|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Other opponents of the Cuernavaca, Morelos identification note a possible alternative in the work of Alonso de Santa Cruz that is consistent with the southern lakes conquests. In his famous map of the basin of Mexico, the label "Cuernavaca" is found on the site of Cuitlahuac, and the accompanying text (Santa Cruz 1920:538) includes "Cornavaca" between Xochimilco and Mizquic, suggesting that a Cuauhnahuac is in the basin. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Several factors support this. First, the repeated references to the four sites together indicate that they are somehow unitedprobably geographically. Second, at this stage of their expansion, it is unlikely that the Aztecs could have mounted a sufficiently large force or generated adequate logistical support to mount a successful campaign so far beyond the basin, so distant from the main thrust of their own expansion, and in an area that was not controlled by the Tepanecs. Third, even if the Aztecs had attempted to wage a war southward out of the basin, there are only two logical routes by which they could have approached what is now Cuernavaca, and both require a major ascent through mountain passes before descending to the temperate lands of present-day Morelos. The southwestern route has a more difficult ascent and goes through a narrower pass, but it is relatively short and enjoys the advantage of placing the already conquered Xochimilcas at the Aztecs' backs. The southeastern route requires a significantly smaller ascent, but it passes through lands held by the still-hostile Chalcas. And fourth, the logic of such a long and arduous campaign seems specious. The potential gains from conquering what is now called Cuernavaca were small, and the threat to the Aztecs' home city was great during their army's absence, since their homefront was not yet secure. Restricting campaigns to roughly within the basin was a safer course of action, because Tenochtitlan's army would be within recall distance should the city be attacked and there were many potential tributaries within the basin who could provide lucrative tribute goods and whose subjugation simultaneously removed them as threats during later, more distant campaigns when the bulk of the Aztec army was beyond effective recall. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The documentary evidence for the conquest of Cuauhnahuac (present-day Cuernavaca) during the reign of Acamapichtli is strong. But such a campaign lacks sound political, economic, or military logic. Thus I am convinced on the basis of that illogic, on the incongruous inclusion of Cuauhnahuac in a manifestly different group of conquests, and on Torquemada's (197583, 1:14849 [bk. 2, chap. 17]) persuasive and detailed account of Cuauhnahuac's conquest during the reign of the next king, Huitzilihhuitl, that the sources erred in crediting it to Acamapichtli. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12. There is some evidence of a second campaign, into the northern areas of the basin of Mexico (Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 2:3336 [chaps. 1214]), that resulted in the conquest of Xaltocan, Cuauhtitlan, and Tepotzotlan and extended as far as Xilotepec. However, the paucity of evidence for these conquests during this reign and the fuller evidence during that of Huitzilihhuitl indicate that they were not conquered at this time. Rather, this too is an apparent temporal confusion with later conquests. An additional town claimed as conquered at this time, Mazahuacan, is unidentified but appar- |
|
|
|
|
|