Conquered Conquistadors: The Lienzo De Quauhquechollan: A Nahua Vision of the Conquest of Guatemala (Mesoamerican Worlds)

Conquered Conquistadors

Mesoamerican Worlds: From the Olmecs to the Danzantes General Editors: Davíd Carrasco and Eduardo Matos Moctezuma Editorial Board: Michio Araki, Alfredo López Austin, Anthony Aveni, Elizabeth Boone, and Charles H. Long After Monte Albán: Transformation and Negotiation in Oaxaca, Mexico, Jeffrey P. Blomster, editor The Apotheosis of Janaab’ Pakal: Science, History, and Religion at Classic Maya Palenque, Gerardo Aldana Commoner Ritual and Ideology in Ancient Mesoamerica, Nancy Gonlin and Jon C. Lohse, editors Conquered Conquistadors: The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, A Nahua Vision of the Conquest of Guatemala, Florine Asselbergs Eating Landscape: Aztec and European Occupation of Tlalocan, Philip P. Arnold Empires of Time: Calendars, Clocks, and Cultures, Revised Edition, Anthony Aveni Encounter with the Plumed Serpent: Drama and Power in the Heart of Mesoamerica, Maarten Jansen and Gabina Aurora Pérez Jiménez In the Realm of Nachan Kan: Postclassic Maya Archaeology at Laguna de On, Belize, Marilyn A. Masson Invasion and Transformation: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the Conquest of Mexico, Rebecca P. Brienen and Margaret A. Jackson, editors Life and Death in the Templo Mayor, Eduardo Matos Moctezuma The Madrid Codex: New Approaches to Understanding an Ancient Maya Manuscript, Gabrielle Vail and Anthony Aveni, editors Mesoamerican Ritual Economy: Archaeological and Ethnological Perspectives, E. Christian Wells and Karla L. Davis-Salazar, editors Mesoamerica’s Classic Heritage: Teotihuacan to the Aztecs, Davíd Carrasco, Lindsay Jones, and Scott Sessions, editors Mockeries and Metamorphoses of an Aztec God: Tezcatlipoca, “Lord of the Smoking Mirror,” Guilhem Olivier, translated by Michel Besson Rabinal Achi: A Fifteenth-Century Maya Dynastic Drama, Alain Breton, editor; translated by Teresa Lavender Fagan and Robert Schneider Representing Aztec Ritual: Performance, Text, and Image in the Work of Sahagún, Eloise Quiñones Keber, editor Ruins of the Past: The Use and Perception of Abandoned Structures in the Maya Lowlands, Travis W. Stanton and Aline Magnoni, editors Skywatching in the Ancient World: New Perspectives in Cultural Astronomy—Studies in Honor of Anthony F. Aveni, Clive Ruggles and Gary Urton, editors The Social Experience of Childhood in Mesoamerica, Traci Ardren and Scott R. Hutson, editors Stone Houses and Earth Lords: Maya Religion in the Cave Context, Keith M. Prufer and James E. Brady, editors Tamoanchan, Tlalocan: Places of Mist, Alfredo López Austin Thunder Doesn’t Live Here Anymore: Self-Deprecation and the Theory of Otherness Among the Teenek Indians of Mexico, Anath Ariel de Vidas; translated by Teresa Lavender Fagan Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl: The Once and Future Lord of the Toltecs, H. B. Nicholson The World Below: Body and Cosmos in Otomi Indian Ritual, Jacques Galinier

Conquered Conquistadors The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Nahua Vision of the Conquest of Guatemala

Florine Asselbergs

© 2004 Research School CNWS, Leiden University and Florine Asselbergs Published by the University Press of Colorado 5589 Arapahoe Avenue, Suite 206C Boulder, Colorado 80303 All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America The University Press of Colorado is a proud member of the Association of American University Presses. The University Press of Colorado is a cooperative publishing enterprise supported, in part, by Adams State College, Colorado State University, Fort Lewis College, Mesa State College, Metropolitan State College of Denver, University of Colorado, University of Northern Colorado, and Western State College of Colorado. The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials. ANSI Z39.48-1992 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Asselbergs, Florine G.L. (Florine Gabriklle Laurence), 1975– Conquered conquistadors : the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, a Nahua vision of the conquest of Guatemala / Florine Asselbergs. p. cm. — (Mesoamerican worlds) Includes folded col. poster of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (48 x 63 cm.) in pocket. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-87081-899-8 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. 2. Manuscripts, Nahuatl—Guatemala. 3. Aztecs—History—Sources. 4. Mexico—History—Conquest, 1519–1540. 5. Guatemala—History—To 1500. I. Title. F1219.56.L49L492 2008 972.0009'031—dc22 2008016864 Design by Daniel Pratt 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

All photographs of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan presented in this book are by Bob Schalkwijk. Courtesy, Museo Casa del Alfeñique, Puebla, Mexico (2001).

To my father, Hans Asselbergs, Who passed away too soon, and To my father, Robert Schaap, Whom I cannot thank enough for entering my life

Contents

xi xiii

Foreword by Davíd Carrasco Acknowledgments

1

1. Introduction

4 7 8 11 15 18 20

Definition of the Research Problem Terminology and Orthography Nahua Pictography Lienzos and Indigenous Cartography Indigenous and European Cartography Colonial Indigenous Maps Summary

21

2. Theory and Methodology

22 26 32

Theory Methodology Summary

35

3. Quauhquechollan

36 39

Prehispanic History of Quauhquechollan Quauhquechollan and the Triple Alliance vii

Contents

43 48 49 55 62 70

Arrival of the Spaniards Quauhquechollan’s Indigenous Historical Record Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec Codex Huaquechula Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan Summary

73

4. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: The Document

73 75 76 77 78 79

History of the Document and Previous Publications The Cloth Creation of the Painting Glosses Original(s) and Copies Summary

81

5. The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

83 87 89 91 95 99 104 106 112

The Conquest of Guatemala: Sources Pedro de Alvarado’s 1524 Campaign of Conquest 1524–1527 Jorge de Alvarado’s 1527–1529 Campaigns of Conquest Indigenous Conquistadors Motivations for Participation Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca Conquistadors 1529–1544 Situation of the Former Conquistadors in the Decades Following the Conquest 119 Summary

123 6. Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan 124 127 127 128 128 128 131 131 132 132

viii

People Place Glyphs Roads with Footprints and Horses’ Hoofprints Rivers Scenes of War and Conquest Quauhquecholteca War Emblems A Spanish Banner Weapons Scenes of Rebellion Kaqchikel Traps

Contents

134 Dances 135 Houses 135 Marketplaces

137 7. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading 138 143 144 146 150 152 155 158 163 165 169 169 172 176 181 184 184 187 190 192

Initial Scene at Quauhquechollan Army Departing from Quauhquechollan Places from Which Indigenous Captains and Soldiers Were Gathered Scenes Depicted in the Left-Hand Part of the Document (Mexico) Soconusco and Retalhuleu Zapotitlan and Suchitepequez Quetzaltenango Olintepeque and Totonicapan Chichicastenango, Olintepeque, Comalapa Chimaltenango The Narrative, Part 1 A Campaign from Chimaltenango to Utatlan A Campaign from Chimaltenango to Petapa and Tzonteconapan A Campaign from Chimaltenango to Pochutla Escuintla The Narrative, Part 2 The Volcán de Agua and Quilizinapa The City of Santiago at Almolonga (Ciudad Vieja) A Dance for the Dead A Campaign from the City of Santiago to Verapaz and the Cuchumatanes 197 The Narrative, Part 3 199 Summary

203 8. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation 204 211 212 218 221 223 228

Narrative Structure and Textual Analysis Layout and Orientation A Familiar Format: The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 Set Formats for Conquest and Migration Stories Where Was the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan Made? Function and Use Summary

231 9. Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest 232 The Lienzo de Tlaxcala

ix

Contents

235 The Lienzo de Analco 236 References to Other Pictorials Dealing with the “Spanish” Conquest 238 Spanish-Indigenous Alliances as Represented by the Tlaxcalteca and the Quauhquecholteca 239 Initial Scenes 242 Similarities and Differences 244 Function and Use 245 The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and Lienzo de Tlaxcala, and Their Contribution to Our Understanding of the Conquest of Guatemala 248 Summary

251 10. Conclusions 252 The Role of the Quauhquecholteca in the Spanish Conquest 253 Decipherment of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and Its Rhetoric 254 Provenance, Purpose, and Message of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, and the Time and Context of Its Creation 257 Future Research

259 Notes 297 Appendixes 297 1. AGN Tierras Vol. 2683, Exp. 4, No. 164: Real cédula (1535) and merced (1545) 301 2. Text in the upper left-hand corner of the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan 305 3. Paso y Troncoso’s description of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (1892–1893) 309 4. AGI Justicia 291: A selection of testimonies 319 5. AGI Guatemala 52: Tlaxcalteca testimonies 323 6. AGI Guatemala 53: Testimonies of indigenous conquistadors from Guatemala 331 7. AGI Guatemala 41: Letter to the king by Jorge de Alvarado (1534) 335 8. AGI Justicia 199: Encomiendas granted to Jorge de Alvarado

337 Bibliography 361 Index



Map Supplement: Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

Foreword

Our series Mesoamerican Worlds is pleased to present Florine Asselbergs’s excellent and precise study of a colonial pictorial, which focuses on a topic that we have not emphasized before—the conquest of Mesoamerica. Further, Asselbergs goes beyond the “vision de los vencidos” narrative of the terrible, destructive, yet creative events of the early sixteenth century that were made available to us by Miguel León-Portilla. In this excellent monograph, Asselbergs reveals in stunning detail and through persuasive interpretation how the Spanish were not alone in their wars of conquista. As she writes about the Spaniards, “they had a most unlikely ally—indigenous conquistadors—an ally whose history, although written, has yet to become well-known or properly understood.” What we come to understand in this book is that thousands of indigenous soldiers, captains, and African servants provided the crucial support and leadership xi

Foreword

that led to the conquest and the early stages of colonial domination. Asselbergs, building on recent scholarship and her innovative readings of a Nahua manuscript, tells us the story of a “joint conquest” in which native peoples and Spanish invaders were “equal allies seeking advancement by combining their forces.” What is especially significant and exciting about this book is Asselbergs’s close contextual interpretation of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, a fascinating pictorial document based on Nahua historical traditions about the military traditions and achievements of local warriors. Readers of this book gain a double advantage in the study of Mesoamerican history and culture: they are granted access to the pictographs and historiography of this single lienzo, and they learn a significant amount about the wider Nahua pictographic traditions that were painted, believed, and ritualized in many parts of Mesoamerica. Although several other studies of this lienzo have been done, Asselbergs is able to identify more thoroughly the places, people, events, and time frame of the narrative. She also achieves a persuasive understanding of the historical and cultural context of this colonial masterpiece. A welcome dimension of the book is an analysis of some of the historical individuals who formed alliances and provided leadership in the crucial early years of the colonial period. We are guided by an insightful discussion that addresses questions about the indigenous allies: Why did they participate? What kind of services did they provide? How did they perceive this episode in history? and, What was their situation after the conquest? The answers to these questions present a new vision of the world that animated the lives of indigenous Mesoamericans during the first half century after the Spaniards arrived. The indigenous warriors were themselves conquistadors, but Asselbergs shows us that they were “conquered conquistadors” and thereby opens up new paths of interpretation in the scholarship on colonial Mexico and Guatemala. We are grateful for her precise interpretations and her general contribution to Mesoamerican scholarship. Davíd Carrasco Harvard University

xii

Acknowledgments

Many people and institutions have supported me in my research and have made it possible for me to write this book. I do not have the words to thank them enough. I will mention them here, hoping I have not forgotten anybody. First, I would like to thank the Netherlands Foundation for the Advancement of Tropical Research (WOTRO) and the Research School for Asian, African, and Amerindian Studies (CNWS) at Leiden University for their financial support that made my research possible. I would also like to thank my advisers, Maarten Jansen and Willem Adelaar, and the staff and colleagues at the CNWS for supporting me during my research and for providing a very pleasant working environment. Next, I would like to mention the staff and employees of the archives, libraries, and museums abroad where I have worked during the past four years. I xiii

Acknowledgments

thank Ferdinand Anders and Eva Irblich for helping me during my study of the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna in 2000. Second, I thank the staff and employees at the Archivo General de la Nación and the Archivo del Registro Agrario Nacional in Mexico City; the Archivo General del Estado de Puebla, the Archivo de Notarias, the Archivo del Ayuntamiento (Archivo General Municipal), and the Archivo del Registro Agrario de Puebla in Puebla; the Archivo General de Centro América in Guatemala City; the Centro de Investigaciones Regionales de Mesoamerica in Antigua Guatemala; and the Archivo General de Indias in Seville, Spain, for allowing me to work in their institutions in 2001 and 2003 and for generously providing the help I needed. Furthermore, I am indebted to the Gobierno del Estado de Puebla, the Secretaría de Cultura del Estado de Puebla, and the staff and employees at the Casa del Alfeñique and the Museo Poblano de Arte Virreinal (San Pedro Museo de Arte) in Puebla, Mexico, for allowing me to take pictures of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan in 2001 and of the Codex Huaquechula in 2004. I express special thanks to Lic. Evelien Flores Rueda, Arq. Maribel Hernándes Sánchez, Ana Martha Hernández Castillo, and Claudia Coronado García. I thank Manuel Hermann Lejarazu, Mónica Salazar López, and Marie van der Meeren for making it possible for me to examine the two extant copies of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan in the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia in Mexico City. The cooperation of these institutions and their employees has been crucial to my work, and I owe them an enormous debt. I express my gratitude and deep affection for the family of Doña Felicitas Ramirez Tufiño and for Don Gonzalo Alejo Martínez, Don Vincente Martinez León, and Don Cándido Reyes Castillo, all from San Martín Huaquechula, the former Quauhquechollan. I also extend my gratitude and affection to Ricardo Pérez Quitt and his family, especially Duardo, for their friendship and support during my work in Puebla and Mexico City. Other people who helped me during fieldwork are Bob Schalkwijk, Vincent Stanzione, and Ed Carter. I am also grateful to Claudia Koning for her company and support during several fieldwork trips. Of course, there have been many others, many of them strangers in the streets or behind the scenes, who have contributed to my fieldwork. I am deeply grateful to them, too. I also express appreciation for my colleagues. First, I would like to mention Michel Oudijk, with whom I have had many lively conversations and who has generously shared his extensive knowledge and ideas with me. His contributions to my research and to this book have been considerable. The transcriptions of the AGI Justicia 291 and AGI Patronato 245 documents used and quoted in this book are from his hand. I am also very much indebted to Ruud van Akkeren. After I discovered that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan depicts Guatemala, he spent many hours with me studying and discussing the document, and he identified several of the place glyphs. Christopher Lutz offered countless valuable xiv

Acknowledgments

suggestions regarding sources on Guatemalan history and provided me with a copy of his transcription of the AGI Justicia 295 document. His confidence in my work has been an enormous inspiration, and I am deeply grateful for his continuous support and for his friendship. I express special gratitude to Maria Castañeda de la Paz, Bas van Doesburg, Hans Roskamp, and Laura Matthew, all of whom have contributed to my work in significant ways as well. This book also benefited greatly from the presentations and insightful remarks of my fellow participants in the Ph.D. seminars at Leiden University between 2000 and 2004: Gabina Aurora Pérez Jiménez, Laura Van Broekhoven, Nicolas Carretta, Rosanna Woensdregt, Enrique García García, Kim Take, Michael Swanton, Alex Geurds, Lea Zuyderhoudt, José Humberto Medina González, Peter Jiménez Betts, and Gilda Hernández Sánchez. I also thank them for their friendship. I am particularly grateful to Michael for his linguistic advice and to Rosanna for her many insightful remarks, for reviewing my transcriptions, and for her other contributions to my work. Other colleagues who have inspired or helped me are Davíd Carrasco, James McAllister, Wendy Kramer, the late Luis Reyes García, Alfredo López Austin, Leonardo Lopez Luján, the late Hilda Aguirre Beltrán, Juan José Batalla Rosado, Susan Schroeder, Yanna Yannakakis, and Robinson Herrera. Also, I thank Françoise Hatchondo, who restored the lienzo in Mexico City in 2005, for sharing her technical observations with me. Michel Oudijk, Michael Swanton, and Rosanna Woensdregt proofread this book, or parts of it. I thank David Thompson and Cheryl Carnahan for their copyediting. I am indebted to them all for improving the quality of my text. They are not responsible, of course, for the flaws that may still occur. I would also like to thank Nadeem de Vree for his valuable suggestions regarding my English and for the countless other times he helped with my work. I thank Laurent Scowcroft for helping with some of the illustrations. Last but not least, I express my appreciation and affection for my parents, family, and friends: for their loving support and understanding, for having allowed me to be who I am, and for being there for me whenever needed. I hope I mean to them what they have meant, and continue to mean, to me.

xv

Conquered Conquistadors

Introduction

Conquered Conquistadors 1. Introduction

I would wish Your Grace to know that the country [Guatemala] is healthy and the climate temperate, and well populated, with many strong towns . . . the which, with all the subject towns and neighborhoods, I have placed under the yoke and in the service of the royal crown of His Majesty. —Pedro de Alvarado in his third letter to the king of Spain, written in Utatlan on April 11, 1524 (Mackie 1924:65)

fue publico e notorio que si los yndios amygos no vinyeran de las provinçias de mexico con el d[ic]ho adelantado [Pedro de Alvarado] no se pudiera conquystar la provinçia de guatimala ny la de honduras. —Diego de Mançanares, one of the indigenous conquistadors who had fought in Alvarado’s army during the conquest of Guatemala and Honduras, June 30, 1564 (AGI Justicia 291, f. 127r)

Conquest: the word brings up violent images of war and destruction and their related horrors—the tension before each battle, the blood and screams of the dying, and the sickening silence when at last the victorious have conquered. It is a story told over and over throughout history. And regrettably, it is one that will in all likelihood be told many more times before humankind finds peace within itself. During the first half of the sixteenth century, Mesoamerica was conquered in the name of the Spanish king. This titanic clash of two worlds has been recorded as ending in the pacification of the region by a handful of triumphant and valiant Spanish captains. But there is another story to be told. History, it is said, is written by the victors, but the Spanish were not alone in their victory. They had a most unlikely ally—indigenous conquistadors—an ally 

Introduction

whose history, although written, has yet to become well-known or properly understood. The topic of the Spanish conquest of Mesoamerica first became en vogue in the scholarly world with William Hickling Prescott’s History of the Conquest of Mexico, first published in 1843. Like many others, Prescott attributed the success of the conquest primarily to the Europeans’ superiority over the indigenous population. Approximately a century later, Robert Ricard portrayed the colonization of Mesoamerica as a spiritual conquest, attributing its success largely to the work of the mendicant orders (1933). Many works followed, in which the Spanish conquistadors, whether military leaders or clergy, were featured as the conquering forces.1 The subjection of Guatemala to Spanish rule has likewise long been (and often still is) represented as a controlled process of pacification under Pedro de Alvarado and his brothers. Behind these apparently Spanish successes, however, is the poorly understood but indispensable role of thousands of indigenous captains and soldiers and their retinues, as well as African servants and slaves, who together provided the manpower and knowledge needed to make the Spanish conquest work. Only in recent years have scholars begun to focus on the story of the indigenous conquistadors, discovering the nature and indispensability of the many alliances established between the Spaniards and the indigenous population.2 This research shows clearly that the indigenous conquistadors who assisted the Spaniards experienced the conquest very differently from the Spaniards. In the historical documents they created, they tell a story of a joint conquest, one in which both Spaniards and indigenous conquistadors are seen as equal allies seeking advancement by combining their forces. The present work focuses on a Nahua source concerning the conquest of Guatemala, composed by indigenous conquistadors from the Central Mexican Nahua town of Quauhquechollan, Puebla. The Quauhquecholteca established an alliance with the Spaniards in 1520, and they assisted them in the subjection of the Mexica Empire and other areas in Mexico. In 1523, a first campaign to Guatemala was organized and executed under the command of Pedro de Alvarado. Four years later, when Pedro left for Spain, his brother Jorge de Alvarado was called upon to take over the conquest of the country, and between 5,000 and 6,000 Central Mexican allies departed with him to take part in this campaign. Among this combined army of indigenous and Spanish conquistadors were Quauhquecholteca conquistadors. In the subsequent three years, this army accomplished most of the pacification of what is now Guatemala. Once the initial period of conquest was over, some Quauhquecholteca veterans of Jorge de Alvarado’s army founded a colony near the present-day town of Ciudad Vieja in Guatemala. They continued to live there, enjoying privileged status as indigenous conquistadors for at least a few decades. During this period, the Quauhquecholteca units’ military achievements and experiences were 

Introduction

documented by Quauhquecholteca tlacuiloque (scribes), who worked in either Quauhquechollan or Guatemala. These scribes created a large pictorial document made according to Nahua historical traditions. This document is presently known as the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. In a setting of roads, rivers, and place glyphs, the painters depicted the journey of the Quauhquecholteca units from Quauhquechollan to and through Guatemala. They depicted the units’ military successes and several other events and described the landscape in which the conquistadors of their community came to live. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan tells the story of the conquest of Guatemala as seen through the eyes of the Quauhquecholteca, reflecting their concerns, ideology, and historical awareness. It is a narrative of conquest and migration. It is a unique source, not only because it represents the Spanish conquest from a Nahua point of view but also because it was composed in a Nahua medium of communication (narrative pictography) and with, most likely, a Nahua public in mind. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was made according to Nahua traditions, and therefore it will be dealt with as belonging to the large corpus of surviving Nahua pictographic documents made in what is now Mexico, regardless of whether this lienzo was made in Quauhquechollan or in its colony in Guatemala. Conquest and migration are prevalent themes in this corpus of pictorial stories, especially in those that report prehispanic events. The best-known example is undoubtedly the Codex Mendoza, a Mexica (Aztec) pictorial that represents the conquests of Mexica rulers between 1383 and 1521. The pictorial records of conquest created in the colonial period are a continuation of this tradition. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is not an isolated creation. Other communities that sent out conquistadors with the Spaniards produced similar pictorials. Particularly suitable for comparison are the several versions of the famous Lienzo de Tlaxcala from Tlaxcala, another Central Mexican Nahua community, which record the military achievements of Tlaxcalteca units under the Spanish banner. Another Tlaxcalteca document is the Lienzo de Analco, which pertains to the municipality of Nuestra Señora de los Remedios Analco, presently part of San Ildefonso Villa Alta, Oaxaca. The Lienzo de Analco tells the story of Tlaxcalteca conquistadors who participated in the conquest of the Sierra Norte, Oaxaca, and founded a colony there. Reportedly, a Central Mexican colony in Totonicapan, Guatemala, once had a conquest pictorial as well, but the whereabouts of this document are unknown (see Chapter 5). These documents seem to have been created not only for the purpose of recording the communities’ conquest histories. They also addressed the need to keep order and the need to understand and find a way to deal with the new postconquest situation. After all, the European intrusion and the changes it brought about were drastic and destructive for the indigenous peoples. Most important, however, these documents served as proofs of identity and legitimization of 

Introduction

status for the indigenous rulers and their communities. The Quauhquecholteca conquest pictorial and most of those of the Tlaxcalteca were created shortly after the conquest. They reflect the indigenous communities’ contemporary perception of the conquest as a joint one and as one that led to their own advancement. None of the extant pictorials represents the Spanish conquest as a humiliating event. Instead, the alliances with the Spaniards take their place in indigenous history as the beginning of a new conquest story for the communities in question, continuous with prehispanic processes of conquest and domination. Of the many books written on the conquest of Guatemala, I would like to mention the work of Wendy Kramer. In her book, Encomienda Politics in Early Colonial Guatemala, 1524–1544: Dividing the Spoils (1994), she provides a detailed analysis of a large number of published sources and unpublished archival documents, and she presents a clear and accurate overview of the leading people and events of this period. Kramer was also the first historian to fully recognize Jorge de Alvarado’s role in the conquest of Guatemala. Another work that stands out is Laura Matthew’s dissertation, Neither and Both: The Mexican Indian Conquistadors of Colonial Guatemala (2004). Matthew’s research sheds new light on the situation of the indigenous allies from Mexico who settled in Guatemala after the conquest period and continued to live there, with a focus on those who settled in Ciudad Vieja. Her study is likewise based on many unpublished archival documents and also on extensive fieldwork in Guatemala. Chapter 5 of this book depends substantially on both Kramer’s and Matthew’s work. For detailed narratives of the role of indigenous conquistadors in the conquest of Mexico and Guatemala, the works of Matthew Restall (1998, 2003) and Michel Oudijk (Oudijk and Restall 2007) also deserve particular mention.

Definition of the Research Problem The present work focuses primarily on the reading and contextualization of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. Previously, the document was studied by Hilda Judith Aguirre Beltrán, who analyzed it using the Galarza method.3 For Aguirre Beltrán’s analysis, I refer to her Ph.D. thesis, El Códice: Lienzo de Quauhquechollac. Manuscrito pictográfico indígena tradicional Azteca-Nahuatl (2 volumes, 1999), in which she presented an elaborate descriptive analysis of the manuscript. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is also regularly mentioned in scholarly studies. Nonetheless, no one has ever identified the locations of the place glyphs depicted in the document or recognized the area represented as Guatemala.4 Instead, it was generally presumed that the landscape depicted represented a region in the neighborhood of Quauhquechollan. Therefore, the places, persons, events, and time frame depicted were never identified correctly. The objectives of my study are (1) to decipher the pictographic contents of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan; (2) to identify the places, people, events, and 

Introduction

time frame of the narrative depicted; (3) to come to an understanding of the purpose, message, and possible meanings of the work; and (4) to place the document and its narrative within its historical, cultural, and ideological contexts to permit its use as a historical source. Over time, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan served in various contexts, starting with the one for which it was originally created and proceeding on to the museum context in which it serves today. Too little is known about the history of the document, however, to reconstruct all these contexts. The present thesis therefore limits its focus to the original purpose for which it was created. This book begins with an introductory section, intended to lay the foundation for the analysis. The present chapter provides a brief introduction to the Nahua pictographic script and the so-called lienzo genre. Chapter 2 presents the theory and methodologies used to come to a reading and interpretation of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. Since no specific information is available on the authors of the pictographic document or on where, when, and why the document was created, the structure and the rhetoric (i.e., convincing power) of the text are our main keys to understanding it. Therefore, I chose to use iconology in combination with a rather structuralist approach to the text, also borrowing some tools from semiotic narratology. Chapter 3 provides an introduction to the history of Quauhquechollan, the hometown of the main actors in the painting. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is not the only pictorial made by the Quauhquecholteca. There are three others, presently known as the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, the Codex Huaquechula, and the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the Codex Huaquechula, and the Genealogía are presently in Puebla, Mexico. The Mapa Circular is now in Vienna. The Genealogía, the Codex Huaquechula, and the Mapa Circular all deal with local affairs and are of a more modest size than the Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan. They will be discussed briefly, to place the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan within the context of Quauhquechollan’s indigenous historical record. In the following chapters I proceed with my study of the Lienzo de Quauh­ quechollan. Chapter 4 provides an examination of the document itself: its physical shape, history, and extant copies. Chapter 5 deals with the contextualization of the narrative depicted. In that chapter I give a brief overview of the most prominent persons and events involved in the conquest of Guatemala, with a primary focus on Jorge de Alvarado’s 1527–1529 term as lieutenant governor. The military achievements of Jorge de Alvarado are poorly documented and therefore often ignored in historical reconstructions. A study of unpublished sources, however, revealed that it was in these years and under his command that most of the Spanish conquest of what is now Guatemala was realized. The indigenous conquistadors, among whom were both Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca, played an important role in this period. I investigate the nature of their alliances with the Spaniards and their contributions to the conquest, 

Introduction

seeking to answer questions such as: Why did they participate? What kind of services did they provide? How did they perceive this episode in history? What was their situation after the conquest? The main sources for this exploration are documents composed by the indigenous allies themselves or ones in which they or their descendants testified. These documents have long been ignored in the reconstruction of the conquest of Guatemala as it is known today. Chapter 6 provides an overview of the basic conventions (pictorial codes) used in the manuscript. Then, in Chapter 7, I present my reading of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, using the historical data provided in Chapters 3 and 5. Chapter 8 is an analysis of the document’s structure and rhetoric. The chapter investigates questions such as: What does the selection of information presented in the document say about the concerns of the creators? How are the elements structured? What does one learn from the document’s format and layout? For what public was it intended, and what does this say about the relationship between the composers and the public? What do the contents and medium reveal about when and where it was made? What does the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan show us of the viewpoint of the Quauhquecholteca? More simply, this analysis asks, and attempts to answer, the key questions of who made the lienzo, where, when, for whom, and why. To come to a proper understanding of the document, it is essential to regard the work not as an individual object of information but rather as a physical body of data communicating the experiences and concerns of its creators and of the community to which they belonged. In Chapter 9, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is compared to the extant versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Analco. These pictographic documents all show the same ideological strategy and address the same concerns. They tell how the Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca allied with the Spaniards, highlighting their role in the conquest and focusing on their victories. Each document enhanced the self-image and position of the community for which it was made. There are many similarities between these documents but also a few important differences. Analyzing them as a corpus leads to a better understanding of each text and of the Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca perceptions of the Spanish conquest. The interpretation of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan presented in this book does not pretend to be exclusive of other interpretations; rather, it is offered as a tool that gives the reader the context and historical data necessary to use the manuscript as a historical source. The present study is also not to be considered the final word on the document. Pictographic documents like the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan were originally presented in combination with the perfor­mance of a storyteller. These oral traditions are now lost. Physically, the document is also incomplete: the right-hand part has been cut off and is unknown. Hence, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is an incomplete body of information, which we attempt to fit into a history as yet only partly known to us today. Possibly, new 

Introduction

information will surface in the future that will provide new insights regarding both the document itself and the history it communicates. In 2002, my colleague Rosanna Woensdregt and I made a large-sized historical lienzo. By doing so, we became particularly aware that each person, each scene, and each element depicted in a pictorial document communicates a message or messages: some obvious, others hidden. If the reader is familiar with the subject, some images trigger the memory of entire stories. Without knowing the details of the background of a story, it is impossible to identify all of the messages the author(s) intended to communicate. This is a major difference between the creation of a lienzo and an alphabetic text. Participating in the creative process of a lienzo gave me insight into the many layers of information that can be incorporated in a pictorial narrative, be they intended or unintended by the makers, and into the complexity and diversity of the medium. In other words, because the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is presently incomplete and a gap exists in time, knowledge, and worldview between the sixteenth-century indigenous world and the present scientific world, much of the encoded information and message will likely remain unknown.

Terminology and Orthography The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was made by artists who belonged to the community presently known as San Martín Huaquechula, cabacera of the municipality with the same name. This town is located in the Valley of Atlixco in the southeastern part of the present-day state of Puebla, Mexico. Quauhquechollan is the prehispanic Nahuatl name for this town. The word consists of the elements quauh–Nahuatl for “eagle,” quechol–“quecholli bird,” and (t)lan–place-­ name suffix (“place of ”), and can be translated as “Eagle quecholli place.” In the sixteenth-century sources this name is spelled many different ways: Cuauhquechollan, Cuauhquecholan, Quauhquechollan, Quauhquecholan, Guaquechula, and so on. For consistency in this book and to avoid confusion, I only use the name Quauhquechollan. I do not use the modern name. With regard to the orthography of the Nahuatl community names used in this book, I normally write them the way I found them most frequently used in the sixteenth-century sources I consulted. This means I do not use the Spanish accents. The same applies to Nahuatl personal names, such as Xicotencatl and Ixtlilxochitl. I make exceptions, however, for community names that are presently well-known (e.g., Tlaxcala instead of Tlaxcallan, Escuintla instead of Yzquintepeque). For indigenous place-names in Guatemala other than Nahuatl names, I use either the old names used in the sources or the indigenous spellings currently used (e.g., K’iche’ instead of Quiché). Throughout this book I use the words “Mexico” and “Guatemala.” Unless indicated otherwise, I use these names to refer to land within the boundaries of 

Introduction

the present-day countries. With the words “Mexican” and “Guatemalan,” I refer to the inhabitants of these lands. Also, although neither Mexico nor Guatemala was ever officially a European colony, they were treated as such. Therefore, in line with other writers, I apply the word “colonial” to describe the status of these countries after the Spanish conquest. Another term that requires clarification is the word “Aztec.” Aztec originally designated the inhabitants of Aztlan, the place of origin of the Mexica of Tenoch­ titlan. In his early-nineteenth-century work, however, the naturalist Alexander von Humboldt erroneously used the word “Aztec” to designate the Mexica of Tenochtitlan. As a result, the word “Aztec” started to appear in the literature in various contexts, and a long tradition of incorrect usage was established. At times, the word is used for all the inhabitants of the Basin of Mexico in the Late Postclassic period. At other times, the culturally related inhabitants of the Puebla-Tlaxcala valleys are also referred to. The word also refers to the peoples who made up the Triple Alliance. Furthermore, the term has been used to designate speakers of the Nahuatl language, the language itself, and even ceramic types that have nothing to do with either the Mexica or the inhabitants of Aztlan. In other words, “Aztec” has become a problematic term involving historical inaccuracy and ambiguity (López Austin 2001:68). I have therefore tried to avoid it. However, since so many earlier scholars have used it, I also use the word on some occasions for the sake of convenience. When used, the word “Aztec” should be understood to refer to the Mexica of Tenochtitlan and the members of the Triple Alliance contemporaneous with the period of conquest. For the most part, however, I use the term “Mexica.”

Nahua Pictography In contrast to peoples who relied on alphabetical or other methods of writing, the indigenous peoples of Mesoamerica developed a system that combined oral and pictographic images to record and transmit information. In the sixteenth century the Spanish friar Diego Durán wrote: “todo lo tenían escrito y pintado en libros y largos papeles con cuentas de años meses y dias en que habían acontecido tenían escritas en estas pinturas sus leyes y ordenanzas sus padrones & c. todo con mucha órden y concierto de lo cual había excelentísimos historiadores que con estas pinturas componían historias amplisimas de sus antepasados” (Durán 1984 I:226). Modern scholars have not always shared Durán’s perception of the Meso­ american pictorials as valuable historical sources.5 As a result, the contents of most Mexican pictorials were often ignored in historical reconstructions. Over the past few decades, however, these documents have become the subject of many scholarly investigations, and fortunately their unique value as historical evidence has again been rediscovered.6 

Introduction

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a most edifying example of the Nahua pictorial writing tradition as practiced in the Basin of Mexico and its immediate surroundings in Late Postclassic and Early Colonial times. The system was likely used before that period as well.7 The system consists of a combination of two types of pictographs: (1) images that are stylized or conventionalized representations of things present in the world around us (for example, roads, water, plants, animals, persons), and (2) logographic signs used for personal names, placenames, and dates (i.e., hieroglyphs with phonetic elements). Most pictographs are agreed-upon standards of graphic representation, and they are structured and organized in such a way that a narrative is told. The script is therefore generally referred to as “narrative pictography” (Prem 1992:53). Since most conventions were not confined to a particular language, they were used and understood by the inhabitants of a variety of political entities in Mexico. Ñuudzavui (Mixtec), Benizaa (Zapotec), and Otomí or Ñañhu readers all used scripts with similar conventions. Variants of these scripts were used on stone (as inscriptions), the walls of buildings and caves, pottery, paper, bone, animal skin, and cloth. The surviving corpus of pictorial manuscripts includes book-size screenfolds (for example, Borgia group, Codex Nuttall  ), scroll-like strips of animal skin or amate paper (often used for genealogies or tribute lists), manuscripts made after the model of European books (Codex Mendoza, Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca), and single panels of paper, hide, or (cotton) cloth in a variety of sizes (Johnson 2000:575). The arrival of the Spaniards in Mexico brought about the destruction of most prehispanic manuscripts. Regardless, the pictorial writing tradition was kept in use throughout the Early Colonial period. There are even some examples of eighteenth-century productions. Elements new to the indigenous traditions, such as European objects, three-dimensionality, and shade effects, were adopted as the system gradually adapted to function in the colonial world. Meanwhile, the indigenous nobility was educated in Spanish convents and learned the alphabetic script. For a while, both writing systems were used next to, or in combination with, each other, until alphabetic writing proved more functional and the pictorial writing system was used less and less. As time passed, many of the pictorial conventions were forgotten, and so were many of the oral traditions related to the extant pictorials. Presently, scholars know of the existence of perhaps 20 prehispanic and around 500 Early Colonial pictorials from Mexico. There are several references to pictorials produced in prehispanic and Early Colonial Guatemala as well, made according to either Maya or Nahua tradition. However, no prehispanic pictorials have survived, and the extant colonial pictorials from Guatemala are few in number (see Chapter 9). Nahua pictography is a relatively well-understood script, thanks to several factors, including (1) the existence of a large corpus of Nahua documents (both pictorial and textual), (2) familiarity with the Nahuatl language, and (3) the 

Introduction

existence of direct translations of glyphic texts into alphabetic writing (like the Codex Mendoza, mentioned earlier). Also, some of the early alphabetic records created by indigenous writers (such as the Historia de los mexicanos por sus pinturas, a textual transcription of earlier painted annals; the Codex Florentino [Sahagún’s team]; and the writings of Ixtlilxochitl, chronicler from Texcoco) still reveal some of the indigenous (pictorial or oral) cognitive ways of structuring a text. However, since each document was made for the individual needs of a community and was created in its own historical and ideological context, the interpretation of the individual Nahua pictorials requires further study with regard to contextualization and to improve our understanding of their meaning. As Durán indicated, the tlacuiloque who composed the pictorials were professional artists and historiographers. These scribes were masters of the use of the pictorial codes, the use of space, and the art of composition. They also mastered the use of rhetorical tools to present a narrative in such a way that it affected the reader and the use of images of everyday objects to convey coded political, moral, and religious messages. In other words, they knew exactly how to use their liberty within the rules of the system to present and combine the elements in such a way as to come to a phase beyond the text: to provoke certain emotions within the reader. This structuring process (or “creative moment”) gave a power to the text, a meaning. Normally, these tlacuiloque worked under the authority of a lord or the local nobility. They based their work on orally transmitted texts, previous pictorials, and the wishes and concerns of the person or community that commissioned the work. With few exceptions, they never signed their works.8 Their names were seemingly considered irrelevant, probably because most pictorials were not meant to serve the cause of the artists but rather that of the artists’ lords and their community. The extant corpus of pictorials covers a variety of subjects: from genealogies, migration stories, war records, and tribute lists to socio-political organization maps, religious and calendrical documents, and cartographic-historical maps. Each so-called genre had its own specialized tlacuiloque. Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl wrote at the beginning of the seventeenth century: las pinturas y caracteres que son con que están escritas y memorizadas sus historias, por haberse pintado al tiempo y cuando sucedieron las cosas acaecidas . . . tenían para cada género sus escritores, unos que se trataban de los anales poniendo por su orden las cosas que acaecían en cada un año, con día, mes y hora. Otros tenían a su cargo las genealogías y descendencia de los reyes y señores de linaje, asentando por cuenta y razón los que nacían y borraban los que morían, con la misma cuenta. Unos tenían cuidado de las pinturas de los términos, límites y mojoneras de las ciudades, provincias, pueblos y lugares, y de las suertes y repartimientos de las tierras, cuyas eran y a quien pertenecían. Otros, de los libros de las leyes, ritos y ceremonias que usaban en su infidel-

10

Introduction

idad: y los sacerdotes, de los templos, de sus idolatrías y modo de su doctrina idolátrica y de las fiestas de sus falsos dioses y calendarios. Y finalmente, los filósofos y sabios que tenían entre ellos, estaba a su cargo el pintar todas las ciencias que sabían y alcanzaban, y enseñar de memoria todos los cantos que observaban sus ciencias e historias. (Ixtlilxóchitl 1985 I:527)

For the sake of scholarly research and cataloging, previous scholars have classified the surviving Mexican pictorials into several groups (see Glass and Robertson 1975). This division was based on (1) the document’s material or format; (2) its genre, theme, or contents; and (3) the circumstances in which the document was made. The names by which most Mesoamerican pictorials are known today have been determined by a variety of circumstances, such as their place of origin, the place where they were (re)discovered, or a collector’s name. These names often also include references to the material or the theme (for example, lienzos, mapas, genealogías). It cannot be presumed, however, that the makers and users of the documents thought in terms of the same classifications or the same names. Their way of referring to their own works may have been very different, and modern classifications and names often tell us little about a pictorial’s original meaning or function. The unique value of the indigenous pictorials lies in the fact that they provide the indigenous version of history as captured in an indigenous medium of communication. In other words, they reflect the indigenous view of historical events, concepts, morals, and ideas, represented by a means of communication the indigenous peoples themselves developed and felt comfortable with. However, since the majority of the extant pictorials were made in a colonial context, they were often adapted to Spanish expectations or influenced by European iconographic and historiographic structures. The degrees of indigenous and European influence therefore depend largely on the document, the region and time period in which it was created, the author(s), the purpose for which it was made, and similar factors. Nonetheless, the corpus of extant pictorials provides unique insight into the indigenous history both before the conquest and throughout the colonial period.

Lienzos and Indigenous Cartography The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan belongs to both the so-called lienzo genre and the “cartographic histories” genre. The word lienzo (Spanish for cotton cloth, canvas, linen, or hemp) is generally applied in reference to pictorials that were painted on large cloth panels. It thus refers to the physical medium rather than the contents of a painting. The name “cartographic history,” in turn, is generally applied to pictorials that transmit both cartographical (toponymic) and historical information. Some cartographic histories emphasize cartography (like the Lienzo de Ocotepec, for example, which is almost fully cartographic), while 11

Introduction

others are mostly historical (like the Lienzo de Tlaxcala). However, both aspects are always represented.9 John Glass defined lienzos as follows: The lienzo is a sheet of cloth, frequently of considerable size. In Spanish arthistorical usage the word is similar to the English word “canvas.” The lienzo is usually made of narrow strips of cloth sewn together; they may be of cotton, maguey fibre, or other material. . . . The lienzo is the common medium for maps and documents recording village history and boundaries, especially those of the cartographic-historical type. (Glass 1975:9)

In their 1975 survey, Glass and Robertson recorded about fifty lienzos dating from the Early Colonial period to the nineteenth century and eighty-seven cartographic histories. The bulk of these documents were painted in the modern Mexican states of Oaxaca, Guerrero, Michoacan, Puebla, Tlaxcala, and Veracruz in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. A few came from the state of Mexico and the Distrito Federal. Although the indigenous peoples of southeastern Mexico, Yucatan, and Guatemala are also known to have used pictographic scripts, no lienzos are known from those areas. The lienzo genre as we know it today thus seems to have been limited to specific areas. The 1975 census, however, does not include all extant lienzos. Others were identified and published after the census was made, and the fact that new lienzos continue to be brought to light indicates that local archives, churches, and private collections in Mexico and elsewhere still hold lienzos presently unknown to the academic world.10 Most lienzos consist of several quadrangular pieces of cloth sewn together that were separately woven on the native back-strap or body-tension loom. Cloth is thought to have been used for pictographic records in prehispanic times as well. Unfortunately, however, no example seems to have survived. A detailed study of the pieces of cloth used for certain lienzos has shown that in many cases, some edges or seams have ribbed borders while others do not. Johnson (2000) therefore argued that those pieces were originally woven for another use, such as clothing, and were only later used for lienzos. This seems a reasonable hypothesis.11 Some lienzos also contain pieces with a palimpsest. One of the pieces of cloth in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows traces of just such an erased previous painting (see Chapter 4). In other words, some pieces of cloth used for lienzos had been recycled.12 One can assume that the shape and size of a lienzo were primarily determined by the document’s purpose, although they may also have been influenced by the availability of cloth. The narrative pictography was painted directly on the cloth. Some lienzos show sketches of incomplete and uncolored drawings to the side of the final painting. This indicates that the tlacuiloque first made sketches to divide the space of the document and to determine a composition before they proceeded with a final version. Such traces of sketches can also be found in the Lienzo de

12

Introduction

Quauhquechollan. The pigments used in colonial lienzos were often of traditional indigenous manufacture, in combination with European colorants. The most common were black, the dark red cochineal, a fine blue-green called matlalli, yellow, and a red and a green obtained from certain minerals (Valle 1997:9). The painting styles and techniques used in Mexican lienzos vary over time and from community to community, although some seem to be clearly the product of a certain artistic “school” (Gruzinski 1993; Robertson 1994). Some lienzos are primarily indigenous in style and content (e.g., the Lienzo de Tuxpan, Lienzo de Tequixtepec II, and Lienzo de Zacatepec). Others are clear examples of the new painting style that resulted from the combination of indigenous and European elements (i.e., concepts, styles, perspectives, colors, layout, and materials).13 The largest known example of a Mexican lienzo is the sixteenth-century Lienzo Seler II from Coixtlahuaca, Oaxaca (4.25 × 3.75 m; see Glass and Robertson 1975:110). At 3.25 × 2.35 m, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is among the larger ones as well. With regard to the pictographic elements and layout of the extant lienzos, I identified these common characteristics: 1. There is almost always a central place, usually represented by a place glyph and a temple or a church. This central place is usually situated more or less in the center of the painting, or, if elsewhere, it is shown in considerable size. A lienzo usually reflects the interests and needs of the community associated with this central place glyph, and it was often painted there. Most lienzos are concerned with small-scale local history, although there are exceptions, such as the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the various versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. 2. Near this central place, one often finds a reference to its founders and its rulers or a ruling genealogy, sometimes in combination with a depiction of the establishment of a political alliance. 3. Other places depicted in a lienzo are always related to the main place in some way. These relations are usually of a political, economic, military, or geographic nature. The other places are subject towns or tribute towns, conquered places, linderos (border places), neighboring altepetl (“city-states”), and similar places. 4. Lienzos also show the people involved in events such as the foundation of settlements, conquests, the subjugation of an enemy, and ritual performances. Normally, the main actors in the narrative are related to the central place. Lienzos often represent the history of local lords by depicting the genealogies, achievements, and migrations of their ancestors. In most cases they also designate the borders of the territory to which the ancestors laid claim. Land claims were usually defined historically rather than geographically, and the emphasis was primarily on the history and achievements of the people who possessed these lands (see also Kagan 2000:115–116).

13

Introduction

5. Movements and connections are usually indicated by means of roads or lines with footprints. These roads serve as graphic links to make the separate elements of the narrative a coherent whole and to indicate the movement of the actors and the structure and reading direction of the narrative. Although the exact distances and the spatial relationships between the toponyms depicted are often not precisely defined in lienzos, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan does give that information accurately. 6. Sometimes elements of flora and fauna (trees, plants, animals), or other place indications such as rivers, roads, mountains, lakes, springs, and seas, are added. Some lienzos are bordered on one or more sides by a band of water (“sea band”).14 Later lienzos (seventeenth and eighteenth centuries) generally show more of such elements than the earlier lienzos (sixteenth century). 7. If explanatory texts are added, they are usually transcriptions of personal names and toponyms. Larger texts are added only in a few occasions. 8. In general, only actors, places, and events that were of influence on the formation and situation of the community in question at the time of the manuscript’s creation are depicted. The places, actors, and events depicted were generally selected on the basis of their relevance to both the community and the purpose of the work.

Most lienzos from the state of Oaxaca emphasize dynastic foundations and genealogies of ruling families, going back four or five centuries before the Spanish conquest. Most lienzos from the states of Puebla, Tlaxcala, and Michoacan, in turn, record a more contemporary history, often related to the Spanish conquest (Mundy 2001:121; see also Chapter 8). Scholars have subcategorized the corpus of extant lienzos based on their themes (territorial, genealogical, historical, or a combination) and on their structure or layout. Distinctions are made between (1) “road maps,” dealing with migration histories and conquest journeys, (2) “idealized maps” (subdivided into rectangular and circular ones), (3) the socalled Texcoco type (characterized by a unique sort of geographic realism), and (4) mixtures of these types.15 The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan belongs to the first category, as it shows both a conquest journey and the migration history of the Quauhquecholteca who founded a colony in Guatemala. Unlike folded codices, lienzos were meant to be viewed flat, and accordingly they are painted on one side only. It seems that they were put on a wall (as is still done in some indigenous communities), laid on the floor, or both. The seventeenth-century chronicler Francisco de Burgoa referred to a manuscript, possibly a lienzo, that was hung on the walls of an indigenous palace (Mundy 2001:121). The Lienzo de Tlaxcala seems to have served a similar purpose (see Chapter 9). Barbara Mundy raised the possibility that lienzos may also have been hung out like banners on festival and market days (Mundy 2001:121). The use of lienzos on the floor seems the most plausible assumption, though, since most

14

Introduction

lienzos show people and places in a variety of orientations. When displayed on the floor, readers can walk around the document, creating diverse orientations depending on where and from which angle they see what is depicted. At the same time, a use on the floor (and also on a wall) transforms the lienzo into a physical microversion of the landscape of the narrative. A lienzo was not read silently, as one reads books today. Instead, its presentation was a public event. A storyteller (tlamatini in Nahuatl) presented the oral traditions related to the text. These orally recited texts often included dialogues, songs, and prose and must have answered many “why” and “how” questions about the actors in the narrative, their motivations, and the meaning of events.16 They helped viewers understand the contents and meaning of the pictorial. They may also have revealed information on how nonmaterial, nonphysical circumstances17 shaped the tlacuiloque’s understanding of the past and present and on the internal mechanisms within the community that determined the presentation of the narrative (i.e., which persons and events were considered relevant to depict, and which were considered less relevant and were subsequently left out). The transformation of oral traditions to pictorial documents was never a complete replacement of the former by the latter. Pictorials and orally recited texts were used in combination, and each played an essential part within indigenous historiography. The oral texts that accompanied the pictorials were thus essential and indispensable parts of the messages. The tradition of creating large paintings with conquest narratives for public viewing was familiar to the Spaniards. In the same decades in which lienzos on the conquest of Mexico and Guatemala were created, in Spain large tapestries were made showing the conquest of Tunis by Charles V, which likewise served a public function.18 These tapestries, part of a long tradition of tapestry making in Europe, may have been presented in combination with storytelling events as well. Thus, a mutual understanding of this tradition must have existed, at least to some degree.

Indigenous and European Cartography Since no pre-conquest lienzo has survived, some doubt that maps in the modern sense of the term (i.e., the projection of a three-dimensional spatial reality onto a flat surface) existed in prehispanic Mesoamerica. Particularly outspoken on this issue is the anthropologist Arthur Miller, in whose view indigenous maps emerged only after 1521 and as a result of the conquest (Miller 1991:171). Other authors, however, have argued in favor of pre-conquest indigenous maps (see, for example, Boone 1992; Kagan 2000). I agree with the latter. Indications of a prehispanic mapping tradition can be found in the alphabetic references and by extrapolating backward from surviving colonial pictorials. Several arguments can be raised: 15

Introduction

1. As appears from the Codex Florentino, the Mexica made and consulted pictorial maps to plan their military campaigns and prepare their attack strategies (see Sahagún 1950–1982:2, book 8, f. 33v).19 The same happened in Michoacan (see Acuña 1987). 2. It is known that the Tlaxcalteca also had a long tradition of painting conquest histories in lienzos, as is clear in these words of Díaz del Castillo: “y trajeron [the lords of Tlaxcala] pintadas en unos grandes paños de henequén las batallas que con ellos [the Mexica] habían habido, y la manera de pelear” (Díaz del Castillo 1992:212 [ch. LXXVIII]). Motecuhzoma was likewise informed about the arrival of various Spanish conquistadors in Mexico by messengers, sent from Veracruz, who brought him the information painted in lienzos. Andrés de Tapia wrote: At this time Moctezuma called the marqués [Hernán Cortés] to show him a mantle on which were painted eighteen ships, five of them wrecked on the coast and turned over in the sand. This is the way the Indians have of conveying news accurately. He told the marqués that the ships had been wrecked eighteen days ago on the coast, almost a hundred leagues from the port. Then another messenger came with a painting that showed certain ships anchoring in the port of Veracruz, and the marqués feared it was an armed force sent out against us. (Tapia 1963:44, transl. Kranz 2001)

3. Cortés mentioned that Motecuhzoma had prepared for him a cloth map of the coast of Mexico, with all its rivers and coves, and that the rulers of Tabasco and Xicalango also presented to him a road map on cloth (Kagan 2000:47–48). The indigenous peoples thus clearly had the skills to make such maps. 4. The European chronicler Peter Martyr (or Pietro Martire d’Anghiera) mentioned two indigenous maps Cortés had sent to Spain in 1522. One was painted on a piece of cotton cloth about 10 m long and depicted the Mexica provinces and their enemy states. The other was a smaller map, representing Tenochtitlan and its temples, bridges, and lakes. Both documents are lost, but Martyr’s remarks imply that these indigenous maps showed cartographic characteristics familiar to him as a European (Kagan 2000:49; Linné 1948:189). 5. Some of the colonial lienzos are clearly copies of prehispanic lienzos. Examples include some of the maps created in Cuauhtinchan, Puebla. These documents must be copies of fifteenth-century maps, as their temporal and thematic contents suggest that the originals were made when the Mexica conquered the region, not after the Spanish conquest (Reyes García 1988:10, 15). 6. The formats and layouts of some pictorial migration and conquest stories presented in a geographic setting show striking similarities. This also suggests a continuation of a longer and thus prehispanic tradition (see Chapter 8).

16

Introduction

7. There are various indirect indications of mapmaking skill. The order and detailed planning with which the Mexica built parts of Tenochtitlan and Texcoco, for example, indicate the work of urban designers and land surveyors capable of rendering ground plans useful for building purposes. None of these maps have survived, however (Kagan 2000:48). Fernando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl also indicated that some tlacuiloque were specialized in the painting of maps (see earlier discussion), which points to the presence of such mapmakers in prehispanic society. 8. The geographic accuracy of the distribution of toponyms in some of the Early Colonial lienzos, along with the appearance of the genre over such a large geographic area, also indicate the existence of a longer tradition of so-called cartographic histories in Mexico and a basis for this tradition in prehispanic times.20

The surviving indigenous maps made in the Colonial period show various indications of a long tradition of indigenous mapmaking and reveal the differences between the indigenous way of representing geography and the mapping tradition familiar today. The major difference is that the indigenous peoples of Mexico represented geography in historical terms. They were primarily concerned with the historical aspect of a narrative, and to them places did not normally exist independent from history. Conversely, events were not necessarily place-related and could also be represented by persons or actions. The story being told usually determined the structure and content of the indigenous maps, and as storytelling instruments, these maps were therefore prone to different layers of representation. In addition, the physical shape of the document, conventions for the depiction of human actors in the maps based on their place in the social order, and the nature of the narrative represented each influenced the layout of indigenous maps. Most indigenous maps can best be described as “maps of experience”21 or “lived geographies”22 rather than maps representing a physical geography or linear connections. Other indigenous maps, however, do represent the distribution of the places on the ground very accurately, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan being a good example. The works of the indigenous mapmakers were indeed very different from the contemporary maps of famous European cartographers such as Gemma Frisius, Gerard Mercator, and Abraham Ortelius (to whose works scholars tend to make comparisons). However, they were little different from the way the Spaniards who arrived in the Americas in the sixteenth century made maps.23 The latter also provided their maps with buildings and other images, projected historical events onto a geographical framework, and depicted the world in local, fairly personal, and often historical terms (Kagan 2000:46). Their focus was still mostly on territoriality, however, instead of on actors and events. Good examples of contemporary Spanish-made maps of Guatemala are the maps published with

17

Introduction

the work of Francisco Antonio de Fuentes y Guzmán, who wrote in the late seventeenth century (Fuentes y Guzmán 1932). In other words, when studying early indigenous maps, present-day scholars face a set of concepts different from the ones they are used to in modern cartography. Obviously, concepts such as “accuracy,” “order,” and “disorder” are very much culturally and temporally related, and in a historical map, what was a logical order to the indigenous tlacuiloque and contemporary readers is not necessarily logical to modern scholars. Likewise, the chronological ordering of events may not have been similarly significant to both. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows these differences very clearly (see Chapters 7 and 8).

Colonial Indigenous Maps Some of the colonial Mexican pictorials were prepared to answer the needs of indigenous people. Others were made specifically for the colonial administration. A pictorial’s original purpose can be discerned in the way the narrative is presented, the selection of the information conveyed, and the rhetorical tools used by the tlacuiloque (see also Chapters 2 and 8). In lienzos or other maps created for a use within the indigenous sphere, geography was normally represented in relation to the history of a particular community (discussed earlier). They were mostly used to remind community members of their shared history and traditions, and so the tlacuiloque constructed the world primarily in human terms. From their perspective, space belonged to the people who inhabited it and had no independent, abstract existence (Kagan 2000:42). Most indigenous maps offered depictions from a “communicentric” rather than a “chorographic” viewpoint. While a chorographic viewpoint might offer a distant overview of a town and reduce towns to a series of elemental forms and shapes in accordance with a mathematical grid (as in “scientific” cartography), the communicentric viewpoint of the indigenous tlacuiloque focused on the human elements and structures of a community. Instead of presenting distant overviews, the tlacuiloque depicted their communities with close-up pictures of identifying structures (such as churches) and people associated with the community’s history and concerns. As these maps were often intended for a local public, that is, people familiar with these elements, the necessity of a description of the town was only a secondary concern. The messages embedded in these maps were therefore often meant primarily for the inhabitants of the community itself (Kagan 2000:108–109). Normally, pictorials created for an indigenous public were made to help structure collective memory, to offer a visual framework for understanding events, and to establish community identity (see also Leibsohn 1994:161). Obviously, the community’s view of itself that emerged from these pictorials was strongly influenced by the way the tlacuiloque structured and presented the story. 18

Introduction

On the other hand, indigenous maps specifically made for the colonial administration often show a different perspective on places in the landscape and a different interest in those places.24 Since territoriality was the main concern of the European judicial system, these documents are often characterized by a greater focus on territoriality than on historical information. Some documents of the lienzo genre were specifically created within the context of land claims or land disputes between communities, and they were presented in Spanish courts of law as evidence. Indigenous communities are known to have presented lienzos originally made for their internal use to Spanish authorities to support certain land claims as well. The lienzos entered the Spanish court for a “secondary” purpose, or what Mundy called a “second life,” often in combination with oral testimonies or alphabetic documents (Mundy 2001:121). Some documents combine pictography with alphabetic writing (in the form of alphabetic explanatory texts; i.e., glosses) to make their contents accessible to readers unfamiliar with the pictorial script. A well-known example in which Nahua pictography and alphabetic writing are used next to each other is the Codex Mendoza from Tenochtitlan.25 Often, documents originally made to serve in the indigenous sphere were later provided with glosses to enable them to serve cross-culturally in the Spanish sphere. It seems the indigenous tlacuiloque knew very well how to design a pictorial in such a way that it would help a community’s case with the Spaniards and at the same time serve the community itself. The speaker who presented the narrative could then focus on the aspect he or she knew was most interesting to the audience and that would enable the document to best serve its immediate purpose (Endfield 2001; Mundy 1996; Smith 1973). The fact that Spanish judges accepted indigenous lienzos and mapas as legal evidence in court is probably one of the reasons the indigenous pictographic tradition continued well into the post-conquest period. Well-known examples of Nahua historical cartographies are the maps related to the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca from Cuauhtinchan, Puebla. Another wellknown example is the Codex Xolotl (1542), also a Chichimec history, which, in turn, consists of a series of maps in which battle sites and the territory of Chichimec influence are indicated by toponyms. Next to the lienzos and cartographic histories, a large corpus of post-contact maps is kept in museums and archives.26 The best-known Mexican maps are undoubtedly the maps that accompanied certain Relaciones Geográficas (see Gruzinski 1987, 1993; Mundy 1996). These maps date from the 1570s and 1580s and show a large variety of gradations in indigenousness and European influence; this influence is displayed mostly through the addition of landscape and three-dimensionality. Hundreds of other maps, the majority simple sketches done in pen and ink, were produced by indigenous communities in the course of boundary disputes brought to the Spanish court. Although these maps clearly reflect colonial concerns, they still contain features seemingly of indigenous origin and are valuable sources for the 19

Introduction

reconstruction of prehispanic cartography. As it seems, pre-conquest cartography in Mesoamerica encompassed a broad spectrum of geographic representations that ranged from cadastral maps that were little different from European maps to historical cartographies that were more difficult for Europeans to understand. The conquest caused this spectrum to narrow, as well as a shift to European cartographic techniques, including the use of three-dimensionality and the depiction of landscape in naturalistic terms (Galarza 1995; Kagan 2000:46, 53).

Summary This book presents a study of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, a large Nahua painting narrating the story of indigenous conquistadors from Quauhquechollan who participated in the “Spanish” conquest of Guatemala. Fortunately, the Nahua pictographic script is relatively well understood. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a continuation of a prehispanic tradition of recording migration and conquest stories in a geographic setting. Through Nahua pictographs and logographs ordered along a road, it depicts part of the history of the Quauhquecholteca community. Pictorials composed in this script were not read in silence but were presented during community rituals and accompanied by oral recitals. These recitals explained the pictography and provided details of the story not given visually. Among the corpus of surviving Nahua pictographic documents are documents with a geographic character, such as the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. These manuscripts are generally referred to as “cartographic histories.” The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is named a lienzo because it is painted on cotton cloth. The Nahuas of Central Mexico already possessed the skills to make “accurate” geographic maps before the arrival of the Spaniards. Unfortunately, very few prehispanic pictorial documents have survived, which makes it impossible to trace the tradition back in time. However, the surviving colonial indigenous maps provide indications of how geography was generally dealt with in Central Mexican indigenous records. One of the most important differences with contemporary European maps is the fact that in indigenous records, geography did not exist independently from history. It was the story that made the maps, leading to depictions of “lived” or “felt” geographic maps rather than just territoriality. This book focuses on the reading of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the interpretation and contextualization of the story it communicates.

20

Theory and Methodology

Conquered Conquistadors 2. Theory and Methodology

I believe that painting’s power over men is greater than that of poetry, and base this opinion on two reasons. The first is that painting works on us by means of the sense of sight. The second is that painting does not employ artificial signs, as does poetry, but natural signs. It is with these natural signs that painting makes its imitations. —Abbé Dubos in Critical Reflections on Poetry and Painting (1719) (Mitchell 1986:75)

Codices and lienzos form an indispensable corpus of sources about the history of the indigenous peoples of Mesoamerica. They present a firsthand visual account of what happened in the indigenous communities from their own point of view. But even more interesting, they transmit this account by means of a medium the indigenous peoples themselves developed, felt comfortable with, and knew how to use to its fullest extent.1 Before attempting to infer historical meaning from the pictorials, however, one needs to decipher and understand their pictographic contents by looking at them within their historical, social, political, and ideological contexts. As with the study of any cultural object, the familiar problems of meaning, interpretation, authorial intention, context, reception, readership, and similar issues will inevitably arise.2 An interdisciplinary approach is therefore required. In this 21

Theory and Methodology

chapter I present a short overview of the theory, terminology, and methodologies pertaining to a variety of disciplines that have proved helpful in my study of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. These intellectual tools aided in the formulation of the textual description and interpretation of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan discussed in later chapters.3

Theory Nahua pictorials such as the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan serve multiple purposes. First, they provide historical information through narratives; they tell a story involving events, people (actors), and what these people do. Furthermore, they serve as media that communicate certain messages or concerns of the makers to the readers. Often, they encrypt moral, political, and religious messages within the “disguised symbolism” of everyday objects. Moreover, most Nahua pictorials are remarkable pieces of art. They provide unique visual impressions and leave their beholders-readers with the particular effect only images can create. These various aspects of the work all influence the way the stories presented in these documents were, and still are, understood and perceived. Over the past century, the study of Nahua pictorials has evolved from an analysis that was mainly formal and focused on aesthetic aspects such as composition and color (often at the expense of the subject matter) to an iconological analysis and, more recently, to a more interdisciplinary approach. This interdisciplinary approach includes, besides iconology, the study of language, ethnographic fieldwork to gather data about cultural continuity and oral traditions, socio-geographic studies, and the study of published sources and unpublished archival documents. These disciplines combine to gain a better understanding of the cultural and historical contexts out of which a pictorial emerged. In this book, I follow this interdisciplinary approach. In addition, I deal with the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan as a narrative and analyze it accordingly. In brief, “iconology” is the theory of images, or the study and psychology of icons (Mitchell 1986:3). Iconology focuses on the interpretation of the content and the philosophy or theology of a work of art instead of only describing it (Burke 2001:35). In the 1930s, “the iconological method” was formulated and presented by Erwin Panofsky (and by Aby Warburg). Panofsky defined iconology as “that branch of the history of art which concerns itself with the subject matter or meaning of works of art, as opposed to their form” (Panofsky 1972:3).4 The iconological method distinguishes three levels of interpretation, corresponding to three levels of meaning in a work of art. The first level concerns the description of the pictorial elements. Panofsky called this the pre-iconographical description. In this level, one focuses on the “natural meaning” of the work, consisting of the objects (e.g., persons, animals, trees) and events (such as battles, alliances, and travel) depicted. The second level involves the identification 22

Theory and Methodology

of the scenes (the iconological analysis in the strict sense). In this level, events are placed in their historical context. A person is identified by name, for example; a battle by participants, place, and date, and so on. The third level involves the identification of the purpose and meaning of the work (iconological interpretation). This level is concerned with what Panofsky called the “intrinsic meaning or content” of the story, to be understood by “those underlying principles which reveal the basic attitude of a nation, a period, a class, a religious or philosophical persuasion” (Panofsky 1939:7).5 With this, Panofsky applied to images the three literary levels distinguished in the early nineteenth century by Friedrich Ast for the interpretation of alphabetical texts: the literal or grammatical level, the historical level (concerned with meaning), and the cultural level (concerned with grasping the “spirit,” or Geist, of the period in which a source was created) (Burke 2001:36). Two large flaws in Panofsky’s iconological method, however, are the lack of a social dimension and the fact that the dynamic character of a tradition and individuality within that tradition are largely neglected. Panofsky included historical context in his method, stating that insight into historical processes is of crucial importance. However, he was indifferent to social context. He acknowledged the influence of the reader’s subjective knowledge and concerns on his or her identifications and interpretations, but only in a general way: that is, without delving into how each reader’s social situation influenced the way that reader’s subjective reading would be formed. In other words, the original iconological method fails to consider that the artist, the person who commissioned the work, and its different readers may all have viewed the same work in different ways and given it different meanings based on their individual social situations. The iconological method provides a useful basis to work from, but one needs to go beyond it (see also Burke 2001:34–45). Two interdisciplinary approaches that fill in some of iconology’s gaps are semiotics (the theory of signs, sign use, and sign systems)6 and narratology (the theory of narrative).7 While semiotics is useful for a better understanding of the medium (the signs and their combinations: in this case Nahua pictography), narratology focuses on the relevance of narrative structure to the meaning of a text (a text defined here as a finite, structured whole composed of signs).8 The combination of these two disciplines (“semiotic narratology”) and their use for visual art other than Mesoamerican pictorials have been expounded and applied in the works of Mieke Bal (1994, 1997) and Frans-Willem Korsten (1998). In brief, one could say that semiotic narratology approaches texts (including visual art) in terms of an “encounter” between “who perceives” and “what is perceived.” It fills in the social context lacking in the iconological method by looking not only at the historical context in which a document was created, read, and interpreted but also at the social context and dynamics of the worlds (culture) of the artists and of the readers-beholders and by considering the subjective nature 23

Theory and Methodology

of the activities of reading and interpreting. A text is never created or perceived in isolation. It is always made within a certain context, for a certain purpose, and with a desired effect. The creators of the Nahua pictorials, too, wanted to make something clear to their readers-beholders. They wanted to convey a message and create an emotion that would support their case. Likewise, each text is perceived within a certain context, and a reader is always influenced by his or her personal history, culture, and concerns. In my analysis of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, I have applied several tools that pertain to semiotic narratology. Narratology makes, for example, a basic division into three layers: (1) the text (a finite, structured whole composed in a sign system; in our case narrative pictography), (2) the story (the presentation of a fabula in a certain manner),9 and (3) the fabula (a series of logically and chronologically related events caused or experienced by actors, or the basic story material) (Bal 1997:6; Prince 1997).10 Although these divisions are purely theoretical suppositions (since, after all, one has access only to the text), they are helpful in reaching better insight into the structure of a (visual) text and its rhetoric (i.e., the actual methods by which the composers of a text created an intended effect). This distinction is analogous to the way most historians approach texts, by comparing and combining sources to find a story that comes closest to the events experienced by the various actors. I examined the story presented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan by considering the four basic elements of a narrative—events, actors, time, and place—and analyzing the arrangement of these elements. This approach is also borrowed from narratology and involves an analysis of several factors: 1. The choice of the sequence in which the events are presented, and the difference of this sequence from the chronological sequence in which they are experienced by the actors in question (i.e., the distinction between the story and the presumed fabula). 2. The amount and kind of attention given to the individual scenes and actors, and their chronological place within the story. This indicates the importance of a specific scene, actor, or place to the story. 3. The distinct traits given to the actors; in other words, how they are individualized and transformed into characters. 4. The characteristics of the locations where events occur, or how space is transformed into specific places. 5. How, in addition to the necessary relationships among the elements, other relationships (e.g., symbolic, allusive, traditional) may have been presented. 6. The choice of the point of view from which the elements are presented (“focalization”) (Bal 1997:7–8, 142–160).11

24

Theory and Methodology

All these factors determine how a fabula is transformed into a story. They are rhetorical tools that make the story specific, distinct from others, with its own unique effect—whether convincing, moving, disgusting, or aesthetic—and its own meaning.12 The analysis of these elements is important to understand the “creative moment” of a story, that is, the phase beyond the text that provokes emotions. A reader’s or beholder’s emotions are affected not only by the contents of a story but also by the medium through which a story is presented (the sign system).13 This is where semiotics comes in. Semiotics studies culture as processes of communication that are possible thanks to the system of signs that underlies them (see also Saussure 1983). Visual images are also considered signs in semiotics. In brief, semiotics addresses questions such as, What types of signs are involved? How are they combined? How do they function? And what is their effect on the beholder? Images like those used in the Nahua pictographic script (see Chapter 1) have characteristics different from those of alphabetic words and thus create different effects and responses. Generally, images are less arbitrary than alphabetic words. That is, whereas the relationship between an alphabetic word and what it signifies is determined by a convention adopted by its users, images require at least some sort of visual connection with the object they represent (Stumpel 1993:105–106). Also, images can represent complete stories and have a magnetic power to attract other ideas to their sphere, whereas alphabetic words are often, although not always, more fixed in the message they communicate (see also Freedberg 1989:1–26; Gombrich 1977:3–25). These differences between images and alphabetic words are especially applicable if words are as widely used as they are in many modern societies. Mitchell even stated, “Images are not just a particular kind of sign, but something like an actor on the historical stage, a presence or character endowed with legendary status, a history that parallels and participates in the stories we tell ourselves about our own evolution from creatures ‘made in the image’ of a creator, to creatures who make themselves and their world in their own image” (Mitchell 1986:9). The layout of the signs and the physical medium of communication also contribute to the effect of a text. Alphabetic texts are normally ordered according to certain principles to, among other things, achieve legibility, keep the reader’s attention, and convey that the text is reliable. Similar principles seem to be present in Nahua pictorials, in the form of agreed-upon formats or layouts on both the scene and document levels (see Chapters 7, 8, and 9). Also, Nahua pictorials were often accompanied by oral recitals that explained the pictography (see Chapter 1). The impact (or what Walter Ong called the “magical potency”) of the spoken word is not to be underestimated. Oral expressions provide information (such as gestures, facial expressions, the presence of witnesses) that has no obvious equivalent in words put down in alphabetic writing (Goody 25

Theory and Methodology

1977:13; Ong 1982:32). The spoken word is an event. While written words or painted images alone would isolate, an accompanying spoken text unites (Ong 1982:74). The combination of a large painting and an oral performance is a very powerful medium of communication. The choice of this medium is connected to the message the composers wanted to communicate and to the impact they wished to have on their audience. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan points to a public reading and a function in a community ritual (see Chapters 1 and 8). This choice indicates that the Quauhquecholteca wanted to call attention to their story. As a painting alone, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is impressive; in combination with an oral recital and presentation during a community ritual, it would no doubt have had even more impact. This effect cannot be reproduced in alphabetic writing read in isolation. It will therefore be lacking in my textual description of the document (Chapter 7). When a text is perceived, each reader or beholder emphasizes different elements of the story and identifies with them in his or her own unique way. A reader will always emphasize what he or she can relate to most and will sympathize with or dislike various aspects according to his or her own norms, values, and worldview. A reader’s interpretation of a text also depends on his or her sensitivity to a medium. European viewers, for example, are trained to look from left to right and thus tend to sweep their eyes in the same direction, and in a painting they tend to focus on the central image. This order is logical to them. Those trained in another tradition, however, may find certain elements more or less immediately appealing. This can result in a different effect on different beholders of one and the same image (see Bal 1994:14, 19, 1997:11).14 In sum, communication (or “encounter”) between the worlds of the creators and those of the readers-beholders of a text is a complex process in which a combination of rules is at work of which the participants are partly aware and partly unaware. Creators and beholders are both subjective entities in dynamic contexts, and their communication depends on the culture, experiences, concerns, gender, social class, and similar factors of both the creators and the readers-beholders (Bal 1994:11–20, 141; Freedberg 1989:1–26; Gombrich 1977:3–25, 154–169, 246–278). As Max Friedländer wrote, “Art being a thing of the mind, it follows that any scientific study of art will be psychology. It may be other things as well, but psychology it will always be” (Gombrich 1977:3, from Friedländer 1946).

Methodology One of the main methodological problems in the study of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan arises from the considerable distance that divides the creators of the document from present-day readers. The creators are distant not only in 26

Theory and Methodology

time but also with regard to place, culture, worldview, and similar factors.15 In our normal speech or writing, a (partially) shared context usually throws light on the meaning of our words (although, as anyone can testify from personal experience, even when the entire context is at hand, the same story can still be given different meanings by different parties depending on such factors as their relationship to the speaker, their gender, social status, and personal concerns). Obviously, when studying a sixteenth-century Mexican pictorial, most of this general context is no longer in existence and can be only partly recovered. To recognize references to historical incidents, to interpret the message, and to understand the symbolic meaning of the details, one has to become familiar with the history, experiences, and codes used by the composers, as well as with the historical and social processes at the basis of the creation of the work. The usefulness of a narrative analysis depends on the possibility of identifying these processes. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is therefore studied through an examination of the social and historical conditions out of which it emerged (contextualization). A further methodological problem is that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was originally part of a larger body of information, the remainder of which no longer exists. The Quauhquecholteca pictorial may once have been part of a larger corpus of pictorials, for example, that may have been read together but the rest of which is unknown to us today. Also, the document originally functioned in combination with oral traditions that are now lost. Furthermore, it can be presumed that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was once accompanied by a written alphabetic text (if so, this was probably a título, or land claim). Sadly, many of the original contexts in which the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan once functioned are lost. Moreover, at an unknown date, part of the document was cut off. As a consequence, parts of both the physical body and the narrative are missing, and the possibility to ascertain an overview of its total layout is gone. Finally, the document was also physically altered by the addition of alphabetical glosses (see Chapter 4). When working on the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, it turned out to be most effective to proceed pragmatically by seizing bits and pieces of information from many different sources, fields, and approaches. My study was first and foremost led by the character and contents of the document and the availability of contextual sources. I applied an interdisciplinary approach and made use of a combination of the aforementioned theories. Iconology is used for deciphering the pictography and understanding the pictorial language or codes. The structure and rhetoric of the story, in turn, are analyzed using some of the tools offered by semiotic narratology. My research methodology involved these steps: 1. Iconographical analysis. The obvious first step in my research was to identify and interpret the signs used in the document: the pictographs. What do they 27

Theory and Methodology

mean, and how can they be understood? As Panofsky stated, an iconographical analysis “presupposes a familiarity with specific themes and concepts as transmitted through literary sources, whether acquired by purposeful reading or by oral tradition” (Panofsky 1972:11). The interpretation of the pictography is based on recognition, connection, and contextual knowledge. In other words, one needs practical experience—that is, familiarity—with the relevant objects and events (Panofsky 1972:15). Some pictographs require only recognition of the images as objects we have come to know from the world around us (iconicity). Other pictographs, however, require familiarity with agreed conventions that certain images mean certain things (symbolicity).16 A Nahua pictograph for a mountain or a temple, for example, is easy to recognize, even for modern beholders. But what happens if one is confronted with an image of a person who is seated inside a circle and holding a precious box? Only those who shared the composers’ knowledge, assumptions, and habits of seeing would be able to read this image without explanation.17 For modern scholars, it requires a trained eye and an intimate familiarity with the world of the composers to be able to understand it (see also Eco 1977:200). Any sixteenth-century Mexican viewer, even those unfamiliar with pictography, might have recognized the precious box as one of the boxes used in markets and would probably have been able to interpret the pictograph as standing for a marketplace. A twenty-first-century European viewer, however, is unlikely to make that link without being familiar with either sixteenth-century Nahua pictographic conventions or the daily life of that period. To decipher the pictographic script used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, one depends on a convergence of factors. One is familiarity with the language of the composers (in this case Nahuatl). Although most pictographs are arguably independent of a specific language’s representational system (e.g., those for trees, roads, and similar objects), others involve phonetic elements (such as the many place glyphs) and require a linguistic analysis. Another factor is the availability of both a considerable corpus of documents using the same type of pictography and of direct translations of pictographic texts into alphabetic writing (Gelb 1963; Urcid Serrano 2001:21). The majority of present-day knowledge of Nahua pictorial conventions is based on the survival of a large corpus of both pictorial and alphabetical Nahua documents, specifically those in which both writing systems are combined. Good examples are the Codex Mendoza, the Codex Sierra (Libro de Cuentos de Santa Catarina Texupan), the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Historia ToltecaChichimeca, the Matrícula de Huexotzinco, the Codex Vaticano A, and the Codex Magliabecchiano. Others are Spanish chronicles, such as the work of Sahagún’s team and Durán. These sources can be used as pictographic or logographic “dictionaries” (Jansen and Pérez Jiménez 2000:27). Particularly helpful in my study of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan have been the Codex Mendoza, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (especially the Glasgow manuscript), and Durán’s work. 28

Theory and Methodology

A method I did not use in my study of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan but that has proved very effective in other studies of Mexican pictorials is the ethno-iconological method.18 This method is based on a special branch within archaeology (known as ethno-archaeology) and on the iconological method as defined by Panofsky and adapted to function in the context of colonialism. Ethno-iconology takes into consideration the cultural continuity that exists within indigenous communities to generate new interpretations of as yet unidentified pictorial conventions. In other words, one works backward in time and uses known conventions and perceptions from the present to give meaning to unknown conventions (images) from the past.19 This method uses what William Fenton once defined as “upstreaming.”20 2. Identification of the scenes and of the relationships between the scenes. Once the pictographic elements have been deciphered, one can proceed to identification of the scenes (Panofsky’s “second level”) and the relationship between the scenes.21 How do the pictographs combine? And how do they form narrative sequences with their specific protagonists, themes, and motifs? On this level, the pictographic elements are analyzed in terms of significant associations and thematic units rather than as isolated elements (Jansen and Pérez Jiménez 2000:71; Loo 1987:21–22). The interpretation of the contents of the scenes is primarily based on (1) what can be identified of the pictographic elements and their composition in the previous level, and (2) the information available from other sources (i.e., other codices and lienzos, contemporary alphabetical sources, ethno-geographic data, fieldwork, and similar sources). Information from other sources serves as a frame of reference that enables one to recognize and contextualize the contents of the scenes (Jansen and Pérez Jiménez 2000:71). This phase of analysis involves a careful and complex process of using bits and pieces from a variety of sources, finding clues, and fitting the pieces together until a coherent pattern is found and the contents of the scenes become clear. This is the phase in which people and places are identified by name and place within their historical context. Determining the internal relationships among the scenes is an important part of this process. Therefore, the scenes are to be regarded in relation to each other, not in isolation. In Nahua pictorials, the most important instruments to indicate the hierarchy among the different scenes are the size, position, and repetition of each scene. A scene depicted in the center of a document, for example, depicted in considerable size elsewhere, or depicted repeatedly draws the reader or beholder’s attention. In the case of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, one scene far exceeds the others in size. This is the initial scene at Quauhquechollan. Other larger scenes are the glyphs for Retalhuleu and Chimaltenango. Quetzaltenango, Olintepeque, and Chimaltenango, in turn, are each depicted repeatedly (see Chapter 7). Readers familiar with the Nahua pictographic script understand that 29

Theory and Methodology

the larger size or repetition identifies these scenes as having primary relevance to the story. Most pictorials provide a reading direction. This direction can normally be derived from the way the actors’ faces are oriented or from pictographs of roads with footprints. In the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the reading direction is provided by a road with footprints and horses’ hoofprints. These roads serve as graphic links between the scenes and determine the narrative structure of the text (see Chapter 8). The identification of the relationships among the scenes, their internal hierarchy, and the graphic links (roads) make it possible to establish a narrative sequence. 3. Decipherment of the place glyphs. The previous step in the research process employed in this study involves, among other things, the decipherment of place glyphs. A Nahua place glyph normally consists of a bell-shaped mountain with a qualifying image inside it or on top of it, and it represents a place in the landscape (an altepetl, barrio, or province). Just like the pictographic elements and the scenes, place glyphs are most effectively analyzed in clusters and thematic units. Normally, one first determines which geographic region is likely referred to by the place glyph and becomes acquainted with the local topography. Place glyphs are often logographs. The names represented by these glyphs can be deciphered on the basis of an iconological and linguistic analysis, inquiring, for example, into the qualifying images in each place glyph and what Nahuatl words can be related to them. The distribution of the place glyphs is also an important clue. Each glyph may have more than one possible interpretation under linguistic and iconological analysis. One can narrow the range of likely interpretations by examining whether some combination of interpretations for glyphs related to one another in the document may correspond to a combination of actual topographical features that is consistent with both the interpreted meaning of each glyph and the relationship between the glyphs as depicted in the document. Another clue is the scene related to a place glyph, if any. One needs to seek links between these scenes and historical events reported in other sources. Prior to my study of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the only place glyph that had been identified was that of Quauhquechollan itself. The rest of the region depicted was yet to be determined. I therefore depended mainly on my own iconological analysis. The place glyphs in the lienzo were clearly related to one another geographically, and so they provided an opportunity to determine where each place represented was located. If interpretations of the glyphs, related geographically in the lienzo, could be shown to correspond to actual places that were similarly related to one another, there would be little doubt that the interpretation of these place glyphs was correct. Three place glyphs in particular drew 30

Theory and Methodology

my attention. The first consists of a bell-shaped mountain with a wall and green quetzal feathers on top. The Nahuatl roots related to these elements are tenam(i) for “wall” and quetzal for the feathers of the quetzal bird. The bell-shaped mountain indicates that the glyph represents a place and also that the place-name ends with a locative suffix, such as “-c(o)” or “-can.” The second glyph consists of a Nahua sign for “movement” (olin) on top of a mountain (tepe) and could also be expected to end with the locative suffix (Olin-tepe-c). The third one consists of a mountain with three flowers (xochi–“flower,” tepe–“mountain,” and the locative suffix, yielding Xochi-tepe-c). In Guatemala towns named Quetzaltenango, Olintepeque, and Suchitepequez are located near each other, and their locations in the lienzo correspond to their distribution on the ground. When such a correspondence occurs, an analysis of the events depicted in the lienzo that relate to the place glyphs in question can provide affirmation that the correspondence is actual and not coincidental. A major key to the decipherment of the place glyphs in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan has been the comparison of these glyphs with those that appear in other pictorial documents. The Lienzo of the Heye Foundation, the Codex Mendoza, and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (in particular the Glasgow manuscript) have been indispensable sources for this. 4. Identification of the narrative, its elements, and their organization. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan communicates a story, a narrative. This level of analysis concentrates on the “creative moment” of the narrative (i.e., the moment in which the story came into being), which is understood in terms of four elements: (1) events (e.g., what are the main events depicted), (2) actors (e.g., which people appear, and what are they doing), (3) time (e.g., what is the time frame of the narrative), and (4) place (e.g., where does the story take place). This part of the analysis draws upon narratology and examines the selection and organization of the elements of the story to understand its character and its use of rhetoric. Basic questions to which answers were sought included: Which episode of history is recorded? Which elements are communicated and which ones are omitted, and how are these represented? What events and actors are placed at center stage? What emotions might have been provoked by the selection, combination, and presentation of the elements? What does the rhetoric of the story tell us about the concerns of its creators (see Chapters 7 and 8)? A methodological problem that arises here is the scarce availability of contextual data. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan focuses on Jorge de Alvarado’s 1527–1529 campaigns, which, unfortunately, are poorly documented. Although sufficient data exist to identify the main outlines of the story, many details remain unclear. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and its contemporary sources are mutually informing: data provided by other sources help to identify the scenes in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, and vice versa. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a rare and thus an important source on this episode in history. 31

Theory and Methodology

5. Contextualization of the document. The story presented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is considered with the same source-critical approach with which any historical document should be studied (see, for example, Barber and Berdan 1998; Carmack 1971). Through an understanding of the social and historical conditions out of which the document emerged, one seeks to comprehend how the document originally fit into that context. Thus, one can begin to answer important questions such as: Who made the document? When? Where? For whom? And, most important, with what purpose? At this level of analysis, the document’s historical context is examined through the juxtaposition of historical data from contemporary sources with the historical content of the document itself. To complete the contextual picture surrounding the lienzo, a historical reconstruction of the time period of its composition, as well as a reconstruction of the socio-political and economic landscape in which the document was created, are needed (see Chapters 3 and 5). Stories are always presented from a certain viewpoint (focalization). The events depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are presented from the point of view of the Quauhquecholteca. The events are represented according to the way those people saw and perceived things. One of the primary goals of this book is to come to a better understanding of the concerns of the composers of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the message they (or the ones who commissioned the work) intended to convey by creating the document. 6. Using the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan as a historical source. Once the contents of the text and the context in which it was created and functioned are understood (as far as this is possible), the data provided by the document can be used for historical reconstructions and conclusions. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan provides valuable information about indigenous participation in the conquest of Mexico and Guatemala during the years 1527–1529. It sheds new light on a variety of subjects, including the indigenous perception of the history of this period of colonization (see Chapters 7 and 8).

Summary This chapter has presented the theory and methodological steps I used to come to my reading and interpretation of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. I used an interdisciplinary approach and a combination of iconology and semiotic narratology. First, the medium of communication (the signs) was analyzed and deciphered to come to an understanding of the contents of the story. Then the narrative and its structure were examined. Subsequently, I sought to distinguish between the different layers and elements of the story. An analysis of the selection and ordering of these elements led to a better understanding of the creative moment of the text and its rhetoric, which, in turn, is key to a better understand-

32

Theory and Methodology

ing of the text. In other words, I used semiotic narratology to establish what the tlacuiloque were trying to do—which is dependent on factors such as who they were and who their audience was—and I studied the rhetoric of the document to define their tactics (i.e., how did the tlacuiloque construct their narrative to achieve their aims). The effect of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan on its readers-beholders is determined not only by the way the story is presented but also by the physical medium through which this story is communicated. The Quauhquecholteca chose to present their story through a large pictorial text in combination with an oral performance, probably presented during a community ritual. This reveals that they wanted to make their story known in a community context. Images presented in this context generally affect a person differently from alphabetic texts read in silence. Both the authors and the beholders are active participants in the process of assigning meaning to the story. The authors convey concerns and messages depending on their cultural and social backgrounds, preoccupations, and other factors. A similar set of factors on the side of the readers-beholders, in turn, determines how the message communicated by the authors is recognized and perceived. When studying the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan today, one faces a set of concepts that are often different from the ones modern investigators are used to. One has to be especially aware of these differences and the concerns of the creators, and ambiguity should never be excluded. Contextualization on all levels is therefore of the utmost importance and has an essential place in this book. The theory and methodologies presented in this chapter are integrated in the various chapters of this book. I applied the same steps used for the lienzos in my analyses of the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan, and the Codex Huaquechula (see Chapter 3). Throughout my work, I proceeded pragmatically by using bits and pieces from the various available sources and fitting the pieces together.

33

Quauhquechollan

Conquered Conquistadors

3. Quauhquechollan

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is an account by and about people from the community of Quauhquechollan in Puebla, Mexico. It tells about the establish­ ment of an alliance between the Quauhquecholteca and the Spaniards and the role of Quauhquecholteca captains and soldiers in Spanish campaigns of con­ quest. The aim of this chapter is to achieve insight into the historical, political, economic, and ideological contexts in which the Quauhquecholteca made the choice to ally with and help the Spaniards and hence to better understand the worldview and concerns of the authors of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. This chapter provides an introduction to the history of this altepetl.1 It deals with the founding of Quauhquechollan in the eleventh century, the history and experiences of the Quauhquecholteca in subsequent centuries, and the arrival of the Spaniards in the area. The information presented is primarily taken from 35

Quauhquechollan

the works of Spanish friars and conquerors who traveled through the area in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, contemporary indigenous pictorial and alphabetic sources, and unpublished archival documents. In addition, three other pictorials from Quauhquechollan, presently known as the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan, and the Codex Huaquechula, will be examined.

Prehispanic History of Quauhquechollan The first known settlement of Quauhquechollan was founded in the eleventh century, a period characterized by many migratory movements throughout Meso­ america. Like various other altepetl in central Mexico, Quauhquechollan was founded by migrating Chichimeca, a Nahuatl-speaking group that reportedly came from the north.2 According to sixteenth-century oral traditions, the Chi­ chi­meca who founded Quauhquechollan had been led by two captains, named Tloquetlatecuhtli and Yohuallatonac.3 Muñoz Camargo, a sixteenth-century mestizo historian from Tlaxcala, dated the arrival of the Chichimeca in the area of Quauhquechollan in the year 4 House of the Nahua calendar.4 Contemporary chroniclers mention that the founding of Quauhquechollan by these Chi­chi­ meca captains was documented in five pictorial documents. Reportedly, these documents also referred to the place of origin of the Chichimeca: the famous Chicomoztoc, or the cave with seven chambers.5 Unfortunately, these pictorials have been lost. They were possibly comparable to other pictorial migration sto­ ries from Puebla that have survived, such as the several documents related to the altepetl of Cuauhtinchan and the Lienzo of the Heye Foundation. Most information on the early history of Quauhquechollan is related to wars in the area and to the alternate alliances and confederations formed between the different altepetl of Central Mexico. Muñoz Camargo recorded two wars in the area of Quauhquechollan that he described as “las más famosas, crueles y lamen­ tables que en el mundo han pasado’’: the war of Poyauhtlan in the Nahua year 1 Rabbit and the war of Texcalticpac in the year 9 Flint (Acuña 1984 I:162).6 Reportedly, these wars were followed by a relatively peaceful period in which political entities were defined and redefined and multi-city alliances between altepetl were established or disintegrated.7 These alliances were often special­purpose relationships; they consisted of allied altepetl drawn together primarily by common interests, such as security from external military threats. If the members’ interests diverged, however, the alliances disintegrated. Therefore their compositions changed rapidly over time (Hassig 1988:23). At the end of the fourteenth century, Quauhquechollan was allied with the altepetl of Cuauhtin­ chan, which consisted of a variety of settlements inhabited by different subgroups (see Kirchoff, Odena Güemes, and Reyes García 1976). The Quauhquecholteca rulers were also genealogically related to the ruling families of Cuauhtinchan; the 36

Quauhquechollan

Figure 1. Map of the area of Quauhquechollan, representing the towns mentioned in this chapter (based on Paredes Martínez 1991:map 1, and a map of the State of Puebla by the Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transportes [1994]).

first ruling lord of Cuauhtinchan, named Teuhctlecozauhqui, was married to a daughter of the lord of Quauhquechollan, named Yohuallatonac.8 Later, as a result of a long series of internal conflicts between the different subgroups of Cuauhtinchan, a new period of warfare followed. An important alliance was established among the inhabitants of Tepeacac, Cuauhtinchan, Tecalco, Tecamachalco, Quechollac, Quauhquechollan, and Teopantlan. This confederation formed a united front against a common enemy: the inhabi­tants of Cholula, Huexotzingo, Tlaxcala, and Totomihuacan (Kirchhoff, Odena Güemes, and Reyes Garciá 1976:221–222). A recurring theme in the war record of Quauhquechollan is a series of con­ frontations with Calpan and Huexotzingo in the second half of the fourteenth century. According to the Spanish chroniclers, these wars resulted from a lack of sufficient land for the Quauhquecholteca, whose number had grown. The Quauhquecholteca attacked the neighboring town of Calpan and chased away its inhabitants. Those who survived fled to Huexotzingo seeking help. Huexo­t­ zingo, located about four km north of Calpan, had allied with Tlaxcala, Totomi­ huacan, Tepeacac, Quauhtla, Cuauhtinchan, and Cholula. These communities 37

Quauhquechollan

Figure 2. Detail of the area presented in Figure 1 (map based on Paredes Martínez 1991: map 1, and a map of the State of Puebla by the Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Trans­ portes [1994]).

gathered their forces and defeated the Quauhquecholteca, who fled down the river to a place near present-day Santa Ana Coatepec.9 There they remained for a few decades until, after repeated pleas for forgiveness, they were given permis­ sion to return to their lands. At the end of the fourteenth century, however, the Quauhquecholteca attacked Calpan again, and history repeated itself: the people from Calpan were defeated, the alliance with Huexotzingo and the other towns was reestablished, and the Quauhquecholteca were crushed. This time they were given no mercy, and they could no longer return to their lands.10 In a document dated 1550, the principales (nobility) of Tochimilco testified that after the second battle with Huexotzingo, the surviving Quauhque­chol­ teca took refuge in Ocopetlayuca-Tochimilco. The document reports that the Tochimilca were also on hostile terms with Huexotzingo and that they protected the expelled lords and gave them permission to settle in their territory.11 Accord­ ing to the Spanish chroniclers, the Quauhquecholteca founded a new town about twenty km southwest of their homeland: the present-day Quauhque­­chollan.12 The lands of the old Quauhquechollan were subsequently divided among the lords of Calpan and Huexotzingo, who repopulated it. This area became known by the name Huehuequauhquechollan (“Old Quauhquechollan”). Huehue­ quauhquechollan, also referred to as Acapetlahuacan or Atlixco, can be found to

38

Quauhquechollan

the east of the Cerro San Miguel in the present-day city of Atlixco. According to Torquemada and Motolinía, the Quauhquecholteca were chased away from their homeland at Acapetlahuacan once and for all around 1400 C.E.13 The indigenous sources date this event in the Nahua year 2 Reed,14 which would be 1403 C.E. (Caso 1977–1979 I).15 The new Quauhquechollan was thus founded in one of the early decades of the fifteenth century. According to local oral tradition, the Quauhquecholteca had lived at the new Quauhquechollan before. However, it is said that because of a lack of rain, the Quauhquecholteca had temporarily moved to Acapetlahuacan. I recorded this story: De aquí [modern Quauhquechollan] se fueron. Quatro años no lluvió. Se fueron para Atlixco [Acapetlahuacan] a vivir, y entonces parece que fue en el 1494 cuando tuvieron el primer enfrentamiento entre los calpeños y los de Acapetlahuacan. Porque querían ampliarse, porque ya habia mucha gente y ya no cabían en donde estaban ubicados. Pero los de Calpan no les dejaron. Entonces hubo ese enfrentamiento y los desterraron y vinieron a vivir allí en Santa Ana Coatepec. Allí este, no sé cuantos años estuvieron. Pero ellos añoraban por sus casas y terrenos que habían dejados allí que hay mucho agua. Entonces optaron por ir a pedir la disculpa a los calpeños, y fueron y llevaron regalos, y les dieron la disculpa y los perdonaron y volvieron a vivir en este lugar [Acapetlahuacan]. Pero a través del tiempo nuevamente se querían ampliarse pero entonces ya definitivamente ya no les dejaron, los calpeños, hubo otro enfrentamiento que los calpeños les dieron. Entonces ellos se dieron obligados a regresar aqui a Huaquechula. (Pers. comm., Don Gonzalo Alejo Martínez, Quauhquechollan, February 2004)

It is possible that the Quauhquecholteca had indeed lived at the site of the new Quauhquechollan before, although no other sources confirm this. The geography of the new area offered natural protection on two sides of the town: on one side are mountains, and on the other runs the River Huitzilac, also known as the Atila River. Moreover, the town is situated at the foot of the vol­ cano Popocatepetl, which was and is the community’s main source for drinking water. The Tochimilca allowed the Quauhquecholteca to irrigate their lands with water from the River Huitzilac in return for a set tribute in the form of cloaks, cacao, and other products.16 After the Quauhquecholteca had settled at this site (or reinhabited it), new alliances and confederacies were established. By the mid-fifteenth century the region was jointly governed by four towns: Tepeacac, Tecalco, Quechollac, and Tecamachalco (Berdan and Anawalt 1997:99). The community of Quauhquechollan developed into a rich and powerful altepetl.

