|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Aztecs did not limit the use of garrisons simply as a matter of policy. Given their manpower needs elsewhere, they could not disperse troops to garrisons year round. Rather, garrisons were either manned for brief periods or were staffed with only a few troops. The locations most often noted as garrisons were adjacent to frontiers near enemies, for example, along the Tarascan frontier, near present-day Pánuco, at Coatzacualco, and near the Tlaxcallan frontier. Locations within the Aztec Empire were transitory or, as in the case of Huaxyacac, in an area of uncertain support since transit rights to the south were essentially negotiated and not won through outright victory in war. Under these circumstances intelligence from the garrisons was more significant than their force. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The absence of garrisons is also associated with the general lack of fortifications. Even Tenochtitlan lacked major fortifications, although this absence has been explained in two ways.
6 First, Tenochtitlan was protected by its location on an island which permitted entry only by several easily defended causeways.7 Second, drawing on European analogies,8 fortifications demarcate political boundaries. Thus small states possess fortifications in their nuclear areas, while large ones possess them on the periphery of their territories.9 But these explanations depend on an erroneous reading of the nature of the Aztec state and its military strategy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perimeter defense and minimal manpower were adequate for low-intensity threats, but high-intensity threats were met by sending concentrated mobile forces forward to intercept the opponent. The battles were usually beyond the fortifications, which were used as a supporting infrastructure for offensive operations.10 Border fortifications could be surrounded, besieged, and bypassed but not easily conquered. They were created not to stop invasions but to pass on intelligence and to threaten the invading enemy's supply lines and troop movements. There were few fortifications in postclassic Mesoamerica, possibly because of limitations in wall-construction techniques. Most of the fortifications took advantage of strong locations, such as hilltops, where the defensive works could be built largely as walled embankments rather than as free-standing walls. Without such natural advantages Mesoamerican defensive works were inadequate as passive defenses capable of repelling invaders. Instead, an active defense was crucial in most cases. The mere existence of fortifications was not always a guarantee of safety in war. But whether they provided adequate protection depended on the exigencies of the |
|
|
|
|
|