hombre-dios. Mexico: UNAM. López Austin, Alfredo. 1967. “Cuarenta clases de magos en el mundo náhuatl.” Estudios de cultura náhuatl 7:87–117. López Austin, Alfredo. 1994. Tamoanchan y Tlalocan. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica. López Austin, Alfredo. 1996 [1980]. Cuerpo humano e ideología. Serie Antropológica 39 (re-edition), 2 vols. Mexico: UNAM. López de Gómara, Francisco. 1966. Historia general de las Indias. 2 vols. Barcelona: Editorial Iberia. López Luján, Leonardo. 2006. La casa de las águilas: Un ejemplo de la arquitectura religiosa de Tenochtitlan. Mexico: Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes, INAH, Fondo de Cultura Económica. López Luján, Leonardo, and Ximena Chávez Balderas. 2010. “Al pie del Templo Mayor: Excavaciones en busca de los soberanos mexicas.” In Moctezuma II: Tiempo y destino de un gobernante, edited by Leonardo López Luján and Colin McEwan, 294–320. Mexico: Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia. Tovar Manuscript. See: Tovar, Juan de. Martínez Baracs, Rodrigo. 2000. “Imágenes de doña Isabel Moctezuma, Tecuichpo.” In Codices y documentos sobre México: Tercer simposio internacional, edited by Constanza Vega Soza, 197–226. Serie Historia. Mexico: INAH. Martínez Marín, Carlos. 1989. “La fuente original del Lienzo de Tlaxcala.” In Coloquio de documentos pictográficos de tradición náhuatl, edited by Carlos Martínez Marín. 147–57. Mexico: UNAM. Matos Moctezuma, Eduardo. 1988. The Great Temple of Tenochtitlan: Treasures of the Aztecs. London: Thames and Hudson. Megged, Amos. 1991. “Accommodation and Resistance of Elites in Transition: The Case of Chiapa in Early Colonial Mesoamerica.” Hispanic American Historical Review 71 (3): 477–500. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2515880.

R eferences

Mikulska-Dąbrowska, Katarzyna. 2010. “¿Cuchillos de sacrificio? El papel del contexto en la expresión pictórica mesoamericana.” Itinerarios 12:125–54. Miller, Mary E., and Karl Taube. 1993. The Gods and Symbols of Ancient Mexico and the Maya: An Illustrated Dictionary of Mesoamerican Religion. London: Thames and Hudson. Moholy-Nagy, Hattula. 1999. “Mexican obsidian at Tikal, Guatemala.” Latin American Antiquity 10 (3): 300–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/972032. Molina, Fray Alonso de, 2001. Vocabulario en lengua castellana y mexicana y mexicana y castellana. Mexico: Editorial Porrúa. Motolinía, Fray Toribio de Benavente. 1970. Memoriales e historia de los indios de la Nueva España. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles, vol. 240. Madrid. Motolinía, Fray Toribio de Benavente. 1973. Historia de los indios de la Nueva España. Mexico: Editorial Porruá. Muñoz Camargo, Diego. 2002. Historia de Tlaxcala. Edited by Germán Vázquez Chamorro. Madrid: Editorial Dastin. Neurath, Johannes. 1992. “Xiuhuitzolli: Motecuhzoma’s Diadem of Turquoise, Fire, and Time. A First Approach to the Problem.” Archiv für Völkerkunde 46:123–48. Nicholson, Henry B. 1959. “The Chapultepec Cliff Sculpture of Motecuhzoma Xocoyotzin.” El México antiguo 9:379–444. Nicholson, Henry B. 1966. “The Problems of the Provenience of the Members of the ‘Codex Borgia Group’: A Summary.” In Summa Antropológica a Roberto A. Weitlener, 145–58. Mexico: INAH. Nicholson, Henry B. 1967. “The Royal Headband of the Tlaxcalteca.” Revista mexicana de estudios antropológicos 21:71–106. Nicholson, Henry B. 1971. “Pre-Hispanic Central Mexican Historiography.” In Investigaciones contemporáneas sobre historia de México: Memorias de la tercera reunión de historiadores mexicanos y norteamericanos, Oaxtepec, Morelos, 4–7 de noviembre de 1969, edited by Daniel Cosío Villegas and Alfredo López Austin, 38–81. Mexico and Austin: Instituto de Investigaciónes Históricas, UNAM, and University of Texas. Nicholson, Henry B. 1972. “A Xipe Cult in Mesoamerica.” In XII Mesa Redonda: Religiones de Mesoamerica, edited by Noemi Castillo Tejero and Jaime Litvak King. Mexico: Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología. Nicholson, Henry B. 1997. “Introduction.” In Primeros Memoriales, by Bernardino de Sahagún, 3–14. Nicholson, Henry B. 2001. “Bernardino de Sahagún.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Mesoamerican Cultures, edited by David Carrasco, 3:105–13. Oxford: University of Oxford Press.

461

462

R eferences

Noguez, Xavier. 1975. “La diadema de turquesa (xiuhuitzolli) y las alianzas de señoríos prehispánicos: Acercamiento iconográfico.” In Balance y perspectiva de la antropología de Mesoámerica y del norte de México, XIII Mesa Redonda, Sociedad Mexicana de Antropología, Xalapa 1973, Mexico, 83–94. Mexico. Noguez, Xavier. 1978. Tira de Tepechpan: Códice colonial procedente del valle de México. Mexico: Biblioteca Enciclopédica del Estado de México. Noguez, Xavier. 1986. “Tres documentos pictográficos sobre tributación indígena del estado de Guerrero, siglo XVI.” Historia Mexicana 36 (1): 5–48. Noguez, Xavier. 1998. “El Códice de Tlatelolco: Una nueva cronología.” In De tlacuilos y escribanos, edited by Xavier Noguez and Stephanie Wood, 15–32. Zamora: El Colegio de Michoacan. Noguez, Xavier, and Stephanie Wood, eds. 1998. De tlacuilos y escribanos. Estudios sobre documentos indígenas coloniales del centro de México. Zamora: El Colegio de Michoacan. Nuttall, Zelia. 1904. A Penitential Rite of Ancient Mexicans. Cambridge, MA: The Museum. Offner, Jerome. 1979. “A Reassessment of the Extent and Structuring of the Empire of Techotlalatzin, Fourteenth Century Ruler of Texcoco.” Ethnohistory (Columbus, Ohio) 26 (3): 231–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/481560. Offner, Jerome. 1984. Law and Politics in Aztec Texcoco. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Offner, Jerome. 2010a. “A Curious Commonality among Some Eastern Basin of Mexico and Eastern Mexican Pictorial Manuscripts.” Estudios de cultura náhuatl 41:259–79. Offner, Jerome. 2010b. “Un segundo vistazo al Códice de Xicotepec.” Itinerarios 11:55–83. Olivier, Guillem. 2002. “Hidden King and the Broken Flutes: Mythical and Royal Dimensions of the Feast of Tezcatlipoca in Toxcatl.” In Representing Aztec Ritual: Performance, Text, and Image in the Work of Sahagún, edited by Eloise Quiñones Keber, 107–42. Boulder: University Press of Colorado. Olivier, Guillem. 2004. Tezcatlipoca: Burlas y metamorfosis de un dios azteca. Trans. Tatiana Sule. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Olivier, Guillem. 2006. “The Sacred Bundles and the Coronation of the Aztec King in Mexico-Tenochtitlan.” In Sacred Bundles: Ritual Acts of Wrapping and Binding in Mesoamerica, edited by Julia Guernsey and F. Kent Reilly, 199–225. Barnardsville, North Carolina: Boundary End Archaeology Research Center. Olivier, Guillem. 2007. “Sacred Bundles, Arrow, and New Fire. Foundation and Power in the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2.” In Cave, City, and Eagle’s Nest: An Interpretative Journey through the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2, edited by Davíd Carrasco and Scott Sessions, 281–313. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press. Olivier, Guillem. 2008. “Las tres muertes simbólicas del nuevo rey mexica: Reflexiones en torno a los ritos de la entronización en el México central prehispánico.” In Símbolos de

R eferences

poder en Mesoamérica, edited by Guilhem Olivier, 263–91. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas, UNAM. Olivier, Guillem. 2010. “El simbolismo sacrificial de los Mimixcoa: Cacería, guerra, sacrificio e identidad entre los mexicas.” In El sacrificio humano en la tradición religiosa mesoamericana, edited by Leonardo López Luján and Guilhem Olivier, 453–82. Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas. Olko, Justyna. 1999. “Hierogamy in Aztec Ritual.” Estudios latinoamericanos (Mexico City, Mexico) 19:101–32. Olko, Justyna. 2004. “Los mensajeros reales y negociaciones de la paz: En concepto de la guerra justa entre los aztecas.” Revista española de antropologia americana 34:125–48. Olko, Justyna. 2005. Turquoise Diadems and Staffs of Office: Elite Costume and Insignia of Power in Aztec and Early Colonial Mexico. Warsaw: Polish Society for Latin American Studies and Centre for Studies of the Classical Tradition, University of Warsaw. Olko, Justyna. 2006a. “¿Imitación, patrimonio pan-regional o distorsión colonial? Influencia mexica en manuscritos pictográficos del centro de México.” Revista española de antropologia americana 36:139–74. Olko, Justyna. 2006b. “Traje y atributos del poder en el mundo azteca: Significados y funciones contextuales.” Anales del Museo de América 14:61–88. Olko, Justyna. 2008. “Convenciones y estrategias en la iconografía del rango de la nobleza indígena del centro de México en el siglo XVI.” Revista española de antropologia americana 38 (2): 207–30. Olko, Justyna. 2012a. “Aztec Universalism: Ideology and Status Symbols in the Service of Empire-Building.” In Universal Empire: A Comparative Approach to Imperial Culture and Representation in Eurasian History, edited by Peter Fibinger Bang and Dariusz Kołodziejczyk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017 /CBO9781139136952.014. Olko, Justyna. 2012b. “Remembering the Ancestors: Native Pictorial Genealogies of Central Mexico and Their Pre-Hispanic Roots.” In Comparative Studies in Mesoamerican Systems of Remembrance, edited by Amos Megged and Stephanie Wood. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Oudijk, Michel R. 2012. “El señorío de Tlapa-Tlachinollan. Los documentos pictográficos de la region de la Montaña, Guerrero.” In Códice Azoyú 2. El señorío de Tlapa-­ Tlachinollan, edited by Constanza Vega Soza and Michel R. Oudijk, 74–170. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Pasztory, Esther. 1983. Aztec Art. New York: Harry N. Abrams. Peñafiel, Antonio. 1903. Indumentaria antiguna: Vestidos guerreros y civiles de los Mexicanos. Mexico: Officina Tip. de la Secretaria de Fomento.

463

464

R eferences

Peterson, Jeanette Favrot. 1988. “The Florentine Codex Imagery and the Colonial Tlacuilo.” In The Work of Bernardino de Sahagún, edited by Jorge Klor de Alva, Henry B. Nicholson, and Elise Quiñones Keber, 273–93. Peterson, Jeanette Favrot. 1995. “Synthesis and Survival: The Native Presence in SixteenthCentury Murals of New Spain.” In Native Artists and Patrons in Colonial Latin America, edited by Emily Umberger and Tom Cummins, 14–35. Tempe: Arizona State University. Peterson, Jeanette Favrot. 2007. “Wild Man, Chichimec, Noble Aztec: The Indian in the Cult of Guadalupe.” In Orientes/Occidentes: El arte y la mirada del otro, edited by Gustavo Curiel, 341–74. XXVII Coloquio International de Historia del Arte. Mexico: Instituto de Investigaciones Estéticas, UNAM. Piho, Virve. 1970. “Función y Simbolismo del Atavío Azteca.” In Verhandlungen des XXXVIII Internationalen Amerikanistenkongreses, Band II, 377–83. München. Piho, Virve. 1973. El peinado entre los Mexicas: Formas y significado. PhD Dissertation, Mexico: UNAM. Pohl, John M. D. 1994. “Weaving and Gift Exchange in the Mixtec Codices.” In Cloth and Curing: Continuity and Change in Oaxaca, edited by Grace Johnson and Douglas Sharon. San Diego Museum Papers no. 32, 3–13. San Diego. Prem, Hanns J. 2000. “La extensión del dominio mexica.” In Codices y documentos sobre México: Tercer simposio internacional, edited by Constanza Vega Soza, Serie Historia, 595–615. Mexico: INAH. Puga, Vasco de. 1945 [1563]. Colección de incunables americanos, siglo XVI. Vol. III, Provisiones, cedulas, instrucciones para el gobierno de la Nueva España. Madrid: Ediciones de Cultura Hispánica. Quiñones Keber, Eloise. 1988. “Reading Images: The Making and Meaning of the Sahaguntine Illustrations.” In The Work of Bernardino de Sahagún, edited by Jorge Klor de Alva, Henry B. Nicholson, and Eloise Quiñones Keber, 199–210. Quiñones Keber, Eloise. 1993. “Quetzalcoatl as Dynastic Patron: The ‘Acuecuexatl Stone’ Reconsidered.” In The Symbolism in the Plastic and Pictorial Representations of Ancient Mexico, A Symposium of the 46th International Congress of Americanists, Amsterdam 1988, edited by Jacquline de Durand-Forest and Marc Eisinger, 149–55. BAS International Series 21. Oxford. Quiñones Keber, Eloise. 1997. “An Introduction to the Images, Artists, and Physical Features of the Primeros Memoriales.” In Primeros Memoriales by Fray Bernardino de Sahagún, edited by Bernardino de Sahagún. Paleography of Nahuatl Text and English Translation by Thelma Sullivan, 15–37. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Ramírez Celestino, Alfredo. 1993. “El espacio y el contexto histórico del Lienzo de Totomixtlahuaca.” La découverte des langues et des écritures d’Amérique: Actes du colloque

R eferences

international, Paris, 7–11 September. Amerindia: Revue d’ethnolinguistique amérindienne, Paris 1995, ns. 19/20, pp. 143–49. Read, Kay. 2000. “Sex, War, and Rulers: Mexica Royal Images of Boundary Breaking and Making.” In Chalchihuitl in Quetzalli: Precious Greenstone, Precious Quetzal Feather: Mesoamerican Studies in Honor of Doris Heyden, edited by Eloise Quiñones Keber, 159–68. Lancaster: Labyrinthos. Reyes García, Luis. 1988. Cuauhtinchan del siglo XII al XVI: Formación y desarollo histórico de un señorío prehispánico. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Reyes García, Luis. 1993. “Documentos pictográficos de Tlaxcala.” In La escritura pictográfica en Tlaxcala: Dos mil años de experiencia mesoamericana, 196–235. Tlaxcala: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Tlaxcala. Reyes García, Luis. 2001. ¿Cómo te confundes? ¿Acaso no somos conquistados? Anales de Juan Bautista. Edición y traducción de Luis Reyes García. Mexico: CIESAS, Biblioteca Lorenzo Boturini, Insigne y Nacional Basílica de Guadalupe. Reyes-Valerio, Constantino. 1989. “Las pictografías náhuas en el arte indocristiano.” In Coloquio de documentos pictográficos de tradición náhuatl, edited by Carlos Martínez Marín, 71–7. Mexico: UNAM. Ruiz Medrano, Ethelia. 2005. “BNF Mexicain 75 : San Juan Ixtacmaxtitlán.” In Diario de Campo, Suplemento No. 35, Memoria textual indígena: Elementos de su escritura. México: INAH. Robertson, Donald. [1959] 1994. Mexican Manuscript Painting of the Early Colonial Period: The Metropolitan Schools. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Rodríguez Cano, Laura, and Alfonso Torres Rodríguez. 2001. “Mapa cartográficohistórico de Atenco-Mizquiahuala.” In Códices del Estado de Hidalgo, edited by Laura E. Sotelo Santos, Victor M. Ballesteros García, and Evaristo L. Torres, 109–13. Pachuca: Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Hidalgo, INAH. Rojas, José Luis de. 1986. México Tenochtitlan: Economía y sociedad en el siglo XVI. Mexico: El Colegio de Michoacán, Fondo de la Cultura Económica. Rojas, José Luis de. 2002. “El imperio en el México central en el Postclásico: A vueltas con las fuentes y las ideas.” Revista española de antropología americana 32:115–26. Rojas, José Luis de. 2010. Cambiar para que yo no cambie: La nobleza indígena en la Nueva España. Buenos Aires: Editorial SB. Rojas Rabiela, Teresa, Elsa Leticia Rea López, and Constantino Medina Luna. 1999–2002. Vidas y bienes olvidados: Testamentos indígenas novohispanos, 4 vols. Mexico: CIESAS. Roulet, Eric. 2008. “Los caciques de Coatlán frente al cristianismo (Nueva España 1544–1547).” Asian Journal of Latin American Studies 21 (1): 97–130. Ruiz Medrano, Ethelia, and Xavier Noguez. 2004. Códice de Santiago Tlacotepec (Municipio de Toluca, Estado de México). Mexico: El Colegio Mexiquense.