Quauhquechollan and the Triple Alliance About five decades after the wars with Huexotzingo, the area of Quauhque­ chollan was conquered by the Mexica and subjected to Tenochtitlan.17 The 39

Quauhquechollan

altepetl Quauhquechollan was reportedly conquered in 1447, in the seventh year of Motecuhzoma Ilhuicamina’s rulership (1440–1468).18 The Mexica normally concluded each successful campaign with the sacrifice of war captives, to which they invited lords and nobles from throughout the empire.19 They performed a similar power display after the conquest of Quauhquechollan. Torquemada recorded that 3,200 Quauhquecholteca were captured, taken to Tenochtitlan, and sacrificed at the Feast of Tlacaxipehualiztli or during the inauguration of the Templo de Çonmolli.20 The Mexica imperial expansion generally brought about regional peace and stability in Central Mexico. The area of Quauhquechollan, however, remained restless, for various reasons. First, some of Quauhquechollan’s neighboring towns were conquered repeatedly and were only conquered once and for all by Motecuhzoma Ilhuicamina’s successors. But more important, despite repeated attempts, the Mexica never managed to conquer the neighboring region of Tlax­ cala, Cholula, and Huexotzingo. One of many unsuccessful campaigns to con­ quer this area was led by Tlacahuepantzin, son of the last Mexica lord, Motecuh­ zoma Xocoyotzin (1502–1521).21 His army traveled by way of Tochimilco and Quauhquechollan. However, even with local military assistance, the troops were unable to defeat the Tlaxcalteca. Instead, the Tlaxcalteca defeated the Mexica and killed Tlacahuepantzin. In response, Motecuhzoma Xocoyotzin called upon all his allies to join in a second attack, but he was still unable to defeat the Tlax­ calteca. During the decades before the Spanish conquest, Motecuhzoma Xoco­ yotzin had encircled the area with Mexica client states along all key borders. In other words, as a result of the hostilities between the Mexica and Tlax­ cala, the area of Quauhquechollan had become a political and military frontier between the two most powerful political alliances in the Mexican Central highlands: Tenochtitlan-Texcoco-Tlacopan (the Triple Alliance) and Tlaxcala­Huexotzingo-Cholula. The Valley of Atlixco, in which Quauhquechollan was situated, became divided into two antagonistic areas: a southern part control­ led by the Triple Alliance and a northern part dominated by Huexotzingo and Calpan. Some claimed the Mexica intentionally never conquered Tlaxcala so the area would provide a never-ending stream of war captives for sacrifice (Acuña 1984 I:185). Local military activities were indeed stimulated by Tenochtitlan’s desire for tribute in the form of war captives from Tlaxcala, Cholula, and Huexot­ zingo.22 One can assume, however, that if the Mexica had been able to incorpo­ rate the area into their empire they probably would have done so, even if only for the economic tribute they could have collected. Most wars between these two rival alliances are referred to as Xochiyaoyotl (“Flower War”), guerra de sangre, or guerra sagrada.23 During the decades before the Spanish intrusion, local social dynamics were therefore greatly influenced by the many battles and skirmishes between the two sides, and the direct result was general destruction within the region and displacement of settlements.24 40

Quauhquechollan

Mexica dominance not only affected local military activities. It was also felt on other levels. The most obvious effect was the economic impact of imperial tribute demands. The formation and development of the empire followed pat­ terns of expansion and control, and each conquered altepetl was forced to pay a set tribute to Tenochtitlan. The subjected towns were organized into tributeproducing “provinces,” with a vast bureaucracy and tax collectors (calpixques). Quauhquechollan was no exception and became part of the “province of Tepeacac.” The amount and kinds of tribute the province owed Tenochtitlan are recorded by Durán, as well as in two pictorial documents: the Matrícula de Tributos and the Codex Mendoza.25 Tributes varied, from clothing and food to precious materials and war captives. On the other hand, being part of the Mexica Empire also implied economic benefits, such as the possibility of using the Mexica trad­ ing network. In addition, Mexica dominance stimulated trade and exchange of products throughout the empire (see also Berdan and Smith 2003). Quauhquechollan was located along important communication routes from Tenochtitlan to Veracruz and other coastal areas, as well as along major thorough­ fares to the south. Many merchants passed through this area.26 During the Late Postclassic there were major market centers in Tepeacac and Ytzucan (present-day Izucar de Matamoros). Tepeacac had its own regular markets, and as a condition of its conquest it was also required to have a vast variety of luxury goods avail­ able for traveling Mexica merchants (pochteca) who passed through this “gateway to the south.” The sort of tribute this area paid to Tenochtitlan reflects that, indeed, not only ordinary products and merchandise but also luxury goods passed through it on a notable scale. Ytzucan, in turn, only about sixteen km southeast of Quauhquechollan, was a major jumping-off point not only for commercial caravans but also for military incursions to the south. The Mexica had stationed troops in both Tepeacac and Ytzucan to protect these border places and the traveling Mexica merchants and to ensure that the “terms of agreement” with their subject towns with regard to the market in Tepeacac were respected (Berdan and Anawalt 1997:99). A document composed on December 1, 1543, recorded that the “yndios mercaderes naturales” of Quauhquechollan traveled to Guatemala, Chiapas, Xicalango, Piastla, Tabasco, Soconusco, Chilatengo, and other “pueblos y tiangues [markets] desta nueva espana” (AGN Mercedes Vol. 2, Exp. 532, fs. 215v–216r). These trading activities may well have been stimulated and developed as a result of Quauhquechollan’s incorporation into the Mexica Empire. Another effect of Mexica dominance involved the status of local lords and nobles. The rulers of the conquered altepetl were normally left in power (given that they were loyal to the Mexica). However, hierarchies and administrative positions were, if necessary, manipulated to ensure the political dominance of the Mexica ruling house. In some cases the Mexica interfered directly in local politics. Also, social links with subordinate dynasties were cemented through marriage alliances and gift giving, out of which a complex system of genealogical 41

Quauhquechollan

and political relations emerged (Hodge and Smith 1994:13–14). There are several references to genealogical ties between the lords of Quauhquechollan and the nobility of Cuauhtinchan, Huexotzingo, Tochimilco, and Ytzucan. The Spanish chroniclers also mention that in 1550, one of the noblemen of Quauh­quechollan, a certain Don Juan, was married to a woman of the lineage of the Mexica lord Motecuhzoma.27 Possibly, such ties between Quauhque­chollan and Tenochtitlan also existed before the arrival of the Spaniards. Subjection to the Mexica implied furthermore that local lords were sometimes invited to Tenochtitlan. In 1487, for example, the Mexica lord Ahuitzotl invited the lords of Quauhquechollan to participate in a feast celebrating the inauguration of a temple. The invitation involved a payment of tribute by the Quauhquecholteca. Such invitations were primarily a social and economic duty. The influence of Tenochtitlan on Quauhquechollan is visible in the town’s archaeological record. Prehispanic stone sculptures present in the modern village include a jaguar-eagle sculpture, a flint knife, a Nahua warrior, Nahua war­ rior shields, a Nahua sun disc, and other images. All of these sculptures show clear similarities to the imagery of Tenochtitlan, although there are also slight differences.28 On most other levels, the Mexica left each conquered area relatively free to operate as it wished. In 1487 there were six villages subjected to Quauhque­ chollan: Acapetlahuacan, Atzitzihuacan, Yaoteuacan, Hueyapan, Tetelan, and Tlamimilolpan. Each of these villages paid tribute to Quauhquechollan, and in times of war they fought under its banner (Durán 1984 II:334 [Ch. XLIII]). The new system thus also allowed the local nobility the opportunity to augment its own sphere of influence and to exploit areas under its control. The Mexica Empire was a tribute-based empire and a political system based on pervasive and dominating influence (hegemonic control) rather than territo­ rial control (Hassig 1988:19). Since the system, which was essentially an alliance, relied more on power (i.e., the perception of the possessor’s ability to achieve its ends) than on force (direct physical action), power displays in the form of the exercise of force (war), rituals, and celebrations were of primary concern.29 To avoid any perception of weakness, conquests were formally announced through­ out Mesoamerica. News of defeats, on the other hand, was kept as silent as possible (Hassig 1988:22). The latter fact is one of the reasons most Mexican pictorials, and also the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, depict conquests in a veni vidi vici manner and normally omit defeats (see Chapter 8). For a subject people, the main results of incorporation into the Mexica Empire were a loss of riches as a result of the tribute demands and a loss of status for the local nobility. However, there were ways to regain some of those losses. One of these ways was to join the new lords in subsequent battles. This would bring the conquered lords land, tribute, and, perhaps even more important, the status of “conqueror” instead of “conquered” (Oudijk and Restall 2007). 42

Quauhquechollan

The success of Mexica military campaigns depended heavily on this system, as it provided the Mexica Army with new manpower to conquer yet more lands. The Mexica Army that had conquered the area of Quauhquechollan, for exam­ ple, had been made up of warriors from Tenochtitlan, Azcapotzalco, Tlacopan, Cuauhtitlan, Acolhuacan, Texcoco, Chalco, Colhuacan, Cuitlahuac, Mizquic, and Coyoacan (Hassig 1988:168, 172). Cities were often attacked sequentially to take advantage of this system most effectively. This allowed the Mexica to reinforce their strength and to use the resources, intelligence, and manpower of their latest conquest to achieve the next one (Hassig 1988:21). When the Span­ iards later used the same strategies, they found many conquered lords prepared to participate in their campaigns precisely because of these prehispanic patterns of conquest and domination. By the time of the arrival of the Spaniards, a large part of Central Mexico had been subjected to the Triple Alliance and paid tribute to Tenochtitlan. Mexica armies had also set out to the south to conquer parts of Guatemala and had even gone as far as Nicaragua, where they reportedly had local polities send­ ing tribute to Tenochtitlan in the form of gold, green feathers, emerald and tur­ quoise, and other locally produced precious materials (Acuña 1984 I:184–185). Several K’iche’ títulos likewise commented on the fact that certain groups in Guatemala paid tribute to the Mexica lords, and there are several references to routes from Mexico to Nicaragua along which Mexica conquistadors and traders traveled (see Broekhoven 2002:81–87).30

Arrival of the Spaniards The first Spaniards who visited Quauhquechollan were Bernardino Vazquez de Tapia and Pedro de Alvarado. Cortés had sent the two captains to Tenochtitlan in 1519, after he had been informed that the Mexica lord Motecuhzoma Xoco­ yotzin was willing to help him in his battle against the Tlaxcalteca. Guided by Mexica representatives, the two traveled to Tenochtitlan by way of Quauhque­ chollan, later returning to Cortés in the company of three Mexica lords and their soldiers (Vázquez de Tapia 1973:27, 35–37). The Mexica, however, did not enter into an alliance with the Spaniards. Instead, Cortés managed to establish an alliance with the Tlaxcalteca in 1519, and then, with his new allies, he moved against Tenochtitlan. As stated before, the Mexica had stationed garrisons in various border areas of their empire; for example, in Tepeacac and Ytzucan. When the Spaniards approached the area, another Mexica garrison was stationed in Quauhquechollan. Torque­ mada records that this garrison consisted of 20,000 soldiers. Cortés mentions 30,000 warriors.31 Their job was to protect the Mexica territory and, as Cortés explained, to prevent the inhabitants of the area from collaborating with the Spaniards (Cortés 1993:89–91). 43

Quauhquechollan

Ironically, however, this move turned out to have the opposite effect for the Mexica. The Quauhquecholteca suffered greatly from the presence of the Mexica soldiers. Harvests were destroyed, and the people were constantly subjected to violence. The perceived balance between the costs and benefits of being in the Mexica Empire had worked to the disadvantage of the Mexica rulers, and the Quauhquecholteca sought help from the Spaniards. When Cortés was in Tepeacac, he received messengers from Quauhquechollan, which declared that its lords were prepared to ally with the Spaniards if they would help get rid of their oppressors. Cortés realized that this move would facilitate his entrance into Mexica territory, and he decided to send Cristóbal de Olid to Quauhquechollan (Cortés 1993:90). Cortés wrote to the king that when Olid set out for Quauhquechollan, he brought 200 Spanish soldiers, 13 horsemen, and 30,000 indigenous allies.32 The Quauhquecholteca had informed the Spaniards of the location of the Mexica garrison and advised them on the best tactics to employ in the battle. In addi­ tion, they had taken Mexica spies captive to keep the arrival of the Spaniards unnoticed for as long as possible. Oral traditions in Quauhquechollan communicate this accounting of the Mexica garrison and Olid’s arrival: Los aztecas vivieron allá, que es el barrio de arriba. De allí, de esta esquina, por arriba es el pueblo que estaba ya ubicado: Ateopanzolco. Se llamaba Ateo­ panzolco. Allí dicen que si vivieron allí. Allí estuvo Cuauhtemoc. Cuando salió derrotado Hernán Cortés en Mexico, se acampó aquí en Tepeaca, Hernán Cortés. Entonces Moctezuma mandó a este, a Cuauhtemoc a res­ guardar aquí. Para que no entrará por aquí Hernán Cortés a atacar nueva­ mente a Mexico. Y allí tenía guarnison. Gente. Resguardando, a fin de de no dejar pasar a Hernán Cortés. Y los de aquí de Huaquechula, fueron, salieron también con los españoles para atacar a México, atacar a Moctezuma. Entonces, al tener esta confianza, pidieron auxilio, los de acá, pidieron auxilio con Hernán Cortés para conquistar ese pueblo. Entonces mandó a Cristobal de Olid, con gente de Cholula, con gente de cholulteca, tlaxcalteca, totonacos, y gente de Narváez, Pánfilo de Narváez. Y conquistaron este pueblo. Huaquechula no era grande. Eran barrios. En Tepapayeca, allá está la píramide-iglesia. Entonces Cristóbal de Olid unió los dos pueblos. Este y ese pueblo. Entonces aquellos se bajaron, que es ahora el barrio de arriba. Y ahora es un solo pueblo. (Pers. comm., Don Gonzalo Alejo, Quauhquechollan, October 1997)

In local oral tradition, Cristóbal de Olid is described as the man who defeated the Mexica (fieldwork Quauhquechollan, 1997, 2004).33 Cortés, how­ ever, wrote that when Olid arrived in Quauhquechollan, there appeared to be more Mexica than expected, and he personally joined Olid with another 100

44

Quauhquechollan

soldiers, 10 horses, and 10,000 indigenous allies. Among those allies were many Tlaxcalteca.34 Pedro and Jorge de Alvarado were also in Cortés’s company at the time (Himmerich y Valencia 1991:119). Cortés wrote this account of the battle for Quauhquechollan: Dentro de la ciudad [Quauhquechollan] andaba muy gran grita por todas las calles: peleando con los contrarios, y guiado por un natural de la dicha ciudad, llegué al aposento donde los capitanes estaban, el cual hallé cer­ cado de más de tres mil hombres que peleaban por entrarles por la puerta, y les tenían tomados todos los altos y azoteas. Los capitanes y la gente que con ellos se halló, peleaban tan bien y esforzadamente, que no les podían entrar el aposento, puesto que eran pocos; porque, demás de pelear ellos como valientes hombres, el aposento era muy fuerte; y como yo llegué luego entramos, y entró tanta gente de los naturales de la ciudad, que en ninguna ma­nera los podíamos socorrer, que muy brevemente no fuesen muertos. Porque yo quisiera tomar algunos a vida, para me informar de las cosas de la gran ciudad [Tenochtitlan] y de quién era señor después de la muerte de Mutezuma, y de otras cosas; y no pude tomar sino a uno más muerto que vivo, del cual me informé, como adelante diré. Por la ciudad mataron muchos de ellos que en ella estaban aposentados, y los que estaban vivos cuando yo en la ciudad entré, sabiendo mi venida, comenzaron a huir hacia donde estaba la gente que tenían en guarnición, y en el alcance asimismo murieron muchos. Y fué tan presto oído y sabido este tumulto por la dicha gente de la guarnición, porque estaban en un alto que sojuzgaba toda la ciudad y lo llano del derredor, que casi a una sazón llegaron los que salían huyendo de la dicha ciudad y la gente que venía en socorro y a ver qué cosa era aquélla. Los cuales eran más de treinta mil hombres y la más lucida gente que hemos visto, porque traían muchas joyas de oro y plata y plumajes; y como es grande la ciudad, comenzaron a poner fuego en ella por aquella parte por do entraban. Lo cual fué muy presto hecho saber por los naturales, y salí con sola la gente de caballo, porque los peones estaban ya muy cansados, y rompimos por ellos, y retrajéronse a un paso, el cual les ganamos, y salimos tras ellos, alcanzando muchos por una cuesta arriba muy agra, y tal, que cuando acabamos de encumbrar la sierra, ni los enemigos ni nosotros podíamos ir atrás ni adelante. Y así cayeron muchos de ellos muertos y ahogados de la calor, sin herida ninguna, y dos caballos se ancaron y el uno muríó. Y de esta manera hicimos mucho daño, porque ocurrieron muchos indios de los amigos nuestros, y como iban descansados, y los contrarios casi muertos, mataron muchos. Por manera que en poco rato estaba el campo vacío de los vivos, aunque de los muertos algo ocupado; y llegamos a los aposentos y albergues que tenían hechos en el campo nuevamente, que en tres partes que estaban, parecían cada una de ellas un razonable villa, porque, demás de la gente de guerra, tenían mucho aparato de servidores y forne­ cimiento para su real, porque, según después supe, en ellos había personas principales; lo cual fué todo despojado y quemado por los indios nuestros amigos, y certifico a vuestra sacra majestad que había ya juntos de los dichos

45

Quauhquechollan

nuestros amigos más de cien mil hombres. Y con esta victoria, habiendo echado todos los enemigos de la tierra, hasta los pasar allende unas puentes y malos pasos que ellos tenían, nos volvimos a la ciudad [Quauhquechollan], donde de los naturales fuimos bien recibidos y aposentados, y descansa­ mos en la dicha ciudad tres días, de que teníamos bien necesidad. (Cortés 1993:91–92)

This brutal battle at Quauhquechollan took place in 1520 (Gerhard 1986:56). The Mexica were defeated, and the Quauhquecholteca lords entered into an alliance with the Spaniards. The Spanish chroniclers described Quauhquechollan as a large and power­ ful altepetl. Cortés estimated the local population at 5,000 or 6,000 inhabitants (or heads of families) (Cortés 1993:92). He wrote that other communities were subjected to Quauhquechollan and that the entire altepetl housed about 12,000 indigenous families-tributaries (Cortés 1993:110). Cortés and Torquemada mentioned that Quauhquechollan was not only situated in a geographically protected area but that there were also double walls around the town and towers that served as observation posts.35 Cortés wrote: Y toda la ciudad está cercada de muy fuerte muro de cal y canto, tan alto como cuatro estados por de fuera de la ciudad, y por dentro está casi igual con el suelo. Y por toda la muralla va su petril tan alto como medio estado; para pelear tiene cuatro entradas tan anchas como uno puede entrar a caballo, y hay en cada entrada tres o cuatro vueltas de la cerca, que encabalga en un lienzo en el otro; y hacia a aquellas vueltas hay también encima de la muralla su petril para pelear. (Cortés 1993:92)

These walls are depicted in both the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (see Chap­ ter 7) and the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec (discussed later in this chapter). They were presumably built to protect the town during the many skirmishes and wars in the area. I have been able to identify the location of these walls on the basis of (1) Cortés’s description (given earlier in this chapter), (2) the way the walls are presented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (see Chap­ ter 7), (3) indications from local oral traditions (fieldwork Quauhquechollan, 1997), and (4) their physical remains (fieldwork Quauhquechollan, 1997). After the Spanish-Quauhquecholteca alliance had been established, the community of Quauhquechollan was given in encomienda to Jorge de Alvarado (Gerhard 1986:57). According to Hubert Howe Bancroft (1883–1886 I:528), the Spaniards moved the town away from its original location, but that is incor­ rect.36 The Quauhquecholteca sent their captains and soldiers with Cortés, just as the Tlaxcalteca and others had done before them. Cortés wrote to the king that when he left Quauhquechollan, he was accompanied by so many indigenous allies that they covered almost all the fields and mountains he could see. He estimated their number at 120,000.37

46

Quauhquechollan

The first Spanish conquest in which the Quauhquecholteca participated was that of Ytzucan.38 Subsequently, they participated in the subjugation of the rest of the Mexica Empire. The Quauhquecholteca are specifically mentioned in rela­ tion to their role in the conquests of Huaxtepec and Chalco.39 During subsequent years, they also participated in military campaigns to the Chichimeca region in the north,40 for example, and to Guatemala (see Chapter 5). In return for these services to the Spaniards, they received certain privileges (see Chapter 4). Some of these privileges were stated in a real cédula (royal order, decree) of 1535 by the Queen of Spain (AGN Tierras 2683, Exp. 4, No. 164; see Appendix 1). In the subsequent period, the altepetl of Quauhquechollan underwent profound changes, and the number of inhabitants declined rapidly. Jorge de Alvarado held the community in encomienda until his death in 1540. His son, also named Jorge, inherited it. Between 1531 and 1533, the first magistrates arrived in Puebla de los Angeles (the modern city of Puebla), Huexotzingo, and Calpan. Part of the region was then annexed to the jurisdiction of Puebla and was populated by Spanish cattle breeders. The Libro de visitas de los pueblos de la Nueva España describes the Quauhquechollan of 1550. According to this docu­ ment, Quauhquechollan then consisted of four barrios, or subunits, named Cuya­ metepeque, Tlasichuca, Cuyacan, and Talnabaca, with a total of 1,746 families. The document also states that eleven communities were subjected to it: Cuyluco (Huiluco), Guayuca (Cuayuca), Teçoçolco, Açiçintlan (Atzitzintlan), Coa­te­ peque (Coatepec), Tocheteupa (Tochteopan), Guaupechuca (Quauhpechco?), Aguacatepeque, Calmecatitlan, Anteupa (Ateopan), and Aguapiltitlan (Libro de visitas, f. 81). In around 1550, various jurisdictional conflicts took place in the valley, also involving the region of Quauhquechollan. Quauhquechollan was claimed by the magistrates of both Ytzucan and Huexotzingo. During the next decade the area was divided into provinces, and Quauhquechollan was assigned to the alcalde of Ytzucan (Gerhard 1986:57–58). In 1563, the community of Quauhquechollan was handed over to Jorge de Alvarado’s grandson, likewise named Jorge. In 1570, seventeen villages were subject to Quauhquechollan, with a total of 3,665 tributaries. In 1591, these communities were subordinate to Quauhquechollan: Santiago Atzitzihuacan, San Francisco Xochiteopan, San Pedro Ixhuatepec, San Mateo Coatepec, San Juan Cotzoc, San Felipe Quapechco (Quauhpechco), and San Marcos Ateopan (AGN Indios, Vol. 3, Exp. 873, fs. 211v–212). At the end of the sixteenth century, the number of Quauhquecholteca tributaries had declined to 2,230.41 When Quauhquechollan was turned over to the jurisdiction of Atlixco in 1602, some of its subject villages were separated from their center and stayed with Ytzucan. Atzitzihuacan was separated from Quauhquechollan in the middle of the seventeenth century (Gerhard 1986:57–58). Quauhquechollan remained a private encomienda until 1696. In 1697, nine­ teen villages were subjected to Quauhquechollan. By that time the community 47

Quauhquechollan

had 2,500 tributaries. In 1792, the number of subjected towns had decreased to sixteen. Meanwhile, the jurisdictions of Ytzucan and Tochimilco had been added to the jurisdiction of Atlixco. In 1755, 1,009 families (396 Spanish, 383 mes­ tizo, and 230 mulatto families) were counted, and in 1791 Quauhquechollan had 5,407 inhabitants (2,604 Spaniards, 1,611 mestizos, and 1,192 mulattoes) (Gerhard 1986:57–58).42 Presently, the municipality of Quauhquechollan (now known as Huaque­ chula) consists of twenty-seven villages with a total of 26,114 inhabitants, covering an area of 240 km2. The town of San Martín Huaquechula, cabacera of the municipality, is located at its center. The products cultivated in the fields of Quauhquechollan are corn, peanuts, sorghum, beans, tomatoes, gourds (cala­ bash), alfalfa, avocados, melons, and limes.43 The original indigenous language spoken in Quauhquechollan is Nahuatl. There were also some Popolocan and Otomí minorities in the area, although most nobles spoke Nahuatl at least to some degree (Gerhard 1986:56).44

Quauhquechollan’s Indigenous Historical Record As a result of the destructive effects of the European intrusion, few indigenous records of the prehispanic and Early Colonial history of the Quauhquecholteca have survived. Local oral traditions have largely been forgotten, and most pre­ colonial artifacts have been lost or are no longer in their original context (they are now in museums or private collections). Some prehispanic stone sculptures survived and are presently exhibited in the park of modern Quauhquechollan.45 Four pictorials made by Quauhquecholteca survived and have been well preserved. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is one of them. This document will be dealt with in the remaining chapters. The other three are now known as the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, the Codex Huaquechula (both in the collection of the Museo Casa del Alfeñique in Puebla, Mexico, together with the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan), and the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan (presently kept in the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna, Austria). These three documents will be briefly examined in this chapter. The four pictorials from Quauhquechollan are all composed in the Nahua pictorial writing style and were produced in the sixteenth century. They record unique historical data. Although they are very informative about the indigenous history of Quauhquechollan and on the structure and concerns of indigenous Central Mexican altepetl in general, they are often ignored by historians. As of yet, no satisfactory study of any of the four pictorials has been published. The main difference between the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, the Codex Huaquechula, and the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan, on the one hand, and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, on the other, is that the first three are concerned with purely local affairs, while the Lienzo de Quauhque48

Quauhquechollan

chollan deals with “international” affairs. The Genealogía presents, as its name suggests, a genealogy of lords of Quauhquechollan. The Mapa Circular provides information on the political and social structure of the altepetl and was used in a local lawsuit. Both documents are painted on pieces of deerskin of about 80 × 80 cm. The Codex Huaquechula and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are painted on cotton cloth. The Codex Huaquechula also deals with local socio-political issues, and its contents partly overlap those of the Mapa Circular. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan measures about twelve times the size of the Genealogía and the Mapa Circular. Several sixteenth- and seventeenth-century pictorials pertaining to other altepetl also include references to Quauhquechollan. The community of Quauhque­ chollan is referred to, for example, in the Codex Mendoza, the Matrícula de Tributos, the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, the Lienzo of the Heye Foundation, and various copies of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. Also, the Archivo General de la Nación holds three maps drawn by indigenous artists in which Quauhquechollan plays a role. One is the Mapa de Tepexuxuma, Guaquichula, Tizacapan, Santistevan, Colotetlopan, Teyuca, Yzucar, etc. This is an anonymous work, drawn in 1571, and measures 44 × 29 cm (AGN Tierras, Vol. 35, Exp. 4, f. 17, Cat. no. 559). Another is the Mapa de Yexotzinco, Guacachula y Yeyetcatepango, signed by a Leo­ nel de Servantes and drawn only four years later, in 1575. This mapa measures 21 × 42 cm (AGN Tierras, Vol. 2809, Exp. 16, f. 22, Cat. no. 2216). The third is the Mapa de San Juan Cuiluco y Guaquachula. This map was drawn more than a century later, in 1694. It is signed by Hernán Pérez de Olarte and measures 43 × 29 cm (AGN Tierras, Vol. 158, Exp. 1, f. 07, Cat. no. 629). All three maps have alphabetical glosses explaining the pictography. They show the position of Quauhquechollan in relation to its neighboring towns and provide information on owners of certain pieces of land and on the inhabitants and positions of other communities in the area.

Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec The Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec is an 83 × 80 cm piece of deerskin painted on both sides (Glass 1964:155). The front side shows the founders of the altepetl and a lineage of ruling lords, either those of the altepetl or of one of its subunits (barrios). The reverse shows a geographic map of the area and the boundary markers (linderos) of Quauhquechollan. The Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec dates from the sixteenth century. Little is known about its history. It is known that in 1892 it was in the collection of the Academia de Pintura de Puebla in Puebla, Mexico, together with the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (Aguirre Beltrán 1999:53). The whereabouts of both documents before that time are unknown. Possibly, the Genealogía de Quauhque­chollanMacuilxochitepec was in the collection of José Manso around 1848.46 Both the 49

Quauhquechollan

Lienzo and the Genealogía were later moved to the collection of the Museo Casa del Alfeñique and more recently (temporarily) to the Museo Poblano de Arte Virreinal, both in Puebla. The Genealogía is also referred to by the name Codex Huaquechula (Glass and Robertson 1975:117; Merlo 2001:21). To avoid confu­ sion, I only use the name Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec. Over the past few centuries, the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec was copied several times. Two copies, both in color and of more or less the same dimensions, are reported in the inventory of the collection of the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia in Mexico City. One was made on deerskin and the other on paper. The names of the authors are unknown.47 In his 1964 catalog, John Glass recorded that an Ignacio Gorozpe donated the deerskin copy to the library in 1940. Glass also wrote that at the time he wrote the catalog, the paper copy mentioned in the inventory was not present in the collection. He raised the possibility that this paper copy was made by Luis Garcés in 1892. Garcés would have made two copies that year, one of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan that was later sent to Madrid (see Chapter 4), and another of a manuscript from Quauhquechollan that was kept in the Academia de Pintura de Puebla and not sent to Madrid (Glass 1964:155; Paso y Troncoso 1892–1893 I:9–10). Since at the time both the original Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the original Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec were in the collec­ tion of the Academia de Pintura de Puebla, it seems indeed likely that Garcés copied these two documents in the same year. A third copy of the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec is in the American Museum of Natural His­ tory in New York City. Zelia Nuttall purchased this document in 1904. Also, in 1933, Rodolfo Barthez copied the manuscript for the Palacio de Bellas Artes in Mexico City. The present whereabouts of Barthez’s copy are unknown (Glass 1964:155). In that same year, Barthez made a copy of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (see Chapter 6). The first published reference to the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuil­ xochitepec is found in the work of Antonio Peñafiel (1914). Peñafiel published a drawing and a brief description of the document, which he referred to as Antiguo Atlixco Guauhquechola Macuilxochitepec. Other short descriptions and images can be found in the works of Glass (1964:155) and Glass and Robertson (1975:117). Robert Barlow also published an image of the Genealogía de QuauhquechollanMacuilxochitepec (Barlow 1995:460). In 1995, María Guadeloupe Mercado Bello (Colegio de Antropología, Universidad Veracruzana) wrote her thesis on the document. Although she described the persons and places represented in the document, she did not identify them. More recently, an image of the manuscript and a brief description were published by Eduardo Merlo (2001). As stated before, the front side of the Genealogía de QuauhquechollanMacuilxochitepec shows a genealogy of the altepetl ’s rulers or those of one of its barrios. The place glyph of Quauhquechollan is depicted in the upper center of the 50

Quauhquechollan

document. This glyph consists of a bell-shaped mountain (tepe), an eagle (quauh), and five flowers (macuil-five, xochi-flower) and is glossed “Quauhquechollan-­ Macuilxochitepec.” The name Macuilxochitepec refers to the Cerro San Miguel (locally also known as the Macuilxochitepetl or Macuilxochitepec) in presentday Atlixco, a hill located at the site where the Quauhquecholteca lived before 1403 (i.e., at the old Quauhquechollan at Acapetlahuacan, discussed previ­ ously).48 The element of the five flowers also appears in the place glyphs of Quauhquechollan, as recorded in the Mexica Matrícula de Tributos (plate 22) and the Codex Mendoza (plate 44).49 However, it does not appear in any of the other pictorials in which Quauhquechollan is represented. Below the place glyph are a wall and a river with little birds. This river can be identified as the River Huitzilac (huitzil–“hummingbird”), which passes the new Quauhquechollan to the northeast. As we will see, the map on the verso side shows the same river and also contains a reference to the old Quauhquechollan. Along the upper edge of the document are depicted nine lords on thrones who are smoking cigars. Three of them are positioned to the left side of the place glyph (from the viewer’s perspective), two are depicted underneath it, and the other four are to its right.50 From their position in the document, namely as a row in its upper part, they can be identified as founders. Their names are given by means of both name glyphs and glosses in alphabetical writing. From the left to the right (for the viewer), these names can be read as Tezcatlpopoca (represented by an image of a smoking mirror), Xihuimitotzin (unclear glyph), Tlotlitotzintetzone (represented by the image of a bird), [unreadable], [unread­ able], Chonin_huimxotil (represented by the image of a head with something on top), Tetoa_honichal (represented by the image of a head), and Pilipopoca (represented by the image of a smoking head). The last founder has no gloss or name glyph. Since the document shows characteristics of both Acapetlahuacan and the new Quauhquechollan (the five flowers in the place glyph refer to Acapetlahua­ can; the River Huitzilac and the wall are both situated at the new Quauhque­ chollan), I believe this document refers to the removal of the Quauhquecholteca from their temporary dwelling place at Acapetlahuacan to Quauhquechollan at its present-day location sometime around 1400. The nine founders must have been the lords who ruled the Quauhquecholteca when they were chased away from Acapetlahuacan and who then retreated with the surviving Quauhque­chol­ teca to the area of Tochimilco (discussed earlier). The upper-left corner of the document shows an image of a cane or reed and the Nahuatl gloss “x acatl xihuitl omochi.” This can be translated as “in the year 10 Reed it was done.” Possibly, this date refers to the founding date of the new Quauhquechollan. According to the chronology of Caso (1977–1979 I), the first Nahua year 10 Reed following 1403 would have been the year 1411. If this was indeed the year the new Quauhquechollan was founded, there was a 51

Quauhquechollan

Figure 3. Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec. Recto side of one of the cop­ ies (no. 35-101) in the collection of the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia in Mexico City (Glass 1964:plate 108).

period of eight years between the day the Quauhquecholteca left their houses at Acapetlahuacan and the official founding of the new town. This would seem a reasonable time frame. The third founder to the right (for the viewer), named Tetoa_honichal, is connected to a line with footprints. This line with footprints, which is a com­ mon pictographic convention for parentage and connects a progenitor to his offspring, leads to another lord, who is connected to yet another lord, and so on. In this way, the document represents a lineage of twelve rulers who descend from the lord Tetoa_honichal. Most of these rulers are seated opposite a woman, indicating a married couple. Sometimes a child or children are connected to a couple. The line with ruling lords leads from the upper-right corner to the center 52

Quauhquechollan

Figure 4. Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec. Verso side of one of the cop­ ies (no. 35-101) in the collection of the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia in Mexico City (Glass 1964:plate 109).

of the document, then downward, then up again, and eventually ends up in the bottom-left corner. At times, lines branch off from this main line and lead to other people who must have been related to the rulers of Quauhquechollan in some way. All persons have an accompanying name glyph and a gloss in alpha­ betic writing. Apart from the nine founders, the document presents a total of seventy-three persons. The document also presents five tecpan images (palaces). As far as decipherable, the accompanying glosses say _acxotla, Cantolco, Teocuicac, Nic_ocan, and Xochinuiuacan. Up to now, I have not found any of these names in the published literature or in archival documents. The bottom part of the document shows several objects accompanied by the Nahuatl phrase “ixquich

53

Quauhquechollan

itiamiq usali quachtli cacauatl sali ystli copali savali chili,” translated as “all their merchandise [was] usali (unknown product), cloaks, cacao, sali (white medicinal sand?), obsidian, copal or incense, jewels, chilli.”51 These products thus refer to the merchandise of the Quauhquecholteca and their trading activities. The images are not provided with Nahuatl numbers, as is usually done with tribute. The bottom-right corner of the document has been cut out and replaced by another piece of deerskin. This “new” piece shows another couple, clearly painted by a different artist. The man is also represented with the attributes of a ruler, and he has a beard. This ruler may have been a later lord of Quauhque­ chollan. By relating himself to the genealogy and thus directly to the founders of the town, he may have tried to prove his descent, or at least he recorded it, probably to claim certain rights. It is also possible that he did not belong to the genealogy but pretended to do so by adding his own image. He has no name glyph, however, nor is his image accompanied by an alphabetic gloss. This sug­ gests the corner was replaced after the glosses were added to the manuscript. The verso side of the document shows a map. The style of this map reveals that it was drawn at a later time. The recto side shows only two-dimensional images, for example, while the verso side shows three-dimensionality. The upper part of the map shows the River Huitzilac, and behind it is a mountainous area with trees. There is one big mountain at the center, glossed “Cuauhquecholan.” A pole on its slopes identifies this mountain as the Macuilxochitepetl/Cerro San Miguel, which still has such a pole on its slopes. This pole, which was and still is used by voladores (dancers attached to the pole with a rope while flying in the air), was originally made of wood but has been replaced by a concrete one. Voladores still perform on this mountain during a regional feast known as the Atlixcayotl. The area above the river can thus be identified as the old Quauhque­ chollan at Acapetlahuacan. Below the river is depicted a series of linderos, positioned along the edges of the document. They have alphabetic glosses, but only the endings of some of the words are still readable (“-cpachtli,” “-cpochtli,” and “-pantli”). Most of these boundary markers are trees. One is a mountain with a tree to its left (from the perspective of the viewer). Another consists of the image of a large rock with a face on it. I identified this rock as a rock known locally as the “Piedra Mascara.” This is a large stone on which a face is carved, situated southeast of the modern Quauhquechollan 7.8 m from a modern concrete boundary marker. This identification implies that the linderos represented are those of the new Quauhquechollan. In other words, the upper part of the map shows the old Quauhquechollan at Acapetlahuacan, and the bottom part represents the new Quauhquechollan. The River Huitzilac is situated between the two. The orientation of the map places the northeast at the top, and it is made in such a way that the viewer feels “present” in the new Quauhquechollan and looks toward the old Quauhque­ 54

Quauhquechollan

chollan at Acapetlahuacan in the distance. The way the river splits the map corresponds to where it splits the landscape. The map thus confirms that the document deals with the removal from the one place to the other. From the fact that the old dwelling place is glossed “Cuauhquecholan,” one can assume that at the time the gloss was added the Quauhquecholteca still considered this site theirs. The Quauhquecholteca had moved away from Acapetlahuacan sometime around 1400, but it is known that in 1487 this place was subjected to the new Quauhquechollan (Durán 1984 II:334 [Ch. XLIII]). The alphabetic sources record nothing about the founders of the new Quauhquechollan or their number. Local oral traditions, however, reveal that in prehispanic times Quauhquechollan consisted of nine barrios named Jaltipan (Chaltipa[n]), Consingo, San Pablo, Soyatepetl, La Trinidad, Xoxtla, Tezayacatl, Petlacalco, and Matadero.52 The nine founders depicted in the Genealogía may have been the founders of these nine barrios. The Genealogía, then, represents the lineage of rulers of one of these barrios, the one related to the founder from which the line with footprints departs. Possibly, each barrio once had its own document(s) presenting a genealogy of its lords. The Genealogía may have been composed to establish the rights and power of the dynasty in question and to legitimize the lineage’s position on the basis of its descent from one of the founders of the altepetl. It is questionable whether the lord who added himself to this lineage by means of the replaced patch was truly a descendant of this lineage. Possibly, the Genealogía was based on (or cop­ ied from) a prehispanic document. It probably served originally within the local indigenous sphere, although, considering the glosses, it may later have also been used in a Spanish context.

Codex Huaquechula Next to the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the Genealogía de Quauhque­chollan­ Macuilxochitepec, the Museo Casa del Alfeñique (Museo Poblano de Arte Virre­ inal) in Puebla houses a third Early Colonial pictorial document from Quauhque­ chollan: the Codex Huaquechula. The Codex Huaquechula has not appeared in scholarly studies to date, and its history is unknown. It is also unknown whether it was ever copied. The ignorance concerning this manuscript may result from the fact that the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec is also some­ times referred to as Codex Huaquechula (discussed earlier). Scholars may not have suspected the existence of two different Codices de Huaquechula. Moreover, the Codex Huaquechula has rarely been exhibited in the past. Like the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the Codex Huaquechula is a painting made on a large piece of cotton cloth. It measures 211 cm × 144 cm.53 This is almost five times the size of the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec and the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan but is still less than half the size 55

Quauhquechollan

Figure 5. Codex Huaquechula. Courtesy, Museo Poblano de Arte Virreinal, Puebla, Mexico.

of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. The Codex Huaquechula is painted on one side. The orientation of the images is diverse: no top or bottom side can be determined. The Codex Huaquechula represents a socio-political map consisting of vari­ ous tecpan images, people, and items in the landscape, such as mountains and trees. The majority of the images are accompanied by both place glyphs and alphabetical glosses. The various places and scenes are connected to each other by means of roads with footprints. These roads indicate the relationship between the places depicted, both geographically and on a socio-political level. A few scenes are depicted in a larger size. These scenes can be identified as the leading scenes in the document.

56

Quauhquechollan

One of the larger scenes in the document features a bell-shaped mountain with an eagle on top. This glyph is depicted in one of the corners. It is glossed “Qu(au)hquec(hu) / la macuill_chi / _c.” The first part of the name represents Quauhquechula with little doubt. The second part of the gloss, however, is less clear. It may have represented Macuilxochitepec, although the pictographic elements of this name are not represented in the glyph. The eagle place glyph most likely refers to the Quauhquechollan at Acapetlahuacan. The position of this place in relation to the other places depicted in the document supports this identification. Next to the eagle place glyph is a tecpan image with three flowers and a man inside it—but without a gloss—and two trees. The trees are glossed, but the gloss is barely readable. Two roads depart from this tecpan image. To the other side of the eagle glyph is an image of another building. This image differs from the other tecpan images represented in the document. The gloss accompa­ nying this image is also faded, but some parts are readable. It says “p_o_tloli_ / oqui(h)_a_tlilaopaca.” Another corner of the document shows a volcano with smoke rising from its crater and two trees. This volcano is glossed “_op_yoncan.” From the volcano two rivers depart, provided with the gloss “Huitzilatl,” identifying one of the rivers as the River Huitzilac. The pictograph of the volcano can therefore be identified as the volcano Popocatepetl, the source of the River Huitzilac. The tecpan images represented in the remainder of the document are ordered along both sides of the rivers. The document shows a central scene in the middle: a large tecpan image with two men inside smoking cigars. This scene is glossed “(o)yame_pech(i) itzi­ lan / ytepa tlatoloya.” Ytepa is Nahuatl for “in,” and tlatoloya can be translated as “place of meeting” or “place where business is done.” The first part of the phrase, however, is difficult to reconstruct. The smoking men can be identified as the local rulers or people in charge. Almost all of the other tecpan images represented are ordered along roads that lead to this central scene. This means these other places were all connected to the central palace as subject towns or barrios. Most likely, the nobles of these various subunits gathered at the central tecpan periodi­ cally to pay court and possibly also to pay tribute or perform services (see also Lockhart 1992; Chapter 2 of this book). The Codex Huaquechula represents a total of twenty tecpan images. Most of these images have a human head inside them, some contain a whole person, and some hold two persons. The majority of the glosses accompanying the tecpan images are readable and represent these names: Calmecatitla, _necapa, Aquiyahuac, Coyohuaca, Tetzotzocalco, Quapechico, Cohuatepec, Tochteopa, _xni_cohuac, Atzitzitla, Huillanco, Quite_tz_tlan(?), Chalcuhcalco, and Tetla. The place glyphs represented with these tecpan images correspond to the names given by the glosses. The document also shows trees and mountains. There are trees glossed “Quahpecotl_,” “Xiloxochitlatesatl,” “_ca_tepatzin,” “Qua_matla,” 57

Figures 6 and 7. Codex Huaquechula, two details. The upper detail shows a Quauhque­ cholteca lord and a mountain with five flowers (Macuilxochitepec). The bottom detail shows the place glyph of Quauhquechollan. The two scenes are related to each other by means of a road. These scenes seem to refer to the first Quauhquecholteca establish­ ment at Acapetlahuacan. Courtesy, Museo Poblano de Arte Virreinal, Puebla, Mexico.

Figure 8. Codex Huaquechula, detail. This part of the document shows two men, identi­ fied as conquistadors, and two women. Courtesy, Museo Poblano de Arte Virreinal, Puebla, Mexico.

Figure 9. Codex Huaquechula, detail. Various people, probably local noblemen, are visit­ ing one of the palaces depicted in the document. Courtesy, Museo Poblano de Arte Virreinal, Puebla, Mexico.

Quauhquechollan

Figure 10. Codex Huaquechula, detail. This part shows the central scene of the docu­ ment: a palace with two men smoking cigars. Considering this scene’s placement in the document, it likely represents Quauhquechollan at its present location. Courtesy, Museo Poblano de Arte Virreinal, Puebla, Mexico.

and “Qu_camintla,” and there are mountains glossed “_xico_,” “_anaqualte­ pec,” “Tlacochcalo,” and “(o)yant_tepec.” Most of the mountains are located along the edges of the document, meaning they represent border places. Some of the names that appear in the Codex Huaquechula also appear in the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan (discussed later). Quapechico (Quauhpechco), Cohuatepec (Coatepec), Atzitzitla (Atzitzihuacan), Huillanco, and Tetlan are known to have been subject towns of Quauhquechollan in the sixteenth century and possibly earlier as well (Libro de visitas, f. 81; AGN Tierras, Vol. 2683, Exp. 4, f. 164). Atzitzihuacan and Tetlan were also subjected to Quauhquechollan in 1487 (Durán 1984 II:334 [Ch. XLIII]). Various geographic features in the Codex Huaquechula help identify the area represented. One is the volcano Popocatepetl, another is the River Huitzilac, and 60

Quauhquechollan

a third is the eagle glyph representing the Quauhquechollan at Acapetlahuacan. Furthermore, the tecpan “Huillanco” and “Tetla” can be identified as two small towns near the modern Quauhquechollan. Considering the position of these places in relation to each other, the central scene can be identified as taking place at, or very near, the site where the modern Quauhquechollan is situated. While many roads gather at the central scene, only one road departs from it. This departing road leads past another scene depicted in a larger size. This scene consists of a man, a mountain with five flowers, and ten houses with various plants scattered around them. The man is glossed “Do[n] Jua[n] Panahuicatl(i) Tlanadostic.” The mountain with the five flowers likely refers to the name of the mountain Macuilxochitepec, which is also represented in the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec. This mountain was located in the Quauhquechollan at Acapetlahuacan. Indeed, one of the roads that departs from the eagle glyph in the corner leads to this five-flower mountain; the two scenes are thus connected to each other. Perhaps the Don Juan represented was a descendant of a lineage of nobles from the Quauhquechollan at Acapetlahuacan. Clearly, both the Quauhquechollan at Acapetlahuacan and the Quauhquechol­ lan at its present-day location had important functions in the document. The houses represented around Don Juan look different from the twenty tecpan images, and, unlike the others, they show three-dimensionality. After the road passes by the scene with Don Juan, it leads to the tecpan image glossed “Tetla.” A few other scenes in the Codex Huaquechula involve people. Two men and two women are walking past one of the rivers, close to the central scene. The men are glossed “tepoliuhque,” which is Nahuatl for “conquistadors.” The women hold objects in their hands, which are either bowls held upside down or skulls. There is also a group of people related to one of the tecpan images. This image is situated between the central scene at Quauhquechollan and the eagle glyph representing the Quauhquechollan at Acapetlahuacan in the corner. The size of this scene approaches that of the tecpan in the central scene. Within the tecpan are two people, accompanied by the gloss “Mozacoatzi[n].” Five people are seated in front of them. These five people are also glossed, but their names are illegible. The first is seated in front of Mozacoatzin and has a beard. The other four are standing. They all wear red cloaks. Two men carry staffs, and two men carry bundles. The last man is depicted much smaller than the rest. It is unclear whether these men represent a group meeting with the people in the tecpan or whether they are standing in line waiting to meet with them individually. Yet another tecpan stands out, the one glossed “Quite tz_tlan” located near the volcano. This tecpan is situated halfway along the road that leads from the Quauhquechollan in the corner to the central scene. Within this tecpan are also two people, and in front of it are various products and two other people. Among the products are a feather headdress insignia, a load of green precious feathers (possibly quetzal feathers), bundles and jars with something inside, and 61

Quauhquechollan

mats in different shapes. The people are depicted among these products and are represented in equal size. One of them holds a bundle of green feathers. These products and people likely indicate that there was a marketplace at this site. After all, the Quauhquecholteca are known to have been notable tradesmen. The Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec also includes references to the merchandise of the altepetl and to its trading activities (discussed earlier). Another possible interpretation of these products is that they are tribute paid to or by this specific tecpan. The people would then either be the ones who delivered the tribute, or they represent tribute themselves in the form of service providers or slaves. Since the products are not provided with Nahuatl numbers, however, the interpretation that they represent merchandise seems more likely. In sum, the Codex Huaquechula shows a total of twenty tecpan images, four of which stand out because of their size, location in the landscape, and particu­ lar characteristics. These are the tecpan in the central scene, the tecpan with the people in front of it, the tecpan with the merchandise, and the tecpan at the eagle glyph in the corner. Another scene that stands out is the one of the mountain with the five flowers, Don Juan, and houses and plants scattered around it. The document also includes a reference to Quauhquecholteca conquistadors. In other words, the Codex Huaquechula represents the area of Quauhque­chollan and tells about the socio-political structures and lands of the altepetl at the time of painting. It describes the communities subjected to the Quauhque­chol­ teca rulers, the extent of the area they controlled, the merchandise, and their relationship to the Quauhquechollan at Acapetlahuacan. The latter was also an important element in the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec. The general layout of the painting shows some similarities to that of the Lienzo de Zacatepec from Oaxaca, for example. Only a few of the names represented in the Codex Huaquechula have been identified. A study of the old indigenous names of the various communities, mountains, and geographical features in the area, in combination with archive research, may lead to an identification of more of the events and persons depicted in this document and to a better understanding of the circumstances and the time period in which it was created.

Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan The Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan is painted on a piece of deerskin, like the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec. The size of this document is comparable to that of the Genealogía. The Mapa Circular measures 86.8 cm × 91.8 cm.54 This document, however, is painted on one side only. The Mapa Circular is no longer in Mexico. Of the three Quauhquechollan documents, the history and former whereabouts of this document are known best. In the nineteenth century, the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan was in the possession of the German collector Philip J. Becker. Becker had his collection on 62

Quauhquechollan

exposition in his house in Darmstadt, Germany, until his death in 1896.55 Later, the Austrian industrialist Georg von Haas bought the document. Von Haas, in turn, donated it to the Museum of Natural History in Vienna, Austria.56 Pres­ ently, the main part of the Becker collection is in the Museum of Ethnology in Vienna. However, the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan was not kept with the other pieces, probably because of its size, and it ended up in the Handschriften­ sammlung of the Imperial Library, also in Vienna. A variety of inventory num­ bers written on its verso side reveal some of the document’s storage locations within the Imperial Library.57 Initially, it was kept in the Latin manuscript col­ lection.58 When it was established that the manuscript was from Mexico and was not of European origin, it was reshelved with the Mexican manuscript group and recoded accordingly. It was then put among the other two pictorials from the Becker collection (Codex Becker I and Codex Becker II ) and the Mexican pictori­ als from the former Bilimek collection, likewise housed in the Imperial Library.59 Later, the Codices Becker I and II were exhibited in the museum, but the Mapa Circular remained with the Bilimek manuscripts. When the Mexican pictorials were numbered, it received the code “Cod. Mex. no. 5.” Its presence among the Bilimek documents has led to some confusion about its provenance, and it is therefore sometimes erroneously referred to as a Bilimek piece.60 Presently, the Mapa Circular is kept in one of the two folders that contain eleven of the twelve Mexican pictorials in the library’s possession. A note on the bottom-right corner of the verso side of the Mapa Circular indicates that the manuscript was restored in 1915.61 No information is known about the restorer or his or her work on the document. The restorations presumably consisted of flattening the document, as it shows traces of having been folded, and attaching small pieces of leather to the verso side to fill little holes and reinforce fragile spots. The Mapa Circular is mentioned in both the handwritten acquisitions book62 and the first published catalog of the Imperial Library.63 Glass and Robertson (1975:117) published a photograph and a one-paragraph description of this manuscript. As of yet, no other studies have been published. The Mapa Circular shows the place glyph of Quauhquechollan, the com­ munity church, a lord seated on a chair, other nobles on thrones, tribute, and two concentric circles, one of which shows calli (house) symbols and the other boundary place glyphs. Many of the images are glossed, and the upper-left part of the document shows a text in Nahuatl (see Appendix 2), which is badly dam­ aged. The place glyph of Quauhquechollan is depicted in the central part of the document and consists of a green bell-shaped mountain with a reddish eagle on top. The eagle has widespread wings, and its head is turned to the left. The ele­ ments referring to the first Quauhquechollan at Acapetlahuacan (the five flowers) are not incorporated into this image. It is glossed “Quauhqechullan.” Below it, at the very center of the document, is a church glossed “Sanct Martyn,” which can be identified as the church and monastery of San Martín Caballero in the center 63

Quauhquechollan

Figure 11. Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan. Courtesy, Österreichische Nationalbiblio­ thek (Imperial Library), Vienna, Austria.

of the present-day town. This was one of the first monasteries built in the area. It was erected at the request of one of the lords of Quauhquechollan (named Don Martín)64 and constructed by the Franciscan friar Juan de Alameda.65 It was built sometime before 1539 and served as a Franciscan monastery until 1642.66 Today, the church of San Martín Caballero is still in use, and the monastery building serves as a local museum. Its open chapel is sometimes used for local music and theater performances. According to local oral tradition, the builders of the monastery made the inhabitants of the town line up down to the River Huitzilac, forming a chain to pass the building stones from the riverside to the place where the building was constructed.67 To the left of the place glyph of Quauhquechollan (from the viewer’s perspective) is a bearded man in European dress. He is seated on a chair and is glossed “don martyn cortes.” The chair indicates that he was a person of authority. The text in the upper-left corner mentions a Don Martín Xochitlahua 64

Quauhquechollan

who is referred to as the lord of Quauhquechollan and who, according to the writer, had brought disorder in the calpolli (lordly houses) of the altepetl. Other sources also refer to a lord of Quauhquechollan named Don Martín. One is the reference, just discussed, to the Don Martín who ordered the construction of Quauhquechollan’s monastery. Another is a merced (grant of land, privileges, or money) dated 1545, which tells that at that time a Don Martín Cortez Xochitla­ hua was “caçique y señor natural del pue[bl]o de guacachula” (AGN Tierras, Vol. 2621, No. 164, f. 3r; see Appendix 1).68 The text on the Mapa Circular is dated only one year later than the merced. The Don Martín Cortés depicted in the Mapa Circular and the Don Martín Xochitlahua mentioned in the text in the upper-left corner are thus one and the same person: the Don Martín Cortez Xochitlahua mentioned in the merced. In addition, a lord with the name Don Martín was in power in 1550.69 It is not unusual to find in Mexican pictorials that indigenous lords depicted themselves with Spanish attributes (e.g., beard, Spanish dress) to emphasize their position of power in the new colonial system. Depicted scattered around the church are sixteen indigenous nobles, rec­ ognizable as such by Nahua conventions for nobility: they are positioned on thrones, they wear red cloaks, and they are holding up one hand pointing for­ ward. Most are accompanied by a name glyph, and some are also identified by a gloss in alphabetic writing. Unfortunately, none of these glosses is completely readable. The text in the upper-left corner ends with a list of indigenous names, which likely refer to these sixteen nobles. The text also explains that these persons “eran fiscales . . . y comerciantes.” The 1545 merced mentions the names of three Quauhquecholteca nobles: Don Alonzo de Menezes Xiloxohcatl, Don Gregorio Telles Xochitla, and Don Simon de Castañeda Xochitotol (AGN Mercedes, Vol. 2, Exp. 532, fs. 215–216r). Unfortunately, most names mentioned in the text of the Mapa Circular are illegible. It can be seen, though, that a Gregorio Telles is indeed among them. As in the Genealogía, there are five tecpan images among the nobles. One is glossed “Tlacpanalqui.” The others have no glosses. The central scene has two concentric circles around it. The inner circle con­ sists of forty-seven house symbols, each with an identifying image on top. The outer circle consists of boundary place glyphs (i.e., mountains with identifying images on top). In between the two circles are ten other house symbols, six of which are related to the inner circle by means of a line. These six are depicted in a larger size. The forty-seven houses are too large a number for each to have been a calpolli (considering that Tenochtitlan, for example, consisted of twenty calpolli). The nature and function of these images are unclear. Possibly, they represented the leading households in Quauhquechollan. The sequence in which they are depicted may have had something to do with the local order of rotation regard­ ing the services they were to perform for the altepetl or the tribute they were due. 65

Quauhquechollan

Outside the two concentric circles, in the bottom-left corner of the docu­ ment, a volcano is depicted, which can be identified as Popocatepetl. As stated earlier, this volcano was, and still is, the major source of water supply in the area. In the sixteenth century, its water was transported to the monastery of Quauhquechollan by means of an underground canal system. It first reached the monastery, and from there it was distributed among the villagers. The Francis­ cans claimed they devised this delivery route to have the water “blessed” before it reached the people. The more obvious and likely reason, however, was to allow them to control water distribution as an instrument of power. The Mapa Circular shows a line that connects Popocatepetl to the church of San Martín Cabal­lero. This line may well refer to the water system of the Franciscans. Another line leads from the volcano to Don Martín, and others lead to four of the other six­ teen indigenous nobles. Perhaps this indicates that these people were the ones in control of water distribution at the time. In the bottom part of the document, the tlacuilo or tlacuiloque depicted a variety of products, each of which is provided with a Nahua numerical indica­ tion.70 They can therefore be identified as tribute. Depicted are 120 (6 × 20) loads of something that cannot be identified, 100 (5 × 20) bundles of blankets, and 14 cloaks. This may have been the tribute due to the Spaniards. The text in the upper-left corner also refers to tribute paid by the town. However, what it consisted of is illegible. It mentions an amount of “sesenta pesos de minas.” The text reveals that Quauhquechollan was referred to as Mexicapan tianquiztenco, or “at the Mexica place at the side of the market.” This name indicates that there was a marketplace at or very close to Quauhquechollan. The alphabetical text in the upper-left corner was clearly written at a later time. Originally, no space was reserved for it. It was written by a man, who referred to himself as “yo, don Esteban de Guzmán, juez por Su Magestad y por la designación del virrey don Antonio de Mendoza.”71 The presence and contents of the text indicate that the pictorial was used for a lawsuit and that the judge in charge wrote a message on it. This Don Esteban de Guzmán is probably the Nahua governor and judge Don Esteban de Guzmán who also appears in the Codex Osuna (1565; see Boone 1998:168–169). Esteban de Guzmán was the son of a lord of Coacalco (the latter is recorded in the Codex Coacalco as having been baptized in Cortés’s presence) and is known to have served as the judge in charge of examining indigenous land documents (Wood 1998:207–208). It is also known that in 1554 he wrote a letter to the king.72 The text on the Mapa Circular may have been his evaluation of matters, possibly land issues, brought to court by the Quauhquecholteca. A transcription and translation of this text are given in Appendix 2. Unfortunately, only fragments of the text are readable, and it is difficult to completely reconstruct the issue at hand. The text mentions the date 1546, which probably refers to the year the lawsuit took place. The judge claims that 66

Quauhquechollan

Don Martín, the lord of Quauhquechollan, had brought disorder in the calpolli of the altepetl and that he himself had put each calpolli “to order” again. The text also mentions the names Tlalnahuac, Coyometepec, Tlacochcalco, and Aqui­ yahuac. The last three of these also appear as the glosses of three of the houses situated between the two concentric circles. It is not possible to read the glosses of the other houses. It is therefore impossible to determine with certainty if the names in the text correspond to these images, yet it is a plausible supposition. The text explains that they were places related to the calpolli of Quauhque­chollan and that “something” [unreadable] was done there. The names Tlacochcalco and Aquiyahuac also appear in the Codex Huaquechula (discussed earlier). A Nahua altepetl was normally composed of multiple sets of calpolli that formed the foundation of its political and social organization and each of which had its own lord, deity, and emblem. They were arranged according to strict rules of preference and rotation (which determined the duties and rights of each calpolli) (Lockhart 1992:14–20). The way the calpolli are generally represented in Central Mexican pictorials (i.e., by an image of a palace, viewed frontally, with a logographic name on its roof ) was both metaphoric and literal, as the term “calpolli” referred to both the social unit and the ceremonial building that was the center of a calpolli’s festivals (Mundy 1996:18–19). The Quauhque­chol­ teca caciques (lords) who set out for Guatemala in 1527 and who are depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan must have belonged to these ruling calpolli of Quauhquechollan, and they carried the emblem of their calpolli.73 The text in the upper-left corner of the Mapa Circular also mentions another series of place-names: Atzintzintitlan (Atzitzitla), Tetzetzacolco(?), Quauhpe­ choco (Quauhpechco), Tochteopan, Cohuatepec (Coatepec), Ahuazhuatepec, Ateopan, and Quauhyacan. These names correspond with the glosses related to the place glyphs in the outer concentric circle. The first name mentioned in the text corresponds to the place depicted above the volcano. The names then follow the circle counterclockwise and are ordered in the same sequence in which they are mentioned in the text. Except for the last three, the glosses are all readable. Two alphabetic documents provide information about the boundary mark­ ers of Quauhquechollan in the mid-sixteenth century. One is the merced of 1545, mentioned earlier (Appendix 1). This merced was written by Antonio de Mendoza, on behalf of the lords of Quauhquechollan, to ask the Crown for recognition of their lands and water rights. It was presented in the eighteenth century in a land dispute. According to the accompanying eighteenth-century document, this merced was presented by the Quauhquecholteca in combination with a real cédula of the queen dated 1535 (Appendix 1) and with a pintura (painting) in which all the circumstances mentioned in the merced were depicted (AGN Tierras, Vol. 2621, No. 164, fs. 1, 6, 9). It is unclear whether the map presented by the Quauhquecholteca was the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan or the Codex Huaquechula or if yet another painting is concerned. The border 67

Quauhquechollan

Figure 12. Map of Quauhquechollan and some of its sixteenth-century border places (based on INEGI map “Atlixco E14B52” [1978]).

places of Quauhquechollan mentioned in the 1545 merced are a mountain named Tilhuatepec, Tetlan, Texayacatl (“Piedra Mascara”), Coçingo, Tzoquilat, the Cerro de los Coyotes, Tezonteopan (Tezontiopa), a painted stone, Cerro Cacalosuchil and Cerro de las Palmas, the Paraje de Tequistengo, two mountains, the River Huitzilac, and four mountains named Xochinno, Nepopoalo, Sotolo, and Huilhuatepec. Coçingo (Consingo) and Texayacatl (Tezayacatl) were the names of two of the nine prehispanic barrios of Quauhquechollan (discussed ear­ lier). The reverse of the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec shows the “Piedra Mascara,” also called Texayacatl. The Codex Huaquechula represents Tetlan. The Cerro de las Palmas, in turn, is depicted in the Mapa de San Juan Cuiluco y Guaquachula, a seventeenth-century map presently kept in the Archivo General de la Nación in Mexico City (discussed earlier). Five years later, in 1550, a different document was composed that provided information on the boundary markers of Quauhquechollan. This document was presented in the Libro de visitas de los pueblos de la Nueva España (Libro de visitas, fs. 18–81v) and mentions eleven communities subjected to Quauhquechollan at the time (discussed earlier) and eleven border markers. The names of the border markers mentioned in this document are Quiçoyo, Açinatla, Tecastle, Teguegue, Xalapeçu, O_petayuca, Puyutan, Guavyo, Patlan, Tetlan, and Istaque çenteupa. The only name that appears in the 1545 merced as well is Tetlan. As mentioned previously, the Codex Huaquechula shows Tetlan as well. The Mapa Circular de 68

Quauhquechollan

Quauhquechollan, however, does not represent any of the names given in these alphabetical sources. Future research may provide more information regarding this matter. The names Atzitzitla, Tetzotzocalco, Quauhpechco, Tochteopan, and Coa­ te­pec also appear with tecpan images in the Codex Huaquechula. Atzitzitla, Coa­ te­pec, Quauhpechco, and Ateopan are known to have been the names of com­ munities subjected to Quauhquechollan in the sixteenth century and possibly earlier (Libro de visitas, f. 81; AGN Tierras, Vol. 2683, Exp. 4, No. 164; AGN Indios, Vol. 3, Exp. 873, fs. 211v–212). The verso side of the Genealogía presents a chorographic view (i.e., a distant overview) of Quauhquechollan. The Mapa Circular, in turn, offers a different sort of image of the altepetl. This map focuses on the human elements and particular structures that served as symbols for the town as a whole, such as the church and local social structures. Social structure maps like the Mapa Circular are usually highly ordered compositions. The way this pictorial represents the community reflects the strongly humanistic character of Amerindian cartogra­ phy and the indigenous understanding of space and surroundings (see Chapter 1). Both the calli symbols and the linderos are ordered in a geometrically perfect frame, reflecting the community as a “perfect” whole. Similarly organized Central Mexican pictorials are the Codex García Granados, for example, and the Lienzo Seler II. This way of projecting places or people around a center, a projection called “communicentric,” was rooted in the community’s sense of itself as the center of things (Mundy 1996:116). As Barbara Mundy pointed out, the circular form was especially appropriate for this purpose, since circles are perfect forms and create a sealed enclosure, closing off the surroundings. As other pictorials illustrate, a similar effect could be achieved by means of a rectangular form.74 Although the Quauhquecholteca artists were clearly influenced by the colo­ nial system, their own indigenous perspective was still used. The map is domi­ nated by the social and political organization of the altepetl, for example, and not by the actual form of the territory. The fact that the artist chose to draw upon a traditional model shows not only that he or she must have had such models at hand or had seen them in the past but also that such models continued to offer valid means of representing communities. In sum, the Mapa Circular comments on the hierarchical and ordered internal structure of the community of Quauhquechollan in the mid-sixteenth century and on the spatial relationships of physical parts of the community with each other. It refers to the territory of the altepetl (by means of the linderos), its political and social structure (the calpolli and calli), the Spanish authority (the judge), its indigenous nobility (the sixteen lords), its religion (the church), the source and distribution of water in the area (the volcano and the canal system), and its economy (tribute). With the lord of Quauhquechollan seated on his throne and the lords clustered together around the community church, the 69

Quauhquechollan

tlacuilo or tlacuiloque showed the circumstances for which the map was created. Communicentric maps were often created primarily for local audiences; that is, for readers acquainted with the physical appearance of the town in question (such as the style of its church) and with its customs, history, social structures, and traditions (Kagan 2000:109). The Mapa Circular seems to have been presented to Don Esteban de Guz­ mán in 1546. It must thus have been made before that time. The comments of the judge refer to a disorder within the structure of the calpolli caused by the lord of the town, Don Martín Cortés. Esteban de Guzmán apparently corrected this disorder. The Mapa Circular likely served in a lawsuit over lands or water. In such lawsuits, official papers concerning land rights were often put forward to claim a community’s right, be they paintings or alphabetical documents (see also Sousa and Terraciano 2003:352).

Summary In this chapter I have presented a brief overview of the history of Quauhquechol­ lan, from the time of its founding in the eleventh century to the period of the Spanish conquest. During most of this time, the region of Quauhquechollan was militarily unstable, and the Quauhquecholteca were involved in several wars. It is unclear where Quauhquechollan was originally established. It may have been founded at the foot of the Cerro San Miguel at Acapetlahuacan (modern Atlixco). It is also possible that the Quauhquecholteca settled at this site only temporarily at the end of the fourteenth century. After repeated con­ frontations with Calpan and Huexotzingo, the Quauhquecholteca were chased away from Acapetlahuacan and established or reestablished the present-day settlement in the area of Tochimilco. As becomes clear from the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-­Macuilxochitepec and from local oral tradition, nine lords founded this new Quauhquechollan, and the community once consisted of nine social subunits. It can be presumed that from each of these founders a lineage of lords descended and that each lineage ruled a different subunit. The Genealogía seems to represent the lineage of one of these ruling dynasties. The pictorials indicate that five other units (represented by tecpan images) were also important to the altepetl. Unfortunately, their names cannot be fully reconstructed, and their function remains unclear. Quauhquechollan was located along major communication routes between the Basin of Mexico and the Puebla-Tlaxcala Valley, as well as along trade routes from the coast (Veracruz) to Mexico and to the south (Central America). Many pochteca traveled through this area, as did Mexica armies, and the Quauhque­ cholteca became involved in trading activities in many places in Mesoamerica. Quauhquechollan served these functions when the Spaniards encountered and subjugated it in 1519 and 1520. The Quauhquecholteca do not seem to have 70

Quauhquechollan

resisted the Spaniards. Instead, they allied with them to defeat the Mexica together. After the establishment of this Spanish-Quauhquecholteca alliance, the community was granted in encomienda to the Spanish conquistador Jorge de Alvarado. In the next decades, Quauhquecholteca assisted the Spaniards in new campaigns of conquest. Presently, four known pictorial documents were made by the Quauhque­chol­ teca: the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, the Codex Huaquechula, the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan, and the Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan. These documents were made in the mid-sixteenth century. They seem to have originally served in an indigenous context, although the Mapa Circular had a clear “second life” in a Spanish context, in court. The first three relate to internal issues in the altepetl. The fourth, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, tells the story of the Quauhquecholteca who left the altepetl and set out with Spanish conquistadors. The remainder of this book focuses on this document and the conquest story of the Quauhquecholteca under the Spanish banner.

71

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: The Document

Conquered Conquistadors

4. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: The Document

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is the most impressive and complex of the Quauhquechollan pictorials. The story told in this document concerns Quauh­ quecholteca conquistadors who set out for Guatemala in 1527. In subsequent chapters I will present a reading and interpretation of this narrative. First, how­ ever, I look into the history and whereabouts of the pictorial, previous studies, and its physical aspects. Presently, two copies of this document are known, made in 1892 and 1933, respectively. Both will be discussed briefly.

History of the Document and Previous Publications The oldest published reference to the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is found in the Catálogo de la Exposición Histórico-Americana de Madrid (Paso y Troncoso 73

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: The Document

1892–1893 I:71–74). In this catalog, Francisco de Paso y Troncoso presented a four-page description of the original and the 1892 copy (see Appendix 3). He commented on the variety of themes depicted and provided a suggestion for the proper reading direction. His interpretation is short and superficial but insight­ ful. When Paso y Troncoso wrote his catalog, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was in the collection of the Academia de Pintura de Puebla. This school is also referred to as the Academia de Bellas Artes de Puebla and is presently known as the Vicerectoría de Extensión y Difusión Universitaria de la BUAP (Aguirre Beltrán 1999:53). According to Paso y Troncoso, the school was not familiar with the provenance of the document. He added that he believed it was made in Quauhquechollan and was kept under poor conditions (Paso y Troncoso 1892–1893 I:71). Unfortunately, the history of the document before 1892 is not recorded. Almost seventy years later, John Glass wrote a one-page description of the document that was published in the Catálogo de la colección de códices (Glass 1964:90). In his bibliography, Glass mentioned only the catalog by Paso y Troncoso discussed earlier. In the meantime, the document had been moved to the collection of the Museo Casa del Alfeñique in Puebla. When this happened is unclear. Glass only recorded that before the document was donated to the museum, it had been in the possession of a José Manso. Manso is reported to have donated two codices to the museum: the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec. The museum, however, has no records or documents in its possession related to this donation, nor is there any reference to the existence of the two documents between 1892 and 1964 (Aguirre Beltrán 1999:55; fieldwork Puebla, Mexico, 2001, 2004). Eleven years later, Glass and Robertson mentioned the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan in “A Census of Native Middle American Pictorial Manuscripts” in volume 14 of the Handbook of Middle American Indians (1975:116–117). At the time, the descriptions by Paso y Troncoso and Glass were still the only published studies on the document. The document has been mentioned repeatedly in more modern literature, but its pictorial contents have never been deciphered. In the Museo Casa del Alfeñique, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was in the permanent exhibition in the Sala de códices until 1996. In recent years, it has been loaned several times to other museums for temporary exhibitions. During the III Coloquio Internacional de Códices y Documentos sobre México in 1996, the document was lent to the Centro Regional del INAH in Puebla, where it was exhibited in the Sala de exposiciones. In April 1998 it was returned to the museum for the Primer Coloquio Poblano de Códices (Aguirre Beltrán 1999:55–56). In 1999 the document was temporarily exhibited in the Museo del Palacio de Bellas Artes in Mexico City as part of the exposition México Eterno, Arte y Permanencia. In 2000 that exposition traveled to Paris, and the pictorial was exhibited in the Louvre.1 After its return to the Museo Casa del Alfeñique, the Lienzo de 74

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: The Document

Quauhquechollan remained in storage in a box in the museum for a few years. In 2003 it was transferred to the Museo Virreinal in Puebla, Mexico. In 2004 it was loaned again, this time to the Museo Nacional de Historia Castillo de Chapultepec in Mexico City, where it was exhibited in the temporal exposition Iberoamérica mestiza: Encuentro de pueblos y culturas (January–March 2004). In 1999 the first extensive and in-depth study of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was presented in Mexico. This was the Ph.D. thesis of Hilda Judith Aguirre Beltrán, El Códice: Lienzo de Quauhquecholac. Manuscrito pictográfico indígena tradicional Azteca-Nahuatl (Siglo XVI) / Propuesta de método y análisis. Temas histórico y geográfico. Algunos ejemplos de lectura. This work provides an analysis of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan according to the Galarza method: all individual elements and scenes are isolated, counted, classified, described, and compared to similar elements in other pictorial manuscripts (see also Chapter 1, note 3). Aguirre Beltrán presented a very elaborate descriptive analysis of the manuscript. However, she isolated both the document and its contents from all contexts, and she did not identify the places, people, and events depicted. My work can therefore be viewed as a study complementary to hers.2

The Cloth The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is made up of sixteen rectangular pieces of cot­ ton cloth sewn together, with a total size of about 2.35 m × 3.25 m.3 The righthand part of the document has been cut off. The 1892 copy shows the same cutoff scenes and borders. This reduction of the cloth thus happened before that time. The original size of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is unknown, but it is estimated to have been about one-third bigger (see Chapter 8). On the left and bottom sides of the document are narrow strips of fabric with water motifs, which I refer to as a “sea band.” The sixteen pieces of cloth are woven separately on the native back strap, or body-tension loom. They are sewn together manually.4 Nicholas Carter Johnson published a stylized diagram of the patchwork presenting a total of fifteen pieces (see Johnson 2000:586, fig. 5).5 Aguirre Beltrán—who also counted fifteen pieces—identified two different indigenous weaving techniques within the lienzo. Nine pieces were woven by passing a single thread from above and another from underneath each thread of the loom. For the other six pieces, one thread was passed over two of the threads of the loom and then underneath two of its threads.6 Not only the weaving techniques but also the dimensions and thickness of the different pieces vary. Also, five of the pieces have reinforce­ ments at the sides: two have their upper and right sides reinforced, another its upper side, yet another its left and right sides, and the fifth the bottom side. These reinforcements are of the kind generally found on edges or seams of clothing. 75

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: The Document

Five of the strips have a textural pattern of ribbing woven along the edges: three pieces have one or two borders that consist of five single ribs, and two pieces have a border of three double ribs. These ribbed borders are small paral­ lel ridges produced by introducing extra-thick threads into the cloth during the weaving process. Such borders are found in lienzos from the Mixteca Alta (Oaxaca), Veracruz, Puebla, and other regions in Central Mexico. Some have complete ribbed borders, while others have ribbons only along portions of the outer edges and on seams.7 Since this type of ribbed border has not been found in other Mexican textiles (not in the scarce remains of other prehispanic and colonial indigenous textiles or in textiles today), it is considered to have been a prehispanic textile embellishment.8 The ribs, however, do not seem to have had any purpose specifically related to the contents or use of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. A relationship between cloth embellishments and contents is not known from other lienzos either.9 The ribs seem always to have been merely a decorative finish to the edges of some of the individual pieces of textile from which lienzos were composed (Johnson 2000:580). One of the pieces on which the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was painted shows traces of a previous painting that was later erased (palimpsest). It almost looks as if this piece of cloth was washed before it was reused. The palimpsest ends where the piece of cloth ends; it does not continue on any neighboring pieces of cloth. It can therefore be presumed that this piece of cloth had been part of another painting before it was used for the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. The palimpsest, the different weaving techniques, and the ribbed borders all indicate that the pieces of which the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan consists were gathered from different parts and made by different hands. Some of the patches may originally have been produced for another purpose (such as clothing) or have had another previous use (such as the part with the palimpsest). Other pieces may have been woven expressly for the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.10 Up to 2005, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was sewn to a red cloth by means of a basted seam, and it showed several perforations and restored parts. The 1892 copy has a similar piece of red cloth on its verso side, suggesting the red cloth of the original was already attached to it before that year. The docu­ ment is now almost 500 years old and has been exposed to light for many years, sometimes natural, other times artificial. The colors have therefore lost much of their intensity. The pictography is still fairly visible, but some scenes have faded or otherwise been damaged. All in all, however, the document remains in a relatively good state.

Creation of the Painting According to Mesoamerican custom, the painters of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan did not put their names on the document, and therefore they remain 76

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: The Document

anonymous. Slight differences of style within the painting and its large dimen­ sions suggest the work of more than one painter. They probably worked in a group, and it must have taken them several weeks, if not months, to make it.11 It can be presumed that they were informed by storytellers familiar with the community’s oral traditions and (other) witnesses to the events depicted and that they may have had other, older pictorials (possibly indigenous military maps) at their disposal. The painting style is similar to that of other pictorial manuscripts from the area, such as the three other Quauhquechollan documents (see Chapter 3), the Codex Mendoza, the Mapas de Cuauhtinchan, the extant versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, and many others. The authors included both indigenous and colonial elements (swords, horses, and Spanish clothing and attributes), both represented in indigenous writing style. Some European influence is recognizable, such as shade effects to create an appearance of three-dimensionality, but the overall layout of the document, the pictographs, the use of space, and the use of dif­ fering sizes for rhetorical purposes are all primarily indigenous. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a good example of the indigenous painting style as it devel­ oped after the arrival of the Europeans. The elements are given their natural colors: for example, water is blue, trees are brown and green, fire is red, and wood is brown. The background of the painting is mostly gray and in some parts blue, brown, or yellow (ocher). The roads are white with black footprints and horse hoofprints. The tlacuiloque used colors to make symbolic distinctions. This is particularly recognizable in the way the persons are colored: the Quauhquecholteca and the Spanish have white skin, while most of their enemies are colored brown (café) or red, indicating that the Quauhquecholteca related themselves more to the world of the Spaniards than to that of the indigenous groups they defeated (see Chapter 8). The colors red and blue appear frequently in the warrior costumes and attributes of both the Spaniards and the Quauhquecholteca and seem to have contributed to this distinction. At several places in the painting, traces of previous sketches or corrections are visible. The most obvious example is the initial scene. The tlacuiloque drew this scene initially in a smaller size, then erased it, and eventually expanded its dimensions to its final version. Possibly, they used the first version as a draft, to calculate the space for the definitive drawing.

Glosses The original Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows traces of glossed slips of paper glued to the document, and three glosses are painted directly on the cloth.12 In the painting, no space was reserved for these glosses (they are often glued on top of images), which indicates they were added at a later stage. Most identify 77

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: The Document

the toponyms and persons in alphabetic writing, and there are also traces of two larger texts. One of these larger texts was glued to the initial scene, above the glyph of Quauhquechollan, and the other was placed near the bottom edge, at the battle for Pochutla (see Chapter 7). Supposedly, these texts commented in detail on the people, places, and events depicted. They may also have included a date or other related information. Unfortunately, the majority of these slips of paper are so badly damaged that the glosses have become illegible. It seems they stiffened because of the glue and were not resistant to movements, such as the doubling or folding of the cloth, that undoubtedly happened to the document in storage and transport. As a result, they broke and fell apart, and some have disappeared completely. Others have survived in part, but they are full of cracks and too badly damaged to be leg­ ible. In 2005, when the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was restored in Mexico City, an attempt was made to read the glosses with infrared and ultraviolet photog­ raphy. This did not make them more legible, however (Pers. comm., Françoise Hatchondo, February 2005). One can presume the glosses were written in either Nahuatl (the language of the Quauhquecholteca) or Spanish. A reading of the glosses would have made identification of the places, scenes, and persons depicted in the lienzo much easier, and their loss is therefore very regrettable. Nonetheless, even if the glosses had still been readable, the glyphs are always considered of primary value: glosses in alphabetical writing can be used to support or confirm certain identifications, but they should never be regarded as more convincing than the information given by the pictographs.

Original(s) and Copies Glass mentioned one original Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and two copies (Glass 1964:90). The document that is now in the Museo Virreinal in Puebla is consid­ ered the original. It is arguable that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was originally produced in multiple versions (see Chapter 8). However, other sixteenth-century versions are presently unknown. The two known copies are in the collection of the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia in Mexico City.13 Each of these documents is referred to as a “Cuauhquechollan canvas.” Both copies are painted with aquarelle (water­ color) on cotton cloth. The 1892 copy was made by an artist named D. Luis Garcés and a D. José María Velasco.14 It was produced in honor of the Exposición Histórico-Americana, an exposition about Mexican art held in Madrid, Spain, in 1892. The document was named after the school where the original was kept at the time (discussed earlier) and was hence called the Lienzo de la Academía de Puebla (Paso y Tron­ coso 1892–1893 I:71). According to Glass, its dimensions are 235 cm × 320 cm 78

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: The Document

(Glass 1964:90). The curators at the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e His­ toria measured it at 238 cm × 320 cm.15 However, when I studied it in Mexico in 2001, it seemed much smaller. The images are more “sketchy” than those represented in the original, some scenes lack certain details, and at least one place glyph is missing. Only two of the many glosses provided on the slips of paper attached to the original were copied (Paso y Troncoso 1892–1893 I:73; also see Chapter 7), and parts of the sea band are lacking in the upper-left corner. Also, the damage done to the right edge of the cloth was not reproduced. Moreover, the cloth of the 1892 copy is thinner than that of the original, and this copy con­ sists of only two large pieces of cloth sewn together by a machine. A photograph of the 1892 copy was published by Glass (Glass 1964:images 44 and 45). The other copy was made over forty years later, in 1933, by an artist named Rodolfo Barthez. This copy is almost completely identical to the original. The images and colors are copied much more faithfully than those in the 1892 copy, and the number and sizes of the pieces of cotton cloth are the same as those in the original. The damaged parts (holes) and the cutting traces on the right side are likewise faithfully reproduced. Most of the glosses on the slips of paper were copied, although not in the form of actual slips of paper; instead, the remains of the texts were written directly on the cotton cloth. They are mostly fragments of names, indicating that by 1933 the slips of paper were already very much dam­ aged. They are barely readable. Very few differences are found between the original and the 1933 copy. The copier forgot to reproduce one place glyph in the list of glyphs depicted under Quauhquechollan. Beyond this, only a few details are lacking.

Summary The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a remarkable document, both for its size and the complexity of the iconography. The document seems to have been created by a team of experienced and highly skilled Nahua tlacuiloque. It was composed according to indigenous customs, and the makers clearly knew the subtleties of the Nahua pictographic script. The history of the document is unclear. It is only known that it appeared in Puebla in 1892. In that year the document was copied. In 1933 another copy was made. Both copies are presently in the collection of the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia in Mexico City. At the time of completion of this book, the original was kept in the Museo Poblano de Arte Virreinal in Puebla. In spite of its impressive appearance, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan has barely been studied. Studies have focused only on the description of the pictography. They have not succeeded in identifying the contents of the document. The deciphering of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a complex process and requires an interdisciplinary approach. In this work, I have succeeded in decoding 79

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: The Document

the manuscript through a combination of iconology and semiotic narratology and by working pragmatically, seizing bits and pieces from different sources and disciplines. Essential to this approach was an examination of the social and historical contexts out of which the document emerged. Chapter 5 presents this contextual information. It provides an overview of most relevant episodes of the conquest of Guatemala, the role of the indigenous allies in Central America, and their presumed motivations.

80

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

Conquered Conquistadors

5. The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

It is said (in the) tradition left (for us by) our grandfathers and fathers; we asked that they tell us, we the lords; we saw the coming of the work of God with Don Pedro de Alvarado the great Captain, Adelantado, Conquistador, (who) came from Castilla from the great Lord God and king; thus, we will establish the order (of occurrence) of that great war which they made against the settlements and fortified centers of the subject peoples; they pushed aside all the settlements and fortified centers; the Rabinal center was brought down; the (Cak)chiquel, the Tzutujil, the Tujaleb, the Cubulcaal, Cunen Cakquilaj, Booj, the Choxa_naj Xjil people, the structures of the Tzitzol; then the center of the __ was brought down. Título C’oyoi, 1550–1560 (quoted in Carmack 1973:293)

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan deals with the Spanish-Quauhquecholteca alliance and tells the story of Quauhquecholteca conquistadors who set out with their encomendero, Jorge de Alvarado, to participate in the conquest of Guatemala. To comprehend this pictographic account, it is necessary first to understand the circumstances in which it came into being. This chapter therefore provides a brief overview of the events related to the first two decades of the Spanish conquest of Guatemala. The first Spanish campaign of conquest into Guatemala took place in 1524, under the command of the Spanish captain Pedro de Alvarado. Driven by a desire to expand the Spanish domain by taking control of new lands and by an insatiable appetite for treasure, Alvarado and a large army entered the lands of the K’iche’, Kaqchikel, Tz’utujil, Mam, Pokomam, Pipil, Lenca, and others and 81

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

began a devastating campaign. With the help of thousands of Mexican allies and by cunningly taking advantage of the internal alliances and hostilities among Guatemala’s different polities, they managed to subjugate and colonize a large part of the country within months. It appeared, however, that Guatemala’s trea­ sure trove did not measure up to Spanish expectations. As a result, the indigenous lords were confronted with unreasonable demands for gold, and the following decades were characterized by inevitable rebellions. When Pedro de Alvarado left for Spain a few years later, in 1527, most of the country was at war. Several “pacified” areas had to be conquered repeatedly. Pedro’s brother Jorge eventually realized the complete conquest of many areas between 1527 and 1529.1 The Spanish conquest of Guatemala, however, lasted well into the 1530s. To date, most historical reconstructions of the conquest of Guatemala have been based on Spanish reports. As a result, it is often represented as primarily a Spanish achievement. However, not only Spaniards but also many Central Mexican allies and African slaves brought by European colonists set out for Guatemala.2 In his 1524 campaign, Pedro de Alvarado had been accompanied by thousands of indigenous allies from Central Mexico, and when Jorge de Alvarado returned to Guatemala in 1527, he reportedly brought another 5,000 to 6,000 new allies with him. Other armies and their retinues followed in later years. The majority of these Mexican allies did not survive the often brutal battles waged under the Alvarados, and those who survived rarely returned to their homelands. Instead, they settled in Guatemala or wherever they had served, usually living together in newly created “Mexican” barrios (subunits) positioned close to Spanish settlements. After the conquest, the indigenous allies enjoyed a unique status as “indios conquistadores.” They received a variety of privileges in return for their services to the Spaniards. However, within a few decades, the Spaniards in Guatemala gradually started to undermine those privileges, and the colonial system eventually tried to downgrade them to the same position as the other conquered indigenous people. The second half of the sixteenth century was therefore characterized by the disillusionment of the indigenous conquistadors and their repeated protests and petitions to the Spanish court about the privileges being taken away from them. These protests and petitions reached their zenith in the 1570s. From this period, several documents exist in which the indigenous conquistadors, and their descendants who lived in Guatemala or elsewhere in southern Meso­ america, presented their cases. They left many eyewitness accounts scattered in a variety of mostly unpublished letters and reports presently kept in archives. These testimonies clearly reflect their feelings, expectations, and disillusionment about the Spanish conquest and how they tried to hold on to their privileged place in the new colonial system. This chapter provides a brief account of the conquest of Guatemala, an overview of the most important sources that exist for this episode in history, and 82

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

a reconstruction of the role and situation of the Mexican conquistadors and their descendants during and after the conquest, with a focus on those from Quauhquechollan and Tlaxcala. On the basis of the indigenous eyewitness accounts, in combination with the information provided by various Spanish chroniclers, I discuss the conquistadors brought to Guatemala, including their numbers, their origins, the kinds of services they provided, their situation in Guatemala, and what happened to their descendants in the decades following the conquest.

The Conquest of Guatemala: Sources During 1524, Pedro de Alvarado wrote four letters to Cortés. The present location(s) of the first two are unknown. Reportedly, one was written in Tehuan­ tepec in January 1524 and the other in Soconusco a few months later.3 His last two letters, however, did survive. One was written in the K’iche’ capital, Utatlan, on April 11, 1524, and the other in the first Spanish city of Santiago at Iximche’ on July 28, 1524.4 In these letters, Alvarado wrote to Cortés about his first encounters with the indigenous peoples of Guatemala and El Salvador and how he subjected them to Spanish rule. Later chroniclers have referred to other Spanish reports written in those early years, but none of these other accounts seems to have survived.5 Therefore, Alvarado’s letters, although often brief and selective, have generally been used as the basic source of reconstructions of the events that took place in 1524. From subsequent years, however, several other sources include testimonies of both Spanish and indigenous witnesses of the conquest. From the Spanish side there are residencias (judicial reviews and inquiries into the conduct of Spanish officials) and probanzas de méritos y servicios (proofs of merit and testimonies of a person’s services). The latter had a dual purpose. One was to inform the king of events and newly acquired lands, and the other was to petition for rewards in the form of offices, titles, and pensions (Restall 2003:12). The most noteworthy documents are the 1529 and 1535 residencias of Pedro and Jorge de Alvarado6 (which, not surprisingly, often contradict the information provided in Pedro de Alvarado’s own letters), the Probanza del Adelantado D. Pedro de Alvarado y doña Leonor de Alvarado su hija (1563),7 and the probanzas de méritos y servicios of other Spanish conquistadors who fought in Guatemala with the Alvarado brothers. Among these conquistadors were Gonzalo de Alvarado y Chávez (Pedro’s cousin), Diego de Usagre, Francisco Castellón, Cristóbal Lobo, Diego López de Villanueva, Diego de Rojas, Gonzalo de Ovalle, Pedro González Nájera, Alonso Luarca, Francisco Hernández de Yllescas, Juan Méndez de Sotomayor, Diego García de Paredes, Pedro de Cueto, Antonio Ortíz, Juan de Aguilar, Juan de Aragón, Bartolomé de Molina, and Francisco Sánchez.8 During the course of the sixteenth century, these conquistadors or their descendants presented their cases to the Crown, usually in the form of a questionnaire with statements from 83

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

the petitioner and the testimonies of several (eye)witnesses confirming these statements. Most probanzas are very long-winded and promote the deeds of the conquistador in question while ignoring those of others. Nonetheless, these reports give a clear image of how the early Spanish conquistadors experienced and perceived the conquest.9 After their service to the Crown had ended, most remained in poverty. They were disillusioned, and they felt the need to appeal to the Crown for some sort of recompense for their services, hoping this would improve the living circumstances for them and their families. Next to probanzas, other types of reports were also written to the Spanish Court, such as relaciones (reports or accounts), cartas (letters), and cartas de relación. During the sixteenth century, thousands of such reports were written. Presently, most are kept in archives in Sevilla, Madrid, Mexico City, Lima, and elsewhere (Restall 2003:12). The Spanish conquistador Bernal Díaz del Castillo and the Dominican friar Bartolomé de las Casas, both of whom spent time in Guatemala in the 1520s and 1530s, also wrote in their chronicles what they saw and were told about the early conquests. Díaz del Castillo also settled in Guatemala, had local encomien­ das, and was a cabildo (municipal council) member in the mid-sixteenth century. In Díaz del Castillo’s case, his probanza evolved into a chronicle. Another important Spanish source is the work of Francisco Antonio de Fuentes y Guzmán, who wrote in the late seventeenth century. Although Fuentes y Guzmán had a tendency to exaggerate or embellish his descriptions, his work contains unique and valuable historical data (Fuentes y Guzmán 1932). The indigenous peoples of Guatemala also left written sources. Several K’iche’ and Kaqchikel títulos (titles, or documents that are essentially claims to land) and anales (annals, yearly accounts), for example, contain references to the Spanish conquest of their lands. The best-known examples of indigenous texts from Guatemala are the Kaqchikel Memorial de Sololá, various títulos written by the K’iche’ lords of Totonicapan, and a variety of indigenous chronicles collected by Adrián Recinos. Other famous indigenous texts from this area are the Popol Vuh and the Rab’inal Achi’. The references to the Spanish conquest in these sources are often brief and offer little detail.10 The present book includes the text of a letter composed by the principales of the town of Atitlan, dated February 1571, in which they present their view of the Spanish conquest of their lands and relate their contribution to the further conquest of southern Mesoamerica. Also included is a letter dated a few years earlier, 1564, written on behalf of Don Juan Mexia, cacique of Cuxutepeque, who talks about his community’s contribution to the conquest of San Miguel (now El Salvador) (see Appendix 6). They are two examples of stories about the Spanish conquest as written by the conquered peoples of Guatemala. Yet another group of important documents, a corpus long ignored by historians, provides essential and unique information about the conquest of Gua84

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

temala. These are the testimonies of the Mexican allies who came to Guatemala with the Spanish conquistadors in the 1520s and 1530s. The legacy of these indigenous conquistadors includes a large number of alphabetic manuscripts, most of which remain unpublished and are kept in archives. In addition, two large pictorial manuscripts depict parts of the conquest of Guatemala: the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, which find their counterpart in Mexico in the Lienzo de Analco. The value of this corpus of sources is enormous, since they not only provide valuable eyewitness accounts of the early conquests but also reflect the voice of a “third group,” the indigenous conquistadors from Mexico, and reveal their view of events. The alphabetical sources in which the indigenous conquistadors speak are often letters or reports, usually composed with the help of Spanish writers or attorneys and directed to the Spanish Court. Most are concerned with the fact that the indigenous allies or their descendants were badly treated or that their rights were neglected by the Spaniards, despite their loyal and indispensable service to the Spaniards in times of both war and peace. To support their case, they provide information about their role in the conquest of southern Meso­ america, reflecting awareness that without their help the Spanish could never have achieved their grand military successes. Valuable documents of this kind are the Carta de los yndios tlaxcaltecas y mexicanos al Rey sobre ser maltratados (1547, AGI Guatemala 52; see Appendix 5), the Carta de los Caciques e Indios Naturales de Suchimilco . . . (1563, AGI Patronato 2-2),11 and Méritos de los de Tlascala (1575, AGI Patronato 74, N.1, R.13). In fact, the claims of the indigenous conquistadors are little different from those of the Spanish conquistadors. They reflect the writers’ disillusionment and poverty after the conquest and the hope for some sort of recompense and better living circumstances. The common manner of making this kind of request was to present one’s services to the Crown in documentation, supported by the testimonies of (eye)witnesses. Other such letters can be found in various archives, such as the Archivo General de Indias in Seville, Spain. In that archive I found letters written in Huehuetenango, Tuzantlan, Tucayucan Amatlan, Tochtlan, Soconusco, and Amaxtlan Soconusco. In these letters, the writers request two things. First, they ask to be made part of the Audiencia of Mexico again because, they claim, the viceroy treated them much better than the authorities in Guatemala did. Second, they ask to be attended by their own bishop because the bishop and clergy of Guatemala did not speak their language.12 These letters are indicative of the unpleasant circumstances in which the indigenous conquistadors were living once they had settled in Guatemala. The most detailed report gathering testimonies of indigenous conquistadors and their descendants is the document titled Los yndios mexicanos, taxcaltecas, zapotecas y otros con el fiscal de S.M. sobre que se les livertase de pagar tributos.13 A copy of this manuscript is kept in the Archivo General de Indias in Seville 85

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

(registered as AGI Justicia 291). This copy consists of more than 800 pages, covering a time span of fourteen years (1564–1578). The project of composing this document was initiated by the leaders of Ciudad Vieja, Guatemala.14 The document contains (1) the testimonies of Central Mexican residents of the most important Spanish and Mexican settlements in Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, who themselves, or whose parents, had participated in the conquest of southern Mesoamerica; (2) the testimonies of Spanish conquistadors who had fought alongside the Mexican conquistadors; and (3) the testimonies of Spaniards who lived near the Mexican conquistadors and were familiar with their situation.15 The purpose of the project was to reinstate and guarantee tribute exemption for themselves and their descendants on the basis of their contribution to the Spanish conquest. Throughout the manuscript, the Mexicans are referred to as “conquystadores desta tierra,” and from their testimonies their awareness of their indispensable role in the conquest of southern Mesoamerica becomes very clear, as does their disillusionment. The value of the testimonies included in the document is enormous, since they not only provide information on the early conquest period, but inferentially they also reveal something of the prehispanic way of thinking about campaigns of conquest and domination and the expectations of those who participated in them. The document reveals some of the motivations, moral and ideological, of the former conquistadors following the conquest period. In addition to the direct correspondence between the Central Mexican conquistadors and the Spanish Court, there are letters written by Spaniards discussing the indigenous conquistadors and their privileges. These letters usually deal with the exemption from tribute and manual labor. While some Spaniards claimed that the indigenous former conquistadors no longer deserved or needed these rights and wanted them taken away, others defended them. The Archivo General de Indias in Seville and the Archivo General de Central America in Guatemala City contain many examples of this correspondence.16 As mentioned earlier, the legacy of the indigenous conquistadors also included pictorial testimonies: the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauh­ quechollan. These paintings present accounts of the conquest of Guatemala not only from the point of view of the “indios conquistadores” but also by means of their own indigenous medium of communication. The two pictorials were created largely independent of Spanish influence and, in the case of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, with not a Spanish audience but an indigenous audience in mind.17 Moreover, these pictorials also provide unique visual impressions of the conquest period. There are references to other such pictorial maps of the conquest of Guatemala (a similar map was reportedly made by a group of Central Mexican conquistadors who settled in Totonicapan, for example),18 but none of these other pictorials has been identified.

86

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

Pedro de Alvarado’s 1524 Campaign of Conquest The first Spanish expedition of conquest into Guatemala started in Mexico City under the command of the Spanish conquistador Pedro de Alvarado. To shed light on the intentions of this military expedition, I turn to Hernán Cortés’s fourth letter to Charles V. In this letter, Cortés wrote that he had been told about Utatlan (the K’iche’ capital) and Tecpan Quauhtemallan (capital of the Kaqchikel), two reportedly rich towns in the south. In 1523, after the Mexica Empire had been subjected to Spanish rule, Cortés decided to send two Spaniards and some indigenous allies to investigate. When they returned, he reported to the king, they were accompanied by more than a hundred K’iche’ and Kaqchikel who were sent by their lords to declare their fealty to the Spanish Crown. Cortés received the messengers, then sent them back to Guatemala with presents for their lords and the promise that if they remained faithful to their pledge they would be well treated and favored by the Spaniards. Cortés was soon informed, however, that the same K’iche’ and Kaqchikel had been harassing Spanish allies in Soconusco. The K’iche’ and Kaqchikel claimed the harm was not caused by them but by others. Cortés wrote to the king that for this reason, he decided to send Pedro de Alvarado to Guatemala to investigate the matter and to subject the area to Spanish rule. Meanwhile, he sent Cristóbal de Olid to Honduras by sea (Cortés 1993:184). Pedro de Alvarado left Tenochtitlan on December 6, 1523. In his report to King Charles V, Cortés mentions that Pedro de Alvarado left the city with 120 Spanish horsemen, 170 horses, and over 300 Spanish foot soldiers, among which were 130 crossbowmen and musketeers. He adds that they also took four cannons and a large supply of ammunition and powder.19 In Pedro’s company were his brothers Jorge, Gonzalo, and Gómez de Alvarado; his cousins Hernando, Diego, and Gonzalo de Alvarado; Pedro Portocarrero (Recinos 1986:64); Diego de Usagre; and Francisco Castellón (Gall 1968:143, 149). Cortés did not mention that the bulk of the army was formed by indigenous conquistadors from Central and Southern Mexico. Pedro de Alvarado and his army traveled to Guatemala by way of Oaxaca and then along the Pacific Coast through Tehuantepec and Soconusco. Alvarado had traveled to the Pacific before, in 1522, perhaps even as far as Soconusco (Mackie 1924:15). The rest of the journey was new territory to the Spaniards. The army followed the same route into Guatemala taken by people from Teotihuacan, by Tolteca, and by Mexica merchants in prehispanic times (Acuña 1982; Berdan et al. 1996; Gall 1972). Clearly, the indigenous allies guided the Spaniards. The outline of the route traveled in this first conquering journey can be deduced from Pedro de Alvarado’s own account and from other sources, such as Díaz del Castillo’s chronicle, the Memorial de Sololá, the Probanza de Gonzalo de Alvarado y Chavez, and the Glasgow manuscript.20 The same route would later be followed by Jorge de Alvarado and many others.

87

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

The events related to Pedro de Alvarado’s 1523–1524 campaign into Guatemala are dealt with in detail by a number of historians, so I will only comment on them briefly.21 The army’s first military confrontations in Guatemala were with the K’iche’, first at Zapotitlan and later on the plains of Quetzaltenango (Xelajuj) in February 1524. In March of that year, Alvarado and his allies conquered and destroyed Utatlan, the K’iche’ capital, where the K’iche’ ajpop (king) and ajpop k’amaja (king-elect) were burned. Before moving on, Pedro de Alvarado wrote his third letter to Cortés, and on March 22 his daughter Doña Leonor was born, also at Utatlan.22 Later that month, the army moved on to the Kaqchikel region and subjected Iximche’ to Spanish rule. With the help of the Kaqchikel, the troops defeated the Tz’utujil at Lake Atitlan. In May 1524 they moved south and conquered Escuintla. Subsequently, the army continued its conquering journey toward the Pipil capital Cuzcatlan (now San Salvador) by way of Atiquepeque, Tacuilula, Taxisco, Nancintla, Pasaco, Nopicalco, Aca­ tepeque, Acajutla, Tacuscalco, Azacualpa, and Atehuan. In July 1524 the troops returned to Iximche’, where they founded the first capital of Santiago. From there, Pedro de Alvarado wrote his fourth letter to Cortés (Mackie 1924). The Texcoca chronicler Fer­nando de Alva Ixtlilxochitl recorded that during this period, several Acolhua and Mexica allies returned to Mexico to inform Ixtlilxochitl and Cuauhtemoc about the new conquests and to deliver letters to Cortés. In response, Cortés sent 200 Spaniards to Guatemala to populate the area (Ixtlilxóchitl 1975 I:490). The Spaniards tried to achieve stability in Guatemala and to consolidate their control by giving encomiendas to the conquistadors. This implied that Spanish conquistadors were given the usufruct of the personal services and production of certain communities as a reward for their services. In turn, they were responsible for the Christianization of the community in question. The encomienda was mostly an institution designed to channel indigenous labor and produce into Spanish hands after the conquest of an area (Kramer 1994:1). In 1524, Pedro de Alvarado distributed the first encomiendas in Guatemala to Spaniards who had served at his side.23 It is generally known that Pedro de Alvarado was a ruthless and cruel conquistador. The conquest of Guatemala went hand in hand with many massacres and with maltreatment of the indigenous population. The Guatemalans were left with little choice but to surrender to Spanish rule and to do whatever they were ordered. But surrender or not, Pedro de Alvarado’s army would often fall upon them, killing and burning. His brothers and other captains were reportedly just as ruthless and without conscience. One of the chroniclers who wrote in detail about the evildoings of Pedro de Alvarado was the Dominican friar Bartolomé de las Casas. Las Casas first visited Guatemala in 1532 on his way to Peru and returned in 1534 to travel through the country for five years to preach. The friar tried to paint a vivid portrait of 88

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

the many families Alvarado and his brothers tore apart by taking away women, men, and children to kill or use as slaves; the rapes and violence they perpetrated; and the suffering and deprivation of liberty of the indigenous population that resulted (Mackie 1924:125–134). Las Casas may have exaggerated the Spaniards’ cruelty to support his own case, but most of what he wrote can be confirmed in other sources, and corroboration can often be found—although presented in different words—in the letters of Pedro de Alvarado himself. Even Cortés commented on the Alvarados’ offensive behavior toward the indigenous population (Cortés 1993:273). Las Casas wrote that between 1524 and 1540—the latter the year in which he wrote his account—Pedro de Alvarado, his brothers, and the other Spaniards in Guatemala had killed more than 4 million people (Mackie 1924:132). The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan displays some of the cruel punishments inflicted by the Spanish conquistadors, such as slavery, the hanging and burning of indigenous lords, and the practice of throwing enemies to the dogs (see Chapter 7).

