|
|
|
|
|
|
|
against an independent city or state if Aztec or allied merchants were killed there.
4 If a town was already an Aztec tributary, further war was just only if that town had rebelled,5 and the action taken depended on whether the rebellion had been caused by all the people or just by their political leadersthe lords. If a rebellion occurred, spies were sent to determine who caused it.6 If the town's lords were at fault, the army and judges were dispatched to capture and publicly try them. But if it was a general uprising by all the people, the residents were first asked several times to resume paying their tribute. If their lords came humbly to Tenochtitlan and paid, they were pardoned, but if they did not, war was declared.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Aztec actions were also provocative, among these, requests to other city-states to accept the Aztec gods and to revere the Aztec king and pay tribute to him. Failure to do either was regarded as a casus belli,8 especially if the ambassadors who took the request were slain.9 These officials (tititlantin; sing. titlantli)10 were often sent to foreign cities carrying seemingly minor requests,11 but their overt purpose cannot disguise their covert political intent. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After the Aztecs decided to go to war, ambassadors were sent to the city in question to announce that it had wronged the Aztecs and to ask for satisfaction. Three different embassies were sent; the first to the rulers, the second to the nobles, and the third to the people. If the enemy city still failed to provide redress, war followed.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Aztecs also had certain expectations concerning what constituted normal relations among nations. These expectations, which may have been common throughout much of Mesoamerica, included free passage of nonhostile people and even of armies. Blocking a road would not have been effective in completely barring traffic in a civilization whose transportation was based on foot travel. Instead, such a blockade was significant for political purposes, signaling the intention of cutting relations, resisting hostile passage or entry, and initiating war. When taken by tributaries, such actions signaled rebellion. And, since they constituted a breach of international etiquette, they were similarly regarded as acts of rebellion when taken by independent cities. But actual Aztec war practice differed markedly from the foregoing (see chaps. 915). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The second approachthe religious viewis based on the role in warfare that the Aztecs attributed to the supernatural. The gods were often viewed as dictating when war was auspicious, when it was to begin, what the outcome would be, and what the Aztecs |
|
|
|
|
|