465

466

R eferences

Russo, Alessandra. 2002. “Plumes of Sacrifice: Transformations in Sixteenth-Century Mexican Feather Art.” Res 42:227–50. Ruz Barrio, Miguel Angel. 2013a. “La estructura del contenido del Ms. RAH de fray Bernardino de Sahagún.” In Los manuscritos de la Historia general de las cosas de la Nueva España de Bernardino de Sahagún. El Códice Matritense de la Real Academia de la Historia, 33–50. Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia. Ruz Barrio, Miguel Angel. 2013b. “Los señores de Tenochtitlan y Tlatelolco en los Manuscritos Matritenses de fray Bernardino de Sahagún.” In Códices del centro de México. Análisis comparativos y estudios individuales. edited by Juan José Batalla Rosado and Miguel Angel Ruz Barrio, 301–330. Warsaw: Faculty of “Artes Liberales”, University of Warsaw. Sahagún, Fray Bernardino de. 1950–1982. Florentine Codex: General History of the Things of New Spain. Translated by Arthur J. O. Anderson and Charles Dibble, 12 vols. Santa Fe: School of American Research and University of Utah. Sahagún, Fray Bernardino de. 1993. Primeros Memoriales. Facsimile Edition by Ferdinand Anders. Civilizations of the American Indian Series 100. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Sahagún, Fray Bernardino de. 1997a. Primeros Memoriales by Fray Bernardino de Sahagún. Paleography of Nahuatl Text and English Translation by Thelma Sullivan. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Sahagún, Fray Bernardino de. 1997b. Historia general de las cosas de Nueva España. Mexico: Editorial Porrúa. Santiago Sánchez, Armando. 2003. Códices del Marquesado del Valle de Oaxaca. Mexico: Archivo General de la Nación. Schele, Linda, and David Freidel. 1990. Forest of Kings: The Untold Histories of the Ancient Maya. New York: William Morrow and Company. Schele, Linda, and Peter Mathews. 1998. The Code of Kings: The Language of Seven Sacred Maya Temples and Tombs. New York: Touchstone. Schreffler, Michael J. 2001. “Juan de Torquemada.” In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Mesoamerican Cultures, edited by David Carrasco, 1:247–49. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Schroeder, Susan. 1991. Chimalpahin and the Kingdoms of Chalco. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. Seler, Eduard. 1902–23. Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur Amerikanischen Sprach- und Altertumskunde, 5 vols. Berlin. Sell, Barry D., Louise M. Burkhart, and Stafford Poole, eds. 2006. Nahuatl Theater, Vol. 1: Our Lady of Guadalupe. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Sell, Barry D., Louise M. Burkhart, Gregory Spira, and Miguel Leon-Portilla, eds. 2004. Nahuatl Theater, Vol. 1: Death and Life in Colonial Nahua Mexico. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

R eferences

Sell, Barry D., Louise M. Burkhart, and Elizabeth R. Wright, eds. 2008. Nahuatl Theater, Vol. 3: Spanish Golden Age Drama in Mexican Translation. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Sharer, Robert J. 1996. Daily Life in Maya Civilization. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Sigüenza y Gongora, Carlos de. 1803 [1680]. Glorias de Queretaro, en la fundacion y admirables progresos de la ... congregacion eclesiástica de presbíteros seculares de Maria Santísima de Guadalupe de México. Mexico: Mariano Joseph de Zúñiga y Ontiveros. Simeón, Remi. 2002. Diccionario de la lengua nahuatl o mexicana. Mexico: Siglo Veintiuno. Smith, Mary Elizabeth. 1991. “Introduction.” In The Codex Tulane, edited by Mary E. Smith and Ross Parmenter, 1–11. Middle American Research Institute Publication 61. Graz and New Orleans: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt and Tulane University. Smith, Mary Elizabeth, and Ross Parmenter. 1991. The Codex Tulane. Middle American Research Institute Publication 61. Graz and New Orleans: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt and Tulane University. Smith, Michael E. 1984. “The Aztlan Migrations of the Nahuatl Chronicles: Myth or History?” Ethnohistory 31 (3): 153–86. Smith, Michael E. 1986. “The Role of Social Stratification in the Aztec Empire: A View from the Provinces.” American Anthropologist 88 (1): 70–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525 /aa.1986.88.1.02a00050. Smith, Michael E. 1996. “The Strategic Provinces.” In Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances Berdan, et al., 137–50. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Smith, Michael E. 1997. The Aztecs. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers. Smith, Michael E. 2001. “The Aztec Empire and the Mesoamerican World System.” In Empires: Comparative Perspectives from Archaeology and History, edited by Susan E. Alcock, Terence N. D’Altroy, Kathleen D. Morrison, and Carla M. Sinopoli, 128–54. New York: Cambridge University Press. Smith, Michael E. 2003. “Economic Change in Morelos Households.” In The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, edited by Michael E. Smith and Frances F. Berdan, 249–58. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Smith, Michael E. 2005. “Life in the Provinces of the Aztec Empire.” Scientific American, 90–7. Smith, Michael E. 2008. Aztec City-State Capitals. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. Smith, Michael E., ed. 1992. Archaeological Research at Postclassic Period Sites in Morelos, Mexico, Volume I: Excavations and Architecture. Monographs in Latin American Archaeology, No. 4. Pittsburg: Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh.

467

468

R eferences

Smith, Michael E., and Frances F. Berdan. 1996a. “Introduction.” In Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances F. Berdan, et al., 1–9. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Smith, Michael E., and Frances F. Berdan. 1996b. “Province Descriptions.” In Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances F. Berdan, et al., 265–323. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Smith, Michael E., and Frances F. Berdan. 2003a. “Postclassic Mesoamerica.” In The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, edited by Michael E. Smith and Frances F. Berdan, 3–13. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Smith, Michael E., and Frances F. Berdan. 2003b. “Spatial Structure of the Mesoamerican World System.” In The Postclassic Mesoamerican World, edited by Michael E. Smith and Frances F. Berdan, 21–31. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Smith, Michael E., and Lisa Montiel. 2001. “The Archaeological Study of Empires and Imperialism in Pre-Hispanic Central Mexico.” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20:245–84. Spitler, Susan. 1998. “The Mapa Tlotzin: Preconquest History in Colonial Texcoco.” Journal de la société des americanistes 84 (2): 71–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/jsa.1998.1717. Spitler, Susan. 2000. “El equilibrio entre la veracidad histórica y el propósito en los códices de Texcoco.” In Codices y documentos sobre México: Tercer simposio internacional, edited by Constanza Vega Soza, 617–31. Mexico: Serie Historia, INAH. Spores, Ronald. 1993. “Spanish Penetration and Cultural Change in Early Colonial Mexico.” In The Indian in Latin American History: Resistance, Resilience, and Acculturation, edited by John E. Kicza, 88–107. Wilmington, DE: Scholarly Resources Inc. Imprint. Sterpone, Oswaldo José. 2001. “Códice de Santa María Nativitias Atengo.” In Códices del estado de Hidalgo, edited by Laura E. Sotelo Santos, Victor M. Ballesteros García, and Evaristo L. Torres, 65–69. Pachuca: Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Hidalgo, INAH. Stone, Andrea, and Marc Zender. 2011. Reading Maya Art: A Hieroglyphic Guide to Ancient Maya Painting and Sculpture. New York: Thames and Hudson. Stresser-Péan, Guy. 1996. Códice de Xicotepec/Xicotepec Codex. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Stuart, David. 2000. “The Arrival of Strangers.” In Mesoamerica’s Classic Heritage, edited by Davíd Carrasco, Lindsay Jones, and Scott Sessions, 465–513. Boulder: University Press of Colorado. Sullivan, Thelma D. 1972. “Arms and Insignia of the Mexica.” Estudios de cultura náhuatl 10:155–93. Sullivan, Thelma D. 1976. “The Mask of Itztlacoliuhqui.” Actas del XLI Congreso Internacional de Americanistas, México 2 al 7 de Septiembre de 1974 2:252–62. Mexico.

R eferences

Sullivan, Thelma D. 1980. “Tlatoani and tlatocayotl in the Sahagún manuscripts.” Estudios de cultura náhuatl 14:225–38. Sullivan, Thelma D. 1986. “A Scattering of Jades: The Words of the Aztec Elders.” In Symbol and Meaning Beyond the Closed Community: Essays in Mesoamerican Ideas, edited by Gary H. Gossen, 9–17. Albany: Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, University at Albany, State University of New York. Taube, Karl A. 1992. “The Temple of Quetzalcoatl and the Cult of Sacred War at Teotihuacan.” Res 21:53–87. Taube, Karl A. 1994. “The Iconography of Toltec Period Chichen Itza.” In Hidden among the Hills: Maya Archaeology of the Northwest Yucatan Península, edited by Hanns J. Prem, 212–46. Acta Mesoamericana 7. Möckmühl: Verlag von Flemming. Taube, Karl A. 2000. “The Turquoise Hearth: Fire, Self Sacrifice, and the Central Mexican Cult of War.” In Mesoamerica’s Classic Heritage: From Teotihuacan to the Aztecs, edited by David Carasco, Lindsay Jones, and Scott Sessions. Boulder: University Press of Colorado. Taube, Karl A. 2005. “The Symbolism of Jade in Classic Maya Religion.” Ancient Mesoamerica 16 (1): 23–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0956536105050017. Terraciano, Kevin. 2001. The Mixtecs of Colonial Oaxaca: Nudzahui History, Sixteenth through Eighteenth Centuries. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Tezozomoc, Alvarado F. 1975. Crónica mexicayotl. Mexico: UNAM. Tezozomoc, Alvarado F. 2001. Crónica mexicana. Madrid: Editorial Dastin. Tomicki, Ryszard. 1987. “Poza społeczeństwem, w pobliżu boskości. Przyczynek do rozważań nad symboliką włosów.” Polska Sztuka Ludowa 41 (1–4): 169–76. Tomicki, Ryszard. 1990. Ludzie i bogowie. Indianie meksykańscy wobec Hiszpanów we wczesnej fazie konkwisty. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Polskiej Akademii Nauk. Tomicki, Ryszard. 2003. “Synowie Słońca, synowie Boga. «Zderzenie języków» podczas podboju Meksyku.” In Między drzewem życia a drzewem poznania. Księga ku czci profesora Andrzeja Wiercińskiego, edited by Mariusz Ziółkowski and Arkadiusz Sołtysiak, 251–69. Warszawa, Kielce: Uniwersytet Warszawski and Akademia Świętokrzyska. Torquemada, Fray Juan de. 1977. Monarquía indiana, 4 vols. Mexico: UNAM. Tovar, Fray Juan de. 1972. Manuscrit Tovar: Origines et croyances des indiens du Mexique. Edited by Jacques Lafaye. Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlangsanstalt. Tovar, Fray Juan de. 2001. Juan de Tovar: Historia de creencias de los indios de Mexico. Edición, prólogo, notas y comentarios de José J. Fuente del Pilar. Madrid: S.A. Ediciones. Townsend, Richard F. 1979. State and Cosmos in the Art of Tenochtitlan. Studies in PreColumbian Art and Archaeology, no. 20. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection.

469

470

R eferences

Townsend, Richard F. 1982. “Malinalco and the Lords of Tenochtitlan.” In The Art and Iconography of Late Post-Classic Mexico, edited by Elizabeth H. Boone, 111–40. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Townsend, Richard F. 1987. “Coronation at Tenochtitlan.” In The Aztec Templo Mayor, edited by Elizabeth H. Boone, 371–410. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Townsend, Richard F. 1992. The Aztecs. London: Thames and Hudson. Umberger, Emily. 1981. Aztec Sculptures, Hieroglyphs, and History. PhD Dissertation, New York: Columbia University. Umberger, Emily. 1996a. “Art and Imperial Strategy in Tenochtitlan.” In Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances Berdan, et al., 85–106. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Umberger, Emily. 1996b. “Aztec Presence and Material Remains in the Outer Provinces.” In Aztec Imperial Strategies, edited by Frances Berdan, et al., 151–79. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Umberger, Emily. 1999. “The Reading of Hieroglyphs on Aztec Monuments.” Thule 6/7:77–102. Umberger, Emily. 2007. “Historia del arte e Imperio Azteca: la evidencia de las esculturas.” Revista española de antropologia americana 37 (2): 165–202. Umberger, Emily, and Cecilia Klein. 1993. “Aztec Art and Imperial Expansion.” In Latin American Horizons, edited by Don S. Rice, 295–326. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Umberger, Emily, and Tom Cummins, eds. 1995. “Native Artists and Patrons in Colonial Latin America.” Phoebus: A Journal of Art History 7. Valle, Perla. 1994a. Códice de Tlatelolco: Estudio preliminary de Perla Valle. Puebla: INAH, Universidad Autónoma de Puebla. Valle, Perla. 1994b. Estudio de Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (Códice Kingsborough). In Códice de Tepetlaoztoc 1994. Valle, Perla. 1998. “La sección VIII del Códice de Tlatelolco: Una nueva propuesta de lectura.” In De tlacuilos y escribanos, edited by Xavier Noguez and Stephanie Wood, 33–47. Vié-Wohrer, Anne Marie. 2002. “Huellas del culto de Xipe Totec en la toponimia del estado de Guerrero.” In El pasado arqueológico de Guerrero, edited by Christine Niederberger and Rosa M. Reyna Robles, 533–66. Mexico: CEMCA, Gobierno del Estado de Guerrero, INAH. Wake, Eleanor. 2007. “The Serpent Road: Iconic Encoding and the Historical Narrative of the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2.” In Cave, City, and Eagle’s Nest: An Interpretative Journey through the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2, edited by Davíd Carrasco and Scott Sessions, 205–54. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

R eferences

Wake, Eleanor, and Phil Stokes. 1997. “Mixtec Manipulations: Pictographic History and Cultural Identity of Early Colonial Mexico.” Journal of Latin American Lore 20 (2): 209–48. Warren, Dave. 1968. “The Nobility Element of the Matrícula de Huexotzinco.” In Actas y memorias del XXXVII Congreso Internacional de Americanistas, 3:155–73. Buenos Aires. Wicke, Charles. 1975. “Once More around the Tizoc Stone: A Reconsideration.” In Proceedings of the International Congress of Americanists (41 session, Mexico, 1974), 2:209–22. Mexico. Wicke, Charles. 1986. “Escultura imperialista mexica: El monumento de Acuecuexcatl de Ahuízotl.” Estudios de cultura náhuatl 17:51–62. Wood, Stephanie. 1998. “The Social vs. Legal Context of Nahuatl Titulos.” In Native Traditions in the Postconquest World, edited by Elizabeth H. Boone and Tom Cummins, 201–31. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection. Wood, Stephanie. 2003. Transcending Conquest. Nahua Views of Spanish Colonial Mexico. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. Wright Carr, David Charles. 1997. “Manuscritos otomíes del Virreinato.” In Códices y documentos sobre México, segundo simposio, edited by Salvador Rueda Smithers, Constanza Vega Sosa, and Rodrigo Martínez Baracs, 2:437–62. Mexico: INAH. Yoneda, Keiko. 1989. “Lectura del Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 3 y el contexto histórico en que se produjo.” In Coloquio de documentos pictográficos de tradición náhuatl, edited by Carlos Martínez Marín, 29–39. Mexico: UNAM. Yoneda, Keiko. 1991. “Migraciones y conquistas: deciframiento global del Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 3.” In Primer coloquio balances y prospectivas de las investigaciones sobre Puebla: Memorias, edited by Alma Y. Castillo Rojas, 233–40. Puebla: Gobierno del Estado de Puebla, Comisión Puebla V Centenario. Zapata y Mendoza, Juan Buenaventura. 1995. Historia cronólogica de la noble ciudad de Tlaxcala. Transcripción paleográfica, traducción y notas Luis Reyes García y Andrea Martínez Baracs. Tlaxcala: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Tlaxcala, CIESAS. Zantwijk, Rudolf A. M. van. 1985. The Aztec Arrangement: The Social History of Pre-Hispanic Mexico. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.

