|
|
|
|
|
|
|
one's territory may have been regarded as sacrosanct and too troublesome for the Aztecs to try to alter. But another reason such internal wars might have been tolerated was that they exhausted tributaries militarily, destabilized them, and reduced their threat to the Aztecs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
However, the Aztecs would stop internal wars that did not benefit them, usually those in areas where there was no major power. These internal wars were unlikely to result in an alliance among the combatants, but they could add to the stature of individual kings, changing the power disparity and thus posing a danger of rebellion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some cities sought Aztec aid against enemies before being incorporated into the empire (e.g., Tzinacantlan against Tolocan and Xiuhtepec against Cuauhnahuac), but tributaries rarely did. The Aztecs apparently saw external attacks on their tributaries as attacks on themselves and responded accordingly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Aztecs had not only to create an empire but to maintain it as well, and the key to their success was the formation of alliances. Early Aztec alliances were relatively fluid, since no polity truly dominated the other city-states. But when the Aztecs achieved ascendancy, political relationsboth friendly and hostilecrystallized. Temporary, limited alliances changed to ones of greater permanence, with the subordinate towns losing autonomy but gaining, peaceful relations, greater trade, and a certain stability. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since power determined many alliances, towns situated between the Aztecs and another formidable polity chose allies on the basis of perceived advantages. These choices were multifaceted: the coercive reasons for allying with one side or the other were obvious; the beneficial reasons took the form of trade and access to a wide range of goods through the central Mexican marketing sphere.
2 One detrimental consequence of severing relations with the Aztecs was that the nobility would be deprived of many elite goods. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rewards also influenced alliance patterns. Gifts and honors were routinely accorded to Aztec and allied warriors, but extraordinary awards were also given on occasion. For example, for siding with the Aztecs the city of Tlalmanalco was given the right to hold the regional market that had previously belonged to Chalco, the Aztecs' primary foe in that war.3 And when the Aztecs conquered Coaixtlahuacan, they sacrificed its ruler and made his brother, Cozcacuauh, lord of the city as a reward for having provided crucial military information.4 Town lordships were conferred as a reward primarily on the basis of loyalty and martial prowess, although legitimate genealogi- |
|
|
|
|
|