|
|
|
|
|
|
|
stable long-term means of integrating them. Sometimes ethnicity offered a basis for larger politics, but because each city's tlahtoani was theoretically autonomous, any political integration above the level of the city involved his relinquishment of his autonomy. The surrender of the various tlahtohqueh's authority, even if only partial, was not entirely voluntary. Rather, they subordinated themselves to a greater tlahtoani for reasons ranging from voluntary alliance to outright conquest. The result was larger polities that were built on a system of alliances in which obedience and tribute were owed to the higher tlahtoani. And although a common ethnic identity may have eased some of these hierarchical relationships, they were ultimately based on the perceived power of the dominant tlahtoani. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The surest way for a particular city to increase its perceived power was to demonstrate it through the exercise of force, which was most readily accomplished by war. To the Aztecs war was not simply the fulfillment of some religious imperative or the defense of what they perceived as vital interests. War was the empire. Halting war for too long diminished perceived Aztec power, undermined imperial ties, encouraged resistance to further expansion, and fostered disaffection and rebellion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because the Aztecs needed to maintain the perception of power to keep local rulers compliant, affronts or challenges to Aztec authority were often met with seemingly disproportionate harshness. Such exercises punished rebellious cities and emphasized the consequences of rebellion for all other tributary cities in the empire. The Aztecs' willingness to exact a harsh retribution raised the stakes for any city contemplating rebellion and played a key role in the perceived balance of costs and benefits of being in the Aztec Empire. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The threat of harsh reprisals did not entirely forestall rebellion, however, because political relations do not always conform to such logical expectations or to economic rationalities. Hopeless battles are fought and matters of principle are supported. But most important, political relationships based on power are in constant flux because perceptions of power change through time. Time, distance, new successes and allegiances, and organizational changes alter the perceptions of relative powerhence the Aztecs' emphasis on driving home the consequences of rebellion when a favorable opportunity to do so arose. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Although power was at the heart of Mesoamerican political relations, logistics played a key role in shaping empires. Spatial contigu- |
|
|
|
|
|