471

Index

Italics indicates that entry is found in a caption for a figure. Acallan, 83, 140, 383

Acamapichtli, 204, 217 Acatelco, 202 Acatlan, 267, 285, 287, 305 acayetl. See smoking tube Achiutla, 352, 357n29 Acolhuaque, 14, 18, 20, 67, 212, 224, 228, 262 Acolhuacan (Acolhua state): region, 16, 21, 40, 223, 271, 286; rulers, 155n8, 223, 256; state, 21, 224, 227, 229, 232, 239, 303n41 Acolhua state. See Acolhuacan Acolman, 112 Actas de Cabildo, 220 Acuecuexatl Stone, 12, 192 Aguilera, Carmen, 7, 87–89, 94, 129, 172, 174, 181n259, 276, 305n66 Ahuatlan, 261 Ahuitzotl: coronation, 75–76, 143, 182n273, 369, 436; funerary bundle, 55, 82, 397; images, 58, 192, 200, 213, 215, 369; insignia, 71, 109, 118, 126, 134, 145, 148, 325, 328–29, 369, 385, 392, 396, 405, 410, 411, 423, 425, 431, 432, 434, 436; reign, 12, 55, 161n55, 161n56, 178n222, 247, 253, 271, 305n62 ajaw, 51 alcalde: 32n12, 44, 216; images, 274, 303n36; as members of municipal councils, 28–29, 243, 289 Alcozauca, 258 Alejandrino, don Diego, 344

Alejandrino, don Miguel, 344, 354, 356 alguacil, 28 altepetl (native state): 5, 9, 13, 16, 36, 57, 67, 226, 302n31, 333n44, 356n21, 416; continuity and survival, 22, 239, 276, 278; and ethnic identity, 19, 132, 238, 241, 288, 348; foundations 19–22, 319, 324–25; in modern historiography 17, 303n41; and native sources, 24, 187, 219, 223, 227, 229, 231, 247, 261–62, 265, 270, 282; organization, 19–21, 24–26, 44–45; relationship between, 26, 229, 233–35, 261–62, 267; rulers, 26, 189, 205, 210–12, 222, 229, 232, 233–34, 235, 265, 302n33, 306n74, 312; as seats of municipal government, 27–28, 32n11; size 20, 261; and Spanish administrative units, 27, 278, 337, 348; strategies, 27, 247, 267, 310, 327, 361–62; subdivisions, 20–21, 26, 231, 233–34, 239, 247, 261–62, 286; subordinate to Triple Alliance, 21, 24, 261, 285–87, 364 Amanalca, 350 amatlacuilo, 28. See also escribano Amaxac, 250 amber, 77–78, 79, 376, 379 Amimitl (deity), 56, 182, 263 Amitzin, 303n37 Amiztlato, Diego, 343 Anahuac, 76, 136, 430, 432 ananacaztli, 109, 130, 131, 156n19, 157n21, 406, 421. See also tlahuiztli

473

474

I ndex

Anawalt, Patricia, 7, 34, 35, 41, 42, 55, 57, 58, 65, 65, 69, 85–87, 89, 92, 93, 93, 95–97, 99, 100, 102, 103, 104, 104, 105, 106, 107, 107, 108, 109, 113, 113, 117–18, 119, 121, 123, 127, 128, 130–31, 133, 134–35, 143, 145, 146–47, 169n140, 171n162, 171n166, 172n168, 173n184, 174, 177n213, 177n215, 177n220, 179n239, 180n251, 181n257, 181n261, 181n262, 182n263, 233, 310, 385, 387, 393, 399, 400, 427, 430 Anders, Ferdinand, 14 Anderson, Arthur J.O., 31, 90, 164n83, 164n88, 169n132, 172n169, 173n177, 173n183, 173n184, 173n185, 174n189, 176n203, 182n267, 312, 402, 404 animal-skin capes. See ehuatilmatli annals: 3, 6, 8–11, 31n8, 88, 109, 342, 343, 356n21, 360; in alphabetic form, 243; and imperial influence, 285, 288, 347, 353; pictorial conventions, 16, 40, 200, 216, 218, 231, 234, 243, 253, 271, 304n47 Aoquantzin, 158n25, 367 Apaneca, 129, 414 Apanohuayan, 356n14 Aquiyahualcatl, don Francisco, 282, 283, 284 348, 353 Aquiyahuateuctli. See Aquiyahualcatl, don Francisco armbands, 34, 139, 322, 425. See also machoncotl; macopilli Arrellano, Manuel, 349 arrows: as Chichimec attribute, 65, 137, 182n272, 203, 223, 225, 228, 232, 234, 240, 265, 267, 276, 324; as royal insignia, 74, 137, 183n275, 293, 293, 320, 389, 418; as weapon, 107, 135, 137, 182n272, 193n273, 301n23, 351–52 Asselbergs, Florine, 262, 264–65, 267, 448 Atencingo, 282 Atengo, Santa María de, 96, 242–43, 468 Atepec, 258 Atlan, 101 Atlantean figures, 47, 49, 50, 51, 88, 89, 172n170, 190 atlatl. See spear-thrower Atlihuetzyan, 306n69 Atlixco, 199, 325 Atotonilco (el Grande), 242–43, 285 Atotonilco de Pedraza, 242, 285 Atzaqualca, 351, 357n27 Audiencia of Guatemala, 355n5 Aubin, Joseph Marius Alexis, 228 Axayacatl: 300n11, 301n20, 325; conquests, 126, 247; costume, 84, 117, 135, 137, 198, 200, 428; descendants, 199–200, 209, 242, 302n33; gifts, 83, 140, 169n131, 174n191, 323, 436; images, 74, 88, 129,

181n359, 197, 213, 256, 414; mortuary bundle, 55, 61, 69, 106, 138, 161n55, 183n275, 199, 375, 392; name, 305n55; reign, 163n78, 189, 299 Axocopan, 96, 105, 112, 242, 285 ayatl (net-like, thin cape), 89, 90, 92, 361, 397 Azcapotzalco: conquered by Tenochtitlan, 36; rulers, 291, 349; sources, 30, 156n20, 213, 247; Tepanec state, 20 aztatzontli, 59, 123, 125, 162n70, 162n71, 350, 357n25, 406 aztaxelli (double heron feather): as attribute of Tezcatlipoca, 58–59; combined with quetzal feathers, 57, 59, 284, 337; images in pictorial manuscripts, 57, 59, 276, 279, 281–82, 284, 305n58; insignia, 58, 132, 278, 337; in religious feasts, 194; ritual and military associations, 58–59, 162n68, 192, 194, 276; worn with headbands, 57–59, 132, 277 Aztec: 7, 27, 31n9, 37, 38, 40, 46, 63, 68, 73, 77, 108, 109, 126, 129, 143, 151, 159n41, 160n51, 171n164, 181n262, 238, 241, 242, 249, 284, 285, 299n7, 300n17, 302n25, 306n70, 345, 373, 376, 405, 414; concepts, 46, 50, 53, 61, 91, 120, 360; merchants, 76, 168n118; monuments, 12, 23–24; period, 18–23, 17, 44, 87, 95–96, 100, 102–4, 152, 154, 187–88, 194–95, 245, 247, 250–51, 255, 257–58, 261, 269–72, 310–11; rulers, 80, 83–85, 87, 97, 103, 118, 136, 139–41, 146, 170n151, 174n192, 181n259, 200, 202, 203, 289, 300n11, 344, 417, 430; warriors, 33, 60, 78, 106, 111, 113, 117, 130–31, 132–33, 182n271, 189, 191, 424 Aztec empire. See Triple Alliance Aztecs: as preconquest Nahuatl-speaking groups, 12, 18; uses of term, 18–19. See also Mexica Aztlan, 18 Baird, Ellen Taylor, 302 Ballesteros García, Víctor Manuel, 304n50 ballgame, 77, 82, 379, 382, 384 banners (flags; panitl): 325, 328, 349, 392; as back insignia, 129–30; as European-style emblems, 353; varieties of, 140, 180n235, 181n260, 198, 298, 350, 406, 407, 408, 409, 410, 411, 413, 415, 417, 418, 420. See also tlahuiztli Barlow, Robert, 11, 31n9, 304n52, 355n6 Barreto Mark, Carlos, 249 Batalla Rosado, Juan José, 14, 43, 101–12, 171n161, 176n206, 177n210, 298, 316, 394, 403 bear, 150 bells: as leg ornaments, 144, 349, 436; made of copper, 145, 436; part of jewelry, 72, 81, 82, 167n114, 352, 376, 377, 382, 383, 436

I ndex

Bench Relief, 45, 144, 167n113, 177n220, 188, 413 Berdan, Frances F., 18, 21, 22–24, 30n2, 31n9, 31n10, 35, 41, 42, 55, 57, 58, 65, 65, 69, 86, 92, 93, 93, 99, 100, 102, 103, 104, 105, 105, 107, 108, 113, 118, 119, 121, 123, 127, 133, 134, 145, 154, 169n140, 177n215, 179n239, 180n251, 233, 242, 243, 245, 247, 250, 261, 271, 286, 305n62, 310, 328, 385, 387, 393, 399, 400, 427, 430 Beyer, Hermann, 38, 43, 45, 46, 53, 128 Bierhorst, John, 30n4 Blanton, Richard E., 233, 239, 303n41 bloodletting. See sacrifice Boban Aztec Calendar Wheel, 154n4, 155n8, 229, 230, 230 bone: 74, 176n205, 192, 199, 300n16; motifs, 100, 106, 316, 391; as sacrificial implement, 192, 195. See also chicahuaztli Bonampak, 51 Boone, Elizabeth Hill, 13, 15, 24, 30n2, 30n5, 31n8, 228, 229, 235, 243, 253, 285, 287, 301, 304n46, 306n71 bow: as Chichimec weapon, 65, 137, 223, 225, 234, 240, 265, 267, 333n35; in imagery, 183n275, 320; as royal attribute, 183n273, 203, 228–29, 232 bracelets (macuextli): 34, 157, 225, 315, 345, 349, 360, 368, 371; images, 190, 303n37; terms, 139, 312, 426; varieties, 139, 213, 342, 344, 424, 425. See also macuextli; matemecatl Brito, Baltazar, 357–58 Broda, Johanna, 23 bronze axe, 138, 183, 252 Brumfiel, Elizabeth M., 325 Buren, Olivier van, 267 butterfly (papalotl): 65, 83, 120, 180n250, 190, 350, 351, 422, 433; back devices, 393, 394, 395, 407, 413, 419, 428; ornaments, 76, 410, 415, 427 Byland, Bruce E., 201 cabecera, 27, 32, 303n41 Cabello Carro, Paz, 307 cabildo (municipal organization): 275, 278, 356n13; members, 220; organization, 27–28; Spanish model, 28, 289 Cacama, 182n273, 211, 229, 338 çacatapayolli (sacrificial grass ball), 60, 195 cacique, 27, 272, 275, 339–40, 354. See also gobernador; tlatoani cactli. See sandals Calapan, 282, 284 Calco, 233 Calendar Stone, 56 Calnek, Edward, 11

calpolli: in altepetl structure, 19, 29, 32n11, 32n12; officials, 44, 343 calzones. See trousers camaxtli, 88, 202, 321 camisa, 335. See also camixatli capes: 34, 58, 63, 106–7, 136, 144, 171n162, 171n163, 172n169, 173n177, 173n181, 173n183, 174n189, 175n193, 175n194, 175n199, 175–76n200, 176n204, 176n205, 176n206, 176n208, 176n209, 176–77n210, 177n211, 177n213, 178n225, 181–82n262, 182n273, 202, 225, 229, 234–25, 272, 276–79, 281–82, 289, 300n12, 302n28, 303n36, 303n37, 303n43, 310, 321, 322, 331n4, 333n35, 335, 336, 337–38, 340, 342–46, 349, 371, 385–403, 434; made of animal skins, 98–100, 175n197, 195, 204, 223, 224, 228, 231, 239, 262, 324; owned by colonial nobles, 84–85, 246–47, 253; associated with Tenochtitlan, 91, 93, 97, 241, 255–57, 267, 270, 286, 316–17, 319, 361; varieties and designs, 84–105; worn by rulers, 4, 7, 38, 85–89, 92–97, 100–1, 152–54, 160n47, 172n173, 173n184, 174n190, 174n192, 175n196, 203–5, 208–9, 210–13, 215–18, 220, 221, 231, 232, 237, 242–43, 245, 249–51, 258, 262, 264–65, 284, 304n47, 311, 323, 327. See also ehuatilmatli; xiuhtilmatli; xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli captives, 184n293, 190, 200; captured in battle, 241, 372; grasping their life force, 34–36; in imagery, 123, 251–52; as sacrificial victims, 66, 91, 97, 175n193, 263, 321, 332n25, 379 çaquantototl, 63 Carrasco, David, 21–23, 25–26, 31, 201–2, 233, 270, 321 Casas, Bartolomé de las, 157n20 Castañeda de la Paz, María, 209, 213, 222, 302n33 Castañeda Tezcacoacatl, don Antonio de, 262 Castilla, don Pablo de, 282, 306n69, 355n2 Castillo de Teayo, 272 Cecetzin, don Cristobal de Guzmán, 210, 214, 215, 216, 221 Cempoala (Veracruz), 240, 271, 285 Cempoallan (Zempoala; Hidalgo), 239 Cerón de Alvarado, don Martín, 345, 352 Cerro de Malinche, 106, 192, 299n7 Chalco. See Chalco Amaquemecan Chalco Amaquemecan, 9, 28, 39, 109, 158n27, 162n63, 177n220, 200, 224, 241, 374 chalchiuhcozcatl (jade necklace), 80, 170n149, 374, 382 Chalchiuhtlicue (goddess), 80, 378, 382, 383 Chance, John K., 22–23, 30n2, 258, 306n70, 339 Chantico (goddess), 182n268, 414, 428

475

476

I ndex

Chapultepec, 13, 61, 72, 136, 164n82, 169n131, 196, 199–200, 202, 234–35, 300n11, 300n16, 378 Charles II, King of Spain, 348 Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, King of Spain, 278 Charlot, Jean, 46 Chávez Balderas, Ximena, 106, 173n182 chayahuac cozcatl (necklace of radiating pendants), 81–84, 170–71n158, 342, 382 Chiapan, 242, 285 Chiauhtla, 231 chicahuaztli (rattle staff ), 142, 198, 200 Chicomecoatl (goddess), 80, 438, 443 Chicomoztoc, 224, 261, 263–64, 266 Chicomoztoc-Colhuacan, 262 Chichen Itza, 46–51, 48, 49, 50, 53–54, 61, 74, 83, 92, 95, 133, 134, 144, 159n41, 160n46, 191 Chichimec: ancestors, 35, 37, 66, 67, 99, 139, 147, 153, 195, 263–65, 271; attributes, 56–57, 65, 66, 137, 150, 174n192, 182n272, 203, 226–27, 228, 240–41, 263, 267, 282, 284, 320, 361, 388, 391, 440, 443; people, 85, 103, 137, 196, 204, 223–25, 228, 234–35, 276, 303n35, 324, 348–49; region, 17, 227, 243, 341–42; rulers, 53, 65–68, 74, 92, 98, 130, 141, 195, 207, 231–32, 262, 293, 406; tradition, 13, 56, 98, 102, 205, 207–9, 223–24, 261–62, 287, 318–19, 333n35; war, 45, 225, 350. See also Chichimeca Chichimeca: attributes, 348; emergence from Chicomoztoc, 262; posing as, 348; Teochichimeca, 99, 147, 387, 391, 392, 437, 440, 443; Tolteca, 262, 262, 263, 264. See also Chichimec chichimecateuctli, 26, 65, 224, 355n4 Chiepetlan, 129, 148, 158n30, 171n164, 177n217, 184n286, 185n310, 185n311, 250, 251, 257, 304n51, 412, 413 chimalli. See shields Chimalli Stone, 181n260, 300n11, 300n17, 430 Chimalpopoca, 135, 183n278, 204, 299n5 Chinantecs, 339 Chocho-Popoloca, 267 Cholula, 59, 74, 261, 262, 264, 267, 269, 318–19 Chontalcoatlan, 249–50 Christianization, 8, 10 Christians, 10, 36, 315, 338, 344, 348, 352–53 Cihuacoatl (goddess), 37, 59, 376, 428, 437 cihuacoatl (title), 21, 159n35, 182n273, 245, 311, 386 Cincalco, 61, 80, 198, 200, 300n13 Cinteotl (maize god), 106 Cipac, don Luis de Santa María, 213–17, 214 Cipactli, 202

Ciudad de Guzmán, 301n23 Clark, James Cooper, 180n251, 401 Clavijero, Francisco Javier, 38 Coanacochtzin, 211, 323 Coatlan (Oaxaca), 167n112, 340 Coatlan del Río (Morelos), 158, 185n311, 249, 251, 269 Coatlichan, 228–29 Coatlicue (goddess), 59, 142, 184n299, 428 coat of arms, 278, 306n69, 339, 353 Cocopin, 232 coçoyahualolli: 165n94, 303n39; as Chichimec attributes, 65, 208, 240; in imagery, 67, 165n96; in Tetzcocan tradition, 203, 226, 232, 241; worn by early rulers, 67–68, 195 codices. See pictorial manuscripts Codex Aubin, 175n195, 216, 217, 217, 297, 297, 394, 402, 415, 432 Codex Azcatitlan, 36, 59, 60, 66, 135–37, 157, 175, 177, 183n277, 184n293, 184n295, 184n298, 195, 292, 292–93, 294, 306n74, 401, 402, 403, 412, 413, 436 Codex Azoyú 1 and 2, 44, 45, 96, 108, 129, 171n164, 175n195, 182n266, 183n285, 184n291, 185n310, 251, 253, 255–60, 256, 259, 290, 305n57, 401, 403, 406, 415 Codex Badianus, 102, 142 Codex Borbonicus, 14, 46, 166n101 Codex Borgia, 46, 53, 175n193 Codex Cozcatzin, 36, 85, 108, 129, 136–37, 171n164, 175n195, 180n247, 180n254, 181n256, 181n259, 183n277, 184n295, 196, 197, 296, 377, 394, 402, 409, 412, 414, 425, 428, 430, 432, 436 Codex Cuetlaxcohuapan, 337 Codex Dehesa, 171n164, 176n201, 269, 355n11 Codex Fiestas, 101, 176n210, 388, 392, 393, 396, 398, 400, 403 Codex García-Granados, 293 Codex Humboldt Fragment 1, 253, 255 Codex Humboldt Fragment 6, 230 Codex Ixtlilxochitl, 87, 96, 109, 110, 130, 131, 137, 139–41, 143, 146, 166n107, 169n131, 169n135, 170n157, 177n219, 183n277, 183n282, 183n285, 184n295, 241, 300n14, 382, 396, 402, 421, 424, 427, 436 Codex Kingsborough. See Códice de Tepetlaoztoc Codex Magiliabechiano, 91 Codex Mendoza, 7, 15, 35, 35, 41, 41–43, 42, 55, 55, 57, 58–9, 63, 65, 65–66, 66, 68, 69, 72, 77–78, 80, 85, 86, 91, 92, 93, 93–94, 98, 99, 101, 102, 103–6, 104, 105, 107, 108, 112, 113, 117–18, 119, 121, 123, 125–28, 127, 130, 133, 135, 137, 144, 145, 155n6, 159n34,