1524–1527 For a reconstruction of the events that took place in Guatemala between 1524 and 1527, I rely largely on the work of Laura Matthew, who has studied this period in much detail (Matthew 2004). In 1524, Pedro de Alvarado had gained control over some of the principal indigenous kingdoms of Guatemala; however, he had not yet conquered the country. Not only had he not even entered a large part of the territory, but several of the subjected towns had to be conquered repeatedly. These recurring uprisings resulted in part from the Spaniards’ exaggerated demands for gold. Entire towns were massacred, and lords were burned alive if they did not meet Spanish expectations. This drove the local lords to despair and eventually led to uprisings and rebellion. Those affected most were the Kaqchikel, who had initially received the Spaniards in peace and even aided them in defeating the K’iche’.24 However, they soon saw themselves as having no other option than to rebel, and the result was six years of almost continuous warfare (1524–1530). When this so-called Kaqchikel rebellion started, Pedro de Alvarado was forced to leave the Spanish settlement at Iximche’. Pedro then left with a few others to travel to Chiapas in search of Cortés. During the journey he left control in the hands of his brother Jorge. This period was crucial: many Spaniards had returned to Mexico, and others had been killed. During Pedro de Alvarado’s absence, there was a period when only a handful of Spaniards were present in the entire country. They were extremely vulnerable and depended completely on the loyalty of their indigenous allies. Luckily for them, a new group of Spaniards and indigenous allies soon arrived with Pedro de Briones, a Spanish captain who had fought in Honduras under the banner of Cristóbal de Olid. Thanks to 89

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

these reinforcements, the Kaqchikel were temporarily defeated and the Spaniards remained in control (Matthew 2004:78–79).25 At the end of 1524, Jorge de Alvarado sent his brother Diego to Cuzcatlan, which was still at war.26 Pedro de Alvarado joined this expedition after his return from Chiapas. Sometime before May 1525, the first Villa de San Salvador was founded (Matthew 2004:80). It took the Spaniards more than two years to conquer this area, however (Gall 1968:144, 147, 155, among others). One of the witnesses, who speaks in the AGI Justicia 291 document, testified that approximately 300 Mexican conquistadors had accompanied Diego de Alvarado in this campaign to Cuzcatlan and that only around 140 returned to Guatemala alive. (AGI Justicia 291, f. 88v; Matthew 2004:80). It is also known that Diego de Usagre, a Spanish conquistador who fought in the battle for Cuzcatlan at Diego de Alvarado’s side, had brought 60 Ñuudzavui (Mixtec) allies to this battle (Gall 1968:147). Usagre had a daughter with a Ñuudzavui woman named Magdalena. The girl, Catalina, was raised by her father and received his family name. At age fifteen, she married the Spanish conquistador Francisco Castellón, who later accompanied Jorge de Alvarado in his Verapaz campaign (Gall 1968:144). Gonzalo de Alvarado led a campaign of conquest to the Guatemalan western highlands in the same year (1525), where he defeated the Mam of Huehuetenango and Pedro de Alvarado defeated the Pokomam of Mixco. Both were reportedly accompanied by large forces of Mexican and Guatemalan conquistadors (Matthew 2004:80).27 Pedro de Alvarado had not found Cortés in Chiapas, and in 1526 he left for Honduras to meet him there. During this journey Alvarado was accompanied by mostly Guatemalan allies.28 At that point, Guatemala was far from being pacified. Cortés wrote this account: [las provincias de] Utlatan [Utatlan] y Guatemala, donde siempre ha residido Pedro de Alvarado, que, después que se rebelaron por cierto mal tratamiento, jamás se han apaciguado; antes han hecho y hacen mucho daño en los españoles que allí están y en los amigos sus comarcanos, porque es la tierra áspera y de mucha gente, y muy belicosa y ardida en la guerra, y han inventado muchos géneros de defensas y ofensas, haciendo hoyos y otros muchos ingenios para matar los caballos, donde han muerto muchos. De tal manera, que aunque siempre el dicho Pedro de Alvarado les ha hecho y hace guerra con más de doscientos de caballo y quinientos peones, y más de cinco mil indios amigos, y aun de diez algunas veces, nunca ha podido ni puede atraerlos al servicio de vuestra magestad; antes de cada día se fortalecen más y se refuerzan de gentes que a ellos llegan. (Cortés 1993:272–273)

In the same letter, Cortés also referred to the disrespectful behavior of some of the Spanish encomenderos (Cortés 1993:273). In August 1526, Pedro de Alvarado decided to go to Spain, by way of Mexico, to report to the king. He left Pedro Portocarrero and Hernán Carrillo 90

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

in charge and sent for his brother Jorge, who had returned to Mexico, to replace him in the function of lieutenant governor of Guatemala.29

Jorge de Alvarado’s 1527–1529 Campaigns of Conquest Jorge de Alvarado returned to Guatemala in the spring of 1527, accompanied by a new Spanish army and approximately 5,000 to 6,000 allies from Central Mexico (Gall 1968:146). As Matthew (2004:80) points out, this was one of the largest migrations of Central Mexican conquistadors into Guatemala. The bulk of the Quauhquecholteca arrived in this group. References to this 1527 migration still exist in local oral tradition.30 At the time, only a few Spaniards were left in the country. The wars had been going on for three years, the Spanish forces were exhausted, and the intensity of the battles had greatly diminished. One of the conquistadors who had served in Guatemala from the very beginning and who later fought under Jorge’s banner was Cristóbal Lobo. In his probanza it is stated: “quando el d[ic]ho capitan jorxe de avarado entro a conquistar esta tierra [1527] . . . la tierra estava de guerra e no se conquistava porque avia poca gente” (AGI Patronato 59-1-1, f. 155).31 Antonio Ortíz, who testified in the same probanza, said: “que sabe que cuando el d[ic]ho adelantado se fue de esta tierra [1527] quedo esta tierra de guerra e la querian despoblar los espanoles” (AGI Patronato 59-1-1, f. 157). The exhausted state of the Spanish troops made the arrival of Jorge and the new reinforcements the decisive moment in the entire conquest period. With their arrival, the conquest was solidified, and the wars revived. The probanzas of Diego de Usagre and Francisco Castellón, who also fought under Jorge’s banner, state: “después que el dicho don Pedro de Alvarado fue a España, vino de la ciudad de México Jorge de Alvarado, su hermano, por capitán. Y con toda la gente que halló tornó a dar guerra de nuevo a los naturales de la dicha provincia de Guatemala” (Gall 1968:143–144). Another conquistador stated: “en este tiempo se fue el d[ic]ho adelantado e la tierra quedo de guerra que no estava paçificada y entonces la començo a conquistar e paçificar el d[ic]ho jorxe de alvarado” (AGI Patronato 59-1-1, f. 155). The Kaqchikel also refer to the revival of war after Jorge’s arrival: “El Día 1 Ka’oq [March 29, 1527] los castellanos comenzaron de nuevo a matarnos y la gente se batió con ellos en una guerra prolongada. Nuevamente la guerra nos hirió de muerte, pero todos los habitantes de la comarca se negaron a pagar el tributo” (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:188). The Kaqchikel source does not specifically mention that the revival of military confrontations between the Kaqchikel and the Spaniards had to do with the arrival of Jorge de Alvarado and his allies. The fact that these conquistadors arrived during this very period, however, leaves little doubt that their arrival was indeed the reason (Gall 1968:146). The Kaqchikel do mention Jorge’s 1527–1529 term as lieutenant governor, but 91

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

without providing any specific details with regard to the battles he waged in this period. In the subsequent three years, Jorge de Alvarado and his Mexican allies managed to subject most of what is now Guatemala to Spanish rule. In fact, Jorge’s military achievements far exceeded those of any other Spanish conquistador. As the probanzas of contemporary conquistadors indicate, many regarded him as the conqueror of Guatemala, not his brother Pedro, as is presently often believed. Nonetheless, few historians have fully recognized his role in the conquest of Guatemala. This seems to be the case for various reasons. First, most well-known chronicles provide lengthy accounts of both Pedro and Gonzalo de Alvarado’s contributions but often ignore Jorge’s role. This practice, in turn, has been followed by many other chroniclers and historians (Kramer 1994:64).32 In addition, conquests carried out by Jorge de Alvarado and other Spanish conquistadors were often wrongly ascribed to Pedro de Alvarado, who led the first Spanish military campaign into Guatemala. Furthermore, most of the documents that elaborate on Jorge’s achievements (often probanzas de méritos y servicios of Spanish conquistadors) remain unpublished. They are rarely used by historians and thus remain unknown to the general public. The Lienzo de Quauhque­chollan, which narrates Jorge de Alvarado’s conquests, is one of the sources that provides the most information about his military achievements in the late 1520s (see Chapter 7). The unpublished sources are very clear about the importance of Jorge’s contribution to the conquest of Guatemala. Cabildo members who speak in the Residencia de Pedro de Alvarado (1535), for example, relate that Jorge de Alvarado conquered most of the territory between 1527 and 1529. Antón de Morales, a witness in this residencia, gave this testimony: dixo hablando generalmente que por la buena yndustria del dicho Jorge de Albarado juntamente con la ayuda de los españoles que con el andubieron conquisto esta provincia de Guatimala y poblo esta çibdad de Santiago e la villa de San Salvador y enbio a poblar la villa de San Miguel y allo que estaba poblada e fynalmente que sirbio muy bien a su magestad en esta tierra e que muchas bezes hablando este testigo e otras perssonas sobrello visto que esta tierra syenpre andaba en capitania y gobernaçion del adelantado e sus hermanos dezian que sy sienpre fuera en poder del dicho adelantado que no se poblara segun andaba desasosegado syno acaesçiera benir por capitan a ella el dicho Jorge de Albarado que se llegaba al paresçer de los buenos que abia en esta tierra. (AGI Justicia 295, fs. 469v–470r)33

Gonzalo de Alvarado wrote to Charles V that “Jorge de Alvarado fue una de las personas que más principalmente sirvieron a su magestad en la conquista y pacificación desta provincia de Guatemala” (Gall 1967b:68).34 Another conquistador testified:

92

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

jorge de alvarado avia sido uno de los primeros conquistadores y de los que primero (_laron) y mas nos [23v] sirvieron en la conquista y paçificaçion desta nueva españa y provinçia de guatimala donde siendo el teniente de n[uest]ro governador e el capitan general gano e conquisto e paçifico la d[ic]ha provinçia e la puso en n[uest]ro corona e patrimonio rreal y que en rrenumeraçion de lo mucho que nos avia servido a su costa y gastos que avia hecho el adelantado don pedro de alvarado governador que fue de la d[ic]ha provinçia le dio y encomendo los pueblos de atitan e de tepanatitan cabaçera de guatimala e Totonicapan e queçaltenango y pochutla con todas sus estançias y subjetos. (AGI Justicia 199, N.1, R.2, fs. 23r–23v)35

Yet another said: jorge de alvarado el qual a oido dezir esta t[estig]o a muchos conquistadores desta provincia que en las conquista della fue general e governador e sirvio a su mag[estad] como persona muy balerosa e cavallero notorio que hera y que mediante lo quel travajo y otros capitanes y la demas gente que anduvo en la pacificaçion destas provinçias es notorio que las traxeron al dominio de su mag[estad]. (AGI Patronato 77, N.2, R.2. f. 174)

Cristóbal Lobo wrote: “que yo el d[ic]ho Cristóbal lobo entre a conquistar esta governaçion de guatemala debaxo de la vadera del capitan jorge de alvarado que fue el que la conquisto e poblo e fundo en esta dicha çiudad de santiago en el asiento viejo e desde aqui enbio a poblar la çiudad de san salvador e çiudad de chiapa e villa de san miguel” (AGI Patronato 59-1-1, f. 148). Lobo also wrote: “los que anduvieron con el dicho capitan jorxe de alvarado son los que conquistaron e poblaron esta t[ie]rra [Guatemala] porque entonces se conquisto e paçifico” (AGI Patronato 59-1-1, f. 153). Antonio Ortíz, who also participated in the conquest of Guatemala and testified in Cristóbal Lobo’s probanza, likewise indicates that most conquests were realized between 1527 and 1529: “los que se hallaron con el d[ic]ho capitan Jorxe de alvarado en la conquista de esta tierra se pueden dezir e nombrar conquistadores porque entonces fue la mayor fuerça de la guerra de esta tierra” (AGI Patronato 59-1-1, f. 156). A Tlaxcalteca witness who testified in the Información de méritos y servicios de Pedro González Nájera (1548) stated that he returned to Mexico in the late 1520s because by that time the majority of the country had been pacified by Jorge and his allies, and his services were no longer needed (Kramer 1994:65). There are many more such references to Jorge de Alvarado’s contribution to the conquest of Guatemala.36 Unfortunately, however, most texts provide only general information about his services and little concrete information with regard to which places were conquered during this period or when. It is known that Jorge and his allies arrived in Olintepeque in March 1527 and made this site their initial base of operations (Gall 1968:146). On March

93

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

20, 1527, Jorge officially took over the function of teniente de justicia mayor e capitán general of Guatemala. He did this in the presence of Pedro Portocarrero, Hernán Carrillo, Hernando de Alvarado, Jorge de Acuña, Francisco de Arévalo, and Diego de Monroy—all of whom swore loyalty to the new captain (Sáenz de Santa María 1991:22–23). Subsequently, Jorge started his campaign against the Kaqchikel and entered the Kaqchikel region with all his men. He passed through Comalapa and then established a new camp at Chimaltenango.37 From Chimaltenango, Jorge led several campaigns. One was a reportedly difficult campaign to Pochutla (modern Pochuta in the department of Chimaltenango) in search of two Kaqchikel leaders, Sinacan and Sequechul. Although Jorge managed to defeat the Kaqchikel at Pochutla, he never caught the two lords.38 After this battle, the Spaniards returned to Chimaltenango (Kramer 1994:69–83). On November 22, 1527, after an intensive survey, Jorge de Alvarado founded a new city of Santiago at Almolonga, and he gave out house plots and agricultural lands. The Kaqchikel area remained unsettled until March 1528, followed by a period of relative peace. Between 1527 and 1529, Jorge de Alvarado gave out encomiendas to his fellow conquistadors. This distribution of encomiendas is generally referred to as the repartimiento general (Kramer 1994:69–83). Both conquered and unconquered lands were granted to the conquistadors. Jorge’s residencia stated: al tiempo quel adelantado don Pedro de Albarado fue a España [1527] la tierra quedo de guerra y luego entro en ella Jorge de Albarado e conquisto mucha parte della e repartio asi la conquistada como la que estaba de guerra y dio yndios en mucha cantidad a los que en su conpañia thenia a caussa que la tierra era muy pobre e por que asi los españoles heran en ella thenidos como por fuer_a dandoles yndios en lo de paz e yndios en lo que estaba de guerra syn saber lo que se les daba. (AGI Justicia 295, f. 277r)

The Spanish conquistadors in Guatemala were mainly interested in quick riches, and the indigenous communities were often enslaved and forced to provide food and gold to their encomenderos and to work in mines. This led to the deaths of many from overwork, mistreatment, and illness. The encomenderos’ unreasonable demands were often the main cause of indigenous rebellion in subsequent decades (Kramer 1994:2, 68–69). In August or September 1528, Jorge de Alvarado led a campaign to the Jalpatagua region on the south coast (the present-day department of Santa Rosa). Between 1527 and 1529 he also entered the Verapaz region (Gall 1968:144) and waged battles for Sacapulas and Uspantlan (Sáenz de Santa María 1969:18) and for the towns of Aguacatlan and Poyumatlan (present-day Santa Eulalia), in the modern department of Huehuetenango (Gall 1968:144; Kramer 1994:66). When Pedro returned from Spain in February 1529, he and his brother Jorge were informed that grave charges had been made against them and that an

94

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

official inquiry (residencia) would be carried out. The first Audiencia of Mexico appointed Judge Francisco de Orduña to investigate the Alvarado brothers’ activities and conduct in Mexico and Guatemala.39 His instructions were to take residencias of all governors, captains-general and their lieutenants, alcaldes (judges and members of the municipal councils of Spanish settlements), justicias (judges/magistrates), regidores (municipal councilmen), alguaciles (constables), and scribes, who during a ninety-day period would be suspended from their posts.40 Jorge, appointed lieutenant governor of Guatemala by Pedro in May 1529, was forced to hand over the post to Orduña on August 14, 1529. Soon thereafter, he returned to his home in Mexico (Kramer 1994:85–99).

Indigenous Conquistadors The military successes of the Spanish conquistadors in Guatemala occurred for a variety of reasons. First, their superior military technology gave them a clear advantage. The indigenous population was unprepared for the devastating effects of Spanish gunpowder and ammunition. Even though the Spaniards and their allies were sometimes outnumbered, they almost always knew how to use their technological advantage to win the battle. Also, the indigenous warriors were often afraid of the conquistadors’ horses, or they did not know how to deal with them. During battles, Pedro de Alvarado tended to retreat with his horsemen, making his enemies follow, at which point he would turn on them and defeat them (Mackie 1924:58). Existing rivalries among the indigenous peoples of Guatemala were also convenient for the Spaniards, who took advantage of those rivalries to inform themselves about lands yet to be conquered and to enlarge their own army (Hassig 1988:21; Salas 1990). The success of the Spanish conquest of Guatemala can be attributed primarily, however, to the participation of indigenous conquistadors from Central Mexico. Large armies of indigenous captains and soldiers fought alongside the Spaniards. These allies also provided the Spaniards with essentials such as food. Moreover, they knew the roads and were familiar with the Mesoamerican way of warfare, as well as the customs and languages. They provided the manpower and knowledge that eventually made the conquest of Guatemala so effective. The Spanish conquistadors provided detailed descriptions of the Spanish part of the army that set out for Guatemala in 1523–1524 (discussed earlier), but they were much less conscientious about reporting the numbers of indigenous allies who accompanied them. All Cortés mentioned is that there were, in Pedro de Alvarado’s company, “algunas personas principales, asi de los naturales de esta ciudad [Tenochtitlan] como de otras ciudades de esta comarca, y con ellos alguna gente, aunque no mucha por ser el camino tan largo.” Díaz de Castillo reported only that over 200 Tlaxcalteca and Cholulteca participated (Cortés 1993:193194; Mackie 1924:100). Pedro de Alvarado barely referred to his indigenous 95

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

allies. He merely mentioned that they were present, participated in his battles, sometimes opened the roads, and gathered grass for the horses. Only once he mentioned that there were 5,000 or 6,000 “friendly Indians” among his people (Mackie 1924:80). In the testimonies of indigenous witnesses, numbers arise that far exceed those mentioned by the Spanish conquistadors. The testimonies recorded in the AGI Justicia 291 document, for example, vividly describe that numerous indigenous men left their lands, houses, wives, and families behind to set out for Guatemala with the Spaniards. Some participated out of free will, others by force. One of the Tlaxcalteca witnesses provides a detailed description of the indigenous units of Pedro de Alvarado’s 1523–1524 army. The man had not left with Alvarado from Tenochtitlan but joined the army later when it passed by Oaxaca. He testified that at that time, Pedro de Alvarado was accompanied by 200 Spaniards—half the number Cortés and Díaz del Castillo claimed. From Tlaxcala, he declared, came 6 captains and 800 macehuales (commoners); from “Guazaçingo” 1 captain and 400 macehuales; from “Tepesica” 2 captains and 1,600 macehuales; and from Mexico and other places came many more whose numbers he did not remember (AGI Justicia 291, fs. 170v–171r). This represents a total of more than 2,800 conquistadors from Central Mexico. In a letter to the king dated 1547, the Mexica and Tlaxcalteca claimed that more than 1,000 of their men went with Alvarado (AGI Guatemala 52).41 In 1563, Xochimilca wrote that 2,500 of its men had gone with Alvarado to Guatemala and Honduras, of whom none survived (AGI Patronato 2-2).42 Also, the lords of Tehuantepec reportedly sent 2,000 men with Pedro de Alvarado (Oudijk and Restall 2007:35). Still others were incorporated into Alvarado’s army during the remainder of his journey. From the testimonies gathered in the AGI Justicia 291 manuscript, it can be gathered that the indigenous conquistadors who traveled to Guatemala in the 1520s included not only people from Mexico, Tlaxcala, and Xochimilca but also allies from Chuzila (“Chuzilas”), Texcoco (“Tizcucos”), the Benizaa (Zapotec) area (“Çapotecas”), the Ñuudzavui (Mixtec) area (“Mystecas”), Quauhquechollan (“Guacachultecas”), Cholula (“Cholultecas”), and “otros yndios de otras lenguas diversas.”43 In other words, the army that entered Guatemala in 1524 must have consisted of thousands of indigenous allies. It is not clear to what extent the Spaniards consciously suppressed the number of indigenous allies who fought with them. It is possible that when Pedro de Alvarado left Tenochtitlan in 1523, there were indeed only a few hundred allies at his side and that the rest joined the army elsewhere. It is also possible, however, that the chroniclers mentioned lower numbers of allies in their records because they wanted to enhance their own roles and glory. Likewise, it is unclear to what extent the indigenous witnesses exaggerated their numbers to support their case. Either way, it is beyond doubt that the number of Central 96

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

Mexican conquistadors who traveled with Alvarado when he entered Guatemala in 1524 must have been more than a few thousand, and thus they far exceeded the number of Spaniards in his company. On his way to and within Guatemala, Alvarado’s army was often enlarged even more with soldiers from newly conquered areas, who made up for his losses and provided new manpower.44 The AGI Justicia 291 document clearly reveals that the conquistadors from Central Mexico were well aware of their indispensable role in the conquest of southern Mesoamerica. As stated before, they referred to themselves as “yndios conquistadores” or “conqystadores desta tierra.” One of the witnesses declared that it was common knowledge at the time that the Spaniards would never have achieved their military successes without the Central Mexican allies (AGI Justicia 291, f. 127r). The latter brought their own warrior dress, insignias, weapons, and other necessary supplies. Like any army, they also brought their own retinue: women and other relatives came along to provide services such as carrying gear, preparing food, and so on (AGI Justicia 291, f. 38v, among others). Several of the witnesses who speak in the AGI Justicia 291 document testified that the Spaniards put most of the indigenous conquistadors under the command of their own indigenous captains, who led them in battle according to their own customs. As one of these witnesses stated, “los d[ic]os capitanes hizieron su cuadrillas cada uno por su orden” (AGI Justicia 291, f. 96v). Obviously, the indigenous soldiers listened better to their own respected captains, in whom they had confidence and who communicated with them in their own language. The Spanish soon realized that this led to a more efficient and formidable army.45 The Central Mexican conquistadors seem to have been highly esteemed by their enemies. The writers of the Título C’oyoi from Utatlan referred to the indigenous conquistadors who arrived with Pedro de Alvarado in 1524 as the “eagle and jaguar warriors” and the “Yaqui people, the great military lords (who) accompanied Don Pedro de Alvarado” (Carmack 1973:298,301).46 The indigenous conquistadors provided the manpower in the Spanish campaigns of conquest. Sometimes they even fought battles without any Spaniards present. This happened, for example, when horses could not reach the enemy and foot soldiers could but also on occasions when the indigenous conquistadors fought alone to keep the Spaniards safe. As one witness stated: “los d[ic]hos capitanes yndios e sus maçeguales fueron por muchas vezes parte para que los d[ic]hos españoles no fuesen muertos y thomados a muchos dellos yndios henemygos en las d[ic]has conquiystas e paçificaçiones y los sirvieron y socorrieron y ayudaron a passar sus travajos” (AGI Justicia 291, f. 39v–40r). Another witness testified: “sirvieron muy bien a los españoles e que se defendian hellos de los henemygos e que guardavan a los españoles no fuesen thomados a manos de los henemygos” (AGI Justicia 291, f. 158r). In general, only the Spanish captains rode horses. The Spanish crossbowmen and those who carried firearms traveled on foot, and the indigenous units were 97

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

also infantry units. While the Spanish used European weapons, the indigenous captains and soldiers were equipped with their own arms and armor. Some indigenous caciques were allowed to ride horses or to carry European swords. Such privileges were normally only granted with special permission by cédula and were limited to the period of the conquest (Powell 1977:172). The Tlaxcalteca were allowed to carry certain European arms in return for aid in overthrowing the Mexica Empire (Simmons 1964:101). The Quauhquecholteca assisted the Spaniards in the same campaign, and they may have been granted the same privilege.47 The use of Spanish arms and attributes by the indigenous captains was not only a matter of practicality but also served as a means to identify with the new lords and to legitimize their position in the new colonial system.48 The Spaniards, in turn, also took certain items they found useful from the indigenous conquistadors, such as wearing the indigenous cotton warrior costume when the Spanish steel armor was too hot and uncomfortable. Likewise, they took advantage of indigenous war strategies, especially with regard to intelligence gathering and communication. Obviously, the Spanish and indigenous conquistadors had several military strategies in common, such as forming alliances, executing conquests sequentially, using spies, and granting privileges to motivate allied forces, among others. These elements are found in both prehispanic Mesoamerican warfare and contemporary European warfare, as well as in warfare elsewhere in the world. The indigenous military units brought their own retinues—among whom were guides, bearers (tamemes), spies, and cooks—who also served the Spanish units. These allies showed the Spaniards the best ways to travel, opened roads to enable the large armies to pass through, provided food for the Spaniards and gathered fodder for the horses, and advised the Spaniards on how to approach an enemy most effectively. They also served as messengers, negotiators, and translators. In Mexica warfare during prehispanic times, spies often investigated an area beforehand, and maps were drawn of the territory to be crossed. In these maps, obstacles such as rivers were marked, and they were used to indicate the routes to be traveled by the army, to determine how many days it would take to reach the enemy, and to ascertain where camps should be established (Sahagún 1950–1982 II:f. 283v). Similar indigenous maps were likely made during the conquest of Guatemala under the Spanish banner. Possibly, such maps aided in the representation of the geographic landscape presented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. The indigenous witnesses who testified in the AGI Justicia 291 document stated that they had to work hard for the Spaniards and that many of their colleagues died during the conquest campaign in southern Mesoamerica (AGI Justicia 291, f. 39r). They claimed to have always done what the Spaniards asked of them. Indeed, it is hard to find evidence that proves otherwise. One witness declared: “los d[ic]hos capitanes y sus maçeguales yndios hizieron los d[ic]hos 98

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

travajos e serviçios a su magestad a su costa e mynsion son que por hellos ny nynguno de los d[ic]hos marques adelantado e sus capitanes les fuesen hechos algu[n]os socorros ny pagas ny de parte de su magestad se les a hecho nynguna m[erce]d ny dado otro aprobechamyento” (AGI Justicia 291, f. 40v). With regard to the tamemes, another witness said: “demas de servir los d[ic]hos capitanes y sus yndios en las d[ic]has guerras e paçificaçiones a su magestad en todo lo q[ue] se ofreçio y convyno peleandose cargaron con petacas Ropa bastimentos y otras cosas y con españoles e yndios heridos muchos dias y camynos” (AGI Justicia 291, f. 40r). Yet another said: “que vio que algunos de los d[ic]hos yndios mexicanos y taxcaltecas para mas ayuda y defensa de los españoles se cargavan con el curraje dellos y con personales españoles de los suçerian en las d[ic]has conquystas” (AGI Justicia 291, f. 48v). Both the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the Glasgow manuscript depict indigenous allies carrying both objects and Spaniards. The Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan shows women carrying warrior gear and men carrying backpacks filled with round objects, possibly fruit or ammunition, as well as other packages. Most tamemes are depicted in the Guatemalan part of the lienzo, often chained together and led by a Spaniard on horseback (see Chapter 7). The Glasgow man­ uscript shows men carrying packages as well. This document also shows a man carrying a cannon and another carrying a Spaniard (Acuña 1984:plate 57). Often, the Central Mexican conquistadors settled in newly conquered areas to keep an eye on the local population. They helped the Spaniards keep the indigenous peoples of Guatemala from rebelling and assisted in converting them to Christianity (discussed later). Mexican conquistadors are known to have operated throughout Mesoamerica.49 Alonso de Cáceres, Cristóbal de Cueva, Diego de Alvarado, and Joan de Mendoza, for example, also brought Mexican allies on their expeditions to Honduras. Juan de Chaves, who also led an expedition in Honduras, reportedly had 60 Spaniards and 2,000 indigenous allies with him in that campaign. When Francisco de Montejo led campaigns into Nicaragua in the 1530s, he depended heavily on hundreds of Mexican conquistadors.50

Motivations for Participation Why were the indigenous lords willing to help the Spaniards in their campaigns of conquest? Why did they choose the side of the new conquistadors, even though they greatly outnumbered them? Various factors played a role.51 As mentioned in Chapter 3, the indigenous peoples of Mesoamerica were used to a city-state culture, with continually changing alliances and shifts of power and status. When a community was conquered, it automatically became part of the new controlling system of the conquerors. This implied a loss of status, wealth, and freedom for the community in question. Allying with a new conquering force was often appealing because doing so normally led to 99

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

protection and advancement.52 When the Spaniards arrived on the shores of Veracruz, they were immediately incorporated into this Mesoamerican system. Their arrival was regarded by many as an opportunity to establish a new alliance through which they could turn the existing socio-political relationship to their own benefit. With this in mind, many agreed to go with the Spaniards to defeat the often ruthless and demanding lords of Tenochtitlan.53 The Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca are two of many communities who allied with the Spanish in those early years for the purpose of defeating the Mexica: the Tlaxcalteca because they were enemies of the Mexica and the Quauhquecholteca because, having been incorporated into the Mexica sphere of influence, they were suffering from Mexica oppression (see Chapter 3). The indigenous communities often did not regard subjection to the Spanish Crown as a humiliation but instead viewed it as an alliance of two equal forces that together would be able to conquer other communities. The indigenous conquistadors acted based on prehispanic experiences: they took an active role in the conquest initiated by the Spaniards and provided the Spaniards with tribute in the form of soldiers and tamemes. As Michel Oudijk and Matthew Restall (2007) have pointed out, the role of the indigenous allies went beyond mere cooperation and alliance. A 1584 document composed on behalf of a cacique of Tepexi de la Seda, for example, claimed that Don Gonzalo Matzatzin Moctezuma, lord of Tepexi at the time of the Spanish arrival, had vowed loyalty to the Spaniards and independently set out to take part in conquests under the Spanish banner. While Cortés carried out the conquest of Tenochtitlan, Don Gonzalo Matzatzin Moctezuma traveled to the south and conquered fourteen to twenty towns in the Mixteca Baja and Alta. He received the title of captain in the name of the King of Spain. One of the witnesses who speaks in this document stated: don goncalo le enbio mensajeros yndios prençipales del d[ic]ho pu[ebl]o de tepexi al d[ic]ho marques [5v:10] del valle a la çiudad de tascala con muchas joyas de oro e piedras preçiadas de mucho valor offreçiendosele por vasallos de su mag[estad]. . . . ffue pu[bli]co e not[ori]o [6r:11] quel d[ic]ho marques del valle lo rreçivio con mucho rregalo y le dio conduta de cap[it]an para conquistar algunos pueblos de la misteca por thenor como thenia gran confiança de su persona por aver visto su offreçimi[ent]o e voluntad grande de servir a su mag[estad] e demas de lo suso d[ic]ho le dio al d[ic]ho don goncalo licençia e ffacultad para que truxese espada y lança para que hiçiese la d[ic]ha conquista e deffensa de su persona y ovedeçiendo a lo que le mando el d[ic]ho marques del valle este t[estig]o oyo desir pu[bli]cam[en]te en el d[ic]ho pu[ebl]o de tepexi como avia conquistado e conquisto el d[ic]ho don gonçalo moteccuma a su costa en n[ombr]e de su mag[estad] e por mandado del d[ic]ho marques del valle los pu[ebl]os de chinautla ygualtepec y acatlan y acatepeque e guaxolotitlan e otros muchos de la provi[nci]a de guaxaca que estavan rrevelados

100

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

contra la rreal corona e que avia paçificado los d[ic]hos pu[ebl]os e por buenas palabras e rrazonamientos los atraya a si y al servi[ci]o de su mag[estad] y que ffuesen xpianos en lo qual hico mucha deligençia e gasto muchos pesos de oro a su costa. (AGI Patronato 245, N.10, fs. 5r–6r/10–11)54

Around thirty witnesses, many from towns conquered by Don Gonzalo Matzatzin Moctezuma, confirmed this claim, and it seems to be truthful (see Oudijk and Restall 2007). By the time of the successful conquest of Tenochtitlan (1521), the Spaniards had gathered an enormous army of indigenous conquistadors. The alliance between Don Gonzalo Matzatzin Moctezuma and Cortés was established in the same period, possibly even during the same weeks, as the cooperation between the Quauhquecholteca and the Spaniards began (Cortés 1993:91–92). The indigenous conquistadors’ expectations were likewise based on their prehispanic experiences. Had they known what changes the new arrivals would bring about, they would probably have made other decisions. But, of course, they did not know. Both the AGI Justicia 291 document and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan reflect some of these expectations and the resulting disillusionment. In the AGI Justicia 291 document, the indigenous conquistadors, referring to themselves as “conquistadores,” clearly regard themselves as being at the same level as the Spaniards, and they are also clearly disillusioned that they received little in return for their loyal service. The tlacuiloque of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, in turn, related themselves to the world of the Spanish by means of dress, weaponry, and skin color (see Chapters 6–8). The indigenous conquistadors who served in Guatemala regarded themselves as being in an elevated position, based on their military role in the conquests of the new lords, and they distinguished themselves from other indigenous peoples. Not all Central Mexican communities allied with the Spaniards immediately or participated in the Spanish conquests voluntarily. The Spanish convinced many by making great promises and providing certain privileges. Such privileges involved the granting of noble titles and military commissions (such as those granted to Don Gonzalo Matzatzin Moctezuma) and permission to use Spanish military equipment. Sometimes the Spaniards offered military protection from attacks by hostile communities. The most common promises made were exemption from the requirements to pay tribute and to provide personal services. If promises did not achieve their goals, the Spaniards used intimidation. During the 1561 Chichimeca uprising in Northern Mexico, for example, the Mexica were told that if they did not serve the Spanish Army, they would be fined forty pesos. They agreed to serve and worked mostly as bearers. In the end, however, they received no payment of any kind in return for their services. Other Mexica and Tarasca caciques were forced to send a certain number of their men with a Spanish captain, and those who refused to do so were put in jail. To motivate

101

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

them, they were repeatedly promised the lands of the Chichimeca they defeated. Again, in the end, the Spaniards did not fulfill their promises. Another way of forcing a town to give up its resistance was to take noble families hostage (Powell 1977:171–172, 174, 177–178). In Guatemala, Pedro de Alvarado often used fear and blackmail to force local communities to submit to Spanish rule. He usually threatened a community by saying he would burn its fields (meaning the loss of its main food resource) or enact other cruelties if the lords would not become his allies.55 Furthermore, he used captives as translators and negotiators to convince local lords to subject to Spanish rule, usually in return for their own freedom. The indigenous rulers often accepted Spanish rule only to prevent further bloodshed. The indigenous communities of Guatemala also sent military units with the Spaniards to participate in their campaigns of conquest.56 With regard to Pedro de Alvarado’s 1524 conquest expedition to Guatemala, a Spaniard stated that various indigenous lords sent their soldiers with him out of free will: “que algunos yndios de Mexico y la provincia de Tlaxcala y sus comarcas havian venido de su voluntad a ayudar a descubrir y poblar la provincia de Guatemala y se quedaron en ella” (AGCA A1.23, Leg. 1512, f. 457).57 One of the witnesses who testified in the AGI Justicia 291 document, however, indicated that the indigenous conquistadors participated in Alvarado’s campaign largely out of compulsion. He relates that at a certain point Cortés called together all the caciques and principales of the provinces of Tlaxcala and Mexico and ordered them to bring people from their villages to accompany Pedro de Alvarado to Guatemala. They seem to have had little choice. Providing soldiers for war had also been an important prehispanic tributary obligation. Perhaps the Spaniards made them promises or manipulated the communities in other ways. The witness added that many captains went with their warriors and family members and that they brought their own arms and armor and food for the Spaniards (AGI Justicia 291, f. 175r).58 In prehispanic times, alliances between communities were often consolidated through the exchange of high-ranking women. This was done in codified public rituals, with the purpose of achieving closer ties with the new lords. Women were binding links between dynasties, and they played an active role in the creation and maintenance of the city-state culture.59 Based on this tradition, the indigenous lords who allied with Cortés often gave their daughters to the conquistador. As a result, the status of the royal houses from which the princesses descended increased. Meanwhile, these alliances gave the Spaniards access to the wealth and labor paid to these families in the form of tribute (Herrera 2002). The best-known example of this practice in colonial times is no doubt the woman named Malintzin, who was given to Cortés when he arrived on the shores of Veracruz.60 Also, when the Spaniards arrived in Tlaxcala, the lords and principales of the community gave Cortés at least five princesses as a means 102

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

to secure their loyalty to him. This latter gift to Cortés is depicted in the Texas manuscript, an early Tlaxcalteca conquest pictorial (see Chapter 9). Díaz del Castillo wrote that the Tlaxcalteca lords gave their most beautiful daughters and cousins who were virgins and that the Tlaxcalteca lord Xicotencatl the elder had said: “nosotros os queremos dar nuestras hijas para que sean vuestras mujeres y hagáis generación, porque queremos teneros por hermanos, pues sois tan buenos y esforzados. Yo tengo una hija muy hermosa, e no ha sido casada, e quiérola para vos” (Díaz del Castillo 1992:207). After receiving the girls, Cortés baptized them and gave four of them to his captains Juan Velázquez de León, Cristóbal de Olid, Gonzalo de Sandoval, and Alonso de Ávila. The fifth, the daughter of Xicotencatl, was baptized Doña Luisa and given to Pedro de Alvarado. Díaz del Castillo said about the latter that “toda la mayor parte de Tlascala la acataba y le daban presentes y la tenían por su señora” (Díaz del Castillo 1992:210). Doña Luisa Xicotencatl’s ability to move easily between the indigenous and Spanish spheres allowed her to function as a two-way conduit of cultural knowledge and understanding, and her presence at Alvarado’s side may have increased the loyalty of the Tlaxcalteca allies (Herrera 2002). It is known that she accompanied Pedro de Alvarado on nearly all his campaigns and even went with him to Peru (Recinos 1986:27). Pedro de Alvarado had two children with Doña Luisa named Pedro and Leonor.61 Jorge de Alvarado married Doña Lucía Xicotencatl, Doña Luisa’s sister.62 As daughters of the Tlaxcalteca lord Xicotencatl, the two girls belonged to the highest nobility of Tizatlan, one of the four socio-political units of Tlaxcala. Thus, they were highly esteemed by the people of Tizatlan. Their presence at the Spaniards’ side may have enhanced the latter’s authority over the Tlaxcalteca of Tizatlan.63 The use of the honorific prefix “Doña” indicates that the Xicotencatl sisters continued to be highly respected in the new colonial situation (Herrera 2002). How and when Doña Lucía came to marry Jorge de Alvarado is unclear. I would not be surprised if the union between the two was established just before Jorge left for Guatemala in 1527 in an effort to secure the cooperation of Tlaxcalteca conquistadors in this new campaign of conquest. The sources do not mention whether the lords of Quauhquechollan also gave their daughters to Cortés or to the Alvarado brothers. The Tlaxcalteca noblewomen Doña Luisa and Doña Lucía were essential to the military victories of the Alvarado brothers, and they were clearly the indigenous noblewomen with whom the Spaniards were most closely involved. It is not unthinkable that during both Pedro de Alvarado’s 1524 campaign and Jorge de Alvarado’s 1527 campaign, these women also took care of some of the communication between the Spaniards and the indigenous units of the army.64 The women given to the Spaniards secured the loyalty of the indigenous conquistadors and protected the Spaniards against bellicose actions of their new allies. Moreover, they served as valuable interpreters and advisers to the Spaniards 103

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

and also as concubines. They were crucial bridges between the indigenous and Spanish spheres (Herrera 2002; Seed 1995:69–71). Like the indigenous peoples of Mexico, the indigenous peoples of Guatemala also provided women to the Spanish conquistadors. The relationships between the Spanish conquistadors and indigenous women from Guatemala, however, seem to have been established with different goals than those of the relationships between Spaniards and Central Mexican women. Whether this was the result of a different indigenous history of establishing alliances is unclear (Herrera 2002).

Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca Conquistadors Among the Central Mexican conquistadors who fought alongside the Spanish in Guatemala were large units from Tlaxcala and Quauhquechollan. The Spanish-Tlaxcalteca alliance was established in 1519 and has been well studied.65 Initially, this alliance was based primarily on the traditional enmity between the Tlaxcalteca and the Mexica of Tenochtitlan (see Chapter 3). The Tlaxcalteca played an important role in the 1519–1521 campaigns into Central Mexico and the overthrow of the Mexica Empire. Later, many Tlaxcalteca also participated in Jorge de Alvarado’s 1527 campaign into Guatemala. One of the Tlaxcalteca conquistadors wrote: yo el mas pobre y mas humilde vasallo de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] hijo que fui de un cacique llamado por su prop[r]io nombre Acxotecatl y por nombre de pila cristoval el qual fue de tlaxcala con todo su poder y voluntad en servi[ci]o de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] en dar favor y ayuda al marques del valle don her[nan]do cortes para conquistar la ciudad de mexico / el qual despues de tomada hizo hazer gente de tlaxcala para conquistar la provy[nci]a de guatimala y en esta conq[uis]ta fue por capitan jorge dalvarado y en esta sazon mi padre me hizo yr con el a la dicha conquista siendo maçuelo en servi[çi]o de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] con gente de guerra y armas / y mandome de toda su voluntad que bolviendo yo / con vict[ori]a plaziendo a dios me hazia suceder en su estado y cargo de cacicazgo despues de sus dias con todos los vasallos que tenia a cargo y aziendas suyas / y de todo esto es muy bien sabidor el marques del valle y don p[edr]o dalvarado adelantado / el qual fue por capitan general a la conquista de guatimala y jorge de alvarado me hizo grandes promesas y offertas de buen tra[ta]my[ent]o y agradescimy[ent]o de todo lo q[ua]l ninguna cosa se cumplio. (AGI Guatemala 52, Francisco, natural de Tlaxcala a Carlos V [Guatemala, 15 de marzo 1547], f. 75r.)

The Spanish-Tlaxcalteca alliance lasted well into the eighteenth century and proved advantageous for both groups. The Tlaxcalteca enjoyed a range of privileges, allowing them to remain relatively independent, both politically and economically, in comparison to many other indigenous communities. The community of Tlaxcala, for example, was never placed under an encomendero.

104

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

Instead, it became an independent municipality and parish (Kranz 2001:133). The Spaniards, in turn, were provided with a core group of loyal allies in their campaigns of conquest throughout the rest of Mesoamerica and in northern New Spain. Over the years the Tlaxcalteca cooperated with the Spaniards in several capacities: (1) as fellow conquistadors in the many battles waged under the Spanish banner; (2) as citizens forming the base of the new colony, securing Spanish authority in newly conquered areas; (3) as teachers of and examples for later conquered peoples; (4) as individual assistants to and servants of Spanish explorers and friars; and (5) as free laborers in the new mining regions (Simmons 1964:102). The Spanish-Quauhquecholteca alliance, on the other hand, has barely been studied. References to the Quauhquecholteca role in the conquest of Mesoamerica are rare. They are sufficient, however, to establish that caciques and considerable numbers of soldiers from Quauhquechollan and its surrounding villages left their homelands to fight alongside the Spaniards. The Quauhquecholteca became allies of the Spaniards in 1520, not long after the Spanish-Tlaxcalteca alliance had been established. As stated in Chapter 3, the Quauhquecholteca took part in the conquests of the Mexica Empire and of the Chichimec region in the north, and there are also references to their participation in the conquest of Guatemala.66 The bulk of the Quauhquecholteca traveled to Guatemala in 1527 to fight under the banner of Jorge de Alvarado. As a witness who speaks in the AGI Justicia 291 document testified, people from many places in Central Mexico had come to Guatemala with Pedro de Alvarado, “eçepto los de la provinçia de guacachula [Quauhquechollan] que vinyeron con jorge de alvarado” (AGI Justicia 291, f. 55v). Likewise, in Pedro González Nájera’s probanza (1564), a witness from Quauhquechollan testified that he, together with other captains from Tlaxcala and Quauhquechollan, had participated in the Spanish conquest of New Spain “quando la pacifico el capitan general jorge de alvarado por ausencia del adelantado su senyor que avia ido a espanya la primera vez” (AGI Patronato 66-1-3).67 And Díaz del Castillo wrote: “[Pedro de Alvarado] enbió a Jorxe de Alvarado por su capitán a la paçificación de Guatimala, y quando el Jorxe de Alvarado vino truxo de camino consigo sobre dozientos indios de Tlascala, y de Cholula, y de mexicanos, y de Guacachula, y de otras provinçias, y le ayudaron en las guerras” (Díaz del Castillo 1992:574 [Ch. CXCIII]). It is not surprising to find that Jorge de Alvarado brought so many Quauh­ que­chol­teca conquistadors with him. After all, he had Quauhque­­cho­llan in encomienda (see Chapter 3; see also Gerhard 1986:57; Paredes Martínez 1991:52). In a 1535 letter to Viceroy Antonio de Mendoza, the then-lords of Quauh­ quechollan referred to their role as loyal allies of the Spaniards by writing that 105

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

they were “caçiques señores e principales del pueblo de guacachula desendientes de los prinçipes e señores desa tierra y que en compañia de los demas caçiquez ayudaron a los españoles a conquistar y pacificar mucha parte della [Nueva España] con harcos e flechas resi[s]tiendo terribles guerras entre los barvaros e infieles a costa de muchissimos travajos poniendo en riesgo y peligro sus vidas” (AGN Tierras, Vol. 2683, Exp. 4, f. 164 [fs. 3r, 3v]). From the same letter, it appears that Quauhquechollan received certain privileges and exemptions in return for these services. Among these privileges was protection of its lands (see Appendix 1).

1529–1544 Jorge de Alvarado and his indigenous allies subjected most of what is now Guatemala to Spanish rule; however, the situation in Guatemala remained unstable. The 1530s and 1540s were characterized by many shifts of power. After Jorge de Alvarado’s departure to Mexico in 1529, Orduña served as judge and captaingeneral of Guatemala for eight months, until April 11, 1530. During this time he led several campaigns of conquest and distributed encomiendas. Reports of his activities are contradictory and often negative. The Audiencia of Mexico had instructed Orduña to search for mines and to make sure that wheat and other Spanish crops were sown and harvested (AGI Patronato 73-1-2).68 His main concern, however, seems to have been with the mines and undermining the Alvarado brothers’ power. Although he did extend to Guatemala certain ordinances concerning the protection of indigenous peoples, he does not appear to have been a great protector of indigenous rights (Kramer 1994:85–99). Orduña’s hostility toward the Alvarados intensified the dissension between those who supported them and their enemies, and the latter became more outspoken in their attacks. Orduña also contested the legitimacy of Jorge’s power as lieutenant governor, and in November 1529 he issued a decree that all of Jorge’s acts after May 1529 be considered null and void. During Orduña’s governorship, records of events were kept more systematically. As a result, much more has been written about the campaigns of conquest that took place under his rule than about Jorge’s campaigns (Kramer 1994:88). In September 1529, Juan Pérez Dardón led an expedition to Jumaytepeque, Petapa, and other communities that had (again) rebelled. In December of that year a campaign was undertaken to Uspantlan, Tecolotlan (Verapaz), and Tequipan Poyumatlan or Tianguisteca (present-day Santa Eulalia) by way of Cochumatlan (present-day Todos Santos Cuchumatan). Documentary evidence indicates that Orduña participated in this expedition and a later one to Cuscatlán, although some historians ignore that evidence (Kramer 1994:90–93). In April 1530, Pedro de Alvarado was released by the Audiencia of Mexico, and he returned to Guatemala with a large group of Spaniards who had come 106

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

with him from Spain. Among them was Francisco Marroquín, the future first Bishop of Guatemala. Shortly after their arrival in Santiago, Orduña returned to Mexico. According to witnesses, Pedro de Alvarado had managed to stop Orduña’s residencia on its way to the Audiencia of Mexico and had destroyed some copies of it.69 The contents can only be speculated upon. Meanwhile, another residencia was carried out in Mexico.70 Regardless of the findings of the two residencias, Pedro’s powers as governor and captain-general remained intact. He even carried new titles (those of “don” and “adelantado”) conferred on him by the Crown. Alerted to the riches discovered by Francisco Pizarro, he soon decided that his next objective was to undertake an expedition to Peru (Kramer 1994:93). In May 1530, the Kaqchikel lords Sinacan and Sequechul, who had been hiding in the woods and mountains for six years, came down to Iztapan (now San Andrés Izapa in the department of Chimaltenango) and to Panchoy (presentday Antigua Guatemala) and surrendered to Pedro de Alvarado (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:188–189). With their surrender, the Kaqchikel rebellion ended. The tribute imposed on the Kaqchikel was very demanding: they paid, among other things, 400 men and 400 women to labor in Santiago and another 400 men and 400 women to wash gold (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:189). The subsequent three years were dominated by the search for, and exploitation of, mines and the need to finance a fleet for Pedro de Alvarado’s expedition to Peru. From the Glasgow manuscript and other sources, it is known that the Spaniards used indigenous allies and slaves to carry parts of boats overland from one coast to the other, including anchors weighing, according to Las Casas, seventy or eighty pounds each. The Dominican friar testified that when he was in Guatemala in the late 1520s, he saw indigenous allies loaded with artillery, suffering along the roads. He added that many died carrying the heavy loads or during the reconstruction of the boats on the other side (Mackie 1924:133). Various Spaniards lost their encomiendas, and the indigenous population of Guatemala was heavily abused. New rebellions came. It is known that during this period, Jorge de Bocanegra led a campaign to Jilotepeque, Chiquimula, and Acazaguastlan. In 1530 Diego de Alvarado led an expedition to Tecolotlan (Verapaz), where the towns of Tequicistlan (Rab’inal), Cobán, and Tactique had rebelled.71 The Spaniards founded a city in this area (San Jorge), which existed for one year. When the call came to set out for Peru, the Spaniards left the area. Within a few years, Pedro de Alvarado had managed to devastate the country and its inhabitants. In a letter to the Crown dated 1531, the contador (accountant) Zurrilla commented that when he arrived in the country that year, the land was “ruined and poor” and nobody wanted to live there. A few weeks later, Zurrilla and the treasurer, Francisco de Castellanos, both previously on Alvarado’s side, wrote a letter to the Crown complaining about their governor’s conduct. They wrote that Alvarado had taken for himself more 107

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

than half of the encomiendas previously held by other Spaniards, that he put his own relatives and friends in every powerful position, and that no one dared to complain to the Audiencia of Mexico because they feared repercussions (Kramer 105–107). In 1533, Pedro granted Jorge the encomiendas of Tecpan Atitlan, Totonicapan, and Pochutla. The terms were: por virtud de los d[ic]hos títulos el d[ic]ho jorge de [5v] alvarado se sirvio de todos los pueblos e llevando los frutos e tributos e aprobechamientos de ellos en esta manera que quando el d[ic]ho jorge de alvarado residio en la d[ic]ha provinçia [Guatemala] se sirvia de los d[ic]hos pueblos y venido el d[ic]ho jorge de alvarado a esta çiudad de mexico el adelantado don pedro de alvarado llevaba los tributos de los d[ic]hos pueblos e se sirvia dellos por razon que el d[ic]ho jorge de alvarado quando residia en esta nueva españa se sirvia y llevaba los tributos de suchimilco y yçucar y chietla pueblos que estavan encomendados al d[ic]ho don pedro de alvarado y esto fue hasta . . . que el d[ic]ho jorge de alvarado falesçio. (AGI Justicia 199, N.1, R.2)72

When Pedro de Alvarado left for Peru in 1534, Jorge was called upon again to take over his brother’s post. At that time Pedro informed both Jorge and the cabildo that he intended to ask the Crown to have Jorge replace him as governor. A representative was sent to Spain to plead for his election. Among the documents he brought to the king was a letter written by Jorge, dated February 26, 1534 (see Appendix 7). In this letter, Jorge brought to the king’s attention his services of 1527–1529. He narrated how he had left the peace and quiet of his home in Mexico in 1527 to travel all the way to Guatemala to serve the king. He emphasized that all his services had been undertaken at his own expense and that he had provided munitions and other supplies for himself and for the other conquistadors. He stated that when he arrived in Guatemala in 1527, the country was still at war and that he had worked very hard for its pacification during three years of continual warfare. He commented on the founding of the city of Santiago and related that he had granted encomiendas to the conquerors who had fought at his side. He wrote that when Pedro returned from Spain, the country was at peace and the conquistadors were satisfied. Nonetheless, he added, he had been given no recompense for his services. He claimed that because of his indispensable role in the pacification of the area, he believed he deserved the same rights as his brother (AGI Guatemala 41). It seems, however, that his plea was not answered (Kramer 1994:121). In late 1534, Jorge put down rebellions in the western highlands around Sacapulas and Uspantlan. Towns involved in these uprisings included Aguacatan, Comitlan, Ilom, Cerquil, and Uspantlan. It is known that Jorge punished the indigenous peoples who participated in these uprisings by “killing them, throwing them to the dogs, hanging them, and throwing them into pits.”73 During this year, he again distributed encomiendas (Kramer 1994:122, 124–125). 108

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

Pedro de Alvarado’s expedition to Peru, meanwhile, had ended in disaster. Alvarado returned to Santiago de Guatemala in April 1535. Jorge went back to Mexico. Just before he left, Pedro granted him the encomiendas of Tequicistlan (Rab’inal) and half of Atitlan. During his times in Guatemala, Jorge is known to have held these communities in encomienda: Quetzaltenango, Tecpan Atitlan, Totonicapan, Pochutla, (half of ) Atitlan (see AGI Justicia 199, N.1, R.2, fs. 23r–23v), Chichicastenango (AGI Justicia 1031), and Tequicistlan (see Appendix 8) (Kramer 1994:75, 122–123, 125, 127). Meanwhile, in Mexico he had been granted Quauhquechollan, Tepapayecan, half of Guazpaltepeque, Suchimilco, Ytzucan, and Chietla.74 Jorge never established a household in Guatemala, and he eventually died in Spain in 1540 or 1541 (Himmerich y Valencia 1991:119). After April 1535, Pedro de Alvarado was again in charge. In that period, the Audiencia of Mexico sent Alonso de Maldonado to Guatemala to carry out a tasación (a measure designed to fix once and for all the amounts of tribute and services encomenderos could receive from their towns). Alvarado did not cooperate (Kramer 1994:128–129). Maldonado returned to Mexico but was again sent to Guatemala to investigate Alvarado’s activities and conduct. The latter, obviously with a guilty conscience, did not wait for Maldonado’s return and left for Honduras. There he conquered “los de Tzutzum Pan y Choloma” (jurisdiction of San Pedro Sula) (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:189). In May 1536, Pedro de Alvarado took charge of the government of Honduras. It is known that at some point he had sent Hernández de Yllescas to Mexico to gather Spaniards for the conquest of Honduras. It was undoubtedly for this occasion. Yllescas had returned not only with Spaniards but also with approximately 600 Tlaxcalteca allies (AGI Patronato 62-1 [3]).75 When Pedro de Alvarado was called upon to undergo his residencia, he was unwilling to return to Guatemala and appointed Rodrigo de Sandoval to represent him. Jorge was likewise unwilling to return to Guatemala for his and also appointed an attorney, Alvaro de Paz. Maldonado’s residencia (1535) survived, and it confirms the facts described in the letters of Zurrilla and Castellanos. The witnesses who speak in the document testified to the Alvarados’ selfish and arrogant behavior in the early 1530s, the unfair distribution of encomiendas, and the exploitation of the indigenous population. They also reported that the Alvarado brothers burned many lords to frighten the indigenous peoples into serving them (AGI Justicia 295, fs. 72v, 117v, 197r–197v). In August 1536, Pedro left Honduras and went to Spain. During the next three years, Maldonado served as governor of Guatemala. In 1536 the Dominican friar Bartolomé de las Casas arrived in Guatemala and relentlessly attacked the conduct of the Spanish encomenderos and conquistadors. The Dominicans proposed nonmilitary pacification of the province of Tecolotlan, which had been abandoned by the Spaniards in the early 1530s (discussed earlier) and was at the 109

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

time still “tierra de guerra.” Maldonado declared himself in favor of the project, and it was agreed that the Dominicans were to be granted complete freedom for a period of five years to carry out this pacification. In the early 1540s, however, Las Casas left for Spain, and the project was postponed for several years.76 As a result of the Dominicans’ influence and his good relationship with Maldonado, the role of Bishop Marroquín also became more significant in this period. During his government, Maldonado set out to conquer the Lacandón area, which was still at war in 1539. This expedition was cut short by Pedro de Alvarado’s return in September 1539 (Kramer 1994:136–141). It seems that during the three years under Maldonado, the country had become much more peaceful. The Kaqchikel wrote: En el transcurso de este año, el día 11 No’j [May 16, 1536] vino el Señor Presidente Mantunalo [Maldonado]. Fue entonces el Señor Mantunalo quien vino a aliviar los sufrimientos de la gente. Luego cesó el lavado de oro, cesó la tributación de muchachas y muchachos. Pronto cesaron también de quemar vivas y de ahorcar a las personas. Cesaron los asaltos con ocasión del robo que perpetraban los castellanos en los caminos y calles, anteriormente asaltaban y robaban en los caminos, pronto los caminos se vieron libres y frecuentados por la gente. Habían transcurrido ocho años desde que se principiaron a pagar los tributos, cuando vino el Señor Mantunalo ¡oh hijos míos! (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:189)

In 1538, in spite of the findings of Maldonado’s residencia, the Crown granted Alvarado full powers as governor for at least another seven-year period (Kramer 1994:152). Back in Guatemala, Alvarado hanged the Sotz’il king Kaji’ Imox, who had been a prisoner of the Spaniards for many years, and probably also the K’iche’ lord Tepepul (Akkeren 2003; Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:190). At the time, many of the indigenous peoples of Guatemala still remained in the mountains and forests, where they had hidden to escape from the Spaniards. The Spaniards tried to get them down by, among other things, promising them one year of exemption from tribute payments and personal services if they would surrender voluntarily (AGCA A1.23, Leg. 4575, f. 51).77 In September 1540, Pedro de Alvarado set sail for an expedition to the South Seas with a new armada, the construction of which had again cost many indigenous lives and resources. Meanwhile, he left his wife’s cousin, Don Francisco de la Cueva, who had come with him from Spain, in charge of the government. En route to the South Seas, on July 4, 1541, Alvarado died in Guadalajara, Mexico (Kramer 1994:154). After his death his wife, Doña Beatriz, was named gobernadora of Guatemala. She immediately passed her governing powers to Francisco de la Cueva, whom she appointed lieutenant governor. Two days later, on September 11, 1541, Doña Beatriz was killed when the city of Santiago at Almolonga was destroyed by a mudflow that came down from the Volcán de

110

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

Agua. The mudflow—caused by three days of continuous rainfall, possibly in combination with an earthquake—buried parts of this city once proudly founded by Jorge de Alvarado. It killed more than 100 Spaniards, 600 indigenous slaves, and a number of African slaves (Lutz 1984:40–41, 90). Doña Leonor, Alvarado’s daughter and heir and one of the most influential people in Guatemala at the time, survived. Francisco de la Cueva married her. Through this marriage he acquired much power and wealth and was soon named co-governor with Bishop Marroquín. The two held power until May 1542. Then Maldonado, who had gone back to Mexico after Pedro de Alvarado’s return in 1539, again traveled to Guatemala (Kramer 1994:151, 160–167, 178). Meanwhile, a new city of Santiago was built in the Valley of Panchoy (modern Antigua Guatemala), and Francisco de la Cueva and Bishop Marroquín continued the (re)distribution of encomiendas. In 1542 the Audiencia of Mexico sent Maldonado to Guatemala to revoke the two men’s repartimiento. Maldonado was elected governor of Guatemala and Honduras and took over the government for the next six years. The new city of Santiago at Panchoy was formally established in May 1543 (Kramer 1994:180–183). There is little evidence that Maldonado enforced the Audiencia’s decree as intended, and it appears instead that he exercised his discretion to benefit his own interests. Until 1544, when all of Pedro de Alvarado’s encomiendas reverted to the Crown, they remained in the hands of the co-governors’ grantees, except for those taken personally by Maldonado (Kramer 1994:183–186). In November 1542, the New Laws of the Indies were established, the purpose of which was to make the indigenous peoples direct vassals of the Crown. Although the laws did not specify the abolition of the encomienda system, they ruled that henceforth no encomiendas were to pass to an heir and that when an encomendero died, his communities were to be transferred to the Crown. This clause was fiercely resisted by many encomenderos. Another clause ordered the establishment of a new Audiencia, the Audiencia de los Confines de Guatemala y Nicaragua.78 This Audiencia was officially established in Gracias a Dios (Honduras) on May 14, 1544, and implied the end of the reign of captains-governor and the beginning of the actual implementation of the New Laws. Under President Maldonado’s leadership, however, the new Audiencia still ignored almost all of the new legislation, especially the parts that pertained to the encomienda system. Maldonado had some of the largest and most lucrative encomiendas, and he clearly did not intend to let go of them. He remained in charge of the government of Guatemala until the first Audiencia’s judicial review in 1548 (Kramer 1994:186–200; MacLeod 1973; Sherman 1979). Throughout the sixteenth century, institutions such as the encomienda had provided the basis of riches for the colonial elite, and the tribute and labor of indigenous peoples had formed the basis of the colonial economy. The lack of mineral wealth, however, had contributed to keeping the Spanish population 111

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

in Guatemala relatively small. Even in the late sixteenth century, the Spanish population consisted of only around 500 citizens and residents (Markman 1993:110–111; Serrano y Sanz 1908:465). The area held significant political importance, though, mainly through the city of Santiago de Guatemala. At the time, Santiago served as the Spanish capital of Central America and hosted the Audiencia until the late eighteenth century. It was situated along the main routes from north to south, and many passed through it for trade purposes or to tend to legal issues. As such, the city held political and economic prominence. Guatemala had a heterogeneous population that included the descendants of the indigenous peoples of Guatemala, Central Mexican conquistadors, African slaves, and European conquistadors and settlers (Herrera 2002). Throughout the Early Colonial period, both Spanish and Nahuatl served as lingua franca in this area (Matthew 2000).

Situation of the Former Conquistadors in the Decades Following the Conquest Most Central Mexican conquistadors did not survive the first years of the conquest of Guatemala. The high death rate among the indigenous allies was caused not only by the often ferocious battles but also by European diseases, malnutrition, and bad living circumstances. Throughout the 1520s and 1530s, most conquistadors suffered under the brutal labor regime of the Spaniards, and many died. Of the thousands of indigenous conquistadors who had come from Tlaxcala and Mexico, only around a hundred people survived this period. As mentioned earlier, the Xochimilca declared to the king that they had sent 2,500 of their men with Pedro de Alvarado and that none survived.79 Yet in 1774 in Almolonga there was a parcialidad named Chinampa, perhaps indicating that some Xochimilca warriors who had come from Chinampa, Mexico, had survived into the late eighteenth century (Lutz 1984:110, note 27). There is little doubt that had the Franciscans and Dominicans not protected the indigenous conquistadors, their situation would have been even worse (AGI Guatemala 52).80 Some of the surviving conquistadors were sent back to Mexico. Most, however, settled in the newly conquered area. Often they had no means or money to return to their homelands. Some were forced by the Spaniards to stay, while others stayed out of free will.81 They usually settled near indigenous or Spanish settlements and continued serving the latter by performing manual labor, helping with construction of buildings, and performing services in the maintenance of Spanish households. There are several references to a colony of Central Mexican conquistadors who settled near Totonicapan. One is a document presently known as the Título de Caciques, composed in 1544 by a group of K’iche’ lords.82 In this document, the lords mention that a group of Mexican caciques lived in San Miguel 112

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

Totonicapan who, according to their knowledge, came from Tlaxcala, Cholula, Uzmatla, and Ayutla. These caciques had come with the Spaniards to conquer Guatemala, and when the rest of the army moved on, they remained in Totonicapan—together with Juan de León Cardona, a Spanish conquistador, and some Spanish friars. The K’iche’ lords explain that the Mexicans stayed voluntarily to keep an eye on the local population and convert them to Christianity (Carmack and Mondloch 1989:212). The names of the caciques are listed in the document. Most had Spanish family names, a few had Nahuatl names, and some had a K’iche’ second family name.83 The K’iche’ names were presumably the result of marriages. Fuentes y Guzmán wrote that the caciques tried to keep their lineage “pure” by marrying only women from the K’iche’ nobility. Nonetheless, the chronicler added, in spite of their nobility they lived in poverty and misery (Fuentes y Guzmán 1932:8, 33, 47–48). Other references to the Central Mexican caciques in Totonicapan indicate that they remained a rather closed group who kept their own customs and traditions. The majority married within the group, which they referred to as calpul, from the Nahua calpolli, or “lordly house” (see Chapter 3). The children of those who married outside the group no longer belonged to the calpul. Eventually, the calpul took the name of three of the principal Central Mexican lineages present in Totonicapan: García, Ávila, and Mendoza. A document dated 1797 indicates that at the time, there were caciques who claimed to be descendants of the caciques mentioned in the Título de Caciques.84 In 1983, Robert Carmack and James Mondloch found a group of descendants of these caciques still living in a separate parcialidad (section of a town) in the cantón of Panquix at Totonicapan.85 A variety of settlements can be identified in Mesoamerica that contained the main centers of Mexican population in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The best known are Totonicapan, the barrios of San Francisco and Santo Domingo in the city of Santiago in the Panchoy Valley (now Antigua Guatemala), and Almolonga (now Ciudad Vieja), in present-day Guatemala; Sonsonate, San Salvador, and San Miguel in modern El Salvador; and Ciudad Real (Chiapas) and Antequera (Oaxaca) in modern Mexico (Matthew 2000). The indigenous conquistadors normally settled together in barrios named after their hometowns. In sixteenth-century Northern Mexico, for example, Tlaxcalteca allies had founded a parish named Tlaxcalilla in San Luis Potosí, and other Tlaxcalteca lived together in a pueblo named San Estéban de Nueva Tlascala, located on the western outskirts of the Spanish town of Saltillo. Similar Tlaxcalteca towns were located along the northeastern rim of the viceroyalty, such as San Miguel de Aguayo, Bustamente, and Nuevo León (Butzer 2001). Another Tlaxcalteca residential area in the north was San Francisco de los Tlascaltecas, near present-day Monclova (Simmons 1964:103–105). Also, there is a Barrio de Analco in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Similar Central Mexican barrios were 113

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

founded in Oaxaca. Nahuas who had assisted Pedro de Alvarado and Francisco de Orozco in conquering this area (estimated at 4,000), for example, settled in and around Antequera, Jalatlaco, and Santo Tomás Xochimilco. It is known that San Martín Mexicapan maintained separate status from other communities and was divided into barrios representing various Central Mexican altepetl (Sousa and Terraciano 2003:353–354). In Guatemala, most Central Mexican conquistadors, among whom were many Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca, settled in the city of Santiago at Almolonga (AGI Guatemala 52).86 The AGI Justicia 291 document reports: “e despues de conquistada e ganada esta tierra los d[ic]hos yndios conquistadores de la nueva españa muchos dellos se quedaron poblados en la çiudad bieja de almolonga ques çerca de guatimala donde agora estan y biven ellos e sus hijos y desçcendientes” (AGI Justicia 291, f. 247r). And Fuentes y Guzmán wrote: “Atmulunga [Almolonga] con título de Ciudad Vieja . . . , de llegar hasta aquella parte lo material de la ciudad poblado de indios extranjeros de Tlaxcala, Mexico y Cholula, que estuvieron siempre allí, como ya se dijo en aquel sitio, como barrio o frontera de la antigua ciudad” (Fuentes y Guzmán 1932:56). A document dated 1774 reports that there were nine barrios in the city of Santiago at Almolonga, named Tascala, Cholula, Teguantepeque, Otumpa, Chinampa, Tenustitlan, Quahquechula, Tatelulco, and Tescuco. These names indicate that people from the Mexican towns with the same names had settled there, among whom were people from Tlaxcala and Quauhquechollan. The writer of the document referred to the inhabitants of these barrrios as “yndios y ladinos” (AGCA A1, Leg. 73, Exp. 1720, fs. 8, 19).87 The nine barrios persisted at least until the nineteenth century, providing the organizing principle for several communities (Matthew 2004). These Central Mexican conquistadors had likely settled in the town when it was founded by Jorge de Alvarado in 1527. The 1760–1783 Libro de Casamientos of Almolonga mentions the names of some of the inhabitants of these Central Mexican barrios. Among them are also the names of men and women from the barrio Quahquechula who wed during that period.88 There are indeed references to the presence of Central Mexican conquistadors when the city of Santiago at Almolonga was founded and to the fact that some settled near this site in 1527.89 The AGI Justicia 291 document contains the testimonies of both former conquistadors who lived in barrios in Almolonga and those who lived in the city of Santiago in the Panchoy Valley. Some of the Central Mexican conquistadors who continued to live in Guatemala enjoyed certain privileges in recognition of their service to the Spaniards. The Título de Caciques records the privileges granted to the Mexican caciques of Totonicapan. In return for their loyal service in the conquest of Guatemala, the caciques were granted these privileges: (1) they enjoyed the use of two insignias, one of which was the double-headed Habsburg eagle (see Chapters 7 and 9); (2) they did not have to provide any services to either the village or the church; 114

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

(3) they were allowed to use horses and guns during the conquest; (4) at least one group of caciques, the Usmatecat, had the right to be merchants; and (5) those who treated them badly would be punished (Carmack and Mondloch 1989:212–213, 218–219). It is also known that some of the Central Mexican conquistadors were given land and encomiendas. In the earliest years, several small towns and parcels of land for cultivation located outside the city of Santiago at Almolonga were granted to the former conquistadors collectively (AGI Guatemala 168; AGCA A1.23, Leg. 4575, f. 48).90 A document dated 1538 reported that the “indios mexicanos y tlaxcaltecas” who had assisted in the Spanish conquest were not given in encomienda and that the district council of the city of Santiago “les ha dado y da solares y tierras junto a ella para sus casas y labranzas.” In return, they were to provide certain public works (AGCA A1.23, Leg. 4575, f. 48). The Central Mexican caciques who settled in Totonicapan were also given land there (AGCA A1, Leg. 6047, Exp. 53.386).91 Pedro de Alvarado had granted the Tlaxcalteca captain Juan de Tascala half of the town of Citala or Zinquinalá in encomienda (AGI Justicia 296, fs. 80v, 87r; Matthew 2004:92). Antonio de Remesal wrote that in 1557, during a celebration in the city of Santiago, the “indios mexicanos” who lived in Almolonga appeared nicely dressed and with many feathers and that they participated in a parade presenting themselves as the ones who had helped conquer the lands.92 He added that they received respect for this, that they had privileges and freedoms others did not have, and that they were exempted from paying tribute (Remesal 1964 I:99; Sherman 1970:136). Although the information on the privileges granted to the Central Mexican conquistadors is limited and fragmented, certain privileges and tribute exemptions clearly were granted. In the second half of the sixteenth century, however, more information is available in the form of many reports sent to the king which indicate that, if granted, these rights were by no means secure and often lasted only a few decades. It seems that the Crown decreed protection for the indigenous conquistadors and their descendants but that the Spaniards who lived in Guatemala tended to ignored their rights. Even when exempted from tribute obligations by cédula, the order was not always enforced.93 Many times, the Spaniards tried to convince the Crown to have the indigenous former conquistadors perform manual labor and other services for their own benefit, and they came up with a variety of reasons to undermine the rights granted to the conquistadors. The three main issues of discussion at the time were (1) fraudulent claims of outsiders who had settled among the former conquistadors (discussed later), (2) the controversy over whether the descendants of the indigenous conquistadors should receive the same privileges as their fathers, and (3) the question as to whether the indigenous people who had served in the conquest not as warriors but as servants and tamemes should receive the same considerations 115

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

as the soldiers. Some claims were heard, while others received little sympathy (Sherman 1970). Several archival documents mention that in the 1530s, the former conquistadors who lived near the city of Santiago were joined by other Mexicans and by people from Guatemala (Sherman 1970:126). Some let their families immigrate from Mexico, and they started marrying local people more frequently. The regi­ dores of various cabildos in Guatemala claimed the main reason the others settled with the former conquistadors was primarily to be associated with them, hoping they would receive some of their special privileges and exemption of tribute as well. The members of the Audiencia wrote to the king in 1552: “Por otra cédula Real dize V. Mt. que es ynformado de que ay grand cantidad de mexicanos en esta prouincia y q con ellos se juntan otros muchos yndios por no tributar y se haze holgazanes y biçios y que conbernia que se diese horden como tributan que aca lo probeamos como mas conbenga platicar sea sobre ello y avisaremos a V. Mt. de lo q çerca dello hizieremos” (AGI Guatemala 9 [Guatemala, December 6, 1554], in Sherman 1970:134). Several Spaniards wrote to the king complaining that although they had always treated their indigenous allies well during the conquest, the privileged groups, both the former conquistadors and the newcomers, had started to behave arrogantly and rebelliously. The Spaniards accused them of stealing, gambling, killing cattle, scandalizing the indigenous peoples of Guatemala, and harming the Spaniards. One Spaniard even suggested they be forbidden to live among the local population (AGI Patronato 231, R. 4). The Spaniards used these arguments in their requests to the Crown to have the groups deprived of their privileges and to require that they perform manual labor in the construction and repair of public works (Sherman 1970:125–127). Documents written on behalf of the Central Mexicans in Guatemala, however, present a different story. The indigenous conquistadors related to the king that they had been forced against their will to leave their families, homes, and lands to participate in the conquest of Guatemala under the command of the ruthless and violent Alvarado brothers. In contradiction to the Spanish letters, they claimed that during the conquest they were treated very badly by the Spaniards. They said they suffered from excessive labor demands and from hunger, thirst, and pestilence. After the conquest, they related, they were all made slaves and tributaries of the Spanish conquistadors, including the caciques, and subjected to overwork and abuses from their Spanish masters. They claimed the Spaniards had made them great promises but that those promises were never realized.94 Obviously, one must allow for some exaggeration in these reports. Both the Spaniards and the indigenous conquistadors had their own interests. Also, the situation may have varied in different places. The data presented here indicate that it is beyond doubt that some communities of indigenous conquistadors 116

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

were indeed granted privileges. The fact that it was attractive for other indigenous communities to be associated with the indigenous conquistadors also points to a privileged position. The most common privileges granted were the exemption from the burdens of tribute payment and manual labor. Another frequently granted privilege was the use of the Habsburg coat of arms (see also Chapter 9). Also, some of the indigenous conquistadors had been allowed to settle near Franciscan schools, where the children of indigenous nobles were educated. The Franciscans taught them the Castilian language, which enhanced their elevated status.95 Most indigenous conquistadors seem to have been exempted from tribute payment and manual labor at least until the 1550s. A document dated 1532, for example, stated that those from Tlaxcala and Cholula who fought with Pedro de Alvarado were not to be employed in public works, as was proposed by a district council in the city of Santiago (AGCA A1.2–4, Leg. 2197, Exp. 15.752, f. 12). The same document ruled that the rights and privileges of the indigenous allies should be defended. Likewise, a document from 1543 stated that the indigenous conquistadors were to be exempted from the burdens of paying tribute and providing personal services to the Spaniards, and a 1546 letter indicated that the indigenous tamemes who served in the conquest were also exempted from paying tribute (AGCA A1.23, Leg. 4575, fs. 64v, 84v).96 Nonetheless, many indigenous conquistadors ended up living in miserable circumstances, and not all were given the same privileges. Several Spanish friars confirmed the sad circumstances in which some Tlaxcalteca lived in Guatemala. Among those friars was Fray Francisco de la Parra, who wrote a letter to the king in which he described that they were treated not like men but like “brute animals.” He said that in spite of their valuable contribution and many sacrifices during the Spanish conquest of Guatemala, they had been given no reward. He asked the king for mercy, stating that at the time of his writing (1549), the Tlaxcalteca conquistadors were old and starving.97 In the 1550s, the status of the indigenous allies who had been granted privileges seems to have become insecure, but they were still protected by the king. A document dated 1552 requested that the Audiencia cancel the tribute exemption of the indigenous conquistadors who served in Pedro de Alvarado’s army. The writer stated that it would be more convenient if they also paid tribute. He wrote: “en esta provinçia de guatemala ay gran cantidad de yndios mexicanos los quales no contribuyen en cosa Alguna y debaxo desta color se juntan con ellos otros muchos yndios por no tributar y se hazen holgazanes y viçiosos y que demas desto lo que los tales yndios dexan de tributar carga sobre los otros yndios que tributan y convenia darse horden como tributasen” (AGCA A1.23, Leg. 4575, f. 118v). Later that year, a document was issued ruling that the Tlaxcalteca who had cooperated with Pedro de Alvarado in the conquest were not to be given in 117

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

encomienda (AGCA A1.2–4, Leg. 2195, Exp. 15.749, f. 141 [1552]). Nineteen years later, the Audiencia wrote two letters, dated September 6 and October 14, 1571, in which they asked the king whether the non-Mexican indigenous conquistadors were to be exempted from tribute payment as well. A reply, dated the next year, reveals that the king had not yet decided on the matter (AGCA A1.23, Leg. 4575, f. 329v [1572]). Other issues came up as well. On the same day the reply was written, a letter arrived at the court informing the king that “algunos negros libres o esclavos” had tried to escape paying tribute by marrying into the Mexican communities, and the issue was brought up as to whether the indigenous allies who served as tamemes in the conquest period should be considered conquistadors as well and thus receive the same privileges (AGCA A1.23, Leg. 4575, f. 329v, 361r [1572]). The subsequent year, the king ruled that he would not make any alteration to the rules concerning the given privileges (AGCA A1.2, Leg. 4575, f. 361 [1573]). By the 1570s, most of the privileges granted to the indigenous conquistadors were gradually being taken away. On December 23, 1574, the Audiencia was informed that a cédula had been issued which declared that the descendants of the former conquistadors who lived in the Valley of Guatemala should be treated equally to the rest of the indigenous population of the province, without any special privileges. If the Guatemalans were to be utilized for public work projects, then the Mexicans should be used as well (AGCA A1.23, Leg. 1513, f. 559). The same proclamation was stated in a document dated one day later (AGCA 1.23, Leg. 1512, f. 457 [December 24, 1574]). The new cédula invalidated a cédula issued earlier, on July 20, 1532, in which it was stated that the indigenous conquistadors who came with Pedro de Alvarado from Mexico were not to be given in encomienda, and neither were their descendants. The document of December 24, 1574, stated that this was no longer convenient, that the 1532 cédula was henceforth no longer valid, and that in the future the former conquistadors and their descendants would be treated the same as the rest of the indigenous population of Guatemala (AGCA 1.23, Leg. 1512, f. 457 [December 24, 1574]). In other words, the indigenous conquistadors and their descendants were being deprived of the privileges once granted to them in return for their service. It was in the 1570s that most claims defending their rights were written (see Chapter 9).98 It is possible that documents such as the Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala were used to support such claims. In the eighteenth century, some descendants of the indigenous conquistadors who lived in Guatemala were still exempted from paying tribute based on their ancestors’ military service. In 1728, for example, Mexicans who lived in Sonsonate wrote: “se presentaron con escripto y otros ynstrum[ent]os los yn[di]os del barrio de los mexicanos de d[ic]ha jurisdicción [Sonsonate], diciendo devian pozar del Pribilegio de estar esemptos a pagar tributos y servicio personal por ser decendientes de los conquistadores mexicanos sapotecas y tlaxcaltecas de la 118

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

Nueba España vinieron con los Españoles conquistadores de esa tierra” (AGCA A1.24, Leg. 1586, Exp. 10.230, f. 123r).99 While the bulk of the Central Mexican conquistadors in Guatemala struggled for their rights and better living circumstances, the Tlaxcalteca who were related to the Alvarado brothers and their descendants were treated exceptionally well by the Spaniards. Doña Luisa Xicotencatl, for example, sent a successful petition to the Crown and was granted a subvention for her service during the conquest. Doña Leonor, her daughter, also sent a document to the king in which she presented her parents’ service.100 The privileges granted to these Tlaxcalteca included, among other things, encomienda privileges (Gibson 1952:163–164). Both Doña Luisa’s and Doña Lucía’s children entered into the elite of Early Colonial Guatemala. Among this elite were other indigenous noblewomen who had participated in conquest events or who had a connection to a participant through marriage. After the conquest period, marriages were still established between indigenous noblewomen and Spaniards, as they increased the status of the indigenous princesses on the one hand and the access to tribute and wealth for the Spaniards on the other (Herrera 2002). Charles Gibson mentions a claim by inhabitants of Tlaxcala, in which they based their right to exemption from tribute payment on a promise made by Cortés. This claim was accepted by both the Audiencia of Mexico and the Crown, and the Tlaxcalteca in Mexico were exempted from tribute payment, among other privileges (Gibson 1952:159–161). Another claim by a Tlaxcalteca conquistador refers to promises and offers of good treatment by Jorge de Alvarado (AGI Guatemala 52).101 Just as the Spanish conquistadors and their descen­ dants had found out that it was most effective to present a petition to the court in person and in combination with a verbal report, so too had the indigenous conquistadors. After the conquest period, several Mexicans traveled to Madrid to present personal requests to the king. They often received an affirmative response.102 It is known that Tlaxcalteca delegations visited the king in 1527– 1530, 1534–1535 (in response to which the title of La Leal Ciudad de Tlaxcala and the Spanish coat of arms were granted), 1540, 1550(?), 1562–1564, and 1583–1585 (Gibson 1952:163–169).103 The second half of the sixteenth century was thus characterized by intense communication between both the Spanish and indigenous populations of Mesoamerica, on the one hand, and the Audiencia and the Spanish Court, on the other, and by the struggle for recompense by both Spaniards and indigenous conquistadors.104

Summary The conquest of Mesoamerica is traditionally seen as a process controlled by Spaniards. In keeping with this image, the Spanish conquest of what is now Guatemala is generally ascribed to the military genius of the Spanish conquistador 119

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

Pedro de Alvarado. Alvarado was indeed the first to lead a conquering expedition under the Spanish banner into this area, in 1524. But he conquered only a few provinces that soon afterward rebelled, and he spent most of the subsequent decade elsewhere in the Americas or in Spain. Moreover, the knowledge and manpower that realized the Spanish military successes in Guatemala were provided not by him but by others. Ascribing the conquest of Guatemala to Pedro de Alvarado perpetuates a distorted image created by historians who used a limited set of Spanish accounts. Other sources are relevant to this episode in history. First, there are the unpublished probanzas of Spanish conquistadors who participated in the conquest of Guatemala and the residencias of the Alvarado brothers. These sources provide another perspective, one in which not Pedro de Alvarado but his brother Jorge figures as the principal Spanish conqueror of the area. The actual subjection of most of the local peoples to Spanish rule appears to have been realized under Jorge de Alvarado between 1527 and 1529. There is also another corpus of sources: the claims of Central Mexican communities that had allied with the Spaniards and sent their captains, soldiers, and retinues with the Alvarado brothers. Both Pedro and Jorge de Alvarado were accompanied by thousands of Central Mexican allies. The latter guided the Spaniards into Guatemala, they provided the essentials of war such as manpower and food, and they served as tamemes, spies, planners, translators, and negotiators. The role of these indigenous allies was essential. It is beyond doubt that without their help, the Spaniards would never have achieved such great military successes in such a short period. The number of Central Mexican allies who participated in the conquest of Guatemala is unknown. The Spanish accounts provide very different numbers than the indigenous sources. In total, there must have been thousands of Central Mexican allies, perhaps even around 10,000, most of whom did not survive. The bulk of these allies, 5,000 to 6,000, arrived with Jorge de Alvarado in 1527. This migration is still referred to in local oral traditions. Other indigenous people were added to the Spanish Army on the way. Also, conquered or allied peoples of Guatemala were required to contribute captains and warriors to the Spanish Army. Both Spanish and Central Mexican conquistadors settled in Guatemala. Two effective ways to keep the conquered areas subjected were the encomienda system, which was introduced by the Spaniards, and the establishment of Central Mexican barrios in newly conquered regions. The latter helped the Spaniards keep an eye on the local population, and they assisted the Spanish friars in converting the local people to Christianity. Several such Central Mexican settlements in Guatemala are known. These barrios often persisted long into the Colonial period. The Quauhquecholteca conquistadors founded such a barrio in the city of Santiago at Almolonga. Normally, the inhabitants of the Central Mexican barrios kept their own traditions and customs and maintained their own historical record. Also, 120

The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala

a considerable amount of correspondence must have occurred between these Central Mexican colonies and the immigrants’ hometowns. The period after the conquest was a difficult one for most. Both the Spanish and Central Mexican conquistadors ended up living in poor circumstances and felt disillusioned. Moreover, for most, the privileges granted to the Central Mexican conquistadors in return for their alliances were soon taken away, and it became clear to them that European dominance was different from their expectations and from what they had experienced previously. This disillusionment resulted in a large number of claims sent to the Spanish king, peaking in the 1560s and 1570s, in which both Spanish conquistadors and indigenous communities presented evidence of their service with requests for recompense. Both the Spanish and indigenous claims were presented in established formats, and sometimes conquistadors traveled to Spain to present their case in person. Much of this correspondence is presently in the Archivo General de Centro América (Guatemala City) and the Archivo General de Indias (Seville, Spain). These documents are extremely valuable sources for achieving a better understanding of the Spanish conquest.

121

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

Conquered Conquistadors

6. Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

The story told in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is communicated through Nahua pictorial writing. To read this story, a basic knowledge of Nahua pictorial conventions is therefore required. Some of the images in the Nahua script are direct representations of the persons or objects concerned. Examples of this kind of image include horses, trees, and mountains, among others. These images are understandable to all readers with little explanation. Other images, however, are more abstract or are designed according to conventions that make their meaning less obvious to the reader, and they do need some explanation. In this chapter I discuss some of the more complex pictorial conventions used by the Quauhquecholteca tlacuiloque, focusing on those conventions that occur repeatedly in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. Most were decipherable through comparison with pictorial conventions used in other Nahua pictorial 123

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

sources. Some conventions, however, are unique to the Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan. These were understood mostly through contextualization of the story.

People The range of actors represented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan includes indigenous peoples of the Americas, Spaniards, and an African slave. These people are not identified by name glyphs or calendar names. Some are accompanied by a slip of paper that once provided their name in alphabetic writing. These glosses are no longer readable, however. Several identities can be established. 1. Conquistadors from Quauhquechollan. Conquistadors from Quauhquechollan are depicted with white skins, they have short hair, and they wear the indigenous quilted cotton armor or animal costumes and sandals. Most carry indigenous emblems, shields, and weapons, and some carry a Spanish sword. The majority of the Quauhquecholteca appear in the context of battles. Some are involved in dances. Normally, Central Mexican armies consisted of units of 400, 200, or possibly 100 soldiers, each of which had its own leader with his own insignia (Hassig 1988:56–58). The Quauhquecholteca captains depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan represent such units. These captains and their units came from the different calpolli, barrios, and subject towns of the community of Quauhquechollan. 2. Women from Quauhquechollan. The Quauhquecholteca women have white skin and long hair, sometimes tied back, and they wear huipils (indigenous blouse/dress). One is shown grinding corn, others carry various items, and yet others are present in battle scenes. 3. Quauhquecholteca merchants ( pochteca, or oztomeca). Pochteca are recognizable by a cacaxtli or another carrying device on their backs and a staff in their hands. Pochteca were involved in trade, but they also acted as spies during times of war (see Chapter 5). A similar image of pochteca with baggage and staffs can be found on folder 316r of the Codex Floren­ tino (Gruzinsky 1992:129). 4. Indigenous tamemes (bearers). The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan depicts both white- and dark-skinned indigenous tamemes. Those with white skin are Quauhquecholteca. Some walk free, while others are chained together as a group and led by a Spaniard. The chained bearers must have been slaves in service of the Spanish conquistadors. Page 57 of the Glasgow manuscript (Acuña 1982 I) shows a comparable image of indigenous tamemes. 5. Spanish conquistadors. The Spanish conquistadors have white skin, and most are bearded. They wear cotton clothes and European shoes and hats. They do not use iron armor. Most Spanish conquistadors are armed with swords or lances, some carry shields, and one uses a cannon. Yet

124

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

Figures 13 and 14. Quauhquecholteca conquistadors in battle with other Mexicans (left) and Quauhquecholteca in battle with Guatemalans (right). The Quauhquecholteca’s higher position indicates they were the victors in these battles.

Figures 15 and 16. Both figures show indigenous bearers (tamemes). The right figure includes an African man. others play musical instruments. Various Spaniards are on horseback, others are on foot. It can be presumed that many of these Spanish conquistadors are representations of Jorge de Alvarado, as he was the one under whose banner the Quauhquecholteca conquered Guatemala. 6. People of authority. Several scenes in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan depict a man seated in a chair. These seated men are dressed in Spanishstyle clothing, and they often hold a Spanish banner, a Spanish sword, or both. They are often, although not always, positioned in front of

125

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

Figures 17 and 18. Spanish conquistadors. The men in the right-hand figure are playing a trumpet and a drum.

a house. These images can be interpreted as conventions representing a local authority. Before these authorities, several kinds of action take place, such as Quauhquecholteca performing a war dance or a dance for the deceased or enemy warriors being punished. These images of men on chairs probably refer to the local Spanish authorities. It is also possible, however, that Quauhquecholteca authorities are represented in those images but are intentionally portrayed to resemble Spaniards. Images of indigenous lords in European costume are known from other Nahua pictorials. The Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan, for example, also shows a Quauhquecholteca lord portrayed to resemble a Spaniard seated on a chair. Representing indigenous lords with Spanish attributes referred to their relation to the new Spanish rulers and to an indigenous lord’s position of authority in the new colonial system (see Chapter 3). 7. One African slave. One African slave is depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. The man’s skin is black, and he carries two African lances. The Spaniards brought many African slaves on their galleons. They played a notable role in the conquest, both as auxiliaries and as workers (see Chapter 5). Similar images of African slaves can be found in Durán’s work (Durán 1984 II:images 57 and 58). 8. Indigenous enemy warriors. The indigenous enemy warriors are the peoples being defeated by the Quauhquecholteca. Most of these warriors are depicted with red or dark brown skin and short hair that is sometimes tied with a band. They normally wear simple cotton costumes and are barefoot. They carry shields, bows and arrows, spears, or axes. In real life, the indigenous peoples of Guatemala also had their own warrior costumes and emblems. The Spanish conquistador Díaz del Castillo

126

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

reported, for example, that the Tz’utujil came out “with great lances and good bows and arrows and many other arms and corselets, sounding their drums, and with ensigns and plumes” (Mackie 1924:113). Also, the K’iche’ lords were reportedly adorned with quetzal feathers (Mackie 1924:59; Recinos 2001:100). The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala; see Chapter 9) shows few of the emblems and plumes described by the Spanish conquistadors. The fact that these insignia are not depicted is related to the document’s rhetorical intention (see Chapter 8). The Quauhquecholteca were also obviously more familiar with their own emblems than with those of others.

Place Glyphs Places (provinces, altepetl, barrios) are normally indicated by means of a bellshaped mountain with an identifying image inside it or on top of it. Most places in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan were once glossed by means of a slip of paper, but these names are now illegible. The place glyphs depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are all pictographs for the Nahuatl names of the places, even when they refer to places in Guatemala that had Maya names. The same applies to the place glyphs represented in the different versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, which likewise refer to areas in Guatemala. This exclusive use of Nahuatl names is not surprising because both documents were made by Nahua tlacuiloque in accordance with the Nahua pictographic tradition. Also, in service as interpreters for the Spanish conquistadors, the Central Mexican allies communicated the place-names to the Spaniards in Nahuatl. These Nahuatl names were even adopted by the indigenous peoples of Guatemala when addressing the Spaniards. Some of these names are still in use today (see Chapters 5 and 9).

Roads with Footprints and Horses’ Hoofprints The place glyphs depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are connected to each other by means of roads with footprints and horses’ hoofprints. These roads serve as graphic links to provide temporal order to the scenes, and they indicate the reading direction of the images. In other words, they define the narrative structure of the text. Roads in pictorial manuscripts are generally signs of movement or migration, referring to the routes by which the people in the narrative traveled. In the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the road that takes us through the narrative starts at the initial scene at Quauhquechollan. It first leads to the bottom-left corner of the document. Then it leads to the right (from the point of view of the viewer), goes up, and bends to the right again. There it splits. In contrast to a rather unambiguous reading direction in the left-hand part of the document, the right-hand part shows a complex landscape of intertwining roads connecting 127

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

place glyphs and scenes of action. In this part, different campaigns are represented overlapping each other. The different campaigns can be identified by following the roads. Without contextual information, however, the chronology of the events depicted in this part of the lienzo is difficult to determine. It can be presumed that most of the roads represented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan were the actual paths traveled by the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors. These paths must have been relatively major communication routes; that is, paths that allowed large armies to pass through.

Rivers The geographic landscape as depicted in the lienzo is not limited to place glyphs and roads; rivers are also depicted. These rivers are represented by means of linear blue glyphs with motifs inside them and white dots on the edges. It is known that in prehispanic times, when planning a war, the Mexica made maps on which the landscape to be traveled was represented, showing the rivers to be crossed (Sahagún 1950–1982 II:book 8, folio 33v). Most of the rivers depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are likewise indicators of when and where the traveling army crossed a river.

Scenes of War and Conquest In the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, battles are usually represented by means of closely juxtaposed fighting warriors: attacker(s) and defender(s). The attacking warrior(s) is/are usually depicted in a higher position, placing the defender(s) in a subordinate one. This is a standard Nahua convention for conquest. In some cases conquest is also represented by means of a place glyph pierced by a sword or by a Spaniard who pierced his lance through a place glyph. These images are colonial variants of the toppled and burning pyramid temple, a common prehispanic convention for conquest.1 Often, a Spaniard on horseback departs from a battle scene, indicating that after the battle was over the army moved on. The positions of the Spaniards are generally clear indicators of the proper reading direction of the roads. The war scenes depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan only show victories, not defeats (see Chapter 8).

Quauhquecholteca War Emblems The Quauhquecholteca represented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are not individualized by means of name glyphs. Instead, they wear war emblems that refer to the lineages or lordly houses to which they belonged. The Quauhquecholteca wear different suits of armor (tlahuiztli in Nahuatl), shields with designs (yaochimalli), prestigious back racks, and sometimes animal costumes (eagle or

128

a

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

i

j

k

l

Figure 19a–u. Overview of the different back racks found in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

m

n

o

p

q

r

s

t

u

Figure 19a–u—continued.

coyote suits) that cover the whole body while the wearer looks out of the animal’s open jaw. The back racks (also referred to as back devices) were emblems fastened to a wooden or bamboo ladder-like frame and strapped to the warrior’s back. The use of such back racks was essential in indigenous warfare. They served both as emblems and as visual means to keep the different units together during battle. When sound devices and musical instruments such as drums and trumpets were no longer audible, these insignia provided a highly visible sign indicating where and when a unit was advancing or retreating.2 130

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

The war shields were usually made of hide or plaited palm leaves, with a feather-work design and a feather fringe at the bottom. Sahagún’s team made drawings of how these feather-work shields were manufactured.3 Normally, each back rack was related to a specific kind of suit of armor and to a set design on the shield. Díaz del Castillo explained that each Central Mexican captain had his own individual emblem. He compared them to the emblems used by the dukes and counts of contemporary Spain (Díaz del Castillo 1992:176 [Ch. LXIV]). These Mexican insignia were normally related to lineages or lordly houses.4 Similar, and sometimes the same, warrior costumes and emblem designs were also used by other Central Mexican altepetl. The Mexica Codex Mendoza, for example, records twelve suits of armor, back racks, and shields used by Mexica warriors;5 and the various versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala identify the Tlaxcalteca units by means of similar costumes and emblems. Other Central Mexican pictorials in which such back racks appear include the Codex Florentino, Codex Durán, Codex Telleriano-Remensis, and the Mapa de Popotla. The appearance of the same emblems in different manuscripts indicates that some were used by members of different Central Mexican altepetl. This is not surprising, considering that the noble houses of the different altepetl often intermarried and thus were linked to each other. Mexica dominance in the area may also have contributed to this overlap. It is also possible that, both in prehispanic times and during battles fought under the Spanish banner, the victors in a battle between two altepetl sometimes took over the battle gear and emblems of the defeated.

A Spanish Banner A recurring element in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a red two-pointed banner tied to a long staff that has a cross on top. This banner is also depicted in other indigenous pictorials and in Spanish paintings of the conquest.6 Such a banner usually appears when the Spaniards are in battle, or it may appear in combination with individual Spaniards such as Cortés, Nuñez de Guzmán, or Antonio de Mendoza. H. León Abrams Jr. (1973:142) interpreted this banner as representing the Spanish government, first as personified by the Audiencia and later by the viceroy. In the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, this banner is used by both Spanish and Quauhquecholteca conquistadors. When the banner is in the hands of a Quauhquecholtecatl, no Spaniards are usually present in the scene. This might indicate that in some cases the Quauhquecholteca set out indepen­ dently on conquering expeditions under the Spanish banner.

Weapons The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows a variety of weapons. The Spaniards use Spanish swords, lances, and a cannon. The Quauhquecholteca normally use

131

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

Figure 20. Quauhquecholteca conquistadors (left) in battle with rebellious Kaqchikel warriors (right) at Pochutla, Guatemala. The fortifications on the road indicate the rebellious status of the Kaqchikel.

bows and arrows (often held in quivers), spears, indigenous swords (macuahuitl ), and axes. The macuahuitl is the most frequently depicted weapon. These swords were made of wood, usually oak, with obsidian or flint blades fitted and glued in grooves along the edges. These weapons generally measured 3 to 4 inches wide and a little over 3.5 feet long (Hassig 1988:83). Most Quauhquecholteca have a macuahuitl or a Spanish sword in one hand and a shield in the other.7

Scenes of Rebellion Several places in the Guatemalan part of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan have depictions of fortifications on roads. Since in Mesoamerica most movement was based on foot travel, blocking a road was obviously not very effective for barring traffic or stopping armies. Instead, such fortifications were a political statement: they signaled the intention to sever relations, resist hostile passage or entry, or initiate a war. When a subjected town or an independent city blocked its roads, this was regarded as an act of rebellion (Hassig 1988:8). The fortification glyphs in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are to be interpreted in this context and can be read as conventional signs for rebellion. They appear mostly in Kaqchikel territory, referring to the Kaqchikel rebellion in the late 1520s.

Kaqchikel Traps The Guatemalan part of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan also shows pictographs of holes with vertical stakes inside. These pictographs represent Kaqchikel traps. 132

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

Several sixteenth-century sources mention that the Kaqchikel dug pits, which they covered with earth and grass and in which they put vertical stakes hardened by fire.8 These pits were meant as deadly traps for their enemies, particularly those on horseback, to fall into. As is recorded in the Memorial de Sololá: Entonces los kaqchikeles empezamos a batirnos con los castellanos. Se cavaron agujeros, sembrándolos de estacas que sirvieron de trampa mortal para los caballos, la gente no pensaba otra cosa que en hacer la guerra. Muchos castellanos perecieron y los caballos murieron en las trampas para caballos. Los K’iche’s, los Tz’utujile’s, así como las demás tribus, fueron destruidas por la gente kaqchikel. Sólo así se hicieron respetar de parte de los castellanos, así como de las demás tribus. (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:187–188)

One of the witnesses who testified in the residencia of Pedro de Alvarado said: en el tiempo de la guerra los yndios mataron muchos caballos e españoles e amigos de los que servian en la guerra haziendo oyos con estacas para en que cayessen los caballos e españoles e los cobijaban con rama e tierra por hencima e poniandose señales de herraduras para que no pensasen que habia hoyos e por mucho abisso que trayan los españoles de los primeros oyos [478v] que abian caydo come heran tantos los oyos que los yndios hazian en todas partes no dexaban de caher en ellos por que los hazian en el camino e fuera del e asimissmo ponian muchas estacas en los caminos chicas por los caminos e fuentes donde yban a beber los españoles e amigos para que se las hincassen por los pies y ansimissmo las ponian por debaxo de los arboles de fruta para que quando fuessen a cogerla se enclavassen. (AGI Justicia 295, fs. 478r–478v)

Figures 21 and 22. Indigenous warriors captured in Kaqchikel traps.

133

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

Figure 23. Dance, probably performed in honor of the Quauhquecholteca who died during the campaigns of conquest under Jorge de Alvarado’s banner.

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows several people, and once a horse, inside these traps. The Spaniards, however, were often able to avoid them. The Dominican friar Las Casas reported that the Spaniards even passed a law saying that the enemies they captured were to be thrown into the pits as punishment. According to his account, even pregnant women, children, and old people were thrown into the traps and left impaled on the stakes until the pits were filled (Mackie 1924:129).

Dances Some scenes in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan depict Quauhquecholteca dancing. These dancing scenes consist of one Quauhquecholtecatl playing a drum (teponaztli) and one or more Quauhquecholteca dancing in the presence of local authorities. The dancers wear their warrior costumes and emblems, but instead of a sword they hold a fan. Little is known specifically about dances performed by the indigenous conquistadors who set out with the Alvarado brothers, but it is known that dances generally held an important place in Mesoamerican life, usually as part of a celebration or ritual.9 One of the dances depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan seems to represent a dance for those killed during battle. According to indigenous customs, those who had perished in war were paid respect by song and dance. Durán wrote: salían a la plaza los cantores de los que morían en guerra, los cuales eran cantores particulares diputados para este solo oficio. Y salían todos, atadas las cabezas con unas cintas de cuero negro, y sacaban un instrumento y tocaban un sonico triste y lloroso y empezaban a lamentar y decir sus responsos a su modo.

134

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

En empezando a tañer y cantar salían las matronas, mujeres de todos los muertos, con las mantas de sus maridos a los hombres y los ceñidores y bragueros rodeados al cuello y los cabellos sueltos. Y todas puestas en ringlera, al son del instrumento, daban grandes palmadas y lloraban amargamente y otras veces bailaban, inclinándose hacia la tierra y andando así inclinadas hacia atrás. (Durán 1984 II:287–288)

Durán’s text is accompanied by an image of a dancing scene similar to those represented in the lienzo: one person plays a drum, and others dance in the presence of a lord seated in a chair (Durán 1984 II:image 25).

Houses Some place glyphs have houses around them. These may represent the lordly houses of local Central Mexican settlements. Near the place glyph for Totonicapan, for example, are four house images. It is known that four Central Mexican groups settled at this site (see Chapters 5 and 9). Most of such Central Mexican settlements in Guatemala were founded in the 1520s and 1530s, early enough for them to have been included in this lienzo (see Chapter 5).

Marketplaces The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows four scenes composed of a circle with one or two persons inside, one of whom holds a chest with feathers on top. These scenes can be read as conventions for marketplaces (tianquiztli).10 Both whiteand dark-skinned indigenous people are inside these circles. The marketplaces included in the Quauhquecholteca narrative must have been important marketplaces at the time, or perhaps they were specifically the marketplaces where the Quauhquecholteca traded with the peoples of Guatemala or where they sold and bought their merchandise. It is known that Quauhquecholteca from Quauhquechollan, Mexico, were involved in trade activities in Central America (see Chapter 3). These passages come from a letter to Viceroy Antonio de Mendoza, dated 1543: por quanto fran[cis]co e juan e bartolome e juan yndios mercaderes naturales del pu[ebl]o de guacachula por si y en nombre de los demas yndios mercaderes del d[ic]ho pu[ebl]o me an [he]cho relaçion que ellos sabian ir a tratar y contratar ansi a las provinçias de guatimala e chiapa e xicalango y piastla tabasco soconusco chilatengo como a otros pu[eblo]s y tiangues desta nueva espana e de las d[ic]has provincias y costas de la mar en los quales los d[ic]hos yndios de mexico santiago escapucalco e tenusco e de otros pu[ebl]os e tiangues desta nueva esp[añ]a e otros pu[ebl]os comarcanos que ellas residen. . . . por el qual doy lic[enci]a e facultad a los yndios mercaderes del d[ic]ho pueblo de guacachula para que sin incurir p[roblem]a alguna puedan yr e

135

Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan

Figures 24–27. Four different marketplaces found in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. vayan a las d[ic]has probincias e pu[ebl]os que de suso se hizen mynçion e a las myn_s e asta de la mar e a otras cuales quyer desta nueba esp[añ]a do[nde] quizieren y por bien tubieren a bender e vendan las me[rcancia]s e otras cossas que llevaren. (AGN Mercedes, Vol. 2, Exp. 532, fs. 215v–216r)

Marketplaces were not only important for trading purposes; they were also sites where news was publicly announced and other community events took place. The Glasgow manuscript from Tlaxcala, for example, shows a scene in which two Spanish friars are preaching at a marketplace. Around them are indigenous people with their food and other products that may represent trading goods.11 Perhaps the marketplaces in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan referred not only to the trading activities of the Quauhquecholteca but also to the places where they received and brought news about the conquest (and where they spied), where new campaigns were announced and soldiers gathered, and where various other kinds of events and communication took place.

136

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Conquered Conquistadors

7. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

This chapter presents my reading of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. The decipherment of the pictographic narrative is based primarily on (1) what is presently known of Nahua pictorial conventions1 and (2) the extant information on the history of the participation of the Quauhquecholteca and others in the conquest of Mesoamerica (contextualization). My description starts at the initial scene at Quauhquechollan in the upperleft corner and follows the roads denoted by footprints. The sequence of scenes in the left-hand part of the document is clear. The arrangement of the right-hand part, however, is less clear, and sometimes it was difficult to determine the order in which the tlacuiloque meant the pictographs to be read. However, chronology and linearity may not have been as fixed and relevant to the indigenous tlacui­ loque and readers as they are to us today. It is possible that, originally, a variety 137

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

of readings were possible. I present a reading of the scenes from this right-hand portion of the document consistent with the chronology in which the events depicted are presently presumed to have happened.

