|
|
|
|
|
|
|
extremely heavy emphasis was placed on the taking of captives in Aztec social life, military structure, state organization and control, and religious cosmology. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But even if religion justified war, and possibly even fostered it, religious mandates were not simply followed as demanded by Aztec beliefs but were manipulated by the state. Although religious festivals required captives, how many were needed turned on political considerations, and many celebrations were emphasized or deemphasized accordingly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Instead of looking at the religious ideology of the populace, we can find the reason for wars by examining motivations in the upper levels of Aztec society, where such decisions were made. Thus, while much about Aztec warfare can be understood on a strictly tactical basis, the reasons for the Aztecs' expansion were embodied in their social world. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Both internal and external political factors fostered expansion. In times of war the tlahtoani's powers were strengthened, and the almost perpetual state of war kept these powers extended beyond their peacetime norm. The king enjoyed great military powers and was titular head of the nobility, but calpolli heads, not the king, held a similar role vis-à-vis the commoners. Thus in dealing with the commoners the king acted through the calpolli heads, a system that served as a brake on his power. The calpolli heads had to be consulted before general warfare could be ordered, because only through them could the chain of command select, order, train, equip, and unite the troops in the numbers needed and at the time necessary. But the king could send the military orders into battle (or permit them to go) without regard to calpolli wishes. And in becoming meritocratic nobles, commoners left the calpolli heads' authority and came under the king's control, creating an independent body of troops. But initially any cessation of war threatened the king's powers, because civil mechanisms might reassert themselves, injuring the office as well as the officeholder. As the nobles became more dependent on the king and as his command over the troops of foreign cities grew, the calpolli heads' position diminished. They increasingly adopted the role of middlemen, balancing the interests of their constituents (in order to stay in power) and the king's wishes (in order to continue receiving booty and tribute goods). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support for an Aztec kingby the nobility, calpolli heads, commoners, and foreign politieswas not entirely automatic. Selection |
|
|
|
|
|