|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ever, many of these provinces were far from Tenochtitlan, and there remained a possibility of rebellion, not just by indigenous rulers but by Aztec nobles. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commoners posed little danger of usurpation, because they could never claim ownership of the goods they collected. But commoners could not be tribute collectors, because collectors had to deal with local nobles, and they had to do so from a superior position. The status problem would be eliminated if a noble were made the tribute collector, but he might claim the goods and property and create an independent power base, since most nobles had at least some potential claim to legitimate rule. This would have been a particular problem during periods of succession in Tenochtitlan, and to avoid this, meritocratic nobles were appointed to these positions. They possessed sufficient status to embody the authority of the Aztec state and to deal with the local nobles, but they could not be legitimate contenders for succession.
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition to its obvious economic purposes and consequent control functions, the tribute system also affected interpolity relations. What was requiredas opposed to how muchcould be manipulated to serve the Aztecs' political purposes. As part of its tribute, for example, Tepeyacac was required to give captive warriors from Tlaxcallan, Cholollan, and Huexotzinco.17 This Aztec demand served to exacerbate relations between these independent enemy city-states and Tepeyacac, a potential ally. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The pattern and the mechanics of Aztec expansion are fairly clear, but they do not explain why conquests were undertaken. As indicated previously, religion did play a part in warfare, but its precise role is unclear, and attributing an expansionistic motivation to it seems unwarranted. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Motivations, even if ideological, are not monolithic. In this case they varied, inter alia, according to the participants' class, city of origin, and degree of political integration into the Aztec Empire. Religious orthodoxy in Tenochtitlan solidly supported the state and its imperial aspirations, probably because the state was so successful and the various cults and temples benefited economically. Religious motivations may have penetrated to the lowest ranks of Aztec society, but they were unlikely to have been shared by people else- |
|
|
|
|
|