Initial Scene at Quauhquechollan The story of the Quauhquecholteca starts in the upper-left corner of the lienzo. Here, the place glyph of Quauhquechollan and the establishment of the Quauhquecholteca-Spanish alliance are depicted. The fact that this is the initial scene in the narrative can be deduced from several factors: (1) this scene is depicted as the largest and thus is given the most attention (see Chapter 1), (2) the road along which the story is ordered starts at this point, and (3) historically, Quauhquechollan was the place from where the main actors of the narrative, the Quauhquecholteca, began their campaign of conquest to Guatemala. In other words, both iconographically and chronologically, this scene stands at the beginning of the story. The initial scene at Quauhquechollan is composed of a place glyph and five people, surrounded by a wall, a river, and another wall. The place glyph consists of a bell-shaped mountain and a double-headed eagle with a sword in each claw. The eagle wears a crown. The eagle’s left side is colored blue and the right side black. Francisco de Paso y Troncoso was the first to identify this glyph as that for Quauhquechollan. He stated that this was the place where the lienzo was made, without explaining why he made this assumption. According to his description of the eagle, the blue had originally been gold. It had turned blue, he wrote, because over time the gold had peeled off (Paso y Troncoso 1892–1893 I:71–72). As will be seen, Paso y Troncoso’s identification of this glyph as representing Quauhquechollan is supported by examination of the glyph itself and by the relationship of the glyph, as it appears in the lienzo, to depicted geographic features that correspond to actual features near Quauhquechollan. The image of the double-headed eagle and the crown represents the Habsburg eagle, the heraldic coat of arms of the Spanish kings. The use of the Habsburg coat of arms was granted to various indigenous communities in return for their military service to the Spaniards (see also Chapter 5). References indicate that the Quauhquecholteca were among those granted certain privileges by the Spaniards (see Chapter 3), but no specific references refer to a grant of the use of the Habsburg coat of arms. Considering the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors’ contribution to the Spanish conquest, however, it is likely that Quauhquechollan was indeed granted this privilege. The fact that it is depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan also points in this direction, although they may have used it without actually having received a merced. Heraldic shields were very much in vogue in fifteenth- and sixteenth-­century Europe. Many European towns and families had their own coats of arms.2 In 138

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

prehispanic Mesoamerica, communities maintained a comparable tradition with insignias on warrior costumes, war shields, and back racks and the pictographic representation of community names. Both traditions seem to have been mutually appreciated, and with the conquest, the insignias of indigenous towns and lords were occasionally modified to include the newly introduced Spanish weaponry. When the use of the Habsburg eagle was granted to an indigenous community, it was usually adapted and elaborated with the particular indigenous elements of that community. This resulted in a new and unique series of emblems fit for the colonial world (Roskamp 2002:229). The Habsburg eagle glyph depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is the result of a mixture of Spanish and indigenous elements, and it conveys several messages. The indigenous name “Quauhquechollan” includes the word “eagle” (quauh in Nahuatl) as well, and the eagle was an essential element in the town’s original indigenous place glyph (see Chapter 3).3 The Quauhquecholteca could thus adopt the Habsburg eagle image without giving up their own indigenous emblem. The original place glyph of Quauhquechollan was modified to function in the new colonial context, so that it referred to both the history and the lineages of Quauhquechollan and also served as a protective emblem by relating Quauhquechollan to the Spanish Crown (see Chapter 9). The Quauhque­ cholteca/Habsburg eagle holds a Spanish sword in one claw and an indigenous sword in the other. These swords refer to the combining of the Spanish and Quauhquecholteca military forces. By displaying the Habsburg eagle in their narrative, the Quauhquecholteca not only emphasized their relation to the Spanish Crown; they also simultaneously proclaimed their conquests under the Spanish banner. The Habsburg eagle is positioned on top of a bell-shaped mountain. Inside this mountain is a European war shield in front of a white pyramid.4 A similar white pyramid is depicted in the place glyph of Quauhquechollan presented in the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan (see Chapter 3). The shield is divided into four quarters with images inside. These images are almost completely faded. Paso y Troncoso’s description indicates that they were already faded in 1892. He wrote that the upper-left quarter contained a plumage, which is still visible; that the upper-right one seemed to show the head of an eagle, and that the bottom two were already faded in his time but seemed to contain feathers (Paso y Troncoso 1892–1893 I:72). These four images may have referred to the presence of four lordly houses (calpolli) in Quauhquechollan. The images depicted within each of them were likely the (military) emblems used by the members of these houses.5 The identification of the glyph mentioned earlier as that of Quauh­que­ chollan is confirmed by the geographic features depicted around it: a double wall and a river. The river contains little birds and can be identified as the River Huitzilac (huitzil–“hummingbird,” a–“water,”-c–locative), presently also known 139

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 28. The establishment of the Quauhquecholteca-Spanish alliance as depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

as the River Atila. This river passes Quauhquechollan to the northeast. When the Spaniards arrived, Quauhquechollan was indeed surrounded by a double wall (see Chapter 3). The way the walls and the river are represented in the lienzo matches exactly the way they are situated in the landscape.6 Glued onto the wall glyph are traces of a glossed slip of paper, the text of which is no longer readable. The size of this slip of paper indicates that it contained several words, possibly an explanatory phrase. Below the place glyph of Quauhquechollan are five people. The two people to the left can be identified as indigenous lords, recognizable as such by their lordly cloaks and hairstyle.7 One of them embraces the third person, a Spaniard, recognizable by his beard and his Spanish hat. The Spaniard’s body is faded. The other lord offers him jewelry. To the Spaniard’s right are an indigenous woman and a second Spaniard. The latter holds the reins of a horse and the red Spanish banner. The manner in which the five individuals are facing one another indicates a meeting between the two lords to the left and the two Spaniards and the indigenous woman to the right. Since the scene takes place at Quauhquechollan, the two indigenous lords can be identified as caciques from that altepetl. The first Spaniard and the 140

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 29. Map of Quauhquechollan and parts of the walls that surrounded the town in prehispanic times (based on INEGI map “Atlixco E14B52” [1978] and fieldwork in Quauhquechollan [1997]).

indigenous woman can be identified as Hernán Cortés and Malintzin, Cortés’s mistress and translator (see Chapter 5:note 60). This identification is based on (1) the fact that Cortés and Malintzin often appear together in Mexican pictorials in the same position (Malintzin positioned behind Cortés),8 and (2) Cortés is presumed to have been in Quauhquechollan in 1520, when the Quauhquecholteca-Spanish alliance was established (see Chapter 3). The Spaniard with the horse and the red banner is another Spanish conqueror, possibly one of the Alvarado brothers or Cristóbal de Olid.9 Considering the theme of the story, this person most likely represents Jorge de Alvarado, who was also in Cortés’s company when the Spaniards arrived in Quauhquechollan in 1520 (see Chapter 3). The red banner indicates that they are acting in the name of the Spanish Crown (see Chapter 6). This scene represents the establishment of the Quauhquecholteca-Spanish alliance in 1520 (see Chapter 3). The imagery corresponds to the way the establishment of Spanish-indigenous alliances is described in other sources. A witness who testified in the document about Don Gonzalo Matzatzin Moctezuma from Tepexi (see Chapter 4), for example, declared:

141

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

oyo dezir pu[bli]cam[en]te este t[estig]o a los que tiene d[ic]hos y a otros muchos yndios prençipales como el d[ic]ho marques del valle avia rrecevido muy bien y con mucho amor a los d[ic]hos mensajeros del d[ic]ho don goncalo y los abraço e rreçivio el oro e joyas e piedras que le llevaron en el d[ic]ho pres[en]te de parte del d[ic]ho don goncalo y los acepto en n[ombr]e de su mag[estad] en su servi[ci]o e por tales basallos de la Real corona. (AGI Patronato 245, N.10, f. 5v/10)10

The scene in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan indicates that the Quauhquecholteca allied with the Spaniards voluntarily, like the lord of Tepexi. The format of this scene is also familiar: it very much resembles the scenes presented in the various versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, for example, in which Otomí and Tlaxcalteca lords meet Cortés, with Malintzin interpreting and another conquistador (on horseback) at Cortés’s side (Acuña 1984:plates 29, 31, 32; also see Chapter 9). Similar scenes are also depicted in the Codex Tzintzuntzan, the Lienzo de Carapan I, and the Lienzo de Carapan II from Michoacan (see Roskamp 1997, 1998). Like the Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca conquistadors, conquistadors from Michoacan assisted the Spaniards in their campaigns of conquest. All the documents mentioned show a meeting between indigenous lords and the Spanish conquistadors, a gift-giving ritual, an embrace, and the Habsburg coat of arms. The combination of these elements seems to have been a set indigenous pictographic convention to indicate an alliance with the Spaniards, the beginning of tribute relationships, and the beginning of a new episode in history. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan presents the establishment of the SpanishQuauhquecholteca alliance not as a humiliating subjection of one force by the other but instead as a gathering of two military forces that both sought advancement. It is not surprising to find the establishment of this political and military “friendship” between the Quauhquecholteca and the Spaniards at the very beginning of the story. After all, this alliance was the basis for all the other events depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, and it emphasized the Quauhquecholteca’s claim to having been conquistadors under the Spanish banner. Above the scene at Quauhquechollan are four place glyphs, each pierced by a Spanish sword. The first glyph is faded. The second shows a bell-shaped mountain with the upper half of a human body on top holding something indeterminable, perhaps a stick. The third is a bell-shaped mountain with a banner.11 The fourth consists of two brick wall structures. There are similarly pierced place glyphs to the left of the Quauhquechollan glyph, but those glyphs seem to have been intentionally erased by the tlacuiloque. The fact that all these glyphs are pierced by swords indicates that the places they represent were conquered, but there are no battle scenes. Considering that the narrative is composed from the perspective of the Quauhquecholteca, they were likely places in whose conquest Quauhquecholteca conquistadors took part or claimed to have taken part. Per142

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

haps they were places conquered with the help of the Quauhquecholteca before they set out for Guatemala in 1527.12 There are traces of sketches indicating that the initial scene at Quauhquechollan was originally drawn in a smaller size. The tlacuiloque seem to have changed their minds about the first draft and in the final version increased the size of this initial scene.

Army Departing from Quauhquechollan Below the scene at Quauhquechollan starts the road, along which the remainder of the narrative is ordered. Seven men set out from Quauhquechollan. The first is a Spaniard on horseback, who leads the group. His face and dress look different from those of the Spaniards represented in the initial scene, which marks him as another person. A second Spaniard follows him, holding a lance and the red Spanish banner. The third person shows cross-cultural characteristics: he is depicted with indigenous armor, sandals, shield, and back rack, but he also has a beard and wears what seems to be a Spanish helmet. This figure’s costume refers to the integration of the Spanish and Quauhquecholteca armies. The next four men can be identified as Quauhquecholteca captains. They all wear the indigenous warrior costume, sandals, shields, and back racks, and they have no beards. The last captain wears a brown/gold eagle costume. Possibly, these four captains were related to the four calpolli depicted in the place glyph of Quauhquechollan. The indigenous captains all carry Spanish swords. The use of Spanish swords by indigenous captains was normally allowed only with special permission (by cédula) and only during times when they fought for the Spaniards. Some indigenous conquistadors received Spanish weapons to consolidate their alliance with the Spaniards. The ruler of Tepexi, for example, received a sword and lance directly from Cortés in 1519, obviously without a cédula, after which he set out for conquests under the Spanish banner (see Chapter 5). This may also have been the case in Quauhquechollan. All of the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors featured in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are depicted with Spanish swords. This, however, does not necessarily mean they actually carried them when in battle. The conquistadors departing from Quauhquechollan are clearly dressed for war. They reappear in the same outfits throughout the remainder of the document. These men can therefore be identified as the main actors in the narrative. The Spaniard leading the group is clearly the military leader of the army. I identified this conquistador as Jorge de Alvarado for these reasons: (1) Most of the conquests depicted in the document took place in Guatemala between 1527 and 1529 under Jorge de Alvarado’s banner, and the Quauhquecholteca are known to have fought at Jorge’s side during these campaigns (see Chapter 5). (2) Jorge de Alvarado was the encomendero of Quauhquechollan, meaning he could make 143

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 30. Jorge de Alvarado’s army departs from Quauhquechollan (rotated 90 degrees counterclockwise).

use of Quauhquecholteca tributaries. It was common for Spanish conquistadors to compose their armies of people from their own encomiendas. (3) The last part of the accompanying slip of paper identifying this person is still readable and shows “-arado.” The Spaniard following Jorge de Alvarado must have been another Spanish conquistador who participated in Jorge de Alvarado’s 1527–1529 campaigns and was also relevant to the story of the Quauhquecholteca. The only way to identify the indigenous captains is by means of their back racks, as they have no name glyphs and the accompanying slips of paper are illegible. At this time, however, too little is known about these back racks to make identifications. It seems the Quauhquecholteca tlacuiloque identified the Quauhquecholteca by lordly house or barrio rather than by the individual. In other words, the captains depicted represent members of lordly houses or barrios from Quauhquechollan that sent captains and soldiers with Jorge de Alvarado to Guatemala.13

Places from Which Indigenous Captains and Soldiers Were Gathered To the right of the departing army a number of place glyphs are depicted. None of these glyphs is pierced by a sword, nor are they accompanied by battle scenes.

144

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 31. Communities in the neighborhood of Quauhquechollan from which captains and soldiers were gathered to assist Jorge de Alvarado in his 1527 campaign of conquest to Guatemala.

They are not presented geographically but in lines, as if representing a “list.” The function of these places in the story could not be determined without identifying the places to which they refer. The fact that they are placed near Quauhquechollan indicates that they were places located not far from the alte­ petl. Through comparison with place glyphs depicted in contemporary local pictorial documents, I identified most of the ones that are still readable. Identified are Tlapanalan (represented by means of a split or broken mountain), Acatlan (a cane), Atzintzintitlan (a hand with jewels), Cuauhyocan (a plant), Nacochtlan (a plugged ear), Epatlan (a skunk), Teopantlan (a house), Huehuetlan (a head), and Tepapayecan (a red mountaintop).14 During his 1527 campaign to and through Guatemala, Jorge de Alvarado was accompanied not only by Quauhquecholteca but also by indigenous lords, soldiers, and their retinues from other Central Mexican altepetl, such as Mexico and Tlaxcala (see Chapter 5). Since the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is the story of the Quauhquecholteca only, it depicts only the units from that altepetl and the towns directly related to it as subjects or (military) allies from prehispanic times. I therefore believe the list of towns depicted near the departing army represents those towns related to Quauhquechollan from which captains and soldiers joined Jorge de Alvarado’s army in 1527. These men were probably gathered in a similar way as the indigenous conquistadors who had set out for Guatemala with Pedro de Alvarado four years earlier. 145

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

A witness who speaks in the AGI Justicia 291 document testified that “se acuerda y vido que el d[ic]ho marques [Hernán Cortés] hizo juntar en mexico todos los caçiques y prinçipales de toda la provinçia de taxcala y mexico y les mando que vinyesen çiertos yndios de cada pueblo y ansy vinyereon mucha cantidad de gente de yndios con el d[ic]ho don pedro de alvarado a la d[ic]ha conquysta de guatimala” (AGI Justicia 291, f. 175r). Another witness said he remembered that “se usava en aquel tiempo sacar las personas prinçipales e gente de sus pueblos para venyr a servir a su magestad con los capitanes que los governadores enbiavan” (AGI Justicia 291, f. 68r). In this case, the lords were probably called together not by Hernán Cortés but by Jorge de Alvarado. In Chapter 5, I elaborated on a variety of reasons indigenous units assisted the Spaniards in the conquest of Mesoamerica and the kinds of services they provided. The exact reasons the Quauhquecholteca units participated in the conquest of Guatemala are unknown. It is beyond doubt, however, that they participated on a large scale and that captains and soldiers from Quauhquechollan’s subject towns and neighbors assisted them. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan points to an active role of these Quauhquecholteca units in the conquest period.

Scenes Depicted in the Left-Hand Part of the Document (Mexico) The first part of the road leads downward to the bottom-left corner of the document. To both sides of this road are place glyphs, many accompanied by battle scenes. These war scenes consist of two indigenous warriors fighting each other. One is always a Quauhquecholteca captain with a back rack, and the other is a warrior from the place under attack. The Quauhquecholteca are depicted in a higher position than their enemies, a Nahua convention to mark them as the victors of the battles (see Chapter 6). In other words, the towns depicted with battle scenes are to be read as conquests by Quauhquecholteca units. To the right side of the road (for the viewer) is a side road leading to a battle scene at an illegible place glyph, where two Quauhquecholteca fight three dark-skinned enemy warriors. Unfortunately, most place glyphs in this part of the document are faded or otherwise badly damaged. Reviewing the glyphs on the left side of the road, from top to bottom, these images can be found: 1. A mountain with a plant or a tree on top (no battle scene). 2. A mountain without a characteristic image. The last part of the accompanying slip of paper of this glyph is partly readable and says “-tepec” (battle scene). 3. A mountain with a sphere of water (a spring) on top (no battle scene).

146

Figure 32. The bottom-left part of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, representing places conquered by the Quauhquecholteca-Spanish army in 1527 before it entered what is now Guatemala.

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

4. A mountain with a house on top (Calpan?). From the size of the accompanying slip of paper, one can deduce that it had a short name (no battle scene). 5. A mountain with a spring similar to the one in the third glyph. The accompanying gloss ends with “-huac” (battle scene). 6. A mountain with human legs on top in a spread position, depicted as seen from the back (no battle scene). 7. A glyph destroyed by a hole in the cloth (battle scene). 8. A mountain with a flint knife on top (battle scene) (Ytzucan?). A similar glyph can be found in the Codex Mendoza, glossed “Tecpatepec” (Berdan and Anawalt 1997:59, f. 27r). 9. A mountain without a characteristic image (battle scene). In the part where the Quauhquecholteca captain is depicted, a piece of cloth has been sewn on top of the original cloth (restoration). 10. A mountain with a plant on top (battle scene).

To the right side of the road one encounters, from top to bottom: 1. A mountain with staffs (no battle scene). 2. A mountain without a characteristic image. Close to this town is a river (no battle scene).15 3. The side road mentioned earlier, leading to a mountain without a characteristic image, and five fighting warriors. 4. A mountain with two claws on top and two others appearing from below (no battle scene).

Figure 33. Tehuantepec’s place glyph as de­picted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

148

Figure 34. Tehuantepec’s place glyph as found in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 314v).

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 35. Soconusco’s place glyph as depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 36. Soconusco’s place glyph as represented in the Codex Mendoza (fs. 15v, 18r, 47r).

This image once represented a beast, the head of which is destroyed by a hole in the cloth. This place can be identified as Tehuantepec (tehuan–“jaguar,” tepe–“mountain”). The Alvarado brothers had conquered this area in 1523, which explains the absence of a battle scene in the story of the Quauhquecholteca. After the road has reached the bottom-left corner of the document, it makes a turn to the right (for the viewer) and continues along the bottom edge of the cloth. An illegible glyph without a battle scene follows, and then there is an erected cross. Next, the road crosses another river and passes by a place glyph characterized by a cactus with flowers. This place glyph can be identified as Soconusco.16 Like Tehuantepec, Soconusco had been subjected to Spanish rule in 1524, before Jorge de Alvarado’s army passed by in 1527. Accordingly, no war scene is depicted with this place glyph.17 The place glyphs depicted in this left-hand part of the document represent towns in what is now Mexico, located along the main route from Central Mexico to Guatemala at the time.18 This route had been a mayor communication route in prehispanic times (see Chapter 5) and remained so after the conquest. A Spaniard who traveled from Mexico to Guatemala and back in the decades following the conquest described the roads this way. por las jornadas contadas ay desde esta çiudad de santiago de guatimala a la çiudad de mexico ay duzientas e cinq[uent]a leguas de camino antes mas que menos las sesenta de las quales son de despoblado e de muchos e muy grandes rios e mosquitos e garrapatas e otras savandizas muy dañosas e por [4v] judiçiales y en todo el d[ic]ho camino por ser tan pasagero valen los bastimentos a muy eçesivos preçios y muchas vezes no se halla a peso de dinero

149

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

y es en tanta manera que muchos dexan de andar el d[ic]ho camino porque dizen que son mas las costas que en el se hazen. (AGI Guatemala 52, Pro­ vança del doctor [Antonio de] Quesada . . . , fs. 4r–4v)19

Although for many travelers, and possibly also for Jorge de Alvarado in 1527, the journey south normally started at Tenochtitlan (Mexico City), it is not surprising that the Quauhquecholteca depicted Quauhquechollan at the beginning of the journey. For them, their hometown was the point of departure. It makes sense that they recorded the campaign from the moment they left their homes. It can be presumed that the place glyphs without battle scenes or sword piercings represent places conquered before Jorge’s army passed in 1527. Their function in the narrative seems to be primarily to indicate the route traveled by Jorge and his allies. The place glyphs with battle scenes, on the other hand, were conquered during Jorge’s 1527 campaign. Since the document presents the history of the Quauhquecholteca, these battles were certainly conquests in which they participated. Obviously, the battles for these places were waged by armies, not just by a few individuals as depicted in the lienzo. The warriors depicted represent these armies. The absence of Spaniards in the war scenes seems to indicate that these battles were fought by Quauhquecholteca units only. Perhaps the Quauhquecholteca conquered these places independently, just as the lord of Tepexi set out for expeditions on his own (see Chapter 5). The tlacuiloque indicated which units participated in which battle by depicting the back racks of the leading indigenous captains.

Soconusco and Retalhuleu To the right of the Soconusco glyph, the tlacuiloque depicted a scene of action other than a battle. A man in Spanish dress is seated in a chair and holds a sword in one hand, a convention that indicates the man’s authority.20 Another, seemingly unarmed man in Spanish dress stands next to him, and a third person is positioned at their feet, facing the two. This third person wears an indigenous shield and sandals in combination with a Spanish hat, and his skin is painted white. The last indicates he was an ally of the Spaniards. The way he is depicted— unarmed, at their feet, and in a running position—suggests he is a messenger or a scout or perhaps a spy who came to talk to the man in the chair. The first two men have their arms raised in the direction from which the messenger came, as if they are talking to him about the area ahead. The scene also shows one of the feather headdress back racks that belonged to the Quauhquecholteca. A possible interpretation of this scene is that the messenger is a Quauhquecholteca ally who had traveled ahead to investigate and then returned to inform

150

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

his authorities about what to expect. The way the men in the scene are positioned suggests they are planning something. Perhaps they are deciding on which roads to travel and with which strategies to proceed on the basis of the information provided by the returned scout. It is also possible that the scout is passing on a message from the indigenous peoples of Guatemala, either from an already subjected group or from one that was still at war with the Spaniards and wanted to negotiate. This is certainly possible, since the indigenous allies also served as scouts and negotiators (see Chapter 5). After this scene, the road crosses another river and passes by an unreadable place glyph. A scene similar to the previous one follows. The only differences between the two scenes are the color of the standing man’s hat and the fact that the sword and the feather headdress are missing in the second image. This second scene is accompanied by a slip of paper revealing the name of the man in the chair. Although badly damaged, part of the gloss is still readable. Paso y Troncoso transcribed it as “Pedro de Alvarado” (Paso y Troncoso 1892–1893 I:73). The last part indeed says “Alvarado,” but the “Pedro” part seems to have been, with all due respect, his own invention. John Glass (1964:90) identified only the “Alvarado” part. Most letters in the original are too badly damaged to be identified with certainty, except for the second letter, which is an “o” beyond doubt. The 1892 copy reveals “Jorj-” in this part. The gloss depicted in the 1933 copy confirms the suspicion that the name presented here is not Pedro but that of his brother Jorge de Alvarado. It can thus be assumed that before entering K’iche’ territory (Guatemala), Jorge de Alvarado had various meetings with indigenous allied messengers, scouts, or spies. After the scenes with the messengers, the road crosses two rivers. In between these rivers is a place glyph consisting of a tree with white flowers, which is pierced by an arrow (the arrow may either be part of the place glyph or a reference to its conquest). This place glyph is depicted in a much larger size than most other scenes in the lienzo. It must thus have been a place of some importance to the story. Up to this point, all place glyphs depicted represent towns that previously belonged to the area that by that time had become known as New Spain. The place glyphs to follow are all places located in the K’iche’ area, or the remainder of what is now Guatemala (discussed later). The tree with the white flowers is located precisely on the border of the two, which probably explains the larger size: this is where Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhquecholteca entered K’iche’ territory, an important place to mark indeed. The tree may be a place glyph for Retalhuleu. The territorial border is situated in this region, it is indeed located between two rivers (the Sununa and Samalá rivers),21 and it was reportedly known for its ceiba trees (see Gall 1963). As mentioned in Chapter 5, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is made up of two different kinds of cloth. The left-hand part of the painting is painted on a material thinner and less compact than the right-hand part. The scene at Retalhuleu 151

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 37. A tree between two rivers, representing Retalhuleu (Lienzo de Quauhquechollan).

is painted on the very spot where the two parts are vertically sewn together. As a result, the thinner cloth contains all the events that take place in what is now Mexico, while the thicker part represents the events that take place in modern Guatemala. The painting styles on the two parts are similar enough to presume that both sides were made by the same authors, but this is certainly a suspicious coincidence. Perhaps the two parts were actually joined later.

Zapotitlan and Suchitepequez After the glyph for Retalhuleu, the road passes by more place glyphs. None of these glyphs is accompanied by a scene of action. The first is a bell-shaped mountain with a large plant or tree on top. This glyph may represent Zapotitlan (present-day San Francisco Zapotitlan, located in the department of Retalhuleu). In February 1524, the Spaniards had their first confrontations with the K’iche’ in the area of Zapotitlan.22 The original K’iche’ name of this place is Xetulul (“under the zapotes”). The next place glyph consists of a bell-shaped mountain with three flowers on top, representing the name Xochitepec (xochi/suchi 23–“flower,” tepe–“mountain”). This glyph probably refers to the area of San Antonio Suchitepequez (present-day department of Suchitepequez).24 Suchitepequez is located near and to the west of Zapotitlan, just as depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. The K’iche’ refer to this place by the name Cotz’ij (Carmack 1973:map 1). After the Suchitepequez glyph, the road goes up, makes another turn to the left, and then proceeds vertically upward. Ever since the road passed by Tehuantepec, and up to this point, it ran parallel to the bottom edge of the document, which is provided with a sea band. The main route from Tehuantepec to Suchitepequez traveled by the armies in the sixteenth century indeed led through coastal areas near the Pacific. The almost ninety-degree turn inland depicted next 152

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 38. Soconusco (left) and Retalhuleu (right). At both places Jorge de Alvarado debriefed scouts upon completion of their mission.

corresponds to the next part of the main route into Guatemala as described by Pedro de Alvarado, Díaz del Castillo, and the authors of the different versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. After passing by Suchitepequez, the travelers left the coastal region and continued in a northerly direction into the Guatemalan highlands (Acuña 1984:plates 103–106; Mackie 1924:53–59). The next glyphs are a big rock or cave to the left of the road and a mountain with staffs to its right. As opposed to almost all other glosses, the gloss attached to this last one is painted directly on the cloth. It is therefore rather well preserved and still shows the final part of the name: “-actepec.” The 1892 copy reveals the same letters. Paso y Troncoso read the glyph as “Acatzinco” while commenting on the fact that another word is represented.25 The staffs in the glyph could very well be canes (aca–“cane”), but I have not found a town named Acatzinco in the area of Suchitepequez on any geographical map. Another possibility is that the image on top of the mountain represents not canes but grass (çaca). There is a town named San Martín Sacatepéquez, to the west of Suchitepequez, to which it may have referred. This would also explain the “-actepec” part in the gloss.26 Although its identification remains unclear, this glyph clearly represents a town in the area of Suchitepequez that was already subjected to Spanish rule in 1527, when Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhquecholteca passed through. The rock or cave glyph to the left side of the road may represent the mountain pass of Santa María de Jesús (also known as Pa Laju[j] Noj, a variation on 153

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 39. Zapotitlan’s place glyph as represented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 40. Zapotitlan’s place glyph as found in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 289v).

Figure 41. Xochitepec’s (Suchitepequez) place glyph as depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 42. Xochitepec’s place glyph as represented in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 308v).

the modern K’iche’ name of Quetzaltenango, Xe Laju[j] Noj). This place is also located along the route traveled by the Spanish conquistadors. In 1524, Pedro de Alvarado made the place well-known by fighting memorable battles there with the local K’iche’,27 and so the location was undoubtedly known to most who traveled by it as a place of historical significance. The K’iche’ Título Nijaib I mentions a cave in this area called Tz’ibampec, “the painted cave” (near the Volcán de Santa María). Another K’iche’ título, the Título C’oyoi, mentions a cave known as Ch’ocol Cakapec, “beautiful red cave,” in this same region. These caves 154

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

were presumably one and the same (Carmack 1973:333). Like the other place glyphs without battle scenes, the presence of this site in the document seems to have functioned primarily to indicate the route by which Jorge de Alvarado’s army traveled in 1527.

Quetzaltenango Next is depicted a place glyph consisting of a mountain with a crenellated wall and quetzal feathers on top. This glyph represents the name Quetzaltenango (quetzal–“quetzal” or “quetzal feathers,” tenam[i]–“wall,” and the locative -co, often written -go). A similar glyph for Quetzaltenango, that is, a stone wall with quetzal feathers, can be found in the various copies of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. The area of Quetzaltenango is located to the north of Zapotitlan and Suchitepequez and was likewise along the main sixteenth-century route into Guatemala. Above the glyph are four houses, which may refer to a Central Mexican (possibly a Quauhquecholteca) settlement in the area. The place glyph for Quetzaltenango is repeated above the houses in the form of a brick wall and feathers, this time without the bell-shaped mountain. The area of Quetzaltenango had been conquered by the Alvarado brothers and their allies in 1524. The Spanish and Central Mexican conquistadors had waged fierce battles with the local K’iche’, who are described by Pedro de Alvarado and in several surviving K’iche’ sources. The Título C’oyoi provides this description of the encounters between Alvarado’s army and the K’iche’ at Quetzaltenango. I quote because this description reflects something of the way the K’iche’ perceived the wars with the Spaniards and their indigenous allies: [O]n Two E [date] they entered __ the eagle and jaguar warriors; they tied up the people of Xetulul and Xepach, the K’alel and Ajpop; then the great stone walls, all the civil buildings were . . . by the people with white skin, the soldiers of Don Pedro de Alvarado, the great captain; they carried lances, battle axes, rifles, shields, and swords; all the chiefs were finished, killed by the metal weapons they used against them; they do not travel on foot, they come on horseback; they came and quickly brought down all of the stone buildings; they took them, knocking down all the stones by the K’ek __ Yaqui people, the great military lords [who] accompanied Don Pedro de Alvarado, the conquistador who came from España, from our great God and King. . . . [T]hen the great Captain Tecum entered from outside with 8,400 people, and 39 flagbearers among them, and drum instruments; thus there were many lords who accompanied him; __ they went to war with all their vassals; they left there at Xelaju, and encountered Don Pedro de Alvarado, the Spanish captain and conquistador; they did battle at Chwaraal in the middle of the pines; the people [were so numerous] that the units of 8,000, 20 and 400 could not be counted, there in the mountains and plains, below the trees and woods. . . .

155

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figures 43 and 44. Two variations of Quetzaltenango’s place glyph as found in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 45. Quetzaltenango’s place glyph as represented in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 290r).

[A]fterwards he [Alvarado] asked the Mexican people the name of the mountain: “What is the name of this mountain?” it was said to them; “(Quetzal)tenanco is what it is called, Señor,” all the Mexican people said to Don Pedro Alvarado; “Good, then Quetzaltenanco __ because a great captain died.” (Carmack 1973:301–303)

The “great captain” to whom the K’iche’ writers refer was Tecúm, or Tecún Umán, a K’iche’ captain from Totonicapan who was sent to Quetzaltenango by the lords of Utatlan (at the time the K’iche’ capital) to fight the Spaniards.28 The authors of the Título Nijaib I, who also described the conquest of Quetzaltenango, referred to the same Tecúm (Carmack 1973:32–33). The K’iche’ 156

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 46. Battle scene at Quetzaltenango (rotated 90 degrees counterclockwise). This battle seems to deal with an internal conflict between two groups of Spaniards, each with its indigenous allies.

warrior did not survive the battle. Tecúm’s historical existence remains an issue of discussion, but nonetheless he now serves as a symbol for, among others, the national armed forces of Guatemala and Guatemala’s resurgent Maya movement. His image is found on modern Guatemalan paper currency.29 Reportedly, Tecúm was wearing a beautiful feather headdress, and Pedro de Alvarado was so impressed that he had other Spaniards look at him after he had fallen (Carmack 1973:342; Recinos 1957:90). It is generally believed that the “quetzal” part in the Nahuatl name “Quetzaltenango” referred to the quetzal feathers that adorned him (Carmack 1973:342; Mackie 1924:59; Recinos, Goetz, and Chonay 1974:119–120). As the Título C’oyoi indicates, the Central Mexican allies of 157

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

1524 had come up with the name. The original K’iche’ name of Quetzaltenango is Xe Lajuj Noj, which refers to a calendrical name and a mountain.30 The glyph for Quetzaltenango depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is one of the indicators that the Quauhquecholteca tlacuiloque depicted the Nahuatl names used by the indigenous conquistadors and not the local K’iche’ names. When Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhquecholteca passed by Quetzaltenango in 1527, the area was relatively tranquil. Nonetheless, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows a large battle scene near the glyph for Quetzaltenango, at a river. At one side of this river are two Spaniards on horseback, one of whom carries the red banner and an indigenous shield. There is also a Quauhquecholteca foot soldier, recognizable by his back rack, and a Spanish gunner. On the other side of the river are two Spaniards on horseback and two indigenous allies, one of whom wears a back rack. No K’iche’ warriors are depicted in this scene. Instead, the scene seems to concern an internal conflict among the conquistadors. It is possible that it represents a military encounter between Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhquecholteca on the one hand, represented by those carrying the red banner, and defecting Spaniards with their own indigenous allied troops on the other hand. It is known that at the time, several Spaniards felt uncomfortable in Guatemala and wanted to leave (see Chapter 5). Spaniards had defected before.31 It is also possible that Jorge de Alvarado’s enemies were Spaniards with their own allies, who were opposed to his arrival for some other reason. Unfortunately, I have found no alphabetical source that can explain this event. When Pedro de Alvarado met his K’iche’ enemies at Quetzaltenango three years earlier, he had also defeated them at a river.32 The river depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan may refer to the same site. Perhaps this was the place where battles were typically waged at the time.

Olintepeque and Totonicapan After the confrontation at Quetzaltenango, the road crosses another river, followed by a place glyph and another scene of action. The place glyph consists of a bell-shaped mountain with the Nahua image for movement (olin) inside. This glyph refers to Olintepeque (in the present-day department of Quetzaltenango), about four km north of Quetzaltenango. A similar glyph for this town is depicted in the Codex Mendoza (f. 24v, referring to an Olintepec in Mexico) and in the various versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (Acuña 1984:plate 124; Berdan and Anawalt 1997:54). Fuentes y Guzmán reported that Olintepeque was also known by the name Xequiqué, which he translated as “debajo de la sangre.”33 The river represents the River Samalá, which runs past Olintepeque. The scene related to this place shows two Spaniards seated on chairs. One is positioned in the upper-left corner of the scene, and the other is in its bottomright corner and holds a sword. In between them is a large brown circle in which 158

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 47. Olintepeque’s place glyph as it appears in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 48. Olintepeque’s place glyph as found in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 300r).

six indigenous warriors are moving. They all wear indigenous warrior suits and shields, and most wear back racks. They are not carrying weapons. Instead, they hold round objects that can be identified as fans. One of them plays a drum. Below the circle is an indigenous woman. Her eyes are closed, and she is doing something with her hands. It looks like she is grinding food, possibly corn, on a metate. On top of the glyph is a third Spaniard, who is on horseback. This scene at Olintepeque is to be interpreted not as a battle but as a dance.34 The dancers are Quauhquecholteca, recognizable by their back racks. Their dance is executed in front of the Spanish authorities represented by the men in the chairs. It is known that the indigenous peoples of Mesoamerica often performed dances during rituals and celebrations and that there existed prehispanic war songs and dances. The sixteenth-century Cantares mexicanos from Mexico City include such songs. It is also reported that when some Nahua captains wanted to set out for Oaxaca, they staged a mock battle before Cortés to prove that they were capable of their mission. They performed their warrior skills, accompanied by the beating of a log drum in accordance with their own traditions (Sousa and Terraciano 2003:361–362). The war dance at Olintepeque must have had something to do with the arrival of Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhquecholteca at Olintepeque in March 1527. From Olintepeque, Alvarado and his allies set out on their mission to defeat the Kaqchikel. Perhaps this dance was the traditional way the Quauhquecholteca prepared for war or displayed their force and military skills to the Spanish captains during their days in Olintepeque in March 1527. The Spanish settlement at Olintepeque was founded by Jorge de Alvarado (Gall 1963, 1967c:40, 49; Kramer 1994:67). The dance may also have had something 159

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 49. This scene shows Olintepeque, where Quauhquecholteca perform a dance in the presence of a local authority, represented by the man in the chair.

to do with this founding or perhaps with a ritual celebration that took place at this time of the year. Pedro Cerón, a witness who testified in the Probanza de méritos y servicios de Diego de Usagre y Francisco Castellón, said he “vido que el dicho Jorge de Alvarado vino de la dicha ciudad de México a la dicha provincia [Guatemala] y de nuevo dio guerra a los naturales de la dicha provincia. Y que puso su real en el pueblo de Ollintepeque y truxo cinco o seis mil amigos y ciertos españoles soldados” (Gall 1968:146). 160

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 50. Totonicapan’s place glyph as found in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

The glyph for Olintepeque appears again later in the painting. It is depicted three times in total. The site was clearly a place of importance to the story of the Quauhquecholteca. Perhaps they returned there repeatedly. After the scene at Olintepeque, the road continues upward and crosses another river. Next is represented a man who carries luggage on his back and holds a staff with feathers on top. The staff looks like the ones normally used by indigenous merchants. A little further along the road is a woman who likewise carries items on her back, but without a pochteca staff. There are several possible interpretations for these scenes. (1) As stated in Chapter 6, several references are made to trading activities of Quauhquecholteca in Guatemala.35 The merchants may have been depicted as a reference to these trading activities, or perhaps the tlacuiloque depicted merchants to identify certain roads as trade routes. (2) In prehispanic times, merchants regularly preceded indigenous armies into an area to serve as spies while seemingly engaged in trade, and this strategy was likewise used during the Spanish conquest of Mesoamerica (see Chapter 5; Carmack 1981:142). The man may represent a Quauhquecholteca merchant-spy. (3) Perhaps these scenes do not represent pochteca but tamemes (bearers). As discussed in Chapter 5, the Spaniards also used their indigenous allies as bearers. Later in the narrative there are many other scenes in which indigenous allies carry luggage. Often they are chained to each other and are led by a Spaniard on horseback. Most of them carry pochteca staffs, indicating that perhaps the indigenous tamemes also used these staffs. To the right of the man with the backpack are another river and a place glyph. The latter consists of a spring, represented by a sphere of water with plumes of smoke. This glyph may represent Totonicapan (totonqui–“warm, hot,” a–“water”).36 Totonicapan is the Nahuatl translation of the K’iche’ name Chwi Miq’ina (“Above the hot spring”). This town is located north of Olintepeque and next to the River Samalá that passes the town to the southwest, just as 161

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 51. From Olintepeque (left), a group of Quauhquecholteca departs, carrying luggage and warrior gear. They are led by a Spanish conquistador on horseback, most likely Jorge de Alvarado (right). The group passes by the fork in the path at modern Los Encuentros.

represented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. Above the spring is a bell-shaped mountain without a characteristic image. To the right of this mountain is a house. There is another house above it and two more on the left side of the road. There are two Spaniards, one of whom is seated in a chair. The other is on horseback and carries a lance. The houses can be read as a settlement of Central Mexican conquistadors in this area. The Título de Caciques (1544), a document from San Miguel Totonicapan, reveals that a Central Mexican settlement indeed existed in Totonicapan, founded by caciques who had served under Pedro de Alvarado in 1524 (Carmack and Mondloch 1989:217; see also Chapter 5). The writers of this document described the arrival of these Mexicans in Totonicapan in 1524: “que cuando ellos llegaron con mucho ruido de cajas de guerra y pilfarro [pífano] de guerra, cuando entraron marchando en el dicho pueblo [San Miguel Totonicapan] los españoles y los casiques Umastecat y los casiques Ayatecat y los casiques de Tlaxcala y los casiques de Cholola y de los cuales casiques quedaron parte de ellos en este dicho pueblo” (Carmack and Mondloch 1989:212). Each of the four groups mentioned in this quotation may have had its own lordly house or barrio in the newly founded settlement, to which the four houses depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan may refer. The Spanish judge/ruler 162

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

and the Spanish conquistador represented near these houses may have been the ones in charge of the area in 1527. The next place glyph is another representation of the Olintepeque glyph. At this point, the road makes an almost ninety-degree turn to the right (for the viewer), and a group consisting of three men and two women is shown walking along it. The women can be identified as such by their hair and dress. They are carrying warrior gear, including an indigenous shield and a feather headdress back rack, and can therefore be identified as tamemes. The first person in the group is divided from the others by a river crossing the road. This group of tamemes represents the retinue of the Quauhquecholteca army at the beginning of the campaign against the Kaqchikel. Reading further, the road splits and turns from one single road into a complex landscape of intertwining roads, numerous war scenes, and other scenes of action. The beginning of Jorge’s campaign against the Kaqchikel thus goes hand in hand with a change of landscape in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. The group departing from Olintepeque therefore simultaneously represents the actual migration or movement of the Quauhquecholteca into Guatemala and the beginning of their military activities there.37 The places represented before the fork in the path at Olintepeque, and those that appear after it, identify this site as present-day Los Encuentros in the department of Sololá, Guatemala. This is still an important crossroads among Sololá, Chichicastenango and Utatlan, Xela (Quetzaltenango) and Guatemala City.

Chichicastenango, Olintepeque, Comalapa After the fork in the path at Los Encuentros, one road leads upward and another downward. I will first follow the road upward. This road proceeds past a place glyph consisting of a mountain with a wall inside that has a plant on top of it. This place can be identified as Chichicastenango, on the basis of (1) the position of this glyph in the landscape, and (2) the identifying elements of the glyph (chichicaxtle–“nettle,” tenam[i]–“wall”).38 To the left of this glyph is a house, and to its right is a Spaniard on horseback who carries the red banner. Only the horse and the red banner are still visible. The Spaniard is positioned in the middle of a crossroad as formed by the road he follows and another that crosses it. He seems to be the leader of the group departing from the second Olintepeque glyph and moving in the direction of yet another Olintepeque glyph. The last Olintepeque differs from the other two in that the olin-sign is placed inside a circle and is colored orange. There are two houses to the left of this glyph. Clearly, the Quauhquecholteca returned to this site repeatedly during the beginning of the campaign. The Spaniard on horseback and the Quauhquecholteca who follow him are no doubt Jorge de Alvarado and his army, starting their campaign against 163

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 52. Chichicastenango’s place glyph as it appears in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 53. Comalapa’s place glyph as depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 54. Place glyph in the Glasgow man­ uscript (f. 299v), glossed “Comahllan.”

the Kaqchikel. The houses related to the Chichicastenango glyph and the third Olintepeque glyph may refer to lordly houses or barrios of Central Mexican settlements in this area, probably comparable to those at Totonicapan. To the right of the third Olintepeque the road crosses two rivers, and there is a large battle scene. This scene shows a battle between Quauhquecholteca warriors with their backs turned to the Olintepeque glyph and five enemy warriors related to another place glyph. This other place is represented by a mountain with a white disk inside and can be identified as Comalapa (comal–“comal”),39 present-day San Juan Comalapa in the department of Chimaltenango. The name Comalapa was a Nahuatl approximation of the Kaqchikel name Chi Xot (“At the comales”) (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:188).

164

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 55. This scene shows that the Quauhquecholteca moved from Olintepeque (left) to Comalapa (right). The battle depicted represents a conflict with the rebellious Kaqchikel of Comalapa.

Below the Comalapa glyph is a fortification on the road depicted by means of a fence made of crossing posts, a convention for rebellion (see Chapter 6). This rebellion glyph designates the rebellious status of the Kaqchikel.40 One of the attacking Quauhquecholteca carries the red banner, and no Spaniards are present in the scene. This indicates that the Quauhquecholteca are fighting independently in the name of the Spanish king, or at least they claim to have done so. Three of the warriors from Comalapa are armed with bows and arrows, and one uses an ax. The fifth seems to be dying. The order in which the events in this part of the document are depicted corresponds to the order in which they are presented by the Kaqchikel in the Memorial de Sololá (see Chapter 5).

Chimaltenango Following the road past Comalapa, the reader arrives at the center of the landscape, at a place glyph consisting of a warrior shield with a crenellated wall on top. This glyph represents the name Chimaltenango (chimal–“shield,” tenam[i]–“wall,” -co–locative), which was in the area of modern Santa Ana Chimaltenango.41 The name Chimaltenango is a Nahuatl translation of the Kaqchikel name Pokob’ (“shield”). This glyph is depicted larger than most others, and three other roads depart from this place. One leads to the upper-left part of the landscape, the second to the upper-right part, and the third to the bottom part. To the left of the glyph is a Spaniard on a rearing horse. The upper part of this Spaniard is faded, but his shield and lance are still visible. Below him is a stone house, probably referring to a Central Mexican settlement. Above the 165

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 56. Chimaltenango’s place glyph as depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 57. Chimaltenango’s place glyph as found in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 300v).

Spaniard is a circle with two people inside, one of whom holds a chest with feathers on top. This is a Nahua convention for a marketplace, or tianquiztli (see Chapter 6).42 On top of the glyph is a man hanged on gallows.43 To the right of the glyph is a stone house, and in front of it is a Spaniard seated in a chair holding the red banner. Below the glyph is an image of a Mesoamerican ballcourt. Chimaltenango must have been a place of importance for the Quauhquecholteca. This is based on the fact that (1) the place glyph of Chimaltenango is depicted larger than most other place glyphs and is positioned in a central spot in the document, and (2) many roads depart from this site. This last fact indicates that the Quauhquecholteca established a new camp at Chimaltenango, from which they executed various attacks. This was indeed the case according to other historical sources (see Chapter 5). The first reference to the presence of Spaniards in the Valley of Chimaltenango is dated September 4, 1527 (Libro Viejo 1934:21, 23; Lutz 1984:51). Gonzalo de Alvarado’s probanza confirms that Jorge de Alvarado was the one who first conquered and pacified this area and also the area of the Valley of Bulbuxyá (or Almolonga, as the Central Mexican allies called it), where later that year he founded a new city of Santiago.44 The conquest of Chimaltenango is also recorded in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and in the AGI Justicia 291 document (see Acuña 1984 I:plate 125; AGI Justicia 291, fs. 97r–97v). The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan does not show a battle scene at Chimaltenango. The resettlement of the area seems to be represented by the Spanish conquistador on horseback, who undoubtedly represents Jorge de Alvarado and who points his lance toward the glyph. 166

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 58. Chimaltenango, represented by its place glyph (a shield and a wall), two Spaniards, a marketplace, and a ballcourt. A Kaqchikel lord has been hanged. This site served as a base camp for Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhquecholteca in 1527, from which they undertook various campaigns of conquest.

The marketplace glyph above the place glyph of Chimaltenango indicates that there was an indigenous marketplace in the area. There was indeed a marketplace, known by the name Tianguesillo, near Chimaltenango. Before the Valley of Almolonga was chosen as the most suitable site for the new city of Santiago, Tianguesillo had been one of the sites considered as a possible new location for the Spanish settlement (Lutz 1984:38–39). The man shown being hanged was undoubtedly a local Kaqchikel lord. There are many references to the fact that the Alvarado brothers hanged Kaqchikel lords. The Memorial de Sololá records the hanging of the Kaqchikel king Kaji’ Imox (see Chapter 5). The source also records the hangings of the Kaqchikel Kiyawit Ka’oq and the Kaqchikel lord Chu’y Tz’ikinu’ (probably the

167

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

lord of Iximche’) and later the hanging of the two Kaqchikel lords Ch’ikb’al and Nim Ab’äj Kejchún (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:190). It is known that Jorge de Alvarado also punished the Kaqchikel ruthlessly, and it would not be surprising if he indeed hanged a Kaqchikel lord at Chimaltenango.45 The ballcourt below the glyph of Chimaltenango may refer to the site San Miguel Escobar, to the south of Chimaltenango and 1.3 km east of modern Ciudad Vieja. This place was also known as San Miguel Tzacualpa (“Old place,” or “Place of the old pyramids”), since it was located close to the remains of a prehispanic settlement. There are several references to the presence of pyramids and other ruins in this area, including one to a ballcourt.46 On November 22, 1527, the second city of Santiago was established near this site, in the Valley of Almolonga. In fact, the presence of the ruins had been one of the arguments in favor of founding the city there, so stones would be available to build houses for the Spaniards (Sáenz de Santa María 1991:34–35). The house at the bottom-left side of the Chimaltenango glyph may have referred to a barrio of Central Mexican conquistadors in this area, possibly Quauhquecholteca. So far, I have found no evidence of Mexicans who settled in Chimaltenango. A noteworthy fact, however, is that modern Chimaltenango is often referred to as “Little Mexico,” a name that reportedly originates from the conquest period. This might indicate that Mexican settlements existed in this area.47 From Chimaltenango, the Spaniards and their indigenous allies waged months of fierce warfare upon the Kaqchikel, during which time the latter refused to pay them tribute. They did not pay their first tribute until January 14, 1528 (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:188). The Kaqchikel lords hid in the woods and did not surrender until 1530 (see Chapter 5). The Kaqchikel were not easy to defeat. One of the Spanish conquistadors who fought with Jorge de Alvarado explained that the Kaqchikel had managed to resist the Spaniards for so long because “descubrieron los naturales [los Kaqchikel] diferentes maneras de defensa para defenderse de la guerra que el dicho señor [Jorge de Alvarado] les hacía.”48 One of the ways the Kaqchikel defended themselves was by creating traps for the horses. They dug pits in which they put vertical stakes hardened by fire and which they covered with earth and grass.49 Kaqchikel traps are depicted around the glyph for Chimaltenango and all over the central part of the landscape (see also Chapter 6, Figures 21 and 22). The central part of the landscape also shows many rebellion glyphs, referring to the rebellious status of the Kaqchikel. I believe this entire area, in which the traps and the rebellion glyphs occur, represents Kaqchikel territory. All the related battle scenes in this part of the landscape refer to the period in which Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhquecholteca fought against the Kaqchikel between 1527 and 1529. Chimaltenango was an essential site in that period and served as a base camp from which most of the campaigns were waged. 168

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

The Narrative, Part 1 So far, this story can be imagined from the point of view of the Quauhquecholteca: A new force of conquistadors arrived in our lands. Our lords established an alliance with these new lords. With the aid of their powerful arsenal we have been able to defeat the Mexica, who had been ruling over our region. We were finally freed from oppression, and so we tolerate the new conquistadors and pay them tribute. And we have sent out our captains with these new allies to proceed in conquest together, to expand our lands, and to fortify our control over our surrounding territory [these conquests are represented around the initial scene at Quauhquechollan]. In the early months of 1527, Jorge de Alvarado, our encomendero, marched out to the south. A vast army of brave Quauhquecholteca traveled with him. We traveled routes taken by our ancestors in past eras and more recently by conquistadors who had moved through these lands. As most of the towns had already been conquered, we met little resistance along the way, and what little confrontation we did encounter was quickly and ruthlessly put down. We placed all the towns under our rule. Meanwhile, messengers informed us about the situation in the lands ahead of us. By March of the same year [1527] our force arrived in Olintepeque. At this site, our captain Jorge de Alvarado established a new settlement. In Olintepeque we danced with music. We also sent out spies all throughout the region of Totonicapan to investigate. Our captains and those of the Spaniards prepared the next step in our campaign to the south. After a brief stay at Olintepeque, our army and retinue set off to war with the purpose of defeating the Kaqchikel. Our tamemes carried our equipment and that of the Spaniards. We first traveled to Chichicastenango. Then we returned to Olintepeque, only to leave shortly thereafter to fight the rebellious Kaqchikel at Comalapa. The Kaqchikel were extremely skilled and valiant warriors, and the fighting was fierce. But we were victorious, and even the Kaqchikel who were left standing in the end surrendered to our rule. And thus we defeated the Kaqchikel of Comalapa. Then we moved on to Chimaltenango. We conquered Chimaltenango together with our Spanish allies. It was here that we established a temporary base camp.

A Campaign from Chimaltenango to Utatlan One road departing from the Chimaltenango glyph at the center leads to the upper left. This road crosses four rivers, then a side road leads back to the Comalapa glyph. At this fork is a glyph for rebellion, near which two Quauhquecholteca captains are shown in battle with two local enemy warriors. The road then crosses another river, and next it crosses the road that leads from Chichicastenango to the third Olintepeque. Meanwhile, it leaves Kaqchikel territory and enters the lands of the K’iche’ while passing by Chichicastenango.

169

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 59. Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. Highlighted is the Quauhquecholteca’s journey from Quauhquechollan to Guatemala, their arrival at Olintepeque, and the path they took from Olintepeque, past Totonicapan and Comalapa, to Chimaltenango. This part of the narrative coincides with the episode described in this chapter as “The Narrative, Part 1.”

At the end of the road is a scene in which indigenous lords are tied to a pole, naked, in the midst of a fire. In other words, they are being burned. Another fire is next to it. Above the two fires is a stone structure that seemingly once had an image on top. To the left are two Quauhquecholteca captains (one carries a back rack, and both use Spanish swords) fighting an enemy warrior at a river. Arrows are flying through the air. In between the two Quauhquecholteca is an image of stones with quetzal feathers. From the location of these events in the pictorial landscape, it seems plausible to presume that they took place at or near the K’iche’ capital Utatlan (to the west of present-day Santa Cruz del Quiché). The K’iche’ name for Utatlan was Q’umarkaj, but because of a strong Mexica influence in the area in prehispanic times, it was already known as Utatlan before the Spaniards and their Mexican allies arrived (Carmack 1981:142–143). The name Utatlan is often translated as “Place of the giant cane” (Mackie 1924:136). The K’iche’ of Utatlan had been subjected to Spanish rule by Pedro de Alvarado in the spring of 1524.50 After

170

Figure 60. Outlines of the journey from Quauhquechollan to Olintepeque presented on a modern geographic map.

Figure 61. Arrival of the Quauhquecholteca in Guatemala by way of Retalhuleu and the outlines of the route they traveled to Chimaltenango, indicated on a modern map (based on Kramer 1994:figure 1.1).

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 62. Utatlan, represented by the burning of indigenous lords.

defeating the K’iche’, Pedro de Alvarado had burned the town and later its lords. He wrote to Cortés that he did this to “insure the good and peace of this land” (Mackie 1924:60–63). Among these lords were the ajpop (king) and the ajpop k’amaja (king-elect) of Utatlan (named Oxib’ Kej and B’elejeb’ Tz’i, respectively).51 The real reason for the burning, though, seems to have been that the K’iche’ lords had been unable to meet his unreasonable demands for gold, and hence they were tied to posts out on the plains and burned.52 The Quauhquecholteca no doubt had heard about this. I believe it is possible that the tlacuiloque of the lienzo depicted this event as a place indicator, to be read along the lines of “there in Utatlan, the place of the ruins, where the K’iche’ lords were burned.” It is known that the sons of the burned K’iche’ lords and the lords of Chiquimula (modern Santa María Chiquimula, located west of Utatlan) later rebelled against the Spaniards and that other K’iche’ uprisings took place afterward (Carmack 1981:306–309). The battle depicted to the left of the burning lords indicates that at a certain point, Quauhquecholteca units set out to this area to fight the rebellious K’iche’. The stone structure above the burning fires may refer to the pyramids of Utatlan, the ruins of which are still present at the site today.53

A Campaign from Chimaltenango to Petapa and Tzonteconapan The second road that departs from the Chimaltenango glyph at center leads straight to the upper-right corner of the document. It first passes a large battle scene in between two rivers. This scene shows a Quauhquecholteca captain with a back rack and the red banner. He is engaged in battle with two indigenous enemy warriors, presumably Kaqchikel. Above them, two enemy warriors hold

172

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

captive a white person, either a Spaniard or an indigenous ally. If this captive ever had a back rack, he was now deprived of it. Men must have been captured by the enemy during every war. The fact that this specific event is depicted indicates that it was a memorable one for the Quauhquecholteca. Perhaps it involved a famous leading Quauhquecholteca captain. Next, there is a half-faded image, which shows one allied warrior and two enemy warriors. There is also a bellshaped mountain, but one without a characteristic image. This place, and hence the scene, could not be identified. Subsequently, a Spaniard followed by two indigenous tamemes walk the road. They walk “back,” in the direction of Chimaltenango. Near them is a Quauhquecholtecatl who has fallen into a Kaqchikel trap. Further on is another bell-shaped mountain without a characteristic image to the right of the road. Two houses are related to this scene, as are two Quauhquecholteca captains (with back racks) who attack three indigenous enemy warriors. This bell-shaped mountain may be related to the toponym depicted directly above it, which consists of

Figure 63. Petapa’s place glyph as depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 64. Petapa’s place glyph as found in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 302v).

Figure 65. Tzonteconapan’s place glyph as represented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 66. Tzonteconapan’s place glyph as found in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 303r).

173

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 67. This place glyph, depicted in the upper part of the Lienzo de Quauhquecho­ llan, may represent Mixco Viejo.

a river with a mat. Above this glyph are two other Quauhquecholteca (with back racks) fighting two indigenous enemy warriors. A similar glyph of a mat and water appears in the Glasgow manuscript, glossed “Petlaapan” (petla–“mat,” a–“water,” -pan–“on, at”). This place can therefore be identified as Petapa, a Pokomam town in the present-day department of Guatemala. The Central Mexican allies who speak in the AGI Justicia 291 document referred to their participation in the conquest of this place, but they did not specify when (AGI Justicia 291, f. 97r). Also, Bernal Díaz del Castillo mentioned that he was wounded in a battle near Petapa on his way from Honduras to Mexico (Mackie 1924:117, 121). It is known that during the late 1520s the area indeed remained unstable. A specific reference to a rebellion in the region of Petapa can be found in the Libro de Actas, which records that in September 1529 an expedition under the command of the alcalde Juan Pérez Dardón had set out to pacify the towns of Jumaytepeque, Petapa, and others that had rebelled (Kramer 1994:90). The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan indicates that at a certain point, Quauhquecholteca units were also involved in putting down a revolt there. Next, the road splits. One part winds to the left and will be discussed later. The other leads to the upper-right-hand part of the document. It first passes by a crenellated wall where a Quauhquecholteca captain crushes two indigenous enemy warriors without heads, then there is a bell-shaped mountain, and further on is a Quauhquecholteca captain next to the depiction of a skull. This part is rather faded, making the images unclear. The Glasgow manuscript shows a glyph of water and a skull glossed “Tzonteconapan” (tzontecom[a]–“skull,” a–“water,” -pan–“on, at”), following that of Petapa. It is possible that there was once water around the skull in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan as well but that it has faded. The fact that the two place glyphs appear successively in both documents suggests they refer to the same campaign. Tzonteconapan remains unidentified. The only clues to its identification are the fact that (1) it is located near Petapa; (2) it contains a water element in its name, which might suggest a site located 174

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 68. This scene represents a fierce battle, possibly at Mixco Viejo. The right-hand part shows the drowning of a large number of enemy warriors.

near water, possibly Lake Amatitlan; and (3) the local word for skull or head is “holom” and might be part of its modern name, although not necessarily.54 After the Tzonteconapan glyph, the road splits again and leads to the righthand border of the document. One of the roads shows two Quauhquecholteca (one with a back rack and the other with a pochteca staff ). The other road shows two indigenous enemies who seem to walk hand in hand. The remainder of the scene has unfortunately been cut off. To the right of the Petapa glyph and the crenellated wall are two other scenes related to the cutoff part of the document. One consists of a battle at a bell-shaped mountain with a house on top. At this site, a Quauhquecholtecatl defeats a local warrior. Only the legs of his enemy are visible; the rest is gone. The other scene shows the end of a road, a bell-shaped mountain, and a dark-skinned man seated in a stone structure who holds feather-work in his hand. On top of

175

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

this glyph is a house image. Since the scene is partly cut off, it was not possible to identify these events. From the probanzas of several Spanish conquistadors it is known that in the summer of 1528, Jorge de Alvarado led a campaign to the Jalpatagua region in the present-day department of Santa Rosa, near the south coast.55 When one travels from Chimaltenango to Petapa, the area of Santa Rosa lies beyond. It is therefore possible that the cutoff part once depicted battles in the Jalpatagua region. While one road leads to the crenellated wall and the Tzonteconapan glyph (and possibly to Jalpatagua), another bends to the left and runs parallel to a river until it hits another road. This road and river bend around a place glyph consisting of a bell-shaped mountain with a house or temple (tecpan/calli/teocalli?) on top, with the Nahua pictogram for a stone (te) inside the house. At this site five Quauhquecholteca captains with back racks defeat two local enemy warriors. To their right, parallel to the river, are three other enemy warriors in various positions, seemingly dead. They may have been taken to the river and drowned. Similar pictographs of drowning people can be found in the various versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, referring to an event at which many of Cortés’s Tlaxcalteca allies drowned (Acuña 1984:plate 57; Chavero 1964:55, plates 18, 18a, 30), and in Durán’s work (Durán 1984 II:303 [Ch. XL], image 27). Apparently, when the Quauhquecholteca attacked this site, so many of their enemies drowned in the river that this destruction was adopted in their stories. The place glyph of the house image with the stone inside it may refer to Mixco Viejo in the so-called Eastern K’iche’ area.56 In the Título de los del Pue­ blo de San Martín Jilotepeque, this place is called Chuwapek Q’eqak’ajol Nima Ab’aj, meaning “Boulder before the Cave of the Sons of the Q’eq.”57 The house image may represent this cave (see also Akkeren 2002:57). Mixco Viejo is located near the Rivers Motagua and Pixcayá, in one of which the warriors may have drowned. The location of this place in the landscape corresponds more or less to its relationship to the scenes painted around it (discussed later).58

A Campaign from Chimaltenango to Pochutla A third road departing from the Chimaltenango glyph leads downward. It first leads to a glyph showing a pyramid with a shield in front of it and a feather on top. To the left are two houses indicating a Central Mexican settlement. There is no battle scene related to this place. The place glyph very much resembles the place glyph for Chimaltenango as represented in the Glasgow manuscript (Acuña 1984:plate 125).59 It is possible that this glyph refers to Chimaltenango again or to another part of the area of Chimaltenango. It is not surprising to see this place-name repeated using a different glyph. After all, Quetzaltenango and Olintepeque, two other sites depicted repeatedly, are also represented by differ176

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 69. This place glyph in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan may be a second representation of Chimaltenango (Lienzo de Quauhquechollan).

Figure 70. Chimaltenango’s place glyph as found in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 300v) (Lienzo de Quauhquechollan).

Figure 71. This place glyph depicts a tree with flowers from which arms emerge. The place represented by this glyph is unknown (Lienzo de Quauhquechollan).

ent variants of the same glyph. If the glyph indeed represents Chimaltenango, the repetition of this place-name emphasizes the site’s importance to the story.60 In between this glyph and the first Chimaltenango glyph are two Spaniards. One plays a trumpet and the other a drum. Spaniards playing the trumpet and drum can also be found in the Texas manuscript, one of the earliest Tlaxcalteca conquest pictorials (see Chapter 9). Next to their instruments, the two Spaniards also carry a shield and a sword, indicating that they belong to the Spanish military. At the glyph of the pyramid with the shield and the feather, the road ends and touches another road. To one side, this other road leads back to the fork at Los Encuentros (discussed earlier), where the narrative split and the army seemingly

177

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

divided. The scenes placed along this road are likewise related to the war against the Kaqchikel. After leaving the fork at Los Encuentros, the road passes by a Kaqchikel trap with a Quauhquecholtecatl inside and another helping him out. Below them is a glyph for rebellion. There are five other traps along this road, three of which show an enemy warrior on top or inside. Following the rebellion glyph is a Spaniard on horseback. He pierces an enemy warrior with his lance by a river. To the left of this scene is a large tree with flowers from which human forearms with hands emerge. This tree can be identified as an “árbol de manitas” or a Macpalxóchitl tree.61 Just before reaching the glyph of the pyramid with the shield and the feather, the road passes by another Spaniard on horseback. This Spaniard faces an enemy warrior at two trees and a river. There is little doubt that the military confrontations depicted along the road between Los Encuentros and the pyramid with the shield and the feather also refer to battles between the Spaniards and the Kaqchikel during the late 1520s. This road may have passed by the former Kaqchikel capital Iximche’.62 Iximche’ played an important role in the initial years of the conquest period. On July 25, 1524, Pedro de Alvarado had founded the first city of Santiago de Guatemala at Iximche’.63 He had chosen this place because, as he wrote to Cortés, “this is the centre of all the country, and there are more and better arrangements for the said conquest and pacification, and to populate the surrounding country” (Mackie 1924:86–87). The use of this site as a home base for the Spaniards ended, however, when the Kaqchikel started to rebel. The town was deserted and never again fully inhabited.64 The name Iximche’ is often translated as “A bunch of trees” (Gall 2000:343), and it received the Nahuatl name Cuauhtemallan or Tecpan Cuauhtemallan (cuauh is the root of cuahu[i]–“tree”). Later, under the corrupt form “Guatimala” or “Guatemala,” this name was extended to the province and then to the republic. Perhaps the two trees at the river below it, if read as “a bunch of trees,” represent Iximche’. It would not be surprising, though, if this site is not represented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. When Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhque­chol­ teca arrived in Guatemala in 1527, Iximche’ may not have been important to them.65 Another possible reading of the two trees is as the unknown hiding place of the two most powerful Kaqchikel lords, Sinacan and Sequechul. The two lords had hidden in the woods to escape imprisonment by the Spaniards. The Memo­ rial de Sololá relates that “por espacio de 1,900 días habían permanecido los reyes en los bosques, bajo los bejucos” (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:188–189). After passing by the glyph of the pyramid with the shield and the feather, this road continues to the right and splits. One of the roads leads to the upper right, and the other winds downward to the bottom edge of the document, with one side road leading to the right. The road leading to the bottom part first passes by an indigenous marketplace glyph at which two Quauhquecholteca with back racks and swords meet three Kaqchikel warriors. To the other side of 178

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 72. This scene may represent the hiding of the Kaqchikel lords in the forest.

the road are two houses and a plant with white flowers. I have not been able to identify this marketplace. A little further on is depicted a big tree and a large battle scene. There are two rebellion glyphs (suggesting two battles) at which five Quauhquecholteca with back racks are at war with seven enemy warriors. From this battle departs a Spaniard on horseback who passes by a defeated (and probably dead) enemy warrior. Below this Spaniard is another scene of action seemingly related to the battle scene. It consists of four houses (a settlement), a Spaniard in a chair with a sword in his hand, and in front of him three enemy warriors, each attacked and bitten by a white dog. This scene shows the traces of a large slip of paper that probably once commented on these events. There are reasons to suppose the scenes depicted along this road refer to Jorge de Alvarado’s 1527 expedition to Pochutla (modern Pochuta in the southeastern part of the department of Chimaltenango). It is known that when Jorge was in Chimaltenango that year, he was informed that the two Kaqchikel lords Sinacan and Sequechul (who had hidden from the Spaniards, as mentioned earlier) resided in Pochutla. Jorge and his allies started a reportedly difficult and rough campaign to this area. They defeated the local Kaqchikel, but they were unable to find and capture the lords, and afterward Jorge’s army returned to Chimaltenango.66 The name Pochutla was derived from the Nahuatl word pochotl or puchotl, meaning “a large or beautiful tree” or “ceiba tree.”67 The large tree to the left of the battle scene may refer to this name. Pochutla was later given in encomienda to Jorge de Alvarado (see Chapter 5).

179

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 73. This scene shows Quauhquecholteca defeating the rebellious Kaqchikel at Pochutla. To the right, indigenous enemy warriors are being punished. They are attacked by dogs under the supervision of a man in a chair (possibly Jorge de Alvarado).

The position of the scene at Pochutla in relation to the Chimaltenango glyph corresponds to the position of Pochutla in relation to Chimaltenango on the ground. The fact that the scene at Pochutla is situated close to the bottom sea band also indicates that it must be a site near the Pacific. Near this scene are depicted three pineapple plants, which likewise indicates that the events took place in the lowlands of Guatemala, where pineapples grow. The battle at the marketplace must therefore have taken place somewhere on the way from Chimaltenango to Pochutla, and the plant with the white flowers may represent a cotton plant because cotton grows abundantly in this area. There are many references to the fact that the Spaniards threw indigenous captives to the dogs, a cruel form of punishment that was used in contemporary Europe as well. This is also depicted in other Mexican pictorials.68 Las Casas specifically mentioned that during the conquest of Guatemala, the Alvarado brothers threw many of their enemies to the dogs, which tore them to pieces and ate them (see Chapter 5). It is also known that Jorge de Alvarado used this form of punishment when suppressing rebellions in the western highlands around Sacapulas and Uspantlan (Kramer 1994:122; Mackie 1924:129). The lienzo indicates that he did so in Pochutla as well. After the scene at Pochutla the road crosses a river, and then there is a Spaniard on horseback with the red banner and four Quauhquecholteca with back racks. These men are seemingly engaged in a battle that has been cut off. Just before the road hits the right edge of the cloth, it merges with another road that started as a side road of one of the roads departing from the first Chimaltenango

180

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 74. Scene representing another fierce battle, which possibly took place at Escuintla. The attacking army is represented by two Spanish and five Quauhque­chol­ teca conquistadors. The Spaniard to the right fires a cannon.

glyph. This road shows a Spaniard on horseback followed by four indigenous tamemes (one white- and three brown-skinned men), who carry items on their backs and hold pochteca staffs. They are chained together, indicating they are slaves of the Spaniard who leads them. As the document has been cut off, their destination is unclear.

Escuintla As stated earlier, a side road branched off the road from the glyph of the pyramid with the shield and the feather toward Pochutla. First along this road, three Quauhquecholteca are shown meeting an enemy warrior, and then, further on, is a battle scene at a large circle of water, possibly a lake, with a bell-shaped mountain inside it. The bell-shaped mountain has four house images inside it. The 1933 copy of the lienzo does not show these houses, one of the rare differences between the two documents. To each side of the mountain is an indigenous warrior defending the place, and in the water are two brown human arms. Another defender is placed outside the lake. They are surrounded by five attacking Quauh­ que­cholteca, four of whom wear back racks and the fifth an eagle costume. To the left is a Spaniard on horseback carrying the red banner, and to the right is another Spaniard firing a cannon. The fact that the tlacuiloque depicted so many warriors at this site suggests a major battle. The road then leads back to

181

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 75. Right-hand part of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. Highlighted are four campaigns of conquest executed from the base camp at Chimaltenango. This part of the narrative is the episode described in this chapter as “The Narrative, Part 2.”

Chimaltenango, passing a bell-shaped mountain with a bird inside at which a Quauhquecholtecatl fights another enemy warrior. Considering the location of the scene in the landscape, it seems it depicts a battle for a settlement south or southeast of Chimaltenango. Possibly, the glyph of the lake represents the region of Escuintla.69 Escuintla was locally referred to as Panatacat or Atacat (in Pipil, a corrupted form of Nahuatl), which has the

182

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 76. The four campaigns highlighted in Figure 75 represented on a modern map (based on Kramer 1994:figure 1.1).

elements a–“water” and t(l)aca–“man” in it. These elements are also represented in the glyph.70 Escuintla was first conquered by Pedro de Alvarado in May 1524, during a battle at which reportedly all the Spanish and indigenous allies were present (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:187). The AGI Justicia 291 document also refers to a battle for this town with participation of indigenous conquistadors (AGI Justicia 291, f. 97r). Another possible interpretation of this glyph is that it may be a place near Lake Amatitlan, a prominent lake in the landscape. The image of the lake and the mountain with the four houses very much resembles the glyph for Aztlan, the place of origin of the Mexica as represented in the first scene of the Codex Boturini. The four houses in this Aztlan glyph refer to the four calpolli of the altepetl. The four houses in the glyph of Escuintla may likewise have referred to the four socio-political units of the town. This glyph is a nice example of the fact that the imagery in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan stems directly from the Central Mexican pictorial tradition. The glyph of the mountain with the bird might represent Alotenango (alo– “large parrot”), a town positioned between the Volcán de Fuego and the Volcán 183

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

de Agua and along the most direct route from Escuintla back to Chimaltenango. Alotenango is located more or less halfway between the two places, exactly as represented in the lienzo.

The Narrative, Part 2 Earlier, I summarized the first part of the story, from Quauhquechollan to Chimaltenango. This part showed a clear chronology. The sequence in which the events are presented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan corresponds to the sequence in which they are referred to in other historical sources. From Chimaltenango on, the chronology is less clear. Yet this narrative can be imagined: At Chimaltenango, where we had our base camp, our captain Jorge de Alvarado laid claim to all the lands in the area. Subsequently, he hanged the lord of Chimaltenango, solidifying his authority. Near this site were a famous local marketplace and some ruins. From this base camp we initiated several military campaigns. Some of our troops set out to the north to defeat rebellious K’iche’ at Utatlan, a site infamous for the burning of two lords by Pedro de Alvarado. We defeated the local K’iche’, and we established peace in the region. While the northern campaign was still in motion, we also undertook an expedition to the west, where we waged a fierce battle between two rivers. During the conflict, in which we were victorious, one of our captains was taken by the enemy. Then we continued to Petapa, which we also conquered. Then we moved on to Tzonteconapan, where we once more subjected the local population to our rule. Another campaign in this area led along a river, where we encountered greater-than-expected resistance. We suffered severe casualties, and many of our men perished. We regrouped in Chimaltenango, and then we set out for Pochutla in search of the Kaqchikel lords who had been hiding out in the woods. The lands of the Kaqchikel are full of traps, and we found much resistance on the roads. We failed to find the lords in Pochutla, but we did defeat the Kaqchikel after another brutal battle. Our esteemed captain Jorge de Alvarado punished the Kaqchikel by throwing them to the dogs. From here we proceeded east, crossed a large river . . . [the rest is cut off ]. Furthermore, our forces were sent out to Escuintla. We, together with our Spanish allies, defeated the Pipil of Escuintla. This, too, was a brutal battle that took its toll on our numbers. By way of Alotenango, our weary, depleted, but victorious force returned to Chimaltenango.

The Volcán de Agua and Quilizinapa To the right of the road past Alotenango runs another road parallel to it. In contrast to most roads so far, this other road does not depart from Chimaltenango,

184

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 77. This part of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows the Volcán de Agua and Quilizinapa. Quilizinapa’s place glyph consists of a circle of water with a bird inside.

although it is linked to the glyph of the pyramid with the shield and the feather by means of yet another road that passes by Alotenango. The former road, instead, starts in the cutoff part of the document at the right and runs through the center of the landscape, eventually bending back to end in the cutoff part again. It is unclear where this campaign started or ended. Along this road are a variety of pochteca, tamemes, or both; an African man, probably a slave; and a major battle scene at a rebellion glyph. Four Quauhquecholteca with back racks wage war with five Kaqchikel warriors. The latter are armed with bows, arrows, lances, and axes. Above the battle is a large mountain from which emerges fire, a convention for a volcano. The slopes of this volcano contain the remains of a glossed slip of paper. The rebellion glyph and the 185

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 78. Quilizinapa’s place glyph as represented in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 311r).

warriors also touch another road that runs above the volcano and that likewise started in the cutoff part to the right. On the road are tamemes. The road passes by two rivers, two burning houses, and two other glyphs of rebellion without battle scenes. The Quauhquecholteca and Kaqchikel warriors who participate in the battle come from both roads. Just before the upper road reaches the volcano glyph there is a side road to the right, with a Spaniard on horseback pointing his lance into the volcano glyph, indicating conquest. The size of the rebellion glyph and the number of warriors indicate an event of major importance to the story of the Quauhquecholteca. The two roads bend around the volcano. Further to the left, the bottom road leads past a circle of water, a lake, with a bird inside. Next to this glyph is a marketplace, and above it are three houses. A similar glyph of water with a bird also appears in the Glasgow manuscript, glossed “Quilitziapan.”71 This place can therefore be identified as Quilizinapa, the name of a lagoon located southwest of present-day Antigua Guatemala. The latter is the site where in 1541 the third city of Santiago was established, after the second city of Santiago at Almolonga (modern Ciudad Vieja) was abandoned as the capital.72 The location of Quilizinapa in relation to Alotenango and Chimaltenango, as depicted in the lienzo, corresponds to the actual geographic location of the two towns. The volcano must then be the Volcán de Agua, which is located more or less to the east of Alotenango and to the south of Quilizinapa, just as represented in the lienzo.73 Below the Quilizinapa glyph is a Spanish foot soldier fighting two indigenous enemy warriors. Both the Glasgow manuscript and the AGI Justicia 291 document record a battle for Quilizinapa, and they both refer to the participation of Central Mexican allies (AGI Justicia 291, f. 97r). From the Quilizinapa glyph, a river leads to a smaller circle of water at its upper right, a lake or lagoon. This lake likely represents the Lake of Quilizinapa. A road links a scene to the lake. This scene consists of a house, in front of which is a man seated in a chair. He holds a sword in one hand and the red banner in

186

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

the other. He is a conquistador in a position of authority. Behind the man is a marketplace. The distance between the scene and the lake seems to exist purely because of a lack of space directly next to the circle of water. The road along which the Quilizinapa glyph is positioned passes by the lake and the scene of the Spaniard in the chair. In between the two scenes is a junction of roads. Then the road leads to the right edge of the cloth, where another large war scene is depicted. This battle takes place at a bell-shaped mountain without a characteristic image. The scene includes a Spanish foot soldier firing a gun, three attacking Quauhquecholteca captains, and eight enemy warriors being defeated. A part of the red banner is visible, suggesting that another Spaniard or Quauhquecholtecatl must have been nearby. It is unclear which event is depicted, as part of the scene is gone and the place glyph is illegible. From this battle scene another road departs, which will be discussed later. The campaigns depicted in this part of the document did not start in Chimaltenango, in contrast to most others described thus far. Instead, the roads started and ended in the missing right-hand part of the lienzo, indicating they were undertaken from a site, or sites, in the east. The Spaniards and their Central Mexican allies had been based in Chimaltenango only until the fall of 1527. In November that year they went to live in the second city of Santiago at Almolonga, from which they executed their subsequent campaigns. It can therefore be concluded that the scenes depicted on the right-hand part of the cloth probably took place in and after November 1527.

The City of Santiago at Almolonga (Ciudad Vieja) The other road leaving the battle scene at the edge of the cloth leads downward. It shows three Quauhquecholteca captains who are dressed for war but are not engaged in battle. Then it passes by a place represented by a greenish shape with four stone structures inside: two houses, a pyramid, and a structure with a stair motif. Further on, it intersects with another road with a pyramid next to a bellshaped mountain, at which a Spaniard on horseback and a Quauhquecholteca captain defeat two local enemy warriors. One of the latter is positioned on the edge of the cloth, and the document has been cut off at his feet. Arrows fly through the air. From the greenish shape with the buildings inside depart two roads. One leads downward and to the right. Before it ends in the cutoff part of the lienzo, there are two tamemes. The other road leads to the upper left. Two rebellion glyphs and a battle scene are near the place glyph, in which four Quauhquecholteca captains fight four enemy warriors. Two Quauhquecholteca carry back racks, the third wears an eagle costume, and the fourth is dressed in a jaguar costume. These scenes are all positioned to the upper right of the scene at the volcano glyph and below the road from Chimaltenango to Petapa and Tzonteconapan. 187

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 79. This part of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows the city of Santiago at Almolonga (right), the Volcán de Agua (bottom), and Quilizinapa (left). The glyph for Quilizinapa is linked to a lake (the Lake of Quilizinapa), which, in turn, is linked to a scene of a man seated in a chair. Various roads depart from the city of Santiago at Almolonga, each of which represents a campaign of conquest.

They must thus have taken place in an area to the north, east, or northeast of the Volcán de Agua and not far away from it. Probably, they refer to the conquest of the Valley of Almolonga by Jorge de Alvarado’s forces and the founding of the second city of Santiago in this area in November 1527. The pyramids may refer to the ruins at this site (discussed earlier). My arguments for the identification of this glyph as Almolonga follow. (1) The conquest of this area and the founding of this city were important achieve188

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 80. Right-hand part of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. Highlighted is the area of Quilizinapa and the Volcán de Agua.

ments by Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhquecholteca. It is thus logical to find them depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. (2) Two roads depart from this site and another passes by, indicating that it was a place from which various military campaigns were initiated. By the end of 1527, the Spaniards had moved their military home base from Chimaltenango to the second city of Santiago at Almolonga. This was thus indeed a site from which military expeditions were 189

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

undertaken at the time. (3) Geographically, this identification matches well with the actual landscape. Presuming that the glyph represents Almolonga, the relationship between the glyphs in this part of the pictorial landscape corresponds nicely to the way the places are distributed on the ground. (4) It is known that after the conquest, a group of Quauhquecholteca settled at this very site and founded a barrio named after their hometown (see Chapter 5). Almolonga was thus an important site to the Quauhquecholteca. In Chapter 8 I elaborate on the possible original size of the Lienzo de Quauh­ que­chollan. It seems that in its original shape, the scenes in this part of the document were located in the center of the Guatemalan landscape. This, and the fact that a group of Quauhquecholteca settled at this site, make it very plausible to presume that the second city of Santiago was the core site of the story of the Quauhquecholteca. It is also possible that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was created at this place. The Volcán de Agua might have served as a perfect point of reference to make the map, as most of the sites depicted in the document were visible from that mountaintop. Fuentes y Guzmán wrote about the view from the volcano: Puédese andar por todo lo alto de su bordo, aunque con dificultad y peligro; y de cualquiera parte de aquella elevada cima se alcanza á ver mucha y muy apacible tierra útil, porque se consigue el ver toda la tierra de la provincia de San Salvador, y todo lo que compone la tierra de la costa del Sur. La laguna de Amatitlán y Petapa se ve á la parte oriental al pie del mismo volcán, y su figura parece, desde la altura, á la manera del corte de una capa; que aunque hay autor que diga parece del tamaño de un pliego de papel, es manifiesto engaño, porque esta se ve toda muy de cerca y de su propia grandeza, y la que dice es la de San Salvador, en Xilopango. Vese todo el valle de Mesas, Mixco y Canales, con todos sus pueblos y labores, con mucha distinción y claridad; la ciudad de Goathemala y sus potreros, y otras muchas poblazones. Vese también, por la parte de Poniente, toda la provincia de Suchitepéquez y la de Soconuzco, y por la del Norte se alcanza hasta la parte que llaman los Llanos de Chiapa, que son los Quelenes. Brollan y nacen en su falda, por la parte del Sur y el Occidente, once arroyos excelentes de maravillosas aguas, que todos van á entrar en la mar del Sur. (Fuentes y Guzmán 1932:55–56)

A Dance for the Dead The upper road departing from the city of Santiago glyph first crosses the road that passed by Quilizinapa, then it crosses the road to Petapa and Tzonteconapan, and eventually it winds upward toward the upper edge of the cloth. Before reaching this upper part it passes by three similar scenes of action: 1. The first scene is positioned after the road has crossed the Quilizinapa road and consists of five houses (two of which stand opposite

190

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figures 81–83. Three dancing scenes represented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. These dances were probably performed in the city of Santiago at Almolonga. Some may have been performed in honor of the Quauhquecholteca who died during the campaigns of conquest. each other), a Spaniard in a chair, and three Quauhquecholteca. Two Quauhquecholteca, one of whom plays a drum, stand on one side with a Quauhquecholteca feather headdress emblem above them. The third stands on the other side and faces them. The latter is provided with another feather headdress emblem, is positioned in a running position, and raises a sword. The Spaniard is sitting behind him. By means of his seated position, the Spaniard can be identified as the person of authority in this scene. 2. The second scene is located to the right side of the road after it has crossed the Chimaltenango-Petapa-Tzonteconapan road. This scene consists of a seated Spaniard and a Quauhquecholtecatl carrying a sword and the red banner on one side and a Quauhquecholtecatl with a back rack and a drum on the other. Above the Spaniard are two houses standing opposite each other. To their left are two enemy warriors bound together by their necks within a wooden frame, a reference to slavery. The Spaniard again takes the leading position. 3. The third scene is positioned to the left side of the same part of the road. It shows a seated Spaniard and four Quauhquecholteca dancers. The latter wear back racks and carry swords and fans, just like the dancers in the scene at the first Olintepeque (discussed earlier).

The drums in the three scenes seem to indicate that the Quauhquecholteca are performing certain rituals in front of their authorities, represented by the men in the chairs. No place glyphs are related to these scenes. I therefore believe they are related to the city of Santiago glyph and are depicted elsewhere only because of a lack of space. The events represented in the first two scenes remain unclear, except that they must have been related to the military activities of the Spaniards and Quauhquecholteca in the area. In both scenes a Quauhquecholtecatl with

191

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 84. Tequicistlan’s place glyph as depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 85. Tequicistlan’s place glyph as found in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 301r).

a sword stands on one side with a Spaniard, and the Quauhquecholteca with the drum stand opposite them. Perhaps this is how news about military campaigns was publicly announced or how allies were called upon to participate in new campaigns. The fact that the events are depicted here means they involved actions important to the Quauhquecholteca and probably were also significant to their social position at the time of painting. The third scene is different, although it involves dancers as well. As mentioned before, dancing was often an important part of rituals and ceremonies. In his Historia de las Indias, Durán included an image that looks similar to the dance performed by the Quauhquecholteca. This dance was performed for those who died during battle (see Durán 1984 II:287 [Ch. XXXVIII], image 25). It would not be surprising to find that the Quauhquecholteca also depicted such a ceremony in their lienzo. After all, few indigenous conquistadors survived the wars waged under Spanish command, and the Quauhquecholteca must also have suffered considerable losses. Those who survived may have lost most of their friends and relatives, whom they undoubtedly honored in their own way. Depicting this dance in the lienzo may have been a way to commemorate the deceased warriors in their historical record.

A Campaign from the City of Santiago to Verapaz and the Cuchumatanes Just before reaching the upper part of the document, the road passes by a large stone structure with five smaller houses around it and two seated Spaniards to its left. Both Spaniards point their swords in the direction of the larger stone

192

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 86. This place glyph possibly represents Panacal. It shows a white circle from which water emerges (Lienzo de Quauhquechollan).

Figure 87. This place glyph shows a conch shell and might be another reference to Tequicistlan (Lienzo de Quauhquechollan).

Figure 88. This place glyph shows three raindrops. The place represented by this glyph is unknown (Lienzo de Quauhquechollan).

Figure 89. This place glyph shows a wall and a deer. The place represented by this glyph may be a site named Mazatenango (Lienzo de Quauhquechollan).

structure. As of yet, I have been unable to identify this scene. Next, the road reaches the upper edge of the cloth and splits. One road leads to the right and runs past the Mixco Viejo glyph and the drowning warriors (discussed earlier). The other leads to the left to continue its way along the upper border of the document. 193

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 90. Tecolotlan’s place glyph as depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Figure 91. Tecolotlan’s place glyph as found in the Glasgow manuscript (f. 313r).

Figure 92. This place glyph shows a gourd and may represent Cubulco (Lienzo de Quauhquechollan).

Figure 93. This place glyph of a bird represents the region of Todos Santos Cuchumatan (Lienzo de Quauhquechollan).

The first place glyph along this road is an image of a red crab. There is a bellshaped mountain below the road, which is possibly related to it. In between the mountain and the crab are two Quauhquecholteca, who attack three local enemy warriors under a rain of arrows. To their left is a Spaniard on horseback carrying the red banner and moving away from the scene. A similar red crab glyph can be found in the Glasgow manuscript.74 This place glyph can be identified as Tequicistlan (tecuici–“crab”) (present-day Rab’inal in the department of Baja Verapaz). This means the Quauhquecholteca had now entered the area of Baja Verapaz.

194

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 94. This scene represents Tecolotlan (right) and the Cuchumatanes area (left). In both areas, battles were waged. The battle scene at Tecolotlan includes images of Quauhquecholteca women. The design of the place glyphs in this part of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan indicates that a mountainous area is represented.

It is known that Jorge de Alvarado indeed led several military campaigns to the north during his first term as lieutenant governor (March 1527–August 1529), including one to Tequicistlan. These campaigns started in the city of Santiago at Almolonga, just as depicted in the lienzo. As is stated in the Probanzas de méritos y servicios de Diego de Usagre y Francisco Castellón: despues que vino a Guatemala el dicho Jorge de Alvarado por capitán [1527], fue a conquistar las provincias de Çacualpa y Tecuastlán y Teculután, que agora se llaman la Verapaz, tierra muy fragosa y belicosa. Y en esta conquista anduvo de ordinario y en su entrada y descubrimiento el dicho Francisco Castellón, sirviendo a su magestad como bueno y leal vasallo, haste que el dicho Jorge de Alvarado volvió a la dicha ciudad de Guatemala. (Gall 1968:144)

Jorge de Alvarado led campaigns not only to the northern places mentioned in this citation but also to the sierra of Sacapulas and Uspantlan (both in the present-day department of Quiché) and to Aguacatan and Poyumatlan (Santa Eulalia) in the present-day department of Huehuetenango (Kramer 1994:66). The road in the upper part of the lienzo displays these campaigns to the north.75 To the left of Tequicistlan, and on the other side of the road, is a place glyph consisting of a bell-shaped mountain and a white circle from which water emerges.

195

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Below this glyph are a bell-shaped mountain and a battle scene: a Quauhquecholtecatl attacks a local warrior while arrows rain down on him. A similar place glyph appears in the Codex Mendoza glossed Ameyalco (ameyal–“spring”; f. 32r, Berdan and Anawalt 1997:69). In this case, it may refer to the town presently known as Panacal, a name derived from Pa Q’ana Ak’al, translated as “place of the yellow or abundant spring.” Panacal is located near Tequicistlan. According to local oral tradition, Spanish weapons and horse bones were found in the fields, which may date from this period and may even originate from the battle depicted (Akkeren 2000:58). Next, a side road leads to a place represented by a bell-shaped mountain with a conch shell on top, possibly another reference to Tequicistlan. According to Ruud van Akkeren (2002:59), this glyph refers to the place presently known as Kaqyub’ or Kaqyuq, an archaeological site north of the modern town of Rab’inal. Below this glyph are two other toponyms. One consists of a bell-shaped mountain with three raindrops (quiahui–“rain”) and the other of a white bird. No actors or events are related to these three places. They seem to have served primarily to indicate the route traveled by Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhquecholteca. The glyph with the raindrops resembles that for Quiauhtepec as it appears in the Lienzos de Chiepetlan from Mexico (see Galarza 1972). Meanwhile, the road continues along the upper rim of the cloth and leads to a place represented by a bell-shaped mountain with a crenellated wall (tenam[i]) and a deer (maza) on top. At this site another battle takes place, in which four local warriors fire many arrows toward two attacking Quauhquecholteca. It is known that there used to be a town named San Lorenzo Mazatenango near Huehuetenango. There are also references to deer dances performed at a site named Chqi Tinamit, not far from Tequicistlan, as deer were important animals in local traditions (Akkeren 2002:59). The lienzo indicates that there must have been a town in this area, known to Central Mexican conquistadors by the name Mazatenango.76 The next place glyph consists of a mountain with a gourd on top, located near a large river. No scene of action is related to this toponym. This glyph may represent the area of Cubulco (“Place of the gourd”), located west of Tequicistlan. After the Cubulco glyph, the road crosses the river and ends at three place glyphs, showing not bell-shaped mountains but high hills, indicating that the army entered a mountainous area. The first glyph in this region consists of a large mountain with an owl on top. A similar glyph appears in the Glasgow manu­ script, glossed “Tecolutla” (Acuña 1984:plate 149). This place can therefore be identified as Tecolotlan or Teculutlan (tecolo–“owl,” -tlan–locative), or Verapaz. Within the mountain is a tree with green fruit or leaves (perhaps gourds, cacao, or avocados), possibly referring to another place-name or to the local vegetation. 196

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Around the tree are nine or ten local warriors, most of whom are hidden behind rocks and houses. This indicates they either fled into the mountains or awaited the army in ambush. They are under attack by three Quauhquecholteca. This scene also shows two Quauhquecholteca women, recognizable as such by their clothing and hairstyle. A rain of arrows comes down on them. Below them is a large circle. There are traces of a Spaniard, but he is almost completely faded. Possibly, this battle scene refers to the 1529–1530 war at Uspantlan, which at the time was part of Verapaz/Tecolotlan (Akkeren 2002:61).77 At the other side of the road is another large mountain with a war scene. This mountain has a bird on top and may therefore refer to the Cuchumatanes Mountains (cocho [plural: cochome]–“parrot”).78 Two Quauhquecholteca (one of whom is dressed in an eagle costume) are attacking three local enemy warriors. Again, the local warriors defend themselves with bows and arrows. Eventually, the road ends in the mountains at a place represented by means of a crenellated wall where two Quauhquecholteca fight two local warriors. The wall may have referred to the name Huehuetenango (huehue–“old,” tenam[i]–“wall”), but the image is too damaged to be certain. The strip of cloth on which this expedition into Verapaz and the Cuchumatanes is painted seems to be bleached in comparison to the strips of cloth on which the Guatemalan highlands are painted. It looks whiter than the rest of the document, and the images are a little more faded, especially in the upper-right corner. The painting style is the same, however. A possible explanation is that the upper strip of cloth was painted with different pigments than the rest of the document.79

The Narrative, Part 3 The Quauhquecholteca story may have continued as follows: We waged another brutal battle against the Kaqchikel at the foot of the Volcán de Agua. Together with our Spanish allies we conquered Quilizinapa. There was a famous marketplace at this site. There was much rebellion in the area. We also conquered the area of Almolonga, and our captain Jorge de Alvarado founded a new city of Santiago. With the founding of this new capital and a Quauhquecholteca barrio, we moved away from Chimaltenango. From the new city of Santiago we resumed fighting the local peoples. Many of our brave men died during the fierce battles. With sadness in our hearts, we executed our ritual dances to honor those who fell in battle, sounding our drums. We always performed these rituals in the presence of our lords. One of the campaigns of conquest executed from this city led to the north. Led by our honored captain Jorge de Alvarado, we entered the Verapaz area by way of Tequicistlan, and we waged another fierce battle at this site. We then conquered several other places in this area. We continued through

197

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 95. Right-hand part of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. Highlighted are the campaigns of conquest executed from the city of Santiago at Almolonga. This part of the narrative is the episode described in this chapter as “The Narrative, Part 3.”

the mountains to the Cuchumatanes, where the people waited for us in ambush. They attacked with the benefit of surprise. But our brave warriors defeated all of them. From the city of Santiago, we set out for several other campaigns of conquest. [Unfortunately, the part of the cloth on which these other campaigns were painted has been cut off.]

198

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

Figure 96. The campaigns highlighted in Figure 95 presented on a modern map (based on Kramer 1994:figure 1.1).

Summary This chapter has detailed the narrative told by the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. The story starts in Quauhquechollan where, by means of an embrace and a ritual of gift giving, the establishment of the Quauhquecholteca-Spanish alliance in 1520 is depicted. This scene represents the way the Quauhquecholteca regarded this alliance: as an alliance like those established with others in prehispanic times and one with the purpose of advancement for both parties. The story then tells of the Quauhquecholteca who set out for Guatemala in 1527 to participate in new conquests with their new allies, in this case under Jorge de Alvarado’s banner. The tlacuiloque depict the places from which the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors and their retinue were gathered and their departure from Quauhquechollan. Then the journey through Oaxaca and along the Pacific Coast is shown. The document shows that Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhquecholteca traveled from Quauhquechollan to Guatemala through routes taken by other conquistadors

199

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

before them, both in prehispanic times and during the early period of the Spanish conquest. The army traveled through Tehuantepec (Oaxaca), Soconusco (Chiapas), and then along the Pacific Coast to the area of Retalhuleu. Subsequently, they passed by Zapotitlan and Suchitepequez. Then they took a turn inland past the mountain pass of Santa María de Jesús and Quetzaltenango and arrived at Olintepeque. The arrival in Olintepeque can be dated in March 1527. From Olintepeque, Jorge de Alvarado and his allies started their campaign against the Kaqchikel. At the time, the latter were in open and hostile rebellion. The document shows that Jorge de Alvarado and the Quauhquecholteca left Olintepeque, passed through K’iche’ territory by way of Chichicastenango, and then entered Kaqchikel territory. They first defeated the Kaqchikel at Comalapa. Then they moved on to Chimaltenango, where a temporary home base was established. The story continues with several expeditions executed from Chimaltenango. One of these expeditions leads to the northwest and involves a battle with rebellious K’iche’ at Utatlan. Two others lead to the south, one to the area of Pochutla and the other apparently to Escuintla, from which they return to Chimaltenango by way of Alotenango. Yet another expedition was undertaken from Chimaltenango and leads to the east, to Petapa and to a place known as Tzonteconapan. Scattered over this part of the landscape are fortifications on roads, pointing at the rebellious status of the Kaqchikel, and Kaqchikel traps: pits with vertical stakes inside. The right-hand part of the landscape shows the Volcán de Agua and the city of Santiago at Almolonga. Jorge de Alvarado founded this city in November 1527. From this new Spanish capital several other campaigns were undertaken. One of the campaigns that started at this site, and that is depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, leads to the north. The Quauhquecholteca appear to have entered the Verapaz area and the Cuchumatanes by way of Tequicistlan. The document also tells of other campaigns starting at the city of Santiago at Almolonga. Several roads depart from this site and lead to the right, suggesting military campaigns to the east. Unfortunately, however, the remainder of the cloth has been cut off, and much information is lost. The surviving alphabetical sources provide little specific information about the conquests realized under Jorge de Alvarado’s banner. It can be concluded, however, that most of the campaigns identified in the Lienzo de Quauh­que­chollan are dated between 1527 and 1529 and that many were indeed realized under Alvarado. Several conquest scenes, however, contain images of Quauh­que­chol­ teca conquistadors only, without Jorge de Alvarado or other Spaniards present and with a Quauhquecholtecatl carrying the red banner. The Quauhquecholteca seem to claim here that they achieved these conquests independently; that is, without Spaniards present. It is possible that they did indeed conquer places in the name of the Spanish king without Spaniards participating. After all, the lord 200

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading

of Tepexi set out for conquests in the name of the Spanish king independently as well (see Chapter 5). No other sources yet known confirm this claim of the Quauhquecholteca. That does not mean, however, that it was false. To the extent that historical reconstructions of the 1527–1529 conquest of Guatemala are available, the account presented by the Quauhquecholteca seems historically reliable. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan can therefore be considered a valuable source and one that also provides unique information. Not only battles are depicted but also marketplaces, pochteca, and tamemes; and there are references to slavery, to punishment by the Spanish authorities, and to the performance of dances. Moreover, the distribution of the place glyphs depicted in this document corresponds more or less to the distribution of these places on the ground. The document thus provides a geographical map that is fairly accurate even by modern standards. Also, it provides detailed information on the main route from Central Mexico to Guatemala taken by the conquistadors in the 1520s. In sum, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a unique and valuable historical source with regard to the conquest of Guatemala in the late 1520s, especially regarding Jorge de Alvarado’s military achievements and the role of the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors. Before using this manuscript as a historical source, however, one needs to analyze the document’s rhetoric to understand the concerns of the lienzo’s creators. After all, it presents the story of the Quauhquecholteca, and thus it communicates only their vision of events. Where was the document made, by whom, and why? These questions will be dealt with in Chapter 8.

201

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

Conquered Conquistadors

8. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

In my study of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, I chose to employ the classical iconographic approach as the central method. In previous chapters I have dealt with the pictorial elements, the analysis of the meaning of those elements, and the identification of the scenes in their historical context (Panofsky’s first two steps). This chapter, in turn, focuses on an exploration of the rhetoric of the work and on the messages it conveys. The aim of this process is to come to a better understanding of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. I therefore analyze the narrative structure of the story and the ordering of its elements. I also discuss the layout of the document and the conventions used within the story and compare them to those of other sixteenth-century Mexican conquest and migration stories.

203

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

Figure 97. Map depicting the places represented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (based on Kramer 1994:figure 1.1).

Narrative Structure and Textual Analysis The narrative structure of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is primarily defined by the roads, which serve as graphic links between scenes. These roads connect the elements of the story, and they lead the reader from place to place, from scene to scene, until eventually the sequences of events they present converge into a narrative. The journey and the events represented by the Quauhquecholteca authors are processes rather than concepts or static events. The lienzo is not about who the Quauhquecholteca were but about who they had become, how this was achieved, and how these changes and transformations are represented. Identity is a key issue here. The document is about migration, transformation, and adapting to new power relations (see also Braidotti 2002:1–2, 8). It serves as an explanation of the situation in which the main actors found themselves and of the identity they had established for themselves at the time the text was created. 204

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

The use of a journey as a means to structure a narrative and to describe transformative processes can also be found in oral traditions and is present in all kinds of world literature, from the Bible to epics like Homer’s Odyssey and fantasies like Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings. The main actors in these stories are not only the doers of certain actions, but they also undergo personal development; they “grow.” This process involves issues of identity, which, in turn, lead to issues of entitlement and power. The road system presented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the journey it represents constitute no more than a variant of this universal literary tool. It is one used, in this case, to show the journey of community members and to illustrate the evolution of the identity of both the community and the different subunits within it. The roads in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan primarily indicate (1) origins (the main actors come from Quauhquechollan), (2) movement (including not only movement from one place to another—the total of which movements amounted, for this community, to a migration—but also movement on the smaller scale of the actions of the warriors in their campaign), and (3) a new identity (as conquistadors). The journey of the Quauhquecholteca proceeds in a direction that is not always linear in time, although in some parts the roads do represent a linear and chronological sequence of events. Because the roads do provide a relatively consistent guide to sequence, the textual description of the events and their historical sequence, presented in Chapter 7, is based largely on the directions of the roads. The narrative itself presents a large variety of themes and should be analyzed with care to respect its ambiguities. The key elements of the narrative represented in the lienzo are the actors, events, and time frame of the narrative and the space in which the narrative occurs. These elements are fully interwoven and inextricably bound up with each other. To come to a better understanding of the different layers and the messages conveyed by the document, it is necessary to identify these elements and to look at the way they are related to one another. 1. Actors. The actors in the story are Spaniards, Quauhquecholteca, an African slave, and indigenous enemy warriors (see Chapter 5). Among the main actors are Jorge de Alvarado and certain Quauhquecholteca captains who appear repeatedly. 2. Events. The events in the narrative include many scenes of war. Other events depicted are related to trade, slavery, authority, and indigenous traditions such as dances. 3. Time. There are no pictographs that provide calendar dates. The time frame of the story therefore must be derived from identifying the events depicted and correlating these events with the known historical record. The first event shown is the establishment of the Spanish-Quauhquecholteca alliance in 1520. One can presume that this is the date when the story begins. The wars depicted are all related to Jorge de Alvarado’s

205

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

1527–1529 campaigns during the period when he served as lieutenant governor. The story thus covers an event that took place in 1520 and events that occurred between 1527 and 1529. 4. Space. The space in which the story is depicted in the manuscript is a large landscape of place glyphs, roads, rivers, trees, plants, and mountains. This landscape covers the area of Quauhquechollan, parts of Southern Mexico, and a large part of the Guatemalan highlands. The story of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan exists in a dual, parallel set of two spaces: the space shown in the lienzo, abstract and selective, and the actual geographic area it represents.

In Chapter 2, I presented a list of factors that determine the effect of a story on its readers. These factors, or tools of rhetoric, consist primarily of the selection, arrangement, and presentation of the narrative elements mentioned earlier. With these factors in mind, I created an analysis of the story presented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. This analysis can be roughly broken down into six distinct but interrelated lines of examination. These lines of examination are discussed further in the sections that follow. First (“Creating the Story”) is an analysis of the manner in which the tlacuiloque created their story, by selecting and placing in sequence events from the larger set of all the events that originally occurred (that is, from the fabula).1 Second (“Rhetorical Emphasis”) is an examination of the rhetorical emphasis the tlacuiloque placed on certain elements of their story, including selected actors, events, scenes, and places. Third (“Creating Characters”) is a discussion of the way actors in the narrative are transformed into characters. Fourth (“Representation of Space”) is an examination of the manner in which space is represented and used in the document. Fifth (“Depiction of Relationships”) is an examination of how relationships among the actors were perceived and represented within the document. Sixth (“Point of View”), and finally, is an examination of the point of view regarding the narrative that is embodied in the document.