I ndex

162n67, 165n93, 167n113, 169n140, 170n145, 170n150, 170n154, 171n164, 176n208, 176n209, 277n214, 177n217, 177n218, 179n241, 180n249, 180n251, 213, 233, 257, 344, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 396, 398, 399, 400, 401, 408, 409, 410, 411, 412, 413, 414, 415, 416, 417, 419, 420, 421, 422, 423, 427, 428, 429, 431, 443, 448, 450 Codex Mexicanus, 175n195, 216–17, 292, 401, 402 Codex Moctezuma, 177n217, 413 Codex Nuttall, 52, 58, 160n44, 161n61, 194, 296 Codex Osuna, 213, 215, 215, 292, 293 Codex Saville, 177n220, 216, 403 Codex Telleriano-Remensis, 45, 47, 67, 68, 97, 108, 155n7, 162n67, 165n95, 167n113, 170n145, 170n154, 170n158, 177n217, 177n220, 179n243, 296, 296, 340, 388, 407, 411, 413, 427, 429, 430, 431 Codex Tudela, 57, 62, 75, 80, 81, 83, 84, 85, 99, 100, 101, 101, 102, 107, 114, 122, 130, 141, 144, 167n113, 176n200, 276n209, 176n210, 278, 300n18, 316, 317, 320, 388, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 400, 401, 403, 430 Codex Tulane, 38, 86, 158n29, 171n164, 268, 268–69, 305n59 Codex Valeriano, 241, 401 Codex Vaticanus A, 77, 82, 91, 108, 126, 135, 140, 141, 141, 146, 147, 180n247, 181n256, 183n278, 196, 197, 198, 415, 416, 428, 429, 430 Codex Vaticanus B, 309 Codex Xolotl, 11, 15, 35–36, 40, 85, 126, 135, 137, 139, 141, 177n217, 177n218, 181n256, 183n278, 184n290, 223–26, 225, 226, 228, 230, 291, 292, 293, 299n5, 303n38, 306n74, 316, 388, 409, 416, 427, 429, 440, 443 Códice de Huamantla, 129, 142, 152, 161n62, 276, 282, 427, 429, 400 Códice de Huichapan, 96, 117, 129, 154n5, 158n31, 161n60, 175n195, 175n196, 177n217, 182n266, 183n277, 184n291, 243, 246, 392, 395, 402, 413, 415, 427, 429 Códice de la Cueva, 267, 427 Códice de las posesiones de don Andrés, 281 Códice de Malinalco, 247, 250 Códice de Nicolás Flores, 158n31, 242 Códice de Ohuapan, 158n30, 253 Códice de Otlazpan, 243 Códice de Santa Cruz Tlamapa no. 3, 239, 290 Códice de Santa María Nativitas Atengo, 243 Códice de Santiago Tlacotepec, 245, 247, 248 Códice de Santo Toribio Xicotzinco, 306n69 Códice de Tecuiciapan, 158n30, 253

Códice de Tepetlaoztoc (Codex Kingsborough), 67, 165n95, 184n300, 185n301, 185n302, 231–32, 233, 388, 391, 396, 396, 427, 440, 443 Códice de Tlatelolco, 45, 125, 140, 142, 181n256, 184n295, 219–22, 344, 346, 345–47, 353, 416, 417, 429 Códice de Xicotepec, 56, 155n5, 161n59, 177n219, 177n220, 183n277, 271, 286, 303n39, 427 Códice en Cruz, 61, 134, 155n7, 158n28, 162n67, 170n145, 177n217, 177n218, 183n277, 198, 231–32, 232, 234, 241, 249, 256, 412, 427, 429, 430 Códice Ritos y Costumbres, 91, 176n210, 394 Códices del Marquesado del Valle de Oaxaca, 158n29, 185n311, 249, 249 Códices Matritenses, 30n1, 203, 205 Coixtlahuaca, 63, 126, 261, 267, 287, 372 Colegio de Santa Cruz, 204 Colhuacan, 229, 235, 327, 356n18 Colhuaque, 224 commoners (macehualtin): access to exotic goods, 310, 343, 355n5; adornments, 33, 73, 84, 102, 117, 148, 167n116, 323, 337, 362, 378, 383, 407, 408; rulers symbolically equated with, 323; and social divisions, 24–26, 28, 327; and sumptuary laws, 310–11 Confirmation des elections de Calpan, 158n29, 270, 304n49 Conrad, Geoffrey W., 31 copilli: 344; as head device, 38–39, 68–69, 69, 117, 157n22, 157n24, 158n25, 159n33, 166n99, 361, 406, 408, 410; as back standard, 118–19, 120. See also tlahuiztli copper, 73, 120, 138, 145, 167, 179n238, 252, 295, 378, 410, 430, 436 coral, 78, 380 Corona, Eduardo S., 226 Coronado, Francisco Vásquez de, 303n35 coronation. See investiture corregidor, 27, 272 corregimiento, 27 Cortés, Hernando, 1–2, 11, 30n1, 64, 73, 94, 121, 140, 209, 238, 277, 277, 296, 299n8, 338–39, 376, 377, 383 Cortés Ixtlilxochitl, don Hernando, 296 Cortés Quapoltochin, don Domingo, 258, 259, 260 Cortés Totoquihuaztli, don Antonio, 221 Cotaxtla, 272 cotinga amabilis: 284; associated with Xiuhteuctli, 54; in Chichen Itza, 54; feathers, 160n51 cotton: 1, 15, 31n7, 37, 69, 224, 225, 323, 324, 373; armor, 107, 362; capes, 34, 84–85, 90–91, 93, 93, 96–100, 173n181, 173n183, 203, 223, 228, 234,

477

478

I ndex

264–65, 303n37, 310, 345, 361, 387, 388, 392; ear pendants, 117; imitations of animal skins, 100, 176n203, 176n204; incense bags, 316; shirts, 362; skirts, 147, 228, 433, 434, 440, 443; varieties grown, 100; xicolli garments, 106 cotzehuatl. See leg bands Coxcoxtli, 235 Coyoacan, 28, 36, 339 Coyolxauhqui (goddess), 167n114 coyote; 100, 149, 176n203, 176n204, 185n305, 350, 386, 387, 433, 440, 443; battle suit, 112, 112–13, 115, 178n233, 179n234, 179n235, 270, 343, 407, 408, 410, 418, 419, 420, 421 cozcapetlatl (plaited necklace), 81, 383, 384 cozcatl. See necklaces Crónica mexicana, 11, 55, 61, 98, 131, 155n14, 161n58, 168n126, 199, 306n74, 311, 328, 419. See also Tezozomoc crown, 38–39, 54–55, 60–61, 156n15, 158n25, 159n33, 159n37, 160n51, 162n71, 163n73, 165n97, 166n102, 169n131, 183n273, 210, 231, 237, 238, 239, 290, 298, 304n48, 304n49, 340, 367 cuechintli (netted cape), 89, 91–92, 361, 387 cueitl. See skirts Cuernavaca. See Quauhnahuac Cuetlaxtlan, 55, 63, 78, 103, 165n98, 372, 375, 390, 394, 444 Cuetzallan, 61 Cuetzpal. See Tlilcuetzpalin cuextecatl battle suit: 38, 68, 69, 75, 78, 109, 119, 123, 133, 377, 404, 427; description, 71, 117, 166n99, 352, 362, 409; and military hierarchy, 117, 345; symbolism, 132, 350; varieties, 117, 407, 408, 410, 422, 423 Cuextlan, 168n126, 211, 302n31 cuexyo design, 113, 117, 133, 133, 134, 134–35, 362, 427 Cuicuitlapan, Bautista, 343 Cuitlahuac, 210, 213, 214, 369 Curcio-Nagy, Linda A., 347 dance: 220, 311; adornments, 61–63, 65, 70, 74–83, 126, 139–40, 142–43, 144, 169n141, 198–99, 221, 344, 347, 349–51, 374, 379, 380, 381, 382, 384, 411, 414, 415, 416, 424, 425, 433, 434, 435, 436, 437, 438, 439; in colonial feasts, 95, 106, 111, 351–52; images of dancers, 129, 140, 160n49; in ritual, 58, 72, 75, 83, 320, 327–28, 352, 368 darts. See tlacochtli Davies, Claude Nigel, 31n9, 104, 242 Dedication Stone, 12, 58, 106, 192, 193, 194 Dehouve, Danièle, 250 Demarest, Arthur A., 31n9

Díaz del Castillo, Bernal, 11, 291 Díaz Migoyo, Gonzalo, 11 Dibble, Charles E., 61, 90, 164n88, 172n169, 173n177, 173n183, 173n184, 173n185, 174n189, 176n203, 182n267, 203, 226, 232, 312, 402, 404 Diel, Loori Boornazian, 30n2, 234–35, 238, 304n48 Doesburg, Sebastián van, 267, 269 Dresden Codex, 160n50, 163n76 drums: 58; as back insignia, 118, 130, 198, 300n14, 412, 417, 418; as part of Xipe dress, 180n245, 198; in possession of colonial nobles, 352 Durán, fray Diego, 11, 36, 45, 62, 66, 75, 82, 84, 129, 130, 139, 146, 159n37, 164n84, 164n85, 169n131, 171n164, 175n195, 177n219, 195, 200–2, 300n16, 305n62, 310, 322, 325, 252, 375, 393, 402, 403, 412, 414, 425, 427, 430 Dyckerhoff, Ursula, 7, 113, 130, 136, 198–99, 300n18 eagle: 55, 74, 76–77, 93, 100, 142, 173n183, 182, 185n309, 238, 247, 263, 317, 342, 345, 352, 379, 380, 381, 386, 392, 395, 397, 401, 403, 428, 433, 434, 438, 440; feathers in headdresses, 59–60, 63, 163n74, 372; war costume, 58, 113, 115, 115, 116, 117, 128, 130, 132, 135, 150, 153, 179, 251, 327–29, 347, 362, 373, 414 ear ornaments (nacochtli): 46, 58, 60, 88, 117, 167n114, 194, 166n106, 166n108, 167n110, 167n111, 167n112, 167n113, 167n114, 167n116, 220, 228, 278, 312, 360–61, 371, 374, 375; in imagery, 71, 190, 183–84, 279, 300n16; varieties, 70–76, 376–78; worn by rulers, 70–73, 153, 183–84, 368, 372 ecacehuaztli (fans): carried by merchants, 140; in dance, 347, 349; as royal attributes, 140, 253, 255, 265, 292, 340, 342, 345; varieties, 67, 140, 412, 415 ecacozcayo design, 101–2, 102, 176n208, 388, 437 Ehecatl (wind god), 101, 176n206, 278, 334n48, 338 ehuatilmatli (animal-skin capes), 98, 99, 175n197, 195, 388 ehuatl tunics, 107–9, 111, 119, 178n221, 351, 362, 404, 405 encomendero, 185n301, 231, 272 encomienda, 27, 29, 32n11 escribano, 28 Espinoza, Carlos, 346 Estrada de Gerlero, Elena Isabel, 337 fans. See ecacehuaztli Fash, William, 13, 30n5 feasting: 65, 76, 153, 155n10, 166n101, 221, 343, 349–52, 364, 376, 377, 384, 387, 389, 391, 394, 401, 409, 414, 433, 440, 441, 442, 443, 444;

I ndex

banquets, 140, 382, 384; fiestas reales, 346, 350; preconquest ceremonies, 16, 46, 56, 58, 72, 75, 82, 83, 90–91, 94–95, 100, 106, 111, 122, 129, 130, 125, 150, 160n49, 162n70, 175n193, 183n284, 184n287, 189, 194, 195, 198, 199, 301n23, 325, 327 featherworking, 12, 60 fire: 77, 159–60n44, 165n94, 176n209, 179n238, 410, 419; in royal investiture, 320–21; and tonalli, 313–15; and turquoise, 45–46, 49–51, 53–54, 58, 61, 314–16, 360, 365. See also Xiuhteuctli; Xiuhcoatl flags. See banners flamingo feathers, 150–51 flayed god. See Xipe Totec flint knife, 63, 118, 198, 295, 372, 374, 409, 412, 421 flintstone, 77, 198 Florentine Codex, 8, 37–39, 41–44, 54, 58, 63, 64, 68, 69, 74, 85, 98, 103, 115, 115, 116, 118, 126, 128, 129, 131–32, 138, 139, 141, 143, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 155n14, 157n21, 159n35, 160n48, 160n49, 162n70, 164n83, 164n86, 165n94, 165n95, 166n99, 166n104, 167n116, 170n144, 171n158, 171n162, 175n193, 175n196, 177n220, 178n225, 178n226, 179n241, 179n244, 180n254, 184n287, 184n295, 185n302, 198, 200, 203–5, 206, 207, 207, 208, 209–13, 211, 218, 235, 289, 301n23, 302n25, 302n26, 302n28, 306n74, 313–16, 318, 322, 326, 330, 337–38, 345, 350, 363, 368, 371–427, 429–44 flowers: 65, 217, 330, 382, 384; bouquets, 141, 265, 267, 272, 279, 284, 289; in imagery, 137, 138, 250, 276–77, 281, 296; motifs on garments, 77, 102, 128, 146–48, 184n300, 185n301, 205, 208, 210, 250, 385, 388, 393, 396, 397, 399, 403, 421, 422, 440, 441; as royal attributes, 4, 138, 140–41, 142, 267, 276, 278, 312, 347, 371; smelling of, 82, 140–41, 184n287, 258, 315; species, 102, 142, 147, 276, 305–6n66 Fragmento de las mujeres, 281 Freidel, David, 48 funeral ceremonies: associated divine costumes, 55, 61, 63, 90, 321, 393; of Mexica rulers, 55, 68, 69, 75, 106, 138, 161n55, 171n161, 199, 202, 291, 301n19, 375 Furst, Jill, 310 Galarza, Joaquín, 250 García Galleja, don Juan, 272 Genealogía de don Francisco Aquiyahuateuctli, 282, 283, 348, 353 Genealogía de los descendientes de Nezahualcoyotl, 40 Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, 40

Genealogía de Quauhtli, 281 Genealogía de Tlatzcantzin, 281, 385, 394 Genealogía de Zolin, 166n107, 175n195, 278, 280, 385, 394, 402 Gibson, Charles, 27, 29, 209, 292, 303n41, 339, 340 Glass, John B., 15, 30n6, 31n7, 203, 216, 218, 228, 231, 242, 267, 304n53, 305n63, 355n6 gobernador: as the head of municipal council, 27; in pictorial manuscripts, 215–16, 249, 258, 272, 275; in postconquest altepetl, 27–28, 213, 342, 354; and tlatoani, 27, 210, 289, 302n33 gold: 1, 159n37, 314; headbands of plaited gold, 55, 55, 59–61, 63–64, 68–69, 117–18, 130, 154, 161n54, 163n76, 164n88, 166n99, 361, 374, 408, 415; insignia ornamented with, 54–55, 69, 111, 118, 129, 135, 328, 404, 407, 408, 410–13, 417–18, 421–23, 436; jewelry, 70–72, 75–78, 81–83, 90, 117, 139, 144, 166n108, 166n109, 167n111, 169n131, 169n141, 170n146, 170n152, 184n296, 220, 228, 279, 300n16, 341, 352, 375–84, 407, 424–25; in ornaments, 137, 140, 170n155, 170n157, 181n260, 183n275, 198, 291, 325, 345, 417, 427, 430, 435 Gonzáles, Alonso, 245–46, 248 grass ball. See çacatapayolli Graulich, Michel, 12, 43, 67, 91, 120, 129, 156n15, 163n78, 299n2, 410, 414 Great Temple. See Templo Mayor Grube, Nikolai, 51, 309 Guadalupe, Virgin of, 349 Guatemala, 132, 211, 341, 355n5, 355n7 Guerrero: emulation of Aztec styles, 13; local states, 3, 21, 36, 183n280, 188; pictorial conventions, 24, 138, 151, 201, 249; pictorial manuscripts from, 40, 96, 129, 151, 175n195, 177n217, 183n285, 184n286, 184n291, 185n311, 252, 269, 285; provinces of Aztec empire, 37, 154n5, 183n266, 285, 301; region, 113, 171n164, 250, 363 Guevara, don Cristobal de, 270 Gulf Coast: cults, 117; emulation of Aztec styles, 13; insignia and garments, 103, 147, 181n262; pictorial manuscripts from, 83, 103; provinces of Aztec empire, 117; region, 13, 147; tribute from, 83, 103, 133, 382, 390 Gutiérrez Mendoza, Gerardo, 257–58, 305n55 Guzmán, Ana de, 356n18 Guzmán, don Alonso de, 28 Guzmán, don Cristobal de. See Cecetzin Guzmán, don Esteban de, 210, 213–4, 213, 215, 302n33 Guzmán, don Gabriel de, 352–53 Guzmán, doña María de, 250 Guzmán Itztlolinqui, don Juan de, 339

