|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
1975:58; Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 2:163 [chap. 63]). Although the conquest of Tliltepec (present-day San Miguel Tliltepec, Oaxaca) has been accepted (Holt 1979:228; Kelly and Palerm 1952:305), there are sound reasons not to do so. Tliltepec is distant from Tenochtitlan and an unlikely target for apparently unassisted Tetzcocas; both Tliliuhqui-Tepec and Tliltepec are recorded (but by different sources) as having been fought in the same year, with many Tetzcocas dying in both; and this war is mentioned in conjunction with a battle with Huexotzinco, which would tend to favor both a xochiyaoyotl and a location closer to the basin of Mexico (Anales de Cuauhtitlan 1975:58). Another consideration here is the confusion between the two names, Tliliuhqui-Tepec and Tliltepec. While there appears to be a considerable difference between the two names, there is little in Nahuatl. They are variant forms of the same thing, "Black-hill-place," and a minor lapse in orthography is easily understood. As a result, while the occurrence of a xochiyaoyotl between Tetzcoco and Tliliuhqui-Tepec is easily supported, a conquest of Tliltepec is not and is likely a lapsus calami. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49. Códice Telleriano-Remensis 196465:302; Códice Vaticano 196465:268. Zoltepec was easily accessible by going west from Tenochtitlan into the valley of Tolocan and then south via Tenantzinco to Malinaltenanco before going a short distance west to the town. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50. Crónica mexicana 1975:53738 [chap. 75]; Durán 1967, 2:35762 [chap. 46]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51. This army included soldiers from Coyohuacan, Xochimilco, Mizquic, Cuitlahuac, Colhuacan, Ixtlapalapan, Mexicatzinco, Huitzilopochco, Chalco, Tlahuic, the lowlands, the Matlatzinco region, the mountains of Tenantzinco, Malinalco, Ocuillan, Xilotepec, Chiapan, Xocotitlan, Mazahuacan, Xiquipilco, Cuauhhuacan, Tollantzinco, and the Otomies (Crónica mexicana 1975:53839 [chap. 75]). Metztitlan is unconvincingly listed as forming part of this army, but some people from the mountains of that region may have participated. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52. Crónica mexicana 1975:541 [chap. 75]; Durán 1967, 2:360 [chap. 46]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53. Torquemada 197583,1:267 [bk. 2, chap. 67]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54. Crónica mexicana 1975:54144 [chaps. 7576]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55. Anales de Cuauhtitlan 1975:58; Anales de Tula 1979:37; Berlin and Barlow 1980:60; Chimalpahin 1965:119 [relación 3], 225 [relación 7]; Códice Vaticano 196465:270; Crónica mexicana 1975:544 [chap. 76]; Durán 1967, 2:35762 [chap. 46]; Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 2:155 [chap. 59,], 163 [chap. 63]; Mengin 1952:456; Torquemada 197583, 1:26567 [bk. 2, chaps. 6667]. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56. Anales de Cuauhtitlan 1975:67; Berlin and Barlow 1980:17; Clark 1938, 1:37; Ixtlilxóchitl 197577, 2:166 [chap. 65]; Paso y Troncoso 193942, 10:119; Torquemada 197583, 1:258 [bk. 2, chap. 63]. These towns are given only in conquest lists. The references made by the sources here to Ayotlan and Xolotlan are errors and refer to the subsequent Xoconochco campaign. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In recording the first major conquest of the next king, Moteuczomah Xocoyotl, two sources describe the conquest of the Tecuantepec region. This campaign to the south began because Aztec merchants were killed by the |
|
|
|
|
|