Creating the Story I examined the selectivity of the tlacuiloque with respect to what information they chose to communicate in the document and their choice of the sequence in which this information is presented (as opposed to the chronological sequence in which the events depicted originally happened; this is also part of the distinction between the story and the presumed fabula). Forming the basis of this analysis is the juxtaposition of the story presented with information from various other sources. These sources provide the means to approach, as closely as possible, a time sequence for the events represented in the story told by the lienzo that corresponds to the sequence in which those events are generally supposed to have actually happened (the fabula). In other words, the events depicted are analyzed 206

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

with respect to both other firsthand accounts (i.e., other contemporary perspectives) and reconstructive viewpoints from later times (i.e., historical reconstructions). The conclusions that result from this analysis are fundamental to my reading of the scenes. The selection of the information presented in the story depended, of course, primarily on the information the composers had at their disposal. In large part, however, it was also a matter of choice. Which persons, places, and events did the tlacuiloque choose to depict, and which ones did they choose to leave out of their story? The narrative of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan begins with the arrival of the Spaniards in Quauhquechollan. It then tells about the experiences of the Quauhquecholteca in the subsequent decade. Only events and actions related to the conquest period are depicted, and no information from before that time is given. From this it can be deduced that the purpose of making the document is one that had specific foundations in the history of the Spanish conquest. The prehispanic history of the community is not referred to. This part of history was not irrelevant to the community, but it was clearly irrelevant for the story of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. That is an important clue. Another kind of selection is the choice of which events related to this period are depicted and which ones are not. In the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, only military victories are depicted in the many battle scenes shown. The story also includes references to the authority of the Spaniards, and, by extension, of their Quauhquecholteca allies, over the newly conquered peoples of Mexico and Guatemala. Although the Spanish-Quauhquecholteca army must have been defeated at times as well, this is not displayed. Such a veni vidi vici way of presenting conquests is found in both Spanish sources and other Mexican pictorials, with few exceptions. It is also a continuation of a prehispanic tradition. The most edifying example of a prehispanic conquest history is the first part of the Codex Mendoza. This document records the conquests of the Mexica rulers between 1383 and 1521: long lists of conquests are depicted, while not a single defeat is represented. This selective way of presenting conquest stories can be traced in part back to the way power by conquest was perceived by the indigenous peoples of Meso­ america. As stated in Chapter 3, the influence of the Mexica rulers was based primarily on perception of power instead of actual force. As a result, the display of power was of the utmost importance. After each conquest, war captives were sacrificed as an elaborate public show, and news of the conquest was formally spread throughout Mesoamerica by messengers, while news of defeats was kept as silent as possible (Hassig 1988:22). The creation of a historical record that avoided any perception of weakness by selective communication and reshaped the past in such a way that it represented the creators at their strongest is therefore not surprising. A selective way of communicating history is typical not only of the indigenous peoples of Mesoamerica but for most records of the time 207

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

and indeed of all times. Most Spanish conquistadors, in turn, also emphasized their successful military achievements in their writings, and they omitted most of their evildoings and failures. Everyone wishes to present his or her case in the most favorable light, and communication is almost always adapted for that purpose. Seen from another angle, the selection of information in the Lienzo de Quauh­ quechollan was also based on the relevance of conquests and the irrelevance of defeats. Generally, conquests resulted in (progress toward) tribute, status, titles, and power. They caused changes in an established order and led to new power relationships. The story of the Quauhquecholteca focuses on those new relations. Normally, defeats are failed conquests; hence, they barely affected the identity of the storytellers and did not establish new relationships. Recording defeats would therefore be of little use, except when they later turned into victories. Since the campaign set out into territory not already under control of the alliance, any defeat would not result in lost territory or status so much as in a lost opportunity to increase territory and status. The composers of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan presented a heroic story. They emphasized that the Quauhquecholteca were conquerors; they were victors in, not victims of, the Spanish conquest. This is a key issue. By depicting themselves as conquistadors, they could “prove” that they deserved the territory they occupied and were worthy of a privileged social position (see Chapter 4). The composers clearly understood that who one was in the past plays a determining role in acquiring power in the “present” (see also Rappaport 1999).

Rhetorical Emphasis Besides exercising selectivity in choosing what events to include in their construction of the story, the tlacuiloque used another tool of rhetoric by choosing the way the actors and events are presented and the amount and kind of attention given to individual scenes and actors. In the initial scene, the Quauhquecholteca lords receive Cortés with an embrace and presents. With this, the tlacuiloque wanted to make clear and to emphasize that the lords greeted the Spaniards as friends. There is no sign of hostility or of a forced or humiliating subjection of one by the other. Instead, the Quauhquecholteca and Spaniards are represented as two equal groups who meet each other and join forces. The fact that this joining of forces is depicted at the beginning of the narrative and in larger size than any other scene tells the reader that this meeting was an important turning point in the history of the Quauhquecholteca. The alliance with the Spaniards was indeed the basis of all the events depicted in the document. It is where the story begins. A few other scenes receive special attention. One is the glyph of Retalhuleu. This is the place where the army entered K’iche’ territory (or what is now 208

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

Guatemala), indeed an important place in the story. Another is the glyph for Chimaltenango. It is not only larger than most other glyphs, but many roads lead to it, indicating that this site was central to the story. Another way the tlacuiloque emphasized the importance of a person or place in this and other narratives was by repetition. The rhetorical tool of repetition can also be found in sixteenth-century alphabetic Nahuatl sources. In the Lienzo de Quauhquecho­ llan, the glyph of Olintepeque appears three times. It is known that this place served as a home base for Jorge de Alvarado’s army in 1527. Thus, it was of special importance to the Quauhquecholteca. Likewise, some of the actors appear repetitively in various places in the lienzo. One of these is a Spanish conquistador with a red banner, whom I have identified as Jorge de Alvarado. He was the person who had led the majority of the Quauhquecholteca to Guatemala (see Chapters 4 and 7), and it is thus not surprising to see him play a leading part in the story. Others depicted several times are certain Quauhquecholteca captains. They can be identified by their back racks and were presumably members of specific barrios/families/groups from Quauhquechollan and its neighboring towns. The painting clearly indicates which captain (or group) participated in which conquest.

Creating Characters It is important to analyze how the actors are individualized and transformed into characters by the distinct traits given to them. One can presume that all persons depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan represent real-life people (or groups/units represented by a real-life person). In predominantly oral societies, storytelling normally deals with concrete, real-life issues and events, and abstraction is rare (Ong 1982:51). Furthermore, narrative pictography does not normally lend itself to depicting people for illustrative purposes only.2 Each person represented in the lienzo must have featured in the oral traditions that once accompanied the manuscript, and each must have had his or her own story.

Representation of Space With regard to space, the tlacuiloque chose to present their narrative in a geographic setting. The document displays a landscape of roads, rivers, trees, mountains, and communities. In this landscape, the route traveled by the Quauhquecholteca is indicated, including the rivers they crossed (this is typical of indigenous narrative maps) and the towns they passed, conquered, or both. The map is a cognitive map: it is the story that made the map, not the other way around. The tlacuiloque did not depict all the towns they passed, only a selection of them (see also “Creating the Story”). These were the towns significant to the story of the Quauhquecholteca.

209

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

Depiction of Relationships In addition to the necessary connections among the basic elements of the story (that is, among the actors, place glyphs, and events), other relationships are presented. Throughout the document, the tlacuiloque created a series of connections between the Quauhquecholteca and the Spaniards, for example, to make clear that this connection was important to the Quauhquecholteca. As some examples, the Quauhquecholteca and Spaniards are shown in the same army, they fight on the same side in battles, and members of both groups carry Spanish swords. In addition, the tlacuiloque emphasized this connection by depicting the Habsburg eagle as the emblem of the community and by representing the Quauhquecholteca with white skin, similar to that of the Spaniards. This contrasts with the brown and red skin of their Guatemalan enemies. The Quauhquecholteca are also shown with their own indigenous prestigious war costumes and insignia, whereas the enemy warriors are dressed scantily and without insignia. This darker skin and scant clothing may have been intended to portray the Quauhquecholteca’s enemies as less civilized. In other words, the Quauhquecholteca are individualized, presented as victorious conquistadors, and shown to be closely related to the world of the Spaniards, at the time the most powerful force in the region. The link between the Spaniards and the Quauhquecholteca is created, however, without depriving the latter of their traditional warrior dress and insignia. In this example one encounters another rhetorical means of communicating a message. Skin color in Mexican codices is not always a racial indicator but can also refer to identity. In this case, the depiction of the dark skin color of the Guatemalans and the light skin color of the Spanish may reflect these people’s actual skin color. But the Quauhquecholteca are depicted with white skin, even though their actual skin color would have been similar to that of most of the people they conquered. This divergence between depiction and reality may have been intended as a reference to the indigenous concept of “enlightenment” and as an indication that the arrival of the Spaniards was regarded as the beginning of a new episode in history (discussed later). The complexity of the different layers in the painting should not be underestimated. On the one hand, the Quauhquecholteca presented themselves as Spanish allies, but, on the other hand, they are portrayed as a distinct and individualized group with its own identity and history. This indicates that the Quauhquechol­ teca wanted to convey two messages. First, they presented themselves as allied to the Spaniards, to legitimize their identity as conquistadors and to emphasize their privileged status in the new Colonial world. Second, they made a point of distinguishing themselves from the Spaniards, presenting themselves as a distinct group of conquistadors with their own unique curriculum of conquests as a means to further support their entitlement to the rights they were supposed to

210

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

receive from those Spaniards. Thus, several messages are conveyed by the document, which also may have had different meanings for different viewers.

Point of View The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan tells the story of the Quauhquecholteca migrants: it is their story, conveys their worldview, communicates their message, and depicts their impression of events (focalization). The painting depicts the persons and places that were important to them, that were relevant to making their point, and that supported their political, social, and economic claims. They redefined their identity by explaining the past in ways that benefited them most at the time of painting. This is what determined the form and content of the story. The fact that certain places that were important to the Early Colonial history of Guatemala in general are not depicted is therefore not surprising, for they were not directly relevant to the story of the Quauhquecholteca. If not relevant, why depict them? The document depicts a local impression of events, drawing exclusively from the oral traditions and social memory of the Quauhquecholteca community.

Layout and Orientation The physical shape, layout, and orientation of a narrative document affect the way a story is perceived. In its physical frame, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a large, rectangular piece of cloth. Within this frame is created a microversion of the part of the world within which the Quauhquecholteca were active and a representation of the history that mattered to its makers. As a map, it differs from European maps in the sense that it is not organized according to fixed scale and orientation. Although there is a strong correlation between the positioning of geographic features in the document and their actual positioning on the ground, the placement of the place glyphs is primarily based on the narrative. Indigenous maps like the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan were normally meant to evoke or describe certain experiences (acting, in a sense, as maps to sites in memory) rather than to describe a landscape (Leibsohn 1994:170). The left-hand part of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is different from the right-hand part, both in layout and organization. In the left-hand part, the road leads the reader through the narrative in an unambiguous sequence. From Quauhquechollan to the second Olintepeque, the reading direction is clear. In the right-hand part of the document, however, the road splits, and the landscape becomes one that consists of many different roads that split and merge. Without any knowledge of the presumed fabula, it is difficult to determine the chronology of the campaigns depicted. That is, it is unclear how events that occur on different roads would be ordered, with respect to one another, in time. The

211

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

composition of the multiple story lines in the right-hand part of the lienzo may strike the viewer as much more chaotic than that of the images in the left-hand part. This seems to be related to what was required by the narrative and by the physical limits and shape of the cloth. The ordering of the events in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan creates a map that correlates well with the position of the places on the ground. The journey from Quauhquechollan to Olintepeque took place along a linear route. It thus could easily be depicted so that both the linear narrative structure and the distribution of geographic features could be represented accurately. The events that took place in Guatemala, on the other hand, involved separate campaigns occurring in the same geographic landscape. Since the cloth on which the landscape is depicted was limited, events that were part of separate campaigns had to be presented alongside one another. When several events took place at one site and there was a lack of space, the tlacuiloque solved this problem by repeating the place glyph or by depicting events on the closest spot in which space was left. Yet despite these limitations of space, the landscape still correlates well with the way the places depicted are distributed on the ground. The left and bottom sides of the lienzo are bordered by a band with a blue water design. This water glyph includes fish, turtles, a conch shell, other shells, and a crab. These elements demonstrate that this water glyph represents the sea. Quauhquechollan is located in the Mexican highlands, not near a sea; the fact that this sea border at one point passes close to the glyph for Quauh­que­chollan should therefore not be read as a physical nearness of the sea to Quauh­que­ chollan. The road depicted in the bottom part of the document, however, does run past a sea, along the Pacific Coast. Thus, the sea shown in this part of the document does indeed serve as a geographic feature. Other Mexican lienzos have similar sea bands, serving as geographic features, symbolic enclosures, or both. Sea bands can also be found in Mexican wall paintings, such as the Teotihuacan frescoes (Anahuac). Most of the images in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are positioned vertically. Some, however, are oriented horizontally or are shown in a circular orientation. Circular orientation of glyphs is typical for lienzos designed to be read on the floor (see Chapter 1). The fact that most images in the Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan are positioned vertically, however, suggests that the composers intended this lienzo to be read vertically, perhaps hanging on a wall. Another possibility is that they made use of earlier documents that had a vertical layout and that the tlacuiloque followed this layout in composing their own document.

A Familiar Format: The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 The layout of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows remarkable similarities to that of the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 from Cuauhtinchan, Puebla. Cuauhtinchan 212

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

is situated sixty km northeast of Quauhquechollan. This Nahua community was subjugated to Spanish rule in the same year as Quauhquechollan (1520). There are presently seven cartographic histories known from Cuauhtinchan: four large maps painted on indigenous paper (the Mapas de Cuauhtinchan no. 1, no. 2, no. 3, and no. 4) and three smaller ones painted on European paper.3 They were all made in the sixteenth century, and they were created according to the Nahua pictorial tradition.4 The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 shares the same large rectangular shape as the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and likewise presents a cartographic history, in this case a prehispanic migration story. It depicts the migration of a group of Chichimeca from Chicomoztoc (the mythical place of origin of many indigenous communities) into Puebla and the founding of the altepetl Cuauhtinchan. This migration is shown within a geographic landscape that includes the place glyphs for Tenochtitlan, Tlaxcala, Cholula (with which Cuauhtinchan had a special connection),5 Tepeacac, the volcanoes Popocatepetl and Iztaccihuatl, and Coixtlahuaca (Mixteca Alta).6 The events represented in this pictorial include conquests, the establishment of settlements, deer hunting scenes, and scenes of sacrifice. Most events are provided with date glyphs. The document also shows the different subgroups and subunits within the altepetl. Below the place glyph for Cuauhtinchan, for example, is a plaza with seven buildings around it, representing the seven groups present in Cuauhtinchan at the time of its foundation.7 The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 shares much of its subject matter with the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, another indigenous historical document from Cuauhtinchan (Doesburg and Buren 1997; Kirchhoff, Odena Güemes, and Reyes García 1976). The similarities between the formats used for the Lienzo de Quauhque­chollan and the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 are striking. Since most aspects of the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 are relatively well understood, a comparison with the latter provides insights into how to read the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. That is, by uncovering parallels between the places and scenes depicted in certain parts of the two documents, it is easier to understand their function. In comparing the two documents, I made several observations: 1. Both the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 and the Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan start with a large initial scene in the upper-left corner. In the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2, this initial scene takes place at Chicomoztoc, and in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan it occurs at Quauhque­chollan. As the analyses of the documents have indicated, these are the places of origin of the narratives’ main actors.8 This was where their migration, and thus their story, began. Structurally, what Chicomoztoc represented to the Cuauhtinchan people is what Quauhquechollan meant to the Quauhquecholteca.

213

Figure 98. Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2. Photograph by Jorge Pérez de Lara. Courtesy, Angeles Espinoza, the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and the Moses Mesoamerican Archive.

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

Both documents show a scene below each of the sites of origin in which the beginnings of the time periods in which the stories take place are established. The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 shows a New Fire Ceremony in this spot, indicating the beginning of a New Year count.9 The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, in turn, shows a meeting between the lords of Quauhquechollan and the Spaniards and the establishment of an alliance between the two. These scenes indicate the beginnings of new episodes in history. 2. The narratives presented in the two pictorials are organized along a road composed of footprints, horses’ hoofprints, or both. These roads depart from the initial scenes, cross rivers, and pass by place glyphs where battles or other events take place. The main actors of the stories travel along these roads. In both documents this road first leads to the bottom-left corner of the painting. It then turns to the right (from the point of view of the viewer) and proceeds partway along the bottom edge of the document. Next the road goes up, splits, and subsequently defines the landscapes that fill the right-hand part of each manuscript. Although the network of roads presented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is far more detailed and complex than that in the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2, in outline the two are largely the same. The narratives presented in these two documents are migration stories. The roads indicate the migration routes. 3. Both pictorials show the destinations of the Chichimeca and Quauhquecholteca migrations in the center of the right-hand part of each landscape, with the place glyphs depicted in particularly large size. The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 shows the glyph for Cuauhtinchan in this spot. This is the place where the Chichimeca settled and founded their altepetl. It is also the place where the document was painted. In the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, Chimaltenango and the city of Santiago at Almolonga (both Central Guatemala) occupy the same position.10 Both sites had special importance in the story of the Quauhquecholteca. It is known that both Chimaltenango and the city of Santiago at Almolonga were founded by Jorge de Alvarado, the Spanish conquistador under whose banner the Quauhquecholteca conquered. It is also known that the Quauhquecholteca founded a colony in the city of Santiago at Almolonga (see Chapter 5). Possibly, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was painted at this site. 4. Both the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 and the Lienzo de Quauh­que­ chollan distinguish different subgroups among the migrating peoples. The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 shows the seven houses representing the seven subgroups within Cuauhtinchan. The Lienzo de Quauh­que­ chollan, in turn, makes a clear distinction between the captains of the different barrios of Quauhquechollan by depicting each with his insignia. This observation is important to achieve a better understanding of what the painters found important to record and what their message was

216

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

meant to convey. They did not depict the concept of migrating Chichimeca or Quauhquecholteca “in general” but instead clearly indicated that there were specific subgroups, each of which fulfilled its own significant role in the stories. 5. Another aspect common to both the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is the importance of a leader to the migration stories. This is also found in other Nahua migration pictorials. The Mexica who migrated from Aztlan and founded Tenochtitlan were led by their patron deity Huitzilopochtli. This is depicted in the Pintura de la Peregrinación de los culhuas-mexitin (or Mapa de Sigüenza), the Tira de la Peregrinación (or Codex Boturini), the Codex Aubin, and the Codex Azcatitlan (see Castañeda de la Paz 2002a, 2002b). The Acolhua who migrated into the Valley of Mexico and founded Texcoco, in turn, were led by their leader Xolotl. This is depicted in the Codex Xolotl (1542) (see Dibble 1996). The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 shows Teuhc­ tlecozauhqui, one of the leaders of the migrating Chichimeca. For the Quauhquecholteca, their important leader was Jorge de Alvarado, who is depicted repeatedly. Alvarado was the one who had taken them from Quauhquechollan, who had brought them to Guatemala, and under whose banner they fought. In other words, Jorge de Alvarado was for the Quauhquecholteca what Huitzilopochtli was for the Mexica of Tenoch­ titlan, Teuhctlecozauhqui for the Chichimeca of Cuauhtinchan, and Xolotl for the Acolhua of Texcoco. 6. The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan show the use of similar kinds of rhetorical tools. The achievements of the main actors are presented in the most favorable light, and events that would not support their case are omitted. In both documents, for example, only conquests are depicted; defeats are not represented. 7. Also, the geographic character and orientation of the two documents show many similarities. When comparing the landscape depicted in the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 to a modern geographic map, it can be concluded that in the left-hand part of the pictorial it was primarily the narrative that determined the placement of elements of the map, while the landscape depicted in the central part of the right-hand side of the document shows many correlations to the actual geographic landscape. The distances between the places are not always presented accurately, but their position in relation to each other largely corresponds to the way they are distributed on the ground (Yoneda 1978:135). The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows similar characteristics. The left-hand part shows one road leading from Quauhquechollan to Olintepeque. The outlines of this route do correspond more or less to the outlines of the route traveled in the actual landscape, but it is primarily the story that is determinative. The places are shown in the order in which they are passed through by the army. The places in the right-hand part of the document, on the other hand, are skillfully organized according to their geographic

217

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

locations. Apart from the bell-shaped mountains that form the basis of the place glyphs, both documents also show other mountain-like glyphs. These glyphs refer to mountainous areas in the landscapes.

In sum, the stories of the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan not only have the theme of conquest/migration and their rectangular shape in common, they are also organized according to the same narrative structure and with a similar set of components. Therefore, it seems plausible to presume that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan conveyed a similar message to the Quauhquecholteca (especially to those who lived in Guatemala) as the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 provided to the inhabitants of Cuauhtinchan. Both seem to have originally served in an indigenous context, to remind the communities in question of the place they or their ancestors originally came from, how they came to be where they lived, who guided them there, and why. Conquest and migration were, after all, important elements of a community’s past. The past was the key to the community’s identity, justified the power and position of its rulers, and supported its political and social structure. Since both documents are so strikingly similar, it can be suspected that the original size of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (from the time before the righthand part was cut off ) was of more or less the same proportions as the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2. This would suggest an original Lienzo de Quauhquechollan about one-third larger than it is now. The only reason the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 is categorized as a mapa and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan as a lienzo is that the first is painted on paper and the second on cloth. This is a revealing example of the fact that the categories used by scholars, based as they are on the material or shape of the document, are not always useful and are sometimes even confusing.

Set Formats for Conquest and Migration Stories Conquest and migration were prevalent themes in Mexican pictorials. As stated earlier, they were central to a community’s identity and justified the power and position of its ruling elite. The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are two examples of Nahua conquest stories, migration stories, or both. Most indigenous conquest and migration stories are organized according to similar principles, use similar formats, and follow the same general outlines. They generally start at the place of origin of the main actors. Then they show a series of places, usually presented sequentially, that were conquered or where other events relevant to the story took place. In the times these documents were made, war was indispensable, as it was the primary means to obtain new lands. Finally, the conquest and migration story concludes with a narration of how the main actors formed a new settlement, often an altepetl or a barrio (see also Boone 2000:163, 242). 218

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

Comparable stories are also found in pictorial documents from Oaxaca. Particularly useful for comparison with the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are the Early Colonial lienzos from the Coixtlahuaca Valley. These lienzos all display cartographic features, and some are rather detailed topographical maps. The Coixtlahuaca lienzos have much in common with both the mapas of Cuauhtinchan and some of the Ñuudzavui (Mixtec) and Benizaa (Zapotec) pictorials from Oaxaca (see Doesburg and Buren 1997). The Lienzo de Tlapiltepec, for example, also narrates a migration story that begins in Chicomoztoc, but it presents an abbreviated version. The bottom-left part of this pictorial shows how the first ancestors emerge from Chicomoztoc and how they migrate into the Coixtlahuaca Valley. This story also includes a New Fire Ceremony. The migration is followed by a genealogy of rulers of Coixtlahuaca and the records of the establishment of communities in the area.11 In the Mexican conquest pictorials, the individual scenes are also depicted in adherence with closely comparable patterns. The initial scene of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, for example, shows the same format used for some of the scenes in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, in which Tlaxcalteca and Otomí lords greet the Spanish conquistadors (see Chapter 7). The initial scene of the Lienzo de Tlax­ cala, in turn, finds a counterpart in the Mexica Codex Mendoza (see Chapter 9). The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan also shows many similarities, both in terms of the document overall and on the level of individual scenes, with the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Analco, two stories of Tlaxcalteca conquest under the Spanish banner (see Chapter 9). It is not surprising to find a set of common, fixed conventions of representation for both the elements of indigenous pictorial narratives and the narratives themselves. Writing has a long history in Mesoamerica, but it served in a largely oral society with its own established conventions of oral culture. Both traditions were closely related to each other. The pictorials may have made use of the same narrative structures present in contemporary oral traditions. In largely oral societies, fixed conventions in writing also helped make the written records acceptable as sources of information and as evidence.12 The same can also be seen in contemporary Spanish sources. Most probanzas of Spanish conquistadors were written according to certain conventions as well, because this made the texts more credible and acceptable as proof of the validity of the writer’s position. The existence of these conventions also helped readers familiar with them understand a written source. The conventions of the indigenous conquest and migration stories seem to date from prehispanic times. The Mapas de Cuauhtinchan and the Lienzo de Tlapiltepec were probably copied, or partly copied, from prehispanic documents. Also, the distribution of documents with similar formats over a large geographic area points in the same direction. Chicomoztoc and the New Fire Ceremony are recurring elements in prehispanic migration stories, the latter serving mostly as an indicator of a “new beginning.” 219

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan indicates that the indigenous formal conventions for conquest and migration stories continued to be used in the Colonial period, although they were adapted to the changed circumstances. In the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the New Fire Ceremony (as an indicator of a new beginning) is replaced by a scene representing the arrival of the Spaniards. The establishment of the Spanish-Quauhquecholteca alliance meant the beginning of a new era for the Quauhquecholteca: they were no longer subjected to the Mexica (see Chapter 3) but had become conquerors at the side of their new allies. This concept of a new beginning is emphasized by the fact that the Quauhquecholteca gave themselves white skin, as opposed to the brown or red skin given to their enemies. This is symbolic of the fact that the Quauhquecholteca regarded themselves as part of a “new world” as opposed to an “old world” to which their enemies belonged. The moment at which the Spanish-Quauhquecholteca alliance was established both separated and connected these two worlds or periods. It is true that the indigenous peoples of Mesoamerica generally perceived of history in terms of multiple periods. The K’iche’ Popol Vuh, for example, divides history into two parts: (1) a first period of sacred history (taking place in darkness), which deals with the formation of the cosmos and the cycle of life and death, and (2) a second period of human history that includes the establishment of the K’iche’ community, its origin, and its ruling dynasties. The arrival of light is what separates/connects these two parts in K’iche’ history, and humankind is referred to as “pueblo de la luz,” “hijos paridos de la luz,” “hijos engendrados de la luz.” A similar moment of dawn at the beginning of humankind can be found in the prehispanic Ñuudzavui pictorial Codex Vindobonensis, which represents this arrival of light by means of a New Fire Ceremony (Jansen 1997:12–15; Tedlock 1985). These same concepts are also present in Nahua historiography, which makes distinctions between multiple creations of “suns,” or periods.13 The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 also presents a New Fire Ceremony at the beginning of its story, at the departure of the Chichimeca from Chicomoztoc. The New Fire Ceremony indicates this moment as the beginning of a new phase in human history. As such, each community and culture took its own place in history with a moment of beginning (or “dawn”). The political and religious conquest by the Spaniards was likewise regarded by many as the beginning of a new era, symbolically marked by the “light” of the evangelization, and it was often incorporated into indigenous historiography as such (Jansen 1997:22). The Lienzo de Tlaxcala illustrates this nicely by depicting not only the establishment of the SpanishTlaxcalteca alliance at the beginning of the story but also the baptism of the Tlaxcalteca rulers and the burning of all indigenous prehispanic documents. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan reflects the same perception of a new beginning by presenting the Spanish-Quauhquecholteca alliance at the beginning of the narrative, on the very spot where the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 shows the 220

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

New Fire Ceremony. The defeat of the Mexica occurred at the end of the previous creation. This period was subsequently considered no longer relevant and is ignored in the document. The new era started at the very moment the Spaniards arrived and the Spanish-Quauhquecholteca alliance was established. Perhaps the Quauhquecholteca tlacuiloque were reluctant to depict a New Fire Ceremony in their initial scene, as it would have been a reference to old “pagan” ceremonies and thus might have been disapproved of by the Spaniards. They may have solved this dilemma by providing the Quauhquecholteca and the Spaniards with white (light) skin instead of depicting the New Fire Ceremony itself. That way, they still communicated the prehispanic concept of “enlightenment” at the beginning of a new era, but they did so according to Colonial “rules.”14 The dark skin of the enemy warriors indicates that they still belonged to the “other world,” as they were not baptized or allied to the Spaniards. The concept of a new beginning is also common in world literature. The arrival of new persons or visitors often marks the beginning of a story, or a beginning is otherwise indicated as a “clean start” through which previous events become irrelevant. The fact that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows the same organizing principles and conventions as those used for stories of prehispanic alliances and conquests and communicates a similar worldview, indicating that the stories of conquests under the Spanish banner were seen within an indigenous historical framework. No new ways of communicating new rules or new principles of composition were developed to correspond with the new era the documents described. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is clearly a continuation of prehispanic thinking with regard to conquest and domination (see Chapters 3, 5, 7, 9).

Where Was the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan Made? The provenance of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is unknown. By the end of the nineteenth century, when the document was first mentioned in the literature, it was in Puebla, Mexico, together with the Genealogía de QuauhquechollanMacuilxochitepec and possibly also the Codex Huaquechula (see Chapters 3 and 4). The whereabouts of these three documents before that time are not recorded. There is little doubt that the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec and the Codex Huaquechula were made in Quauhquechollan. The fact that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan ended up in the same collection suggests that it had been in Quauhquechollan as well at one time or another and that the three documents were possibly transferred to Puebla together. Paso y Troncoso (1892–1893 I:71), who first described the document, wrote that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was made in Quauhquechollan. Unfortunately, he does not explain the factual basis for his statement. If the document was indeed produced in that community, the tlacuiloque must have 221

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

been well informed about the conquest journey of the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors. They may have participated in the conquest themselves or been informed by former conquistadors or their descendants. It is also possible that they had learned about the conquered area from travel, perhaps while engaged in trade. They may also have had previous pictorials or maps from the area at their disposal. Another possibility, however, is that it was made in a colony of Quauhquecholteca in Guatemala and sent to Quauhquechollan. The most probable place of creation in Guatemala is the city of Santiago at Almolonga. It is known that the Quauhquecholteca founded a colony there, and the tlacuiloque may have climbed the Volcán de Agua to be able to depict the places mentioned in their story more or less in the way they are distributed on the ground (see Chapter 7). If composed in Guatemala, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was probably sent to Quauhquechollan to report the military achievements of the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors to their lords and community members at home. This would explain why it ended up in Puebla, together with the other pictorials from Quauhquechollan. If it was sent to Mexico for use in interactions with the Spanish (which is less probable), some of the document’s possible destinations may have been with the viceroy in Mexico City, with Jorge de Alvarado after his return to Mexico, or perhaps even Spain.15 It is known that both Nahua communities and their colonies elsewhere in Mesoamerica had pictorials that were made according to Nahua writing traditions. In Tlaxcala, for example, several pictorials were created that documented the conquests achieved by Tlaxcalteca conquistadors (see Chapter 9). Examples of documents made in colonies are the lost mapa of Totonicapan, reportedly made by Central Mexican conquistadors who had settled in Totonicapan (see Chapters 4 and 9), and the Lienzo de Analco. The latter was made by Tlaxcalteca who lived in a Tlaxcalteca colony in Oaxaca (see Chapter 9). During her research in the Archivo General de Indias in Seville, Spain, Wendy Kramer encountered a document dated 1571 in which the Spaniard Juan Fernández Nájera (a fluent speaker of Nahuatl and translator for the indigenous conquistadors) declared that he had seen “un paño pintado q. truxeron a esta ciudad [Santiago de Guatemala] unos indios en q. señalaban los conquistadores y los viajes q. abian  hecho a los que en las dhas conquistas mas se abian señalado y servido.” The Spaniard added that this painting included images of Diego Sanchez de Santiago, one of the area’s first conquistadors.16 This cloth document may well have been the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, which would confirm a creation and early use of the document in Guatemala. It is also possible, however, that the Spaniard referred to a comparable document that is now lost. In June 2006, Laura Matthew identified a document containing another testimony by Juan Fernández Nájera, in which she found the Spaniard again referring to painted documents and even more specifically to the fact that they 222

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

were presented to the Spaniards as part of indigenous petitions for mercedes. Fernández Nájera stated that he knew about the role of the “indios principales tascaltecas e mexicanos” in the conquest, among others, on the basis of “figuras y pinturas que mostraban a gobernadores y presidente y oidores de esta tierra para que se les hiciesen mercedes como tales conquistadores lo mostraban asi y por relacion y escrituras.”17 A third, although less probable, possibility regarding the Lienzo de Quauh­ que­chollan’s place of creation is that the right-hand part of the document (the Guatemalan landscape) was made in Guatemala or copied from a Guatemalan document and that the left-hand part (the initial scene at Quauhque­chollan and the battles that took place in what is now Mexico) was added later in Mexico. The composition of the document on two different types of cotton cloth (one type for the Mexican part and another for the Guatemalan part) raises this as a possibility. The two parts are sewn together just before the road reaches Zapo­ titlan, the place where Pedro de Alvarado’s army had its first encounter with K’iche’ warriors in 1524. Against this hypothesis is the fact that the two parts show the same writing style. If it was indeed made in two parts, it was presumably still made by the same tlacuilo or tlacuiloque. Perhaps future research into the fiber or weave of the different parts of the documents, or into the origins of the pigments used to paint it, will reveal more information. More than one Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was possibly produced. The contemporary Lienzo de Tlaxcala, for example, was reportedly made in three copies: one for the Town Hall in Tlaxcala, another for the viceroyalty in Mexico City, and a third to be sent to Spain (see Chapter 9). If the Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan was made in Guatemala, I would argue that at least two versions were made: one version for the Quauhquecholteca community in the city of Santiago at Almolonga and another to be sent home to the rulers, families, and the rest of the community in Mexico. The last would be the version that is presently in Puebla. It is known that the Spaniards in Guatemala and Mexico communicated with each other by means of letters (see Chapter 4), and there is evidence that the indigenous conquistadors communicated with their hometowns as well (see Matthew 2004). The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan may point to a correspondence between the Quauhquecholteca who lived in Guatemala and those who had remained in their hometown.

Function and Use Some Early Colonial pictorials were created for use within the indigenous community, while others were specifically made for the Colonial administration (see Chapter 1). Even though the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows many Colonial elements, I believe it was originally made for internal use and that only later did it serve in a Spanish context, if at all. 223

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

This assumption is primarily based on the document’s contents and rhetoric (discussed earlier). The imagery was clearly directed to evoke indigenous memories rather than to communicate to a Spanish audience. Moreover, the fact that a Nahua medium of communication (Nahua pictography) and a Nahua format (the indigenous migration and conquest format) were chosen suggests it was meant for Nahua readers. This medium and format would have been fully understood only by those familiar with them; that is, a Nahua public. The complexity of the iconography also points to use by Nahua readers. It is still possible that it was made for a Spanish public, and this possibility should not be excluded. Perhaps future research will provide more information. Lienzos and other historical narratives primarily created for use within the indigenous sphere were normally used to help community members structure and acknowledge their collective memory and history, to offer a framework for understanding certain events and for establishing identity and self-recognition (see also Leibsohn 1994:161, 164–165). Another important purpose was to acknowledge power relations and social structures. Most pictorials were created above all to legitimize the position and power of the rulers of the community in question (see also Doesburg and Buren 1997:106). Crises are intensifiers. The Spanish conquest of Mexico and Guatemala brought about radical changes and led to a new socio-political system. It left the indigenous peoples with uncertainties and disorder. The rulers of the communities not only needed to adapt to a new system, but they also needed to give their people a renewed sense of certainty and common identity that would make it possible for them to deal with the new post-conquest situation. The need for an explanation and redefinition of identity must have been felt strongly within indigenous communities during the decades following the Spanish conquest. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan functioned in this context and provided such an explanation to the Quauhquecholteca. The painted journey explained and rationalized the processes that had taken place and the new situation and position of the Quauhquecholteca at the time of painting. It explained their contributions to the Spanish conquest and therefore their status as conquerors. The document is about the transformation of a system, of a community, and of the community’s identity as a result, with its purpose being to position the Quauhquecholteca advantageously within the Colonial system. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan not only explained the position of the Quauhquecholteca in a new system, but it also explained and justified the presence of Quauhquecholteca in Guatemala and provided the reason many had perished. This element of justification was essential, so the common feeling would be one of security and perhaps even pride rather than of sadness and dissatisfaction. The document created a shared memory of the Quauhquecholteca as brave warriors and successful conquerors. It contributed to the self-image of the Quauhquecholteca in Guatemala as conquerors among the conquered, as victors 224

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

in conquest rather than victims. It also established a distinct social position for this group within the community in which they lived. The Quauhquecholteca were conquistadors, related to the world of the new lords and with a privileged position distinct and separate from that of other conquered peoples. That is how they expected to be recognized by others. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan provided a written record, a physical “proof,” of this status. It proved that the Quauhquecholteca had won the lands they inhabited, that they deserved them, and that they also deserved the titles and privileges related to their service. Mesoamerican cultures knew literacy through pictography, but these peoples still relied heavily on oral communication of memories. In the indigenous communities, large-sized pictorials like the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan were not read silently (see also Chapters 1 and 2). They were normally presented during storytelling events, in combination with oral texts recited by a historian or sage. These oral recitals provided much more information than what is depicted in the pictorial. They undoubtedly provided information on the character of the actors, the motivations behind their actions, the circumstances in which they traveled, and details of the battles and the other events depicted. Perhaps they also included a more detailed description of the landscape they traveled through, the rivers they crossed, and the characteristics of the places they passed. Unfortunately, these oral recitals are lost. In largely oral cultures, modes of expression, thought processes, and the way things are remembered are different from our culture of writing. To recall information accurately, thinking was often done in mnemonic patterns. The oral recitals that accompanied the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan no doubt included rhythmic patterns such as song and prose, since rhythm aids recall. Presumably, they also used repetition to keep both speaker and hearers focused (Ong 1982:33–34, 40). In oral accounts, the main actors are often praised highly, and both storytellers and audiences likely felt an emotional bond with them, creating a communal reaction rather than individual reactions. Although the visual input from the lienzo was fixed, the oral part of the story may have varied at each presentation, depending on the occasion, the storyteller, the audience, the interaction with the audience, and other social and psychological factors. After all, storytellers narrate what audiences call for or will tolerate (see also Ong 1982:45–46, 60, 67). Well-known examples of alphabetic texts structured according to oral memory are the greater part of the Old Testament, the Iliad, and the Odyssey. For oral recitals to be recalled well by the storytellers, they had to be spoken frequently, and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was presumably presented repeatedly on special public occasions. An occasion serving a public function can be considered a ceremony or a ritual.18 It can be presumed that, as in any ritual, the presentations of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan took place in a specified context with set formalities, by specific people, at a special place, and on specific days. 225

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

The exact manner of these presentations depended on the social circumstances and needs of the community (see Rappaport 1999:33). By repeatedly retelling the story of the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors, the storytellers provided an explanation of their status and situation in their world and touched upon one of the fundamental aspects of ritual: commitment.19 The Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan was not only a memory, it was also a physical manifestation of the Quauhquecholteca’s commitment to their role in the conquest period, to their identity, and to their vision of society and the new system.20 If the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was indeed made in duplicate, with one copy for the Quauhquecholteca who ended up in Guatemala and the other for those in Quauhquechollan, it may have been used in community rituals in both places. These rituals may have allowed them to commemorate the many war victims and to take courage from the community’s past as they tried to achieve what they wanted for their future. The presentation of the Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan may have been comparable to modern rituals such as the U.S. Fourth of July celebration, the Mexican Día de Independencia on September 15, and the Dutch Fourth of May commemoration. Perhaps some Quauhquecholteca from Guatemala traveled to Quauhquechollan to participate in the commemoration at their hometown. For those who participated in the ceremonies in Guatemala, it was not only a moment of dealing with their past and of commitment but also a moment of “contact” with their place of origin. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was originally made without alphabetic glosses. These glosses were added at a later stage.21 The fact that these texts were added means someone wanted to make the contents of the document understandable to readers unfamiliar with the Nahua pictorial script. These readers may have been either indigenous or European. The glosses might originate from a later use in a Spanish context. The indigenous nobility knew a document was only valuable in an interaction with the Spaniards, such as a legal case, if it had alphabetic glosses on it or a text explaining the events (Gruzinski 1993). The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan may have come into use in the Spanish sphere in a dispute regarding land claims or, more likely, in attempts to regain the privileges granted to the indigenous conquistadors, which, after a few years, were often ignored. Many such claims exist in alphabetic sources in which indigenous communities present to the king evidence of their contributions to the conquest to support their demands for their rights. The bulk of these alphabetic claims were written in the 1560s and 1570s (see Chapter 5). Many of these claims, generally in Spanish and Nahuatl, deal with the indigenous conquistadors’ indispensable military role in Guatemala. References indicate that some of these written documents, in particular those composed by Nahuas who lived in Guatemala, were accompanied by a geographic-historical map in pictorial writing; that is, a lienzo.22 The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan may have fulfilled a similar role when the Quauhquecholteca became involved in land or tribute claims, 226

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

either in Quauhquechollan or in Guatemala. There is little doubt that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was once accompanied by a document in alphabetic writing, which commented on the painting. I believe the evidence suggests that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was created in the 1530s. The pictorial depicts events that took place between 1520, when the Spanish-Quauhquecholteca alliance was established, and 1527–1529. Subsequent events are not recorded, at least not in the surviving part of the document. It must thus have been painted after 1529. In 1541, a large part of the city of Santiago at Almolonga was destroyed by a mudflow that came down from the Volcán de Agua (see Chapter 4). It seems unlikely that the story was recorded after this event and excluded it, for the obvious reason that the document would then, with its depiction of the city as still in existence, have been obsolete. Another clue is the almost suspicious absence of churches in the painting. This is in sharp contrast to the presence of at least one and often several churches in almost every other Colonial Mexican pictorial. The building of notable churches in Guatemala started later than it did in Mexico; that is, in the late 1530s and 1540s. The absence of churches in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan suggests that it was made in an early stage of colonization. The characteristics of the painting, such as style, colors, use of space, and similar elements, also point to an early date of creation.23 The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan has had different meanings for different readers over time. Many readers, from a variety of cultures, times, and social backgrounds, have viewed the pictography in terms of their own tradition, including scholars studying the document. Each reader emphasizes different elements, depending on his or her understanding of the medium, relation to the Quauhquecholteca, social class, gender, worldview, and concerns. To the Quauhquecholteca who participated in the conquest and came to live in Guatemala, for example, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was primarily a story explaining why they lived there. It was a reference to their roots and experiences, and it explained the formative processes of their community. It was also physical evidence of the privileged status the Quauhquecholteca enjoyed in Guatemala, a social status different from that of other indigenous groups. To them, the document served as both a means of establishing their identity within their new surroundings and a record of their past experiences. For the children and grandchildren of the former conquistadors, it served a similar purpose, except that the experiences were not their own but those of their ancestors. To the Quauhquecholteca who remained in Quauhquechollan, on the other hand, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was the heroic story of their fellow community members who had left their town and set out to conquer. For readers related to one or more of these conquistadors, it was the heroic story of their relatives. To the lords of the town, the document recorded the military achievements of their people and thus, indirectly, their own achievements. For other, later 227

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

Quauhquecholteca, the manuscript may have had less immediate impact because with greater distance in time, the document’s interest would be more historical. It explained why a colony of their community existed in Central America and how that colony had come into being. Quauhquecholteca in both Quauhquechollan and Guatemala may have claimed rights and privileges based on this history of what their ancestors did in the conquest. After all, the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors were sent by the community, and, as such, they represented it, or rather, its ruling houses. It is unknown whether Jorge de Alvarado ever saw the Lienzo de Quauh­ quechollan. If so, he witnessed his own story as well as that of the Quauhque­chol­ teca. Intentionally or unintentionally, the document also served his interests. It is possible that the Quauhquecholteca created the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan in one of the periods in which Alvarado was in control of the government of Guatemala. When they saw their patron becoming more important, they may have believed that the fact that they were allied to him would give greater meaning to the service they had provided. In that case, making a lienzo that served his interests would also support the cause of the Quauhquecholteca and raise their status as conquistadors. Since all the principal events related to his first term as lieutenant governor are recorded in the document, the Lienzo de Quauh­ que­chollan would then, in this scenario, probably have been created in 1534 or 1535, during his second term. There is no evidence of this, however; I raise it only as an imaginable possibility. If other Spanish conquistadors ever saw the document, they were no doubt most drawn to the conquests in which they themselves participated.

Summary In this chapter I examined the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan as a narrative by looking at the various elements of the story (actors, events, time, place), at their ordering, and at the document’s structure and format. The way these elements are presented—that is, the rhetoric of the document—is the key to our understanding the message the composers wanted to convey and the purpose for which the document was created. The document’s rhetoric also reflects something of the worldview and ways of thinking of the creators and of their historical awareness in the days of the lienzo’s creation. The story’s main focus is the alliance between the Quauhquecholteca and the Spaniards and the connection of the former to the world of the latter. The document represents the way Quauhquecholteca identity was shaped through this alliance and through the military achievements the alliance achieved. In painstaking detail, the tlacuiloque depicted the military achievements of the Quauhquecholteca between 1527 and 1529, their relationship to the Spanish conquistador Jorge de Alvarado, the routes along which they traveled, and the 228

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

places and events that were important to them. By skillfully playing with space, size, and colors, they emphasized their indispensable role in the conquest of Guatemala and their identity as conquistadors. The Quauhquecholteca chose to use the fixed prehispanic conventions for conquest and migration stories, revealing the continuity of the indigenous prehispanic tradition into Colonial times. The use of these conventions also indicates that the conquest story of the Quauhquecholteca was regarded in line with prehispanic conquest stories. Likewise, the alliance with the Spaniards was regarded as a continuation of prehispanic alliances and patterns of conquest and domination. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is an edifying example of a source that demonstrates the continuation of prehispanic perceptions into the Colonial period. The story shows a few adaptations to the Colonial system. For example, the concept of a new beginning is not portrayed through a depiction of the New Fire Ceremony but rather by depicting the establishment of the Spanish-Quauhquecholteca alliance in the initial scene and by portraying the Quauhquecholteca with white skin. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows striking similarities to the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2. A comparison of the two documents leads to a better understanding of both documents and of the way migrations were depicted and identity was established. The similarities between the two also made it possible to estimate the original dimensions of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. Like oral traditions and various alphabetic texts of the time, Nahua pictography appears to have made use of fixed formats, both on the document and the scene levels. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was most likely made in the 1530s. The depiction of the roads, trade routes, marketplaces, and events presented in the Guatemalan part of the pictorial suggests involvement of the tlacuiloque who composed it, or of their informants, in the area’s social, economic, and political life. The area represented includes the Valley of Chimaltenango and the area around the city of Santiago at Almolonga (to the east of modern Ciudad Vieja). It is known that a group of Quauhquecholteca conquistadors did not return to Mexico and settled in this very area. There is little doubt that, spiritually, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan came into being in Guatemala, in that the thoughts and experiences represented originated there. Whether it was also painted there remains unclear. If so, it was probably produced in the city of Santiago at Almolonga, possibly in more than one copy, with one of the copies sent to Quauhquechollan. The fact that the document was painted in Nahua pictorial writing would then indicate that Mexican traditions continued in the Guatemalan colonies, which is not surprising considering the early date of creation of the document. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a product of a largely oral society that also employed writing and whose writings originally functioned in public events in combination with oral recitals. These ceremonies may have functioned to create 229

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation

a shared feeling of identity for the Quauhquecholteca in order to legitimize to themselves their status as conquistadors and their position within the new Colonial system. The document’s character and contents suggest it was made pri­mar­ ily for indigenous use. The possibility should not be excluded, however, that it was made for Spaniards. The glossed slips of paper indicate that at a later time, an attempt was made to make the contents understandable for people who did not understand the pictographic script. Possibly, the manuscript had a second life in the Spanish sphere. Future research into the paper, ink, or glue used for these glosses may determine the age of these pieces of alphabetic texts. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is the story of the Quauhquecholteca. It was made on the basis of the experiences of Quauhquecholteca, and it was told from their point of view, using media they were familiar with and by which they could best convey their messages. It communicates the concerns of the Quauhquecholteca and their perception of the Spanish conquest. This has to be kept in mind when using the document as a historical source. In Chapter 9, I consider the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan in comparison to the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Analco, two pictorials that also communicate stories of indigenous conquistadors, in this case from Tlaxcalteca. This analysis will place the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan in a broader context. Discussing the conquest pictorials as a corpus enhances the understanding of each of these sources and also of how the Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca conquistadors viewed the Spanish conquest.

230

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

Conquered Conquistadors

9. Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

The Quauhquecholteca were not the only Central Mexican allies of the Spaniards who recorded their experiences in a pictorial manuscript. The Tlaxcalteca left various conquest pictorial accounts as well. There are also references to yet other communities who once had conquest pictorials in their possession, although unfortunately none of these other records seems to have survived. The Tlaxcalteca created the well-known Lienzo de Tlaxcala. This document is now lost, but there are many copies made over a period of centuries, and some of the copies survive. These copies provide evidence of how the Tlaxcalteca chose to represent the Spanish conquest and their alliance with the Spaniards. Another Tlaxcalteca story is the Lienzo de Analco, which belongs to the municipality of Nuestra Señora de los Remedios Analco (presently part of San Ildefonso Villa Alta) in Oaxaca. This lienzo focuses on the Tlaxcalteca who assisted in the 231

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

conquest of the Sierra Norte and who settled there and founded the barrio of Analco. The Tlaxcalteca conquest pictorials from Tlaxcala and Analco are, like the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, painted in Central Mexican pictorial writing style, and they were created in the decades following the conquest. Together, these conquest pictorials form a significant and meaningful corpus. In this chapter I give a brief introduction to the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Analco and discuss them in relation to one another and to the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. I compare their contents, format, and rhetoric to reach a better understanding of these documents, of how the indigenous conquistadors felt about their alliances to the Spaniards, and of how they presented the history of these alliances and their feelings about them in their pictorial records.

The Lienzo de Tlaxcala In both prehispanic and Early Colonial times, the people of Tlaxcala created a large number of pictorial manuscripts. By 1525, all the prehispanic documents had been burned during an “incendio de todas las ropas y libros y atavíos de los sacerdotes idolátricos, que se los quemaron los frailes” (Acuña 1984 I:plate 13). Between 1530 and 1776, however, the Tlaxcalteca made new pictorials, of which forty-six are known. Seven relate to the arrival of the Spaniards and to the Spanish-Tlaxcalteca alliance (Reyes García 1993:10). It is generally believed that the oldest surviving conquest pictorial from Tlaxcala is the so-called Texas manuscript, a four-page pictographic text painted on the two sides of a folded folio of maguey paper.1 This document focuses on the establishment and consolidation of the alliance between the Tlaxcalteca and the Spaniards. It records that Cortés was kindly received in Tlaxcala by the lords Tepolouatecatl and Xicotencatl of Tizatlan. It shows Cortés seated next to Xicotencatl in his palace in Tizatlan and the Tlaxcalteca lords presenting luxurious gifts to him. It also shows the lords offering their daughters to the Spaniards to consolidate the alliance (see Chapter 5). The pictography in the Texas manuscript is provided with explanatory texts in Nahuatl (Kranz 2001: 59–69). The Texas manuscript seems to have been made very shortly after the Tlaxcalteca and the Spaniards established their alliance. This can be derived from (1) the early painting style of the manuscript and (2) the fact that the document depicts events related to the establishment and consolidation of the TlaxcaltecaSpanish alliance and does not record events that happened later, such as conquests. It is possible, however, that the manuscript is presently incomplete. The provenance of the manuscript is unknown. The first reference to it was made by the Swiss natural scientist Henri de Saussure in 1855. When Saussure saw the document, it was in the Tlaxcalteca archives.2 232

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

In his Descripción de la Ciudad y Provincia de Tlaxcala, the chronicler Diego Muñoz Camargo mentioned that the walls of the casas principales of Tlaxcala were decorated with conquest paintings. He wrote: estando, luego entrando, pintada la entrada y primera venida de Hernando Cortés y de sus españoles, y de cómo dio al través de los navios, y los hizo barrenar y dar fuego, y del recibimiento y regalo que en Taxcala se hizo, y de la paz que se le dio en toda esta provincia, y de cómo bautizaron los señores de las cuatro cabeceras de Taxcala, y de otras muchas particularidades de la conquista desta tierra; lo cual va todo figurado por pinturas en este corredor y sala, que esta ciudad lo tiene por memoria y antigualla, y de las hazañas que /12v/ ellos y los españoles hicieron en la pacificación de toda esta tierra. (Acuña 1984 I:49)

These paintings were made before 1560 (Gibson 1952:247). Later in his account, Muñoz Camargo wrote that in one of the rooms of Xicotencatl’s palace in Tizatlan there were conquest paintings as well that were made much earlier. He wrote: “En /24n/ esta sala tienen pintada la venida de Cortés y sus españoles, y del buen acogim[ient]o que se les hizo y la conquista de México, aunque no con la perfección que está en la ciudad porque, en aquella sazón, no hubo tan perfectos pintores como el día de hoy los hay, ansí de pintores y escultores, como de otros oficios y artes que han deprendido y tomado de los n[uest]ros” (Acuña 1984 I:62). The paintings in Xicotencatl’s palace were probably made shortly after the conquest, and it is possible that they were made around the same time the Texas manuscript was painted or even earlier (Kranz 2001:58). Both the paintings in the casas principales and those in Xicotencatl’s palace are lost. Muñoz Camargo does not reveal whether they were wall paintings or portable lienzos. The famous Lienzo de Tlaxcala was painted around 1550. This document is also lost. Before it disappeared, it was described by Don Nicolás Faustino Mazih­ catzin y Calmecahua, a municipal official in Tlaxcala who wrote in or before 1787 (Mazihcatzin y Calmecahua 1927). According to Mazihcatzin, this “mapa historiografo” was painted at the request of Don Luis de Velasco, the second viceroy of New Spain, under the supervision of the Tlaxcalteca cabildo (municipal council). Mazihcatzin reported three originals: one made for the king of Spain (Charles V), a second made for the viceroy in Mexico City (Velasco), and a third made for the Town Hall or archives of Tlaxcala. Only the last version was seen and described by Mazihcatzin. He mentioned nothing about the material it was painted on, but since he referred to it as a lienzo, it seems likely that it was painted on cloth. Soon after Mazihcatzin wrote about the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the document was transferred to Mexico City to be copied by the Comisión Scientífica Francesa. When Tlaxcala requested its return in 1867, it could not be found (Chavero 1892; Gibson 1952:247–253). The copy made by the Comisión Scientífica 233

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

Francesa is also lost. The Italian voyager Giacomo Beltrami, who had been in Tlaxcala in 1825, reported that he had seen a “map” painted on cotton cloth, kept by the cabildo of Tlaxcala. This was probably the same original as the one described by Mazihcatzin (see Glass and Robertson 1975:215). Beltrami wrote: The Cabildo (the municipality) [of Tlaxcala] still keeps in their archives a map, an Indian work, painted on cotton, which represents the arrival of Cortés in Tlaxcala. Everything seems peaceful and the men, women, and children seem joyful. But according to the historians, the consternation about the arrival of the Spaniards in Tlaxcala was such that only the warriors had stayed in town, and that the rest of the population had run away to hide themselves in the caves of the mountain Matlalcueyes. (Beltrami 1830 II:308)3

Beltrami tried to acquire this document; however, he did not succeed because, he said, of a lack of time (Beltrami 1830 II:308). Presently, none of the originals of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala is known, and it is unclear if they were identical. Fortunately, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala was copied repeatedly before it was lost. In their 1975 census, John Glass and Donald Robertson reported eleven copies and a list of falsifications (Glass and Robertson 1975:214–217). More recently, at least one other copy has been identified.4 The two best-known copies are (1) a large painting made by Juan Manuel Yllañes in 1773, and (2) lithographs made by Genaro López in the nineteenth century.5 Although the surviving copies vary in form and content, most have the same outline. They narrate the Tlaxcalteca­Spanish alliance as it was established in 1519; they comment on the most important people, places, and events related to this alliance; and they record the military achievements of the Tlaxcalteca under the Spanish banner. From these copies and from Mazihcatzin’s description, the appearance of the original Lienzo de Tlaxcala can be derived. The original had an initial scene at the top, which represented the place glyph of Tlaxcala, the Spanish viceroys, the members of the Royal Audiencia in Mexico City, and the indigenous caciques and captains of the four principal districts of Tlaxcala. This scene also included references to the Tlaxcalteca-Spanish alliance and to the conversion of the Tlaxcalteca lords to Christianity. The rest of the painting consisted of at least eighty-seven boxes, each of which showed people, places, and events related to the consolidation of the alliance, the adaptation of Tlaxcala to Spanish rule, and the conquest of many places throughout Mesoamerica (see Glass and Robertson 1975:214). Each extant copy or version of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala has its own emphasis and scope. The most elaborate version is an eighty-one-folio-page document found in the Hunter Collection at the University of Glasgow. This manuscript accompanies a signed version of Diego Muñoz Camargo’s Descripción de la ciudad y provincia de Tlaxcala (1585) and was published by René Acuña (1981,

234

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

1984). Except for six folios that are painted on one side, the folios are painted on both sides, and the document contains 156 scenes in total. The first 25 scenes describe colonial Tlaxcala. This part includes references to the four royal houses of Tlaxcala, the baptism of the Tlaxcalteca lords, and the various Spanish conquerors and rulers. Represented are Columbus, Pizarro, Cortés, Charles V, and Philip II. The document was reportedly sent to Philip II. Scenes 26 through 75 present the events of the conquest up to the conquest of Tenochtitlan, and the remainder of the document (scenes 76 through 156) narrates the conquests of numerous other places throughout Mesoamerica, ranging as far as Florida and California to the north and Nicaragua to the south.6 The Glasgow manuscript seems to be an updated and adapted version of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala narrative mentioned earlier (see also Gillespie 1994:119–120). The Tlaxcalteca conquest pictorials present the Tlaxcalteca version of the Spanish conquest and the Tlaxcalteca-Spanish alliance. They depict what was most important to the Tlaxcalteca and what they thought needed to be recorded. The earliest versions (i.e., the conquest paintings in Xicotencatl’s palace and the Texas manuscript) may have been made primarily for indigenous use. It is known, however, that versions were also made specifically for the Spaniards. The Tlaxcalteca cabildo minutes of June 17, 1552, comment on a (first?) version made for the Spaniards. This document was to be sent with a delegation to the emperor in Spain. The minutes stated: “A painting of Cortés’ arrival in Tlaxcala and the war and conquest is to be prepared for presentation to the emperor; two regidores are to oversee the project and to arrange for artists’ supplies through the city major-domo and to choose the artists. At this point it is not decided whether the painting should be on cloth (tilmatli) or paper (amatl)” (Kranz 2001:67).7 The earlier versions were no doubt used as sources for this newly created pictorial and perhaps also for later copies. The conquest pictorials from Tlaxcala have been studied by various scholars.8 It is generally believed that the Lienzo de Tlaxcala was made to support certain claims to the Crown, such as those for tribute exemption and other privileges promised them in return for their service to the Spaniards (see Chapter 5). In spite of the availability of numerous written claims by Tlaxcalteca, however, a concrete reference to the use of such a painting for the purpose of claiming privileges is unknown. A study that compares and analyzes all the extant versions and their individual histories is yet to be done. Such a study would probably lead to a much better understanding of the meaning and use of the corpus of Tlaxcalteca conquest pictorials.

The Lienzo de Analco The Lienzo de Analco is also a Tlaxcalteca story. It is painted on a large piece of cotton cloth (245 × 180 cm) about half the size of the material used for the 235

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. The Lienzo de Analco depicts Tlaxcalteca conquistadors in alliance with the Spaniards during and after the conquest of the Sierra Norte, Oaxaca. In 1526, these Tlaxcalteca conquistadors settled in Villa Alta, in a barrio named Analco. As in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the narrative of the Lienzo de Analco is told within a geographic landscape that represents, in this case, the region of Villa Alta. This area is represented very accurately, and among the sites depicted are a stylized plan of the town of Villa Alta and the settlement of Analco.9 Analco was founded by Tlaxcalteca in 1526. Scattered all over the landscape are captains and soldiers, battles between the Tlaxcalteca-Spanish army and the local population, Mixe invasions into the area, and other events related to the conquest period, such as the use of indigenous people as tamemes and workers and scenes of punishment.10 The scenes of punishment probably represent executions conducted by Luis de Berrio, the first alcalde mayor of Villa Alta, who was reputed to have ruthlessly hanged, burned, and thrown to dogs anyone who did not obey his orders (König 1993:136). The original Lienzo de Analco is presently in the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia in Mexico City. In the mid-twentieth century, when the document was first mentioned in Western literature (Blom 1945), the document was in Analco, and it was accompanied by a pile of alphabetic documents written in Spanish and Nahuatl, presumably títulos.11 Unfortunately, the present location of these alphabetic texts is unknown. There was once at least one copy of the Lienzo de Analco, but the present whereabouts of this copy are also unknown (Sleen n.d.; see also Doesburg 1998b). It can be presumed that the Lienzo de Analco was painted in Analco and not in Tlaxcala because (1) the document was found in Analco, and (2) the accuracy of the geographic landscape indicates that the composers were familiar with the local geography. The scenes in the Lienzo de Analco are positioned in such a variety of orientations that no top or bottom side can be determined. It can therefore be presumed that the document was meant to be laid out on the floor to be read. The readers would stand and walk around it, making this diverse orientation a logical one (see also Chapter 1). The most elaborate published study of the Lienzo de Analco is that of Viola König (1993:122–138), written in German. König commented on the various scenes and published a variety of black-and-white photographs. A more elaborate study of the document is yet to be made.

References to Other Pictorials Dealing with the “Spanish” Conquest There is little doubt that other lienzos made by indigenous conquistadors once existed. A concrete reference to another such conquest pictorial can be found in 236

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

the Título de Caciques (1544), a document composed by a group of K’iche’ lords from Totonicapan, Guatemala (Carmack and Mondloch 1989:218). The K’iche’ lords who wrote this document refer to the presence of a group of Central Mexican caciques in San Miguel Totonicapan, who had arrived with the Spaniards and settled there (see Chapter 5). Reportedly, these conquistadors came from Tlaxcala, Cholula, Uzmatla, and Ayutla and had “títulos suyos juntamente con la mapa y un lienso de San Juan Bautista” (Carmack and Mondloch 1989:212). According to the text, these títulos were written in Nahuatl, and it is possible that the accompanying mapa was composed in Nahua pictorial writing. Robert Carmack and James Mondloch (1989) argue that this pictorial document from Totonicapan was comparable to the Lienzo de Tlaxcala: it would have shown the Central Mexican caciques who had come with the Spaniards and recorded their contribution to the conquest of the area (Carmack and Mondloch 1989:212– 213, 218). As a result of the conquest, Mexican settlements like Analco, the settlement of Quauhquecholteca in the city of Santiago at Almolonga, and the settlement of Central Mexican conquistadors at Totonicapan were established throughout Mesoamerica. These colonies were often named after the barrio, altepetl, or confederation of several altepetl from which the conquistadors came, and the settlers often kept their own customs and traditions. They also normally enjoyed certain privileges in return for their community’s contribution to the conquest (see Chapter 5). Like the indigenous conquistadors who settled at Totonicapan, Analco, and Almolonga, most other communities of indigenous conquistadors likely also maintained their own historical record, possibly including lienzos, mapas, or other pictorials created according to the traditions of their homelands. Besides the pictorial documents discussed in this study, several other Mexican pictorial manuscripts contain references to the Spanish conquest. Most of these documents deal with the changes brought about by the colonial system, such as the change of authority, the change in the socio-political and economic situation, baptism, and similar factors. However, they do not represent Spanish campaigns of conquest. Good examples are the Lienzo de Aztactepec y Citlaltepec, the Codex Carapan no. 1, and the Lienzo de Coacoatzintla.12 Some of the Tlaxcalteca conquest pictorials do not show the conquering campaigns either. The indigenous tlacuiloque rarely depicted actual military confrontations between the Spaniards and their own communities.13 This probably had to do with (1) the simple fact that nobody likes to depict him- or herself in defeat, (2) the purpose for which a document was made (if the battle was not relevant to the story in question, why depict it?), and (3) the way the Spanish conquest was perceived. In several cases, there was no battle but merely the establishment of an alliance. The Spaniards also produced many paintings in which military clashes between Spanish and indigenous armies are elaborately displayed. Like the 237

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca, the Spaniards were victors in conquest and wished to be remembered as such.

Spanish-Indigenous Alliances as Represented by the Tlaxcalteca and the Quauhquecholteca The Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca conquest narratives communicate comparable stories. The Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Analco depict the Tlaxcalteca in alliance with the Spaniards and their military achievements and experiences in the initial period of the conquest. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan does the same for the Quauhquecholteca. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the different versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala show the establishment of alliances with the Spaniards in their initial scenes. The contents of these first scenes tellingly reveal the way the alliances were regarded by the Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca and how the lords of those communities chose to represent and communicate these events both to their own people and to the Spaniards. This point of view is expressed consistently throughout the remainder of both documents. A first and essential message conveyed by the pictorials is that the Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca received the Spaniards kindly. The local lords received the Spaniards with gifts and an embrace, and none of the documents records any hostility. The Quauhquecholteca indeed never fought against the Spaniards (see Chapter 3). The Tlaxcalteca, however, had initially waged war upon the Spaniards. Only later, after at least three hostile confrontations, did they decide to establish an alliance (Gibson 1952:15–21). These initial clashes are not recorded in any of the Tlaxcalteca pictorials. They are ignored in the narratives as if to suggest that they never took place. The Tlaxcalteca obviously wanted to stress their loyalty to the Spaniards. Regardless of the fact that military confrontations did take place, they recorded themselves as having been faithful allies from the very beginning to present an unambiguous story that would best serve their interests. A second message expressed by both the Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca tlacuiloque is that their alliances with the Spaniards were perceived as equal alliances, not as alliances compelled by the Spaniards’ domination. The Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca communities were subjected to the Spanish Crown, it was true, but not in a humiliating way. Instead, the alliances with the new lords were perceived of as a gathering of forces and the establishment of a new power. To demonstrate these alliances, the tlacuiloque sought ways to show the connections between themselves and the Spaniards’ world. They came up with a variety of modifications of pictographic conventions that enabled them to make these connections without giving up their own identities. The captains and soldiers are depicted in the pictorials with Spanish swords, for example, but also with their 238

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

own indigenous war costumes and emblems. The Quauhquecholteca tlacuiloque even portrayed the Spaniards and Quauhquecholteca with the same white skin color, while their enemies have brown and red skin (see Chapter 8). Such indicators showed that these communities had become Spanish allies without giving up their own identity and heroic past but instead by adapting them. This way, the documents served as means for these communities to assert their claims to status and privileges by reaffirming their independence, identity, and equality. A third message communicated by the pictorials is the distinction between the indigenous allies and the non-allied indigenous peoples. In comparison to the Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca, the other indigenous peoples depicted in the pictorials are shown barely clothed, and they use a much more limited variety of weapons. In contrast to the allies’ swords, back racks, insignia, and elaborate costumes, their opponents normally wear a simple cotton warrior costume, they are barefoot, and they carry ordinary shields, bows and arrows, spears, and axes. This distinction in presentation does not correspond to the way they dressed in real life. To the contrary, from the Spanish chronicles it is known that the enemies encountered by the indigenous conquistadors wore the more elaborate warrior costumes and insignia as well (see Chapter 6). Both the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, however, show little of the plumes and insignia their enemies wore. All these elements are purely rhetorical devices used by the composers to enhance their identity and to make a critical point: the Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca were conquistadors, related to the world of the new lords, and with a position distinct and separate from other conquered peoples. And this was how they expected to be recognized by others. The distinction of skin color found in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan intensifies this message.

Initial Scenes The alliances with the Spaniards were initially regarded as continuations of preColonial patterns of conquest and domination. This perception is apparent in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (see Chapter 8) and also in the pictorial documents from Tlaxcala. The contents of these documents are clearly of the Colonial era, but the medium, format, function, and organizing principles of the narratives are primarily indigenous in design. Both the Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca narratives present the alliances established and the conquests achieved under the Spanish banner as following the same patterns and underlying principles as preColonial conquest stories. In Chapter 8, I compared the organization of the narrative presented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan with that of pre-conquest stories told in other Mexican Colonial pictorials. Similar comparisons can be made for the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. The initial scene of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, as known from the Yllañes 239

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

copy, is in many ways comparable to the first page of the Mexica Codex Mendoza, which shows the founding of Tenochtitlan. As Jeanne Gillespie observed, the Tlaxcalteca tlacuiloque used conventions similar to those used in the Mexica pictorial (Gillespie 1994:5). The initial scene of the Tlaxcalteca document shows the Habsburg coat of arms, a cross, a reference to the Virgin Mary, a list of the rulers of Tlaxcala and the viceroys of New Spain, the four noble houses that ruled the altepetl, and, finally, the lords and different emblems related to each of those houses. The Codex Mendoza, in turn, shows the glyph of Tenochtitlan, a skull rack (tzompantli), the four districts of the altepetl, and the rulers of each of those districts. In other words, both scenes have a similar set of ingredients: they indicate the establishment of a new socio-political entity (Colonial Tlaxcala and Tenochtitlan, respectively), they show the different subdivisions of each altepetl and their rulers, and they include a reference to religion. In both documents, these scenes stand at the beginning of the narratives, and they employ similar rhetorical means to characterize that new beginning. As discussed in Chapter 8, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan used somewhat different rhetoric to communicate this same message, similar to that of the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2. Like the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala shows the Habsburg coat of arms in its initial scene. Both Habsburg eagles are positioned on top of a mountain. The images representing this coat of arms are largely the same, but there are a few differences. The eagle in the Yllañes copy of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala shows a shield with a typically European shape in front of or inside the eagle, while the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows a shield within the mountain. Also, instead of the two swords shown with the eagle in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the eagle represented in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala has the two columns of Hercules at its sides, which were added to the Habsburg coat of arms by Charles V, with the words “Plus Ultra” written nearby. Moreover, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows a pyramid inside the mountain, behind the shield, while the Lienzo de Tlaxcala shows a temple with an image of the Virgin Mary in this spot. In spite of the differences, both eagles communicate the same message. They reflect the mutual recognition by allies of the power and tradition of each force and simultaneously underscore the merging of the two forces’ identities. A new elite had come into being, based both on local prehispanic traditions and the power of the newcomers. In the case of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, Serge Gruzinski (1993:23) pointed out that in associating the Habsburg eagle with the heron emblem of Mazihcatzin of Ocotelulco, the scene illustrates the meeting of two powers through their respective symbols. The use of the Habsburg coat of arms was granted to the Tlaxcalteca by Charles V in 1535 (Kranz 2001:72; Zapata y Mendoza 1995). The Habsburg eagle glyphs in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are typical examples of the mixture of indigenous and Spanish 240

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

culture that took place in Colonial Mexico. The complexity and different layers of information contained in these images should not be underestimated. The representation of the double-headed eagle in the pictographic documents is, first, a reference to the relation between the lords of Tlaxcala and Quauhquechollan and the Spanish kings. Second, it embodied the Spaniards’ recognition of the Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca conquests under the Spanish banner, as it was a privilege granted to them in return for their military service. Third, it was related to the indigenous emblems: the eagle (quauh) of Quauhquechollan and the heron emblem of Mazihcatzin. Finally, it may even have referred to a divine protection of the communities, considering that the double-headed eagle is one of the most powerful nahuals (a form-changing animal spirit that often fulfilled the role of a personal spirit-companion, or alter-ego) in Mesoamerican cosmology. Other Mexican pictorials that represent the Habsburg eagle (each with its own adaptations) are the Genealogía de Azcapotzalco or Codex García Granados, the Escudo de Armas de Tzintzuntzan, the Escudo de Armas de Texcoco, the Lienzo de Carapan I, and the Lienzo de Carapan II. The emblem was granted not only to Mexican communities but also to certain K’iche’ communities in Guatemala. Examples of Guatemalan Habsburg eagles appear in the Título de Totonicapán and the Título de Caciques, both from Totonicapan; the Título de Momostenango and the Buenabaj Pictorials, both from Momostenango; and the Título C’oyoi from Utatlan.14 A significant difference between the initial scenes of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is that the former evidences the impact the conversion of the indigenous lords to Christianity had made on the indigenous culture. As stated earlier, the Yllañes copy of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala shows a cross and an image of the Virgin Mary, the latter adopted by the Tlaxcalteca as their patroness in 1521 (Kranz 2001:142). The Glasgow manuscript shows these elements as well and dedicates a full page to the burning of prehispanic books and religious materials of the priests (Acuña 1984 I:plate 13). The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows no references to the conversion of the Quauhque­chol­ teca to Christianity. Further, the Quauhquecholteca tlacuiloque did not depict a conversion in any other part of the lienzo. The only religious reference is a relatively small cross near the place glyph of Soconusco, which seems to function primarily as a place indicator. The reason for this difference in the two documents is unclear. It might have to do with the earlier date of creation of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan as compared to the version of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala represented in the surviving copies (which were produced later), or it may indicate that the intended use of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan lay entirely within the indigenous sphere. The Lienzo de Analco does not have an initial scene. Strikingly, it does not even depict Tlaxcala, the presumed place of origin of the main actors. The identification of the indigenous conquistadors depicted in this document is based primarily 241

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

on the fact that (1) Analco, the main place in the narrative, was founded and inhabited by Tlaxcalteca, and (2) Tlaxcalteca allies played an important role in the pacification of the Sierra Norte, Oaxaca. The Lienzo de Analco itself, however, has no elements that identify the actors as Tlaxcalteca, nor do the persons depicted carry any emblems, except for a few warriors who wear jaguar costumes. It is unclear why their identity is not indicated and why Tlaxcala, their place of origin, is not depicted. Possibly, the Nahuatl documents that once accompanied the document (discussed earlier) provided the explanation.

Similarities and Differences The Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Lienzo de Analco, and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan have the theme of conquest in common, and to a large extent they share a similar message. Yet there are also a number of differences. Both the similarities and the differences are important. The lienzos are the individual stories of distinct communities, each of which had its own unique history and specific concerns that determined the contents, layout, and rhetoric of the narratives. And obviously, each of the documents was created in its own unique circumstances, for its own specific public, and with its own purpose. The Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Lienzo de Analco, and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan all depict similar aspects of the conquest. Each lienzo depicts not only battles but also the use of indigenous allies as tamemes. As discussed in Chapter 5, the indigenous communities provided their new allies not only with manpower for battle but also with large numbers of bearers for both objects and persons. The Lienzo de Tlaxcala shows men carrying packages, anchors, a cannon, and a Spaniard (Acuña 1984 I:plate 57). The Lienzo de Analco shows men carrying packages, and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows women carrying warrior gear (headdresses, shields, insignia) and men carrying backpacks filled with round objects or other packages. The Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca pictorials also depict the punishment of indigenous peoples. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the Lienzo de Analco, and some versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala all depict people being burned and hanged. The Lienzo de Analco and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan also depict the punishment of throwing people to the dogs. Both Luis de Berrio and Jorge de Alvarado were indeed reputed to have used this kind of punishment (see König 1993:136; Chapter 5, this volume). Similar punishment scenes with dogs can be found in other Mexican pictorials as well (see Chapter 7:note 74). The Lienzo de Tlaxcala displays the most elaborate references to the conversion of the community to Christianity (discussed earlier). The Lienzo de Analco, in turn, shows a church and some friars who perform rituals. These rituals have yet to be identified. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, however, shows no churches, and it does not include any friars in its narrative (see earlier discussion). 242

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

The Lienzo de Tlaxcala is the only document with elaborate references to the socio-political divisions of the polities within the altepetl and their rulers. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, for its part, is the only document representing a migration story: the journey of the Quauhquecholteca from Central Mexico to and through Guatemala. The various versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala show campaigns to and through Mesoamerica as well, but these campaigns are not represented as migrations. Instead, they are merely presented in broad overview, without any indication as to whether certain places were more significant to the story than others. The Lienzo de Analco does not show a migration either. It barely provides the names of the places where the battles and other events depicted took place.15 The Lienzo de Analco also omits an initial scene. A major difference between the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the Lienzo de Analco, on one hand, and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, on the other, is their layout and the use of space. While the narratives of the former two are presented in a geographic landscape, the copies of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala are ordered in squares. The presentation of information in squares was also an indigenous way of orga­ nizing space, as known from the Tonalamatl de Aubin (a possibly prehispanic calendrical screenfold from the same area), the Codex Telleriano-Remensis (representing Mexica conquests in sequential images), and the Lienzo de Jucatacato from Michoacan. While in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the Lienzo de Analco the roads served as structuring tools to organize the accounts and to act as an aid to memory for recitation, the tlacuiloque of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala chose a purely sequential presentation to structure their story. An interesting observation is that the tlacuiloque of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the Lienzo de Analco, and most of the Tlaxcalteca conquest pictorials (the Texas manuscript is an exception) did not provide the actors with name glyphs. While most Mexican pictographic texts do provide such names, the composers of these conquest pictorials apparently did not feel the need to do so. In the case of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the back racks served as identifiers instead, as they indicated which lineage, or house, of Quauhquecholteca or Tlaxcalteca participated in each battle. The Lienzo de Analco, however, does not seem to show any identifying marker for that purpose, just as it does not represent Tlaxcala. It is unclear why that is the case. As opposed to the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhque­chollan, the Lienzo de Analco barely shows any individual traits of the Tlaxcalteca con­ quistadors. It does show some captains wearing jaguar costumes, but the majority of the indigenous warriors are dressed only in the common indigenous cotton warrior costume, without carrying any specific insignia. Also, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan show only a few warriors in each conquest scene. The Lienzo de Analco, on the other hand, depicts large squadrons of marching warriors, which often overlap each other. The latter seems to be a stylistic element borrowed from European painting and does not appear in the 243

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

Lienzo de Tlaxcala or the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. Both the general manner in which the warriors are represented and the style, which, uniquely, contains overlapping figures, indicate that the tlacuiloque of the Lienzo de Analco were more strongly influenced by European painting styles than those of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan.

Function and Use Even though the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Lienzo de Analco, and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan contain many elements that show Colonial influence, there are reasons to believe they were made not long after the conquest period and probably not much later than the mid-sixteenth century. The later iterations of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala are exceptions. Such early dates of creation are supported by (1) the characteristics of the paintings in terms of their style, colors, use of space, and similar elements, and (2) the selection of events depicted. The Lienzo de Analco, to start with, only depicts events from the conquest period, and it places great emphasis on what are apparently representations of the cruel punishments executed by Luis de Berrio during his first term as alcalde mayor of Villa Alta (1529–1531) (Chance 1989:18; König 1993:136). This document must have been created after Analco was founded in 1526 and probably before 1550. In 1550 a new church, a wall, and two bridges were built on the orders of Luis de León Romano, none of which is depicted. Had they existed at the time of the lienzo’s creation, they would no doubt have been depicted because they are prominent structures in the area (König 1993:138). The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan likewise shows only events related to the early conquest period (1520–1529), and it does not depict any churches (see Chapter 8). In sum, the Lienzo de Analco and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan seem to have been made in the same period, before 1550. The earliest conquest pictorials from Tlaxcala are also dated before or during 1550. The medium, conventions, and rhetoric of the conquest pictorials suggest that each was made primarily for local use. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is provided with alphabetic glosses, which may indicate a later use in the Spanish sphere. The glosses may also have been added for Nahua readers unfamiliar with the pictographic script. The early conquest pictorials from Tlaxcala seem instead to have been copied and adapted for use in Spanish society, although references indicate that some versions were specifically created originally for the Spaniards (discussed earlier). The existence of, and similarities among, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Lienzo de Analco, and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan suggest a larger tradition of creating pictographic accounts of the role of indigenous conquistadors in the Spanish conquest. According to my research, this tradition can be dated to the 1530s and 1540s and was part of the indigenous process of adaptation to Colonial life, 244

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

of a redefinition of identity, and of the search for the best possible status within the new Colonial system. The lost mapa of Totonicapan fits within this scheme perfectly, since it must have been created before 1544 (the year the Título de Caciques was written), and it was described as having been in the possession of the Central Mexican caciques together with Nahuatl annals as their own indigenous historical record (discussed earlier). Later, when the privileges granted to the indigenous conquistadors were ignored and undermined by the Spaniards and the bulk of the alphabetic claims were written (in the 1560s and 1570s), a number of these early conquest pictorials may have been used to support indigenous claims to the Spanish Crown. Indigenous communities are indeed known to have presented lienzos originally made for internal use to the Spanish authorities to support certain claims (Mundy 1996:111). In his Comentarios de la pintura, Felipe de Guevara referred to a painting of the Spanish conquest of Mesoamerica at the Spanish court. De Guevara died in 1563; this painting must thus have been there before that time. He wrote: “queriendo un Cazique mandar a alguna tierra de sus súbditos le acudan con cuatrocientos hombres de guerra, pintan un hombre con las armas en la mano, el un pie delante para caminar, y encima de la cabeza de este hombre ponen un círculo, dentro del cual ponen cuatro puntos, que significan cuatrocientos, y así tienen figurados en pintura las jornadas que los vasallos de V.M. y ellos hizieron en la conquista de México y otras partes” (Guevara 1788:236). It is generally presumed that this painting was a version of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (Gibson 1952:248; Kranz 2001:70). It remains unclear, however, in what context it was sent to Spain. It is likely that each of the conquest pictorials was once accompanied by an alphabetical text. The Glasgow version of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala was accompanied by a written text by Muñoz Camargo, and there may have been other texts accompanying the other copies. The Lienzo de Analco, in turn, was found together with a bundle of now-lost Nahuatl documents. The lost lienzo of To­tonicapan was also accompanied by Nahuatl títulos. The only document that lacks a concrete reference to an accompanying alphabetical text is the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. It seems likely, however, that such a text did once exist.

The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and Lienzo de Tlaxcala, and Their Contribution to Our Understanding of the Conquest of Guatemala In contrast to the large corpus of surviving pictographic accounts from Mexico (about 500 documents), the surviving indigenous pictorial manuscripts from Guatemala are few in number. Most are one- or two-page drawings or maps attached to alphabetic documents, all made after the Spanish conquest.16 The alphabetical sources contain various references to other pictographic documents 245

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

made by the indigenous peoples of Guatemala around the time of contact, but unfortunately these documents are presently unknown. Bartolemé de las Casas wrote this account about indigenous scribes from Guatemala: Estos cronistas tenían cuenta de los días, meses y años, y aunque no tenían escriptura como nosotros, tenían empero sus figuras y caracteres, que todas las cosas que querían significaban, y déstas sus libros grandes, por tan agudo y sotil artificio, que podríamos decir que nuestras letras en aquello no les hicieron muncha ventaja. Déstos libros vieron algunos nuestros religiosos, y aun yo vide parte, los cuales se han quemado por parecer de los frailes. (Casas 1992b:1455–1456 [Ch. 235])

With regard to the continuation of this indigenous writing tradition in the Colonial period, he wrote: no sabiendo leer nuestra escritura, escrebir toda la doctrina ellos por sus figuras y caracteres muy ingeniosamente, poniendo la figura que corresponderá en la voz y sonido a nuestro vocablo: así como si dijésemos amén, ponían pintada una como fuente y luego un maguey, que en su lengua frisaba con amén, porque llámanlo ametl, y así de todo lo demás. Yo he visto muncha parte de la doctrina escripta por sus figuras e imágenes, que la leían por ellas como yo la leía por nuestra letra en una carta, y esto no es artificio de ingenio poco admirable. (Casas 1992b:1456 [Ch. 235])

Antonio de Fuentes y Guzmán also mentioned pictographic documents made by the indigenous peoples of Guatemala. He referred to a lienzo brought to a litigation by K’iche’ authorities and two pictographic documents that may have been tribute lists (see Sáenz de Santa María 1969 II:71–75). Moreover, the Popol Vuh is generally presumed to be an alphabetic copy of an older pictographic or hieroglyphic document (Akkeren 2000:50; Carmack 1973:13). Since none of these other documents survived, it is difficult to make statements about the pictographic or hieroglyphic writing traditions used in prehispanic and Colonial Guatemala. The Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are the only two surviving indigenous pictorials that represent scenes related to the Spanish conquest of what is now Central America. They are also the most elaborate and detailed indigenous visual accounts available about the people and geography of the Guatemalan highlands in the sixteenth century. Moreover, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan can be considered the earliest geographic map of the area. A further study of the network of roads, rivers, place glyphs, and marketplaces presented in this document may provide new insights into what paths were most commonly used during the conquest period and what sites and paths were used for trading purposes. In addition, both the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala provide unique accounts of the Spanish conquest of Guatemala as seen through the eyes of Central Mexican allies and presented through a medium of communication they knew how to use to its fullest extent. 246

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

The extant versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala contain significant numbers of toponyms of places in Central America. For example, the Glasgow manuscript depicts Pedro de Alvarado’s 1524 campaign of conquest through Guatemala and El Salvador,17 as well as the conquest of another thirty-five places in Guatemala and Central America, extending as far south as Nicaragua.18 The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan shows many Guatemalan towns as well, with a focus on those conquered during Jorge de Alvarado’s first term as lieutenant governor (1527–1529). Since Jorge was assisted by both Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca, there is a large overlap between the places listed in the Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca conquest narratives. The lists of toponyms presented in the stories of the Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca and the order in which they are presented (as far as identifiable) correspond largely to the conquest route described by Pedro de Alvarado in his letters to Cortés and later by Díaz del Castillo. Since the pictorial accounts contain more detailed lists, they not only confirm the information provided by the Spaniards, but they also make it possible to provide a more detailed reconstruction of the route than has been presented by scholars so far. Especially with regard to the first part of the route into Guatemala, the Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan is particularly helpful. Since the Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca were Nahuatl speakers, it is not surprising that the place glyphs presented in their pictorial documents refer to the Nahuatl names of the Guatemalan towns and not to the local Maya names. Most of these Nahuatl names stem from the early conquest period. In their communication with the Spaniards, the Central Mexican allies, most of whom were Nahuatl speakers, translated the names of the Guatemalan towns into Nahuatl, and those names were taken over by the Spaniards. Many of those Nahuatl names are still in use today. With a few exceptions, they are literal translations of the original Maya names. One exception is the name Quetzaltenango. The original K’iche’ name of this place was Xe Lajuj Noj, which refers to a calendrical name and a mountain. The Nahuatl name Quetzaltenango consists of the elements quetzal (“quetzal feathers”), tenam(i) (“wall”), and -co (locative). Reportedly, the Central Mexican conquistadors created this name as a reference to the quetzal feathers that adorned the enemy K’iche’ lords who awaited them there for battle (Carmack 1973:342; Mackie 1924:59; Recinos, Goetz, and Chonay 1974:119–120; also see Chapter 7). The place glyphs for Quetzaltenango in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan both depict the same elements of feathers and a wall, and thus both refer to the Nahuatl name and not to the K’iche’ name. It is these exceptions that allow us to distinguish that the Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca tlacuiloque were, in their pictographic rendering of place-names, referring to Nahuatl translations of the local names instead of transcribing locallanguage place-names into Nahua pictography. The glyphs of Guatemalan towns 247

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

presented in the Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca lienzos are unique to those documents.

Summary In this chapter I have sought to come to a better understanding of the conquest pictorials from Tlaxcala, the Lienzo de Analco and the Lienzo de Quauh­que­ chollan, by regarding them as a corpus and comparing their contents and layouts. This analysis led to the conclusion that the Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca pictorials are similar not only in theme but also in format and in their use of rhetoric to convey their creators’ perception of the Spanish conquest. It has also become clear that these Colonial conquest documents were not isolated creations. The common features of their form and content point to a more widely practiced indigenous tradition of communicating conquest and migration stories. The Lienzo de Analco and the descriptions of the lost mapa of Totonicapan indicate that this tradition was not only kept in use by the Nahuas in Central Mexico but also by Nahuas who went to live elsewhere in Mesoamerica. If, as is likely, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was composed by the Quauhquecholteca in Guatemala and not in Quauhquechollan, this lienzo joins the others as an example of the practice of the tradition in Mesoamerica. The format and layout used in the Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca conquest pictorials have their counterpart in prehispanic conquest stories. The design and contents of the initial scenes of the Codex Mendoza and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, for example, show many similarities. The same applies to the striking similarities between the layout of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and that of the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 (see Chapter 8). One of the clearest messages conveyed by the manner of composition of both the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is that the alliances these communities made with the Spaniards were considered the beginning of a new era: in this case, a new era defined by new power relationships. The moment of the formation of these alliances is presented in almost mythical terms at the beginning of each narrative. The use of prehispanic conventions to record the Spanish conquest indicates that the alliances with the newcomers were initially regarded as a continuation of prehispanic patterns of conquest and domination. They were understood within a prehispanic historical framework, and they were communicated as such. In the alphabetical sources, the indigenous conquistadors literally referred to themselves as “indios conquistadores.” In line with this view, the tlacuiloque of the pictorial accounts emphasized this status of the Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca as conquistadors by means of their actions, position at the Spaniards’ side, dress, attributes, and skin color. The indigenous communities presented themselves as co-conquistadors with the Spaniards, and their participation in the conquest was regarded as essential to the status of their community at the time of 248

Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest

the lienzos’ painting. The pictorial accounts of the Spanish conquest must have played an important role in the process of adaptation to the new Colonial system and the redefinition of communal identities. Their role seems to have been to present the past in such a way that it created a shared understanding of what had happened and a shared sense of being conquistadors. There are reasons to believe the early Tlaxcalteca conquest pictorials, the Lienzo de Analco, and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan were made not long after the conquest period, probably in the 1530s, and that they were used primarily in the indigenous sphere. In the second half of the sixteenth century, a large number of Spanish conquistadors sent their probanzas de méritos y servicios to the court to bring their miserable situation to the king’s attention, with the peak of such activity in the 1560s and 1570s. The Central Mexican conquistadors did the same thing, in the form of letters or more elaborate alphabetic claims such as the AGI Justicia 291 document. It is possible that each of the conquest pictorials discussed, or copies of them specifically made for this purpose, accompanied such a claim and were at one time sent to Spain and later returned to the community to which they belonged. As of yet, however, only later versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala are known to have been made to be sent to Spain, and only these are known actually to have been sent there. Other indigenous pictorial documents contain references to the Spanish conquest of Mexico, but both in the amount of detail and the point of view expressed, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Lienzo de Analco, and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are exceptional. Moreover, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are the only two extant pictorial sources that narrate the Spanish conquest of Guatemala. A comparative study of these documents reveals much information regarding the perspective of the Central Mexican conquistadors on the Spanish conquest of this area and also regarding the Nahuatl names given to towns in Central America and the way those names were communicated. The Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca conquest documents are historical sources indispensable to a better understanding of the Spanish conquest of Mesoamerica and of the migrations that resulted, as seen through the eyes of the indigenous conquistadors. These pictographic documents can no longer be overlooked in historical reconstructions of this era.

249

Conclusions

Conquered Conquistadors

10. Conclusions

This book’s primary purpose has been to provide a reading and interpretation of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. When I started my research, the contents of this document were barely known. Only parts of the initial scene had been identified: the place glyph for Quauhquechollan and the images of Cortés and Malintzin. Furthermore, since the story presented clearly dealt with the Spanish conquest of Mesoamerica in the sixteenth century, it was generally presumed that the document represented the Spanish conquest of an area in Central Mexico. The present research provides many new insights into this manuscript. One of the most important conclusions is that it is not Central Mexico that is depicted but instead a large part of what is now Guatemala. The document has been revealed to present the story of Quauhquecholteca conquistadors, who set out with their encomendero Jorge de Alvarado in his 1527 campaign to Guatemala. 251

Conclusions

During the next three years, Jorge de Alvarado and his allies subjected most of the country to Spanish rule. Jorge de Alvarado’s military actions are poorly documented and therefore often underestimated. Part of the present research, therefore, involved an investigation into his role in the conquest of Guatemala.

The Role of the Quauhquecholteca in the Spanish Conquest The alliance between the Quauhquecholteca and the Spaniards was established in 1520. For the indigenous peoples, the establishment of alliances with the Spaniards marked a new era. For communities in Central Mexico, such an alliance meant they were finally able to defeat the Mexica and free themselves from the harsh rule and often heavy tribute demands of Tenochtitlan. Also, the new alliances were regarded as an opportunity to gain new wealth and status by assisting the Spaniards in future military campaigns. In other words, the Spanish conquest was perceived as a continuation of prehispanic patterns of conquest and domination because, as might be expected, the indigenous communities’ perceptions were based on their previous experiences. This indigenous view of the alliances with the Spaniards is reflected in the indigenous historical record. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan clearly reflects that the Quauhquecholteca placed the Spanish conquest within an indigenous historical framework. The story of the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors had much in common with the stories of other indigenous communities. Some altepetl may have resisted the Spaniards at first, but nearly all of them eventually collaborated. One of these other communities is Tlaxcala. Like the Quauhquecholteca, the Tlaxcalteca conquistadors also recorded their experiences during the Spanish conquest in pictorial manuscripts. Their story is known through, for example, the famous Lienzo de Tlaxcala. When Pedro de Alvarado set out for Guatemala in 1523, Tlaxcalteca and many other Central Mexican communities sent military units with him. It is unclear if any Quauhquecholteca conquistadors were present in this campaign. It seems there were not, as none of the sources mention them, and the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan depicts most places on the route to Guatemala without a battle scene. This means these places were already conquered when the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors passed through in 1527. Had they participated in the earlier conquests, that participation would no doubt have been recorded in their narrative. Later, in 1527, a new group of 5,000 to 6,000 indigenous conquistadors, among whom again were Tlaxcalteca and this time Quauhquecholteca, traveled to Guatemala with Jorge de Alvarado. The total number of allies who set out for Guatemala in the 1520s is unclear, although large numbers—probably up to 10,000—are suspected. The indigenous conquistadors were essential to the conquest of southern Mesoamerica. They provided the manpower and knowledge needed to make the Spanish conquests a success, and it seems they even fought 252

Conclusions

battles independently under the Spanish banner. Furthermore, they provided the Spaniards with essentials such as food, and they served as indispensable bearers (tamemes) and guides, leading the Spaniards to the south along prehispanic trade and conquest routes. The indigenous allies also served as translators, negotiators, scouts, and spies. The indigenous women sent along to consolidate the alliances through marriages also served as concubines. Few of the indigenous conquistadors and their retinues survived the often brutal battles fought under the Spanish banner. Those who did survive often settled in Guatemala and continued their lives there. Colonies of Central Mexican conquistadors were founded in the second city of Santiago at Almolonga, where the conquistadors and their descendants lived in barrios named after their hometowns. The Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca conquistadors were among these settlers. The barrios persisted at least until the eighteenth century. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan presents the story of the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors in this episode in history. This pictorial tells us the routes they traveled, it shows which units participated in which battle, and it comments on themes related to the campaigns of conquest, such as slavery, punishment, dances, and the presence or establishment of Central Mexican settlements in the area. The narrative is not merely a factual account but a narrative of adventure and endurance, telling the dramatic stories of the Quauhquecholteca armies. The events presented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and its landscape of roads, rivers, and marketplaces show how the Quauhquecholteca were engaged in local social, economic, and political life. The narrative is also the political history of this conquering group. It is a story of migration, formation of settlements, and legitimization of status as a victorious people. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan focuses on the experiences of the Quauhquecholteca, and the places and events depicted are limited to those that affected their situation and contributed to their socio-political status.

Decipherment of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and Its Rhetoric The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a pictographic narrative, and I studied it accordingly. At present, we have only the lienzo (i.e., the text) itself at our disposal. Therefore, the decipherment of the pictography, identification of the rhetorical elements, and contextualization of the document and the narrative are the primary keys to its understanding. In this book, the Lienzo de Quauh­que­chollan has been examined using concepts and approaches borrowed from iconology and semiotic-narratology. My research was primarily driven by the character of the document and the availability of contextual sources, and it consisted of piecing together bits and pieces from all of these, finding clues to enhance our understanding of the document’s significance. 253

Conclusions

Key sources that assisted in the decipherment of the Lienzo de Quauhque­ chollan were the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2. The first was an essential source for the identification of place glyphs, and it provided a better understanding of how the indigenous allies viewed the conquest. The ways the alliances with the Spaniards and the conquests under the Spanish banner are presented in the Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca stories share many similarities. The Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2, in turn, provided a better understanding of the format in which the story of the Quauhquecholteca is presented. The striking similarities between the formats used in the two documents indicate that an established Nahua format for migration and conquest stories existed, with its roots in prehispanic times. Both the format and the pictography used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan indicate that it was created according to Nahua pictographic tradition. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan not only provides information on the military achievements and experiences of the Quauhquecholteca under the Spanish banner, it also shows that their view of themselves was based on prehispanic concepts. They were conquerors and therefore people who had achieved prestige and deserved a privileged position. By depicting themselves with white skin and placing themselves at the Spaniards’ side, they related themselves more closely to the world of the Spaniards than to that of other indigenous groups. They presumably painted the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan to strengthen claims to prestige and privilege related to this status. Contemporary alphabetical claims reflect the same perception that the indigenous allies, often referred to as “indios conquistadores” by both themselves and the Spaniards, had a legitimate claim to that identity.

Provenance, Purpose, and Message of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, and the Time and Context of Its Creation The provenance of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is unknown. It seems to have been painted either in Quauhquechollan, Mexico, or in the Quauhque­chol­teca colony in the city of Santiago at Almolonga in Guatemala. If the latter was the case, at least two copies were probably made, with one sent to Quauhquechollan. The latter would then be the version presently in Puebla. Arguments can be put forth supporting both possibilities. I favor the latter, based on the fact that the format used for the story is one used for migration stories (see Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2), pointing to the probability that the creators of the document had experienced a migration. It is known that conquest pictorials of the Nahua tradition were made in Guatemala, as there are references to a comparable pictographic document from Totonicapan, and the Spaniard Juan Fernández Nájera documented that he had seen a “paño pintado” in Guatemala that referred to the role of Mexican conquistadors in the Spanish conquest of 254

Conclusions

the area. If the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was indeed painted in Guatemala and then sent to Quauhquechollan, it would serve as an interesting example of continued contact between the Mexicans who settled in Guatemala and their home provinces in Mexico. Also, it would be a valuable example of the continuation of Mexican traditions and customs, in this case the traditional form in which history was recorded, in colonies in southern Mesoamerica. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan seems to have been produced in the early 1530s. The document depicts nothing from after that period. If it had been created much later, the story would have been obsolete at its creation, in the sense that important changes that occurred after the 1530s were not reflected in the document. The style and character of the pictography and the absence of churches in the painting also point to an early date of creation. The authors of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan are unknown. They must have been Quauhquecholteca tlacuiloque who were very familiar with Nahua pictorial writing and its conventions and who worked at the request of a Quauhquecholteca lord: either a lord from Quauhquechollan or a ruler in the Quauhquecholteca community at the city of Santiago at Almolonga. In keeping with Mesoamerican traditions, the document is not signed. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan was likely created for an indigenous public. The medium indicates it was meant for public viewing. The document probably served in a community ritual related to the conquest period, in which the story of the Quauhquecholteca conquistadors was presented through this visual medium in combination with oral traditions. No doubt, the main purposes of such a ceremony were to create a shared feeling of identity, to proclaim the legitimacy of the claim to the status and privileges of conquistadors, and to help the community understand and deal with the new situation in which its members found themselves. In Tlaxcala, the conquest story of the Tlaxcalteca conquistadors was once displayed on the walls of buildings, in the form of either lienzos or murals. Perhaps the Quauhquecholteca conquest story was exhibited in a similar form as well. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan not only provides historical information, it also presents geographic data. The position of the place glyphs is predominantly determined by the narrative. In most parts of the document, however, the distribution of the place glyphs also corresponds to the actual distribution of these places on the ground. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan can be considered an accurate geographic map of the area and is probably the very first known such map of Guatemala. The places depicted in the pictorial are all indicated by their Nahuatl names, not by the local Maya names. The Lienzo de Tlaxcala shows Nahuatl names for places in Guatemala as well. These Nahuatl glyphs for places in Guatemala are unique to the two documents. A comparative study of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan and the known conquest pictorials created by Tlaxcalteca (i.e., the various versions of the Lienzo 255

Conclusions

de Tlaxcala and the Lienzo de Analco from Oaxaca) reveals valuable information about these two indigenous communities’ perspective on the Spanish conquest at the time of their composition. All conquest pictorials convey the message that the establishment of an alliance with the Spaniards was initially considered an advancement for the community. They represent the Spanish conquest as an event predicated on the initial combination of Spanish and indigenous forces and as a continuation of prehispanic processes, in which the achievement of status for a community came through military success. In other words, the Quauhquecholteca and Tlaxcalteca did not consider themselves conquered; they were conquistadors. To find this point of view expressed in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Lienzo de Analco, and the early Tlaxcalteca conquest narratives is not surprising if these sources were indeed made in the first decade following the conquest. The awareness of their subjugation came later, in the second half of the sixteenth century, when things did not turn out as the indigenous conquistadors had expected. The Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca pictorials emphasize their status as conquistadors at the time of painting and describe the processes that led to that status. The alphabetic sources created in the subsequent decades clearly reflect enormous disillusionment following the conquest period. This disillusionment started when it became clear that the Spanish conquest was different from conquest as known in the prehispanic era. Promises were ignored, privileges were taken away, and the expected status and riches generally failed to be realized. The indigenous conquistadors were not considered conquistadors like the Spaniards. They were indigenous peoples now subjected to Spanish rule. Mesoamerica changed forever. But the Spanish conquistadors were also disillusioned. Large numbers of reports were written to the king commenting on the poor circumstances in which both indigenous and Spanish conquistadors had come to live. Their claims are not that different. The conquest had obviously created high expectations that were not realized. Although there is no direct reference to it, it is possible that the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, or both served as physical proof supporting some of the indigenous conquistadors’ later claims. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is a valuable historical source that is now accessible. It sheds new light on the conquests of Jorge de Alvarado in the late 1520s, which are poorly documented elsewhere. Also, together with the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Lienzo de Analco, and our knowledge of the lost mapa of Totonicapan, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan demonstrates a continuation of the prehispanic tradition of creating conquest pictorials to legitimize a conqueror’s status and a large and widespread tradition of creating pictorial accounts of the Spanish conquest. But most important, the story of the Quauhquecholteca contributes to a better understanding of the Spanish conquest. The latter is traditionally seen as a Spanish achievement, but the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, the conquest pictori256

Conclusions

als from Tlaxcala and Analco, and the written (alphabetic) claims of indigenous conquistadors prove otherwise. This is the story of a joint conquest, a conquest achieved by Spanish and indigenous conquistadors together. These indigenous sources make us aware of the fact that the stories of the Spanish conquest told today are unbalanced, even unfair, and that revision is badly needed.