479

480

I ndex

Guzmán, Nuño de, 209 Guzmán Omacatzin, don Francisco de, 302n33 Hackmack (Hamburg) Box, 58, 162n69 hair binders: in pictorial manuscripts, 62–63, 64, 220, 349; as royal attribute, 36, 62–64, 69, 241–42, 368, 371–75; varieties, 62–64; worn in dance, 349, 374 hairstyles: of rulers, 34–35, 155n8, 155n10; varieties, 34–37, 154n4; of warriors, 35–36, 154n5, 155n6, 115n7, 162n68, 229, 245; of women, 37. See also ixquatzontli; temillotl; tzotzocolli Hamburg Box. See Hackmack Box Harris, Max, 348, 351 Haskett, Robert, 298, 352–53 Hassig, Ross, 21–22, 31n9, 107, 199 hats, 217, 250, 272, 289, 302n54, 335, 337–38 hawk scratches: 404, 415; on cuextecatl suits, 117, 179n238, 408, 409, 423; on shields, 133, 427 headbands: as local/ethnic attribute, 55, 55–56, 132, 154, 162n63, 271, 348; in pictorial manuscripts, 55, 57, 162n62, 262–64, 276–79, 281–82, 284, 305n58, 337; varieties, 56–59; worn by Chichimecs, 55–58, 66, 69, 263–64, 361 headdresses: 4, 7, 84, 109, 118, 156n17, 157n23, 159n42, 159n43, 159–60n44, 160n45, 160n50, 160n51, 162n70, 163n77, 163n78, 163n89, 166n101, 166n102, 179n235, 179n234, 181n258, 181n259, 247, 266, 267, 270, 290, 300n15, 309, 310, 351–52, 361, 410, 411; golden, 52–55, 60; and investiture, 37–41, 45, 183n275, 368, 372; made of feathers, 57, 59–61, 65–66, 69, 123, 129–30, 162–63n71, 163n79, 191, 192, 194, 198–99, 262–64, 300n16, 327, 349, 361, 373, 406, 414, 415, 418; pillbox/drummajor headdress, 46–47, 50, 50–52, 51, 52, 61, 160n46, 160n47; varieties, 37–70. See also aztaxelli; crown; headbands; tlalpiloni; xiuhhuitzolli helmets, 46–49, 51, 64, 118, 126, 130, 159n43, 179n235, 179n243, 189–90, 270, 309, 350, 361, 411, 412, 416, 417, 418, 420, 421 Hermann Lejarazu, Manuel, 7 heron feathers: and ethnic associations, 195, 305n58; head ornaments, 57–59, 162–63n71, 277, 281–82, 348–49, 415; military insignia; 123, 126, 404, 410, 411. See also aztaxelli Hernández Ayopochtzin, don Domingo, 9 Hernández de León-Portilla, Ascensión, 8 Hernández Moxochintzetzeloatzin, don Diego, 338 Herrera, Antonio de, 156–57n20 Heyden, Doris, 102 Hicks, Frederic, 21, 25, 31n9

Hidalgo: pictorial manuscripts from, 40, 56, 64, 66, 96, 117, 129, 151, 154n5, 175n195, 177n217, 182n266, 184n291, 239, 242, 285; provinces of Aztec empire, 285; region, 3, 13, 21, 24, 36, 188 hip cloth, 89, 94–97, 95, 143–44, 145, 174n189, 174n192, 175n193, 184n294, 190, 337, 402, 403 Historia de las Indias de Nueva España, 175n195 Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, 35, 66, 66, 74, 139, 161n59, 176n201, 177n217, 185n310, 195, 261–64, 263, 267, 319–20, 388 Hodge, Mary G., 21–22, 31n9, 233, 239, 271, 303n41 Honduras, 140, 209, 211, 238, 338, 383 Horn, Rebecca, 27–29, 339 horse, 29, 239, 338–39, 348, 352, 355n3, 355n5, 365 Houston, Stephen, 80, 315 Huanitzin, don Diego (Panitzin), 209–10, 213, 214, 216, 218, 238 Huastec: affiliations, 38, 39, 68, 73, 78, 103, 117, 118, 139, 142, 147, 153, 166n99, 364, 376, 377, 380, 381, 386, 390, 407, 408, 409, 410, 415, 417, 422, 423, 424; insignia, 194, 327, 406; mother goddesses, 75, 117, 409; region, 117, 126, 168n126, 271; shields, 117, 133–34, 134, 345, 350, 427, 429. See also Huastecs Huastecs, 73, 103, 139, 168n119, 322, 333n38, 376, 406, 415, 424 Huaxtepec, 112, 147, 250, 285 Huei Mollan, 355n3 Hueipochtlan, 112 Huei Tecuilhuitl, 58, 376 huei teocalli. See Templo Mayor huei tlatoani (tlatoque): 150–51, 199; funeral rites, 202, 317, 321; images, 12; increase of tonalli, 321; insignia, 40, 111; investiture and accession, 292; title of rulers of Tenochtitlan, 21, 26, 189, 194, 205, 242, 325, 327 huei tlatoque. See huei tlatoani Hueycatenango, 258 Huemac, 129, 163n81, 198 Huetzin, 303n37 Huexotla, 68, 98, 176n202, 203–4, 207–9, 208, 212, 228–29, 302n28, 303n41 Huexotzinco, 56, 78, 83, 158n29, 169n134, 199, 202, 261, 269, 269–70, 287, 305n60, 318, 333n38, 335, 336, 337, 382, 397 huipilli (female shifts): 184n299, 185n301; in pictorial manuscripts, 147; varieties, 146–48, 440–42 Huitzila, 412, 158n29, 184n286, 252 Huitzilihuitl, 136, 216–17, 323, 367 Huitzilopochtli (Mexica patron god): 299n3, 315, 327, 334n45, 382; costume, 72, 95, 97, 134–35, 142, 167n114, 168n119, 172n173, 176n205, 202, 292,

I ndex

322, 376, 378, 425, 438; images, 72, 191, 299n5, 409, 429; manifestations, 94–95, 136, 175n193, 409, 414, 417, 432; as royal patron, 23, 100, 189–90, 192, 194–95; sacred bundle, 100, 317; solarization, 23, 189–90; temple, 23, 316–17 Huitznahuaque, 224 Huixtocihuatl (goddess), 72 Humboldt Fragment 6. See Codex Humboldt Fragment 6 ichcahuipilli, 107–8, 108, 177n220, 178n223, 276, 341, 362 icpalli. See seats Icpatepec, 165n98 Icxicoatl, 262, 263 Icxiquauhtli, 234–35 ihuiteteyo chimalli, 134, 135, 428. See also shields Ilamateuctli (deity), 59 incense bags: as priestly attribute, 192, 194, 195, 253; in royal imagery, 192, 231, 255, 199n7, 316 Inquisition, 340 investiture (accession rites): 5, 11, 25, 79, 202, 226, 293, 295, 296, 303n39, 306n74, 316, 327; and Chichimec rulers, 74, 226, 262, 319, 320; in Cholula, 74, 226, 318; and coronation, 316–21; and nose perforation, 73–75, 318–19, 321; and rulers of Tenochtitlan, 201, 292, 328; and transformation, 316–19, 364–65 Ipalnemohuani (deity), 330 Isaac, Barry L., 22 Itlacauhtzin, 204, 208 Itzcoatl, 20, 154n4, 205, 218, 222, 229, 230, 231, 239, 245, 246 itzpapalotl, 120, 122, 166, 180n250, 410 Itztlacoliuhqui (deity), 411 Itzyocan. See Izúcar de Matamorros -ixiptla, 155n10, 189 Ixmiquilpan, 45, 242, 341–42 Ixnextli (deity), 177n213, 390 ixquatzontli, 35. See also hairstyles Ixtlilton (deity), 65, 171n160, 384 Ixtlilxochitl, don Fernando de Alva, 11, 21, 40, 65–68, 85, 121, 137, 141, 156n20, 157n22, 164n91, 165n92, 165n95, 183n276, 202, 205, 224, 232–33, 310, 315–16, 325, 333n33, 355n2, 411, 422 Izcalli, 46, 72, 75, 83, 95, 100, 106, 160n49, 194, 195, 384, 387, 394, 433 Iztactlachco, 242 Izúcar de Matamorros (Itzyocan), 266 Jacoba, doña María, 345 jade: jewelry, 73, 156n17; in Maya culture, 48, 53; motifs, 136; ornaments, 369; symbolism, 309, 312, 314

jade necklace. See chalchiuhcozcatl jaguar: 33, 74, 115, 116, 117, 132, 136, 146, 153, 162n69, 176n202, 179n237, 179n244, 247, 251, 263, 329, 347, 349, 362, 412, 414, 432, 434, 438; jaguar skin insignia, 68, 98–100, 99, 113, 118, 198–99, 204, 220, 392, 430, 437, 443; motifs, 58, 115, 118, 148, 175n199, 175–76n200, 345, 350, 413; seats covered with jaguar skin, 148–50, 182n273, 183n275, 185n305, 185n307, 185n309, 245, 272–74, 300n16, 319, 327, 342 Jalisco, 201, 301n23, 303n35 Jansen, Marteen, 14 Jerusalem, 348 jet, 73, 378 Jiménez, don Juan, 352 Jiménez García, Elisabeth, 49, 88, 89, 134, 172n170 Jiménez Padilla, Blanca M., 250, 304n51 Juárez, don Diego, 345 judges: 28–29, 243, 260; appointed by Spaniards, 213–15; attributes of, 41–42, 137, 151, 159n34, 175n196, 205, 213–17, 249, 289–90; as officials of municipal council, 28; in pictorial manuscripts, 41, 42, 43, 220, 303n36; in pre-Hispanic times, 41, 41–45, 134n35, 159n36, 213, 258, 325; See also teuctlatoque; juez de residencia; juez gobernador juez de residencia, 210, 213 juez gobernador, 215–16 K’awiil (deity), 189 Karttunen, Frances, 171–72n167, 312 Katz, Friedrich, 31n9 Klaus, Susanne, 30n4, 39 König, Viola, 257–58 Kranz, Travis Barton, 306n67 Kristan-Graham, Cynthia, 46–47, 83, 159n42 Lakamha, 51 leather: as Chichimec attribute 56, 65, 139, 223, 263; garments, 73, 98, 100, 150n63, 165n197, 376, 424, 425, 437, 440, 443; ornaments, 167n116; seats covered with, 150 leg bands (cotzehuatl): 143, 157n21, 190, 349; in pictorial manuscripts 190, 284; varieties, 144–45, 436; worn by rulers, 144–45, 220, 284, 362, 368, 371, 372. See also cotzehuatl; tecuecuextli León (Spanish province), 273 Leibsohn, Dana, 261–64 León-Portilla, Miguel, 8 Lesbre, Patrick, 224, 230, 304n44 Lienzo de Aztactepec y Citlaltepec, 252, 304n53 Lienzo de Coacoatzintla, 142, 185n311, 272, 273, 274, 275, 290, 305n65

481

482

I ndex

Lienzo de Guevea, 62 Lienzo de Oyamatepec y Huitzilatl, 158n29 Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, 132, 179n237, 335n7, 414 Lienzo de Quetzpalan, 171n164, 175n195, 265, 401 Lienzo de San Vincente Palmar, 269 Lienzo de Tecamachalco, 267, 287 Lienzo de Tepeticpac, 57, 91, 129, 152, 154n5, 161n62, 177n217, 185n306, 267, 276, 387, 413 Lienzo de Tetlama, 158n29, 185n311, 247 Lienzo de Tlaxcala, 35, 56–57, 59, 60, 61, 63, 66, 66, 75, 78, 79, 112, 117, 119, 120, 121, 121, 122, 124, 125, 126, 127, 129, 132–33, 133, 135, 142, 151, 154–55n5, 161–62n62, 169n131, 170n149, 177n217, 179n237, 180n249, 180n254, 181n260, 182n263, 277, 277–78, 341, 387, 398, 401–2, 406–13, 415–17, 419–22, 427–29, 431, 443 Lienzo de Totomixtlahuaca, 185n311, 252, 304n53 Lienzo of the Heye Foundation, 266 Lienzos de Chiepetlan, 185n311, 250 lip ornaments: 300n16, 400, 170n144, 170n146; as attributes of warriors, 76–79, 371; in ceremonies, 76–77, 350; in pictorial manuscripts, 78, 79, 71, 169n135, 284, 341; as royal attributes, 73, 76–77, 169n131, 372, 169n141, 220, 278, 312, 361, 368, 371–72, 374; varieties, 76–79, 379–81. See also tençacatl; tencololli; tentetl Lockhart, James, 7, 10, 19–21, 25–28, 30n4, 31n9, 32n11, 39, 44, 237–38, 262, 270, 295, 298, 312, 329, 335, 557, 340, 343, 354, 356n21 loincloths. See maxtlatl Loo, Peter van der, 14 López Austin, Alfredo, 34, 141, 200, 313–15, 320–21 López de Gómara, Francisco, 328 López Luján, Leonardo, 106, 173n182, 318 macehualtin. See commoners machoncotl (armband): 424; owned by colonial nobles, 342; in pictorial manuscripts, 139; as royal attribute, 139; varieties, 139. See also armbands; macopilli macopilli (armband): owned by colonial nobles, 344; in royal imagery, 139; varities, 139. See also armbands, machoncotl macquahuitl (war club), 138, 220, 284 macuextli (bracelets), 139, 331n3, 345, 424, 426. See also bracelets; matemecatl Macuiltochtli (deity), 166n100 Macuilxochitl (deity), 166n100, 171n160, 384, 427 maguey fiber: 31n7, 333n35, 419, 437; capes, 90, 102, 173n177, 388, 389, 392, 400, 401, 403; in commoners’ garments, 84; in low-quality

clothes, 323; worn by Aztec rulers upon the fall of Tenochtitlan, 323 Malinalco, 58, 148, 182n273, 247, 285 Mamalitzin, 325 Mansilla, don Juan de, 142, 272–74, 274 Manuscrito del Aperreamiento, 63, 64 Mapa Catastral de Tepoztlan, Panhuacan, Ayapango y Tlanahuac, 158n27, 241 Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan, 266, 290 Mapa de Atenco–Mizquiahuala, 64, 96, 105, 242, 244, 285, 402 Mapa del Coatlan del Río, 249, 251 Mapa de Metlatoyuca, 303n39 Mapa de Popotla, 125, 412, 413, 417, 418, 422, 427 Mapa de San Antonio Tepetlan, 185n311, 305n65 Mapa de Sigüenza, 223 Mapas de Quauhtinchan, 56, 58, 261, 276, 388 Mapa de Xochitepec, 269 Mapa Quinatzin, 35, 40, 66, 66, 141, 185n304, 223, 230, 233, 303n40, 388 Mapa Tlotzin, 35, 40, 154n4, 155n8, 223, 225, 227–30, 227, 303n40, 388, 440, 443 Marquesado (del Valle de Oaxaca), 158n29, 185n311, 249, 249 Martínez Baracs, Rodrigo, 171n165 Martínez Marín, Carlos, 278 matemecatl (bracelets), 139, 156n19, 157n12, 368, 372, 424. See also bracelets; macuextli Mathews, Peter, 47–48, 160n51 Matlatzinca, 62, 140, 174n191, 245, 363 Matos Moctezuma, Eduardo, 23, 31n9 Matrícula de Huexotzinco, 158n29, 269, 270, 287, 335, 336, 337 Matrícula de Tributos, 14, 41, 63, 93–94, 98, 103, 109, 112, 118, 126, 128, 130, 154, 165n93, 170n150, 176n208, 177n214, 177n215, 179n241, 180n249, 183n280, 185n302, 257, 372, 385–93, 396, 398–400, 408–10, 412–14, 416, 419–23, 427–28, 431, 440, 443 mats, 185n309: varieties, 148–50; in pictorial manuscripts, 185n304, 272, 345; as royal attributes, 148–50, 182n273, 183n275, 319, 327. See also pepechtli; petlatl Maxixcatzin, 333n35 maxtlatl (loincloths): varieties, 143–44, 433–35; in pictorial manuscripts, 143, 174n189; as royal garments, 143–44, 371 Maya: area, 51, 61, 148; culture, 46, 52, 53–54, 74, 80, 159n43, 160n46, 160n50, 167n116, 194, 309, 360; gods, 163n76, 189; rulers, 13, 48–49, 82, 144, 202 mayordomo, 28, 243 Mazahua language, 245

