|
|
|
|
|
|
|
looting was prevented or curtailed for political reasons, the Aztecs paid the soldiers for their losses.
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peace could always be restored, either by defeating the attacking army or by submitting, but the process was not an unconditional either/or: surrender had many permutations. Conquest might mean outright destruction and domination, but it could also merely be the point at which the destruction reached unacceptable levels, leading to surrender. Consequently, a ''conquest'' was not always clear-cut. Instead, there were grades of conquest: voluntary alliance, "voluntary" tribute, tribute under threat, submission under threat of war, submission during or after battle, and utter destruction. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the actual peace process a noble envoy or delegation was dispatched to the enemy with the offerusually, if it had been defeated, to become a tributary.23 But if a city did not yield early, such as by pledging obedience to the Aztecs on first request or submitting on the approach of their army, battle was joined, and the terms of submission became more onerous. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The defending city would not initiate battle unless it felt it could actually prevail. But once the battle began, surrender usually followed, to save the city from imminent defeat24 or to avert its destruction.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The victors did not ordinarily make offers to the vanquished once battle had been joined and the fate of emissaries sent to negotiate a cessation was not always a happy one. When Cortés had already destroyed much of Tenochtitlan, for instance, he sent for a noble captured a few days before and asked him to negotiate a surrender by the Aztecs. The noble agreed and was received in Tenochtitlan with the respect due his rank, but the Aztecs then sacrificed him.26 Similarly, when Aztec emissaries were sent to ask for help from the Tarascans against the Spaniards, they were killed because the Tarascans were suspicious of their true intentions.27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These suspicions arose, in part, because some segments of a community might sue for peace while others continued to fight. Furthermore, peace negotiations were often used as subterfuge. When Cortés attacked Xochimilco, the Indians negotiated for peace, but they did so to salvage their property and to delay the Spaniards until the Aztecs could come to their aid.28 Similarly, the Aztecs began negotiations in order to use the time to resupply themselves.29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another option was to withdraw to a stronghold. Such retreats bolstered a side's negotiating position, particularly since those tak- |
|
|
|
|
|