Future Research As stated earlier, the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan is only one of several sources that provide new insights into the indigenous view of the Spanish conquest. Several researchers are currently involved in the study of other indigenous sources being uncovered in archives. This research is needed to provide a more balanced view of this episode in history. Accounts from both the indigenous and Spanish sides have to be analyzed critically, as both came from people who had their own viewpoint and concerns. This book focused on the story of the Quauhque­chol­teca, but there are also stories of other indigenous conquistadors from what is now Mexico. Furthermore, the indigenous peoples of Guatemala and other Meso­american countries also left accounts, many of which have yet to be published and which require examination. I have deciphered and interpreted most of the contents of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, but some parts deserve more investigation. Also, I have not made a physical analysis of the document. Such an analysis might provide new insights. Analysis of the pigments and the cloth, for example, may reveal where it was created. After all, the distance between Quauhquechollan and Guatemala is considerable. Also, further archival research might lead to yet a better understanding of the 1527–1529 period in the conquest of Guatemala and thus of the events depicted in the lienzo. Perhaps one day the missing part of the document will be found. Or a written document may appear that provides more information on the creation, use, and contents of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. With regard to the Tlaxcalteca conquest pictorials, there is still much to investigate. Although the Lienzo de Tlaxcala and its different versions have been studied by a number of scholars, many elements require further research. A study could be made of the relation of the various versions to one other or of their use, their histories, and their distribution. The Lienzo de Analco, in turn, has barely been studied. Although it was briefly examined by König and is occasionally mentioned in scholarly discussions, a more profound analysis is needed. A study of the Tlaxcalteca conquest pictorials in relation to the many other extant pictorial accounts from Tlaxcala might also lead to new insights. Another interesting subject yet to be investigated in detail is the use of emblems by the indigenous military units and the occurrence of shields and back racks in Mexican pictorials. In this book I have surveyed only the insignia presented in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. The Lienzo de Tlaxcala presents many 257

Conclusions

more, and other Mexican pictorials depict them as well. The use of some of these emblems by different altepetl is also an intriguing research topic. Research into the historical traditions in Central Mexican colonies in Meso­ america should also be taken further. Barrios were founded by Tlaxcalteca conquistadors all over Mesoamerica, often named after their founders’ hometown. In Oaxaca and the city of Santiago at Almolonga, barrios were also founded by indigenous conquistadors from other Central Mexican altepetl. Little is known about the communication between the inhabitants of these colonies and their places of origin. Future research might give us new insights. Finally, the three other pictographic documents from Quauhquechollan are yet to be studied in detail. I have provided only preliminary interpretations based on limited research. The Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan, the Codex Huaquechula, and the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec all contain detailed information on the socio-political structure of sixteenth-century Quauhquechollan. Presently, little is known about this topic, and future investigation of these documents, in combination with archival research, might bring to light valuable new information.

258

Notes

Conquered Conquistadors

Notes

Chapter 1. Introduction 1. Other works I would particularly like to mention are Greenblatt (1993), Gruzinski (1993), and Thomas (1993). Gruzinski focuses on the representation of conquest events in indigenous pictorials. 2. Among these scholars are John Chuchak, Laura Matthew, Michel Oudijk, Matthew Restall, and Yanna Yannakakis. 3. The Escuela Galarziana follows the approach and method introduced by the Mexican scholar Dr. Joaquin Galarza to decipher indigenous pictorial writing. As Galarza proposed, the decipherment of Nahua pictorial writing should be done by means of a profound analysis of the elements of the writing system. Galarza considers pictography and text inseparable and states that glyphs are formed by grammatical-phonetic-plastic elements, combining to transcribe syllables, words, and short and long phrases that are associated in groups of paragraphs to form an account, which, in turn, is to be read in

259

Notes

Nahuatl. The basic methodology of the Galarza school consists of isolating the various elements in the pictography and analyzing them individually, with the purpose of coming to an interpretation of the whole. See Galarza (1972, 1978, 1992, 1995, for example). The main flaw in Galarza’s method is that it ignores contextualization. Using the Galarza method therefore leads to elaborate descriptive studies but not to readings and interpretations. 4. Aguirre Beltrán 1999; Brotherston 1994:114; Glass (1964:90); Glass and Robertson (1975:116); Brotherston 1994:144; Johnson 2000:584. 5. There are two reasons for this. First, for many, the concept of cultural “difference” or “otherness” was poison, and the two were long considered the equivalent of inferiority. The concepts of “otherness” and “difference,” as based on power relations, have been part of the theoretical and political agenda only in the past few years. I will not enter this discussion here. This topic is explored in Bhabba (1995) and Braidotti (2002), as well as in other works not cited. The second reason was the pictographs’ independence from speech, which caused the documents’ script to be categorized as nonwriting, and thus nonhistory, by some scholars. Presently, however, the Nahua script has come to be considered true writing by most. For a discussion of this topic, see Boone (1994, 2000). 6. Research into the iconography and pictography in old Mexican manuscripts can traditionally be divided into the studies of Nahua (Aztec), Ñuudzavui (Mixtec), Benizaa (Zapotec), and Maya writing systems. One of the first contributions to the study of Mexican iconography was that of Eduard Seler (1849–1922). His interpretations were very diverse: he considered lienzos to be “simple maps” (because he had not studied them thoroughly), whereas he explained parts of codices in terms of complex symbolic displays of astronomic movements (a paradigm known as Astraldeutung; see Loo 1987). Nonetheless, he was a great iconographer, and his work has been indispensable to later studies. Seler’s interpretations were followed by an approach in which the question of whether scholars’ interpretations corresponded with the indigenous reality was not addressed. Around the same period, the historical-iconographical approach (1902–1935) was developed in the footsteps of the scholar Zelia Nuttall. This approach led to fundamental breakthroughs in the study of pictorial manuscripts. Historical persons were identified, and the indigenous and European chronologies were linked to one another (see, for example, Caso 1949, 1977–1979). Later, geographical, political, ideological, and religious aspects were increasingly included in study. Place-name glyphs were identified, and the relationships among religion, politics, ideology, and the analysis of pictorial conventions were established. In the past decades, many studies have been published on the decipherment of Mexican pictorial manuscripts. Excellent examples include the works of Smith, Anders, Troike, Jansen, Pérez Jimenez, Dibble, Berdan and Anawalt, Kirchhoff, Reyes García, Robertson, Glass, Boone, Doesburg, Roskamp, Oudijk, and Castañeda de la Paz. 7. The script has roots as early as 1000 B.C. and developed over time into the pictorial system found in well-known Nahua documents such as the Codex Mendoza, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Mapas de Cuauhtinchan, and many others (see Glass 1975). 8. A few Relaciones Geográficas maps do contain the name of their creator. See Mundy (1996:62). 9. For more elaborate discussions of the lienzo and cartographic histories genres, refer to Boone (1991, 1992, 1998, 2000); Leibsohn (1993, 1994, 1996); Mundy (1996, 2001); Oettinger (1983); Smith (1973); Zborover (2002).

260

Notes

10. Since 1975, several other lienzos have come to the attention of scholars. Among these newly “rediscovered” lienzos are, for example, a group of six lienzos from Chiepetlan, Guerrero, and three lienzos from the Coixtlahuaca Valley, Oaxaca (Parmenter 1993; Rincon Mautner 1994, 1997:134). For new lienzos found in Guerrero, refer to the work of Samuel Villela and Blanca Jiménez, and for Oaxaca, refer to the work of Michel Oudijk. Others have been found in Central Mexico. 11. As tribute payments, for example, cotton was exchanged in different ways: (1) as unprocessed cotton, (2) as semi-finished products (cloaks), and (3) as finished clothes. The cloaks offered as tribute often were prepared in standard sizes. The pieces originally intended for the production of clothes are recognizable by their (relatively small) size. Possibly, these pieces were also used for lienzos, not only for clothes. Pers. comm., Hans Roskamp, Mexico-Leiden, August 2003. 12. For studies of Mesoamerican weaving and textile production techniques, refer to Anawalt (1981:9–14, 214–215); Mastache de Escobar y Alba (1971); Weitlaner Johnson (1959, 1971); for studies of lienzos with a focus on the cloth, refer to Altamirano Rocha (1982); Weitlaner Johnson (1966). See also Cervera Xicotencatl and López Ortiz (2000). 13. For studies of the development of the indigenous painting style in the Colonial period, refer to Gruzinski (1993); Robertson (1994). 14. Other examples of pictorials bordered by a sea band are the Mapa Regional Primero from Tuxpan (see Melgarejo Vivanco and Álvarez Bravo 1970) and the Lienzo de Tecciztlan y Tequatepec (Zborover 2002). 15. See Boone (2000); Gruzinski (1993); Mundy (1996); Robertson (1994); Zborover (2002). 16. The Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca vividly illustrates this way of presenting a narrative. In this document the role previously assigned to spoken or chanted words is fulfilled by the alphabetic text. Extensive dialogues and songs are related to the pictography, revealing the structure, style, and rhetoric of the originally orally recited texts. See Kirchhoff, Odena Güemes, and Reyes García (1976). 17. “Nonphysical circumstances” means those things generally defined as supernatural, metaphysical, and spiritual by Western thinkers (Cavender Wilson 1998:23–26). 18. These tapestries were painted by Jean de Vermayen and woven by Guillermo Pannemaker (1535–1554). Presently, they decorate the walls of the Salón de Tapices of the Real Alcázar of Seville, Spain. See Fidalgo (1995:53). 19. For this map and other aspects of Mexica mapmaking, refer to Boone (1998). 20. Prehispanic Ñuudzavui (Mixtec) codices also show landscape-like scenes and lists of toponyms (Codex Nuttall, pp. 36, 47–48, see Anders, Jansen, and Pérez Jiménez 1992a:167, 190–193; Codex Vindobonensis, pp. 9–10, see Anders, Jansen, and Pérez Jiménez 1992b). This indicates that the concept of placing a narrative in a landscapelike environment was indeed already used in prehispanic pictography. The painter of the Codex Nuttall provides such detailed information that it can be suspected he was aided by other, previous pictorials (Jansen 1998:38). 21. Anthony Pagden came up with this term. See Kagan (2000:46, 211). 22. This designation was formulated by James McAllistair, pers. comm., spring 2002. 23. Different kinds of cartographic traditions existed in sixteenth-century Europe, one of which was “scientific cartography.” This approach emerged during the period of

261

Notes

the conquest of the Americas, following the translation into Latin of Ptolemy’s Geographia in 1412. It conceived of the world mathematically and measured it in accordance with a complex geometric grid. Meanwhile, however, the older and more widespread tradition of mapmaking in which space was represented in symbolic terms, often related to religion (i.e., symbolic cartography), was also still in use. See Kagan (2000:55); Woodward (1985). 24. A large number of documents were clearly made specifically for use in court. Good examples are various Títulos Primordiales and the majority of the pictorials made in Michoacan. 25. This is not a claim that all documents combining both scripts were always used for a cross-cultural purpose. The Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca from Cuauhtinchan, Puebla, for example, also combines pictography with alphabetic writing. However, this document is directed to an indigenous public. 26. At present, the Biblioteca Nacional de Antropología e Historia and the Archivo General de la Nación, both in Mexico City, and the Bibliothèque National de France hold the largest collections of lienzos and mapas.

Chapter 2. Theory and Methodology 1. Obviously, the Nahuas were familiar with their own pictorial script, and they knew how to use it to convey messages, encrypt messages, and provoke certain emotions in the reader. As they were less familiar with the alphabetic script, this was a much more limited medium of communication for them. 2. These problems are presently among the primary concerns of semiotics, mostly as a result of the contemporary encounter between semiotics and art history. See Bal (1994:139). 3. With regard to the word “interpretation,” no interpretation can be “right,” “exhaustive,” “certain,” or “objective”; nor do I intend to present my interpretation of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan as such. At best, an interpretation can shed specific light on a text, but it never excludes other meanings (see also Bal 1994:11–12). An interpretation is “richer” when it is more general (i.e., when it holds for more people, in more situations, in more cases), discussable, and sufficiently grounded and when it brings new insights—which is my aim. Many aspects of the discussion in this chapter may seem obvious to the reader. They serve merely to provide a foundation and structure for the discussion and to explain the point of view from which I work. 4. Panofsky used the word “iconography” instead of “iconology.” He separated “iconology” from “iconography” by stating that the former is the interpretation of the total symbolic horizon of an image and the latter is the cataloging of particular symbolic motifs (Panofsky 1972:3–17). Most scholars, however, use both terms interchangeably. To avoid confusion and for the sake of consistency, I use the word “iconology” in my text and omit the word “iconography.” 5. See Burke (2001:35–36); Panofsky (1972:3–17). The internal stratification and historical context as well as the social context of the document are important to examine. The function and meaning of the elements and the scenes, as well as those of the document itself, may have changed over time. One needs to study the significance of the document as well as its place in a cultural dynamic context (i.e., its particular use as a symbol of the ideological politics at the time of creation, its function throughout the Colonial period and in the period of the republic, and its role in present-day society).

262

Notes

6. At the start of the twentieth century, the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure defined a science that studied signs, what signs are made up of, and how they function. He called this “semiology,” and this science was applied primarily to alphabetic texts. Around the same time, the American philosopher Charles Alexander Peirce came up with an analogous field of study that he called “semiotics” and that explicitly included pictures and images as signs as well. Today, semiology and semiotics are often regarded as near-equivalents (Peirce 1931–1958; Saussure 1983). For more on semiotic theory, refer, for example, to Bal (1994); Bal and Bryson (1991); Eco (1977). 7. The term “narratology” (from the French narratologie) was introduced by Tzvetan Todorov (1969). In brief, narratology considers texts to be rule-governed ways in which people (re)fashion their universe. One could say that narratologists aim to determine the grammar of narrative. Narratological models have been criticized for being, among other things, too limited, static, and incoherent. Nonetheless, the theory has contributed a great deal to our understanding of the way human beings construct narratives and how they paraphrase, summarize/expand, and use them; in other words, how people make sense of and use narratives to give order to the world and help them shape their experiences (Prince 1997). 8. The word “finite” in this definition does not mean the text itself is finite. It only refers to the fact that there is a first and a last word or image to be identified or, as in the case of a painting such as the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, that there is a physical framework (from Bal 1997:5). 9. The distinction between story and fabula is based on the difference between the sequence of events as experienced by the actors and the way they are presented. 10. Although these layers do not necessarily exist independently of one another, it is possible to analyze them separately. The divisions of the narrative into the layers and elements discussed earlier are only theoretical suppositions that help us understand the structure and rhetoric of the narrative. In practice, the only materials we have for our research are the painting and the alphabetical texts before us. Only the text layer is directly accessible; that is, normally one experiences the text, not the fabula. 11. Bal defines “focalization” as “the relation between the vision [point of view] and that which is ‘seen,’ perceived” (Bal 1997:142). 12. The selection and arrangement of these elements is a rhetorical tool used by the authors to evoke a certain reaction or emotion in the reader. This effect is sometimes intended, sometimes unintended, or it may take place beyond the author’s consciousness. Sometimes, it even comes close to manipulation of the reader. One speaks of manipulation when a message is conveyed without giving the reader the means to realize it, hence to consciously accept or reject it (Bal 1994:3, 1997:3–4). 13. The word “sign” is derived from the Latin word signum, used for the standards carried by Roman military units for visual identification (etymologically, the “object one follows”). The Romans used the word “signum” not for lettered words but for images or designs (Ong 1982:76). 14. Also, when a sign receiver is not familiar with certain signs, he or she will still tend to look for a meaning in them and will bring his or her own ideas to fill the gap. This results in a new way of assigning meaning and applies not only to the reading of signs but also to the interpretation of texts and works of art as a whole (Bal 1994:20).

263

Notes

15. For the concept of “otherness,” refer to Bhabba (1995); Thomas (1994). I will not enter this discussion here. 16. In the iconological tradition, one also delves deeply into analysis of the degree to which images are conventional and the degree to which they are “natural.” One of the proponents of this approach was Gombrich. See, for example, Steiner (1981). 17. In the case of Mexican pictography, for those indigenous people who lived when the system was still functioning and were familiar with a document’s context, the pictorials were easily readable, to the surprise of the Spanish as appears from the words of Torquemada: “y para escusar confusión en el conocimiento de estas tierras, las tenían pintadas en grandes lienços_y así con estos colores, en abriendo qualquier pintura se veía todo el pueblo y sus términos y limites, y se entendía cuias eran, y en que parte estaban, que era una curiosidad muy grande” (Torquemada 1986 II:546). 18. I did not use this method simply because I have found few modern concepts or conventions that are applicable to the pictography in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. I mention this method in any case because it has been very useful in the study of other pictorials and also because it greatly influenced my scholarly education. For discussions and applications of the ethno-iconological method, refer to Doesburg (1996); Jansen (1988); Jansen, Loo, and Manning (1988); Loo (1987); Oudijk (2000); Roskamp (1998); and the books pertaining to the series Códices Mexicanos, composed with the participation of Anders, Jansen, Reyes García, and Pérez Jiménez (1991–1996). 19. To recognize cultural continuity (and change) between the present and the past and to gain perspective on longer processes of development, archaeological, historical, and ethnographical sources are to be used, and the development of the indigenous culture and the effects of colonialism are to be taken into account. The methodological problems that may result from this approach (misrepresentation as a result of historical selection of the material and “invisible” conceptual changes) are to be prevented as much as possible by comparing the material in question with other pictorial manuscripts from the same region and with data provided by the historical sources and archive documentation (Doesburg 1996; Jansen 1988). 20. The application of this method (“upstreaming”) rests on three assumptions, as defined by Fenton: (1) that the major patterns of culture remain stable over long periods of time, producing repeated uniformities; (2) that these patterns can best be seen by proceeding from the known ethnological present to the unknown past, using recent sources first and then earlier sources; (3) that those sources which ring true at both ends of the time span merit confidence. As Fenton points out, this method must be used with caution because it contains a built-in fallacy historians will recognize as the doctrine of uniformitarianism, inferring past from present. See Fenton (1957:21–22). 21. A scene can be defined as a combination of signs or elements, each of which has its own conventional significance, that forms a coherent group. The size of a scene can vary from very small (involving only one actor and event, for example) to very large, showing various actors and events together.

Chapter 3. Quauhquechollan 1. The principal organizing structure in Late Postclassic Central Mexico was the altepetl (a–“water,” tepe–“mountain”). The word altepetl refers primarily to an organiza-

264

Notes

tion of people holding power over a given territory (Lockhart 1992:14). In size, the altepetl were comparable to the early Mediterranean city-states. The preconquest “empires,” in turn, were conglomerations in which some altepetl were dominant and others subordinate. Normally, an altepetl was made up of symmetrical parts of four, six, or eight units, named calpolli or tlaxilacalli (“big house”). Each of these components was a semiindependent entity with its own specific territory, name, deity, and ruler (teuctlatoani). After the conquest, the altepetl became the basis of most political structures. Everything the Spaniards organized outside their own settlements (the encomienda, rural parishes, indigenous municipalities, initial administrative jurisdictions) was built on the existing altepetl. The Spaniards translated altepetl as pueblo, or “people” (Lockhart 1992:14–16). For more on the altepetl structure and organization, refer to Lockhart (1992:14–58); Smith (2000). 2. The many migrations at the time played an important role in the development and formation of socio-political units in Central Mexico. Important lineages appeared, and the foundations of principalities and political confederations were established. See Acuña (1984 I:151); Paredes Martínez (1991:22). 3. See Acuña (1984 I:151); Torquemada (1986 I:262 [Book 3, Ch. XI]). The Chi­chi­ meca populated many provinces of Mexico: the mountains; the coast; areas to the north and part of the east, such as Tuçapan, Papantlan, Tonatiuhco, Metzitlan, Achachalintlan, Nauhtlan; and many other places such as Tlaxcala, the slopes of the volcano Popo­cate­ petl, Tetelan, Tochimilco, Atlixco, Coatepec, Tepapayecan, Cholula, and Tetliyacac (Tor­que­mada 1986 I:261–262 [Book 3, Ch. X]). For more on the migrations of the Chi­chi­meca and the altepetl they founded, refer to Kirchhoff, Odena Güemes, and Reyes García (1976). 4. See Acuña 1984 I:151. The corresponding Christian year is not given. According to local oral tradition in modern Quauhquechollan, the town was founded around A.D. 1100 (fieldwork, Quauhquechollan, 1997). In that period most altepetl in the area were established. The year 4 House closest to A.D. 1100 would be 1093 (or 1145) (Caso 1977–1979 I). 5. The story tells that in Chicomoztoc lived an old man named Iztac Mixcoatl. He and his wife, Ilancueitl, had six sons named Xelhua, Tenuch, Ulmecatl, Xicalancatl, Mixtecatl, and Otomitl. Each of the sons founded a number of towns and was the progenitor of a group named after him. Quauhquechollan was founded by Xelhua, the eldest. In the present-day town his name can be found at the entrance of the church of San Martín Caballero. For more on the migration stories from Chicomoztoc, refer to Kirch­hoff, Odena Güemes, and Reyes García (1976); Mendieta (1993 II:146 [Ch. XXXIII]); Motolinía (1995:5) (epístola proemial); Torquemada (1986 I:32 [Book 1, Ch. XII]). The resemblance between the texts of Torquemada and Mendieta is so striking that one must have copied from the other, not an unusual phenomenon at the time. 6. According to the chronology of Caso (1977–1979 I), there are several years 1 Rabbit in the relevant time frame (1100–1350): 1142, 1194, 1246, 1298, and 1350. The years 9 Flint are 1124, 1176, 1228, 1280, and 1332. 7. See Acuña (1984 I:162); Torquemada (1986 I:262, 268–269 [Book 3, Chs. XI and XIII]). During this time period, most groups in the area, including residents of Quauhquechollan, established a bond of friendship with the Tlaxcalteca.

265

Notes

8. See Kirchhoff, Odena Güemes, and Reyes García (1976:218); Reyes García (1988:88). This lord is named after one of the two Chichimeca founders of Quauhquechollan, suggesting that he may have belonged to the same lineage. 9. To the south of present-day Santa Ana Coatepec is an archaeological site that might be related to this settlement of Quauhquecholteca. This site is yet to be investigated. Pers. comm., Luciano Torres, archaeologist at the INAH Puebla, Mexico, October 1997. 10. The two wars with Calpan and Huexotzingo are described by Motolinía (1995: 192 [Part III, Ch. 18]); Torquemada (1986 I:316–317 [Book 3, Ch. XXXI]). They are also recorded in the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca (Kirchhoff, Odena Güemes, and Reyes García 1976:211–212) and the Anales de Cuauhtitlán (Feliciano Velázquez 1992:23, 26). The last two sources date these wars in the Nahua years 1 Reed and 2 Reed. 11. AGN Tierras, Vol. 11, 1a pta. Exp. 1, f. 3v, in Paredes Martínez (1991:30). 12. See Motolinía (1995:192 [Part III, Ch. 18]); Torquemada (1986 I:316–317 [Book 3, Ch. XXXI]). 13. Motolinía (1995:192 [Part III, Ch. 18]); Torquemada (1986 I:316–317 [Book 3, Ch. XXXI]). 14. These sources are the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca and the Anales de Cuauh­ titlán. See Feliciano Velázquez (1992:26); Kirchhoff, Odena Güemes, and Reyes García (1976:212). 15. Paredes Martínez (1991:24–25) dated this war in 1443. That would be contradictory to the information provided by Motolinía and Torquemada. Paredes Martínez seems to have considered the Mixtec year 2 Reed, which indeed corresponds to the year 1443, instead of the Nahua year 2 Reed. The first war with Calpan and Huexotzingo took place in the Nahua year 1 Reed, which would have been either 1311 or 1363 (Caso 1977–1979 I). 16. AGN Tierras, Vol. 11, 1a pta., Exp. 1, f. 3v, in Paredes Martínez (1991:30). 17. For more on the Mexica expansion, refer to, for example, Berdan and Anawalt (1997); Berdan et al. (1996); Carrasco (1999); Davies (1968); Hassig (1988); Hodge and Smith (1994); Smith (2000). 18. In this battle, important contributions were made by the Mexica captains Cuitlahuatzin (one of Motecuhzoma Ilhuicamina’s brothers), Mauhcaxacohitzin, and Ezhuahuacatl. Five other Mexica captains were killed: Macuilmalinaltzin, Tlacateccatl, Quitzquaquatzin, Ilamaehuatzin, and Xochitlahuatzin. See Torquemada (1986 I:210 [Book 2, Ch. LXXVI]). According to local oral tradition, the Mexica conquered Quauhquechollan in 1439. Quauhquechollan would have consisted of nine barrios, which the Mexica reportedly united into one town. Pers. comm., Don Gonzalo Alejo, Quauhquechollan, Mexico, October 1997. 19. The Mexica realm is usually described as an empire, but whether it truly was one is debated. See also Tilly (1975). 20. See Hassig (1988:168); Torquemada (1986 I:211 [Book 2, Ch. LXXVI]). 21. Acuña (1984 I:181); Torquemada (1986 I:201 [Book 2, Ch. LXXI]). 22. War captives from this area were considered more valuable than those from other areas. See Berdan and Anawalt (1997:98–99); Hassig (1988:39). 23. Xochi–“flower,” yaoyo–“war.” In Nahua poetic imagery, “flower” is a metaphor for human blood, and the battlefield was conceived of as a field of flowers. The Flower

266

Notes

Wars were ritual wars undertaken primarily to provide a never-ending stream of war captives for sacrifice. This need for war captives stemmed from the Mesoamerican belief that their gods (in particular Quetzalcoatl) had sacrificed themselves for the people, and thus the people were expected to sacrifice young warriors in return for the world to continue. The Flower Wars were waged with great formality, with a (sacred) place and time set for the battle beforehand, and they were accompanied by a predetermined set of conventions and rituals. For more information on this type of warfare, refer to Hassig (1988:10); Plunket and Uruñuela (1994). 24. During this period, Tlaxcala underwent a process of gradual conquest through siege (external trade was cut off ) and periodic military attacks and battles. Nonetheless, it managed to hold on to its independent status (Acuña 1984 I:182–184). See also Hodge and Smith (1994). 25. According to Durán, this tribute included cloaks, animal skins, sandals, stones, jewels, gold, and other precious objects such as rich feathers, shields, and warrior costumes (Durán 1984 II:158–159). See also Berdan and Anawalt (1997:98–101); Prem (1974). 26. See Motolinía (1995:188 [Part III, Ch. 17]); Torquemada (1986 I:517 [Book 4, Ch. LXXVII]). 27. Cortés (1993:93); Díaz del Castillo (1992:308 [Ch. CXXXVI]); Feliciano Velázquez (1992:63); Kirchhoff, Odena Güemes, and Reyes García (1976:218); Reyes García (1988:88); Torquemada (1986 I:317 [Book 3, Ch. XXXI], 518–519 [Book 4, Ch. LXXXVII]). At the time of documentation, Don Juan was already an old man. See Mendieta (1993:184 [Book 3, Ch. XLII]); Motolinía (1995:92–93 [Part II, Ch. 5]). 28. For studies of and publications on the archaeological record of Quauh­que­cho­ llan, refer to Asselbergs (1998); Paredes Martínez (1991); Plunket (1990); Plunket and Uruñuela (1987, 1991–1992). 29. See Hassig (1988:18); Luttwak (1976). Luttwak analyzes political relations in terms of the degree to which they rely on force and power. 30. The Título Nijaib I contains a claim that the K’iche’ paid tribute to Motecuhzoma. See Carmack (1973:62). 31. Cortés (1993:89, 91); Torquemada (1986 I:517 [Book 4, Ch. LXXVII]). 32. Olid and Díaz del Castillo, however, recorded that the army consisted of 300, not 200, soldiers. Torquemada wrote that Diego de Ordás and Alonso de Ávila were sent to Quauhquechollan, joined by 300 Spaniards. See Cortés (1993:90); Díaz del Castillo (1992:302 [Ch. CXXXII]); Heliodoro Valle (1950:74–75); Torquemada (1986 I:517–518 [Book 4, Ch. LXXVII]). 33. There are several references to Cristóbal de Olid’s presence in Quauhquechollan in local oral tradition. Also, in the fields of Quauhquechollan is a large rock with a face carved in it. This rock is referred to as the Piedra Mascara. According to local stories, the carved face “es Cristóbal de Olid, hablando.” Pers. comm., Doña Felicitas Ramirez Tufiño, fieldwork, Quauhquechollan, 1997. 34. Cortés (1993:90); Díaz del Castillo (1992:302 [Ch. CXXXII]); Heliodoro Valle (1950:74–75); Torquemada (1986 I:517–518 [Book 4, Ch. LXXVII]). The conquest of Quauhquechollan is depicted in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. Olid and Díaz del Castillo also refer to the participation of the Tlaxcalteca in the conquest of Quauhquechollan. See Díaz del Castillo (1992:302 [Ch. CXXXII]); Heliodoro Valle (1950:74–75).

267

Notes

35. See Cortés (1993:92); Torquemada (1986 I:518 [Book 4, Ch. LXXXVII]). 36. See Bancroft (1883–1886 I:528). This original location would have been a site located 11.5 km to the north. That cannot be correct, though, since the remains of the walls can still be found around the present-day town (discussed earlier), and a prehispanic boundary marker is present at the modern town (the Piedra Mascara: see note 33). The removal Bancroft referred to must have been the removal of the town from Acapetlahuacan around 1400. 37. Cortés (1993:93); Díaz del Castillo (1992:303 [Ch. CXXXII]). 38. Shortly thereafter, the eight-year-old son of the lord of Quauhquechollan was appointed the new lord of Ytzucan. The lord of Ytzucan had died, and he had no sons qualified for the position. The boy had a genealogical relation to the lineage of Ytzucan (his mother was a daughter of Ytzucan’s former lord). Various other noblemen, one of whom was from Quauhquechollan, assisted the boy until he reached the appropriate age to rule. See Cortés (1993:93); Díaz del Castillo (1992:308 [Ch. CXXXVI]); Torquemada (1986 I:518–519 [Book 4, Ch. LXXVII]). 39. Quauhquecholteca captains and soldiers helped Gonzalo de Sandoval defeat the Mexica at Huaxtepec. The Quauhquecholteca also served as indispensable negotiators in the subjection of Chalco. See Cortés (1993:115, 120); Torquemada (1986 I:535 [Book 4, Ch. LXXXVI]). 40. Caciques from Quauhquechollan are mentioned in Gabriel de Castañeda’s description of the journey of the cacique Don Francisco de Sandoval Acazitli to the Chichimeca region in the north. During this journey, Sandoval Acazitli was reportedly accompanied by caciques from Chalco, the Zapotec area, Michoacan, Tlaxcala, and Quauhquechollan. See García Icazbalceta (1980 2:323). 41. This decline of tributaries resulted largely from the series of epidemics that devastated Central Mexico, virtually all of Mesoamerica, and most of the Americas because of European-indigenous contact. 42. Both Spanish conquistadors and settlers brought significant numbers of African slaves, who eventually mixed with the local population. 43. See Cuaderno Estadístico Municipal: Huaquechula, Estado de Puebla (1996:3, 19, 68). 44. For more information on sixteenth-century Quauhquechollan, refer to Paredes Martínez (1991) and Prem (1988), both of whom provide general overviews of the sociopolitical and economic situation in the area at the time. 45. Refer to note 28 of this chapter. 46. Glass raised the possibility that this document is the same as a deerskin manuscript mentioned in an 1852 note cited by Quintana (1960:9–10). If so, the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec was in Manso’s collection in 1848. See Glass (1964:155). 47. These documents are filed and described in the library records as follows: (1) 79 / AII 6-5 / Cuauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, Genealogía de / 10-16 3114 / 35-101 /-/ piel / pieza / 0.850 × 0.810 mts. / dibujo color / anónimo, and (2) 80 / AIII c-17 / Cuauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, Genealogía de /-/ 17* (antes: 35-101[A]) / Siglo XIX / papel / Hoja / 0.943 × 0.870 mts. / impreso coloreado / anónimo. 48. Macuilxochitl is also the patron deity of Atlixco (local oral tradition, fieldwork, Atlixco, Mexico, 1997).

268

Notes

49. The alphabetic gloss in the latter, however, says “Quauhquechollan” only and does not include the word Macuilxochitepec. 50. The persons in this upper row can be identified as lords on the basis of their attributes: they are seated on thrones, they wear cloaks, and they smoke cigars. These are all attributes of lordship. Lords smoking cigars also appear in other sixteenth-century indigenous pictorial documents from Mexico (see, for example, the pictorial documents from Huitulco). 51. Translation by Luis Reyes García, Tlaxcala, Mexico, 1997. 52. When in Quauhquechollan, I recorded this testimony: “Antes Huaquechula era nueve barrios: Jaltipan, Consingo, San Pablo, Soyatepetl, La Trinidad, Xoxtla (allá está el templo), Tezayacatl (en la dirección de la Piedra Mascara), Petlacalco y Matadero (allá hay piedras prehispanicas, uno como caracol). . . . En el barrio de Consingo (está en la dirección de la Piedra del Sol y de la Luna), allá cayó la culebra de agua en el año 1314, y la gente salieron. Ya no existe este barrio. En el año 1439 vinieron los aztecas. Fueron muy agresivos. Los nuevos barrios reconcentraron hasta un Huaquechula” (pers. comm., Don Gonzalo Alejo, Quauhquechollan, October 1997). Note that this list includes Spanish names. The fact that the nine founders are depicted in the Genealogía (see text) indicates that even though the Mexica reorganized the town, the original social structures were still acknowledged within the community. 53. I took these measurements of the Codex Huaquechula in March 2004. The upper rim measures 213 cm, the bottom rim 209 cm, the left rim 144 cm, and the right rim 143.5 cm. 54. Measurements taken by Professor Dr. F. Anders and myself in October 2000. The measurements mentioned in the text were taken in the middle part of the document. Horizontally, the upper side measures 92.5 cm, whereas the bottom side measures 88.5 cm. Vertically, the left side measures 87.0 cm and the right side 87.5 cm. 55. Philip Becker was a German collector who had spent many years in Mexico. During those years (and also later, with the help of his many contacts) he collected Mexican artifacts, among which were stone sculptures and ceramics, pieces of obsidian, other precious stones and bone, and three Mexican pictorials. The three Mexican codices of the Becker collection are described as “3 alte Manuskripte, davon zwei aus einer Papiermasse aus Agavefasern und eines aus Pergament gefertigt” (Heger 1908:42). The first two are now known as the Codex Becker I and Codex Becker II. The third is the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan. The Becker collection presently consists of 1,226 pieces and is in Vienna. Pers. comm., Dr. Ferdinand Anders, Vienna, October 2000; Heger (1908:40–42). 56. At the time, von Haas bought numerous collections of different origins, which he offered to Austria in order to receive the third class of the imperial Austrian Franz Joseph Order. Once he had received the order, however, von Haas was no longer interested in buying collections and stopped doing so. He had bought the Becker collection not long before he donated it to the museum (pers. comm., Dr. Ferdinand Anders, Vienna, October 2000). In 1901, the artifacts were studied and cataloged by Dr. Eduard Seler (Heger 1908:42). 57. The verso side of the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan shows three codes: a number that says “60.308,” with a “9” added under it; the name “Ser. nov. 4740,” which was later crossed out; and the name “Mexic. 5.” The last two are written on a piece of

269

Notes

paper attached to the document, corresponding to the way the Imperial Library numbers (and has always numbered) its pieces (pers. comm., Prof. Irblich, Vienna, October 2000). The number 60.308 is written in ink directly on the document. This number must thus have been given to the document before it came into the Imperial Library collection. Comparing it to the numbers given to the two other Becker documents in the Museum für Völkerkunde in Vienna (Codices Becker I and Becker II ), one finds that the numbers are successive (the Codex Becker I shows the number 60.306, and the Codex Becker II has the number 60.307). It can thus be concluded that the number given here was the original Becker number. The number 9 is written on a piece of paper that was attached to the document later. The acquisitions book of the Imperial Library describes the Mapa Circular with the names “Cod. Suppl. 4740,” “Ser. nov. 4740,” “60.308,9,” “Cod. Mex. no. 5,” and “Becker III.” Fieldwork, Vienna, October 2000. 58. The document received the name “Cod. Suppl. 4740,” which was soon thereafter, during a general renaming project of all documents, changed to “Ser. nov. 4740.” Both are codes related to the Latin manuscripts collection. Presently, the manuscript documented in the library catalog under the name “Ser. nov. 4740” is a German poem. 59. Dr. Dominik Bilimek, entomologist, was sent to Mexico by Emperor Maximilian to work as a priest and to found a museum of national history. He brought his insect collection and founded the museum now known as the Museo de Historia Natural in Mexico City. During his stay in Mexico he collected Mexican antiquities, among which were many artifacts of stone, ceramic, and bronze and ten pictorial manuscripts. Later he brought his collection to Europe, and in 1878 he sold it to the Naturhistorischen Hofmuseum in Vienna for a total amount of 8,100 kronen. In 1908 it went to the Imperial Library. The Bilimek collection consists of 818 artifacts and is considered one of the most prominent Mexican collections brought to Europe in early times. Pers. comm., Dr. Ferdinand Anders, Vienna, October 2000. 60. The acquisitions book of the Imperial Library (a handwritten document dating from the early twentieth century) shows that the Mapa Circular was originally recorded as a Bilimek piece acquired the same year as the other Bilimek pieces. This error presumably occurred because the manuscript was put among the Bilimek manuscripts at such an early stage and was numbered afterward. This came to light in October 2000, when I visited the Imperial Library and investigated the history of the document. On October 20, 2000, Professor Eva Irblich corrected the text in the acquisitions book and changed the name “Bilimek” to “Becker.” 61. This note reads “Restauriert im August 1915.” 62. The acquisitions book documents that the Mapa Circular is made of “pergamentblatt” (pergamino) and that it measures 84 × 85 cm. Note the difference from the measurements given in the catalog mentioned earlier. A piece of paper attached to the page in question reveals a transcription of the Nahuatl text in the upper-left corner. This transcription was made by a researcher who came to the library to study the document, but his or her name is unknown. It reveals some words of the text and the date 1540 (which should be 1546, as will be explained). The writer in the acquisitions book regarded the date 1540 as the date of composition. The document is also mentioned in another handwritten book about the collection by Professor Eva Irblich. This is basically a copy of the lines in the acquisitions book, giving the same measurements, but this time it says—correctly—that the manuscript was made of deerskin.

270

Notes

63. The first catalog on the collection, published in 1959, reports this text with regard to the Mapa Circular: “Cod. Mexic. 5, Besitzstand der Kirche S. Martín. 1 f. Hischleder, 870 × 910.—Farbige Bilder, Darstellingen von Häusern und verschiedenen Abgaben. 2. Viertel d. 16. Jh., Mexiko.” 64. The monastery was dedicated to San Martín Caballero, the name saint of Don Martín. During Don Martín’s rule, the second most important noble in Quauh­que­ chollan was a Don Juan. This is the Don Juan discussed earlier, who was married to a woman from the lineage of the Mexica lord Motecuhzoma. Quauhquechollan was thus ruled by either the same Don Martín for at least eleven years (from 1539 to 1550) or by two different Don Martíns who succeeded each other. See Mendieta (1993:284 [Book 3, Ch. XLII]); Motolinía (1995:92–93 [Part II, Ch. 5]). 65. Friar Juan de Alameda (1500?–1570) came from the province of La Concepción, Spain, and arrived in Mexico in 1528. He learned the indigenous language and used it to preach and hear confessions (mostly as a prelate). He constructed, for example, the monasteries of Quauhquechollan and Huexotzingo (Puebla) and later that of Tula (Hidalgo), where he served as guardian during the year 1539. See Mendieta (1993:654 [Book 5, Ch. XXXVI]). After his death in 1570, Alameda’s remains were buried in the monastery of Quauhquechollan. 66. In 1539, when Pope Paulus III issued the order to reserve baptism for sick people and children only, the monastery of Quauhquechollan already existed. It must thus have been built before that time. See Mendieta (1993:275–278 [Book III, Ch. XXXIX]); Motolinía (1995:88–89 [Part II, Ch. 4]); Torquemada (1986 II:162–165 [Book 10, Ch. XII]). It was the first monastery in the area that later reopened its doors to receive everyone for baptism again. In the following period a large number of people from the surrounding area traveled to Quauhquechollan to be baptized, and at the end of the sixteenth and the beginning of the seventeenth centuries, 80,000 people were reportedly baptized in the monastery. See Motolinía (1995:90 [Part II, Ch. 4]). In 1642, Bishop Juan de Palafox prohibited the Franciscan friars from maintaining parishes in the villages. Therefore the order of Quauhquechollan (which by that time had become a village) moved to the city of Puebla. After being deserted by the Franciscan friars, the monastery was abandoned for many years. 67. Pers. comm., Doña Felicitas Ramirez Tufiño and Don Gonzalo Alejo Martínez; fieldwork, Quauhquechollan, 1997. 68. This letter (AGN Tierras, Vol. 2621, No. 164, f. 3r) was written by Don Antonio de Mendoza, viceroy of New Spain, who spoke on behalf of Don Martín Cortez Xochitlahua and the other “caçiques, tequitatos y macehuales” of Quauhquechollan to ask the king for recognition of their lands and waters. 69. See Mendieta (1993:284 [Book 3, Ch. XLII]); Motolinía (1995:92–93 [Part II, Ch. 5]). 70. A flag is a Nahua convention for the number twenty (20), and a dot represents the number one (1). A flag and eight dots would represent the number 28, for example. In this manner, the numbers of the products are indicated. 71. In my text I give the Spanish translation. The original text is in Nahuatl, a transcription of which can be found in Appendix 2 of this book. 72. “Carta de don Esteban de Guzmán, de don Pedro de Moteuczoma Tlacahuepantli y de los alcaldes y regidores de la Ciudad de México al príncipe Felipe.” This

271

Notes

letter was written in Nahuatl and Spanish and is dated Mexico, December 19, 1554. See Pérez Rocha y Tena (2000:191–199). 73. Likewise, the Glasgow manuscript depicts the four calpolli of Tlaxcala (Quiya­ huiztlan, Tepeticpac, Ocotelulco, and Tizatlan) and the related emblems. See Acuña (1984 I:plates 1–4). 74. See, for example, folios 26v–27r of the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, which was composed between 1547 and 1560, only a few years after the Mapa Circular’s creation. See also Mundy (1996:117).

Chapter 4. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: The Document 1. A beautiful full-color photograph was published in the catalog of this exhibition (Carlos and Alberto González Manterola 1999:132–133). The catalog, however, does not describe the painting; it only says “193. Lienzo de Cuauhquechollan, siglo XVII, autor desconocico, tela pintada, 237.5 × 320 cms. Museo del Estado ‘Casa del Alfeñique’ ” (p. 291). 2. In 2002, I published a first paper on the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (see Asselbergs 2002). The present book elaborates on the contents of that paper and includes updates. 3. In 2005 the lienzo was restored in Mexico City. Françoise Hatchondo, the restorer, discovered that the document was made up of sixteen pieces of cloth instead of fifteen pieces, as indicated in previous studies (pers. comm., Françoise Hatchondo, December 2005). With regard to the measurements of the total lienzo, these measurements were taken: Glass (1964) measured 235 cm × 320 cm, the Museo Regional de Puebla (pers. comm., 1997) measured 235 cm × 325 cm, Hilda Aguirre Beltrán (1999) measured 242 cm × 313 cm, and José Ignacio González Manterola (pers. comm., 2000) measured 237.5 cm × 320 cm. I am using the data provided by the Museo Regional de Puebla. 4. For more on Mesoamerican weaving and textile construction techniques, see Anawalt (1981:9–14, 214–215); Johnson (2000:577); Mastache de Escobar y Alba (1971); Weitlaner Johnson (1959, 1971). 5. The diagram presented by Johnson is intended primarily to show the different pieces the cloth was made up of and where the ribbed borders are located. Therefore, it does not indicate the exact measurements of the pieces (although their dimensions are more or less correct); the ribbed borders are represented schematically, and thus their width is exaggerated; and only the number and type of border elements are shown (borders may be either single or double; both are found in this lienzo) without showing any variation in detail. The actual borders are no more than 3 or 4 cm wide. See Johnson (2000:578). 6. See Aguirre Beltrán (1999:60–61); Mastache de Escobar y Alba (1971:24). 7. Examples of lienzos with complete ribbed borders are the Lienzo de Ocotepec (Mixteca Alta, Oaxaca, sixteenth century), the Mapa Regional Primero de Tuxpan (Northern Veracruz, sixteenth century), the Lienzo of the Heye Foundation (Central Mexico, sixteenth century), and the Lienzo de Yatini (Eastern Oaxaca?, eighteenth century). There is one lienzo known that not only has a textural pattern of ribbing woven along the edges of the cloth but is surrounded by a border of three red threads woven or embroidered into the cloth: this is the Lienzo de Cordova-Castellanos (Mixteca Alta, Oaxaca, sixteenth century). Examples of lienzos with ribbed borders on some edges or seams are the Lienzo de

272

Notes

Ihuitlan (Mixteca Alta, Oaxaca, sixteenth century), the Lienzo de Yolotepec (Mixteca Alta, Oaxaca, sixteenth century), the Mapa Local de Tuxpan (Northern Veracruz, sixteenth century), and the Lienzo de Santiago Ixtlan (Oaxaca, sixteenth century). See Johnson (2000:575–588). 8. Aguirre Beltrán (1999:54); Johnson (2000:579, 584–587); Weitlaner Johnson (1966:144). 9. Even lienzos with completely ribbed borders do not show a clear relationship between cloth embellishments and the contents of the document. The paintings are normally not confined to the area within the ribbed edging, so they do not serve as a frame. 10. Johnson (2000) argued that the pieces of textile of which lienzos were made, including the textiles of the lienzos with complete ribbed borders as a whole, formerly had other actual or intended uses. He stated that this other purpose was probably as clothing. There is little difference in the material of lienzos and clothing and much evidence of the use of decorative borders on garments, such as men’s capes and women’s tunics. These borders are often depicted in pictorial manuscripts. The Codex Magliabechiano shows nice examples of these borders and also of capes not worn but displayed as a flat piece of cloth (see folios 3–8 and 85r of the Codex Magliabechiano, Anders 1970; Nuttall 1983). The proportions of height to width of these capes seem similar to the proportions of the lienzos with complete ribbed borders, which might, according to Johnson, suggest a previous use of certain lienzos as capes. See Johnson (2000:588–592). 11. This time estimation is based on my experiences with making a large Mexicanstyle painting on cotton cloth together with my colleague Rosanna Woensdregt. I take into account that the tlacuiloque who made the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan were much more experienced than we were and that there were presumably more than two artists at work. From a practical point of view, however, it is unlikely that more than two or three people worked on the document at the same time. 12. Aguirre Beltrán counted the slips of paper or their traces and came to a total of seventy-six slips of varying dimensions (Aguirre Beltrán 1999:56). 13. Both are documented under the name Lienzo de Cuauhquechollan. The 1892 copy received the inventory number 10.163010, code AII 18-4, and catalog number 35-44. The 1933 copy received the inventory number 10.163015, code AII 17-1, and catalog number 35-44A. Fieldwork, Mexico, 2001. 14. Paso y Troncoso gives this information: “Copia moderna á la acuarela hecha sobre tela por el artista D. Luis Garces, dirigiendo la parte de pintura el profesor D. José María Velasco y el que suscribe la parte arqueológica.” See Paso y Troncoso (1892–1893 I:71). 15. These measurements were given to me when I was studying the copy in the Biblioteca Nacional in Mexico City (2001). They are recorded in the inventory documents related to the document.

Chapter 5. The “Spanish” Conquest of Guatemala 1. Jorge de Alvarado, the second oldest of the Alvarado brothers, was, like his brother Pedro, a native of Badajoz, Spain. Their father’s family name was Gómez de Alvarado (Caballero de Santiago), and their mother’s name was Doña Leonor de Contreras. Jorge had first arrived in the Americas in 1510, in Santo Domingo. He had taken part in the conquest of Cuba, arrived at the coast of Mexico with Grijalva in 1518, then he and

273

Notes

three of his brothers joined Cortés in the conquest of Tenochtitlan. Jorge must thus also have traveled with Cortés through Quauhquechollan (see Chapter 3). Next, Jorge took part in the conquests of Panuco, Oaxaca, Tehuantepec, Soconusco, and Guatemala. He married Doña Luisa de Estrada, with whom he had three children (a son, Don Jorge, and two daughters). He established his household in Mexico, but during the 1520s and 1530s he traveled to Guatemala several times to manage the affairs of Pedro de Alvarado and to conquer and resettle the area. In return for his service, Jorge was granted various encomiendas in the new continent (discussed later in this chapter). He died in Spain in 1541. See Himmerich y Valencia (1991:119). 2. The first Africans had been brought to the Americas probably around 1502. In 1510, the king authorized the first large shipment of African slaves (250 African slaves destined for Hispaniola), and throughout the sixteenth century many more followed. Estimates of the total number of African slaves shipped to the Americas in the sixteenth century range from 75,000 to 120,000 (Restall 2003:50, 174). For more on the role of African slaves and servants in the conquest of Mesoamerica, refer to Restall (2000, 2003:50–63). For more on Atlantic slave trade, see Berlin (1998); Klein (1999); Thomas (1997). 3. The letter written in Tehuantepec is mentioned by Cortés in his fourth letter to Charles V (Cortés 1993:194); and in his third letter, Alvarado refers to the letter written at Soconusco (Mackie 1924:53). 4. These two letters were first printed as an appendix to the fourth letter of Cortés to the Crown in Toledo on October 20, 1525, by Gaspar de Ávila. A facsimile copy of this edition is in the New York Public Library. Other versions were published later. The bestknown one is a Spanish text printed in Madrid in 1749 by Andres González de Barcia in his Historiadores Primitivos de las Indias Occidentales (Mackie 1924:9–10). 5. Francisco Antonio de Fuentes y Guzmán, for example, who wrote in the seventeenth century, used some of these reports. Unfortunately, the chronicler embellished the information he derived from the accounts, which makes it difficult to determine what was said in the reports and what was his own contribution. See Fuentes y Guzmán (1932). 6. In the 1520s and 1530s three residencias were made of Pedro and Jorge de Alvarado, two in 1529 (one in Mexico and the other in Guatemala) and another in 1535. A transcription of the 1529 residencia made in Mexico was published by José Fernando Ramírez (Ramírez 1930–1933) and in the Libro Viejo de la fundación de Guatemala y papeles relativos a Don Pedro de Alvarado (Libro Viejo 1934:137–256). The other 1529 residencia was made in Guatemala by Orduña. This document is now lost. A copy of the 1535 residencia (carried out by Maldonado in 1535) is in the Archivo General de Indias in Seville (AGI Justicia 295). Pers. comm., Wendy Kramer, November 2003. 7. A transcription of this probanza was published in the Anales de la Sociedad de Geografía e Historia de Guatemala 13, 4 (1937):475–487. 8. Documents composed by or on behalf of these conquistadors and their descen­ dants can be found, for example, in the Archivo General de Indias in Seville, Spain. 9. The probanzas often present the Spaniards as superior, self-sacrificing individuals, blessed by divine providence. Africans and indigenous allies are often ignored in these reports. See also Restall (2003:12). 10. For an overview and analysis of the extant K’iche’ títulos, refer to Carmack (1973:11–79).

274

Notes

11. “Carta de los Caciques é Indios Naturales de Suchimilco a Su Magestad, alegando sus servicios desde el principio de la Conquista de Méjico, Panuco y Xalisco, al Marqués del Valle y al Adelantado Alvarado, y pidiendo Restitucion de sus derechos y posesiones de que han sido despojados” (May 2, 1563). A transcription of this document was published in Documentos ineditos del Archivo de Indias V, 13, Serie I, 293–301. 12. These letters are gathered in the file AGI Guatemala 52, provided with Spanish translations. Mexicans from Tuzantlan wrote, for example: “suplicamos a vuestro mag[esta]d no nos olbide y nos favoresca en sojutarnos a la governaçion de mexico porque a la absençia de guatimala no queremos estar por que recibimos muchos agravios por que quando estavamos en la de mexico estabamos contentos y faboreçidos asi del virrey como de los oydores por que las justiçias que nos an . . . de guatimala asi alcalde mayor como teniente como alguazil mayor como otros alguaziles todos son mercaderes y nos ha . . . tomar las mercaderias contra nuestra voluntad y toda la comun . . . lloran por rrazon de hazelles tomar por fuerça asi reales como . . . y vino y otras cosas contra nuestra voluntad y lo hazen tomar . . . por fuerça y asi estamos como esclavos porque el tiempo antiguo estavamos contentos con la absençia de mexico y . . . otros padres nuestros pasados siempre fueron sujetos a la governaçion de mexico suplicamos a vuestra mag[esta]d nos buelva a la jure[s]diçion della” (AGI Guatemala 52). 13. A full transcription of this document was made by Michel Oudijk. I am indebted to him for sharing his transcription and his ideas about its contents with me. For this study I worked with his transcription. Laura Matthew also studied this document in depth. For more information on the contents and history of the document, refer to Matthew (2004). 14. The size and contents of the document imply an expensive and time-consuming project that involved various scribes, lawyers, messengers, and numerous witnesses. This project has been a huge undertaking for the Mexican conquistadors and their descen­ dants. See Matthew (2004). 15. Matthew (2004:103–104) noted that among the Spanish witnesses who testified on behalf of the conquistadors were well-known and powerful Spaniards. They included conquistadors who had come to Guatemala with either Pedro or Jorge de Alvarado and were well-known members of Spanish communities in Central America. The list of witnesses included Don Francisco de la Cueva, Juan Gómez, Juan de Aragón, Pedro de Ovid, Pedro González Nájera, Alonso de Loarca, Diego López de Villanueva, Gonzalo Ortíz, Ivaro de Paz, and Francisco Castellón. 16. See, for example, AGCA A1.2–4, Leg. 2197, Exp. 15.752, f. 12 (July 20, 1532); AGCA A1.23, Leg. 4575, f. 64v (September 13, 1543), f. 118v (January 18, 1552), f. 329v (May 18, 1572), f. 361 (May 26, 1573); AGCA A1.2–4, Leg. 2195, Exp. 15.749, f. 141 (July 20, 1552); AGCA A1.23, Leg. 1513, f. 559 (December 23, 1574); AGCA 1.23, Leg. 1512, f. 457 (December 24, 1574); AGCA A 1.24, Leg. 1586, Exp. 10.230, f. 123 (Sonsonate, 1728); AGI Guatemala 393, R-1, fs. 39r–39v (Real cédula, Medina del Campo, June 20, 1532); AGI Guatemala 393, R-2, fs. 146r–146v (Real cédula, Toledo, November 18, 1538). 17. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan may have fulfilled a secondary purpose in a Spanish context at a later time, but it seems to have been made primarily for an indigenous audience. See Chapter 8. 18. See Título de Caciques (1544) in Carmack and Mondloch (1989:211–219).

275

Notes

19. See Cortés (1993:193–194). Díaz del Castillo gave a similar description but with slightly different numbers. According to Díaz del Castillo’s report there were 135 Spanish horsemen and 300 foot soldiers, among whom were 120 Spanish musketeers and crossbowmen. See Mackie (1924:100). Fuentes y Guzmán reported that Pedro de Alvarado was accompanied by 750 “hombres de calidad” (300 foot soldiers, 135 horsemen, 200 Tlaxcalteca and Cholulteca, and 100 Mexica). He also mentioned Usagre and commented that Usagre was in charge of the artillery (which would be the four cannons). See Fuentes y Guzmán (1932:24). 20. The Glasgow manuscript records this order of conquest (following the orthography of the manuscript): Tzapotitlan, Quetzaltenango, Tecpan Atitlan, Quauhtemallan, Itzcuintepec, Aticpac, Tlaxichco, Zonacapan, Nantzintlan, Pazan, Acatepec, Cuextlan, Acxotlan, Tlacochcalco, Tecpan Izalco, Yopicalco, Miahuatlan, Teyocan, Cozcatlan. See Acuña (1984). 21. For a good overview of these conquests and their related events, refer to the letters of Alvarado himself (published in Libro Viejo 1934 and in English by Mackie 1924) and to Kramer (1994). 22. Doña Leonor was a daughter of Pedro de Alvarado and his Tlaxcalteca “mistress,” Doña Luisa Xicotencatl. 23. The creation and distribution of encomiendas played a key role in spreading and consolidating the Spanish presence in Mesoamerica. In Guatemala, however, the abusive exploitation of indigenous labor and tribute by the Alvarado brothers and their men contributed to many uprisings and resistance for more than a decade. See Kramer (1994). 24. Pedro de Alvarado wrote: “That I, Sir, left the City of Utatan [Utatlan] and came in two days to this city of Guatemala where I was very well received by its chiefs, that I could not have been better off in our parents’ house, and we were so well provided with everything necessary that nothing was lacking” (Mackie 1924:69). 25. For more on the Kaqchikel rebellion and this period, see Kramer (1994:36–46); Kramer, Lovell, and Lutz (1993:65-68); Matthew (2004:chapter 3). Matthew (2004:79) noted that one of the conquistadors who came with Briones, Pedro Cerón, testified in the “Probanza de méritos y servicios de Diego de Usagre y Francisco Castellón” (Gall 1968:146) and that another, Juan Gómez, testified in the AGI Justicia 291 document. 26. The witnesses who speak in the “Méritos de Pedro Nuñez de Guzmán,” for example, testified that Jorge de Alvarado sent Diego to Cuzcatlan. To quote one: “A la quinta pregunta dixo que este t[estig]o sabe e vido por vista de ojos como jorge de albarado enbio a diego de albarado su primo a conquistar la probinçia de cuscatan donde agora esta fundada esta çiudad de san salvador porque estaba toda de guerra y entre los soldados que truxo el dicho diego de albarado fue el dicho mariscal pedro nuñez de guzman.” AGI Patronato 72, R.11 (1572), dig. 15. 27. These expeditions are reported by Fuentes y Guzmán (1932 II:109–129 [Book 8, Ch. 19–23]). 28. Matthew (2004:80). Her sources: AGI Guatemala 39-11: “Carta de Andres de Cereceda al rey” (1536); AGI Guatemala 9-56: “Carta del licenciado Pedraza, Obispo, al rey sobre las primeras conquistas en Guatemala” (1539). 29. Kramer (1994:63–64) noted that Jorge was officially named lieutenant governor of Guatemala by Marcos de Aguilar, who was in power in Mexico at the time. He was received by the cabildo on March 20, 1527. It seems without doubt, however, that

276

Notes

he derived his authority primarily from Pedro’s influence. No personal correspondence between the two brothers is known today. During the times he was called upon to take over the conquest and government of Guatemala, he left his home and family behind in Mexico, but he always returned afterward and never established a household in Guatemala. 30. Pers. comm., Laura Matthew, November 2002. When Matthew, during fieldwork in Ciudad Vieja, asked an inhabitant about the “indios conquistadores” from Mexico, he answered that they had come with Jorge de Alvarado. He did not mention Pedro de Alvarado. This is noteworthy, since most references to the conquest period in modern history books are about Pedro de Alvarado, not Jorge. 31. AGI Patronato 59-1-1: “Información de méritos y servicios de Cristóbal Lobo” (Guatemala, December 9, 1549). 32. Kramer (1994:64) noted that Fuentes y Guzmán (1932), for example, attributed no conquests to Jorge; Bancroft (1886–1887:96–99) discussed the founding of Santiago at Almolonga by Jorge but none of his military campaigns; and Milla (1976:176–177) mentioned only the Spanish attack on Jalpatagua in 1528 and a campaign against the indigenous peoples of Jumay. 33. AGI Justicia 295: “Residencia de Pedro de Alvarado” (1535). An English translation of this part is given in Kramer (1994:65). 34. See Gall (1967b:68). Jorge de Alvarado’s crucial role in the conquest of Guatemala is also mentioned in the AGI Justicia 291 document. 35. AGI Justicia 199, N.1, R.2: “Con Luis Alfonso de Estrada y su hermana D[oñ]a Luisa muger que fue de Jorge de Alvarado con el Señor fiscal s[ob]re ciertos pueblos de Indios, que piden” (Mexico 1544). 36. Other references to Jorge de Alvarado’s indispensable contribution to the conquest of Guatemala can be found in AGI Patronato 77, N.2, R.2, dig. fs. 169, 179. 37. “Méritos y servicios de Diego de Usagre y Francisco Castellon” (Gall 1968:146); AGI Patronato 59-1-1: “Probanza de méritos y servicios de Cristóbal Lobo” (1549); Luján Muñoz et al. (1999:188). 38. The two lords eventually surrendered to Pedro de Alvarado in 1530. See Luján Muñoz et al. (1999:188–189). 39. Kramer (1994:85–99) noted that Orduña arrived in New Spain in 1521 and took part in its conquest. In subsequent years he held important administrative and judicial positions in Mexico under various governors. In 1523 he served as Cortés’s secretary; in 1524 he was secretary of the cabildo of Mexico; and in 1528 he was made regidor. He arrived in Guatemala with very specific instructions from the Audiencia. 40. Kramer (1994:87) noted that a copy of these instructions was found in a probanza presented by Orduña’s grandson (AGI Patronato 73-1-2: “Información de los méritos y servicios del Gobernador Francisco de Orduña,” 1573). 41. AGI Guatemala 52: “Carta de los yndios tlaxcaltecas y mexicanos al Rey sobre ser maltratados” (1547). 42. AGI Patronato 2-2: “Carta de los Caciques é Indios Naturales de Suchimilco a Su Magestad” (May 2, 1563), in Documentos ineditos del Archivo de Indias V, 13, serie I, 293–294. 43. These names are spelled as they appear in the AGI Justicia 291 document. They appear on folios 1r, 7v, 44r, 47v, 51v, 55v, and others.

277

Notes

44. As a witness in the AGI Justicia 291 document declared: “estando en esta tierra el d[ic]ho don pedro [de Alvarado] siempre venyan muchos mas yndios de las d[ic]as partes a ffavoreçcer e ayudar a los d[ic]hos españoles y los demas yndios en las d[ic]as conquystas.” 45. This conclusion is derived from evidence in several documents. See, for example, AGI Justicia 291, f. 38v. Regarding the conquest of the north, see AGN Indios, VI-A, Exp. 1053, p. 85 (cited in Powell 1977:177). 46. Yaqui winak was a term used by the K’iche’ to refer to the Central Mexican groups that fought alongside the Spaniards in the conquest of Guatemala. Yahquetl is a Nahuatl word for “(young) warrior.” The K’iche’ used this word to refer to peoples of Mexica or Tolteca origin who came in contact with the K’iche’ both before and after the Spanish conquest (Acuña 1982:40). 47. Another possibility is that the tlacuiloque depicted the caciques with swords simply to show they felt themselves related to the Spaniards’ world, just as other documents show indigenous caciques in Spanish dress and with beards as a means to legitimize their position. See also Chapter 3. 48. Whenever dealing with conquistadors and conquered groups, and, more generally, whenever two cultures meet, there is always the search for a common means of communication and establishing relationships. In this case, the indigenous lords sought acknowledgment by both the Spaniards and their own people by taking on Spanish arms and attributes. This related them to the new lords and was a way to establish their function within the new system. By being part of that new system, they legitimized their power in the eyes of their own people, and in so doing, they served in both systems. 49. For the service provided by indigenous conquistadors elsewhere in Mesoamerica, refer to Powell (1977). Powell described the role of the Tarasca, Mexica, Cholulteca, Otomí, Tlaxcalteca, Cazcane, and others in the pacification of the Gran Chichimeca. His book gives an idea of the service these groups provided for the Spaniards in the north of Mexico and the privileges they received in return, both during the period of the conquest (such as the use of Spanish weapons and horses, the golden eagle emblem, certain titles) and afterward (exemption from tribute and personal services) (Powell 1977:168, 172). 50. See Matthew (2004). Her sources: AGI Guatemala 44-18: “Carta del cabildo secular de Gracias a Dios al Rey” (1536); AGI Patronato 58-3: “Gonzalo de Chaves Alvarado . . . solicita en gratificación de lo que ha servido se le encomienden en Guatemala algunos indios” (1542–1572); AGI Guatemala 9-105: “Carta del adelantado Montejo al rey sobre la pacificación de la provincia de Honduras” (1539). 51. For a more detailed discussion of these factors, refer to Oudijk and Restall (2007); Restall (2003). 52. For more on prehispanic Mexica patterns of conquest and rebellion, refer to Berdan et al. (1996); Carrasco (1999); Oudijk and Restall (2007). 53. At the time of Cortés’s arrival in 1519, the Mexica of Tenochtitlan, Texcoco, and Tlacopan (i.e., the Aztecs) dominated a large part of what is now Mexico, forming the so-called Aztec Empire. Refer to Chapter 3 of this book. 54. Transcription by Michel Oudijk. Credit for finding this document in the AGI and making it known belongs to him, and I am indebted to him for bringing it to my attention.

278

Notes

55. A good example is the conquest of Escuintla, where Pedro de Alvarado subjected the lords to Spanish rule by threatening to destroy their maize fields. Likewise, when he wanted the lords of Tecpan Atitlan to surrender, he sent messengers to say that if they would not surrender he would wage war on them, cut down all the trees in their cocoa plantations, and do all the damage he could. If they would surrender, however, he would release all those he had taken prisoner, receive the lords well, and honor them (Mackie 1924:75, 114). This seemed a successful strategy: it often resulted in the lords submitting themselves to Alvarado, bringing presents of gold, or offering themselves as vassals to the Spanish king. Earlier, the Mexica had used similar campaigns of intimidation, so it was not something new to them (Hassig 1988:21). 56. After the conquest of Utatlan, for example, Alvarado asked the Kaqchikel of Iximche’ for 2,000 warriors. He needed them, he said, to show him the way, to clear intentionally made obstructions from the roads, and to carry baggage. The Memorial de Sololá and Díaz del Castillo also state that Alvarado asked for 2,000 Kaqchikel warriors. Alvarado wrote to Cortés that he was sent 4,000 Kaqchikel warriors. See Lovell and Lutz (2001); Mackie (1924:63, 111). 57. AGCA A1.23, Leg. 1512, tomo III, “Reales Cédulas” (January 3, 1572–October 2, 1575). 58. The witness was a man originally from Chalcotamanalco, Mexico, who at the time of writing (1564) lived in Gracias a Dios. For the composition of Nahua armies, see Hassig (1988); Salas (1990). 59. Various sources from Central Mexican and Ñuudzavui (Mixtec) codices make de­tailed reference to how ruling houses were related to each other through marital exchanges. 60. Malintzin (1500?–1551?), also known as Malinche or Doña Marina, was a woman originally from Veracruz who was a slave among the Maya of Potoncan (Tabasco). The Maya gave her to Cortés when the conqueror arrived in Mexico in March 1519. She was baptized by the Spaniards. Cortés soon discovered her qualities as an interpreter, since she spoke both Nahuatl and Maya. In combination with Jerónimo de Aguilar, a Spanish priest who had learned to speak Maya, she was his key to communicating with the Mexica authorities. She later played an essential role in the conquest of Mexico. Cortés had a son with her, Martín Cortés. Later, Cortés arranged for her to marry Juan Jaramillo, with whom she had a daughter, María. Malintzin is generally considered to have been the true shaper of the political discourse of the conquest, and even the Spanish conquistadors acknowledged her fundamental importance. See Carrasco (2001 II:156–157). The literature on Malintzin is considerable. See, for example, Baudot (1993); Cypess (1991); Glantz (1994); Herrera (2003); Núñez Becerra (1996). 61. Pedro de Alvarado had children not only with Doña Luisa Xicotencatl but also with several other indigenous women. Most of these children, however, remain unknown, and none of them garnered the respect his children with the Tlaxcalteca princess received. Don Pedro’s fate is obscure. It seems he perished at sea on a trip to Spain with his uncle, Juan de Alvarado. Doña Leonor, on the other hand, is frequently mentioned in the sources. She later became one of the wealthiest and most powerful women in Guatemala. See Herrera (2002); Recinos (1986:78, 221–227). 62. See Herrera (2002). His source: Edgar Juan Aparicio y Aparicio, Conquistadores de Guatemala y fundadores de familias guatemaltecas, Mexico (Mexico City: Tipográfica Guadalajara, 1961), 3.

279

Notes

63. The name Xicotencatl is also spelled Xicontecatl. This difference in orthography results from local practice. In Mexico his name is usually written as Xicotencatl, and in Guatemala Xicontecatl is most common. Xicotencatl was known by the Spanish name Don Lorenzo de Vargas. For more on the importance of Xicotencatl and his family, refer to Gibson (1952:5, 25, 98). Doña Luisa Xicotencatl (whose name also appears as Doña Luisa Teohquilhuastzin) is often mentioned in the chronicles and remains the bestknown Central Mexican woman in Guatemalan history. Doña Lucía Xicotencatl, on the other hand, is rarely mentioned. For more on Doña Luisa Xicotencatl, see, for example, Gorriz (1943); Meade de Angulo (1992). See also Herrera (2002) and the “Probanza del Adelantado D. Pedro de Alvarado y doña Leonor de Alvarado su hija” (1937). 64. It is possible that the Spaniards referred to the Tlaxcalteca when they actually meant all Central Mexican conquistadors, simply because the Tlaxcalteca were the people with whom they had the most contact. If this is indeed so, the information in Spanish documents about the Tlaxcalteca in Guatemala might also be applicable to the other Central Mexican groups that ended up living there. 65. The role and position of the Tlaxcalteca allies in Central Mexico have been thoroughly investigated and described by Gibson (1952). For their service in the Spanish borderlands in the north, up to Texas and New Mexico, refer to Powell (1977); Simmons (1964). For the activities of the Tlaxcalteca in Oaxaca, see Yannakakis (2003). And for studies of their service to the Spanish in Central America, refer to Matthew (2004); Sherman (1970). These studies provide references to the places where the Tlaxcalteca served the Spanish, the nature of those services, the privileges they received in return for their loyalty, and their position in the new Colonial system. 66. One is the testimony of a man named Nyculao López de Yrarraga, who speaks in the AGI Justicia 291 document. When he was asked whether he knew the captains who came to Guatemala with Pedro de Alvarado (a list of names was presented to him), he responded that he did and that the names were those of captains from Mexico, Tlaxcala, and Quauhquechollan. Nyculao López de Yrarraga had served in Alvarado’s army in Guatemala, Peru, and what he calls the “Costa del Ponyente.” At the time of his testimony (1564) he was fifty years old. He must thus have been a teenager when he joined the Spanish Army. See AGI Justicia 291, fs. 67r–67v. 67. AGI Patronato 66-1-3: “Probanza of Pedro Gonzáles Nájera” (1564). I am indebted to Laura Matthew for bringing this document to my attention and for sharing her transcription of it with me. This text includes the testimony of an Antonio de Mendoza, who came from Quauhquechollan: “conquistador que dice ser desta provincia que vino con ella con los amigos y vasallos de su magestad de taxcala todos conquistadores que dijeron ser desta provincia . . . este testigo estaba en estas provincias y de buelta a la nueva espanya por que abia dexado esta tierra la mayor parte della pasifica quando la pacifico el capitan general jorge de alvarado por ausencia del adelantado su senyor que avia ido a espanya la primera vez y pasificada esta tierra este testigo con sus companyeros con tres senyores de taxcala que se dezia don martin suchitlahuantli y don diego y don pfelipe valientes hombres y principales de quaquachula donde este testigo es natural y dende (?) cierto tiempo por se rebelan los caciques y principales que dize la pregunta en esta provincia por que tributassen este testigo y sus companyeros volvieron con el d[ic]ho pedro de alvarado y pedro gonzales najera su ynterprete a los traer al servicio de dios y de su amgestad yque tributassen como se hizo por que la tierra casi toda estaba.”

280

Notes

68. See Kramer (1994:90). Her source: AGI Patronato 73-1-2: “Información de los méritos y servicios del Gobernador Francisco de Orduña” (1573). 69. Kramer (1994:93) noted that Pedro de Alvarado managed to stop Juan de Celada (who was on his way to deliver the residencia to the Audiencia of Mexico) at Soconusco, and he either forced him to return to Santiago with the copies or destroyed them. Pedro must have seen the document, since afterward those who testified against him were treated as mortal enemies. According to Alvarado, these were the people who testified against him: Pedro de Paredes, Diego de Monroy, Luis de Vivar, Juan de Espinar, and Cristóbal de Salvatierra. Kramer’s source: “Residencia de Pedro de Alvarado” (1535) (AGI Justicia 295, fs. 133, 167, 296). 70. For publication of the 1529 residencia, see Ramírez (1930–1933); the Libro Viejo (1934:137–256). 71. The expedition to Tecolotlan is also mentioned in the méritos y servicios document of Diego García de Paredes: AGI Guatemala 52, document without a title, fs. 4v, 9r, 11r, 19r, 23r, 25r–25v. 72. AGI Justicia 199, N.1, R.2: “Con Luis Alfonso de Estrada y su hermana D[oñ]a Luisa muger que fue de Jorge de Alvarado con el Señor fiscal s[ob]re ciertos pueblos de Indios, que piden” (Mexico, 1544). 73. Translation by Kramer (1994:122) from “Residencia de Pedro de Alvarado” (AGI Justicia 295, 1535), f. 471. 74. AGI Justicia 199, N.1, R.2: “Con Luis Alfonso de Estrada y su hermana D[oñ]a Luisa muger que fue de Jorge de Alvarado con el Señor fiscal s[ob]re ciertos pueblos de Indio, que piden” (Mexico, 1544). See also Chapter 3 of this volume; Himmerich y Valencia (1991:119). 75. AGI Patronato 62-1 (3): “Antonio Nuñez, casado con Leonor de Illescas, hija de Hernando de Illescas, primer conquistador de Nueva España y Guatemala y vecino de Santiago, solicita un repartimiento” (1559–1578), Section 1, p. 1; Section 2, p. 2. 76. For discussions of the peaceful conquest of this area by the Dominicans, refer to Bataillon (1951); Saint-Lu (1968). 77. This is stated in a cédula issued on June 10, 1540. See AGCA A1.23, Leg. 4575, f. 51 (1535–1603). 78. Before the establishment of this Audiencia, Central America was distributed into several gobernaciones: (1) Guatemala, founded by Pedro de Alvarado, which included Santiago de Guatemala, San Salvador, and San Miguel (both in modern El Salvador); (2) Honduras, ruled by Francisco de Montejo; his territory extended to Gracias a Dios, Comayagua, San Pedro, San Jorge de Olancho, Trujillo, and Nueva Salamanca; (3) Chiapas, likewise governed by Francisco de Montejo, with Ciudad Real as the main population center; and (4) Nicaragua, with the cities of León, Granada, and Nueva Segovia. The Audiencia de Confines created the provinces of Comayagua (Honduras), Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Soconusco, Chiapas, and Guatemala, which were subdivided into alcaldías mayores and corregimientos. See AGI Guatemala/1525–1837/Audiencia de Guatemala. 79. “Carta de los Caciques é Indios Naturales de Suchimilco a Su Magestad” (2 de Mayo de 1563), in Documentos ineditos del Archivo de Indias V, 13, serie I, 293–294. 80. AGI Guatemala 52: “Carta de los yndios tlaxcaltecas y mexicanos al Rey sobre ser maltratados” (1547).

281

Notes

81. Sherman (1970:136). His source: “Tratado de la executoria dada por la Audiencia de Mexico en favor de los Yndios Mexicanos y su libertad. Hecho en la ciudad de Guatemala a 28 de febrero [1571]” (AGI Patronato 231, N.4, R.14 [1543]). In the 1564 part of this document, five indigenous nobles representing Tlaxcalteca and other Mexican groups, including Zapoteca, made complaints through their procurador, Juan de Salazar. They asked for exemption from tribute for themselves and their descendants and stated that they had remained in Guatemala only because they were too poor to return to their homelands. 82. This document was published with a commentary by Carmack and Mondloch (1989:211–219). It was first published in the newspaper Diario de Guatemala in April 1925 by an M. Y. Arriola. Arriola published the Spanish translation of the manuscript (made in 1686), which comments that the original was written in Nahuatl. The translation gives the original date of composition as January 13, 1544. The data provided in the Título de Caciques may not be completely reliable. The witnesses declared, for example, that it was Hernán Cortés who came to conquer Guatemala instead of Pedro and Jorge de Alvarado. These data should therefore be dealt with critically. The Título de Caciques seems to have been written by the same writer, Don Cristóbal, who wrote the Título Totonicapán. See Carmack and Mondloch (1989:211–219). 83. The names listed in the Título de Caciques are Don Juan Fernando Escoyque, Don Felipe Hernández K’alel Ajaw, Don Tovar Morales Coroxón K’alel, Don Martín Herrera, Don Gonsalo Asiquinal, Don Nicolás Abiloaca, Don Benito Cárdenas Gutiérrez Usamachí Cumpar, Don Melchor de Masariegos, Don Gaspar Rodríguez, Don Gabriel Say, Don Bartolomé Ordoñez, Don José García, and Don Francisco Tubías. See Carmack and Mondloch (1989:212, 218). 84. See Carmack and Mondloch (1989:218). Their sources: AGCA A1: 191-3889; 6105-55, 843; 6119-56, 809; A3: 241-4797; AEG, Totonicapan, Paquete 5, 1899. 85. See Carmack and Mondloch (1983:introduction, 1989:218). 86. AGI Guatemala 52: “Francisco, natural de Tlaxcala, a Carlos V” (Guatemala, March 15, 1547). This information is confirmed by the fact that we know there were barrios in Ciudad Vieja named after places in Mexico (see text). 87. I am indebted to Laura Matthew for bringing this document to my attention. 88. “Libro de Casamientos #1,” 1760–1783, pp. 1–16, Mormon #1162400, Item 2. I am indebted to Laura Matthew for bringing this document to my attention and for sharing her transcription with me. The people from Quauhquechula mentioned in the document are Martin Peres; Sebastiana, daughter of Gabriel Peres and Francisca de Paz; María Jacinta, daughter of Martin Rosas and Ramona de Paz; María Gertrudis, widow of Phelipe Neri; Meregildo Coachita and Ygnacia Milian; Andres Hipolito, son of Nicolas Hipolito and Barbara Ramires; Gregorio Garcia and Dionicia Martin; Anastecio de los Reyes, son of Francisco Reyes and Petrona Reyes; Pasquala Hipolito, daughter of Juan Hipolito and Manuela Paredes; Pantaleon Ypolito, son of Juan Hipolito and Rita Selada; Pedro Vasques; Bentura Perea, Nicolas Hipolito; and Luis Larios, son of Thomas Larios and Josepha García (see fs. 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 15). 89. See Sherman (1970:126). His sources: AGI Guatemala 393, R-2: “Real cédula” (Toledo, November 8, 1538), fs. 146–146v. Sherman noted that in this document the regidores of various cabildos in Guatemala indicated that certain Tlaxcalteca and Mexica had been present when Santiago was founded and that they had settled nearby.

282

Notes

90. The AGI Guatemala 168 document is also cited in Matthew (2004:92–93); Sherman (1970:133). 91. AGCA A1, Leg. 6047, Exp. 53.386: “Memorias de la conquista, San Cristóbal Totonicapan.” f. 1r. The writer of the document refers to a group of possessors of land at Totonicapan as those who “fueron los principales y caciques que fueron ante el capitan P[edr]o Alvarado tonati y lo qual fueronse testigos los padres de C_on fran[cis]co que la horden de S[an]to Domingo.” They must thus have been the same caciques as the ones mentioned earlier in this book. 92. This is the celebration of the Día de Santa Cecilia. For a discussion of this cele­ bration, see Hill (1992); Matthew (2004). 93. As an example of a cédula that set the Tlaxcalans free from serving in encomiendas and stated that they should be left alone, Sherman (1970:125–126) refers to the source: AGI Guatemala 393, R-1: “Real cédula” (Medina del Campo, July 20, 1532), fs. 39–39v. 94. AGI Guatemala 52: “Indios de Tlaxcala y México a Carlos V” (Guatemala, March 15, 1547). For a more elaborate study of these complaints from both the Spanish and Mexican sides, refer to Matthew (2004); Sherman (1970). 95. Sherman (1970:134) pointed out that such schools were located in the barrio of San Francisco in Santiago de Guatemala next to the Franciscan monastery, Atitlan, and Tecpan Atitlan. Nahuatl was also taught to Guatemalans who did not want to learn Spanish. 96. The AGCA A1.23, Leg. 4575 document is titled “Recopilación de todas las provinciones, cédulas, y cartas de su majestad, enviadas a los gobernadores de esta provincia de Guatemala, y a la Real Audencia desde su fundación, año 1535 hasta 1603.” See the part dated September 13, 1543. 97. Sherman (1970:133) refers here to the source: AGI Guatemala 168: “Fray Francisco de la Parra a Carlos V” (San Francisco de Guatemala, July 15, 1549). A friar at the Franciscan monastery in the city of Santiago de Guatemala wrote this letter. This source is also cited in Matthew (2004:92–93). 98. There are also various claims dating from after this period. In 1587, for example, Pedro Gómez, an indigenous resident of Ciudad Real de Chiapas and a descendant of Tlaxcalteca conquistadors, asked to be exempted from tribute. See AGCA A3.16-2, Leg. 2799, Exp. 40.482 (1587). Another claim dates from 1680 and was made on behalf of eight inhabitants of Santa Cruz Chiquimulilla, who asked for tribute exemption on the basis of the service of their ancestors in the conquest period. See AGCA A3.16-2, Leg. 2887, Exp. 42.264 (1680). Matthew (2004:133–134) discusses this last case in more detail. 99. AGCA A1.24, Leg. 1586, Exp. 10.230 (1728), f. 123r: “estos indígenas estaban exonerados de tributación por ser descendientes de los auxiliares de Pedro de Alvarado.” See also fs. 123r–124v. 100. See the “Probanza del Adelantado D. Pedro de Alvarado y doña Leonor de Alvarado su hija” (1937); Herrera (2002). 101. AGI Guatemala 52: “Francisco, natural de Tlaxcala a Carlos V” (Guatemala, March 15, 1547), f. 75r. This part of the claim is quoted earlier in this chapter. 102. As early as 1526, two Mexican nobles (named Don Rodrigo and Don Martín) had an audience with the king. They were given encomiendas as a reward for the services presented. See Gibson (1952:164).

283

Notes

103. For a list of the royal privileges granted to the Tlaxcalteca over the years, refer to Gibson (1952:appendix VII). 104. For more on the Central Mexican conquistadors who ended up in Guatemala, refer to Matthew (2004), who focuses on their social, political, and economic situation throughout the rest of the Colonial period. For more on the case of the Tlaxcalteca, refer to Gibson (1952).

Chapter 6. Basic Pictographic Conventions Used in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan 1. This convention can be found, for example, in the Codex Mendoza. See Berdan and Anawalt (1997:5). 2. For more on Mexica warrior costumes, refer to Sahagún’s “Matritensis,” which contains the section of battle dress from the Primeros Memoriales (1997); Acuña (1984); Anawalt (1981); Berdan and Anawalt (1997). 3. Berdan and Anawalt (1997); Hassig (1988); Sahagún (1950–1982 II:fs. 371v– 375r). 4. The alphabetic glosses in the Glasgow manuscript and the accompanying text by Muñoz Camargo comment on the significance of four of the back racks used by Tlaxcalteca captains. From these texts it is understood that each principal house of the four socio-political units of Tlaxcala (Quiyahuiztlan, Tepeticpac, Ocotelulco, and Tizatlan) had its own emblem that was used by its descendants (Acuña 1984 I:276–277, plates 1–4). The Tlaxcalteca had sent captains from all four units to Guatemala, and they used many more insignia (Acuña 1984 I:276). These four back racks and many others appear throughout the entire painted manuscript. From the many back racks depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, it can be deduced that the Quauhquecholteca used a similar repertoire of emblems. 5. At least four of the back racks depicted in the Codex Mendoza can be found in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan as well: the Quetzalpatzactli back rack (a wing of green feathers on a golden case), a back rack called Xopilli (“claw back rack”), a back rack with a quetzal bird in flight, and the Toxicocolli (generally interpreted as a winding umbilical cord). See Berdan and Anawalt (1997:104). 6. Other indigenous pictorial documents in which this red banner is depicted are, for example, the Tira de Tepechpan (plate 16; see Noguez 1996), the Codex Telleriano Remensis (Part 4, plate xxix; see Abrams 1973), and the Codex Vaticano-Rios 3738 (plates cxxxii, cxxxiv, and cxxxvii). See also Durán (1984 II:plates 54–56) and the Codex Florentino (Gruzinski 1992a:34, 36–37). 7. For more on arms and armor used by the Nahuas of Central Mexico, refer to Hassig (1988:75–94). 8. The Kaqchikel traps are mentioned by Cortés (1993:272); the writers of the Memorial de Sololá (Luján Muñoz et al. 1999:187–188); Las Casas (Mackie 1924:129); in the AGI Justicia 291 document (f. 98r); in the “Provanza de los descargos de D. Pedro de Alvarado,” in Proceso de residencia contra Pedro de Alvarado (Ramírez 1930–1933); in AGI Justicia 295, fs. 478r–478v (1535); and in the AGI Patronato 54, N.6, R.1: “Informacion de méritos y servicios de Francisco Granada uno de los primeros conquistadors

284

Notes

de la ciudad de Mexico y Guatemala” (1529). I am indebted to Christopher Lutz for bringing the last document to my attention. 9. Similar dances are depicted and described in the work of Durán. See Durán (1984 I:190 [Ch. XXI] and plate 30, 1984 II:414–415 [Ch. LIV] and plate 39). Also, in Chapter 5 of this book I mentioned a dance related to the celebration of the Día de Santa Cecilia, when the Spaniards considered the conquest of Guatemala to be complete. See Remesal (1964–1966 I:99); Sherman (1970:136). Other examples of indigenous dances related to the Spanish conquest of Guatemala are those related to the Fiesta del Volcán and to the symbolic surrender of the last Kaqchikel ruler Sinacan (see Hill 1973). The most famous prehispanic dance-drama from Guatemala is the Rab’inal Achi (see Akkeren 2000; Breton 1994). 10. I identified these images as marketplaces on the basis of the drawings published by Durán (1984 I:177–186 [Ch. XX] and plate 28). 11. The Nahuatl text that accompanies this image describes this place as a tiyanuizco (marketplace). See Acuña (1984 I:plate 5).

Chapter 7. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: A Reading 1. A source critical to the identification of the place glyphs and to the discovery that most of the landscape depicted represents Guatemala was the Glasgow manuscript (one of the surviving copies of the now-lost Lienzo de Tlaxcala). Refer to Chapter 9. 2. These coats of arms both identified the users and indicated their importance. With the addition of a patron saint on the shield, the users hoped to enjoy some sort of divine protection, and by depicting elements related to the royal house (or other nobles) they displayed their political ties to, and protection by, that powerful agency. 3. In other Mexican pictorials, Quauhquechollan is represented by a mountain and an eagle as well, sometimes in combination with a quecholli bird or other elements. Depictions of the place glyph of Quauhquechollan can be found in, for example, the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, the Codex Mendoza, the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, the Lienzo of the Heye Foundation, the Genealogía de Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, and the Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan. 4. The three bottom steps of the pyramid are visible below the shield. It then continues upward behind the shield (only the outsides of the three subsequent steps are visible), and its three upper steps then reappear above the shield. 5. This interpretation is based on the similarities to the format of the initial scene in the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. The Glasgow manuscript, which depicts a similar story, likewise starts with the depiction of the four lordly houses of Tlaxcala and their (military) emblems (Acuña 1984 I:plates 1–4). 6. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan depicts, among others, a second river that branches off from the Huitzilac River. This second river is known today as the Matadero River. The spot on which this branching-off is depicted in the lienzo corresponds to the way the Matadero branches off of the Huitzilac River on the ground. 7. These men wear capes that were characteristic of the indigenous nobility. They also wear sandals, and their hair is tied together in an indigenous hairstyle. For more on the way indigenous lords are depicted in Mexican pictorials, refer to Anawalt (1981); Gruzinski (1992a).

285

Notes

8. A good example of this is the way Malintzin and Cortés are positioned in the various versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. See Acuña (1984 I:plate 29). 9. Olid and the Alvarado brothers were in Cortés’s company when he arrived in Quauhquechollan in 1520. 10. Transcription made by Michel Oudijk, Seville, 2003–2004. 11. This glyph may represent Panuco (pan–“banner”). I do not know of any references indicating Quauhquecholteca participation in the conquest of Panuco. This, however, does not mean they did not participate. 12. There are some vague traces of lines in the very upper-left corner of the document; however, it is not clear what kind of image this once was. It may have explained the role of the conquered places in the narrative. Since the place glyphs are not yet identified, their significance remains unclear. 13. The questionnaire presented in the AGI Justicia 291 document contains a list of names of indigenous captains who accompanied the Spanish conquistadors to Central America in the 1520s. According to one of the witnesses who speaks in the manuscript, these were the names of “naturales de taxcala [Tlaxcala], guacachula [Quauhquechollan] e mexico” (AGI Justicia 291, fs. 67r–67v). It is not clear, however, which persons came from which altepetl. It seems probable that the Quauhquecholteca mentioned in this list were also depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan. 14. Very helpful to these identifications were the Codex Mendoza (which presents the glyphs of numerous places in Mexico in combination with readable glosses) and the Lienzo of the Heyes Foundation (which contains the glyphs of several places close to Quauhquechollan, likewise glossed). Similar representations of some of these communities appear in these documents. For the deciphering of the glyphs in the Lienzo of the Heyes Foundation, I am indebted to María Castañeda de la Paz and Bas van Doesburg. 15. A similar glyph for this town can be found in the various versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala (e.g., Acuña 1984 I:f. 314v). 16. A similar glyph for Soconusco is depicted in the Codex Mendoza, f. 47r (see Berdan and Anawalt 1997:99). 17. When Pedro de Alvarado passed through the Soconusco area in 1523, the inhabitants of the region reportedly received him peaceably: they gave him gold and surrendered themselves as vassals to the King of Spain (Mackie 1924:102). 18. It can be presumed that Jorge traveled along the same roads he had traveled before with, among others, his brother Pedro in 1523–1524. Both campaigns passed by Tehuantepec and Soconusco. 19. This testimony was the answer to the question: “[1v] si saben que desde la d[ic]ha çiudad de mexico a esta çiudad de guatimala ay dus[ient]a e cinq[uent]a leg[u]as de muy malos caminos y las sesenta dellas de despoblados y çienegas y mosquitos y en todo el d[ic]ho camino valen los bastimentos muy caros y se hallan con mucha dificultad.” See AGI Guatemala 52, “Provança del doctor [ed. Antonio de] Quesada para los ss. al rreal consejo de yndias sobre los gastos que hizo a la venida de guatimala. Guatemala 27 de abril de 1545.” Other Spaniards who testified in this document gave similar descriptions. See fs. 1v, 2v, 3v–4v, 5v, 6v–7v, 9r, 10r–10v. 20. A person (either a Spaniard or an indigenous lord) seated in a chair is a common Nahua pictorial convention for authority. As Paso y Troncoso wrote: “ú otro es acto de

286

Notes

autoridad por los españoles ejercido, lo que se representa con un hombre blanco sentado en silla de tijera.” See Paso y Troncoso (1892–1893 I:73). 21. The Título Retalulew mentions that the Samalá River passed by sixteenth-century Retalhuleu. The título is transcribed and published in Carmack (1973:361–363). 22. This conquest is depicted in the Glasgow manuscript and described in the third letter of Pedro de Alvarado to Hernán Cortés (dated April 11, 1524) and in the probanzas of Gonzalo de Alvarado (Pedro’s nephew)—all eyewitness accounts. It is also mentioned in the Memorial de Sololá. See Acuña (1984 I:plate 103); Mackie (1924:54–56); Recinos, Goetz, and Chonay (1974:119). 23. Suchi is a sixteenth-century Nahuatl variant of the classic Nahuatl word xochi– “flower.” Likewise, tepequez is a variant of tepec–“at the mountain.” 24. Fuentes y Guzmán (1932:26) wrote: “la provincia de Sopotitlan [Zapotitlan], que hoy es Suchitepeques, que quiere decir cerro de flores, y es más conocido con el nombre glorioso de San Antonio.” He is one of the few chroniclers who mentioned Suchitepequez in the description of the route the early conquistadors took into Guatemala. 25. Paso y Troncoso wrote: “parece que dice Acatzinco, á lo que creo recordar, aunque el pintor ha escrito cosa distinta; pero el jeroglífico que cerca se halla, parece confirmar que se trata de aquel pueblo.” See Paso y Troncoso (1892–1893 I:73). 26. Since the information depicted in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan (and hence also the names of the places represented) was presumably transferred orally, it is possible that the writer misspelled the name on the basis of its pronunciation. This might explain the extra -c-. 27. Pedro de Alvarado wrote to Cortés that this mountain pass was so rough the horses could barely climb it. He had two encounters with K’iche’ warriors there, and when leaving it he faced an army of 30,000 K’iche’ warriors (according to his own estimation). A grand battle followed. His army was at a great numerical disadvantage, but through the combination of more effective weapons and strategy, they nonetheless managed to defeat the K’iche’. See Mackie (1924:56, 135). 28. Fuentes y Guzmán (1932:29) reported that “el nombre de esta príncipe era Tecún Umán, y los appellidos, Tanub, y Zequechul.” He based this on the contents of the indigenous chronicles he had at his disposal. 29. Tecúm’s existence is doubted because he is not mentioned by any of the Alvarados or by Díaz del Castillo (who also recorded the battle). Nor does his name appear in the Memorial de Sololá from Totonicapan. Pedro de Alvarado does mention that during a previous encounter with K’iche’ warriors in the Valley of Quetzaltenango, “one of the four chiefs of the city of Utatan [Utatlan] was killed, who was the captain general of all this country” (Mackie 1924:58). Also, Díaz del Castillo reported that when they arrived in the town of Quetzaltenango, they found out that they had killed two captains who were lords of Utatlan (Mackie 1924:105). However, neither man mentioned the name Tecúm. The only Spanish chronicler who referred to him seems to be Fuentes y Guzmán (1932:27, 29). For more on this discussion, refer to Lovell and Lutz (2001). 30. Pers. comm., Ruud van Akkeren, 2002. Fuentes y Guzmán (1932:29) wrote: “Xilajú, que quiere decir ‘debajo de diez,’ por aquellos diez grandes que tenían el gobierno de ochenta mil hombres, á ocho mil cada uno de ellos, desde este suceso se llamó Quezaltenango, que quiere decir, ‘el cerro de el Quetzal.’ ” To this day, in conversation and informal writing, most Guatemalans call Quetzaltenango Xela or Xelaju.

287

Notes

31. When Pedro de Alvarado prepared to leave for Honduras in 1526, for example, many of the men chosen to make the journey with him had deserted and fled toward Mexico. Alvarado managed to catch up with them at Iximche’. A fight was narrowly averted, and he was able to persuade some to rejoin his army. However, others escaped during the night and returned to Mexico (Mackie 1924:20–21). 32. Pedro de Alvarado stated that they met the K’iche’ army in the middle of a plain. He said: “Later we returned against them, and our friends and the infantry made the greatest destruction in the world, at a river” (Mackie 1924:59). 33. Fuentes y Guzmán (1932:28) wrote about the conquest of Olintepeque in 1524: “Fueron estas batallas (que aun no terminan en Utatlan), tan duramente sangrientas, habiendo sucedido todo, como hemos dichos, en las barracas de Ollintepeque, arrimándose los indios al pie de un cerro, fué tan la mortandad de indios que en esta ocasión hizo nuestro ejército, que la sangre de ellos corrió á manera de un arroyo desde la falda del monte adelante; quedando todo aquel sitio alagado en ella y cubierto de cuerpos y de espantosas adversidades á la memoria de los indios, que desde entonces al pueblo de Ollintepeque le llamaron Xequilquel, que quiere decir ‘debajo de la sangre.’ ” 34. For similar images and related descriptions of indigenous dances, refer to the works of the Spanish friars Durán and Sahagún. See Durán (1984 I:187–196 [Ch. XXI], 1967 II:548 [Ch. LXXIV]); Sahagún (1950–1982 I:f. 262v). 35. For prehispanic and Early Colonial trade routes in Guatemala, see, for example, Acuña (1982); Lee and Navarette (1978). 36. I am indebted to Ruud van Akkeren for the identification of this glyph as the one for Totonicapan. 37. As stated in Chapter 5, the indigenous conquistadors brought their own food, arms, and armor. They had to carry everything from battle to battle. The women depicted may represent women who traveled with the warriors to prepare their meals and perform similar duties. For a study of the role of women in the conquest of Guatemala, refer to Herrera (2002, 2003). 38. For the identification of the plant depicted as the Chichicaste plant, I am indebted to Ruud van Akkeren. He also informed me that this plant grows in the area of Chichicastenango. 39. A similar glyph can be found in the Codex Mendoza, glossed Comaltepec. 40. For more on the Kaqchikel rebellion, refer to Kramer (1994:36–76); Kramer, Lovell, and Lutz (1993:65–69); Luján Muñoz et al. (1999). See also Chapter 5. 41. Regarding the decipherment of this image, I am indebted to Bas van Doesburg. A similar glyph for this place can be found in the various versions of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, in which it is depicted by means of a shield and a pyramid. 42. Similar images appear in the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2. See also Durán (1984 I:177 [Ch. XX] and plate 28). 43. Similar images of men hanged on gallows can be found in the Codex VaticanoRios 3738, plate cxxxv, and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, for two examples. See Acuña (1984 I:plates 11, 12, 14). 44. The Kaqchikel name for this area was Bulbuxyá (“spring” or “gushing water”), approximated by the Nahuas to Atmulunca or Almolonga. See Kramer (1994:67); Luján Muñoz et al. (1999:188).

288

Notes

45. The AGI Justicia 295 document states: “e por esto [los oyos] el dicho Jorge de Albarado e por que no benia de paz les hazia muchos castigos [a los Kaqchikeles]” (f. 479). 46. See Lutz (1984:39, 51). Fuentes y Guzmán (1932:39) also refers to ruins in this area. 47. Pers. comm., Vincent Stanzione, Guatemala, May 2001; local fieldwork May– June 2001. 48. AGI Guatemala 41: “Escrituras que presentó Juan Méndez de Sotomayor en nombre de la ciudad de Santiago de Guatemala, 1534,” in Kramer (1994:67). 49. See Cortés (1993:272); Luján Muñoz et al. (1999:187–188); Mackie (1924:20, 129); “Provanza de los descargos de D. Pedro de Alvarado,” in Proceso de residencia contra Pedro de Alvarado (1529), Mexico, 1847 (in Recinos 2001:104, note 236). 50. For more on the conquest of Utatlan, refer to Carmack (1981:143–147); Mackie (1924:62–63, 138). 51. Fuentes y Guzmán commented on the fact that some claimed Tecúm was burned at Utatlan. He explained that it was not Tecúm but his son who was burned. He wrote: “que el rey de Utatlan quemado, no fue Zequechul, ó Zequechil, como le llaman en los libros secretos del Cabildo de la ciudad de Goathemala, sino Chignahuiucelut, como va dicho, hijo de Tecún Umán.” Fuentes y Guzmán also reported that the son of Chignahuiucelut (also named Sequechul) had been held prisoner in the city of Santiago and perished later (probably in 1541), together with the rebellious Kaqchikel lord Zinacan (also spelled Sinacan). He added that these men were the last lords of the K’iche’ and the Kaqchikel (Fuentes y Guzmán 1932:33). 52. See Ramírez (1930–1933 7:117); Recinos (1986:76). Alvarado accused the lords of having prepared a trap for the Spaniards. This seems to have been one of his common excuses for his actions, however, and not necessarily reflective of reality. Alvarado described a similar trap when he conquered San Pedro Tututepec, Oaxaca, Mexico, for example. Another example is Alvarado’s behavior at Cuzcatlan (El Salvador), where the Spaniards chained all inhabitants of the town and marked them as slaves with the king’s brand because they had not given him the gold he wanted. The same slave branding was executed in many places in Guatemala. See Mackie (1924:132). 53. The ruins of Utatlan are situated about 3.2 km southwest of the modern town of Santa Cruz del Quiché (present-day department of Quiché). For more on the history of Utatlan and its pyramids, refer to Carmack (1981). 54. Pers. comm., Ruud van Akkeren, September 2003. 55. The battle at Jalpatagua is mentioned in the probanzas de méritos y servicios of Hernán Méndez de Sotomayor (AGI Patronato 84-1-9, 1604); that of Francisco de Utiel (AGI Patronato 60-5-6, 1556); and that of Cristóbal de Salvatierra (AGI Guatemala 54, 1560). See Arévalo (1932:65); Kramer (1994:66). 56. This term to indicate the region mentioned earlier was used by the archaeologist John Fox. See Fox (1978:268–269), quoted in Akkeren (2000:143). 57. AGCA A1, Leg. 6013, Exp. 52.978, f. 11r, in Akkeren (2000:143). 58. Considering the elements depicted (a house/temple/palace or cave and a stone), possible Nahuatl names for this site may have been Teyo-calco, Te-calco, Te-teocalco, Te-ozto-tepec (ozto–“cave,” te–“stone”), or Ozto-(te)-tepec. Other names that included these elements are also possible.