I ndex

Medina Lima, Constantino, 257, 305n55 Megged, Amos, 355n5 Mendoza, don Antonio de, 303n35, 339, 341 Mendoza Imauhyantzin Huitznahuatlailotlac, don Diego de, 219–21, 347 merchants (pochteca): 95, 362, 441, 442, 444; in Aztec empire, 76, 168n118; insignia, 76, 79, 81, 82, 106, 111, 126, 140, 142, 175n193, 291, 350, 353, 377, 379, 381, 384, 386, 392, 405, 406; privileges, 72, 77–78, 184n287, 311, 330, 381, 382 Mesoamerica: art, 287, 309, 316, 362; beliefs, 189, 201, 316; cultures, 7; ethnic groups, 17, 309–10; geographic conditions, 22; power centers, 53, 360; regions, 1, 18; studies on, 2, 7, 17, 152; symbols and concepts, 49, 56, 80, 80, 98, 140, 144, 148, 150, 153, 193, 235, 314–15, 320; trade, 142; traditions, 12, 24, 34, 73, 112, 113, 133, 160n51, 194, 252, 310–11, 362–63; unification, 80, 98, 133, 190; world system, 17, 31n9 messengers, 41, 63, 70, 73, 83–84, 106, 140, 159n33, 291, 323, 327, 274, 376, 384, 397 Metztitlan, 22, 168n126, 242 Mexica, Tenochca, 13, 18, 21, 221, 239, 242, 245, 253, 257, 271, 282, 284–86, 320, 323, 329, 428 Mexico City, 140, 349 Mexico-Tenochtitlan: 27, 24, 26, 113–15, 130, 153–54, 179n237, 223, 304n47, 323, 356n14, 356n18; in Aztec empire, 18–22, 44, 221, 285–86, 310–11; ceremonies, 67–68, 74–75, 91, 97, 100, 111, 220, 260, 292, 319–22, 343; conquests, 20–21, 23, 169n131, 247, 253, 266, 271, 286–87, 305n60, 305n62; cults, 45, 75, 201, 235, 301n23; influence, 20, 109, 233–34, 241–43, 257, 260, 266–67, 270, 284–87; monuments, 12–13, 40, 56, 67, 142, 231, 324; pictorial styles, 115, 188–219, 234–36, 236, 239–41, 284–86, 305n56; rulers, 41, 45, 54–55, 58, 70–71, 84, 86, 93, 96, 98, 103, 109, 189–202, 203–19, 291–93, 310, 315–17; sources, 9, 30n4, 31n9, 156n20, 304n45 Michhuaque, 68, 324 Michoacan: 168n126, 333n32, 401; inhabitants, 324; military campaign in, 200; Tarascan state, 139, 242. See also Michhuaque Mictlanquauhtla, 394 Mictlanteuctli, 43, 101, 101, 340 Mikulska-Dąbrowska, Katarzyna, 60 Miller, Mary E., 194 Mimixcoa (deities), 67, 264, 318 mirrors, 90, 94, 144, 189, 190, 200, 300n10, 300n16, 322, 378, 382, 397, 421, 435. See also tezcacuitlapilli miquiztli insignia, 119, 420. See also tlahuiztli

miter: 156n16; of bishops, 88, 297–98, 367; of plaited gold, 54–55; and xiuhhuitzolli, 297, 367 Mixcoatl (deity), 56, 67, 263–64, 319 Mixe, 339 Mixteca-Popoloca, 262 Mixtec: 7, 138, 194, 250, 304n54; people, 139, 142, 201, 262, 291, 383, 424, 433, 438; pictorial manuscripts, 14, 16, 37, 58, 159–60n44, 194, 202, 267–68, 282, 309–10, 319, 355n11; region, 3, 95, 106, 126, 146, 151, 269, 287, 299n1, 352 Mixteca Baja, 3, 267, 269, 287 Mixton, 45, 220, 303n35 Mizquiahuala, 96, 158n31, 242 Mo’-Xook-Chahk Itzam-K’an-Ahk, 51 Moctezuma, don Pedro, 242 Moholy-Nagy, Hattula, 167n116 Molina, fray Alonso de, 36–37, 65, 79–81, 88–90, 96, 109, 111, 128, 148, 154n3, 155n9, 155n11, 155n15, 156n16, 156n18, 159n36, 163n74, 164n90, 167n115, 170n148, 170n153, 171–72n167, 172n168, 172n171, 176n207, 178n223, 178n229, 178n230, 178n231, 306n74, 312–13, 321, 329, 344, 365, 377, 385 momoyactli back devices, 127, 128, 180n255, 181n257, 412. See also tlahuiztli Montúfar, fray Alonso de, 220, 297, 297 moon ornaments. See yacametztli Moors, 348 Moquihuixtli, 126, 134, 136, 389, 398, 403 Morelos: Aztec provinces, 258; pictorial manuscripts, 142, 158n29, 177n217, 184n286, 185n311, 247, 249, 252; region, 3, 21, 24, 151, 188, 285, 363 mortuary bundle: attributes of, 63, 80, 81, 83, 84, 202, 291, 317; of rulers of Tenochtitlan, 55, 61, 68, 69, 75, 83, 106, 138, 161n55, 183n275, 199, 236, 238, 321, 375, 397 mosaic: design, 48, 72–73, 87–89, 132, 204; headdress, 46–54, 160n45, 160n46, 160n51, 270, 309; of turquoise, 37–39, 46, 54, 68, 72, 86–88, 89, 89, 92–94, 93, 96–97, 104, 108, 136, 143–44, 159n40, 167n114, 172n170, 174n192, 175n196, 204, 213, 269, 312, 316, 319, 344, 360–61, 376–77, 382, 402, 403, 432, 435. See also xiuhhuitzolli Motelchiuh, Andrés de Tapia, 209–10, 216–17 Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina: attributes, 83, 137, 139, 143–44, 160n51, 170n144, 310, 381, 399; conquests, 242, 257, 276; imagery, 60, 74, 169n131, 189, 319; reign, 20, 271, 299n2, 305n55 Moteucçoma Xocoyotzin: 242, 351, 399, 400, 416, 419; attributes, 31, 67, 80, 167n112, 174n190, 175n199, 195, 197, 291, 378, 397; conquests, 161n56; imagery, 57–58, 72, 82, 139, 140–41, 143, 148, 169n135, 194, 202, 210, 213, 214, 216, 271,

483

484

I ndex

300n16; investiture, 55, 103, 118–19, 145, 168n126, 174n191, 180n250, 369, 389, 390, 401, 420, 424, 425, 434, 436; reign, 13, 182n273, 192, 199n8; war costume, 118, 198–200 Motolinía, fray Toribio de Benavente, 11, 25, 157n20, 198, 316, 318 mountain lion, 99, 149, 150, 185n305, 185n307, 391 Moxixicoa, Simón, 356n18 Muñoz Camargo, Diego, 12, 25, 126, 318, 324, 416 municipal organization. See cabildo nacochtli. See ear ornaments Naolinco, 274 native state. See altepetl Neçahualcoyotl: 166n106, 183n275, 200, 234, 375; achievements, 202, 232–33, 271; adornments, 130, 139, 169n135, 184n293, 204, 229, 427; and Chichimec identity, 226, 228; founder of Tetzcocan power, 21, 227; images, 76, 109, 110, 154n4, 169n131, 183n285, 226, 230, 230, 231, 316, 370 Neçahualpilli: 182n273, 320; adornments, 204, 231; allies, 174n191, 325; and Chichimec identity, 228; descendants, 296, 338; images, 87, 96, 141, 143, 154n4, 231, 370 necklaces (cozcatl): 157n21, 170n152, 170–71n158, 171n160, 190, 322; owned by colonial nobles, 82–83; as part of Xipe costume, 382; in pictorial manuscripts, 170n149; as royal attributes, 60, 80–84, 312, 341, 342, 368, 371, 374; as status objects, 34, 153; varieties, 79–84, 382–84; worn by warriors, 83 Neurath, Johannes, 7, 45, 53, 159n40 New Fire, 13, 46, 67, 194–95 New Mexico, 303n35 New Spain, 6, 11–12, 27, 140, 196, 278, 289, 291, 339, 341, 346–47, 350, 354 Nicholson, Henry B., 7–8, 13–14, 31n8, 38, 43, 56, 161n61, 161–2n62, 164n82, 196, 199, 201–4, 300n16 Noguez, Xavier, 7, 38, 40–41, 45–46, 53, 67, 160n49, 166n101, 219, 234–35, 238, 245–46, 293, 296, 303n35, 304n46 Nopaltzin, 224, 293 nose ornaments: 101, 169n129, 372; in investiture, 168n126, 182n273, 318–20; as royal attributes, 33–34, 46, 76–77, 168n120, 168n123, 189, 264, 284, 300n16, 360–61; varieties, 73–76; worn by warriors, 46, 60, 77–78, 79, 117, 168n119, 407, 408, 409, 427. See also yacamitl; yacaxihuitl Nuttall, Zelia, 129

Oaxaca: region, 3, 21, 24, 37, 151, 201, 285, 421, 432; and cult of Xipe Totec, 201, 301n23; pictorial manuscripts from, 158n29, 185n311, 249, 249; rebellion in, 45, 340; and Spanish influence, 339–40 ocelot, 149–50, 175n200, 185n305, 185n307, 198, 373, 392, 395 ocelotl, 113, 113, 114, 115, 117, 175n200, 328, 350, 392, 412, 414. See jaguar; tlahuiztli Ocelotl, Martín, 92, 93, 93, 340, 341 Ocelotl, Pablo, 245 Ochpaniztli, 111, 150, 327 Ocotelolco, 337, 343, 348, 356n21 Ocotochco, 282 octli deities, 101, 121. See also pulque deities Ocuillan, 103, 176n208, 309, 393 Offner, Jerome, 56, 224, 226, 230, 234, 239, 271, 303n38, 303n39 Ohuapan, 252 Olac (Xochimilco), 302, 356n18 Olivier, Guilhem, 26, 58, 60, 67, 90, 100, 189, 201, 264, 317, 319 Olko, Justyna, 16, 22, 24, 44, 49, 51–52, 57, 60, 66–67, 66, 89, 93, 95, 134, 141, 170n151, 195, 197, 200, 214, 219, 225–26, 232–33, 234–35, 246, 256, 259, 271, 278, 280–82, 296, 327, 346 Olmec: period, 235; traditions, 194, 383, 433, 438 Olmeca-Huixtotin, 139, 424 Olmos, fray Andrés de, 157 Omacatl (deities), 89, 166n100, 378 Ome Tochtli (deities), 413 Opochtli (deities), 162n70, 162n71 Ordenanza del Señor Quauhtemoc, 36, 415 Otomi: ethnic group, 73, 76, 78, 90, 102–3, 162n62, 170n143, 242–43, 245, 271, 276, 322, 363, 376–81, 385, 388–89, 392, 398, 401, 441, 444; warriors, 63–64, 69–70, 77–78, 123, 169n134, 169n137, 373, 375–78, 380–81 Otonteuctli (deity), 56, 69, 91, 120, 122, 129, 166n101, 179n238, 182n272, 386, 410, 437 Otumba, 121, 328, 411, 422 Oudijk, Michel, xxi, 253, 255, 257, 258, 259, 260, 305n57 Oztoticpa, 224, 228 Pacific coast, 22, 126, 139, 201 Painal, 94, 95, 136, 168n119, 175n193, 299n5, 409, 414, 417, 432 Palenque, 48, 51–52, 309 Palimpsesto Veinte Mazorcas, 158n30, 185n311, 251–52, 254, 287, 304n53 panitl, 123, 129–30, 413. See banners

I ndex

Panitzin, 209. See Huanitzin, don Diego Panohuayan, 325, 356n14 Panquetzaliztli, 94, 168n118, 175n193, 409 Pantecatl, Martín Lázaro, 356n14 papalotl back standards, 123, 136, 357n27, 413. See butterfly Paris, 30n4 parrot feathers, 64, 67, 120–21, 164n8, 178, 416, 419, 428, 430, 431, 442 Pasztory, Esther, 12–13, 179n235, 188, 190, 194–95, 299n8 patzactli, 125–26, 127–28, 128–29, 181n257, 181n259, 355n10, 406, 409, 412, 414, 421. See also quetzalpatzactli; tlahuiztli Peñafiel, Antonio, 7 pepechtli, 148, 150, 185. V Peralta, don Gastón de, 350 Peterson, Jeanette Favrot, 298, 302n25, 342, 349 petlatl, 81, 148–50, 185n305, 345. See also mats; pepechtli Philip II, king of Spain, 220, 346 pictorial manuscripts (codices): and elite subculture, 13, 78, 135, 142, 236, 316, 388; genres, 11–13, 147, 152, 200, 216, 218, 227, 265, 271, 287, 363, 413; regional styles, 7, 40, 61, 113, 133–35, 138, 151, 201, 247, 267, 286, 289 Piedras Negras, 49, 51, 52 Piho, Virve, 37, 154n2, 155n6 pilli. See pipiltin Pimentel, don Diego, 228 Pimentel, don Hernando, 212, 221, 302n32 Pimentel Tlahuitoltzin, don Antonio, 230 Pinome, 261, 262 pipiltin (nobles; pilli): and noble houses, 25; and descent from tlatoani or teuctli, 26; attributes, 325 Pipiyollin, 305n55 Plano Parcial de la Ciudad de México, 213, 214 Pochotl, 225, 303n37 pochteca. See merchants Pohl, John M.D., 201, 310 political organization: in imperial provinces, 5, 13, 19, 20–26, 31n9, 31n10, 40, 189, 202, 212, 241, 253, 255, 257, 327; among preconquest Nahuas, 9, 16, 18, 135, 309; after Spanish conquest, 5, 27, 29, 188, 220, 259, 260, 269, 284, 290, 348, 354. See also Triple Alliance Popoloca, 262, 267, 287, 363 Porras, don Martín de, 243 Prem, Hanns J., 104 priests: costume and attributes, 4, 12, 34, 58, 59, 69, 85, 90, 106, 162n70, 166n101, 171n162, 192,

194–95, 226, 253, 298, 315, 316; in imagery, 35, 46, 58, 91, 106, 144, 194–95, 196, 226, 300n9, 316; and mane hair, 34, 59; in religious ceremonies, 46, 59, 69, 85, 90, 106, 199, 315, 316; and royal investiture, 74, 146, 156n16, 226 Primeros Memoriales, 7, 8, 15, 25, 33, 35, 38, 46, 57, 60, 63, 65, 66, 67, 71, 71, 74, 80, 81, 82, 83, 88, 92, 95, 98 99, 109, 112, 115, 118, 119, 120, 121, 124, 125, 127, 130, 131, 132, 134, 135, 137, 148, 151, 195, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 218, 223, 224, 232, 245, 262, 289, 344, 345, 363 Puebla: imperial provinces, 21, 24, 285, 286, 364; local altepetl, 16, 364; pictorial manuscripts from, 74, 151, 155n5, 156n20, 175n195, 177n217, 183n285, 184n286, 250, 265, 287; pictorial styles, 66, 129, 151, 246, 247, 269, 270, 271, 276, 282, 287, 305; region, 3, 16, 56, 57, 152, 261, 363 Puebla-Tlaxcala: elite attributes, 58, 141, 143; investiture rites, 201, 202, 318, 321; pictorial manuscripts from, 57–58; region, 14, 56, 59, 132, 137, 143, 26, 318, 321, 340, 365; Spanish influence, 340 Puga, Vasco de, 355n1 pulque, 75, 101, 103, 121, 123, 163n73, 170n158, 382, 393, 406, 412, 413, 427, 438 quacalalatli, 64, 350, 418 quachichictli, 36, 155n9, 350 Quaquauhtzin, 233, 324, 325, 236 Quaquauhtzintlan, 272, 274 Quauhcececuitzin, 325 Quauhnahuac (Cuernavaca), 23, 112, 247, 258, 369 Quauhquechollan, 132, 179n237, 261, 265 Quauhtemoc, 209, 210, 213, 214, 217, 238, 323, 329, 338, 369 Quauhtenanco, 70, 76, 126, 139, 178n222, 377, 405, 424 Quauhtinchan: altepetl, 261; people (Quauhtinchantlaca), 18, 56, 262, 263, 264; pictorial manuscripts, 74, 262, 264, 265 Quauhtitlan, 30n4, 78, 112, 142, 169n134 quauhtlatoani (quauhtlatoque), 209, 210, 238 quauhtlatoque. See quauhtlatoani quauhxicalli, 12, 189 Quauhxicalli of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina, 60, 83, 144, 160n51, 189 quaxolotl insignia, 119, 121, 328, 404, 405, 407, 411, 414, 418, 420, 423. See also tlahuiztli Quecholli, 56, 162n63 quechquemitl, 146, 147 Querétaro, 349, 350 Quetzalacxoyatl, 168n121, 174n190, 182n273

