|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ing refuge there usually included the political leaders. Open flight was another option taken by some and it had many variations. Dependents could get out of the city before the battle, leaving only combatants,
30 or the nobility and political leadership of the city might flee.31 Both alternatives left the fate of the city dependent on the battle's outcome. But more common was flight after the city had been conquered. Thus, when the Aztecs conquered Amaquemecan (Amecameca), sixteen thousand people abandoned the town and fled to Huexotzinco.32 The city's fate was then solely in the hands of the Aztecs, since they had conquered it and the citizens had not "ransomed" it by submitting. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most radical of all was abandonment before the arrival of the attacking army. This was rare, but occasionally it was the only way to salvage anything at all. When Yancuitlan and Tzotzollan rebelled and killed some Aztec merchants, for example, the Aztec army marched on them. It reached Yancuitlan first and retaliated fiercely, killing even the elderly and burning the town. Two days later it reached Tzotzollan, only to find that the city had been burned by its own inhabitants, who had fled and could not be found.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When all hope of a military victory was lost and the enemy recognized its imminent defeat, it laid down its arms as a sign of surrender.34 Openly surrendering was an act of submission that could salvage something from the defeat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part of what determined the course of battle and its subsequent destructiveness was the degree to which the two sides shared the same premises: expectations of victory and defeat played a significant part in Mesoamerican warfare. Where concepts of what constituted victory or defeat were shared, destruction might be minimized, because the loser would recognize when defeat was inevitable and might quit. Where this view was not shared, as with the Chichimecs and, later, the Spaniards, battles might be bloodier, because the opponents would not recognize the pivotal point of defeat. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taking captives was extremely important to the social, military, and political aspirations of the warriors. Accordingly, a major strategy in Aztec warfare was to capture rather than to kill the enemy.35 Thus, even when he could as easily have been killed, an enemy was wounded so that he could not defend himself and, thus weak- |
|
|
|
|
|