289

Notes

59. The Glasgow manuscript shows a similar image of a pyramid with a shield but without the feather on top. This feather may be a variant of the red and white band with a feather that was used by Tlaxcalteca nobles and is represented in several Tlaxcalteca pictographic documents (Reyes García 1993:105). In the Glasgow manuscript, this headband appears in the representations of four towns, glossed Tecpan Atitlan, Tecpan Izalco, Tecpan Pantitlan, and Tecpanapan (Acuña 1984 I:plates 105, 117, 137, 138). The depiction of this emblem is related to the word tecpan: no other names mentioned in this document have tecpan in them, and no other pictographs have the feather headband. Tecpan is Nahuatl for “royal residence” or “capital” (Brinton 1885:12–13; Mackie 1924:136). The presence of this headband in the four glyphs may have indicated the presence of Tlaxcalteca rulers or a certain Tlaxcalteca authority in these places. The glyph for Quauhtemallan is not provided with a tecpan image in this Tlaxcalteca pictorial. It is possible that the feather depicted on the Chimaltenango glyph in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, which is an eagle feather (quauh), refers to the authority of certain Quauhquecholteca rulers at Chimaltenango. 60. If the glyph of the pyramid with the shield and the feather indeed represents Chimaltenango again, it seems that some Quauhquecholteca units traveled to Chimaltenango by way of Chichicastenango and Comalapa, while others traveled there by another route. A possible explanation for the two roads to Chimaltenango and also for the two Chimaltenangos might be that the tlacuiloque were dealing with more events than fit along one road and that they created a second road and place glyph to add in the remainder of the events. 61. For recognition of the arms in this glyph, I am indebted to Rosanna Woensdregt, with whom I analyzed the glyph in September 2003. In 2007, Ana Lucía Ortiz identified this tree as the “árbol de manitas,” or Macpalxóchitl, and she brought to my attention chapter 7 (“De toda clase de hierbas”) in Book XI of the Florentine Codex (Sahagún 1950–1982). Sahagún wrote: “También hay unos árboles en las florestas que se llaman macpalxóchitl en que se hacen unas flores que son a manera de mano con sus dedos, quiere decir flores dedos; tiene las hojas gruesas y muy ásperas; también este árbol se llama macpalxóchitl, porque sus flores son como la palma de la mano con sus dedos (y) toma nombre de la palma y de los dedos.” Pers. comm., Ana Lucía Ortiz, Universidad Francisco Marroquín, Guatemala, February 19, 2007. 62. Fuentes y Guzmán published a largely fanciful map of the site, dating from the late seventeenth century. The original is presently in the cabildo in Guatemala City. A copy of this map, kept in Madrid, was later published by Stoll. Brühl and Maudslay republished it. Later, plans of the ruins were made by Maudslay, Brühl, and Sapper, although none of them agree in detail. See Fuentes y Guzmán (1932); Mackie (1924:139); Maudslay and Maudslay (1899). 63. The founding of a Spanish town at Iximche’ was never more than a formality. It even remained unmentioned in the Memorial de Sololá. See Lutz (1984); Recinos (2001:102, note 233). 64. The fortifications of the capital were demolished, and the Spaniards ordered the indigenous inhabitants of the town to settle in other localities. Many of the stones were carried away to construct churches and houses elsewhere. See Mackie (1924:138). 65. Contreras argued that the Xepau mentioned in the Memorial de Sololá is a town in the Iximche’ area (see Chapter 5). If Contreras is right, the region of Iximche’

290

Notes

did remain important to the Spaniards. As stated before, this point needs more research. 66. See Kramer (1994:67). Her sources: “Probanza de méritos y servicios de Cristóbal Lobo” (AGI Patronato 59-1-1, 1549) and “Probanza de méritos y servicios de Francisco de Utiel” (AGI Patronato 60-5-6, 1556). 67. Siméon (1977:389) translated this word as “[Bombax ceiba], árbol hermoso y grande, de cuyas raíces se sacaba un jugo que se utilizaba como febrífugo.” 68. Similar scenes with dogs attacking people can be found in the Lienzo de Analco (see Chapter 9) and the Manuscrito del Aperreamiento (Bibliothèque Nacionale/Paris, Mex. 374). A color reproduction of the latter has been published in the Journal de la Société des Américanistes (1998), Tome 84-2, plate 17. For a study of the training and use of dogs in the conquest, refer to Varner and Johnson Varner (1983). 69. Previously, I raised the possibility that this toponym referred to the Tz’utujil capital Tecpan Atitlan (Asselbergs 2002:43). However, I have not been able to trace any report of the Tz’utujil having rebelled against the Spaniards since being subjected to Spanish rule by Pedro de Alvarado in April 1524. According to de Alvarado, the Tz’utujil were the most pacific group in the entire country, and they assisted the Spaniards in further conquest (see Mackie 1924:71–73; Recinos 2001:104, note 237). It is thus very unlikely that the battle scene depicted in the lienzo refers to a rebellious Tz’utujil settlement. I therefore dismiss this previously raised possibility. 70. Carochi (1983:127) gives this translation of the word atlacatl (with the first “a” as a long vowel): “marinero, o pescador.” The authors of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala represented this place differently, namely by means of a dog on top of a mountain (itzcuin–“dog”). See Acuña (1984 I:f. 291v). 71. See Acuña (1984 I:f. 311r). This name appears in many forms in the sources. Among the oldest variants are “Yirulinapa” (1528: Libro Viejo de la Ciudad de Guatemala), “Quilitziapan” (ca. 1550: Glasgow manuscript), and “Quyliçinapa” (1578: AGI Justicia 291, f. 97r). On the basis of the glyph in both lienzos, we can presume that the Quilitzi part in this name refers to a bird (quiltoto–“small parrot” or “magpie”), while a is Nahuatl for “water,” and -pan is a locative. In this book I use the name Quilizinapa. 72. On September 11, 1541, the second city of Santiago at Almolonga was hit by an earthquake in combination with heavy rainfall, which caused a mudflow from the Volcán de Agua to destroy most of the settlement (Lutz 1984:41). This event is not represented, only a battle scene. Most Spaniards and some Central Mexican conquistadors moved to the new city. The indigenous conquistadors settled primarily in the barrios presently known as Santo Domingo and San Francisco. The bulk of the indigenous former conquistadors, however, remained in the old town. See Chapter 5. See also AGI Justicia 291, f. 23r, among others. For a more elaborate study of the history, social organization, and demography of the Quilizinapa area at the time, refer to Lutz (1984), who also discusses the establishment of the various cities of Santiago. 73. Previously, I identified this volcano as the Volcán de Fuego (Asselbergs 2002:36– 37). This was based on the fact that the volcano depicted shows fire rising from its crater, and the Volcán de Fuego is often represented in a similar way in other contemporary images. Now that I have identified more of the toponyms around it, I have concluded that this volcano must be the Volcán de Agua. The fire may have been depicted solely as a means to indicate the mountain as a volcano.

291

Notes

74. See Acuña (1984 I:f. 301r). For the identification of this glyph, I am indebted to Ruud van Akkeren, who made the identification during a meeting in the winter of 2000–2001. 75. For more on the history of Tequicistlan, refer to Akkeren (2000); for more on the Cuchumatanes, refer to Lovell (1985). 76. Mazatenango was a filial of Huehuetenango, situated one league from that town. See Palma Murga (1991:283). 77. The various battles for Uspantlan are described by Fuentes y Guzmán (1932). 78. This glyph presents a bird similar to that in the Alotenango glyph (discussed earlier in the text). Both of the names related to these places refer to parrots. 79. Another possibility would be that the document has been kept folded for a while with this part on top. It would be suspicious, however, that if so, the fold would be exactly on the seam and not above or underneath it. Yet another possibility is that this part of the cloth was added to the main part later. The possibility presented in the text, however, seems most plausible.

Chapter 8. The Lienzo de Quauhquechollan: Interpretation 1. For definitions of the terms story and fabula, refer to Chapter 1. In sum: the distinction between story and fabula is based on the difference between the sequence of events as they are generally supposed to have happened (fabula) and the way they are presented (story). 2. The Nahua pictographic script was used to represent narratives. The role of the actors in a pictorial narrative can be considered the same as the role they would have if the same narrative was written in words, using the alphabetic script. In my own process of making a lienzo in the Central Mexican pictographic script (see Chapter 1), I found myself automatically representing real-life people and not creating people just for illustration. 3. One of these smaller maps is presently known as the Mapa Pintado en Papel Europeo y Aforrado en el Indiano, or Mapa Pintado. The other two are part of the historical annals known as the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca. 4. For studies of the Cuauhtinchan pictorials, refer to Bittman Simons (1968); Leibsohn (1993, 1994); Reyes García (1977); Yoneda (1981, 1999). In more recent years, the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 has been studied in detail by a team of researchers related to the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies at Harvard University and the Moses Mesoamerican Archive, resulting in the publication Cave, City and Eagle’s Nest: An Interpretive Journey Through the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan No. 2, Davíd Carrasco and Scott Sessions, eds. (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2007). 5. Cholula received special placement: it is positioned on the same horizontal axis with Cuauhtinchan and is related to the latter by footprints indicating migration from one site to the other. According to the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, the Cuauhtinchan people provided military assistance to Cholula, and in return they received land and women and the first right to found an altepetl. See Leibsohn (1994:180–181). 6. For a list of place glyphs in the manuscript already identified, refer to Yoneda (1978:246–247). 7. As Reyes García (1977) argued, there were seven barrios in Cuauhtinchan at the time of its founding. See Leibsohn (1994:181).

292

Notes

8. The other indigenous sources from Cuauhtinchan identify Chicomoztoc as the place of origin of the Cuauhtinchan people (discussed earlier in the text); for the Quauh­ quecholteca who traveled to Guatemala, their migration began at Quauhque­chollan (see Chapter 7). 9. The New Fire Ceremony was a ritual whose practice was widespread in Postclassic Central Mexico. For more on this ritual, refer to Elson and Smith (2001). 10. Chimaltenango is located at the center of the Guatemalan landscape, considering the shape of the document as it is today. Part of the document has been cut off, however, and it was once larger. Possibly, in its original format, it was not Chimaltenango that was located at the center but the city of Santiago at Almolonga. Regardless, both places clearly occupy an essential place in the narrative. Therefore, I consider them both as counterparts to Cuauhtinchan in the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2. 11. The upper-left part of the Lienzo de Tlapiltepec shows a genealogy of rulers of Coixtlahuaca, extending from the eleventh century through the time of conquest. The right-hand part shows a variety of communities, among which are Coixtlahuaca and Tlapiltepec. The pictorial also shows migrations into Puebla, to Tepexi, Tecamachalco, Tepeaca, Quechollac, Oztoticpac, and Cuauhtinchan. Lines connect some of the communities in the Coixtlahuaca Valley with communities in Puebla. It is known that certain lords from Coixtlahuaca married into one of the royal houses of Cuauhtinchan. This is also depicted in the Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2 and the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca (Kirchhoff, Odena Güemes, and Reyes García 1976:205; Reyes García 1988:56–61). Some rulers and nobles appear in all three documents. The Lienzo de Tlapiltepec was possibly made for the descendants of a Lord 3 Rain from Coixtlahuaca, who had established himself in Tlapiltepec. It may have served to support their claim to power over the area Lord 3 Rain once ruled, which extended from the center of the Mixteca to Tenochtitlan (Doesburg and Buren 1997:128–130). This document presents a predominantly prehispanic story, but it also shows Colonial events, such as the foundation of churches and chapels (Doesburg and Buren 1997:148). For publications on the Lienzo de Tlapiltepec, refer to Caso (1961); Doesburg (1998a, 1998b); Doesburg and Buren (1997); Jansen (1992); Jansen and Pérez Jiménez (2000); Johnson (1992, 1994, 1997); Parmenter (1982); Pohl (1994); Rincon Mautner (2000). 12. The development of fixed conventions in the writings of largely oral societies can be observed at any level of society, at different times in history, and in different places in the world (Haring 2003:258–259). It is therefore not surprising to find fixed conventions in the pictorial record of Mexico as well. 13. The Nahuas distinguished four main eras, each governed by a different deity. The inhabitants of each era were destroyed at its end. They believed they lived in the fifth sun, or era, which was named 4 Olin (“movement”). The name of this era is carved in one of the stone sculptures found in Quauhquechollan. This concept of different eras is also found elsewhere, for example, in the Andes. 14. For more on the concept of “enlightenment” in Mesoamerican life, refer to Jansen (1997). 15. This option is less probable precisely because it ended up in the same collection as some of the other pictorials from Quauhquechollan. This indicates it had been in Quauhquechollan at some point and was sent there, not to Puebla, Mexico, or Spain. Moreover, the contents point to an indigenous use of the document (see text).

293

Notes

16. AGI, Patronato 66a-1-7: “Probanza de meritos y servicios de Gaspar Martin” (1571) ± f. 110v. I am indebted to Wendy Kramer for bringing this information to my attention. The transcription of the citation is from her hand. 17. Laura Matthew brought the following text to my attention, from AGI Patronato 59-1-3, f. 23: “2. Dijo que cuando paso lo contenido en esta pregunta este testigo no estaba en esta provincia porque estaba en la Na España pero que ha sabido asi de conquistadores como pobladores antiguos y de los gobernadores e indios principales tascaltecas e mexicanos que fueron por parte de S.M. en la conquista y pacificación de esta tierra con quien este testigo ha comunicado por servir como es interprete de esta tierra haber pasado asi como la pregunta contiene y porque figuras y pinturas que mostraban a gobernadores y presidente y oidores de esta tierra para que se les hiciesen mercedes como tales conquistadores lo mostraban asi y por relacion y escrituras dichas mediantes este testigo como interprete y decian que el dicho Pedro Gonzales Najara lo sabia por ser interprete en aquel tiempo y conquistador antiguo el y su padre y esto responde.” 18. Rappaport identified ritual as “the performance of more or less invariant sequences of formal acts and utterances not entirely encoded by the performers.” The terms “ceremony” and “ritual” are closely related, if not synonymous. In anthropology and sociology they refer to a large range of social events, not all of which are religious, or they denote the formal aspects of such events. See Rappaport (1999:24). 19. For more on ritual, refer to Rappaport (1999); Turner (1969). 20. An example of a document still used in such a context is the Lienzo de Petlacala. See Oettinger and Horcasitas (1982). 21. Originally, no space was reserved for these glosses; they were sometimes added on top of painted images. This indicates that they were added at a later stage. 22. Indigenous communities are known to have presented lienzos originally made for internal use to the Spanish authorities to support certain claims. See Mundy (1996:111). Good examples are the Mapa de Teozacoalco (which was used only later for the local Relaciones Geográficas) and the Codex Colombino-Becker. 23. My conclusions are based on the document in its present form. The missing part of the cloth may have included events dated after 1530. However, the absence of churches in the existing part still leads me to believe it was made before the 1540s and certainly not later than the mid-sixteenth century.

Chapter 9. Other Pictographic Accounts of the “Spanish” Conquest 1. This document is presently in the Nettie Lee Benson Latin American Collection at the University of Texas in Austin, and it is therefore referred to as the Texas manuscript or the Texas fragment. Brotherston and Gallegos (1990) and Reyes García (1993:118) also indicated that this manuscript is probably the oldest known version of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala. 2. At the time, Saussure had traveled through Mexico. He made tracings of this fragment and mentioned its presence in the Tlaxcalteca archives in a letter to his family, written in Puebla and dated May 2, 1855. See Galarza (1992); Kranz (2001:59). 3. The original French text is: “Ce Cabildo (la municipalité) conserve encore dans ses archives une mappe, ouvrage Indien, sur toile de coton, qui représente l’entrée

294

Notes

de Cortès dans Tlascala. Tout y paraît pacifique et exultation d’hommes, de femmes et d’enfans [sic]. Cependant, entendez les historiens: telle était la consternation dans Tlascala, à l’approche des Espagnols, que les seuls guerriers étaient restés dans la ville, et que le reste de la population avait couru se cacher dans les cavernes de la montagne Matlalcueyes” (Beltrami 1830 II:308). I am indebted to Michael Swanton for bringing this text to my attention. 4. After the 1975 census was made, at least one other copy of the Lienzo de Tlaxcala was identified. This copy is presently in the Casa de Colon in Valladolid. See BallesterosGaibrois (1977). 5. These lithographs reproduced colored tracings made of the original painting by Diódoro Serrano in the nineteenth century, before the original disappeared. They are therefore generally referred to as the “Serrano copy.” The lithographs were published by Chavero in 1892 and by Torre in 1983. 6. This manuscript was first published by Diego Muñoz Camargo in Descripción de la ciudad y provincia de Tlaxcala de la Nueva España y las Indias y del mar océano para el buen gobierno y ennoblecimiento dellas (see Acuña 1981). René Acuña later republished it as an attachment to the Relaciones Geográficas of Tlaxcala (Acuña 1984 I). 7. Translated by Lockhart, Berdan, and Anderson (1986:51). The Nahuatl text is published in Actas del cabildo de Tlaxcala 1547–1567 (Mexico City: Archivo General de la Nación, 1984), 127–128. See Kranz (2001:67). 8. For a good overview of the known versions and copies, refer to Gibson (1952:247–253); Glass and Robertson (1975:214–218); Wake (2002). These works include bibliographies of the various studies and publications of the documents. For the most recent and updated studies, refer to Gillespie (1994); Kranz (2001). 9. The geographic features presented in this pictorial have been investigated by König (1993:136) and Michel Oudijk (pers. comm., Seville, July 2003). Both concluded that the document presents a geographically accurate map. 10. Over the course of the sixteenth century, several Mixe rebellions took place in the Sierra Zapoteca. The town of Villa Alta was attacked by Mixe in 1550 and 1570. See König (1993:137). 11. See Blom (1945). Shortly after Blom reported the document, however, it disappeared from the town. According to local oral tradition it was taken by a private collector who was later caught at the border trying to take the lienzo abroad (pers. comm., Michel Oudijk, Seville, July 2003). When it was next mentioned in the literature by Cline in 1966, it was in the collection of the Biblioteca Nacional in Mexico City. See Cline (1966:114); König (1993:123–124). 12. For images of these documents, refer to Glass (1964:plates 83, 137); Glass and Robertson (1975:plates 25, 29). 13. Exceptions are the Codex Huamantla fragments (see Glass 1964:plate 3) and the Lienzo de San Juan Chicomesuchil from Oaxaca (see Glass and Robertson 1975:105). 14. See Carmack (1973:1, 266); Carmack and Mondloch (1983:folio ii, 1989:215, 219). 15. It seems that only one place is indicated by name. That place is Tiltepec, which is represented by means of a black mountain (pers. comm., Michel Oudijk, March 2004). 16. Surviving indigenous images from Guatemala are, for example, the Buenabaj Pictorials and another pictorial from Momostenango; two emblems depicted in the Título

295

Notes

de Caciques and an image in the Título Totonicapán, both from Totonicapan; two pictorials in the Título C’oyoi from Utatlan; a map related to the Título Sacapulas; a coat of arms attached to the Título Retalulew; an indigenous map related to the Relación Geográfica de Santiago Atitlán; a pictorial related to the Título Zapotitlán; a drawing in the Memorial de Sololá; a map related to the Título Chuachituj from Santa Cruz del Quiché; and a map related to the Título Chamelco from the area of Cobán (Verapaz). These pictorials were all made after the arrival of the Spaniards in Guatemala. Most of these images have been analyzed and discussed by Acuña (1982); Carmack (1973, 1995); Glass and Robertson (1975). 17. With regard to this early campaign, the Glasgow manuscript shows the place glyphs for Tzapotitlan, Quetzaltenango, Tecpan Atitlan, Cuauhtemallan, Itzcuintepec, Aticpac, Tlaxichco, Zonacapan, Nantzintlan, Pazan, Acatepec, Cuextlan, Acxotlan, Tlacochcalco, Tecpan Izalco, Yopicalco, Miahuatlan, Teyocan, and Cozcatlan (orthography of the Glasgow manuscript ; see Acuña 1984 I). 18. They are the following, with a few exceptions of places in other parts of Mesoamerica: Xillopanco, Comahllan, Tlalolintepec, Chimaltenanco, Tecuzistlan, Tlama­caz­ catepec, Xocotenanco, Petlaapan, Tzonteconapan, Tlacuilulan, Tziquinalá, Huehueichan, Cozamaloapan, Citlallaapan, Acatenanco, Tecpan Pantitlan, Tecpanapan, Atlpopocayan, Cuezalapan, Xochitepec, Tlacochcalco, Miahuatlan, Atlmoloyan, Quillitzinapan, Mixtepec, Zentzonapan, Texac, Tecollotlan, Cohuatlan, Coaxyacac, Tecuantepec, Mixitlan, Cohuatzacualco, Nochtlan, and Cipolla (orthography of the Glasgow manuscript; see Acuña 1984 I).

296

Appendix 1

Conquered Conquistadors

Appendix 1

At the end of the eighteenth century, the Quauhquecholteca were involved in a land dispute with neighboring communities. During this conflict they tried to legitimize their land rights by presenting a real cédula dated 1535, a merced dated 1545, and a painted map related to the latter. The map’s composition and whereabouts are unknown. The real cédula and the merced were copied repeatedly in a document about the conflict dated 1797 (AGN Tierras, Vol. 2683, Expediente 4, No. 164). Transcriptions of these texts are presented here.

Copy of the Real Cédula of 1535 [f. 3r] Este es un treslado bien y fielmente sacado e traduçido de una cedula rreal y una merced que se dio a pedimento de los caçiques y prinçipales del pueblo de guacachula que su thenor es el sigiente. 297

Appendix 1

{ R[eal] Ced[ul]a } La Reyna Preçidente y oidores de la n[uest]ra Aud[ienci]a y chancilleria R[ea]l que esta y rrecide en la Ciudad de tenuxtitlan mex[i]co de la nueba españa / saved que pedro garçia vullon en nombre de don m[a]r[ti]n cortez xochitlahua / don alonzo de menezes xiloxohcatl / don gregorio telles xochitlami / e don simon de castañeda xochitotol / por una ynformaçion que ante nos presentó nos ha sido hecha rrelaçion que son caçiquez señores e principales del pueblo de guacachula desendientes de los prinçipes e señores desa tierra y que en compania de los demas caciquez ayudaron a los españoles a conquistar y pacificar mucha parte della con harcos e flechas resitiendo terribles guerras entre los barvaros e ynfieles a costa de muchissimas travajos poniendo en riesgo y peligro sus vidas trallendolos a la Religion de n[uest]ra s[an]ta ffeé Catholica e rreduçiendolos al agua del s[an]to Baptismo / y atento a esto nos pidio y suplicó en el d[ic]ho nombre / de / los declarasemos por tales caciquez señores e prinçipales de ese d[ic[ho pue[bl]o / y que los mandasemos amparar en sus tierras aguas e montes que tienen al preçente y han poseido desde su gentilidad que memoria de hombres no ay en contrario para las tener con mejor e d[e]r[ech]o titulo por que temen el que los [e]spañoles u / otras personas se les entren en ellas de que les verna gran daño y perjuiçio y que vos mandasemos no conçintiesedes ni diesedes lugar a ello por causa o motibo alguno / o como la n[uest]ra m[e]rc[e]d fuese / e visto po[r] los del n[uest]ro consejo [f. 3v] Real de las Yndias fue acordado que deviamos mandar dar esta cedula para vos e yo e lo havido por bien e por ende declaramos a los d[ich]hos don m[a]r[ti]n cortez xochitlahua / don alonzo de meneses / don gregorio telles / y a don simon de castañeda por tales caçiquez señores e principales del d[ic]ho pueblo de guacachula / y a sus herederos e subcesores / e como a tales les consedemos todas las preeminencias / prebilegios / y esempciones que por cuyo fuero gozan e deven gozar eseptuandolos de servidumbres y oficios viles y bajos por su nobleza meritos y serviçios que a nos han hecho/ y en lo que toca a sus tierras haziendas e montes vos mandamos que hagais rreçivir informacion de las que son e f[ec]has las diligenç[ias] neçessarias constandos no ser en perjuiçio de tersero les dareis titulo vastante de todas ellas para en guarda de su d[e]r[ech]o y en caso que no tengan vastantes para si e para sus tequitatos e masehuales en que puedan paztar sus ganados y hazer sus labranças e sementeras / les dareis e señalareis todas las que vos parecieren ser combenientes sin despojar a otros que a su linde pueda haver segun en los terminos que calleren / e no concintais ni deis lugar a que los susod[ic]hos recivan agravio ni perjuicio algu no / hantes en ello y en todo lo demas que se les ofreciere los amparad y defended como a subditos y vasallos n[uest]ros / y hareis a las Justic[ia]s a cuyo cargo esta la admi nistraçion del d[ic]ho pue[bl]o / a otras quales quiera que sean / que al preçente son y en lo de adelante fueren que guar den cumplan y executen el thenor de esta n[uest]ra cedu la / ymponiendoles graves penas para ello / que es ff[ec]ha en madrid a 298

Appendix 1

treinta y un dias del mez de [f. 4r] Mayo de mill e quin[ient]os e treinta y cinco anos / = Yo La Reyna / Por mandado de su magestad / Juan basquez = y al pie de ella contan cinco rrubricas de los señores de su real consejo. { obedec[imien]to } En la Ciu[da]d de Mex[ic]o a diez dias del mez de Junio de mill e qui[nient]os e quarenta y tres años estando los señores prec[iden]te y oido res de l[a] aud[enci]a R[ea]l de la nue[v]a Esp[añ]a en el acuerdo se preçento la rr[ea]l cedula de su mag[esta]d en la oxa hantes de esta contenida e por los d[ic]hos señ[ore]s vista la obedecieron con la rreverençia y acatam[ien]to devido y en q[uan]to a su cumplim[ien]to dixeron que haran e cumpliran lo que por ella su mag[esta]d les embia a mandar / e que quedando un testim[oni]o de ella en el acuerdo se les vuelba orig[ina]l a los caziquez del pue[bl]o de guacachula para enguarda de su d[e]r[ech]o y assi lo mand[ar]on a sentar por a[l]to / passó antemi / Antonio de turçios. ff[echo] sacado/ corregido y consertado fue este traslado de la rr[ea]l cedula de su mag[esta]d que orig[ina]l debolvio a los caçiquez del pu[ebl]o de guacachula a que me rremito que la ciu[da]d de mex[ic]o a trece dias del mez de jullio de mill e qui[nient]os e quarenta y cinco años / e va sierto e verdadero siendo testigos a lo veer sacar corregir e consertar diego tarrique / e gaspar hernandez e fran[cis]co galban-entre rreng[lone]s / que hagais rreçivir ynformaçion de las que son / son / de Junio / v[alg]a / testado / de / no v[alg]a Antonio de Turçios

Copy of the Merced of 1545 This transcription contains a few additions presented between brackets. These additions are based on a similar copy of this merced presented on f. 9 of the same document. [f. 1r] Yo Don Antonio de Mendoça visorey e gover[nad]or por su mag[estad] en esta nueva españa etc por parte de vos don m[a]r[ti]n cortez xochitlahua caçique y señor natural del pue[bl]o de guacachula y en nombre [de los] demas demas caçiquez tequitatos y macehuales del d[ic]ho pue[bl]o presentaisteis ante mi una real ce[dula de] su mag[estad] e me pedisteis que en su rr[ea]l nom[bre] vos hiciese merced de las tierras y aguas que han estado gozando y p[oseyendo] desde la gentilidad para las tener con mejor y d[e]r[ech]o titulo / y en su cumplim[ien]to por un mandam[ien]to y comicion lo fue ha veer e uido don pedro de guebara correg[id]or en el pu[ebl]o de guexocingo y haviendo hecho las dilig[encia]s y [averi] guac[ione]s necesarias e pintura de todas ellas conforme a lo que se le mando declaro e dio su parecer jurado e sin ningun perjuiz[i]o y 299

Appendix 1

poderse os haçer la d[ic]ha m[er]c[e]d por ser tierras v[uest]ras e proprios de v[uest]ra comun[idad co] mo consta e parece por sus terminos e mojoneras antiguas que enpiesan a correr desde el serro que llaman [tlil]huacatepec e de aqui caminando sesgado que alindan con el pueblo de tetlan en donde esta [un] arbol de alamo hasta una piedra que le diçen texayacatl e va siguiendo hasta la varranca [que] vaja de coçinco ques el paraje que le diçen el tetzoquilote y / passado esta se tuerse mirando al [sur] hasta el serro de los coyotes e de aqui va corriendo mirando al oriente hasta el paraje que lla[ma] de [te]zontzeopan y sigue hasta un montoncillo de piedras e desde este paraje va corriendo der[echo] asia la parte del d[ic]ho viento en donde parte terminos con tierras del pue[bl]o de teyuca / e siguiendo [la li]nea d[e]r[ech]a hasta el paraje de la piedra pintada / e de aqui da vuelta hasta el serro de las palmas [y a el otro] que le dicen cacaloxuchitl / e de aqui sigue asia la parte del norte a la otra vanda de un arroyo [seco hasta] un pa[ra]je en donde hay muchos organos / e cogiendo asia la parte de d[ic]ho viento mirando al pon[ien]te y a[trabesando] el d[ic]ho arroyo hasta el paraje de tehuiztengo / e de aqui va siguiendo hasia dos serritos que les diçen [suchitepec] y desde estos va d[e]r[ech]o mirando al sur por un llano montuoso por donde pasa el rrio de agua que vaja d[e el Bolcan] del d[ic]ho pu[ebl]o de guacachula hasta coger unas lomas arriva hasta encumbrar unos serros que [les diçen Xochinño] y el de nepopoalo / y el de sotolo hasta el de tlilhuacatepeq ques en donde sierran los terminos [y linderos de] d[ic]has tierras / e visto por mi atento lo susod[ic]ho por la preçente en nom[br]e de su mag[esta]d [e] . . . d[ic]ho don m[a]r[ti]n cortez e los demas caciques tequitatos e masehuales del d[ic]ho pue[bl]o guaquechula . . . [de] v[uest]ra su m[agesta]d de todas las tierras que de suso va f[ec]ho minsion / con tanto no siendo en . . . otro terçero alguno / e con cargo e condiçion que no las tengais valdias ni desocupadas . . . y que en los valdios que de ellas les quedaren puedais traer hasta quinientas caveças de g[anado] no las puedais vender trocar ni enagenar a persona alg[un]a todas o parte de ellas ni ay . . . sopena que por el mesmo caso esta m[e]r[ce]d sea ensy ning[un]a ni de ningun valor y efecto [po]der haser m[e]r[ce]d dellas librem[en]te a otra pers[on]a / e cump[lien]do lo que d[ic]ho es / e guardando la . . . / estan f[ec]has las d[ic]has tierras sean v[uest]ras e de v[uest]ros subçesores e proprios de v[uest]ra comu[nida]d . . . gais como cosa v[uest]ra propria adqueridas con justo e d[e]r[ech]o titulo / e mando que des . . . tomaredes no seais despoçeydos sinque por fuero e d[e]r[ech]o seays vencidos f[ec]ho [en el mes de] . . . de mill e qui[niento]s e quarenta y cinco años entre rreng[lone]s traer / si [valga] Don Antonio de Mendoza por mandado de su . . . Antonio de Turçios caciques y principales del pu[ebl]o de guacachula

300

Appendix 2

Conquered Conquistadors

Appendix 2

The Mapa Circular de Quauhquechollan is provided with a text in Nahuatl written in the upper-left corner of the document. Below is a transcription of this text, followed by a translation in English. The transcription was made by Luis Reyes García. When studying this text in Vienna in 2000, I was able to further decipher a few letters and words of the original text. I put those words in parentheses. The translation is based on a Spanish translation made by Alfredo López Austin in 1998, which, in turn, was based on Reyes García’s transcription.

Transcription of the Nahuatl Text nehuatl don estevan de guzman juez por su magestad y huan y[tencopa] don antonio de mendoza visorrey yhuan governador mochihua yn nican Nueva

301

Appendix 2

España . . . monahuatilli . . . nihualla . . . (quauhquechollan) . . . auh huel oni­ quitac in ixquich yn calpoli mochi/oquixnelo yn don Martin (xochitlahuac onin) . . . equi huel itech oquipouh auh in iquac otlamic residencia yc omocemito . . . yz ye omotecpan yn cecencalpolli/occan monotza motenehua tlaixpan tlatepotica yn tlaixpan yehuatl . . . tehuantoc auh yn tlatepotoca . . . oatic . . . (_tepec) . . . motenehua tlalnahuac coyometepec tlacochcalco . . . ça hua . . . (yehuacan) . . . pan aquiyahuac yn izca canin huel cecen calpoltin auh yzca canin con . . . yn quauhquechollan auh ça no yhuan yn motenehua mexicapan tianquiztenco quauhpa . . . mochi/oncan . . . yn quauhquechollan auh yzcatqui tlatohua . . . motenehua tlato(ani)_ tlaca conpehualtia Atzitzintitlan niman titeotzacono niman Quauhpechoco niman tochteopan niman cohuatepec niman Achuezhuatepec niman ateopan niman quauhyacan niman co . . . huel nononqua cate ceceme tlatoque auh yece ynin netlacam(at)_ yahque y . . . ypan quimata yn quauhquecholtecatl ce . . . yn itequi(uh) . . . quihualtequi . . . yn tlacalaquil oc e(h)_(h)tica epoalli pesos minas yn itequiuh no yxquich ytequiuh yn . . . (quauhquechollan) . . . y cueitl ya [yn] huipilli ça no yuhqui moxelhuiaya oy­hui­ nin yzcatqui . . . ynic nican momachiotlalia ynic aocmo cepa (om y xochihui yn ixquich yn quip_) . . . ye cenca (tl)atlauhco yn omoxexeloca yn ce([n])ca/oc mocepa yuh mochihu(a)z . . . yn ixquich . . . yn altepehuaque huel cenca opachihuic yn inyo(ll)o huel oquipaccacelique . . . huelomo . . . tecpan . . . ixquich calpolli yzcatqui in intoca don pedro ho(ca)_chin don hernando cortes don . . . don antonio vazquez don diego xicotencatl don alonso barrios don gregorio tellez . . . _tado _(ch)cohuacatl paulo hezhuahuacatl andres xiloxochicatl juan . . . pedro de _lias antonio . . . _que francisco accatecatl estevan . . . _(ancatl . . . _yautecatl) agostin pochtec_ . . . fiscal ocatca . . . yn pil . . . _(hua) yhuan pochteca (yn) ixquich . . . qui _itla . . . y paltzinco totlatocauh ynayecac ceppa quixneloz . . . melahuac . . . yn nican tictlali[l]o yn totocan yhuan . . . yc caxtolihuitl ozce . . . mani yn metztli . . . de mill quiniento sy quarenta y seys.

English Translation I, Don Esteban de Guzmán, judge of His Majesty, and by designation of the viceroy Don Antonio de Mendoza, governor of this place, in New Spain, . . . it is established by law . . . (Quauhquechollan) . . . and each calpolli / which was disorganized by Don Martín Xochitlahua . . . it pertained to him, and when the residencia ended, it was determined . . . and so each one of the calpolli was orga­ nized / in two places, which are called “in the front part,” “in the back part,”1 of it . . . belongs together with others and in the back part . . . called Tlalnahuac [“the place surrounded by land”], Coyometepec [“the place of the coyote mountain”], Tlacochcalco [“the place of arrows”] . . . only . . . in Aquiyahuac [“the exit of water”], and here where each one of the calpoltin, and here where . . . Quauhquechollan, also called “Mexicapan tianquiztenco” [“in the Mexica 302

Appendix 2

place at the side of the market”], Quauhpa [“above the woods”] . . . all / there . . . Quauhquechollan, and here it is called . . . they express . . . men, it starts at At­zintzintitlan [“the place of the venerated agua”], followed by Titeotzacono [?], followed by Quauhpechco [“the wooden scaffold”], followed by Tochteopan [“the temple of the rabbit”], followed by Cohuatepec [“the serpent hill”], followed by Achuezhuatepec [“the place of the . . . hill”], followed by Ateopan [“the temple of the water”], followed by Quauhyacan [“the tree-covered top”], followed by . . . the lords were all separated; but this prosperity2 . . . like this . . . within the men of Quauhquechollan knew3 . . . their tribute . . . they came to pay tribute . . . their contribution still . . . sixty pesos of gold, and also all their tribute . . . (Quauhquechollan) . . . “the skirt the blouse” [diffrasism for “woman,” ed.], and similarly it was distributed in such a way, and here . . . and so the order was established here, so that no longer . . . all . . . a lot . . . in the ravine it is divided, a lot yet so it will be done . . . all . . . many of the hearts of the people of the town were crushed, they received him with much joy . . . good they . . . the house of government . . . each one of the calpolli, and here [are] their names, Don Pedro, . . . Don Hernando Cortés, Don . . . Don Antonio Vázquez, Don Diego Xicoténcatl, Don Alonso Barrios, Don Gregorio Téllez . . . Paulo Ezhuahuácatl, Andrés Xiloxochícatl, Juan, . . . Pedro de . . . Antonio, . . . Francisco Acatécatl, Esteban, . . . Agustín Pochtécatl . . . they were fiscales . . . and merchants,4 all . . . our King willing . . . once they are mixed . . . correctly . . . here it was established and . . . the sixteenth day . . . of the month . . . of 1546.

Notes 1. This translation applies if tlatepotica is read as tlateputztica. 2. This translation applies if netlacam is read as netlacamatiliztli. 3. This translation applies if quimata is read as quimatia. 4. This translation applies if pochtec is read as pochtecatl or pochteca.

303

Appendix 3

Conquered Conquistadors

Appendix 3

Description of the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan by Francisco de Paso y Troncoso, published in the Catalogo de los objetos que presenta la Republica Mexicana en la Exposición Histórico-Americana de Madrid (1892–1893), Vol. 1, pp. 71– 74. [p. 71] XXIII—Lienzo de la Academia de Puebla Copia moderna á la acuarela hecha sobre tela por el artista D. Luis Garcés, dirigiendo la parte de pintura el profesor D. José María Velasco y el que suscribe la parte arqueológica. El original se conserva en la Academia de pintura de Puebla, ignorándose allí su procedencia; está materialmente destrozado y casi borrado, habiendo sido muy difícil de consiguiente la reproducción, que debe ser estimada como de muy buen desempeño. 305

Appendix 3

El asunto es un itinerario de campañas realizadas por los castellanos conquistadores con el auxilio de los indios aliados á ellos, contra otros indios no sujetos aún al dominio de España. En la parte superior del cuadro, bastante cerca del ángulo izquierdo está el jeroglífico de la población en la cual se hizo el mapa, viéndose allí destacarse una águila de dos cabezas, la imperial austriaca, de un lado con las plumas negras y del otro con las plumas doradas, pero que por haberse caído [p. 72] ya el oro aparecen azulados; en cada pata lleva el animal una espada, empuñándola con sus garras, y sobre la doble cabeza se le notan claros vestigios de una corona. Sobre el pecho del animal se observa el jeroglífico propio de la población urbana entre los indios, es decir, el cerro; y en el campo de ese cerro se ven varias figuras que, por lo muy borradas, no se atina bien lo que representarán: arriba una gradería y debajo de ésta dos figuras, una de las cuales, que se halla á la derecha, parece una cabeza de águila, mientras que la de la izquierda tiene el aspecto de un penacho de ricas plumas: abajo hay otros objetos más borrados todavía que parecen también plumas. El águila cuauhtli; las plumas ricas que en el lienzo de Tlaxcala (núm. 38) dan el nombre quechollan, parecen autorizar que la población se llamaba Cuauhquechollan, pero debe aun estudiarse la pintura antes de resolver el asunto. Arriba del escudo hay tres lienzos de muralla, almenados, que corren paralelamente, y que son signo de que el sitio estaba bien fortificado: entre dos de esas murallas corre un rio al cual se reune otro arriba, y todo esto parece corroborar que se trata del pueblo de Cuauhquechollan, porque dicen los historiadores de la Conquista, que se hallaba situado en lugar áspero y fuerte, rodeado de muros y cercado casi de dos rios. Sobre el agua del río principal están tendidas varias aves que pueden ser de la clase del quecholli ó del huitzillin, y entonces el rio se llamaría quechollac o huitzilatl. Debajo del escudo se halla representado con varias figuras el primer encuentro de los españoles con los indios de la región, notándose que se abrazan los dos jefes y que el Cacique indio regala con presentes al Capitán castellano. Inmediatamente debajo está el principio del itinerario, indicado por un camino sobre el cual se notan las huellas de los hombres y la herradura de los caballos: los expedicionarios van caminando, y primero se ve á un español montado, otros luego á pie, y detrás de todos, los indios: á los lados del ca[p. 73]mino están las poblaciones por las cuales fueron pasando los de la expedición, y los combates que ellos fueron sosteniendo. En el original hay huellas muy visibles de haberse sobrepuesto al jeroglífico de cada pueblo el nombre del mismo, escrito sobre una pequeña tira de papel, pegada encima del lienzo, pero por el poco cuidado que se ha tenido con éste, los rótulos se han ido cayendo á pedazos. El copista no ha reproducido más que dos: en uno se lee el nombre de Pedro de Alvarado, y en el otro parece que dice Acatzinco, á lo que creo recordar, aunque el pintor ha escrito cosa distinta; pero el jeroglífico que cerca se halla, parece confirmar que se trata de aquel pueblo. El camino que traza el itinerario de la 306

Appendix 3

expedición, va serpenteando por todo el cuadro; pero de un modo metódico, pues dos veces baja y sube otras tantas para venir á rematar en la parte derecha del cuadro, cuando había partido de la izquierda. Con la vía principal, como se podría llamar, se confunden otras secundarias que de ella se derivan, y las cuales, á veces, también con ella vienen á cruzarse; todo lo cual indica que la expedición general se destacaron otras pequeñas expediciones, de ella dependientes y con ella ligadas. No sólo hay en el cuadro figuras de poblaciones y de combatientes: exprésanse otros varios acontecimientos enlazados con el asunto culminante. Ya es la administración de justicia ú otro acto de autoridad por los españoles ejercido, lo que se representa con un hombre blanco sentado en silla de tijera; ya es una ejecución de justicia que mandan hacer, quemando, ahorcando, aperreando indios ó castigándolos con otros suplicios, entre los cuales hay buenos ejemplares en este lienzo, como el de ponerles colleras para llevárselos como esclavos; ya otras veces expresan su regocijo los indios, danzando en presencia de los españoles al sonido del huehuetl ó tambor de pie, tocado por ellos mismos. Se puede decir cuándo se hacían los combates detrás de un muro, de un [p. 74] vallado, etc.; porque bien representados vienen también el modo y el orden de la defensa. En fin, el cuadro, salvo algunos anacronismos en trajes, que indican se hizo bastante tiempo después de la Conquista, es interesante y se debe estudiar con más reposo que el que hemos tenido en medio del barullo de la Exposición. Por orla lleva el jeroglífico del agua que le forma una especie de marco.

307

Appendix 4

Conquered Conquistadors

Appendix 4

This appendix presents fragments of the AGI Justicia 291 document. The first fragment is a list of questions presented to a number of witnesses concerning their experiences during the period of the Spanish conquest (fs. 37r–43r). Most witnesses who speak in the remainder of the document confirm the contents of these questions. Included are the testimonies of two witnesses. The first is the Spanish conquistador Diego López de Villanueva (fs. 55r–58v), who, at the time of the document’s composition, lived in the city of Santiago (fs. 55r–58v). The second witness is a Tlaxcalteca conquistador named Francisco Ocelote (fs. 170r–174r). Ocelote had joined Pedro de Alvarado’s army in the early 1520s. He participated in various Spanish campaigns of conquest and eventually settled in Gracias a Dios (Honduras). The transcriptions of these texts were made by Michel Oudijk. 309

Appendix 4

Questions Asked to the Witnesses [37r] Por las preguntas sig[uiente]s se hesamynen los testigos que seran presentados por parte de don joan y don françisco y los demas yndios mexicanos y taxcal[tec][37v]as conquystadores e sus hijos desçendientes en el pleito que tratan con los ofiçiales Reales sobre el tributo que se les echa para su ma[gesta]d y piden ser Relebados del por Razon de ser tales conquystadores y aver servido a su magestad 1 Primeramente por el conoçimy[ent]o de las partes e si conoçieron e tubieron notiçia del marques del Valle y de don pedro de alvarado y de chichimecatecotle don hernando xicomanes françisco de alvarado panteca cacahua/toçe çetepaçi tetlepançi cuac/yxtapal cusçamany auhiçi/ capitanes taxcaltecas y si conoçieron y tuvieron notiçia de don joan cuahiçin / un guzman çacangamj myagui/chalchio tepegua huiznagual / capitanes mexicanos q[ue] binyeron a las conquystas destas provinçias en conpanya del adelantado don pedro de alvarado digan lo que saben [38r] 2 Si saben que el marques del valle enbio al adelantado don pedro de alvarado a poblar e conquistar estas provinçias de guatimala y todas las demas deste distrito y por mandado del d[ic]ho marques el d[ic]ho adelantado vino con cantidad de españoles desde la çiudad de mexico donde el d[ic]ho marques quedo digan lo q[ue] saben 3 Si saben que el d[ic]ho don pedro de alvarado para las d[ic]has conquystas y poblaçiones traxo consigo muchos yndios mexicanos taxcaltecas y de otras lenguas y entre ellos traxo los capitanes conthenydos en la primera pregunta y otros muchos que por ser prolixo no se ponen aquy digan lo que saben 4 Si saben que los d[ic]hos capitanes taxcaltecas y mexicanos de suso de conthenydos y otros muchos que vinyeron en conpanya del d[ic]ho adelantado [38v] don pedro de alvarado sacaron de sus pueblos y naturaleza grand cantidad de yndios asi deudos como maçeguales vezinos y naturales dellos los quales hizieron entre si sus capitanyas e quadrillas para que en la guerra uviese todo conçierto e orden e mejor pudiesen servir a su magestad digan lo que saben e oyeron los testigos 5 Si saben que ansimysmo los d[ic]hos capitanes mexicanos y taxcaltecas salieron de sus pueblos y naturalezas muchos adereços para la guerra bastimentos y otros peltrechos [sic] neçesarios y ellos y los demas yndios q[ue] vinyeron a servir a su magestad dexaron en su tierra e pueblos sus casas y haziendas mugeres e hijos y otras ffamylias digan los testigos lo q[ue] saben e vieron 6 Si saben que siempre los d[ic]hos capitanes sus quadrillas e gente obedesçieron al d[ic]ho [39r] adelantado don pedro de alvarado e hizieron todos los trabajos e serviçios que el susod[ic]ho e sus capitanes les mandavan con toda fidelidad e deligençias neçesaria y que ansimesmo le ofreçieron digan lo que saben e vieron

310

Appendix 4

7 Si saben que los d[ic]hos yndios en companya del d[ic]ho adelantado don pedro de alvarado y de sus capitanes entraron en la conquysta e paçificaçion de los naturales de los thermynos desta çiudad de guatimala donde los d[ic]hos capitanes yndios e sus compañeros sirvieron a su mag[esta]d en todo lo que se ofreçio y se fue mandado por el d[ic]ho adelantado e sus capitanes muchos años y tiempos hasta que los naturales dieron el travajo e serviçio a su mag[esta]d en lo qual passaron grandes travajos y murieron muchos capitanes y maçeguales yndios y muchos españoles y mediante los d[ic]hos yndios se poblo e conquysto la d[ic]ha çiudad e yndios e pueblos dellos [39v] digan lo que saben 8 Si saben que despues de paçificada e poblada la d[ic]ha çiudad de guatimala por mandado del d[ic]ho adelantado fue un grand cantidad de los d[ic]hos yndios mexicanos y taxcaltecas en companya del d[ic]ho adelantado y de sus capitanes que para ello enbio a poblar la çiudad de sant salvador villa de sant myguel y la villa de la chuluteca e çibdad de graçias a dios comayagua que [e]stan en la provinçia de honduras y en la provinçia de guatimala donde se passo gran tiempo en conquystar las d[ic]has partes çiudades e vi[ll]as e lugares y muchos años donde los d[ic]hos yndios e sus capitanes fueron muertos y sacrificados muchos dellos y sirvieron en todo lo que se ofreçio passando grandes trabajos peligros y neçesidades digan los testigos lo que vyeron y saben 9 Si saben que los d[ic]hos capitanes yndios e sus maçeguales [40r] fueron por muchas vezes parte para que los d[ic]hos españoles no fuesen muertos y thomados a muchos dellos yndios henemygos en las d[ic]has conquystas e paçificaçiones y los sirvieron y socorrieron y ayudarron a passar sus travajos digan los testigos lo que vyeron y saben 10 Si saben que demas de servir los d[ic]hos capitanes y sus yndios en las d[ic]has guerras e paçificaçiones a su magestad en todo lo q[ue] se ofreçio y convyno peleandose cargaron con petacas Ropa bastimentos y otras cosas y con españoles e yndios heridos muchos dias y camynos e fueron grand parte para que las d[ic]has conquystas se hiziesen y los d[ic]hos españoles saliesen con el serviçio de su magestad que avian yntentado digan lo q[ue] saben 11 Si saben que los d[ic]hos capitanes y sus maçeguales yndios hizieron los d[ic]hos travajos [40v] e serviçios a su magestad a su costa e mysion son que por hellos ny nyngunos de los d[ic]hos marques adelantado e sus capitanes les fuesen hechos algu[n]os socorros ny pagas ny de parte de su magestad se les a hecho nynguna m[erce]d ny dado otro aprobechamyento digan los testigos que saben e vyeron de lo susod[ic]ho 12 Si saben que muchos años y tiempos que estan pobladas la çiudad de guatimala e la çiudad de sant salvador y villas de sant myguel y de la chuluteca estan en la provinçia de guatimala que los d[ic]hos yndios e sus capitanes ayudaron a poblar e conquystar e paçificar a donde se a sembrado la dotrina xpiana y los naturales de los thermy[n]os dellos son xpianos y tienen toda doctrina e pudiçia y sus prinçipales çiudades y pueblos digan los testigos lo q[ue] saben 311

Appendix 4

13 Si saben que asymysmo a [41r] muchos años y tiempo que estan pobladas las çiudades de graçias a dios comayagua que los d[ic]hos yndios conquystaron e paçificaron q[ue] son en la provinçia de honduras y los thermynos dellas estan muy bien doctrinados y paçificados y tienen toda pudiçia e dotrina y entre ellos se a predicado e predica el santo evangelio digan los testigos lo q[ue] saben 14 Si saben que en todas las d[ic]has çiudades villas e lugares que asy los d[ic]hos yndios conquystaron que de susod[ic]ho se hazen mynçion en las preguntas antes desta estan muy bien poblados con muchos españoles de mucha Renta e rricos y que de todo ello su magestad a sydo servydo e aprobechado de las grandes Rentas derechos e quintos que a de probecho ansy de tributos de los d[ic]hos yndios como de fundaçiones de mynas de oro y plata que a vydo [41v] ay e otras cosas lo qual an sydo y es en mucha cantidad digan los testigos q[ue] saben 15 Si saben que despues de paçificadas e conquystadas e pobladas las d[ic]has çiudades villas e lugares q[ue] de susod[ic]ho se hazen mynçion en las preguntas antes desta en cada una dellas como se yvan conquystando e paçificando se quedaron en ellas en cada una dellas muchos de los d[ic]hos yndios mexicanos y taxcaltecas para hazer cuerpo y se poblaron en ellas donde an estado y estan poblados al presente donde siempre an defendido e an parado el trabajo e conquystas que avian hecho en muchas Rebelaçiones que los yndios de los thermynos dellas despues de conquystados avian hecho y alçamyentos que cometieron en des [sic] serviçio de su magestad y siempre los hazian q[ue]dar a los d[ic]hos yndios y que se poblasen en las [42r] d[ic]has partes para servir a su magestad como servieron quando se ofreçio en lo susod[ic]ho digan los testigos q[ue]saben 16 Si saben que todos los d[ic]hos yndios conquystadores despues de hechas las d[ic]has conquystas e paçificaçiones quedaron muy pobres sin propiedad ny rraiz alguna y del trabajo de sus personas personales se an susentado y sustentan y passan grand trabajo y neçesidad ellos e sus mugeres e hijos digan los testigos lo q[ue] saben 17 Si saben que despues de estar paçificas [sic] e conquystadas d[ic]has çiudades villas e lugares que de suso se haze mynçion los d[ic]hos yndios mexicanos y conquystadores ovyeron muchos hijos e hijas e asimysmo se an venydo entre ellos a poblar muchos deudos hijos e hijas sobrinos e otros deudos y hermanos digan lo q[ue] saben 18 Sy saben que por Razon de los [42v] grandes muchos trabajos e leales serviçios que los d[ic]hos yndios hizieron a su magestad. En las d[ic]has conquystas muertes e peligros que passaron a ellos mesmos e a sus desçendientes su magestad esta obligado a descargar con ellos su rreal conç[i]ençia pues mediante hellos los españoles ovieron tan grand premyo y pasa de sus serviçios y trabajos como es notorio digan los testigos q[ue] saben 19 Si saben que en general todos los d[ic]hos yndios conquystadores de las d[ic]has çiudades villas e lugares por rrazon de no thener nynguna perpetindad Rayz ny grangeria son muy pobres y no tienen con que se poder sustentar ny aun 312

Appendix 4

con q[ue] bestir a sus mugeres e hijos y passan tanta neçesidad que aun para se sustentar no alcalçan quanto mas para pagar tributo digan lo que saben XX Sy saben que todo lo susod[ic]ho [43r] es publico y notorio e publica voz e ffama

Testimony of Diego López de Villanueva [55r] [En el margen: t[estig]o] Despues de lo susod[ic]ho en la d[ic]ha çibdad a treze dias del d[ic]ho mes de março del d[ic]ho año de myll e quynientos e sesenta e quatro años ante my el d[ic]ho Reçeptor algunos dellos d[ic]hos yndios para mas berificaçion de lo conthenydo en las preguntas del d[ic]ho ynterrogatorio presentaron por testigo diego lopez de villanueva v[ezi]no deste çiudad e alcalde hordinario en ella que estava presente del qual fue rreçebido juramento e juro por dios nuestro señor e por una señal de cruz en que puso su mano y por los santos quatro hevangelios su cargo del qual prometio dezir verdad y siendo hesamynado y preguntado por el thenor de las preguntas del d[ic]ho ynterrogatorio por este sobre si apartadamente dixo e depuso lo syguyente [55v] I A la primera preg[un]ta dixo este testigo que conoçe a don Joan e a don françisco e otros yndios mexicanos de los que estan poblados en la çiudad vieja e que conoçio al marques del valle y don pedro de alvarado e a los yndios q[ue] anduvyeron en la guerra e conquysta porque avia ansi yndios mexicanos como taxcaltecas y de guacachula e mystecas aunque de tales este testigo no tiene notiçia si se llamavan como dize la pregunta mas de que algunos dellos por los nombres los conoçio y este testigo y que vinyeron a estas conquystas con el d[ic]ho adelantado don pedro de alvarado eçepto los de la provinçia de guacachula que vinyeron con jorge de alvarado y con otros de las partes que tiene declarados porque este testigo les vio andar en la guerra y que este testigo es de hedad de mas de çinqu[en]ta e çinco años y no le tocan las preguntas generales ny nynguna dellas [56r] II A la segunda preg[un]ta dixo este testigo ques verdad lo en ella declarado porque este testigo fue uno de los que vynyeron con el d[ic]ho adelantado a estas provinçias en conpanya de las demas personas que se hallaron en las d[ic]has conquystas y vino con el desde la çiudad de mexico de donde salio al efecto declarado en esta p[regun]ta y esto Responde a ella III A la terçera preg[un]ta dixo que este testigo vio quel d[ic]ho adelantado truxo en conpanya muchos yndios de las partes declaradas en la pregunta y se hallaron en las conquystas desta tierra porque este testigo les vio en ellas y entre los yndios que truxo truxo algunos de los declarados en la primera pregunta y los demas el d[ic]ho Jorge de alvarado segund este testigo tiene declarado y esto Responde IIII A la quarta pregunta dixo este testigo que ansi es verdad que los d[ic]hos yndios trayan por caudillos a algunos prinçipales [56v] dellos a quyen 313

Appendix 4

thenyan Respeto e otros yndios vinyeron allegados a los españoles y les servian en las entradas que se hazian y en todo lo que se ofreçia servian a su magestad e ansimysmo los d[ic]hos yndios conquystadores truxeron muchos yndios deudos e que se les allegavan asi y estando en las d[ic]has conquystas ca[da] dia acudian a ellas otros de nuevo e asy lo vio este testigo y esto Responde V A la quynta pregunta dixo que ansy es verdad que los d[ic]hos yndios para venyr a hallarse en las conquystas trayan de sus naturalezas sus armas segund su uso de cada uno dellos e que pues salieron de sus naturalezas en ellas no podrian dexar de quedar sus hijos o mugeres e haziendas los que las tuvyesen y esto Responde a esta pregunta y en lo que toca a las armas este testigo las vio traer consigo a muchos dellos VI A la sesta pregunta dixo este testigo [57r] que ansi lo que les mandava el d[ic]ho adelantado como sus capitanes y los que se hallaron en la guerra vio este testigo que los d[ic]hos yndios lo hazian con toda fidelidad e diligençia y rriesgo de sus personas y ansy lo vio este testigo en las d[ic]has conquystas como uno de los que se hallaron en ellas VII A la septima pregunta dixo este testigo que a la continua hasta que se conquysto esta çiudad y thermynos y naturales dellos siempre los d[ic]hos yndios ayudaron e favoreçieron a los d[ic]hos españoles y en las d[ic]has conquystas sirviendo a su magestad ffalleçieron muchos dellos y en lo demas declarado en la pregunta se Refiere a lo que d[ic]ho tiene en la antes desta VIII A la octava pregunta dixo este testigo que paçificada esta çiudad se poblo la de sant salv[ad]or y las demas partes e que vio que con los españoles y capitanes que yvan a las d[ic]has conquystas yvan de los d[ic]hos yndios mexicanos y de otras partes los quales [57v] no pudieron dexar de morir muchos dellos en las d[ic]has conquystas y otros de sus enfermedades y q[ue] en la paçificaçion de las p[ar]tes que d[ic]ho tiene se ocupavan siete u ocho años y al fin dellos ya paçificos ubo algunos alçamyentos y tanbien los d[ic]hos yndios ayudaron e anduvieron con los españoles a la continua en las d[ic]has Rebeliones y esto es ansi lo oyo este t[estig]o en estas provinçias y esto Responde IX A la novena pregunta dixo este testigo que muy lealmente sirvieron a su magestad en las d[ic]has conquystas segun lo tiene declarado en la antes desta a que se Remyte X A las diez preguntas dixo este testigo que vio lo declarado en la pregunta por vista de ojos y esto Responde a ella XI A las onze preguntas dixo este testigo que no les vio pagar y gratificar sus serviçios mas de buenos tratamyentos les hazian y esto rresponde [58r] XII A las doze preguntas dixo este testigo que despues de aver poblado e conquystado las partes declaradas en la pregunta los naturales dellas son xpianos y tienen dotrina y dello se a seguido grand bien e aumento y esto Responde XIII A las treze preguntas dixo que se rrefiere a lo que d[ic]ho tiene en la antes desta 314

Appendix 4

XIIII A las catorze preguntas dixo este testigo que de todas las poblaçiones que se an hecho demas del serviçio que se hizo a dios a su magestad se a seguido Gran bien e aumento de su rreal patrimonyo y esto Responde XV A las quynze preguntas dixo que es notorio que en las poblaçiones que se hizieron se quedaron algunos de los yndios declarados en la pregunta y esto Responde a ella XVI A las diez e seys preguntas dixo este testigo que los d[ic]hos yndios quedaron con poco aprobechamyento e que de sus granjerias y trabajo siempre an bivido y biven y ansi lo a visto [58v] y vee este testigo e que entrehellos ay muchos pobres que por desear neçesidad y esto rresponde XVII A las diez e siete preguntas dixo que se Refiere a lo que d[ic]ho tiene en las antes desta XVIII A las diez y ocho preguntas dixo que pues los d[ic]hos yndios ayudaron tanbien a su magestad en las d[ic]has conquystas e paçificaçiones su magestad en rreconpensa destes serviçios en lo que fuere servido les puede ffavoreçer e hazer m[erce]des y esto Responde XIX A las diez e nueve preguntas dixo ques verdad que los d[ic]hos yndios son pobres y neçesitados e passarian mayor neçesidad si se les echase tributo y tendrian mas trabajo e que esta es la verdad en que se afirmo y rretifico fue el leydo firmolo de su nonbre diego lopez de villanueva ante mi joan de vall[adol]id.

Testimony of Francisco Ocelote [170r] T[estig]o el d[ic]ho françisco oçelote yndio natural de taxcala vezino que dixo ser de los asiento de los mexicanos desta çiudad de graçias a dios testigo rreçebido por el d[ic]ho señor alcalde para en la d[ic]ha Razon el qual avyendo jurado en forma de derecho e siendo preguntado por el thenor del d[ic]ho ynterrogatorio mediante el d[ic]ho p[edr]o hernandez çapatero ynterpete nonbrado dixo e depuso lo siguyente I A la primera pregunta dixo que conoçe al d[ic]ho don françisco gualalo panteca vezino de los taxcaltecas de guatimaltecos demas en la pregunta conthenydos conoçio en la çiudad de guatimala que heran capitanes al tiempo que don pedro de alvarado vino a conquystar la provinçia de guatimala porque este testigo vino desde la çiudad de guaxaca en su conpanya y por esto los conoçio y conoçe que puede aver treynta e dos años poco mas o menos de vista y habla que con ellos tuvo porque deste testigo fue su capitan el d[ic]ho don françisco Preguntado por las generales [170v] de la ley dixo ques de hedad de sesenta años poco mas o menos e quel d[ic]ho don françisco Gualalo panteca hera su amo deste testigo e que no le enpeçe nynguna de las generales de la ley II A la segunda pregunta dixo que la sabe como en ella se contiene porque vydo al d[ic]ho don pedro de alvarado en la çiudad de guaxaca que venya con dozientos españoles a conquystar a guatimala e venyan con el muchos yndios 315

Appendix 4

amygos de mexico y de taxcala e llegaron a guatimala e anduvyeron en la conquysta hasta que fue paçifica y por esto la sabe y el marques cortes se quedo en mexico III A la terçera pregunta dixo que este testigo como d[ic]ho tiene vino con el d[ic]ho don pedro de alvarado a la conqysta de guatimala e traya consigo muchos yndios de mexico y de taxcala y de otros pueblos y venyan los capitanes yndios en la pregunta conthenydos porque este testigo venya con ellos y lo vydo e anduvo en la conqysta de guatimala y esto vydo [171r] IIII A la quarta pregunta dixo que este testigo vido venyeron los d[ic]hos capitanes yndios muchos deudos e parientes e maçeguales porque de taxcala salieron ocho çientos yndios y seys capitanes y de guazaçingo salaron [sic] quatro çientos yndios con un capitan y de tepesica vinyeron myll e seys çientos yndios con dos capitanes y de mexico y de los demas salio mucha gente que este testigo no se acuerda mas de que todos vinyeron juntos a la conquysta de guatimala donde sirvieron a su magestad hasta que fue paçificas y esto sabe e vydo V A la quynta pregunta dixo que este testigo sabe y vido que los d[ic]hos capitanes conthenydos en la pregunta quando vinyeron a la d[ic]ha guerra heran casados y truxeron sus mugerers e hijos y dexaron sus casas y naturalezas y todos los yndios que vinyeron a la d[ic]ha conquysta trayan sus armas de algodon y rrodelas e arcos y flechas para servir a su magestad en la d[ic]ha conquysta y mucha comyda y este testigo sabe y vido de la pregunta VI A la sesta pregunta dixo [171v] queste testigo vido que todos los yndios que asi venyeron taxcaltecas e mexicanos y los demas y sus capitanes hazian y hizieron todo lo quel d[ic]ho don pedro de alvarado y los demas españoles les mandavan en la d[ic]ha conquysta de guatimala y les ayudavan a buscar de comer a los españoles y este sabe y vido VII A la septima pregunta dixo que este testigo sabe que duro la guerra de la provinçia de guatimala çinco años y los d[ic]hos yndios e sus capitanes anduvyeron en la d[ic]ha conquysta donde murieron muchos dellos ansi capitanes como yndios e que mediante los d[ic]hos yndios se paçifico la tierra y este sabe e vydo VIII A la otava pregunta dixo que este testigo sabe y vydo que despues de paçifica guatimala e su provinçia el d[ic]ho adelantado don pedro de alvarado enbio sus capitanes a las d[ic]has çiudades y villas para que lo conquystasen españoles con los quales salieron muchos yndios taxcaltecas e mexicanos a la d[ic]ha conquysta en que sirvyeron en la guerra de cuzcatan y pucatepete y la chuenteca [172r] nueve años donde murio mucha gente de los d[ic]hos yndios y despues fueron a la çiudad de graçias a dios e comayagua con joan de chaves y hernando de alvarado capitanes y alonso de caçeres y otros muchos españoles con los quales vinyeron çierta gente de los d[ic]hos capitanes con sus yndios hasta que lo apaçiguaron donde murio mucha parte dellos y este testigo anduvo en la d[ic]ha guerra como d[ic]ho tiene e sirvieron a su magestad en todo lo que 316

Appendix 4

los españoles les mandavan fielmente hasta que fue paçificada tierra y esto vydo y sabe IX A la novena pregunta dixo que este testigo sabe e vido que si no fuera por los d[ic]hos capitanes y sus yndios los españoles rreçibieran mucho trabajo en la d[ic]ha conquista por causa de los bastimentos e ellos les ayudavan en la guerra y les buscavan de comer y ayudar a passar sus trabajos y esto sabe y vido X A la deçima pregunta dixo lo que este testigo vido e sabe que andando en la d[ic]ha guerra los españoles conquystando y los capitanes e yndios trayan las petacas e rropa y comyda de los españoles [172v] acuestas e que si algun español o yndio avia herido los d[ic]hos yndios lo trayan al rreal donde estavan sentados los españoles para que hellos saliesen con el serviçio de su magestad en la d[ic]ha conquysta y esto sabe y vido y los demas andavan en la guerra XI A la onzena pregunta dixo que este testigo no sabe ny tal vido quel d[ic]ho don pedro de alvarado y los demas capitanes diesen a los d[ic]ho capitanes yndios ny a sus maçeguales les pagassen nyngu[na] cosa ny gratificado ny su magestad les a hecho nynguna m[erce]d por sus trabajos syno que los d[ic]hos yndios a su costa anduvyeron en la d[ic]ha guerra y este sabe y vido XII A las doze preguntas dixo que a mucho tiempo que la çibdad de guatimala e sant salvador y sant myguel y la chuluteca estan pobladas de xpianos y despues que los d[ic]hos yndios capitanes las ayudaron de conqystar an venydo los naturales en conoçimyento de dios n[uest]ro señor y son xpianos y tienen doctrina y pudiçia y son de las prinçipales que ay en esta provinçia y esto sabe e vido XIII A las treze preguntas dixo que [173r] este testigo sabe e vido que la çibdad de graçias a dios e comayagua que los d[ic]hos yndios ayudaron a conqystar e paçificar los yndios estando endoctrinados e son xpianos y tienen toda pudiçia y les predican el santo hevangelio los saçerdotes que los visitan y esto sabe y a visto XIIII A las catorze preguntas dixo que este testigo sabe que estan pobladas las d[ic]has çibdades e villas de españoles muchos dellos son Ricos y este testigo sabe que dan a su magestad mucha rrenta ansi de oro de las mynas como Ropa y otras cosas e que en la d[ic]ha poblaçion dellas su magestad a sido servido y esto sabe e a visto XV A las qynze preguntas dixo que este testigo sabe y vido que en poblando un pueblo despañoles de los conthenydos en las preguntas se quedavan e poblavan muchos de los d[ic]hos yndios taxcaltecas e mexicanos para ffavoreçer a los xpianos donde muchos dellos son muertos y otros estan poblados e an servido y sirven a su magestad y esto sabe XVI A las diez y seys preguntas [173v] dixo que este testigo sabe e vido que los yndios que quedaron de las d[ic]has conqystas quedaron pobres e al presente muchos dellos lo estan porque no tienen rrayzes sino que de su trabajo biven y lo buscan para sus personas sustentar su casa e mugeres e hijos e que muchos 317

Appendix 4

dellos pagan grand neçesidad y esto sabe e a visto ansi en esta çiudad de graçias a dios como en las demas XVII A las diez e siete preguntas dixo que este testigo a visto ansi en la çiudad de guatimala como en esta de graçias a dios y otras partes despues que se alebaron de conqystar y los d[ic]hos yndios poblaron siempre an venydo yndios deudos e parientes y naturales de la provinçia de taxcala y de mexico a estar e Residir con ellos e se an algunos casado y dexado hijos e mugeres y esto sabe e a visto XVIII A las diez e o[cho] preguntas dixo que le pareçe a este testigo que (cuento) los trabajos que los d[ic]hos yndios passaron en la conqysta e paçificaçion de la provinçia de guati[mal]a [174r] e de las demas çiudades e villas pobladas de españoles su magestad seria obligado de descargar con ellos e con los españoles su trabajo XIX A las diez e nueve preguntas dixo que este testigo sabe e a visto que muchos de los yndios conqystadores quedaron e estan pobres que apenas tienen para se bestir asi ny a sus mugeres y esto sabe e a visto XX A las veynte preguntas dixo que dize lo que d[ic]ho tiene en hello se afirma y es la verdad p[ar]a el juramento que hizo y lo declaro el d[ic]ho ynterpete y lo firmo de su nonbre con el d[ic]ho señor al[ca]lde Rodrigo descobar pe[d]ro he[rnan]dez passo ante mi joan Rodriguez escrivano de su magestad

318

Appendix 5

Conquered Conquistadors

Appendix 5

This appendix presents the transcriptions of two letters that are part of the AGI Guatemala 52 document. The first was written by Tlaxcalteca and Mexica former conquistadors in 1547. The second was written by the Tlaxcaltecatl Don Francisco in the same year.

“Carta de los yndios tlaxcaltecas y mexicanos al Rey sobre ser maltratados” [77r] S[u/Sacra] C[católica] C[esarea] R[eal] M[agestad] 1547 Los de Tlaxcalla con todas sus comarcas y mexicanos con todos sus sub­ jetos vasallos nuevos de V[uestra] R[ey] M[agestad] que residimos y abitamos en esta provy[nçi]a de guatimala los quales todos demas cumu[nidade]s y de 319

Appendix 5

una mesma voluntad besamos pies y manos de v[uestra] R[ey] m[agestad] en cuya presencia acatamos humyllamos y obedecemos como en quien tenemos toda n[uest]ra confiança y justi[çi]a ante ponido a dios n[uest]ro senor / que es a v[uestra] s[u] m[agestad] /Al qual como a senor y emperador n[uest]ro y al alto y real principe n[uest]ro y de toda la cristianidad / supplicamos humilmente nos oya y favorezca con justi[çi]a / y a v[uestra] s[u] c[esarea] m[agestad] le es notorio y çierto que todos los juntam[en]te ya nombrados que por servi[çi]o de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] dexamos y desamparamos a n[uest]ros padres y madres hijos y parientes casas haziendas y tierras / para venir a conquistar la pr[ovinç]ya de guatimala debaxo del cargo y yugo pesado del capitan y adelant[ad]o don p[edr]o dalvar[a]do y don pedro de puerto carrero y jorge de alvarado donde nos dester­ ramos mas de dozientas leguas de n[uest]ro natural myl hombres y mas / combat­ ientes con hartos y excesivos trabajos de ha[m]bre y sed y pestilencia y muy malos tratamy[ent]os de n[uest]ros capitanes espanoles y sus sequaces / haziendonos muchas fuercas y violencias ahorcancando y matando de n[uest]ra gente a muchos y viniendo con ellos ya de paz y en su favor y ayuda haziendonos tributar esclavos de guerra y de paz que fueron mas de quatro cie[nt]os sin otros tantos que dellos no ay memoria y tributando de gallinas mayz axi sal alpargates / que en lugar de tratar nos por hijos y tenernos por libres nos hazian esclavos y tributarios suyos / y no dexando [77v] de ayudarles ni favorescerles con todos n[uest]ros trabajos y malos tratamy[ent]os / con n[uest]ras personas y armas en todas las conquistas etc. yban haziendo donde pereccimos gran p[ar]te de n[uest]ra gente / asi de malos tratami[ent]os como de trabajos y de pestilencia y en guerra / ya despues de llegado los capitanes y toda la gente en las comarcas de la provyn[ci]a de gua­ timala todos los que aviamos escapado que veniamos con ellos nos repartieron como de esclavos entre los dichos capitanes y su gente espanoles a unos cepos a xx y a [o]tros quinze y a otros d[i]ez y asi de todos nosotros no quedo cacique ny principal en su libertad / y estos malos tratamy[ent]os duraron hasta que se pacifico la pr[ov]y[nçi]a de guatimala por los capitanes y españoles y nosotros y despues de ya assentada la tierra nos relaxaron ya algun tanto de los agravios y malos tratami[ent]os / mas no en n[uest]ra libertad que como a siervos y esclavos nos trayan / y por mas nos arraygar en la tierra nos hizieron grandes promesas de dar a n[uest]ras cabeças los p[rin]cipales reprosimy[ent]os de yndios / despues de algunos anos pasados fue el dicho don pedro dalvarado a castilla / y a la buelta vino hecho adelandado por v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] y començo luego ha hazer una armada muy grande para descubrir tierras nuevas donde se tornaron a renovar y atrescer los trabajos que soliamos tener / por que tornamos a tributar de nuevo y de trabajar en cortar y asrerar madera y ha hazer pez y maromas y carbon para hazer navios y galeras y sustas / y servi[çi]os excessivos y a toda su caja mantenida y sobrada y todos [muy] mayores trabajos que pasaron los hijos de ysrael / y donde casi de los que aviamos quedado y escapado pezicimos de los grandes y malos tratamy[ient]os y[n]dolen[çi]as que por nosotros paso / y todos estos tra­ 320

Appendix 5

bajos han durado hasta estos tiempos de agora y duran avia que no tanto / y de los que hemos escapado abra quarenta o cinquenta de cada p[ar]te de tlaxcala y mexico / y todos estos trabajos an sido en servi[ci]o de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] / por tanto visto y oydo [78r] los muy buenos servi[çi]os y provechosos hechos a v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] suplicamos humilmente una y dos myl vezes como a s[eñ]or y emperador n[uest]ro y al pri[nci]pe real n[uest]ro se acuerden ya de nosotros pobres myserables acabo de tantos tiempos y trabajos / de nos relaxar y quitar la (subjeçion) que nos tienen estos espanoles / y de darnos libertad a n[uest]ra voluntad con justitia sometiendonos debaxa della / y que no conozcamos a otro por señor ni obedezcamos a otro si a v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] no / y que no podamos huir a otro ni atributar a nadie pues no tenemos de que ni de donde pues no estamos en n[uest]ro natural / y todo lo suplicamos a v[uestra] s[acra] c[atólica] c[esarea] R[ey] m[agestad] / que lo mande por una super[j]uisio firmada de su real nombre para que se cumpla y effetue / por que una cedula que v[uest]ra m[agestad] r[ey] nos hizo m[erce]d sobre mas libertad / no la quisieron cumplir ni obedesser / las justicias de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] que en esta pr[ov]y[nç]ia de guatimala presiden / ni tampoco nos quieren hazer just[ici]a antes ellos son causa de todo n[uest]ro mal y dano y si ellos nos pudiesen de(vorar) / como lobos a vacas y corderos / lo hazian sino que por los religiosos fran[ciscan]os y dominicos vivimos debaxo de su protection y defensa y pues a oydo v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] la sin just[içi]a que nos hazen / tornamos a resuplicar finalmente que venga ya su just[içi]a / en n[uest]ro favor que cada hora y momento lo desseamos y lloramos para venida y alcançada / rescibamos gran consuelo y esfuerço en la s[an]ta fee de n[uest]ro redemptor jesu christo al quien rogamos con fuertes oraçiones / guarde con salud y vida y con rescidos y largos ymperios por muchos anos y largos tiem­ pos para su sancto servi[ci]o y grandes triumphos y venamy[ent]os a v[uestra] s[acra] c[atólica] c[esaria] r[ey] m[agestad] de guatimala / a quinze de março de myl y quy[nient]os y quarenta y siete. D[ivina] V[uestra] S[sacra] C[atólica] C[esarea] R[eal] M[agestad] que humilmente nos prestramos ante su acatamy[ient]o real vasallos

Letter by the Tlaxcaltecatl Don Francisco [75r] S[acra] C[atólica] C[esarea] M[agestad] 1547 Francisco vassallo de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] natural de tlaxcala besa sus pies y manos reales acatando el estado real y poderio que v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] tiene sobre todos nosotros los naturales destas p[ar]tes de sus yndias / en [nueva españa?] a los de tlaxcala para hazernos justi[ci]a de los buenos y malos servi[ci]os que a v[uestra] m[agestad] se fueren hechos / y como sus vasa­llos no tenemos 321

Appendix 5

ni conoçemos a otro por señor y empe[ra]dor asy (occurimos) a v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] en quien tenemos el refugio todo de n[uestr]a deffensa y favor / yo el mas pobre y mas humilde vasallo de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] hijo que fui de un cacique llamado por su prop[r]io nombre Acxotecatl y por nombre de pila cristoval el qual fue de tlaxcala con todo su poder y voluntad en servi[çi]o de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] en dar favor y ayuda al marques del valle don her[nan]do cortes para conquistar la ciudad de mexico / el qual despues de tomada hizo hazer gente de tlaxcala para conquistar la provy[nçi]a de guatimala y en esta conq[uis]ta fue por capitan jorge dalvarado y en esta sazon mi padre me hizo yr con el a la dicha conquista siendo maçuelo en servi[çi]o de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] con gente de guerra y armas / y mandome de toda su voluntad que bolviendo yo / con vict[ori]a plaziendo a dios me hazia suceder en su estado y cargo de cacicazgo despues de sus dias con todos los vasallos que tenia a cargo y aziendas suyas / y de todo esto es muy bien sabidor el marques del valle y don p[edr]o dalvarado adelantado / el qual fue por capitan general a la conquista de guatimala y jorge de alvarado me hizo grandes promesas y offertas de buen tra[ta]my[ent]o y agradescimy[ent]o de todo lo q[ua]l ninguna cosa se cumplio / y por guarda de mi persona y gente medio a un conquistador servidor de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] llam[a]do herna[n] perez / el qual reside en esta ciudad de guatimala / y al t[iemp]o que mi padre murio / esta mayo en esta provy[inçi]a de guatimala en servi[çi]o de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] y dexo mandado en su estado a un sobrino suyo llamado sandoval que despues que yo bolviese a tlaxcala que el mismo rep[ar]tiese los servi[çi]os y aziendas y tierras a mi y a otros mis hermanos / y por esto no es no pude bolver a tlaxcala [75v] por sustentar la gente que avia quedado en guatimala en servi[çi]o de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] / despues aca e sido ynformado por mucha [an]x[ie]dad de mis natu­ rales que todos mis hermanos se han entremetido en las haziendas y tierras que mi padre me dexo / y no obstante esto han hecho y hazen muy malos tratamy[ient]os a los de tlacaxcala los quales en otro tiempo fueron de mi padre / quitandoles las tierras y semetenas y haziendas de todo lo qual a sido causa que se ayan despo­ blado y despueblan muchos dellos a otras tierras estrañas / por tanto oydo nos de just[içi]a suplico a v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] que provea en ello y sobre ello / y pues que de v[uestra] m[agestad] es de remunerar los buenos servi[çi]os y los malos castigar y pugnir / como perfecto senor y emperador sup[li]co se aya memoria en que toda las haziendas y tierras y servi[çi]os se me mande restituir guardar y con­ provar / y para que conosçiendo el favor y m[erce]des de v[uestra] r[ey] m[agestad] sus vasallos conozcamos su just[ici]a y magnanimidad y nos crezca la voluntad de servirle de dia en dia y de rogar a n[uest]ro señor conserve (por) salud y vida por muy largos tiempos y ynumerables ymperios para su santo servi[çi]o a v[uestra] c[atólica] c[esarea] m[agestad] de guatimala 15 de março / V[uestra] D[ivina] V. C[atólica] C[esarea] M[agestad] que sus pies y manos reales besas 322

Appendix 6

Conquered Conquistadors

Appendix 6

This appendix presents two letters written by indigenous lords. Both are presently in the file AGI Guatemala 53. The first is a letter composed by the lords of Atitlan, written February 1, 1571.1 The second is a letter preceding the probanza of Don Juan Mexia, lord of Cuxutepeque, and it was written in 1564.

“Los prinçipales del pueblo de atitlan primero febr[er]o de 1571” (AGI Guatemala 53) A la c[esarea] r[eal] m[a]g[estad] del rey don felipe n[uest]ro señor en su muy alto y rreal consejo de indias

323

Appendix 6

[1r] R[eal] C[esarea] M[a]g[estad] nos los caçiques y prinçipales vezinos y naturales del pu[ebl]o de santiago de atitlan damos a v[uestra] m[agestad] rrelaçion de n[uest]ros pasados de los señores que fueron y los que somos sus hijos y quienes fueron antes que los españoles vinieran a esta tierra a la conquistar damos rrelaçion de los nombres de n[uest]ros pasados y n[uest]ros que fueron estos la cabeça y señor de todos fue su nombre atziquinihay y los demas señores juntos con el d[ic]ho señor se llamavan amac tzutuhile, y estos fueron señores sin tener ni conosçer a otro señor porque a estos davan y recognosçen el dia de hoy las estançias nombradas sant bartolome y sant andres y sant francisco y sancta barbola y assimismo tennan sus servidores y criados y lo que les davan y tributtavan los d[ic]hos, hombres y mugeres por esclavos y esclavas, assi mismo piedras de balor entre nosotros que llaman chalchiuitl, oro, y cacao y plumas gallinas miel y muchas sementeras de mayz y assi mismo eredades de cacao, y les hazian sus casas. la orden que estos señores tenian en su antiguedad es la siguiente en hazer justi[ci]as y castigar a los delinquentes conforme a los delitos ahorcavan y desquartiçavan y el delinquente despues de muerto las haziendas y muger y hijos lo confiscavan y llevavan en pena de su delito y a las estançias que son pu[ebl]os las arriba nombradas para averiguar y hazer sus ynformaçiones enbiavan a algun deudo muy çercano con poder bastante como en[1v]tre nosotros se usava y hecho esto todo le davan por salario la mitad de todo lo que tenia el delinquente assi tenian y enbiavan a este como su justi[ci]a mayor por su salario señalavan todo esto porque de alli se sustentavan los que yvan a tal cargo destos dichos offiçios esta es la horden hasta aqui y esta sentençia que es de tal señor dava era sin ninguna apelaçion porque era embiado del señor y rey de esta d[ic]ho pueblo diziese esto porque no tenian rreconoscimi[ent]o a señor ninguno. las personas que a estos señores servian en sus casas y por offiçiales della se dezia y llamavan lolmay, atzihunac, calel, ahuchan. estos dichos eran como sus fatores y contadores y tesoreros que conforman con los d[ic]hos nombres la causa de llamarse y nombrarse este señor primero que se dize atziquinihay. era en aquel t[iem]po rey y señor de su pu[ebl]o y pu[ebl]as arriba nombradas los siguientes que sse llaman n(a)tztihay, aquibihay, acuhay, quiçihay, acaborul, amac, tzutuhile. todos estos d[ic]os ombres estavan en posesion de duques y condes y marqueses y cavalleros y hidalgos y otros ombres prinçipales y assi por estas causas era antes de los españoles llamando en n[uest]ra lengua rreyno por si sin reconosçer en parte ninguna y de otras partes venian aver la corte donde estos dichos señores estavan. assimismo n[uest]ros pasados tenian grandes guerras, con tres reynos los nombres de los quales eran tecpan utlatlan, y tepan guatimala y tepan tecoçitlan, y assimismo nombravan en esta provinçia de guatimala de quatro reyes y señores y assimismo todo lo que tenian y les davan de tributo y rentas gastavan y destribuyan en sus personas y davan a todos los d[ic]hos señores y tambien a 324

Appendix 6

muchos offiçiales de diferentes offiçios que en su señorio tenian y en su servi[ci]o como de carpinteros canteros pintores y offiçiales de pluma que entre ellos los ay oy dia y lo quedavan a los señores para armas de todos los señores que entre ellos se usavan y usan para defensa de su señorio. [2r] Assimismo quando a estas partes vinieron don p[edr]o de alvarado y los demas españoles conquistadores quando venian entrado por toda a esta tierra ningun pueblo se dava de paz sino por fuerça de armas y llegados a este n[uest]ro pu[ebl]o de santiago de atitlan resçibieron al dicho don p[edr]o y a los demas en toda amistad y seguro sin ninguno dellos tomar armas y assi p[ar]a los demas rreynos nombrados llevavan de los n[uest]ros por amigos de paz y conpañeros a subjetar a los demas con fuerça de armas hasta las provinçias de verapaz graçias a dios y sant miguel y leon donde quedaron muchos caçiques y prinçipales muertos en las gueras y quando rescibieron nuestros padres a los españoles fue con muy grandes presentes de todas aquellas cosas que entonçes tenian y poseyan, assimismo despues de apaçiguada la tierra dieron tribu[t]o a toda la tierra a cada pu[ebl]o conforme lo que tenian y a este n[uest]ro pu[ebl]o dieron que tributase esclavos de hombres y mugeres en cantidad de quatro cientos y de quinientos para servicio de sus personas y embiar a las minas y assi mismo tributavan mantas cacao miel gallinas, sal, agi, cobre y pita y otras muchas cosas que les hazian dar y assi mismo les hazian dar muchos yndios de tribu[t]o cada quinze dias de los quales les davan tan eçesibos trabajos que dellos morian y padesçian muy mucho porque de los españoles que los tenian a cargo assi prinçipales que salian con los dichos yndios como los mismos yndios eran de los muy maltratados y assi no bolvian muchos dellos a sus tierras porque alla morian y asi vinieron n[uest]ros pasados en tanta diminuyçion que de señores vinieron a servi[ci]o que para sus casas y menester ellos y sus mugeres lo trabajavan y fanavan y gastaron sus ha­ziendas de cacao y todas las otras cosas que les davan de tribu[t]o porque les pesian muy muchos tributos y para cumplir todo esto gastavan y vendian todo quando tenian y a esta causa vinieron y padesçian tanta neçesidad ellos y sus mugeres que llegaron a tanto que les fue forçado cargarse y cabar y comer de frutas y rayzes de arboles por las cosas eçesivas que se les pedian de tributos. [2v] Y assimismo nosotros sus hijos padesçemos oy dia de que nos cargamos y n[uest]ras mugeres nos muelen y sirven y para sustentar nuestras casas cabamos y usamos de lo que n[uest]ros esclavos nos solian servir por donde passamos y padesçemos mucha nesçesidad y los hijos de señores vamos en diminuyçion porque somos acostumbrados a los tales ofiçios de servir sino de ser servidos por desçender y ser hijos de tales señores pues tenemos agora y creemos en dios n[uest]ro señor y somos por los religiosos alumbrados de todos los mandami[ent]os de dios y estamos en la sancta fee catholica. de los primeros amos que tubimos fueron el adelantado don p[edr]o de alvarado y fulano de cueto, a los quales davan de tribu[t]o n[uest]ros padres mill e quatrocientos xiquipiles de cacao que son en dinero diez mill tomines sin muchas 325

Appendix 6

mantas gallinas miel mayz y otras cosas de menudençias que les mandavan dar en cada año davan todo lo suso dicho a que dieron estos tributos a los dichos encomenderos quarenta y dos años y despues que estamos en cabeça de v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] y de n[uest]ro encomendero sancho de barahona a treynta y dos años poco mas o menos y assi mismo tributaron n[uest]ros pasados a v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] y al d[ic]hyo sancho de barahona hasta que vino el lic[encia]do carrato, que nos taso enmoderado tribu[t]o, y quito de los eçesivo que solian dar de suerte que nos dexo de tribu[t]o seys cientos xiquipiles de cacao y nos quitaros las mantas y nos dieron que dieramos quatro çientas gallinas de la tierra y otras tantas de castilla y a esta tasaçion del licen[cia]do carrato nos libertaron y quitaron todos los esclavos y esclavas que teniamos de n[uest]ro servi[ci]o por donde nos dexaron a los caçiques y prinçipales libertados de pagar tribu[t]o ningu[n]o y por dexarnos sin serv[ic]io ninguno emos perdido n[uest]ras haziendas y heredades de cacao y unos pajaros que se llaman papagayos nos los an destruydo y no tener quien nos los guardasen ni por ellos mirar a esta causa y biuimos en mucha pobreza y nesçesitadad todos, y assimismo quando vino a estas partes el licen[cia]do candecho le pedimos fuese serviendo de contarnos y tasarnos y hecho la cuenta nos añadio de tribu[t]o dos mill tomines sobre lo que davamos y mas dozienta fanegas de mayz y diez arrobas de miell [3r] y assi lo tenemos por mucha carga yçesivo tribu[t]o aunque todos los presidentes y oydores que a estas partes vienen nos dan a entender que solo vienen a faboresçernos y ayudarnos pero de n[uest]ro tribu[t]o no somos en ningu[n]a manera descargados. y assi mismo el lic[encia]do fran[cis]co brizeño quando a estas partes vino paresçimos ante el, y le pedimos quenta de n[uest]ros yndios y tasaçion porque estavamos muy cargados, hecha la cuenta nos añadio mas de lo que soliamos dar treynta y çinco cargas de cacao que son en dineros seteçientos y çinquenta tomines y mas en dinero dozientos y cinquenta tomines son todos los que nos añidieron mas de tribu[t]o mill tomines por donde nos cargaron a nosostros los caçiques y a n[uest]ros hijos tribu[t]o como a n[uest]ros propios vasallos. y que agora todos nosotros los caçiques y prinçipales desta d[ic]ho pu[ebl]o estamos muy contentos en la llegada de la audiençia a esta provinçia de guatimala donde por el presidente y o[y]dores della emos sido y somos muy faboresçidos solo suplicamos a v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] en lo que toca a n[uest]ro tributo que en lo tocante a ello no se nos añadida cosa alguna por los grandes trabajos y nesçesidades que pasamos dando nos v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] para ello una provision rreal sobre la dicha rrazon. como es muy notorio en toda la tierra fundaron n[uest]ros padres de los primeros que en otra parte ninguna una yglesia de canteria y de madera labrada y cubierta de teja y solada de ladrillo y cal y en esta obra gastamos solos muy mucha cantidad de dineros para todas las herramientas neçesarias para la dicha obra sin darnos los encomenderos cosa algu[n]a para ayuda de la d[ic]ha yglesia dezimos los primeros que fueron el adelantado y cueto eçeto despues que estamos 326

Appendix 6

en cabeça de v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] y sancho de barahona en vezes de la parte de v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] nos an dado cient pesos y de la parte de n[uest]ro encomendero an sido trezientos p[es]os que son por todos quatro çientos p[es]os de los quales se an conprado hornamentos para n[uest]ra yglesia y demas desto se dio a n[uest]ra yglesia una campana y un caliz de parte de v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] y assi tenemos posible para poder lo comprar. [3v] damos relaçion y cuenta a v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] de todas estas cosas serviçios de n[uest]ros padres y pasados y nosotros ayssimismo de la neçecidad y pobreça en que estamos y n[uest]ros hijos por que v.mg. sea servido de apiadarse de nosotros pues estamos y alumbradas de cosas de la sancta fee catholica y somos cristianos porque pedimos y suplimos nos mande dar de las rrentas de v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] alguna parte por donde nos podiamos sustentar ser remediadas de algu[n]a nesçesidad n[uest]ra con mas de alguna m[e]r[çe]d de darnos las armas que a v.mg. le paresçiere y fuere servido para nosostros juntamente con algunos privilegios y mas n[uest]ro pueblo sea nombrado de çiudad pues somos basallos y estamos en cabeça de v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] y otro si pedimos y suplicamos a v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] por razon de que ay en n[uest]ras estançias algunos yndios rebeldes de que quiren estar fuera de n[uest]ra subjeçion y no obedesçer n[uest]ros mandami[ent]os en rrecoger el tributo y otras cosas tocantes al bien y pro de las dichas n[uest]ras estançias tenemos nesçesidad de que v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] nos haga merçed de una provision que seamos obedesçidos y acatados asi como obedesçian y acatavan n[uest]ros antepasados pues somos hijos legitimos de tales señores y poniendoles sobre ello la pena que v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] fuere servido otro si pedimos y suplicamos a v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] que pues la vida que es la palabra de sancto evang[elic]o se nos aperdicado contra malos exemplos de muerte que emos visto al contrario en algunos dellos que an venido despaña donde es causa que nosotros estemos tan tibios en el obrar de las virtudes para por ellas alcançar el descanso de la bien aventurança que v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] modere el preçio de n[uest]ros trabajos temporales. Esta es n[uest]ra petiçion y verdadera relacíón por donde viendo v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] nuestra justa petiçion seamos siendo por v[uestra] m[a]g[estad] oydos de hazer nos merçed de aquello que con mas justa causa pediomos como tales y leales hijos y basallos humilmente pedimos y suplicamos [4r] fecho en este vuestro pueblo de santiago el mayor de atitlan a primero de febrero del año de mill e quinientos y setenta y un años. humilles vasallos de v[uestra] c[esarea] r[eal] m[a]g[estad] don fran[cis]co de ribera don joseph de sanctamaria don gaspar manuque don pablo aguilar 327

Appendix 6

don h[e]r[nan]do de soto don lucas de escobar don thoribio de costantino Provança hecha por parte de don joan mexia caçique del pueblo de cuxutepeque de los therminos de la ciudad de sant salvador de la provinçia de gua[temala] sobre sus serviçios que a hecho a su m[a]g[estad] va cerrada y sellada.

Letter Preceding the “Ynformaçion de servi[ci]os de don juan mexia caçique del pueblo de cuxutepeque que es en al provi[nçia] de guatimala,” Guatemala, 1564 (AGI Guatemala 53) Muy p[oderos]o señor Don juan mexia caçique del pueblo de cuxutepeque ques en la provinçia de guatimala dize que el y su padre y antepasados fueron caçiques y senores naturales del d[ic]ho pueblo y como tal a sido y fueron obedeçidos por los demas caçiques y naturales del mandando rregiendo y governando a los d[ic]hos naturales con toda onestidad y quietud dando siempre buen exemplo y do[c]trina de su persona siendo muy amigo de los espanoles y rreligiosos procurando de los albergar y rrecoger en su casa y pueblo proveiendoles de lo neceçario y espeçialmente a los probes y rreligiosos rrespetandoles y procurando que los vezinos sean mantenidos en justiçia y curados de sus enfermedades y que entre ellos aya gran puliçia y cristiandad y en que la igleçia del d[ic]ho pueblo se hiziese y probeiese de lo neçesario donde n[uest]ro señor fuese [loado?] y servido y al tienpo de la conquista de aquella tierra sirvio a v[uest]ra alteza con su persona deudos y vezinos del d[ic]ho pueblo en conquistar y paçificar la villa de san miguel y naturales de sus terminos en conpania de los espanoles llevando del d[ic]ho su pueblo mucho numero de bastimentos y otras cosas neceçarias al probeimiento de los d[ic]hos espanoles por cuyo socorro y ayuda se conquisto y sujeto la d[ic]ha villa de san miguel y naturales de sus terminos y juridi[ci]on en lo qual el y sus deudos y maçeguales __ pasado muy grandes y eçesibos travajos y peligros asta lo sujetar y allanar a v[uest]ro rreal serviçio gastando toda su hazienda y patrimonio por cuya cauça a pasado y pasa muy gran travajo y neceçidad segun consta por esta ynformaçion que presenta a v[uest]ra al[teza] suplica que teniendo consideraçion a lo d[ic]ho se le de çedula dirigida al governador e audiençia de la provinçia de guatimala para que rreparta o senale alguna cantidad de los yndios del d[ic]ho pueblo y su sujeto que le tributan con que se pueda sustentar o selado y daria le de los tributos del d[ic]ho pueblo que en ello v[uest]ra al[tez]a descargara su real conçiençia y el rresciviera bien y merçed. alonso de herrera

328

Appendix 6

Note 1. An earlier transcription of this text has been published as “Relación de los Caciques y Principales del Pueblo de Atitlán el 1 de febrero del año 1571,” Anales de la Sociedad de Geografía e Historia 26 (September–December 1952):435–438.

329

Appendix 7

Conquered Conquistadors

Appendix 7

Letter to the Spanish King, written by Jorge de Alvarado on February 26, 1534 (AGI Guatemala 41, N.1, fs. 5r, 5v [digital pages 11 and 12])1 [5r] s.c.c.m. como quiera que por ser yo el mas minimo vasallo de v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] ynvitisimo prinçipe no me aya atrevido a suplicarle hasta agora me hiziese mas en rremuneracion de los serviçios que yo a v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] e hecho ansi en la conquista paçificaçion e poblaçion destas provinçias de guatimala con cargos de v[uest]ro capitan de diez y ocho años a esta parte e agora animado y confiado de la mucha ma[g]nanimidad y grandeza de v[uestra] s[acra] m[ages]t[ad] porque no puedo yr personalmente a besar v[uest]ros rreales pies por estar como estoi

331

Appendix 7

ocupado en v[uest]ro rreal serviçio con el administraçion de la v[uest]ra just[içi]a y governaçion de esta provinçia en lugar y por absençia del adelantado p[edr]o de alvarado mi hermano gobernador della por v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] cuya persona es yda en v[uest]ro rreal serviçio con una muy buena armada por esta mar del sur a conquistar y poblar en aquellas partes que dios fuere servido a donde mediante la divina voluntad abra ya rreconoçida t[ie]rra / por que a mes y medio que partio del puerto en la d[ic]ha demanda / acorde escrevir esta para hazer saber a v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] como yo al t[iem]po que el adelantado mi hermano / fue destas partes a esos rreynos / a besar los rreales pies de v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] por el v[uest]ro gobernador y justiçia mayor de la nueva espana / yo fue proveido por v[uest]ro capitan y en v[uest]ro rreal nombre me mandaron venir a conquistar y poblar estas provinçias de guatimala que a la sazon todo estaba de guerra y sali de mi casa y rreposo tresientas leguas de camino a mi costa y mision traje mucha gente y cavallos/ y muniçion y los pertrechos nesesarios para hazer semejante conquista / en la qual servi y trabaje con mi persona y adereços de noche y de dia como he d[ich]o a mi costa en continua guerra por espaçio y tiempo de tres anos que se me detuvieron los naturales della que no quisieron venir a dar la obediençia a v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] aunque por mi e por mis mensajeros de v[uestra] r[eal] parte fueron muchas y diversas vezes rrequeridos finalmente ynvitisimo c. yo mediante la voluntad divina los conquiste e traxe e puse debajo de v[uest]ro yugo y dominio rreal y funde y poble de espanoles en las d[ic]has provinçias la çiudad de santiago e dos villasque en ella estan pobladas oy dia y pase en todo esto muchos trabajos y peligros de mi persona y gastos de mi hazienda en caballos y pertrechos para mi y para los conquistadores a cabsa de lo qual ma[g]nanimo prinçipe quede muy adebdado / y puesto que en v[uest]ro rreal nombre yo encomende y rreparti los naturales de esta t[ie]rra entre los conquistadores espanoles que conmigo anduvieron en la d[ic]ha conquista / a t[iem]po que yo avia de ser aprovechado y pagar mis debdas vino el adelantado mi hermano proveido por v[uest]ro gobernador de las d[ic]has provinçias / y le dexe y entregue la d[ich]ha t[ie]rra en toda paz y sosiego segund que yo en v[uest]ro rreal nombre la tenia e yo me torne a mi casa a la çibdad de mexico / y estando rreposando el d[ic]ho adelantado me ynbio a llamar para que durant[e] su absençia o mientras fuese v[uestra] r[eal] voluntad tubiese en administraçion y cargo estas provinçias lo qual yo açete porque me pareçio que en ello servia a v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] y que ansi convenia a v[uestra] r[eal] serviçio por la paçificaçion e sustentaçionde la t[ie]rra y naturales della a donde demas despues que a ella vine no me an faltado trabajos en asosegar algunos pueblos rrebeldes / que por ser como es muy aspera la t[ie]rra les convida se rrebelar / e pareçiendome que al serviçio de v[uestra] m[agestad] ansi convenia ynbio en v[uestra] r[eal] nombre a poblar en esta parte e provinçias della della hazia la mar del norte que es entre naco e la villa de san salvador que esta poblada otra villa de que mediant n[uest]ro senor v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] sera servido. ansi que c.m. el adelantado 332

Appendix 7

mi hermano creo escribe a v[uestra] m[agestad] suplicandole en remuneraçion de mis serviçios y los muchos gastos que he hecho / me haga m[erce]d de la governaçion de estas provinçias de guatimala segund el la tiene de v[uestra] m[agestad] como creo v[uestra] m[agestad] abra visto por sus cartas / por tanto muy poderoso senor / a v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] [5v] suplico sea servido descargar su rreal conçiençia conmigo e me haga m[erce]d[e]s pues mis serviçios an sido e son muy notorios dandome la d[ic]ha gobernaçion / como la tiene el adelantado mi hermano pare que con el administraçion della yo pueda servir mas a v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] como mi voluntad lo desea y pues para v[uest]ra rreal serviçio lo pido a v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] umyllmente sup[li]co sea servido de me otorgar la m[erce]d dios n[uest]ro senor prosperamente crezca y aumente la vida y ynperial estado de v[uestra] s[acra] c[atólica/cesarea] m[agstad] en aumentami[ent]o de mayor ynperio rreynos e señorios / a su s[an]to serviçio de esta çiudad de s[an]tiago de la provinçia de guatimala a d[ivina] v[uestra] s[acra] c[atólica] c[esarea] m[agestad] muy humyll siervo vasallo / que sus reales pies y manos besa jorge dalvarado

Note 1. I thank Wendy Kramer for her valuable feedback on my transcription of this text (2006).

333

Appendix 8

Conquered Conquistadors

Appendix 8

Fragment of the Document AGI Justicia 199, No. 1, Ramo 2 (N.1, R.2): “Luis Alfonso de Estrada y su hermana D[oñ]a Luisa muger que fue de Jorge de Alvarado con el Señor fiscal s[ob]re ciertos pueblos de indios, que piden. Mexico. Año de 1544” (fs. 15v–16r) [15v] çedulas de deposita por la siguiente se deposita y encomienda en vos jorge de alvarado en nombre de su magestad el pueblo de tequiçistlan y la mitad del pueblo de tatitlan con sus subjetos segund y de la manera que los tenian e poseyan baltasar de mendoça y pedro de cueto difuntos por [?] e fallesçimiento y conforme a la costumbre que en esta governaçion se tiene y por los muchos serviçios que a su magestad

335

Appendix 8

en ella aveys hecho se os haze el d[ic]ho deposyto en rreconpensa e rrenumeraçion de algunos gastos que aveys hecho en la conquista della de los quales os podays servir e sirvays de ellos en v[uest]ras haziendas e granjerias segund y de la manera que se sirve los demas pueblos encomendados con cargo que tengays de los yndios [triar?] en las cosas de n[uest]ra santa fee catolica poniendo . . . la diligençia posible conforme a las ordenanças [16r] destas partes fecha a tres de junio de mill e quinientos e treinta e çinco años el adelantado pedro de alvarado por mandado de su señoria anton[io] de morales. por la siguente se deposita en vos jorge de alvarado vezino desta çiudad de santiago (el) mi teniente de governador los pueblos y señores y naturales del pueblo de tecpan atitlan cabeçera de guatimala e totonicapan e pochutla con todas sus estançias e subjetos segund y de la manera q[ue] vos os [?] servir quando conquistastes esta d[ic]ha provinçia y segund yo me he servido siempre de los d[ic]hos pueblos por los muchos y buenos serviçios que a dios y a su magestad aveys hecho en estas partes en espeçial en esta governaçion e mando al alguazil mayor o menores o otras qualquier justiçias que vos metan en la posesion hecho a veynte de diziembre de mill e quinientos e treinta e tres años el adelantado pedro de alvarado por mandado de su señoria fernando de sosa escribano de su magestad.