485

486

I ndex

quetzalapanecayotl, 129, 130, 181n258, 181n259, 351, 323, 414 Quetzalcoatl (deity), 13, 48, 6872, 81, 82, 97, 101, 129, 174n192, 181n258, 181n259, 189, 192, 193, 196, 202, 278, 299n3, 299n7, 299n8, 322, 351, 377, 378, 382, 384, 388, 393, 414, 437; Ce Acatl Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl, 192 quetzal feathers: in arm bands, 139; in fans, 120, 140, 342; in headdresses and headbands, 57, 59, 60, 61, 63, 68, 69, 112, 113, 117, 123, 124, 129, 284, 337; in military insignia, 63, 64, 68, 71–72, 77, 119, 121, 124, 128, 130; owned by postconquest nobles, 342, 344, 345, 348, 353; in sapote skirt, 198; shields decorated with, 134, 343; worn in dance, 65 quetzalpatzactli, 109, 113, 126, 127, 128, 129, 132, 181n259, 190, 191, 200, 220, 221, 328, 341, 342, 353, 405, 416. See also tlahuiztli Quetzaltehueyac, 262, 263 quilted garments, 147, 148, 440, 443; armor, 107; capes, 93, 94, 177n215, 245, 385; patterns, 93, 94; sandals, 146, 437 Quinatzin, 224, 228, 230 Quiñones Keber, Eloise, 13, 192, 203, 204, 299n7 Quiyauhteopan, 183n280, 257 Quiyauhtzin, 255, 256 Quiyahuiztlan, 337, 348, 356n21, 416 rabbit fur, 146, 167n116, 400, 439, 441 rattle staff. See chicahuaztli Read, Kay, 170n151 Real Audiencia, 27, 260 regidor, 28, 32n12, 289, 292 Relación de Chiepetlan, 304n51 Relaciones geográficas, 12, 337 Reyes García, Luis, 20, 261, 262, 267, 306n69, 342, 343, 353 Reyes-Valerio, Constantino, 298 Rhodes, 348 Robertson, Donald, 14, 31n8, 223, 230, 239, 302n25, 303n40, 304n44, 304n45 rock crystal, 73, 78, 310, 377, 380 Rodríguez Cano, Laura, 242 Rodríguez Vega, Juan, 250 Rojas, doña Isabel de, 352 Rojas, José Luis de, 29, 31, 339 Rosa, don Julián de, 343 roseate spoonbill. See tlauhquechol Roulet, Eric, 340 Ruiz Medrano, Ethelia, 245, 246, 306n72 Russo, Alessandra, 315 Ruz Barrio, Miguel Angel, xxi, 30n3, 205, 302n26

sacrifice (bloodletting): and rites of royalty, 12, 23, 146, 189, 192–94, 196, 198, 316–18, 321; of captives, 23, 66, 67, 91, 97, 175n193, 321; implements, 37, 60, 189, 299n8; bloodletting, 155n15, 192–94; and war, 66, 67, 120, 196; in imagery, 59, 118, 193, 300 Sahagún, fray Bernardino de, 8, 38, 64, 91, 118, 199, 201, 203, 204, 205, 209, 210, 212, 219, 232, 311, 312, 314, 321, 322, 323, 329, 360, 363 Saint Francis, 350, 351, 353 St. Louis, 77 Saint Sebastian, 351, 352 Salazar, Gonzalo de, 185n301 Salazar, Juan Velásquez de, 231 San Bartolomé Actopantonco, 345 San Dionisio Yauhquemecan, 282 San Francisco, convent of, 204 San Francisco, don Julián de, 344 San Francisco Tlahuililpan, 342 San Juan Bautista Suchitepec, 269 San Juan Ihualtepec, 269, 352 San Juan Moyotlan, 3343 San Juan Teotihuacan, 331, 356n15 San Pablo Coapan, 272 San Pablo Teopan, 209 San Pedro Atoyac, 269 San Pedro Tecpan, 343, 344 San Pedro Tonayan, 272 San Sebastián Tzaqualco, 356n18 Sánchez-Nava Monolith. See Quauhxicalli of Moteucçoma Ilhuicamina sandals (cactli), 145–46: in pictorial manuscripts, 89; as royal atttibutes, 143, 145, 220, 312; and sumptuary laws, 310; varieties, 146, 437–39 Sandoval Acacictli, don Francisco de, 340 Santa Bárbara, Ana de, 356n18 Santa Maria Asunción, 270 Santa María Atlihuetzian, 282 Santa María de Atengo, 96, 242, 243 Santa María Magdalena, 272 Santa María Redonda Cuepopan, 218 Santiago, 352 Santiago Sánchez, Armando, 249 Santo Domingo Tepexi de la Seda, 356n18 sapote, 118, 142, 144, 180, 198, 300n13 Schele, Linda, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 160n51 Schreffler, Michael, 157n20 Schroeder, Susan, 9, 28, 31, 38, 39, 338, 355n4 seats (icpalli), 148–52; covered with animal skins, 150, 245, 319, 327; curule chair, 220, 238, 265; iconography of rank, 2, 148, 151, 152, 226, 229, 231, 232, 235, 276, 327, 346, 362; icpalli, 150, 151,

I ndex

258, 265, 345; in investiture rites, 148, 150, 226, 231; stools, 152; tepotzoicpalli, 150, 151, 216, 221, 223, 226, 229, 231, 235, 242, 249, 250, 256, 256, 265, 267, 268; varieties, 34, 150, 151; Seler, Eduard, 7, 12, 38, 46, 52, 61, 62, 82, 89, 101, 107, 117, 120, 121, 123, 126, 129, 136, 137, 139, 192, 201 shell, 48, 53, 64, 78, 82, 91, 101, 194, 310, 377, 380, 381, 388, 393, 396, 440 Sigüenza y Góngora, don Carlos de, 349, 356n24, 357n25 silver, 1, 64, 68, 72, 129, 181n60, 372, 411 shields (chimalli), 132–39; in Huastec style, 117, 133, 134, 350; associated with Huitzilopochtli, 134– 35, 136; in metaphorical expressions, 135; and military garments, 7, 34, 109, 111, 113; in pictorial manuscripts, 134–35; owned by postconquest nobles, 345; and tlahuiztli, 109, 111; covered with turquoise mosaic, 88, 136; varieties, 109, 113, 114, 117, 132–34, 135, 350, 427–34; shifts. See huipilli; quechquemitl shirts, 107, 164n88, 198, 200, 215, 217, 218, 220, 250, 270, 272, 335, 336, 337, 338, 347, 362. See also camisa skirts: as gifts, 323; in pictorial manuscripts, 149, 228, 279, 322; varieties, 147, 148, 362 Simeón, Remi, 168n125, 173n188, 184n296 Smith, Mary Elizabeth, 269, 305n59 Smith, Michael E., 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 105, 242, 243, 245, 247, 250, 25, 261, 271, 276, 286, 287, 310, 325 smoking tube (acayetl), 137, 138, 140, 141, 265, 289, 312 Spaniards: clothes, 94, 232, 274, 323, 338, 355n3; conquest, 1, 24, 27, 28, 58, 64, 68, 75, 83, 121, 211, 232, 278, 289, 323, 328, 329, 338, 340; status markers, 27, 291, 297, 323, 328 spear-thrower (atlatl), 135, 137, 138, 315, 429 Spitler, Susan, 223, 228, 229 Spores, Ronald, 29 staff of justice. See vara; topilli Stark, Barbara L., 22, 23, 258 Sterpone, Oswaldo José, 243 Stokes, Phil, 298 Stone of Warriors, 45, 142, 291 Stuart, David, 53, 80, 315 Sullivan, Thelma D., 7, 26, 53, 312 sumptuary laws, 84, 131, 145, 310–11 sun: and 4 Movement, 194; and back mirrors, 144; creation of, 54; descending, 129; designs alluding to, 90, 100, 121, 140, 163, 318, 399, 400, 407, 414, 416; and rulers, 317; and sacrifice, 23,

196, 318; and tonalli, 159n40, 313; and warriors, 121, 130 sword, 29, 107, 220, 239, 284, 338, 339, 341, 355n3, 355n7, 365 Tabasco, 139, 424 Tamoanchan, 141, 177n213 Taquitenango, 249 Tarascan state. See Michoacan Taube, Karl A., 48, 49, 53, 54, 80, 83, 91, 109, 133, 134, 144, 194, 309, 314, 315 Tecalco, 261 Tecamachalco, 261, 267, 282 teccalli, 25, 43, 44, 142, 246, 261, 262, 265, 270, 284, 343. See also tecpan Techotlalatzin, 185n304, 224, 225, 228, 230 Tecocoltzin, 211, 338 Teçoçomoc (Tezozomoc), 213, 291 tecpan, 25, 43, 44, 246, 298, 345, 356n13. See also teccalli tecpilotl, 65, 66, 67, 164, 165 tecuecuextli. See leg bands Tecuilhuitl, 58, 376, 440, 441, 442, 443, 444 Tehuantepec, Isthmus of, 136 tehuehuelli chimalli, 134, 135, 220, 428, 429. See also shields Tehuetzquititzin, don Diego de San Francisco, 210, 213, 214, 218, 237 Tejeda, don Luis, 232, 233 temalacatl, 12, 189, 396 temillotl: and high-ranking warriors, 36, 155n6, 229, 245, 251; as military hairstyle, 35, 36, 154n5, 155n6, 155n7, 229, 245, 251, 267, 271; in pictorial manuscripts, 35, 155n8; regional distribution, 155n7, 267; in association with rulers, 229, 271 Temilo, don Pedro, 205, 210, 211 Temple Stone, 13, 67, 194, 195, 196, 324 Templo Mayor (Great Temple; huei teocalli): Bench Relief, 45, 167n113, 177, 413; as a main pyramid and ritual precinct, 106; objects dicovered in excavations, 93, 106, 115, 118, 140, 167n113, 317 tençacatl, 76, 77, 78, 371, 372, 379, 380, 381. See also lip ornaments tencololli, 76, 78, 79, 379, 381. See also lip ornaments Tencoyotzin, 166n101, 233, 293 teniente, 28 tenixyo: in imperial provinces, 204, 216, 265; in pictorial manuscripts, 204, 257, 258, 265, 267, 268, 270; as prestigious motif, 85 Tenoch, 66, 216 Tenochca. See Mexica

487

488

I ndex

Tenochtitlan. See Mexico-Tenochtitlan tentetl, 76, 77, 156n19, 368, 371, 372, 380, 400. See also lip ornaments Tentzontotochtin, 171 Teocalli. See Temple Stone Teochichimeca. See Chichimeca Teotihuacan, 11, 48, 49, 50, 52, 53, 80, 82, 83, 91, 112, 120, 144, 152, 159n43, 160n46, 282, 296, 325. See also San Juan Teotihuacan Teotitlan del Camino, 169 Tepanec: altepetl, 36; state, 20, 104, 247; war, 20, 205, 212, 223, 243, 299n4, 333n38. See also Azcapotzalco Tepaneca, 18, 20, 21, 36, 169n134, 224, 242, 323, 324 Tepechpan, 236, 237; altepetl, 67, 233–34, 235, 285; rulers of, 166, 233–34, 235, 237, 238, 293; strategies, 233, 235, 238, 286 Tepeme (deities), 162n70 Tepepolco, 8, 131, 158n25, 182n263, 203, 204, 302n24 Tepequaquilco, 253 Tepetenchi (Xochimilco), 345, 356n14, 356n16, 356n17 Tepeticpac, 337, 348, 356n21 Tepetlaoztoc, 67, 68, 231, 232, 233, 286 Tepetzinco, 191 Tepeyacac: altepetl, 276; imperial province, 261, 267, 270, 276, 285, 287; shrine, 349 Tepeyollotl (deity), 195 Tepiquatzin, 229 tepotzoicpalli. See seats tepoztopilli, 137, 295 Terraciano, Kevin, 352, 353 Tetela, 261 Tetenango, 250 Tetlahuehuetzquitzin, don Pedro, 228 Tetlepanquetzaltzin, 323 Tetzcoco, 222–41; altepetl, 26, 231, 319; pictorial manuscripts, 14, 36, 40, 203, 212, 224, 271; royal attributes, 40, 65, 68, 77, 130, 141, 161, 168, 200, 204, 205, 223, 285, 293, 320; rulers of, 137, 140, 174n190, 176n202, 200, 203, 207, 209, 212, 220, 221, 228, 229, 232–33, 271, 325, 327, 331, 346, 347, 349; in Triple Alliance, 3, 5, 18, 20, 285, 287 Tetzcotzinco, 202 teuctlatoque, 29, 44. See also judges Texalocan, 261 Teyahualohuatzin, don Hernando, 236 Tezcacuitlapilli, 162n70, 376 Tezcatlipoca (deity): as royal patrons, 26, 58, 82, 89, 97, 100, 189, 201, 317; feasts of, 58, 72, 91, 155n10, 189, 376; attributes, 37, 57, 58, 59, 82, 85, 89, 92,

97, 100, 162, 172, 175, 189, 194, 202, 299n4, 321, 371, 387 Tezcatzoncatl (deity), 160n70, 376 Tezontepec, 242 Tezozomoc, don Hernando de Alvarado, 11, 55, 61, 63, 64, 69, 72, 75, 78, 80, 82, 89, 90, 98, 100, 101, 102, 103, 106, 117, 118, 119, 134, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 150, 151, 198, 199, 200, 291, 310, 311, 312, 319, 320, 322, 324, 325, 327, 328, 329, 342 Tezozomoc, ruler of Azcapotzalco. See Teçoçomoc Tezoyuca, 249 teuctli: and altepetl structure, 44, 45; as preconquest title, 25, 26, 41, 42, 43, 151, 159n35, 226, 257, 270, 292, 320, 343; and xiuhhuitzolli, 44, 45, 216, 290 thrones. See seats Tiacapan, Ana, 356n16 tiacauh, 63, 70, 75, 76, 78, 82, 111, 119, 169n132, 372, 381, 383, 404, 406, 407, 408, 434 Tiçatla, 277, 337, 348, 356n21 Tiçoc: coronation of, 75, 166n106, 172n175, 183n275, 368, 401, 436; funeral of, 68, 75, 142, 291; reign, 12; stone of, 12, 58, 83, 126, 142, 144, 163n78, 181n259, 189, 190, 195 Tikal, 48, 49, 52 Tilantongo, 58, 319 tilmatli. See capes Tira de Peregrinación, 129, 414 Tira de Tepechpan, 66, 137, 155n7, 158n28, 165n95, 195, 234, 236, 237, 238, 239, 241, 243, 260, 265, 290, 293, 295, 296, 304n46, 301n47, 301n48, 363, 402 Tititl, 58 Titres de Propriété Mexico Tenochtitlan, 175, 218, 219, 401 Tlacaellel, 245, 311, 386 Tlacahuepan, 199 Tlacahuepan, don Pedro, 351 Tlacateccatl, don Martín, 45, 159n38, 220 tlacateuctli, 41, 42, 43, 257 Tlacaxipehualiztli: as feast of Xipe Totec, 183, 198, 199, 301n23; and sacrifice, 196, 198, 200, 201, 301n23, 389, 391, 397 Tlachco, 103, 390 Tlachinollan, 250, 253, 255, 256, 257, 258, 260, 286 Tlacochcalcatl, Juan Rafael, 356n18 Tlacochcalco Yaotl (deity), 57, 82, 89, 155n10 Tlacochteuctli, 41, 42, 43 tlacochtli (darts), 137, 295 Tlacocihuatzin, 158n25, 367 Tlacopan, 3, 18, 20, 21, 138, 161n57, 174n191, 220, 221, 327, 346, 347

