|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Anales de Tlatelolco (Berlin and Barlow 1980:16), with the conquest of Cuauhtitlan further supported by the Codex Mexicanus (Mengin 1952:444). However, both of these sources fail to note the conquests of these same locations during the reign of Huitzilihhuitl, as indicated by most of the sources. Thus, this listing probably represents a simple temporal misplacement of the same conquests and not actual reconquests at all. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37. García Icazbalceta 188692, 3:251; Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 2:53; Torquemada 197583, 1:155 [bk. 2, chap. 19]. Tequixquiac is also widely attested as having been conquered during this reign (Barlow 1949b:121; Clark 1938, 1:29; Leyenda de los Soles 1975:128; Mendieta 1971:149). However, given the temporal confusion between his and the preceding reign, the logical fit it has with the earlier northern campaign, and its distance from any current conquests, there is a strong argument for placing it within the reign of Huitzilihhuitl, which is even more clearly the case with Cuauhtitlan. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For their aid in the Acolhua war, King Tetzotzomoc of Azcapotzalco gave the Aztecs the sites of Teopancalco, Atenchicalcan, and Tecpan (Anales de Cuanhtitlan 1975:37), identified as being near Cuitlahuac (Kelly and Palerm 1952:286n.1). Since these rewards were bestowed for having taken part in a campaign that began in the reign of Huitzilihhuitl (Torquemada 197583, 1:155 [bk. 2, chap. 19]), many of the conquests that occurred before the succession of Chimalpopoca but within the campaign ending in his reign, appear to have been restatements on the occasion of a new king's succession (García Icazbalceta 188692, 3:251), giving rise to a certain amount of confusion over credit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38. Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 1:322. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39. Torquemada 197583,1:154 [bk. 2, chap. 19]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40. Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 1:33241. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41. Torquemada 197583, 1:155 [bk. 2, chap. 19]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42. Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 1:33241. Veytia (1944, 1:403) states that the siege lasted only four months (of 20 days each, totaling 80 days). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43. Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 2:4349 [chaps. 1719]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44. Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 1:33241; 2:4349 [chaps. 1719]; Torquemada 197583, 1:156 [bk. 2, chap. 19]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45. Chimalpahin 1965:189 [relación 7]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46. Chimalpahin 1965:189 [relación 7]; Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 2:5355 [chaps. 2122]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47. Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 1:34647. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48. Chimalpahin 1965:190 [relación 7]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49. Barlow 1949b:121; Clark 1938, 1:29; Leyenda de los Soles 1975:128; Mendieta 1971:149; Mengin 1952:444, 446. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50. Chimalpahin 1965:89 [relación 3]; 189 [relación 7]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51. Acosta 1604, 2:47374; Durán 1967, 2:71 [chap. 8]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52. Durán 1967, 2:72 [chap. 8]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53. Anales México-Azcapotzalco 1903:49. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54. There are also a number of anomalous "conquests" of this period. First, Ahuilizapan is listed (Berlin and Barlow 1980:16) but probably belongs to the reign of Huitzilihhuitl. Second, Xaltocan is also listed as a conquest but Torquemada (197583, 1:153 [bk. 2, chap. 18]) failed to list this conquest |
|
|
|
|
|