I ndex

Tlacotlalpan, 272 Tlacotzin, Juan Velásquez, 209, 216, 217, 338, 355n3 Tlacuilollan, 274 tlahuiztli, 107, 109–32, 324, 362; among postconquest nobles, 282, 353; use of, 117, 130, 132, 328; varieties, 112, 115, 117, 118, 120, 125, 128, 129, 136, 328, 343, 362, 406 Tlalhuica, 322 Tlalmanalco, 30n5, 340 Tlaloc (rain god), 80, 81, 90, 106, 162n70, 162n71, 173n178, 202, 322, 382, 415, 438 Tlaltenanpan, 61 Tlaltepantzin, 303n37 Tlalteuctli (earth deity), 60 Tlapacoyan, 261 Tlapan: conquered by Tenochtitlan, 253, 257; as local state, 40, 96, 250, 253, 258, 285, 287; local strategies, 258; pictorial manuscripts, 250, 258, 260; rulers, 253, 255, 256, 258, 259, 260 Tlapanec: language, 250; people (Tlapaneca), 201, 363; region, 201 tlalpiloni. See hair binders Tlatelolca, 18, 126, 204, 205, 210, 219, 221, 262, 303n35, 323, 375 Tlatelolco, 219–22; insignia associated with, 40, 41, 45, 70, 125, 177n220, 200, 403; native collaborators, 205, 212; rulers, 126, 134, 136, 138, 207, 211, 213, 220, 222, 224, 233, 346, 347; and Spanish conquest, 64, 204, 210–11, 221; war with Tenochtitlan, 41, 323, 329 Tlatlauhquitepec, 261 Tlatlauhqui Tezcatl/Tezcatlipoca (deity), 200 tlatoani (tlatoque): and concept of royalty, 26, 40, 44, 210, 316, 320–21; and gobernador, 27–28, 210, 275, 289, 302n33; in imagery, 83, 111, 135, 189, 192, 194, 205, 220, 228, 231, 232, 234, 235, 238, 246, 316–17; in preconquest altepetl, 20, 26, 234, 303n41; and postconquest survival, 205, 221, 236, 290, 331, 338, 345, 354, 355n4; as a royal title, 12, 20, 21, 25, 26, 44, 130, 210, 217 tlatocatlatquitl, 63, 77, 154n1, 311, 344, 374, 380 tlatocayotl, 20, 26, 28, 37, 39, 44, 157n23, 158n25, 159n33, 210, 211, 229, 345, 355n4, 367 tlatoque. See tlatoani tlauhquechol (roseate spoonbill) feathers: in colonial feast, 183n284; in headdresses, 61, 118, 163n79, 300n16, 349, 418; in military insignia, 180, 198, 199; and Xipe Totec, 181n260, 198, 351, 413, 418. See also tlauhquecholtzontli Tlauhquechol, don Francisco, 272, 274, 275, 351 tlauhquecholtzontli: as attribute of Xipe, 61, 62, 118, 198, 199, 300n15, 300n18, 351, 418; and Mexica

rulers, 61, 198, 300n15, 351; in royal portraits, 61, 199 Tlaquixtecatl, don Pedro de San Francisco, 342, 343, 352 Tlaxcala: local insignia 108, 119, 124, 132, 141–42, 143, 151, 153, 161, 182, 271, 276, 278, 285, 318, 328, 337, 348, 364; pictorial manuscripts, 14, 57, 66, 133, 276, 282; resistance to Triple Alliance, 22, 152, 153, 276, 282, 364; rulers and nobility, 35, 56, 58, 98, 103, 121, 137, 161n131, 175, 277–79, 282, 284, 333n35, 337; sources, 40; warriors, 35, 36, 61, 75, 78, 137, 161n131, 179, 341 tlaxilacalli, 19 Tlilcuetzpalin, 325 Tlilpotonqui, don Diego, 232, 233 Tloque Nahuaque (deity), 314 tobacco gourd (yetecomatl): as priestly attribute, 253, 316; associated with rulers, 194; worn by tribute collectors, 253 Tochpan, 101, 103, 165n93, 285, 400 Tochtepec, 55, 78, 103, 125, 395, 417 Toci-Teteoinnan (goddess), 69 Tocuepotzin, 83, 169n131 Toltec: apparel, 46, 60, 74, 83, 83, 85, 89, 96, 97, 144, 173n184, 190, 195, 225, 299n4; art, 49, 139, 191; culture, 46, 56, 87, 105, 153, 160n46, 190, 191, 224, 228, 324; period, 17, 80, 97, 104, 109; rulers, 85, 129, 264, 299n7 Tolteca Chichimeca. See Chichimeca Toltecs, 53, 85, 100, 136, 146, 157n22, 160n48, 174n192, 181n262, 223, 312, 316, 322, 414, 432, 438. See also Tollan; Toltec Toluca. See Tollocan Tollan: and Chichimec migration route, 267; as place of reverence, 242, 318; Tollan Cholollan, 262, 318; and Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl, 129 Tollocan, 103, 245 Tomicki, Ryszard, 34, 59, 61, 190, 200, 299n8, 300n12 Tomiyauhteuctli (deity), 163n71 Tonacateuctli (deity), 43 tonalamatl, 16 Tonalamatl Aubin, 161n62 tonalli: as destiny, 34, 76, 141; location, 34, 35; increase of, 320–21, 332n25; as innate property, 76, 313, 330, 334n48, 365 Tonayan, 274 topilli, 142, 291, 295. See also vara Topiltzin. See Quetzalcoatl Toquepotzin, 137 Torquemada, fray Juan de, 11, 38, 39, 81, 85, 103, 130, 156n19, 156n20, 157n21, 157n22, 292, 383, 389, 397, 401, 406, 424, 436

489

490

I ndex

Torres Rodríguez, Alfonso, 242 Totochtin (deities), 162n71, 170n158, 174n189 Totoltecatl (deity), 163n71 Totonac/Totonaca/Totonacs, 56, 126, 146, 155n5, 271, 322, 328, 363, 406, 444 Tovar, fray Juan de, 293 Tovar Manuscript, 38, 74, 75, 80, 137, 139, 148, 151, 169n135, 174n190, 195, 183n282, 293, 294, 319, 399, 402, 424, 425, 436 Townsend, Richard F., 12, 13, 170n151, 192, 200, 247, 316, 327 Toxcatl: as feast of Tezcatlipoca, 26, 58, 72, 82, 91, 155n10, 189, 376, 377, 409; and effigy of Huitzilopochtli, 72, 135, 376, 409; and Mexica rulers, 82, 91 tozcololli insignia, 121, 124, 132, 180n251, 419. See also tlahuiztli trade: goods, 82, 83, 105, 140, 335, 376, 377, 381, 382, 383, 384, 389, 399, 400, 401, 435, 441, 442, 443, 444; and status items, 24, 54, 55, 103, 136, 181n261, 309, 361; and Tlaxcala, 276 Tres Islas, 51 Triple Alliance: conquests, 21, 23, 271; formation of, 20–21, 212; internal power relationships, 20, 21, 23, 31n10, 285–87; impact in conquered areas, 3, 5, 14, 23, 31n10, 36, 105, 108, 140, 212, 269, 285, 286, 299n1, 361, 364; organization, 19, 21, 25, 26; provinces, 13, 85, 267, 271, 285; strategies, 22, 24, 29, 212, 261, 271; tribute networks, 40. See also Mexico-Tenochtitlan; Tetzcoco; Tlacopan trogon feathers, 108, 405 trousers (calzones, zaragüelles), 215, 220, 265, 270, 272, 289, 335, 336, 337, 338, 341, 347 Tula, Anales de, 158n31, 242. See also Tollan Tulancingo. See Tullantzinco Tullantzinco (Tulancingo), 335, 344, 354, 356n18 Turcio, doña Petronila de, 345 Turin, 77, 167n133 turkey feathers, 108, 404, 419 Turks, 348 turquoise (xihuitl): and celestial fire, 54, 61, 83, 314–15, 365; etymology, 171n166, 172n168, 332n17; insignia, 37, 53, 54, 61, 72, 74, 86, 87, 97, 136, 144, 152, 160n46, 169n135, 177n45, 182n273, 191, 205, 213, 271, 312, 316, 319–20, 324, 360–61, 421, 432; jewelry, 37, 45–46, 58, 72, 74–76, 77, 79, 80, 81–82, 138, 167n110, 167n112, 167n114, 170n149, 213, 300n16, 374, 376, 378, 380, 381, 383, 424, 426; mosaic, 53, 72, 86, 87, 88, 89, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 104, 106, 108, 136, 143, 144, 159n40, 172n170, 175n196, 312, 316; in Tula and Chichen Itza, 46, 48, 49, 74, 83, 95, 144, 160n46, 168n120.

See also Xiuhcoatl, xiuhhuitzolli, Xiuhteuctli, xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli turquoise diadem. See xiuhhuitzolli Tuxtepec, 272 Tzapotlan, 201, 301n23 Tzapotlan tenan (deity), 428 Tzinacanoztoc, 224, 228 tzitzimime, 118. See also tzitzimitl tzitzimitl, 117–18, 119, 179n244, 328, 329, 333n41, 334n42, 412, 417, 420, 421, 422, 423. See also tzitzimime Tziuhcoac, 109, 200 tzotzocolli, 36, 155n10, 162n68. See also hairstyles Uxmal, 133 Umberger, Emily, 12, 13, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 245, 272, 299n2, 299n6, 299n7, 299n8, 300n10, 300n11, 323 Valderrama, Jerónimo de, 214 Valencia, fray Martín de, 337 Valeriano, don Antonio, 216, 217 Valle, Perla, 45, 219, 220, 231, 346 vara (del mando, de justicia): as attribute of native judges, 137, 215, 291; combined with xiuh­huitzolli, 290; in investiture, 296; and native spears, 296; as Spanish status marker, 213, 215, 289, 291 Velasco, don Luis de, 220 Veracruz: conquered by Triple Alliance, 3, 21, 24, 151, 271, 285; imperial impact, 188, 271, 285; pictorial manuscripts, 24, 151, 363 Verdugo Quetzalmamaliztzin, don Francisco, 331, 356n15 Viceroy 27, 220, 222, 339, 340, 347, 350. See also Velasco, don Luis de Vié-Wohrer, Anne Marie, 7, 201 Vienna, 78, 128–29, 182n264, 241, 266 Villela, Samuel L., 250, 304n51 Virgin Mary, 315 Virgin of the Assumption, 278 Wake, Eleanor, 262, 267, 298 Warren, Dave, 270 warriors: armor, 66, 72, 111, 123, 132, 329, 362, 404; attributes, 64, 67, 73, 77, 78, 137, 139, 169n137, 364, 376, 380, 381; battle insignia, 45, 56, 58, 59, 60, 63, 70, 83, 91, 119, 133, 138, 142, 153, 160n51, 178, 264, 311, 325, 327, 328, 341, 350, 373, 378, 381, 383, 406; military ranks, 36, 63, 70, 72, 78, 79, 82, 83, 111, 112, 115, 119, 126, 129–30, 133, 137, 153, 145, 162, 263, 310, 319, 325, 327, 373, 374 375, 377, 378, 380, 381, 382, 383, 398, 399, 404, 406; in pictorial

I ndex

manuscripts, 12, 36, 68, 70, 91, 111, 135, 138, 142, 143, 155n7, 161n60, 167n113, 251, 388; in preconquest monuments, 45, 58, 138, 139, 142, 144, 291; rewards to, 33, 63, 70, 73, 77, 79, 102, 103, 107, 111, 112, 123, 130, 136, 150, 153, 169n131, 169n134, 170n144, 311, 323, 325, 326, 327, 330, 371, 372, 374, 375, 376, 379, 381, 385, 386, 389, 390 Wicke, Charles, 12 wills; of colonial nobility, 3, 10, 352; and preconquest status items, 6, 10, 342, 345, 352; and Spanish material culture, 6 wolf skin: cape designs, 99–100, 387; sandals, 146, 437; seats, 148, 185n307; mats, 148–49, 182n273; dance costumes, 350 Wood, Stephanie, 7, 14, 298, 337, 353 Wright Carr, David Charles, 243, 276 Xalapa, 271, 272, 274, 338 Xalaquia ceremony, 151 Xaltepec, 61 xicacoliuhqui design, 113, 133, 134, 135, 146, 148, 349, 401, 431, 444 Xico Viejo, 272 xicolli (sleeveless jackets): discovered as part of offering, 93, 106; as priestly garment, 90, 106m 173n178, 176n205, 194; varieties, 105–6, 107; worn by rulers, 95, 106, 192, 194, 299n7, 316 Xicotencatl, 277 Xicotepec, 271 Xicotli, 305n55 xihuitl. See turquoise Xilonen (maize goddess), 80, 81, 383, 437 Xipe Totec (flayed god), 61, 62, 75, 101, 121, 181n260, 201, 301n23, 350, 351–52, 413, 431; costume of, 7, 61, 142, 144, 151, 180n245, 196, 197, 199, 321, 322, 412; and military outfit of Mexica rulers, 61, 80, 109, 118, 136, 153, 196, 199, 300n11, 325, 364, 382, 405, 413, 418, 427, 428, 430, 432; in Tlacaxipehualiztli, 196, 199, 201 Xiquipilco, 61, 325, 407 xiquipilli, 253. See also incense bags xiuhchimalli, 136, 432. See also shields; turquoise Xiuhcoatl (fire serpent): in Classic and Early Postclassic times, 49–50, 52, 160n44, 316; as fiery spear-thrower, 49, 138, 315; as manifestation of Xiuhteuctli, 46, 167n114, 314; and xiuhhuitzolli, 46, 53. See also Xiuhteuctli xiuhhuitzolli (turquoise diadem), 37–54, 56, 156, 349; etymology, 37, 45, 155n14, 156n15; associated with judges and teteuctin, 41, 43–44, 216; in investiture rites, 15n97, 367, 368, 369; in imperial provinces, 239, 249, 286; lack of,

40, 209, 210, 211, 246, 282; and Maya mosaic headdresses, 46–47, 50, 53, 86; origin, 74, 153, 160n51, 316; in pictorial manuscripts, 37, 40, 43, 203, 208, 216, 247, 249, 250, 258, 266, 267, 270; as royal insignia in Tenochtitlan, 40, 44, 55, 75, 86, 97, 153, 158n25, 165n97, 189, 209, 221, 235, 239, 252, 256, 297, 319, 304; in Tula and Chichen Itza, 46, 51, 53; worn in military contexts, 45; and Xiuhcoatl/Xiuhteuctli, 45–46, 50, 53, 160n44, 160n50, 360 Xiuhnenetzin, 303n37 Xiuhteuctli (fire god), 47; and celestial fire, 54, 91, 316, 320; insignia, 45–46, 54, 60, 77, 95, 97, 106, 167n114, 191, 194, 314, 320, 378, 432; in investiture rites, 106, 320; as manifestation of creator god, 26, 53–54, 160n49; as royal patron, 53, 72, 75, 191, 194, 320, 384. See also Xiuhcoatl xiuhtilmatli: as plain blue capes, 38, 97, 401; as royal capes, 92, 97–98. See also capes xiuhtlalpilli tilmatli: accepted in conquered provinces, 245, 286; decorated with painted turquoise mosaic design, 86, 87, 96, 97, 106, 174n192, 204, 213, 239, 245, 286, 340; decorated with pieces of turquoise, 87, 89; discussion, 87, 97, 174n192, 177n215; and netted capes, 86, 89, 90, 92, 97; in pictorial manuscripts, 95, 160n48, 204, 241; as royal cape in Tenochtitlan, 86, 87, 92, 96, 97, 204, 241, 242, 245, 257, 286, 340, 349, 401, 402, 403; and tlalpilli hip cloth, 94, 95, 96, 171n167, 174n189, 174n192. See also capes xiuhtototl, 54, 109, 161n52, 163n76, 163n78, 282, 422; chimalli, 182n270, 432; headdress, 160n51. See also cotinga amabilis xiuhtzontli, 37, 156n17, 203, 269. See also xiuhhuitzolli Xochimilco, 182n268, 210, 258, 302n33, 304n51, 345, 356n14, 356n16, 356n17, 356n18, 414 Xochipilli (deity), 80, 163n79 Xochiquentzin, Pablo, 209, 213, 214, 216, 217 Xochiquetzal (goddess), 180n250, 422 Xochitlahua, don Martín, 265 Xochpanecatl, Francisco, 356n14 Xochtzin, 233, 236 Xoconochco, 78, 126, 161n56 Xocotitlan, 103, 393 Xocotl huetzi, 91, 122, 129, 130, 166n101, 414 Xocoyotl, María, 356n14, 356n17 Xolotl: as Chichimec leader, 223, 224, 349; as deity, 119, 407 xopilli back device, 120, 122, 123, 132, 411, 422, 427. See also tlahuiztli

491

492

I ndex

Yacanextli, 126 Yacateuctli (merchant god), 95, 97, 172n173, 173n181, 175n193, 387, 429, 438 yacametztli (moon ornament): and Huastec origin, 75, 117; among insignia stolen by Spaniards, 75; as part of cuextecatl battle suit, 117; and pulque gods, 75, 101, 393; as shield decoration, 117, 133, 427; worn by impersonator of Xipe, 75; worn independently of cuextecatl costume, 75 yacamitl (nose ornament), 74 yacaxihuitl (nose ornament), 46, 75, 168n119, 168n122, 168n125 Yanhuitlan, 352 Yauhqueme (deities), 163n71, 166n102 Yauhtepec, 258 Yaxchilan, 51 yetecomatl. See tobacco gourd

Yohuallahuan (deity), 199, 202, 322. See also Tezcatlipoca Yolloxochitl, don Diego, 236 Yoneda, Keiko, 261 Yopi/Yobi, 164n84, 201 Yope. See Tlapaneca yopihuehuetl, 198, 200, 300n21, 350. See also drums yopitzontli, 61–62, 164n83, 164n84, 198–99, 201, 352. See also Xipe Totec Zacatecas, 303n35 Zantwijk, Rudolf A. M. van, 31n9 Zapata y Mendoza, don Juan Buenaventura, 9, 88, 339, 348, 351, 353 Zapotec: and cult of Xipe Totec, 61, 201, 301n23; people, 299n1, 339; region, 3, 37, 146 zaragüelles. See trousers