336

Bibliography

Conquered Conquistadors Bibliography

Abbreviations CIESAS CIRMA CISINAH CNWS CONACULTA CONACYT INAH INEGI MNA UAT UDLA UNAM UNESCO

Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social Centro de Investigaciones Regionales de Mesoamérica Centro de Investigaciones Superiores del INAH Research School for Asian, African, and Amerindian Studies Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia Instituto Nacional de Estadística Geografía e Informática Museo Nacional de Antropología Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala Universidad de las Américas Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization

337

Bibliography

Published Sources and Dissertations Abrams Jr., H. León. 1973. “Comentario sobre la sección colonial del Códice Telleriano-Remensis.” Anales del Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia (Mexico) 7a, 3:139–176. Abrams, M. H. 1999 [1941]. A Glossary of Literary Terms. Seventh ed. Harcourt Brace College Publishers, New York. Acuña, René, ed. 1981. Descripción de la cuidad y provincia de Tlaxcala de Nueva España y las Indias y del Mar Océano para el buen gobierno y ennoblecimiento dellas: Edición facsimil del Manuscrito de Glasgow. UNAM, Instituto de Investigaciones Filológicas, Mexico City. ———. 1982. Relaciones Geográficas del siglo XVI: Guatemala. UNAM, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas, Mexico City. ———. 1984. Relaciones geográficas del siglo XVI: Tlaxcala (Descripción de la ciudad y provincia de Tlaxcala de la Nueva España y las Indias y del mar océano para el buen gobierno y ennoblecimiento dellas), 2 Vols. UNAM, Instituto de Investigaciones Antro­ pológicas, Mexico City. ———. 1987. Relaciones geográficas del siglo XVI: Michoacan. UNAM, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológicas, Mexico City. Aguirre Beltrán, Gonzalo. 1989 [1946]. La Población Negra de México: Estudio etnohistórico. Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. Aguirre Beltrán, Hilda Judith. 1999. El Códice: Lienzo de Quauhquecholac. Manuscrito pictográfico indígena tradicional Azteca-Nahuatl (Siglo XVI) / Propuesta de Método y análisis. Temas histórico y geográfico. Algunos ejemplos de lectura. UNAM, Instituto de Investigaciones Antropológica, Mexico City. PhD dissertation. Akkeren, Ruud van. 2000. Place of the Lord’s Daughter. Rab’inal, Its History, Its DanceDrama. CNWS Publications, Leiden. ———. 2002. “Lugar del cangrejo o caracol: La fundación de Rab’inal-Tequicistlan, Guatemala.” Mesoamérica 44:54–81. ———. 2003. “Authors of the Popol Wuj.” Ancient Mesoamerica 14, 2 (Fall):237–256. Alcina Franch, José, ed. 1969. Expediciones acerca de los antiguos monumentos de la Nueva España (1805–1808), por Guillermo Dupaix. Colección Chimalistac de libros y documentos acerca de la Nueva España 27. Ediciones José Porrúa Turanzas, Madrid. Alcina Franch, José, Miguel León-Portilla, and Eduardo Matos Moctezuma. 1992. Azteca mexica / Las culturas del México antiguo. Sociedad Estatal Quinto Centenario, Lunwerg Editores, Madrid. Altamirano Rocha, Sara Eugenia. 1982. Tecnología y conservación de los lienzos de Tuxpan, Ver. Escuela Nacional de Conservación, Restauración y Museografía Manuel del Castillo Negrete, Mexico. M.A. thesis. Anawalt, Patricia Rieff. 1981. Indian Clothing Before Cortés: Mesoamerican Costumes from the Codices. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Anders, Ferdinand. 1970. Codex Magliabechiano, Cl. xiii.3 (B.R. 232). Biblioteca Nazionale di Firenze (Códices Selecti 23) (ed. facsimilar). Akademische Druck- und Ver­lags­an­ stalt, Graz. Anders, Ferdinand, and Maarten Jansen. 1988. Schrift und Buch in alten Mexiko. Aka­ demische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz.

338

Bibliography

———. 1993. Manual del adivino. Libro explicativo del llamado Códice Vaticano B. Códices Mexicanos IV (Ferdinand Anders, Maarten Jansen, and Luis Reyes García, Comisión Técnica Investigadora). Sociedad Estatal Quinto Centenario, Madrid; Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz; Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. ———. 1996a. Religión, costumbres e historia de los antiguos mexicanos. Libro explicativo del llamado Códice Vaticano A. Códices Mexicanos XII (Ferdinand Anders, Maarten Jansen, and Luis Reyes García, Comisión Técnica Investigadora). Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz; Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. ———. 1996b. Libro de la vida. Texto explicativo del llamado Códice Magliabechiano. Con contribuciones de Jessica Davilar and Anuschka van ’t Hooft. Códices Mexicanos XII (Ferdinand Anders, Maarten Jansen, and Luis Reyes García, Comisión Técnica Investigadora). Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz; Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. ———. 1999. Mexiko: Alte Handschriften beginnen zu sprechen. Staatliches Museum für Völkerkunde, Munich. Anders, Ferdinand, Maarten Jansen, and Gabina Aurora Pérez Jiménez. 1992a. Crónista Mixteca: El rey 8 venado, garra de jaguar, y la dinastía de Teozacualco-Zaachila. Libro explicativo del llamado Códice Zouche-Nuttall. Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz; Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. ———. 1992b. Origen e historia de los reyes mixtecos. Libro explicativo del llamado Códice Vindobonensis. Códices Mexicanos I (Ferdinand Anders, Maarten Jansen, and Luis Reyes García, Comisión Técnica Investigadora). Sociedad Estatal Quinto Centenario, Madrid; Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz; Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. ———. 1994. El libro de Tezcatlipoca, señor del tiempo: Libro explicativo del llamado Códice Vejérváry-Mayer. Códices Mexicanos VII (Ferdinand Anders, Maarten Jansen, and Luis Reyes García, Comisión Técnica Investigadora). Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz; Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. Anders, Ferdinand, Maarten Jansen, and Luis Reyes García. 1991. Libro de Ciuacoatl: Homenaje para el año de fuego nuevo. Libro explicativo del llamado Códice Borbónico. Códices Mexicanos III (Ferdinand Anders, Maarten Jansen, and Luis Reyes García, Comisión Técnica Investigadora). Sociedad Estatal Quinto Centenario, Madrid; Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz; Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. Arévalo, Rafael de, ed. 1857. Colección de documentos antiguos del Archivo del Ayuntamiento de la Ciudad de Guatemala. Imprenta de Luna, Guatemala City. ———, ed. 1932 [1856]. Libro de actas del ayuntamiento de la ciudad de Santiago de Guatemala, desde la fundación de la misma ciudad en 1524 hasta 1530. Topografía Nacional, Guatemala City. Arnheim, Rudolf. 1969. Visual Thinking. University of California Press, Berkeley. Asselbergs, Florine. 1998. Quauhquechollan. Research into the Political, Economic and Religious Development of a Nahua-Cacicazgo in the Late Postclassic and Early Colonial Period. Leiden University, Leiden. M.A. thesis. ———. 2002. “La conquista de Guatemala: nuevas perspectivas del Lienzo de Quauh­ quecholan en Puebla, México.” Mesoamérica 44:1–53.

339

Bibliography

———. 2007. “The Conquest in Images: The Stories of Tlaxcalteca and Quauhquecholteca Conquistadors,” in Indian Conquistadors: Indigenous Allies in the Conquest of Mesoamerica, Laura E. Matthew and Michel R. Oudijk, eds. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Pp. 65–101. Bal, Mieke. 1994. On Meaning-Making: Essays in Semiotics. Polebridge, Sonoma. ———. 1997 [1985]. Narratology / Introduction to the Theory of Narrative. University of Toronto Press, Toronto. Bal, M., and N. Bryson. 1991. “Semiotics and Art History.” The Art Bulletin 83, 2 (June): 174–208. Ballesteros-Gaibrois, Manuel. 1977. “El Lienzo de Tlaxcalla de la Casa de Colon de Vall­ adolid,” in Cuadernos prehispánicos V, 5. Seminario Americanista de la Universidad Casa de Colón, Valladolid. Pp. 5–16 + plates. Bancroft, Hubert Howe. 1883–1886. History of Mexico, 6 Vols. The History Company, San Francisco. ———. 1886–1887. History of Central America, 3 Vols. The History Company, San Francisco. Barber, Russell J., and Frances F. Berdan. 1998. The Emperor’s Mirror: Understanding Cultures Through Primary Sources. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Barlow, Robert H. 1994. Fuentes y estudios sobre el México indígena / primera parte. Ed. Jesús Monjarás-Ruiz, Elena Limón, and María de la Cruz Paillés H. Series Obras de Robert H. Barlow, Vol. 5. INAH and UDLA, Mexico City. ———. 1995. Fuentes y estudios sobre el México indígena / segunda parte. Ed. Jesús Monjarás-Ruiz, Elena Limón, and María de la Cruz Paillés H. Series Obras de Robert H. Barlow, Vol. 6. INAH and UDLA, Mexico City. ———. 1999. Escritos diversos. Ed. Jesús Monjarás-Ruiz and Elena Limón. Series Obras de Robert H. Barlow, Vol. 7. INAH and UDLA, Mexico City. Baron Castro, Rodolfo. 1950. Reseña histórica de la Villa de San Salvador. Ediciones Cultura Hispanica, Madrid. Bataillon, Marcel. 1951. “La Vera Paz, Roman et histoire.” Bulletin Hispanique 53:235– 300. Baudot, Georges. 1993. “Malintzin, imagen y discurso de mujer en el primer México virreinal.” Cuadernos americanos, nueva época 7, 4, Mexico City:181–207. Beltrami, Giacomo Costantino. 1830. Le Mexique, 2 Vols. Crevot, Paris. Benson, Elizabeth P., ed. 1973. Mesoamerican Writing Systems. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Berdan, Frances F., and Patricia Rieff Anawalt. 1992. The Codex Mendoza, 4 Vols. University of California Press, Berkeley. ———. 1997. The Essential Codex Mendoza. University of California Press, Berkeley. Berdan, Frances F., Richard E. Blanton, Elizabeth Hill Boone, Mary G. Hodge, Michael E. Smith, and Emily Umberger, eds. 1996. Aztec Imperial Strategies. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Berdan, Frances F., and Michael E. Smith. 2000. “The Postclassic Mesoamerican World System.” Current Anthropology 41:283–286. ———. 2003. The Postclassic Mesoamerican World. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

340

Bibliography

Berlin, Ira. 1998. Many Thousands Gone: The First Two Centuries of Slavery in North America. Belknap Press of Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. Bhabba, Homi. 1995. The Location of Culture. Routledge, London. Bierhorst, John, ed. 1985. Cantares Mexicanos: Songs of the Aztecs. Stanford University Press, Stanford. Bittman Simons, Bente. 1968. Los Mapas de Cuauhtinchan y la Historia Tolteca Chichi­ meca. INAH, Mexico City. Blom, Frans. 1945. “El Lienzo de Analco, Oaxaca.” Cuadernos Americanos 4, 24:125– 136. Boone, Elizabeth H. 1991. “Migration Histories as Ritual Performance,” in To Change Place: Aztec Ceremonial Landscapes, Davíd Carrasco, ed. University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Pp. 121–151. ———. 1992. “Glorious Imperium: Understanding Land and Community in Moctezuma’s Mexico,” in Moctezuma’s Mexico: Visions of the Aztec World, David Carrasco and E. Matos Moctezuma, eds. University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Pp. 159–173. ———. 1994. “Introduction: Writing and Recording Knowledge,” in Writing Without Words: Alternative Literacies in Mesoamerica and the Andes, Elizabeth H. Boone and Walter D. Mignolo, eds. Duke University Press, Durham, N.C. Pp. 3–26. ———. 1998. “Pictorial Documents and Visual Thinking in Postconquest Mexico,” in Native Traditions in the Postconquest World, Elizabeth H. Boone and Tom Cummins, eds. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Pp. 149–199. ———. 2000. Stories in Red and Black: Pictorial Histories of the Aztecs and Mixtecs. University of Texas Press, Austin. Boone, Elizabeth H., and Walter D. Mignolo, eds. 1994. Writing without Words: Alternative Literacies in Mesoamerica and the Andes. Duke University Press, Durham, N.C. Braidotti, Rosi. 2002. Metamorphoses: Towards a Materialist Theory of Becoming. Polity and Blackwell, Cambridge, England, and Malden, Mass. Brasseur de Bourbourg, C. E. 1857–1859. Histoire des Nations Civilisées du Mexique et de l’Amérique Centrale, durant les siècles antérieurs à Christophe Colomb, écrite sur des documents originaux et entiérement inédits, puisés aux anciennes archives des indigènes, 4 Vols. Artus Bertrand, Paris. Breton, Alain. 1994. Rabinal Achi. Un drame dynastique maya du XVème siècle. Édition établie d’après le Manuscrit Pérez. Société d’Ethnologie/Société des Américanistas (Recherches américaines 5), Nanterre. Bricker, Victoria R. 1981. The Indian Christ, the Indian King: The Historical Substrate of Maya Myth and Ritual. University of Texas Press, Austin. Brinton, D. G., ed. 1885. The Annals of the Cakchiquels. The Original Text, with a Translation, Notes and Introduction by Daniel G. Brinton, Vol. VI. D. G. Brinton, Philadelphia. Brinton’s Library of Aboriginal American Literature. Reprint AMS, New York, 1969. Brotherston, Gordon. 1992. Book of the Fourth World: Reading the Native Americas Through Their Literature. Cambridge University Press, New York. ———. 1994. Painted Books from Mexico. British Museum Press, London. Brotherston, Gordon, and Ana Gallegos. 1990. “El Lienzo de Tlaxcala y el Manuscrito de Glasgow (Hunter 242),” Estudios de Cultura Náhuatl 20, UNAM, Mexico City:117–140.

341

Bibliography

Burke, Peter. 2001. Eyewitnessing: The Uses of Images as Historical Evidence. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, N.Y. Butzer, Elisabeth. 2001. Historia social de una comunidad tlaxcalteca: San Miguel de Aguayo (Bustamante, N.L.), 1686–1820. Archivo Municipal de Saltillo, Instituto Tlax­ calteca de la Cultura, Tlaxcala, Mexico. Carmack, Robert M. 1968. “Toltec Influence on the Post-Classic Culture History of Highland Guatemala.” Archaeological Studies of Middle America, Middle American Research Institute Publ. 26, Tulane University, New Orleans:49–92. ———. 1971. “Ethnography and Ethnohistory: Their Application in Middle American Studies.” Ethnohistory 18, 2:127–145. ———. 1973. Quichean Civilization: The Ethnohistoric, Ethnographic, and Archaeological Sources. University of California Press, Berkeley. ———. 1981. The Quiché Mayas of Utatlán: The Evolution of a Highland Guatemala Kingdom. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. ———. 1993. “Introducción: Centroamérica aborigen en su contexto histórico y geográfico,” in Historia General de Centroamérica, Tomo I: Historia Antigua, Robert M. Carmack, ed. Pp. 15–60. Madrid, Spain: Comunidad Europea, Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales. ———. 1995. Rebels of Highland Guatemala: The Quiche-Mayas of Momostenango. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Carmack, Robert M., John Early, and Christopher Lutz, eds. 1982. The Historical De­mo­ graphy of Highland Guatemala. Institute for Mesoamerican Studies Publ. 6, State Uni­ver­sity of New York at Albany. Carmack, Robert M., and James L. Mondloch, eds. 1983. El título de Totonicapán. UNAM, Instituto de Investigaciones Filológicas, Centro de Estudios Mayas, Mexico City. ———, eds. 1989. El título de Yax y otros documentos Quichés de Totonicapán, Guatemala. UNAM, Mexico City. Carochi, Horacio. 1983 [1645]. Arte de la Lengua Mexicana. UNAM, Mexico City. Carrasco, Davíd. 1982. Quetzalcoatl and the Irony of Empire: Myths and Prophecies in the Aztec Tradition. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. ———. 1991. To Change Place: Aztec Ceremonial Landscapes. University Press of Colorado, Boulder. ———, ed. 2001. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Mesoamerican Cultures: The Civilizations of Mexico and Central America, 3 Vols. Oxford University Press, New York. Carrasco, Davíd, Lindsay Jones, and Scott Sessions, eds. 2000. Mesoamerica’s Classic Heritage: From Teotihuacan to the Aztecs. University Press of Colorado, Boulder. Carrasco, Pedro. 1999. The Tenochca Empire of Ancient Mexico: The Triple Alliance of Tenochtitlan, Tetzcoco, and Tlacopan. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Casas, Fray Bartolomé de las. 1971 [1559]. History of the Indies. Harper & Row, New York. ———. 1992a [1552]. The Devastation of the Indies: A Brief Account. Transl. Herman Briffault. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. ———. 1992b. Apologética Historia Sumaria, III, in Obras Completas, Vidal Abril Castelló, Jesús A. Barreda, Berta Ares Queija, and Miguel J. Abril Stoffels, eds., Vol. 8. Alianza Editorial, Madrid.

342

Bibliography

Caso, Alfonso. 1949. “El Mapa de Teozacualco.” Cuadernos Americanos 47.8, 5:145–181. Editorial Cultura, Mexico City. ———. 1961. “Los Lienzos Mixtecos de Ilhuitlán y Antonio de León,” in Homenaje a Pablo Martinez del Rio en el vigesimoquinto aniversario de la primera edicion de los Origenes Americanos. INAH, Mexico City. Pp. 237–274. ———. 1977–1979. Reyes y reinos de la Mixteca, 2 Vols. Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. Castañeda de la Paz, María. 2002a. “De Aztlan a Tenochtitlan: Historia de una peregrinación.” Latin American Indian Literatures Journal (Penn State, McKeesport) 18, 2 (Fall):163–212. ———. 2002b. “El largo periplo de un documento colonial: La Pintura de la Peregrinación de los culhuas-mexitin (El Mapa de Sigüenza).” Anuario de Estudios Americanos (Seville) 59, 1:613–641. Castro Morales, Efraín. 1989. Huaquechula de ayer y hoy. Gobierno del Estado de Puebla, Puebla. Cavender Wilson, Angela. 1998. “American Indian History or Non-Indian Perceptions of American Indian History?” in Natives and Academics: Researching and Writing About American Indians, Devon A. Minesuah, ed. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Pp. 23–26. Cervera Xicotencatl, Ariadna, and Maria del Carmen López Ortiz. 2000. Identificación de Materiales Constitutivos y Técnica de Manufactura de los Códices Prehispánicos, a través del análisis de las fuentes del Siglo XVI. Escuela Nacional de Conservación Restauración y Museografía “Manuel del Castillo Negrete,” Mexico City. M.A. thesis. Chamberlain, Robert S. 1948. The Conquest and Colonization of Yucatán. Carnegie Institution, Washington, D.C. Chance, John K. 1989. Conquest of the Sierra: Spaniards and Indians in Colonial Oaxaca. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Chavero, Alfredo. 1864. Lienzo de Tlaxcala. Introduction and commentary by Alfredo Chavero. Artes de México XI, 51, Mexico City. ———. 1892. “Lienzo de Tlaxcala,” in Antigüedades Mexicanas. Publicadas por la Junta Colombina en el cuarto centario del descubriemiento de América, 2 Vols. Oficina Tipográfica de la Secretaría de Fomento, Mexico City. Clendinnen, Inga. 1991. Aztecs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Cline, Howard. 1966. “Native Pictorial Documents of Eastern Oaxaca, Mexico,” in Summa Anthropológica en Homenaje a Roberto J. Weitlaner, Antonio Pompa y Pompa, ed. INAH, Mexico City. Pp. 110–130. ———, ed. 1975. Handbook of Middle American Indians, Vol. 14: Guide to Ethnohistorical Sources. University of Texas Press, Austin. Cortés, Hernán. 1993 [1523]. Cartas de relación de la conquista de México. Seventeenth ed. Editorial Porrúa, Mexico City. Cuaderno Estadístico Municipal: Huaquechula, Estado de Puebla. 1996. Gobierno del Estado de Puebla, INEGI, H. Ayuntamiento Constitucional de Huaquechula, Aguas­ calientes, Ags., Mexico. Cypess, Sandra Messinger. 1991. La Malinche in Mexican Literature: Myth and History. University of Texas Press, Austin.

343

Bibliography

Dakin, Karen, and Christopher H. Lutz. 1996. Nuestro Pesar, Nuestra Aflicción: Memorias en lengua náhuatl enviadas a Felipe II por indígenas del valle de Guatemala hacia 1572. UNAM, Mexico City; CIRMA, Antigua Guatemala. Davies, Claude Nigel Byam. 1968. Los señoríos independientes del imperio Azteca. INAH (Serie Historia XIX), Mexico City. DeFrancis, John. 1989. Visible Speech: The Diverse Oneness of Writing Systems. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Díaz del Castillo, Bernal. 1980 [1960]. Historia verdadera de la conquista de la Nueva España. Introducción and notas de Joaquín Ramírez Cabañas. Editorial Porrúa, Mexico City. ———. 1992. Historia verdadera de la conquista de la Nueva España. Editorial Planeta, Barcelona. Dibble, Charles E. 1970. “Writing in Central Mexico,” in Handbook of Middle American Indians, Vol. 10, Robert Wauchope, Gordon F. Ekholm, and Ignacio Bernal, eds. University of Texas Press, Austin. Pp. 322–332. ———. 1978. The Conquest Through Aztec Eyes. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. ———. 1996. Códice Xolotl, 2 Vols. UNAM, Instituto Mexiquense de Cultura and Legislature del Estado de México, Mexico City. Dubos, Jean-Baptiste. 1719. Réflexions critiques sur la poésie et sur la peinture, 3 Vols. Paris. English translation by T. Nugent, 1748. Durán, Fray Diego. 1984. Historia de las Indias de Nueva España e Islas de la Tierra Firme, 2 Vols. Editorial Porrúa, Mexico City. Eco, Umberto. 1977. A Theory of Semiotics. Basingstoke, London. Eliade, Mircea. 1963. Myth and Reality. Harper & Row, New York. Ellingson, Ter. 2001. The Myth of the Noble Savage. University of California Press, Berkeley. Elliott, John H. 1963. Imperial Spain: 1469–1716. Arnold, London. Elson, Christina M., and Michael E. Smith. 2001. “Archaeological Deposits from the Aztec New Fire Ceremony.” Ancient Mesoamerica 12:157–174. Endfield, Georgina H. 2001. “Pinturas, Land and Lawsuits: Maps in Colonial Mexican Legal Documents.” Imago Mundi 53:7–27. Feliciano Velázquez, Primo. 1992 [1945]. Códice Chimalpopoca / Anales de Cuauhtitlán y leyenda de los soles. Traducción directa del náhuatl por Primo Feliciano Velázquez. UNAM, Mexico City. Fenton, William. 1957. American Indian and White Relations to 1830, Needs and Opportunities for Study: An Essay. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill. Fidalgo, Ana Marín. 1995. El Real Alcázar de Sevilla / Guía de visita. Aldeasa, Seville, Spain. Florescano, Enrique. 1994. Memory, Myth, and Time in Mexico: From the Aztecs to Independence. University of Texas Press, Austin. ———. 2002. “El canon memorioso forjado por los Títulos primordiales.” Colonial Latin American Review 11, 2:183–230. Fox, John W. 1978. Quiché Conquest: Centralism and Regionalism in Highland Guatemalan State Development. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

344

Bibliography

Freedberg, David. 1989. The Power of Images: Studies in the History and Theory of Response. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Friedländer, Max J. 1946. Von Kunst und Kennerschaft. Bruno Cassirer and Emil Oprecht, Oxford and Zurich. Fuentes, Patricia de, ed. 1963. The Conquistadors: First-Person Accounts of the Conquest of Mexico. Orion, New York. Fuentes y Guzmán, Francisco Antonio de. 1932. Recordación florida: Discurso historial y demostración natural, material, militar y política del reyno de Guatemala (edición conforme al códice del siglo XVII que original se conserva en el archivo de la municipalidad de Guatemala), 3 Vols. Biblioteca “Goathemala” de la Sociedad de Geografía e Historia de Guatemala, Guatemala City. Galarza, Joaquín. 1972. Lienzos de Chiepetlan: Manuscrits pictographiques et manuscrits en caractères latins de San Miguel Chiepetlan, Guerrero, Mexique. Mission Archéologique et Ethnologique Française au Mexique, Mexico City. ———. 1978. “The Aztec System of Writing: Problems of Research,” in Approaches to Language, Anthropological Issues, William C. McCormack and Stephen A. Wurm, eds. Section 3: Languages: Areas and Influences. Mouton, the Hague. Pp. 271–276. ———. 1992. In Amoxtli, in Tlacatl: El libro, el hombre. Códices y Vivencias. Tava Editorial, Mexico City. ———. 1995. “Lienzos, cartes et plans,” in Mille ans de civilisation mésoaméricaine des Mayas aux Aztèques: Hommage à Jacques Soustelle, Vol. II: La Quête du cinquième soleil, J. de Durand-Forest and G. Baudot, eds. Editions L’Harmattan, Paris. Pp. 107–121. Gall, Francis, ed. 1963. Título del Ajpop Huitzilzin Tzunún: Probanza de méritos de los de León y Cardona. Ministerio de Educación Pública, Publicación 11. Centro Editorial “José de Pineda Ibarra,” Guatemala City. ———, ed. 1967a. “Probanzas del capitán Gonzalo de Alvarado, conquistador que fue de las provincias de Guatemala (primera parte).” Anales de la Sociedad de Geografia e Historia de Guatemala 40, 1–2:192-228. ———, ed. 1967b. “Probanzas del capitán Gonzalo de Alvarado, conquistador que fue de las provincias de Guatemala (continuación).” Anales de la Sociedad de Geografia e Historia de Guatemala 40, 3–4:68–100. ———, ed. 1967c. “Los Gonzalo de Alvarado, Conquistadores de Guatemala.” Anales de la Sociedad de Geografia e Historia de Guatemala 40, 3–4:38–49. ———, ed. 1968. “Probanzas de méritos y servicios de Diego de Usagre y Francisco Castellón.” Anales de la Sociedad de Geografía e Historia de Guatemala 41, 2–4:141–198. ———, ed. 1972. “Relaciones conocidas y rutas de don Pedro de Alvarado en Guatemala,” in Exploraciones y conquista en Mexico y Centroamerica. Sociedad Mexicana de Geografía y Estadistica, Mexico City. Pp. 93–120. ———, ed. 2000. Diccionario Geográfico de Guatemala (compact disk). Instituto Geográfico Nacional, Guatemala City. García Añoveros, Jesús María. 1985. “Campañas militares y expediciones a la Mar del Sur del Adelantado, don Pedro de Alvarado.” Anales de la Sociedad de Geografía e Historia de Guatemala 61:47–68.

345

Bibliography

García Icazbalceta, Joaquín. 1980. Colección de documentos para la historia de México. Editiorial Porrúa, Mexico City. Gelb, Ignace J. 1963. A Study of Writing. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Gerhard, Peter. 1986. Geografía histórica de la Nueva España 1519–1821. UNAM, Mexico City. Gibson, Charles. 1952. Tlaxcala in the Sixteenth Century. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn. ———. 1964. The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule: A History of the Indians of the Valley of Mexico, 1519–1810. Stanford University Press, Stanford. ———. 1967. Spain in America. Harper and Row, New York. Gillespie, Jeanne Lou. 1994. Saints and Warriors: The Lienzo de Tlaxcala and the Conquest of Tenochtitlan. Arizona State University, Tempe. PhD dissertation. Gillespie, Susan D. 1989. The Aztec Kings: The Construction of Rulership in Mexica History. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Glantz, Margo, ed. 1994. La Malinche, sus padres y sus hijos. Editorial Aguilar, Mexico City. Glass, John B. 1964. Catálogo de la colección de códices. INAH and MNA, Mexico City. ———. 1975. “A Survey of Native Middle American Pictorial Manuscripts,” in Handbook of Middle American Indians, Vol. 14, Howard F. Cline, ed. University of Texas Press, Austin. Pp. 3–80. Glass, John B., and Donald Robertson. 1975. “A Census of Native Middle American Pictorial Manuscripts,” in Handbook of Middle American Indians, Vol. 14, Howard F. Cline, ed. University of Texas Press, Austin. Pp. 81–252. Gombrich, Ernst H. 1977 [1960]. Art and Illusion. A Study in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation. Phaidon Press, London. González Manterola, Carlos and Alberto. 1999. México eterno / Arte y permanencia. CONACULTA, Ediciones Espejo de Obsidiana, Mexico City. Goody, Jack. 1977. The Domestication of the Savage Mind. Themes in the Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ———. 1986. The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society. Studies in Literacy, Family, Culture and the State. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Gorriz, Natalia. 1943. Luisa Xiconténcatl, Princesa de Tlaxcala. El Liberal Progresista, Guatemala City. Greenblatt, Stephen. 1991. Marvellous Possessions: The Wonder of the New World. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. ———, ed. 1993. New World Encounters. University of California Press, Berkeley. Griffiths, Nicholas, and Fernando Cervantes, eds. 1999. Spiritual Encounters: Interactions Between Christianity and Native Religions in Colonial America. University of Birmingham Press, Birmingham. Gruzinski, Serge. 1987. “Colonial Indian Maps in Sixteenth-Century Mexico: An Essay in Mixed Cartography.” Res (Cambridge) 13:47–61. ———. 1992a. Painting the Conquest: The Mexican Indians and the European Renaissance. UNESCO, Flammarion, Paris. ———. 1992b. The Aztecs, Rise and Fall of an Empire. Thames & Hudson, London.

346

Bibliography

———. 1993. The Conquest of Mexico: The Incorporation of Indian Societies into the Western World, 16th–18th Centuries. Polity, Cambridge. First published as La Colonisation de l’imaginaire, Editions Gallimard, Paris, 1988. ———. 2001. Images at War: Mexico from Columbus to Blade Runner (1492–2019). Duke University Press, Durham, N.C. Guevara, Felipe de. 1788. Comentarios de la pintura. Geronimo Ortega, Madrid. Haring, Ben. 2003. “From Oral Practice to Written Record in Ramesside Deir ElMedina.” JESHO (Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient) 46, 3:249–272. Brill, Leiden. Harvey, H. R., ed. 1991. Land and Politics in the Valley of Mexico: A Two Thousand Year Perspective. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque. Hassig, Ross. 1988. Aztec Warfare: Imperial Expansion and Political Control. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. ———. 2001. Time, History and Belief in Aztec and Colonial Mexico. University of Texas Press, Austin. Heger, Franz. 1908. “Die archäologischen und etnographischen Sammlungen aus Ame­ rika im k.k. naturhistorischen Hofmuseum in Wien.” Festschrift herausgegeben anläss­ lich der Tagung des XVI. Internationalen Amerikanisten-Kongresses in Wien (Wien), 9, 14 (September):1–72. Heliodoro Valle, Rafael. 1950. Cristóbal de Olid: Conquistador de México y Honduras. Sociedad de Estudios Cortesianos, Mexico City. Herren, Ricardo. 1992. Doña Marina, la Malinche. Editioral Planeta, Barcelona. Herrera, Robinson A. 2002. Concubines and Wives: Re-interpreting Native-Spanish Intimate Unions in Sixteenth-Century Guatemala. Paper presented at the Southern Historical Association meeting, Baltimore, Maryland, November. ———. 2003. Natives, Europeans, and Africans in Sixteenth-Century Santiago de Guatemala. University of Texas Press, Austin. Hill, Robert. 1992. Colonial Cakchiquels: Highland Maya Adaptations to Spanish Rule, 1600–1700. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Fort Worth. Himmerich y Valencia, Robert. 1991. The Encomenderos of New Spain 1521–1555. University of Texas Press, Austin. Hodge, Mary G., and Michael Smith. 1994. Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm. Institute for Mesoamerican Studies. University of Texas Press, Austin. Ixtlilxóchitl, Fernando de Alva. 1975. Obras Históricas, 2 Vols. UNAM, Mexico City. Jansen, Maarten. 1988. “The Art of Writing in Ancient Mexico: An Ethno-Iconological Perspective,” in The Image in Writing, H. G. Kippenberg, L. P. van den Bosch, L. Leertouwer, and H. A. White, eds. Visible Religion IV. Instituut voor Godsdiensthistorische Beelddokkumentatie, Rijksuniversiteit te Groningen. E. J. Brill, Leiden. Pp. 86–113. ———. 1992. “Mixtec Pictography: Conventions and Contents,” in Supplement to the Handbook of Middle American Indians, Vol. 5: Epigraphy, Victoria Reifler Bricker, ed. University of Texas Press, Austin. Pp. 20–33. ———. 1997. “La serpiente emplumada y el amanecer de la historia,” in Códices, Caciques y Comunidades, Maarten Jansen and Luis Reyes García, eds. Cuadernos de Historia Latinoamericana No. 5. Asociación de Historiadores Latinoamericanistas Europeas, Ridderprint, Ridderkerk, the Netherlands. Pp. 11–63.

347

Bibliography

———. 1998. “Purpose and Provenience of the Mixtec Codices: Mexican Codices and Archaeology,” in Indiana Journal of Hispanic Literatures, G. Brotherston, ed., 13. Indiana University Press, Bloomington. Pp. 31–45. ———. 1999. “Los fundamentos para una ‘lectura lírica’ de los códices.” Estudios de cultura náhuatl 30:165–181. Jansen, Maarten, Peter Kröfges, and Michel R. Oudijk. 1998. The Shadow of Monte Alban: Politics and Historiography in Postclassic Oaxaca, Mexico. CNWS Publications, Leiden. Jansen, Maarten, and Aurora Pérez Jiménez. 1997. “Los códices y la consciencia de ser indígena.” Revista mexicana de ciencias políticas y sociales 97:83–104. ———. 2000. La dinastia de Añute: Historia, literatura e ideologia de un reino mixteco. CNWS Publications, Leiden. Jansen, Maarten, and Luis Reyes García, eds. 1997. Códices, Caciques y Comunidades. Cuadernos de Historia Latinoamericana No. 5. Asociación de Historiadores Latinoamericanistas Europeas, Ridderkerk, the Netherlands. Jansen, Maarten, Peter van der Loo, and Roswitha Manning. 1988. Continuity and Identity in Native America. Brill, Leiden. Johnson, Nicholas Carter. 1992. The Genealogical Map of the Lienzo of Tlapiltepec: The Coixtlahuaca Region. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque. M.A. thesis. ———. 1994. “Las líneas rojas desvanecidas en el Lienzo de Tlapiltepec: Una red de pruebas,” in Códices y Documentos sobre México: Primer Simposio, Constanza Vega Sosa, comp. INAH, Mexico City. Pp. 117–144. ———. 1997. “The Route from the Mixteca Alta into Southern Puebla on the Lienzo of Tlapiltepec,” in Códices y Documentos sobre México. Segundo Simposio, Vol. 1, Salvador Rueda Smithers, Constanza Vega Sosa, and Rodrigo Martínez Baracs, eds. INAH, Dirección General de Publicaciones del Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes, Mexico City. Pp. 233–268. ———. 2000. “Lienzos Made from Cloth Originally Woven for Other Uses,” in Códices y Documentos sobre Mexico. Tercer Simposio Internacional, Constanza Vega Sosa, ed. Serie Historia. INAH, Mexico City. Pp. 575–594. Justeson, John S., and Peter Matthews. 1990. “Evolutionary Trends in Mesoamerican Hieroglyphic Writing.” Visible Language 24, 1:89–132. Kagan, Richard L. 2000. Urban Images of the Hispanic World 1493–1793. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn. Keen, Benjamin. 1971. The Aztec Image in Western Thought. Rutgers Univerity Press, New Brunswick, N.J. Kicza, John E. 1992. “A Comparison of Indian and Spanish Accounts of the Conquest of Mexico,” in Five Centuries of Mexican History, Virginia Guedea and Jaime E. Rodriguez O., eds. University of California Press and Instituto Mora, Irvine. Pp. 49–63. Kingsborough, Eduard K. 1831. Antiquities of Mexico, 7 Vols. R. Havell, London. Kirchhoff, Paul, Lina Odena Güemes, and Luis Reyes García. 1976. Historia toltecachichimeca. CISINAH and INAH-SEP, Mexico City. Second ed., CIESAS, Mexico City, 1989. Klein, Herbert S. 1999. The Atlantic Slave Trade. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

348

Bibliography

König, Viola. 1993. Die Schlacht bei Sieben Blume: Konquistadoren, Kaziken und Konflikte auf alten Landkarten der Indianer Südmexikos. Edition Temmen, Bremen. Korsten, Frans-Willem. 1998. The Wisdom Brokers: Narrative’s Interaction with Arguments in Cultural Critical Texts. Amsterdam School for Cultural Analysis, Theory and Interpretation (ASCA), Amsterdam. Kramer, Wendy. 1994. Encomienda Politics in Early Colonial Guatemala, 1524–1544: Dividing the Spoils. Westview, Boulder, Colo. Kramer, Wendy, W. George Lovell, and Christopher H. Lutz. 1993. “La conquista española de Centroamérica,” in Historia General de Centroamérica, tomo II, Edelberto Torres-Rivas and Julio César Pinto Soria, eds. Sociedad Estatal Quinto Centenario, Madrid. Pp. 21–94. Kranz, Travis Barton. 2001. The Tlaxcalan Conquest Pictorials: The Role of Images in Influencing Colonial Policy in Sixteenth-Century Mexico. University of California at Los Angeles. PhD dissertation. Lee, Thomas A., and Carlos Navarette, eds. 1978. Mesoamerican Communication Routes and Cultural Contexts. New World Archaeological Foundation, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah. Leibsohn, Dana. 1993. The History of the Tolteca-Chichimeca: Recollecting Identity in a Nahua Manuscript. University of California at Los Angeles. PhD dissertation. ———. 1994. “Primers for Memory: Cartographic Histories and Nahua Identity,” in Writing Without Words: Alternative Literacies in Mesoamerica and the Andes, Elizabeth H. Boone and Walter D. Mignolo, eds. Duke University Press, Durham, N.C. Pp. 169–187. ———. 1996. “Mapping Metaphors: Figuring the Ground of Sixteenth-Century New Spain.” Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies 26, 3:497–523. León-Portilla, Miguel. 1992 [1962]. The Broken Spears: The Aztec Account of the Conquest of Mexico. Revised ed. Beacon, Boston. Lévi-Strauss, Claude. 1963. Structural Anthropology. Basic Books, New York. Libro Viejo de la fundación de Guatemala y papeles relativos a Don Pedro de Alvarado. 1934. Sociedad de Geografía e Historia de Guatemala, Vol. 12. Biblioteca “Goathemala,” Guatemala City. Libro de visitas de los pueblos de la Nueva España. 1550. Biblioteca Nacional de España, Ms. 2800. Linné, Sigvald. 1948. El valle y la ciudad de Mexico en 1550. Statens Etnografiska Museum, Stockholm. Lockhart, James. 1991. Nahuas and Spaniards: Postconquest Mexican History and Philology. Stanford University Press and UCLA Latin American Center, Stanford. ———. 1992. The Nahuas after the Conquest: A Social and Cultural History of the Indians of Central Mexico, Sixteenth through Eighteenth Centuries. Stanford University Press, Stanford. ———. 1993. We People Here: Nahuatl Accounts of the Conquest of Mexico. University of California Press, Berkeley. Lockhart, James, Frances Berdan, and Arthur J.O. Anderson. 1986. The Tlaxcaltec Actas: A Compendium of the Records of the Cabildo of Tlaxcala (1545–1627). University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

349

Bibliography

López Austin, Alfredo. 1997. Tamoanchan, Tlalocan: Places of Mist. University Press of Colorado, Niwot. ———. 2001. “Aztec,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Mesoamerican Cultures, 3 Vols., Davíd Carrasco, ed. Oxford University Press, New York. Vol. 1, pp. 68–72. Lovell, W. George. 1985. Conquest and Survival in Colonial Guatemala: A Historical Geography of the Cuchumatán Highlands 1500–1821. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Kingston. Lovell, W. George, and Christopher H. Lutz. 2001. “Pedro de Alvarado and the Conquest of Guatemala, 1522–1524,” in The Past and Present Maya: Essays in Honor of Robert M. Carmack, John M. Weeks, ed. Labyrinthos, Lancaster, Calif. Pp. 47–62. Luján Muñoz, Jorge, and J. Daniel Contreras R., eds. 1999. Memorial de Sololá. Edición facsimilar del manuscrito original. Transcripción al kaqchikel moderno y traducción al español de Simón Otzoy C. Comisión Interuniversitaria de Conmemoración del Quinto Centenario del Descubrimiento de América, Guatemala City. Luttwak, Edward. 1976. The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Lutz, Christopher H. 1984. Historia Sociodemográfica de Santiago de Guatemala 1541– 1773. CIRMA, Antigua, Guatemala. ———. 2002. “Una elegía Kaqchikel: Evaluación del Memorial de Sololá. Una perspectiva etnohistórica.” Mesoamérica 44:151–160. Mackie, Sedley J., ed. 1924. An Account of the Conquest of Guatemala in 1524 by Pedro de Alvarado. Cortés Society, New York. MacLeod, Murdo J. 1973. Spanish Central America: A Socioeconomic History 1520–1720. University of California Press, Berkeley. Marcus, Joyce. 1992. Mesoamerican Writing Systems: Propaganda, Myth, and History in Four Ancient Civilizations. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. Markman, Sydney D. 1993. Architecture and Urbanization of Colonial Central America, Vol. 1, Selected Primary Documentary and Literary Sources. Center for Latin American Studies, Arizona State University, Tempe. Martyr, Peter. 1912. De Obre Novo, the Eight Decades of Peter Martyr d’Anghera. Translated by Francis A. MacNutt. G. P. Putnam’s Sons, New York. Mastache de Escobar y Alba, Guadalupe. 1971. Técnicas prehispánicas del tejido. Serie Investigaciones 20. INAH, Mexico City. Matos Moctezuma, Eduardo. 1987. “Symbolism of the Templo Mayor,” in The Aztec Templo Mayor, Elizabeth H. Boone, ed. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Pp. 185–209. Matthew, Laura. 2000. “El náhuatl y la identidad mexicana en la Guatemala colonial.” Mesoamérica 40:41–68. ———. 2004. Neither and Both: The Mexican Indian Conquistadors of Colonial Guatemala. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. PhD dissertation. Matthew, Laura E., and Michel R. Oudijk, eds. 2007. Indian Conquistadors: Indigenous Allies in the Conquest of Mesoamerica. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Maudslay, Anne C., and Alfred P. Maudslay. 1899. A Glimpse at Guatemala. Murray, London. Mazihcatzin y Calmecahua, Nicolás Faustino. 1927. “Descripción del Lienzo de Tlaxcala.” Revista Mexicana de Estudios Históricos (Mexico City) 1:59–90.

350

Bibliography

Meade de Angulo, Mercedes. 1992. Doña Luisa Teohquilhuastzin, Mujer del Capitan Pedro de Alvarado. Gobierno del Estado de Puebla, Puebla. Melgarejo Vivanco, José Luis, and Manuel Álvarez Bravo. 1970. Códices de tierras: Los lienzos de Tuxpan. La Estampa Mexicana, Mexico City. Mendieta, Fray Gerónimo de. 1993. Historia eclesiastica indiana [written at the end of the sixteenth century]. Editorial Porrúa, Mexico City. Merlo, Eduardo. 2001. Patrimonio de Puebla: Siglos XVI–XIX. Museo Poblano de Arte Virreinal, Puebla. Milla, José. 1976. Historia de la América Central. Piedra Santa, Guatemala City. Miller, Arthur G. 1991. “Transformations of Time and Space: Oaxaca, Mexico, Circa 1500–1700,” in Images of Memory: On Remembering and Representation, Susanne Kuchler and Walter Melion, eds. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Pp. 141–175. ———, ed. 1983. Highland-Lowland Interaction in Mesoamerica: Interdisciplinary Approaches. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Mitchell, W.J.T., ed. 1981. On Narrative. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. ———. 1986. Iconology: Image, Text, Ideology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Molina, Fray Alonso de. 1970 [1555]. Vocabulario en lengua castellana y mexicana y mexicana y castellana, Miguel León-Portilla, ed. Editorial Porrúa, Mexico City. Motolinía, Fray Toribio. 1995 [1541]. Historia de los indios de la Nueva España: Relación de los ritos antiguos, idolatrias y sacrificios de los indios de la Nueva España, y de la maravillosa conversion que Dios en ellos ha obrado. Introduction and notes by Edmundo O’Gorman. Editorial Porrúa, Mexico City. Mundy, Barbara. 1996. The Mapping of New Spain: Indigenous Cartography and the Maps of the “Relaciones Geograficas.” University of Chicago Press, Chicago. ———. 2001. “Lienzos,” in The Oxford Encyclopedia of Mesoamerican Cultures: The Civilizations of Mexico and Central America, Davíd Carrasco, ed., 3 Vols. Oxford University Press, New York. Vol. 2, pp. 120–123. Noguez, Xavier. 1996 [1978]. Tira de Tepechpan, códice colonial procedente del valle de México, 2 Vols. Edición Facsimilar. Biblioteca Enciclopédica del Estado de México, Mexico City. ———. 1999. “Los codices del grupo Techialoyan.” Arqueología Mexicana 7, 38:38– 44. Núñez Becerra, Fernanda. 1996. La Malinche: De la historia al mito. INAH, Mexico City. Nuttall, Zelia. 1983. The Book of the Life of the Ancient Mexicans: Containing an Account of the Rites and Superstitions: An Anonymous Hispano-Mexican Manuscript Preserved at the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Florence, Italy. University of California Press, Berkeley. Oettinger, Marion. 1983. Lienzos Coloniales: Guía de la Exposición de Pinturas de Terrenos Comunales de México (Siglos XVII–XIX). UNAM, Mexico City. Oettinger, Marion, and Fernando Horcasitas. 1982. The Lienzo of Petlacala: A Pictorial Document from Guerrero, Mexico. American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia. Ong, Walter J. 1982. Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. New Accents. Methuen, London.

351

Bibliography

Oudijk, Michel. 2000. Historiography of the Bènizàa: The Postclassic and Early Colonial Periods (1000–1600 A.D.). CNWS Publications, Leiden. Oudijk, Michel R., and Matthew Restall. 2007. “Mesoamerican Conquistadors in the Sixteenth Century,” in Indian Conquistadors: Indigenous Allies in the Conquest of Mesoamerica, Laura E. Matthew and Michel R. Oudijk, eds. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Pp. 28–63. Pagden, Anthony. 1993. European Encounters with the New World: From Renaissance to Romanticism. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn. Palma Murga, Gustavo, ed. 1991 [1863]. Índice General del Archivo del Extinguido Juzgado Privativo de Tierras Depositado en la Escribanía de Cámara del Supremo Gobierno de la República de Guatemala. Second part: Índice Alfabético General. CIESAS, Centro de Estudios Mexicanos y Centroamericanos, Mexico City. Panofsky, Erwin. 1972 [1939]. Studies in Iconology: Humanistic Themes in the Art of the Renaissance. Harper & Row, New York. Paredes Martínez, Carlos Salvador. 1991. La región de Atlixco, Huaquechula y Tochimilco: La sociedad y su agricultura en el siglo XVI. CIESAS, Estado de Puebla and Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. Parmenter, Ross. 1982. Four Lienzos of the Coixtlahuaca Valley. Studies in Precolumbian Art and Archaeology 26. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. ———. 1993. The Lienzo of Tulancingo, Oaxaca. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 83, Part 7. Philadelphia. Paso y Troncoso, Francisco de. 1892–1893. Catálogo de los objetos que presenta la Re­púb­ lica Méxicana en la Exposición Histórico-Americana de Madrid, 2 Vols. Est. imp. “Sucesores de Rivadeneyra,” Madrid. Peirce, C. S. 1931–1958. “The Icon, Index, and Symbol,” in Collected Works, Charles Hartshorne and Paul Wiess, eds., 8 Vols. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. Vol. 2, pp. 156–173. Peñafiel, Antonio. 1914. Ciudades coloniales y capitales de la República mexicana. Las cinco ciudades coloniales de Puebla: Cholula, Huexotzinco, Tepeaca, Atlixco y Tehuacán. Secretaría de Fomento, Mexico City. Pérez Quitt, Ricardo. 1996. Xelhua. Historia de Atlixco. Tava Editorial, Mexico City. Pérez Rocha, Emma, and Rafael Tena. 2000. La nobleza indígena del centro de México después de la conquista. Colección Obra Diversa. INAH, Mexico City. Plunket, Patricia, 1990. “Arqueología y etnohistoria en el Valle de Atlixco.” Notas Meso­ americanas 12:3–18. Departamento de Antropología, UDLA, Puebla, Mexico. Plunket, Patricia, and Gabriela Uruñuela. 1987. La población del Valle de Atlixco: Desde su orígenes hasta la época colonial. Primer informe Técnico al INAH, Copia en Archivo, Laboratorio de Arqueología, UDLA, Puebla, Mexico. ———. 1991–1992. “La escultura Postclásica del Valle de Atlixco.” Notas Mesoamericanas 13:35–49. Selecciones del segundo simposio de Cholula, Departamento de Antropología, UDLA, Puebla, Mexico. ———. 1994. “The Impact of the Xochiyaoyotl in Southwestern Puebla,” in Economies and Polities in the Aztec Realm, Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, Mary G. Hodge and Michael E. Smith, eds. University of Texas Press, Austin. Pp. 433–446. Pohl, John. 1994. The Politics of Symbolism in the Mixtec Codices. Publications in Anthropology 46, Vanderbilt University, Nashville.

352

Bibliography

Powell, Philip W. 1977. La Guerra Chichimeca (1550–1600). Fondo de Cultura Eco­ nómica, Mexico City. First edition in English: Soldiers, Indians and Silver: The Northward Advance of New Spain, 1550–1600. University of California Press, Berke­ ley, 1952. Prem, Hanns J. 1971. “Calendrics and Writing in Mesoamerica,” in Observations on the Emergence of Civilization in Mesoamerica, R. F. Heizer and J. A. Graham, eds. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility 11, Berkeley. Pp. 112–132. ———. 1974. Matricula de Huexotzinco. Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, Graz. ———. 1988. Milpa y hacienda. Tenencia de la tierra indígena y española en la cuenca del Alto Atoyac, Puebla, México (1520–1650). CIESAS, Estado de Puebla, Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. ———. 1992. “Aztec Writing,” in Supplement to the Handbook of Middle American Indians, Victoria Reifler Bricker, ed. University of Texas Press, Austin. Vol. 5, pp. 53–69. Prescott, William H. 2001. History of the Conquest of Mexico. Modern Library, New York. Prince, Gerald. 1997. “Narratology,” in The Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism, Michael Groden and Martin Kreiswirth, eds. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Available at http://www.press.jhu.edu/books/hopkins_guide_to_ literary_theory/narratology.html. Consulted August 9, 2004. “Probanca del Adelantado D. Pedro de Alvarado y doña Leonor de Alvarado su hija.” 1937. Anales de la Sociedad de Geografía e Historia de Guatemala 13, 4:475–487. Quintana, José Miguel. 1960. Las artes gráficas en Puebla. Antigua Librería Robredo, Mexico City. Ramírez, José Fernando, ed. 1930–1933. “Proceso de residencia contra Pedro de Al­var­ ado: ilustrado con estampas sacadas de los antiguos códices mexicanos y notas y noticias biográficas, críticas y arqueológicas.” Anales de la Sociedad de Geografía e Historia de Guatemala 7, 1–4 (1930–1931):95–122, 210–239, 360–387, 513–528; 8, 2–4 (1931–1932):254–267; 9, 1–2 (1932–1933):121–129, 256–264. Rappaport, Roy A. 1999. Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Recinos, Adrián. 1957. Crónicas indígenas de Guatemala. Editorial Universitaria, Guatemala City. ———. 1986. Pedro de Alvarado: Conquistador de México y Guatemala. Editorial “José de Pineda Ibarra,” Guatemala City. ———. 2001 [1950]. Memorial de Solola, Anales de los Cakchiqueles. Título de los señores de Totonicapán. Piedra Santa, Guatemala City. Recinos, Adrían, Delia Goetz, and Dionisio José Chonay, eds. 1974. The Annals of the Cakchiquels: Title of the Lords of Totonicapan. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Remesal, Antonio de. 1619. Historia de la Provinca de San Vincente de Chyapa y Guatemala. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles. Ediciones Atlas, Madrid. ———. 1964–1966. Historia General de las Indias Occidentales y Particular de la Gobernación de Chiapa y Guatemala, 2 Vols. Biblioteca de Autores Españoles. Ediciones Atlas, Madrid.

353

Bibliography

Restall, Matthew. 1998. Maya Conquistador. Beacon, Boston. ———. 2000. “Black Conquistadors: Armed Africans in Early Spanish America.” The Americas 57, 2:239–267. ———. 2003. Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Reyes García, Luis. 1977. Cuauhtinchan del siglo XII al XVI: Formacion y desarrollo historico de un señorio prehispanico. Franz Steiner, Wiesbaden. ———. 1988 [1978]. Documentos sobre tierras y señorios en Cuauhtinchan. Estado de Puebla and Fondo de Cultura Económica, Mexico City. ———. 1993. La escritura pictografica en Tlaxcala / Dos mil años de experiencia Meso­ americana. CIESAS-UAT, Mexico City. Ricard, Robert. 1933. La “Conquête spirituelle” du Mexique: Essai sur l’apostolat et les méthodes missionaires des ordres mendicants en Nouvelle Espagne de 1523–24 à 1572. Université de Paris, Paris. Published in English: The Spiritual Conquest of Mexico: An Essay on the Apostolate and the Evangelizing Methods of the Mendicant Orders in New Spain, 1523–1572. Translated by Lesley Bird Simpson. University of California Press, Berkeley, 1966. Rincon Mautner, Carlos. 1994. “A Reconstruction of the History of San Miguel Tulan­ cingo, Coixtlahuaca, Mexico, from Indigenous Painted Sources.” Texas Notes on Precolumbian Art, Writing, and Culture 64 (February):1–18. University of Texas at Austin. ———. 1997. “Reading the History of Place-Becoming in the Codices from the Coixtla­ huaca Basin,” in Latin American Indian Literatures: Messages and Meanings, Mary H. Preuss, ed. Labyrinthos, Lancaster, Calif. Pp. 129–148. ———. 2000. “La reconstrucción cronológica del linaje principal de Coixtlahuaca,” in Códices y Documentos sobre México. Tercer Simposio Internacional, Constanza Vega Sosa, ed. INAH, Serie Historia, Mexico City. Pp. 25–43. Robertson, Donald. 1994 [1959]. Mexican Manuscript Painting of the Early Colonial Period. Yale University Press, New Haven, Conn. Rodríguez Becerra, Salvador. 1977. Encomienda y conquista: Los inicios de la colonisación en Guatemala. Publicaciones de la Universidad de Sevilla, Seville. Roskamp, Hans. 1997. “Pablo Beaumont and the Codex of Tzintzuntzan: A Pictorial Document from Michoacán, West Mexico,” in Códices, Caciques y Comunidades, Cuadernos de Historia Latinoamericana, Maarten Jansen and Luis Reyes García, eds., 5. Asociación de Historiadores Latinoamericanistas Europeas, Ridderkerk, the Netherlands. Pp. 193–246. ———. 1998. La historiografía indígena de Michoacán: El Lienzo de Jucutácato y los Títulos de Carapan. CNWS Publications, Leiden. ———. 2002. “La heráldica novohispana del siblo XVI,” in Esplendor y ocaso de la Cultura Simbólica, Herón Pérez Martínez and Bárbara Skinfill, eds. El Colegio de Michoacán, CONACYT, Zamora, Michoacán. Pp. 227–268. Sáenz de Santa María, Carmelo. 1940. Diccionario Cakchiquel-Español, 3 Vols. Tipografía Nacional, Guatemala City. ———. 1983. “La hueste de don Pedro de Alvarado en la historia del Perú.” Revista de Indias 43, 171:314–325. ———, ed. 1969 [1699]. Obras Históricas de don Francisco Antonio de Fuentes y Guzmán. Ediciones Atlas, Madrid.

354

Bibliography

———, ed. 1991. Libro Viejo de la Fundación de Guatemala. Academia de Geografía e Historia de Guatemala, Guatemala City. Sahagún, Fray Bernardino de. 1950–1982. Florentine Codex: General History of the Things of New Spain [originally written 1575–1577 or 1578–1580]. Translated and edited by Arthur J.O. Anderson and Charles E. Dibble. Monographs of the School of American Research 14, pts. 2–13. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City. ———. 1997. Primeros Memoriales. Translation by Thelma D. Sullivan; completed and revised by H. B. Nicholson, Arthur J. Anderson, Charles E. Dibble, Eloise Quinones Keber, and Wayne Ruwet. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Saint-Lu, André. 1968. La Vera Paz. Esprit évangélique et colonisation. Centre de Re­cherches Hispaniques, Paris. Salas, Elizabeth. 1990. Soldaderas in the Mexican Military: Myth and History. University of Texas Press, Austin. Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1983. Course in General Linguistics, Translated by Roy Harris. Duckworth, London. Schroeder, Susan, Stephanie Wood, and Robert Haskett, eds. 1997. Indian Women of Early Mexico. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Schwartz, Stuart B., ed. 2000. Victors and Vanquished: Spanish and Nahua Views of the Conquest of Mexico. Bedford and St. Martin’s, Boston. Seed, Patricia. 1995. Ceremonies of Possession in Europe’s Conquest of the New World, 1492–1640. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Seler, Eduard. 1992. Collected Works in Mesoamerican Linguistics and Archaeology. English translations of German papers from Gesammelte Abhandlungen zur amerikanischen Sprach und Alterthumskunde, 6 Vols. Labyrinthos, Culver City, Calif., 1990–1998. Vol. 3. Serrano y Sanz, Manuel, ed. 1908. Relaciones Históricas y Geográficas de América Central. Librería General del Victoriano Suárez, Madrid. Sherman, William. 1970. “Tlaxcalans in Post-Conquest Guatemala.” Tlalocan 6:124– 139. ———. 1979. Forced Native Labor in Sixteenth-Century Central America. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Simmons, Marc. 1964. “Tlascalans in the Spanish Borderlands.” New Mexico Historical Review 39:101–110. Smith, Mary Elizabeth. 1973. Picture Writing from Ancient Southern Mexico: Mixtec Place Signs and Maps. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Smith, Michael. 2000. “Aztec City-States,” in A Comparative Study of Thirty City-States Cultures, Mogens Herman Hansen, ed. Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters, Copenhagen. Pp. 581–595. Sousa, Lisa M., and Kevin Terraciano. 2003. “The ‘Original Conquest’ of Oaxaca: Nahua and Mixtec Accounts of the Spanish Conquest.” Ethnohistory 50, 2 (Spring) 349–400. Steiner, Wendy. 1981. Image and Code. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. Stumpel, Jeroen. 1993. “Hobby Horses in Lascaux: Pictures and Semiosis.” Argumentation 7:102–117. Tapia, Andrés de. 1963. “The Chronicle of Andres de Tapia,” in The Conquistadors: First-Person Accounts of the Conquest of Mexico, Patricia de Fuentes, ed. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Pp. 17–48.

355

Bibliography

Tedlock, Dennis, ed. 1985. Popol Vuh: The Mayan Book of the Dawn of Life. Simon and Schuster, New York. Terreciano, Kevin. 2001. The Mixtecs of Colonial Oaxaca: Ñudzahui History, Sixteenth Through Eighteenth Centuries. Stanford University Press, Stanford. Thomas, Hugh. 1993. Conquest: Montezuma, Cortés, and the Fall of Old Mexico. Simon and Schuster, New York. ———. 1997. The Slave Trade: The Story of the Atlantic Slave Trade, 1440–1870. Touchstone, New York. ———. 2000. Who’s Who of the Conquistadors. Cassell, London. Thomas, Nicholas. 1994. Colonialism’s Culture: Anthropology, Travel and Government. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. Tilly, Charles, ed. 1975. The Formation of National States in Western Europe. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J. Todorov, Tzvetan. 1969. Grammaire du Décaméron. Mouton, the Hague. Torquemada, Juan de. 1723. Monarquia Indiana. Madrid. ———. 1986 [1615]. Monarquia Indiana, 3 Vols. Introduction by Miguel León Portilla. Editorial Porrúa, Mexico City. Torre, Mario de la. 1983. El Lienzo de Tlaxcala. Cartón y Papel de Mexico, Mexico City. Trouillot, Michel-Rolph. 1995. Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History. Beacon, Boston. Turner, Victor. 1969. The Ritual Process. Aldine, Chicago. Urcid Serrano, Javier. 2001. Zapotec Hieroglyphic Writing. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Valle, Perla. 1997. “Códices coloniales/Testimonios de una sociedad en conflicto.” Arqueología Mexicana 4, 23:64–69. Editorial Raíces, Mexico. van Broekhoven, Laura N.K. 2002. Conquistando lo Invencible / Fuentes históricas sobre las culturas indígenas de la región Central de Nicaragua. CNWS Publications, Leiden. van der Loo, Peter. 1987. Códices, costumbres, continuidad: Un estudio de la religión mesoamericana. Indiaanse Studies II, Leiden. PhD dissertation. van der Sleen, W.G.N., Dr. N.d. Mexico; Geschiedenis, land en volk. Nederland’s Boekhuis, Tilburg. van Doesburg, Bas. 1996. La herencia de señor Tico: La fundación y desintergración de una casa real cuicateca. Leiden University, Leiden. PhD dissertation. ———. 1998a. “Commercializing Coixtlahuaca History: The Twentieth Century Adventures of the Lienzo de Tlapiltepec.” Indiana Journal of Hispanic Literatures 13:59–66. ———. 1998b. “El Origen de cuatro documentos pictográficos de Oaxaca en la ‘Expo­ si­ción Histórico Americana’ de 1892.” Cuadernos del Sur 5, 12 (May), Oaxaca, Mexico:103–114. ———. 2001. Códices Cuicatecos, 2 Vols. Editorial Porrúa, Mexico City. van Doesburg, Bas, and Olivier van Buren. 1997. “The Prehispanic History of the Valley of Coixtlahuaca, Oaxaca,” in Códices, Caciques y Comunidades, Cuadernos de Historia Latinoamericana, Maarten Jansen and Luis Reyes García, eds., No. 5. Asociación de Historiadores Latinoamericanistas Europeas, Ridderprint, Ridderkerk, the Netherlands. Pp. 103–160.

356

Bibliography

Varner, John Grieg, and Jeannette Johnson Varner. 1983. Dogs of the Conquest. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Vasquez, Francisco. 1714–1716. Chronica de la Provincia del Santissimo Nombre de Jesus de Guatemala. “Biblioteca Goathemala,” Sociedad de Geografía e Historia de Guatemala, Guatemala City. Vázquez de Tapia, Bernardino. 1973. Relación de méritos y servicios del conquistador Bernardino Vázquez de Tapia, vecino y regidor de esta gran ciudad de Tenustitlan, Jorge Gurría Lacroix, ed. UNAM, Mexico City. Verdesio, Gustavo. 2001. Forgotten Conquests: Rereading New World History from the Margins. Temple University Press, Philadelphia. Villaseñor Espinosa, Roberto, ed. 1978. Atlas de los antegüedades mexicanas por Guillermo Dupaix. Facsimile of the 1834 French edition. San Angel Ediciones, Mexico City. Wake, Eleanor. 2002. “Codex Tlaxcala: New Insights and New Questions.” Estudios de Cultura Náhuatl 33:91–140. Webre, Stephen, ed. 1989. La sociedad colonial en Guatemala: Estudios regionales y locales. CIRMA, Antigua, Guatemala, and Plumsock Mesoamerican Studies, South Woodstock, Vt. Weitlaner Johnson, Irmgard. 1959. “Hilado y tejido,” in Esplendor del México antiguo, R. Noriega, C. Cook de Leonard, and J. R. Moctezuma, eds. 2 Vols. Centro de Investigaciones Antropológicas de México, Mexico. Vol. 1, pp. 439–478. ———. 1966. “Análisis textil del lienzo de Ocotepec,” in Summa Anthropologica en Homenaje a Roberto J. Weitlaner, Antonio Pompa y Pompa, ed. INAH, Mexico City. Pp. 139–144. ———. 1971. “Basketry and Textiles,” in Handbook of Middle American Indians, Vol. 10, Gordon F. Ekholm and Ignacio Bernal, eds. University of Texas Press, Austin. Pp. 297–322. ———. 1959. “Hilado y tejido,” in Esplendor del México antiguo, R. Noriega, C. Cook de Leonard, and J. R. Moctezuma, eds. 2 Vols. Centro de Investigaciones Antropológicas de México, Mexico. Vol. 1, pp. 439–478. Wolf, Eric R. 1982. Europe and the People Without History. University of California Press, Berkeley. Wood, Michael. 2000. Conquistadors. University of California Press, Berkeley. Wood, Stephanie. 1998. “The Social vs. Legal Context of Nahuatl Títulos,” in Native Traditions in the Postconquest World, Elizabeth Hill Boone and Tom Cummins, eds. Dumbarton Oaks, Washington, D.C. Pp. 201–231. ———. 2003. Transcending Conquest: Nahua and Mixtec Accounts of the Spanish Conquest. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Woodward, David. 1985. “Reality, Symbolism, Time and Space in Medieval World Maps.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 75:510–521. ———. 1997. “Medieval Mappaemundi”: The History of Cartography. Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient, and Medieval Europe and the Mediterranean, Vol. 1. J. B. Harley and David Woodward, eds. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Ximenez, Francisco. 1857. Las Historias del Origen de los Indios de esta Provincia de Guatemala, traducidas de la lengua Quiche al Castellano, D. C. Scherer, ed. Carl Gerold, Vienna.

357

Bibliography

Yannakakis, Yanna. 2003. Indios Ladinos: Indigenous Intermediaries and the Negotiation of Local Rule in Colonial Oaxaca. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. PhD dissertation. Yoneda, Keiko. 1978. Los mapas de Cuauhtinchan y la historia cartográfica prehispánica, un análisis estilíco. Escuela Nacional de Antropología e Historia, Mexico City. PhD dissertation. ———. 1981. Los Mapas de Cuauhtinchan y la historia cartogáfica prehispánica. Archivo General de la Nación, Mexico City. ———. 1999. “Los Mapas de Cuauhtinchan.” Arqueología Mexicana 7, 38 (July–August): 18–24. Zapata y Mendoza, Juan Buenaventura. 1995. Historia cronológica de la Noble Ciudad de Tlaxcala. Universidad Autónoma de Tlaxcala, Tlaxcala. Zborover, Danny A. 2002. Kingdom on Cloth: Cartographic-Histories and the Curious Case of the Lienzo de Tecciztlan y Tequatepec. Leiden University, Leiden. M.A. thesis.

Archival Sources Archivo General de Centro América (Guatemala City) AGCA A1, Leg. 73, Exp. 1720 AGCA A1, Leg. 6047, Exp. 53.386 AGCA A1.2-4, Leg. 2195, Exp. 15.749 (1552) AGCA A1.2-4, Leg. 2197, Exp. 15.752 (1532) AGCA A1.23, Leg. 1512 (1572–1575) AGCA A1.23, Leg. 1513 (1574) AGCA A1.23, Leg. 4575 (1535–1603) AGCA A1.24, Leg. 1586, Exp. 10.230 (1728) AGCA A3.16, Leg. 2318, Exp. 34.229 (1663) AGCA A3.16-2, Leg. 2799, Exp. 40.482 (1587) AGCA A3.16-2, Leg. 2887, Exp. 42.264 (1680)

Archivo General de Indias (Seville) AGI Guatemala 41 AGI Guatemala 52 AGI Guatemala 53 AGI Guatemala 54 AGI Guatemala 168 (1549) AGI Guatemala 393, R-1 (1532) AGI Guatemala 393, R-2 (1538) AGI Guatemala/1525–1837/Audiencia de Guatemala. AGI Justicia 199, N.1, R.2 (1544) AGI Justicia 291 AGI Justicia 295 (1535) AGI Justicia 296 (1537–1539)

358

Bibliography

AGI Justicia 1031 (1537) AGI Patronato 2-2 AGI Patronato 6a-1-7 AGI Patronato 54, N.6, R.1 (1529) AGI Patronato 58-3 (1542–1572) AGI Patronato 59-1-1 (1549) AGI Patronato 60-5-6 (1556) AGI Patronato 62-1 (3) (1559–1578) AGI Patronato 66-1-3 (1564) AGI Patronato 72, R.11 (1572) AGI Patronato 73-1-2 (1573) AGI Patronato 74, N.1, R.13 AGI Patronato 77, N.2, R.2 AGI Patronato 84-1-9 (1604) AGI Patronato 231, N.4, R.14 (1543) AGI Patronato 245, N.10

Archivo General de la Nación (Mexico City) AGN Indios, Vol. 3, Exp. 873 AGN Mercedes, Vol. 2, Exp. 532 AGN Tierras, Vol. 11, 1a pta, Exp. 1 AGN Tierras, Vol. 35, Exp. 4 AGN Tierras, Vol. 158, Exp. 1 AGN Tierras, Vol. 2621 AGN Tierras, Vol. 2683, Exp. 4, No. 164 AGN Tierras, Vol. 2809, Exp. 16

359

index

Conquered Conquistadors

index

Page numbers in italics indicate illustrations.

Abiloaca, Nicolás, 282(n83) Acajutla, 88 Acapetlahuacan, 38–39, 42, 51–52, 54–55, 57–58, 61–63, 70 Acatenanco, 296(n18) Acatepec, 100, 276(n20), 296(n17) Acatepeque. See Acatepec Acatlan, 100, 145 Acatzinco, 153, 287(n25), 306 Acazaguastlan, 107 Achachalintlan, 265(n3) Açiçintlan. See Atzitzitla Acolhua, 88, 217 Acolhuacan, 43 Acuña, Jorge de, 94 Acxotlan, 276(n20), 296(n17) African slave(s), 2, 82, 111, 112, 124–126, 185, 205, 268(n42), 274(n2)

Aguacatan, 108, 195 Aguayo, San Miguel de, 113, 324 Aguilar, Jerónimo de, 279(n60) Aguilar, Juan de, 83 Aguilar, Marcos de, 276(n29) Aguilar, Pablo, 327 Aguirre Beltrán, Hilda Judith, 4, 75, 272(n3) Ahuazhuatepec, 67 Ahuitzotl, 42 ajpop, 88, 155, 172, 345 ajpop k’amaja, 88, 172 Akkeren, Ruud van, 196, 288(nn36, 38), 292(nn74, 75) Alameda, Juan de, 64, 271(n65) alcalde(s), 47, 95, 174, 271, 313, 315 alcalde mayor, 236, 244, 275(n12) alguacil, 95, 175 alguazil. See alguacil

361

index alguazil mayor, 275(n12), 336 Almolonga, City of Santiago at, 84, 110, 112– 115, 120, 186, 188–191, 195, 197–198, 200, 216, 222–223, 227, 229, 237, 253– 255, 258, 277(n32), 291(n72), 293(n10); Valley of, 166, 167, 168, 288(n44) Alotenango, 183–186, 200, 292(n78) Alva Ixtlilxochitl, Fernando de, 10, 17, 88 Alvarado, Diego de, 90, 107, 276(n26) Alvarado, Doña Leonor de, 111, 119, 273(n1), 276(n22), 279(n61), 280(n63), 283(n100) Alvarado, Gómez de, 87, 273(n1) Alvarado, Gonzalo de, 87 Alvarado y Chávez, Gonzalo de, 83, 87, 90, 92, 166, 287(n22) Alvarado, Hernando de, 87, 94, 316 Alvarado, Juan de, 279(n61) Amatitlan (Amatitlán), Lake, 175, 183, 190 Amatlan, 85 Amaxtlan Soconusco, 85 Ameyalco, 196 Anahuac, 212 Analco, Barrio de (Santa Fe), 113 Analco, Nuestra Señora de los Remedios, 3, 231–232, 236–237, 242, 244, 257 Andes, 293(n13) Antequera, 113, 114 Anteupa. See Ateopan Antigua Guatemala, 107, 111, 113, 186 Aquiyahuac, 57, 67, 302 Aragón, Juan de, 275(n15) Arévalo, Francisco de, 94 Asiquinal, Gonsalo, 282 Ast, Friedrich, 23 Astraldeutung, 260 Atacat, 182 Atehuan, 88 Ateopan, 47, 67, 69, 302, 303 Ateopanzolco, 44 Aticpac, 276(n20), 296(n17) Atila (river), 39, 140 Atiquepeque, 88 Atitan. See Atitlan, Santiago de Atitlan (Atitlán), Santiago de, 84, 93, 109, 283(n95), 296(n16), 323–325, 327, 329, 335 Atitlan, Lake, 88 Atitlan, Tecpan, 93, 108, 276(n20), 279(n55), 283(n95), 290(n59), 291(n69), 296(n17), 336

362

Atlixco, 38–39, 50, 51, 70, 265(n3), 268(n48); jurisdiction of, 47, 48; Valley of, 7, 40, 68, 141 Atlmoloyan, 296(n18) Atlpopocayan, 296(n18) Atmulunca. See Almolonga Atmulunga. See Almolonga Atzitzihuacan, Santiago, 42, 47, 60 Atzitzitla, 47, 68, 145, 303 Audiencia of Mexico, 85, 95, 106–109, 111, 119, 131, 234, 281(n69) Audiencia de los Confines de Guatemala y Nicaragua, 111–112, 116–118, 277(n39), 281(n78) Ávila, Alonso de, 103, 113, 267(n32) Ávila, Gaspar de, 274(n4) Ayutla, 113, 237 Azacualpa, 88 Azcapotzalco, 43 Atzintzintitlan, 302 Aztlan, 8, 183, 217 B’elejeb’ Tz’i, 172 Badajoz, 273(n1) Baja Verapaz, 194 ballcourt, 166–168 Bancroft, Hubert Howe, 46, 268(n36), 277(n32) Barthez, Rodolfo, 50, 79 Beatriz, Doña, 110 Becker, collection, 63, 269(nn55, 56); Philip J., 62, 269(n55) Beltrami, Giacomo Constantino, 234 Benizaa. See Zapotec Berrio, Luis de, 236, 242, 244 Bible, 205 Bilimek, Dominik, 63, 270(nn59, 60) Bocanegra, Jorge de, 107 Booj, 81 Borgia group, 9 Briones, Pedro de, 89, 276(n25) Buenabaj Pictorials, 241, 295(n16) Bulbuxyá, 166, 288(n44) Bustamente, 113 C’oyoi, Título, 81, 97, 154, 155, 157, 241, 296(n16) cabacera (cabaçera), 7, 48, 93 cabildo(s), 84, 92, 108, 278(n50); of Guatemala, 116, 282(n89), 289(n51), 290(n62); of Tlaxcala, 233–35, 294(n3), 295(n7); of Mexico, 276(n29), 277(n39)

index cacaxtli, 124 Cáceres (Caçeres), Alonso de, 99, 316 cacicazgo(s), 104, 322 cacique(s), 84, 98, 100, 101, 112–116, 268(n40), 278(n47), 280(n67), 329; of Quauhquechollan, 67, 105, 140, 268(n40), 278(n47), 298, 299, 300, 306; of Tlaxcala, 102, 104, 234, 245, 320, 322; at Totonicapan, 162, 237, 245, 283(n91) Caciques, Título de, 112, 113, 114, 162, 237, 241, 245, 275(n18), 282(nn82, 83), 296(n16) Çacualpa, 195 California, 235 calli, 63, 69, 176 Calmecatitla, 47, 57 Calmecatitlan. See Calmecatitla Calpan, 37–40, 47, 70, 148, 266(nn10, 15) calpixques, 41 calpolli, 113, 265(n1); of Aztlan, 183, of Quauhquechollan, 65, 67, 69, 70, 113, 124, 139, 143, 302–303; of Tlaxcala, 272(n73) calpul. See calpolli Cantolco, 53 Çapotecas. See Zapoteca(s) Cárdenas Gutiérrez Usamachí Cumpar, Benito, 282 Carrillo, Hernán, 90, 94 Carta de los Caciques e Indios Naturales de Suchimilco a Su Magestad, 85, 275(n11), 277(n42), 281(n79) Casas, Bartolomé de las, 84, 88–89, 107, 109, 110, 134, 180, 246 Castañeda Xochitotol, Simon de, 65, 298 Castañeda, Gabriel de, 268(n40) Castellanos, Francisco de, 107 Castellón, Francisco, 83, 87, 90, 91, 275(n15) Cazcane, 278(n49) cazique(s). See cacique(s) cédula (çedula). See real cédula Celada, Juan de, 281 Cerón, Pedro, 160, 276(n25) Cerquil, 108 Ch’ocol Cakapec, 154 Chalco, 43, 47, 268(nn39, 40), Chalcotamanalco, 279(n58) Charles V, 15, 87, 92, 233, 235, 240, 274(n3) Chaves, Juan (Joan) de, 99, 316 Chi Xot, 164 Chiapa(s), 41, 89, 90, 93, 113, 135, 190, 200, 281(n78), 283(n98)

Ch’ikb’al, 168 Chichicastenango, 109, 163, 164, 164, 169, 200, 288(n38), 290(n60) Chichimeca, 36, 101–102, 213, 216–217, 220, 265(n3), 266(n8); region, 47, 268(n40), 268(n40) Chicomoztoc, 36, 213, 219–220, 265(n5), 293(n8) Chietla, 108, 109 Chignahuiucelut, 289(n51) Chilatengo, 41, 135 Chimaltenanco. See Chimaltenango Chimaltenango, 29, 94, 165–173, 176–177, 179–180, 182, 184, 186–187, 189, 191, 197, 200, 216, 229, 290(n60), 293(n10), 296(n18); department of, 94, 107, 164, 179; glyph for, 180, 209, 290(nn59) Chinampa, 112, 114 Chinautla, 100 Chiquimula, 107, 172 Chiquimulilla, Santa Cruz, 283(n98) Cholola. See Cholula Choloma, 109 Cholula, 37, 40, 44, 96, 105, 113–114, 117, 162, 237, 265(n3), 292(n5) Cholulteca(s), 44, 95, 96, 276(n19), 278(n49) Chqi Tinamit, 196 Chuwapek Q’eqak’ajol Nima Ab’aj, 176 Chu’y Tz’ikinu’, 167 Chuzila(s), 96 Chwi Miq’ina, 161 Cipolla, 296(n18) Citala, 115 Citlallaapan, 296(n18) Ciudad Real (de Chiapas), 93, 113, 283(n98) Ciudad Vieja, 2, 4, 86, 113, 114, 168, 186, 229, 277(n30), 282(n86), 313 Coacalco, 66 Coachita, Meregildo, 282(n88) Coatepec, 47, 57, 60, 67, 69, 265(n3), 302, 303; Santa Ana, 38, 39, 266(n9); San Mateo, 47 Coatepeque. See Coatepec Coaxyacac, 296(n18) Cobán, 107, 296(n16) Cochumatlan. See Cuchumatan Coçingo. See Consingo Codex Aubin, 217 Codex Azcatitlan, 217 Codex Becker I, 63, 269(n55), 270(n57) Codex Becker II, 63, 269(n55), 270(n57) Codex Boturini, 183, 217

363

index Codex Coacalco, 66 Codex Colombino-Becker, 294(n22) Codex Durán, 131 Codex Florentino, 10, 16, 131 Codex García Granados, 69, 241 Codex Huaquechula, 5, 33, 36, 39, 44, 48–50, 55–62, 67–69, 221, 258, 269(n53) Codex Huamantla, 295(n13) Codex Mendoza, 3, 9, 10, 19, 28, 31, 41, 49, 51, 77, 131, 207, 219, 248, 260(n7), 284(nn1, 5), 285(n3); place glyphs in, 148, 149, 158, 196, 240, 286(nn14, 18), 288(n39) Codex Magliabechiano, 28, 273(n10) Codex Nuttall, 9, 261(n20) Codex Osuna, 66 Codex Sierra (Libro de Cuentos de Santa Catarina Texupan), 28 Codex Telleriano Remensis, 131, 243, 284(n6) Codex Vaticano A, 28 Codex Vaticano-Rios 3738, 284(n6), 288(n43) Codex Vindobonensis, 220, 261(n20) Codex Xolotl, 19, 217 Cohuatepec. See Coatepec Cohuatlan, 296(n18) Cohuatzacualco, 296(n18) Coixtlahuaca, 13, 213, 219, 261(n10), 293(n11) Colhuacan, 43 Colotetlopan, 49 Columbus, 235 Comahllan, 164, 296(n18) Comalapa, 94, 164–165, 169–170, 200, 290(n60) Comayagua, 281(n78), 311, 312, 316, 317 Comisión Scientífica Francesa, 233–234 Comitlan, 108 Consingo, 55, 68, 269(n52) Constantino, Thoribio de, 328 Contreras, Leonor de, 273(n1) Cortés Xochitlahua, Martin (Martyn), 64–65, 271(n68), 298–299, 302 Cortés, Hernán, 16, 44, 87, 141, 146, 282(n82), 287(n22) Costa Rica, 281(n78) Cotz’ij, 152 Cotzoc, San Juan, 47 Coyoacan, 43 Coyometepec, 67, 302 Cozamaloapan, 296(n18) Cozcatlan, 276(n20), 296(n17) Cuauhtemoc, 44, 88

364

Cuauhtinchan, 16, 19, 36–37, 42, 212–213, 216–220, 262, 292(nn4, 5, 7), 293(nn8, 10, 11) Cuauhtitlan, 43; Anales de, 266(n10) Cuauhyocan, 145 Cuba, 273(n1) Cubulcaal, 81 Cubulco, 194, 196 Cuchumatan, Todos Santos, 106 Cuchumatanes, 195, 197, 198, 200, 292(n75) Cueto, Fulano de, 325, 326 Cueto, Pedro de, 83, 335 Cueva, Cristóbal de, 99 Cueva, Francisco de la, 110–111, 275(n15) Cuextlan, 276(n20), 296(n17) Cuezalapan, 296 Cuiluco, 49, 68 Cuitlahuac, 43 Cuitlahuatzin, 266(n18) Cunen Cakquilaj, 81 Cuxutepeque, 84, 323, 328 Cuzcatlan, 88, 90, 276(n26), 289(n52) Día de Independencia, 226 Día de Santa Cecilia, 283(n92) Díaz del Castillo, Bernal, 84, 87, 96, 103, 105, 126, 131, 153, 247, 276(nn32, 34), 276(n19), 279(n56), 287(n29) Dominicans, 109–110, 112, 281(n76) Durán, Diego, 8, 10, 28, 41, 126, 134–135, 176, 192, 285(nn9, 10), 288(n34) El Salvador, 83, 84, 86, 113, 247, 289(n52) encomendero(s), 81, 90, 94, 104, 109, 111, 143, 169, 251, 326 encomienda(s), 88, 94, 106–109, 111, 115, 118–120, 144, 265(n1), 276(n23), 283(n93, 102); of Jorge de Alvarado, 46– 47, 71, 105, 108, 109, 179, 274(n1), 335; of Pedro de Alvarado, 108, 111 Encuentros, Los, 162–163, 177–178 Epatlan, 145 Escapucalco, 135 Escobar, Lucas de, 328 Escobar, San Miguel, 168 Escoyque, Juan Fernando, 282 Escudo de Armas de Texcoco, 241 Escudo de Armas de Tzintzuntzan, 241 Escuintla, 7, 88, 181–184, 200, 276(n20), 279(n55), 296(n17) Espinar, Juan de, 281(n69) Estrada, Doña Luisa de, 274(n1)

index Ezhuahuacatl, 18 Ezhuahuacatl (Ezhuahuácatl), Paulo, 302 Fernández Nájera, Juan, 222–223, 254 Fiesta del Volcán, 285(n9) Florentine Codex. See Codex Florentino Florida, 235 Flower War(s), 40, 266–267(n23) focalization, 24, 32, 211, 263(n11) Franciscans, 66, 112, 117, 271(n66) Frisius, Gemma, 17 Fuentes y Guzmán, Francisco Antonio, 18, 84, 113–114, 158, 190, 246, 274(n5), 276(nn19, 27), 277(n32), 287(nn24, 28, 29, 30), 288(n33), 289(nn46, 51), 290(nn62, 77) Garcés, Luis, 50, 78, 305 García de Paredes, Diego, 83, 281(n71) Garcia, Gregorio, 282(n88) García, José, 282(n83) García, Josepha, 282(n88) García Vullon, Pedro, 298 Genealogía de Azcapotzalco, 241 Gertrudis, Maria, 282(n88) Glasgow Manuscript, 28, 31, 87, 99, 107, 124, 136, 186, 235, 241, 245, 247, 272(n73), 276(n20), 284(n4), 285(nn1, 5), 287(n22), 291(n71); place glyphs in, 148, 154, 156, 159, 164, 166, 173, 174, 176, 177, 186, 186, 192, 194, 194, 196, 290(n59), 296(nn17, 18) Goathemala (Guatemala), 190, 289(n51) Gómez de Alvarado, 87, 273(n1) Gómez, Juan, 275(n15), 276(n25) Gómez, Pedro, 283(n98) Gonzáles Nájera, Pedro, 83, 93, 105, 275(n15), 280(n67) Gorozpe, Ignacio, 50 Gracias a Dios, 111, 278(n50), 279(n58), 281(n78), 309 Gran Chichimeca, 278(n49) Granada, 281(n78) Grijalva, Juan de, 273(n1) Guadalajara, 110 Guaxolotitlan, 100 Guazaçingo, 96, 316 Guazpaltepeque, 109 Guerrero, 12, 261(n10) Guevara, Felipe de, 245 Guzmán, Esteban de, 66, 70, 271(n72), 301, 302, 303

Haas, Georg von, 63, 269(n56) Habsburg Eagle (coat of arms), 114, 117, 138–139, 142, 210, 240–241 Hernán Cortés, 16, 44, 87, 141, 146, 282(n82), 287(n22) Hernández de Yllescas, Francisco, 83, 109 Hernández K’alel Ajaw, Felipe, 282(n83) Herrera, Alonso de, 328 Herrera, Martín, 282(n83) Hipolito, Andres, 282(n88) Hipolito, Juan, 282(n88) Hipolito, Nicolas, 282(n88) Hipolito, Pasquala, 282(n88) Hispaniola, 274(n2) Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca, 9, 19, 28, 49, 261(n16), 262(n25), 266(nn10, 14), 272(n74), 285(n3), 292(nn3, 5), 293(n11) Homer, 205 Honduras, 86, 87, 89, 90, 96, 99, 109, 111, 174, 281(n78), 288(n31), 309, 311, 312; conquest of, 1, 109, 278(n50) Huamantla fragments. See Codex Huamantla Huaxtepec, 47, 268(n39) Huehueichan, 296(n18) Huehuequauhquechollan, 38 Huehuetenango, 85, 90, 94, 195, 196, 197, 292(n76) Huehuetlan, 145 Huexotzinco. See Huexotzingo Huexotzingo, 37–40, 42, 47, 70, 266(nn10, 15), 271(n65) Hueyapan, 42 Huitzilac, river, 39, 51, 54, 57, 60, 64, 68, 139, 285(n6) Huitzilopochti, 217 Humboldt, Alexander von, 8 Ilamaehuatzin, 266(n18) Ilancueitl, 265(n5) Iliad, 255 Ilom, 108 Itzapan. See Izapa Itzcuintepec. See Escuintla Ixhuatepec, San Pedro, 47 Iximche’, 83, 88–89, 178, 279(n56), 288(n31), 190(nn63, 65) Ixtlilxochitl, Fernando de Alva, 7, 10, 17, 88 Izapa, San Andrés, 107 Iztac Mixcoatl, 265(n5) Iztaccihuatl, volcano, 213 Izucar de Matamoros, 41–43, 47–49, 108, 109, 148, 268(n38)

365

index Jacinta, Maria, 282(n88) Jalatlaco, 114 Jalpatagua, 176, 277(n32), 289(n55) Jaltipan (barrio), 55, 269(n52) Jaramillo, Juan, 279(n60) Jilotepeque, 107, 176 Jumay, 277(n32) Jumaytepeque, 106, 174 Kaji’ Imox, 110, 167 K’alel, 155, 282(n83) Kaqchikel rebellion, 89, 107, 132, 276(n25), 288(n40) Kaqyub’, 196 Kaqyuq. See Kaqyub Kiyawit Ka’oq, 167 Kramer, Wendy, 4, 222, 276(n21), 277(nn32, 39, 40), 281(n69), 294(n16), 333 La Concepción, 271 La Trinidad (barrio), 55, 269(n52) Lacandón, 110 Larios, Luis, 282(n88) Larios, Thomas, 282(n88) Lenca, 81 León Cardona, Juan de, 113 León Romano, Luis de, 244 Lienzo de Academia de Puebla, 305 Lienzo de Analco, 3, 85, 222, 235–236, 241– 245, 248–249, 291(n68); and the Lienzo de Tlaxcala, 6, 219, 230–232, 238, 256–257 Lienzo de Aztactepec y Citlaltepec, 237 Lienzo de Carapan I, 142, 237, 241 Lienzo de Carapan II, 142, 241 Lienzo de Coacoatzintla, 237 Lienzo de Cordova-Castellanos, 272(n7) Lienzo de Ihuitlan, 272–273(n7) Lienzo de Jucatacato, 243 Lienzo de Ocotepec, 11, 272(n7) Lienzo de Petlacala, 294(n20) Lienzo de San Juan Chicomesuchil, 295(n13) Lienzo de Santiago Ixtlan, 273(n7) Lienzo de Tecciztlan y Tequatepec, 261(n14) Lienzo de Tequixtepec II, 13 Lienzo de Tlapiltepec, 219, 293(n11) Lienzo de Tuxpan, 13 Lienzo de Yatini, 272(n7) Lienzo de Yolotepec, 273(n7) Lienzo de Zacatepec, 13, 62 Lienzo of the Heye Foundation, 31, 36, 49, 272(n7), 285(n3), 286(n14) Lienzo(s) of Chiepetlan, 196, 261

366

Lienzo Seler II, 13, 69 Lima, 84 Loarca, Alonso de, 83, 275(n15) Lobo, Cristóbal, 83, 91, 93 López de Villanueva, Diego, 83, 275(n15), 309, 313 López de Yrarraga, Nyculao, 280(n66) López, Genaro, 234 Lord 3 Rain, 293(n11) Luarca. See Loarca, Alonso de Lutz, Christopher, 285(n8), 291(n72) Macuilmalinaltzin, 266(n18) Madrid, 50, 78, 84, 119, 274, 290, 298 Maldonado, Alonso de, 109–111, 274(n6) Malinche, 102, 141–142, 251, 279(n60), 286(n8) Malintzin. See Malinche Mam, 81, 90 Mançanares, Diego de, 1 Manso, José, 49, 74 Manuque, Gaspar, 327 Mantunalo. See Maldonado, Alonso de Manuscrito del Aperreamiento, 291(n68) Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 1, 77, 213, 260 Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 2, 77, 212–213, 214, 216–220, 229, 240, 248, 254, 260, 288(n42), 292(n4), 293(nn10–11) Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 3, 77, 213, 260 Mapa de Cuauhtinchan no. 4, 77, 213, 260 Mapa de Sigüenza, 217 Mapa de Teozacoalco, 294(n22) Mapa de Tepexuxuma, 49 Mapa Local de Tuxpan, 273(n7) Mapa Pintado (en Papel Europeo y Aforrado en el Indiano), 292 Mapa Regional Primero de Tuxpan, 261(n14), 272(n7) Marina, Doña. See Malinche Marroquín, Francisco, 107, 110–111 Martin, Dionicia, 282(n88) Masariegos, Melchor de, 282(n83) Matadero (barrio), 55, 269(n52) Matadero, river, 285(n6) Matlalcueyes, 234, 295(n3) Matrícula de Huexotzinco, 28 Matrícula de Tributos, 41, 49, 51 Matthew, Laura, 4, 89, 91, 222, 259(n2), 275(nn13, 15), 276(n25), 277(n30), 280(n67), 282(nn87, 88), 294(n17) Matzatzin Moctezuma, Gonzalo, 100–101, 141

index Mauhcaxacohitzin, 266(n18) Maya, 9, 127, 157, 247, 255, 260, 279(n60) Mazatenango, 193, 196; San Lorenzo, 196, 292(n76) Mazihcatzin y Calmecahua, Nicolás, 233 Memorial de Sololá, 84, 87, 133, 165, 167, 178, 279(n56), 284(n8), 287(nn22, 29), 290(nn63, 65), 296(n16) Méndez de Sotomayor, Juan, 83, 289(nn48, 55) Mendoça, Antonio de. See Mendoza, Antonio de Mendoza (lineage), 113 Mendoza, Antonio de, 300 Mendoza, Antonio de (viceroy of New Spain), 66, 67, 105, 131, 135, 271(n68), 301, 302 Mendoza, Joan de, 99 Menezes Xiloxohcatl, Alonzo de, 65, 298 Mercator, Gerard, 17 Metzitlan, 265(n3) Mexia, Juan (Joan), 84, 323, 328 Mexicapan, San Martín, 114 Mexicapan tianquiztenco, 66, 302 Miahuatlan, 276(n20), 296(nn17, 18) Michoacan, 12, 14, 16, 142, 243, 262(n24), 268(n40) Milian, Ygnacia, 282(n88) Mixco, 90, 190 Mixco Viejo, 174, 175, 176, 193 Mixe, 236, 295(n10) Mixitlan, 296(n18) Mixtec, 9, 90, 96, 219, 260(n6), 261(n20), 266(n15), 279(n59) Mixteca, 193(n11) Mixteca Alta, 76, 100, 213, 272–273(n7) Mixteca Baja, 100 Mixtecatl, 265(n5) Mixtepec, 296(n18) Mizquic, 42 Moctezuma. See Motecuhzoma Molina, Bartolomé de, 83 Momostenango, 241, 295(n16) Monclova, 113 Monroy, Diego de, 94, 281(n69) Montejo, Francisco de, 99, 281(n78) Morales Coroxón K’alel, Tovar, 282 Morales, Antón de, 92, 336 Motagua, river, 176 Moteccuma, Gonçalo. See Matzatzin Moctezuma, Gonzalo Motecuhzoma Ilhuicamina, 40, 266(n18) Motecuhzoma Xocoyotzin (last Mexica lord), 16, 40, 42, 43, 44, 267(n30), 271(n64)

Motolinía, Toribio de, 39, 266(n10), 266(n15) Muñoz Camargo, Diego, 36, 233–234, 245, 284(n4), 295(n6) Nacochtlan, 145 nahual(s), 241 Nancintla, 88 Ñañhu, 9 Nantzintlan, 276(n20), 296(n17) Nauhtlan, 265(n3) Neri, Phelipe, 282(n88) New Fire Ceremony, 216, 219–221, 229, 293(n9) New Laws (of the Indies), 111 New Mexico, 113, 280(n65) Nicaragua, 43, 99, 235, 247, 281(n78) Nim Ab’äj Kejchún, 168 Nochtlan, 296(n18) Nopicalco, 88 Nueva Salamanca, 281(n78) Nueva Segovia, 281(n78) Nuñez de Guzmán, Pedro, 131, 276(n26) Nuttall, Zelia, 50, 260(n6) Ñuudzavui. See Mixtec Ocopetlayuca, 38 Ocotelulco, 240, 272(n73), 284(n4) Odyssey, 205, 225 Old Testament, 225 Olid, Cristóbal de, 44, 87, 89, 103, 141, 267(n32–34), 286(n9) Olintepec (Mexico), 158 Olintepeque, 29, 31, 93, 158–164, 159, 169, 170, 171, 176, 191, 200, 209, 211, 212, 217, 288(n33) Ollintepeque. See Olintepeque Ordás, Diego de, 267(n32) Ordoñez, Bartolomé, 282(n83) Orduña, Francisco de, 95, 106–107, 274(n6), 277(nn39, 40), 281(n68) Orozco, Francisco de, 114 Ortelius, Abraham, 17 Ortíz, Ana Lucía, 290(n61) Ortíz, Antonio, 83, 91, 93 Ortíz, Gonzalo, 275(n15) Otomí, 9, 48, 142, 219, 278(n49) Otomitl, 265(n5) Otumpa, 114 Oudijk, Michel, 4, 100, 259(n2), 261(n10), 275(n13), 278(nn51, 54), 286(n10), 295(n9), 309

367

index Ovalle, Gonzalo de, 83 Ovid, Pedro de, 275(n15) Oxib’ Kej, 172 oztomeca, 124 Oztoticpac, 293 Pa Laju(j) Noj, 153 Pa Q’ana Ak’al, 196 Paredes, Manuela, 282(n88) Panacal, 193, 196 Panatacat (Escuintla), 182 Panchoy, 107, 111, 112, 114 Pánfilo de Narváez, 44 Pannemaker, Guillermo, 261 Panofsky, Erwin, 22–23, 28–29, 203, 262(n4) Panquix (cantón), 113 Panuco, 274(n1), 275(n11), 286(n11) Papantlan, 265(n3) Paredes, Pedro de, 281(n69) Pasaco, 88 Paso y Troncoso, Francisco del, 74, 138–139, 151, 153, 221, 273(n14), 286(n20), 287(n25) Paz, Alvaro de, 109 Paz, Francisca de, 282(n88) Paz, Ivaro de, 275(n17) Paz, Ramona de, 282(n88) Pazan, 276(n20), 296(n17) Peirce, Charles Alexander, 263(n6) Perea, Bentura, 282(n88) Peres, Gabriel, 282(n88) Peres, Martin, 282(n88) Peres, Sebastiana, 282(n88) Pérez Dardón, Juan, 106, 174 Pérez de Olarte, Hernán, 49 Peru, 88, 103, 107–108, 109, 280(n66) Petapa, 106, 173, 174–176, 184, 187, 190– 191, 200, 296(n18) Petlaapan. See Petapa Petlacalco (barrio), 55, 269(n52) Philip II (Spanish king), 235, 323 Piastla, 41, 135 Piedra del Sol y de la Luna, 269(n52) Piedra Mascara, 54, 68, 267(n33), 268(n36), 269(n52) Pilipopoca, 51 Pintura de la Peregrinación de los culhuas­mexitin, 217 Pipil, 81, 88, 182, 184 Pixcayá, river, 176 Pizarro, Francisco, 107, 235

368

pochteca, 41, 70, 124, 161, 175, 181, 185, 201, 302, 303(n4) Pochuta. See Pochutla Pochutla, 78, 93, 94, 108, 109, 132, 179–181, 184, 200, 336 Pokob’, 165 Pokomam, 81, 90, 174 Paulus III, Pope, 271(n66) Popocatepetl, volcano, 39, 57, 60, 66, 213, 265(n3) Popol Vuh, 84, 220, 246 Popolocan, 48 Popotla, Mapa de, 131 Portocarrero, Pedro, 87, 90, 94 Potoncan, 279(n60) Poyauhtlan, 36 Poyumatlan. See Tequipan Poyumatlan Primeros Memoriales, 284(n2) Q’eq, 176 Q’umarkaj (Utatlan), 170 Quapechco. See Quauhpechco Quapechico. See Quauhpechco Quauhpechco, 47, 60, 67, 69, 302, 303 Quauhpechoco. See Quauhpechco Quauhquechollan, Mapa Circular de, 5, 33, 36, 48–49, 55, 60, 62–71, 64, 126, 139, 258, 269(nn55, 57), 270(nn57, 60, 62), 271(n63), 272(n74), 285(n3), 301 Quauhquechollan-Macuilxochitepec, Genealogía de, 5, 33, 36, 46, 48–50, 52, 53, 55, 61–62, 65, 68–71, 74, 221, 258, 268(nn46, 47), 269(n52), 258(n3) Quauhyacan, 67, 302, 303 Queçaltenango. See Quetzaltenango Quechollac, 37, 39, 293(n11), 306 Quelenes, 190 Quesada, Antonio de, 150, 286(n19) Quetzalcoatl, 267(n23) Quetzalpatzactli, 284(n5) Quetzaltenanco. See Quetzaltenango Quetzaltenango, 29, 31, 88, 93, 109, 154–158, 163, 176, 200, 247, 276(n20), 287(nn29, 30), 296(n17) Quilitziapan. See Quilizinapa Quilitzinapa. See Quilizinapa Quilizinapa, 185, 185, 186–190, 291(nn71, 72), 296(n18) Quillitzinapan. See Quilizinapa Quitzquaquatzin, 266(n18) Quiyahuiztlan, 272(n73), 284(n4) Quyliçinapa. See Quilizinapa

index Rab’inal, 81, 107, 109, 194, 196 Rab’inal Achi’, 84, 285(n9) Rabinal. See Rab’inal Ramires, Barbara, 282(n88) Real Alcázar, 261(n18) real cédula, 47, 67, 98, 115, 116, 118, 143, 275(n16), 279, 281–283(nn77, 93, 96), 297–299, 321 Relaciones Geográficas, 19, 260(n8), 294(n22), 295(n6) repartimiento(s), 10, 94, 111, 281(n75) residencia(s), 83, 95, 281(n69), 302; of Pedro de Alvarado, 83, 92, 107, 109–110, 120, 133, 274(n6), 281(n70); of Jorge de Alvarado, 83, 94, 120, 274(n6) Restall, Matthew, 4, 100, 259(n2), 274(n2), 278(nn51) Retalhuleu, 29, 151–153, 152, 171, 200, 287(n21) Retalulew, Título, 287(n21), 296(n16) Reyes, Petrona, 282(n88) Reyes, Anastecio de los, 282(n88) Reyes, Francisco, 282(n88) Ribera, Francisco de, 327 Rodríguez, Gaspar, 282(n83) Rodríguez, Joan, 318 Rojas, Diego de, 83 Rosas, Martin, 282(n88) Sacapulas, 94, 108, 180, 195 Sacatepéquez, San Martín, 153 Sahagún, Bernardino de (Sahagún’s team), 10, 28, 131, 284(n2), 288(n34), 290(n61) Salazar, Juan de, 282(n81) Saltillo, 113 Salvatierra, Cristóbal de, 281(n69), 289(n55) Samalá, river, 151, 158, 161, 287(n21) San Estéban de Nueva Tlascala, 113 San Francisco (barrio, Guatemala), 113, 283(n95), 291(n72) San Francisco de los Tlascaltecas, 113 San Jorge, 107 San Jorge de Olancho, 281(n78) San Juan Bautista, 237 San Luis Potosí, 113 San Martin Caballero, 63, 64, 265(n5), 271(n64) San Miguel (El Salvador), 84, 93, 113, 281(n78), 325, 328 San Miguel, Cerro, 39, 51, 54, 70 San Pablo (barrio), 55, 269(n52) San Pedro, 281(n78)

San Pedro Sula, 109 San Salvador, 88, 92, 93, 113, 190, 276(n26), 281(n78), 311, 317, 328, 332 Sánchez, Francisco, 83 Sanctamaria, Joseph de, 327 Sandoval Acazitli, Francisco de, 268(n40) Sandoval, Gonzalo de, 103, 268(n39) Sandoval, Rodrigo de, 109 Santa Cruz del Quiché, 170, 289(n53), 296(n16) Santa Eulalia, 94, 106, 195 Santa Fe (New Mexico), 113 Santa María de Jesús, 153, 200 Santa Rosa, 94, 176 Santistevan, 49 Santo Domingo (barrio), 113, 291(n72) Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic), 273(n1) Saussure, Ferdinand de, 263(n6) Saussure, Henri de, 232, 294(n2) Say, Gabriel, 282(n83) Selada, Rita, 282(n88) Seler, Eduard, 260(n6), 269(n56) Sequechul (Zequechul, Zequechil), 94, 107, 178, 179, 287(n28), 289(n51) Serrano copy (Lienzo de Tlaxcala), 295(n5) Serrano, Diódoro, 295(n5) Sierra Norte (Oaxaca), 3, 232, 236, 242 Sierra Zapoteca (Oaxaca), 295(n10) Sinacan, 94, 107, 178, 179, 285(n9), 289(n51) Soconusco, 41, 83, 85, 87, 135, 149, 149, 150, 153, 190, 200, 241, 274(nn1, 3), 281(n69, 78), 286(nn16–18) Soconuzco. See Soconusco Sololá, 163 Sonsonate, 113, 118 Sopotitlan. See Zapotitlan Sosa, Fernando de, 336 Soto, Hernando de, 328 Soyatepetl (barrio), 55, 269(n52) Suchimilco. See Xochimilco Suchitepec, 300 Suchitepeques. See Suchitepequez, San Antonio Suchitepequez (Suchitepéquez), San Antonio, 31, 152–155, 154, 190, 200, 287(n24), 296(n18), 300 Sununa, river, 151 Tabasco, 16, 41, 135, 279(n60) Tactique, 107 Tacuilula, 88

369

index Tacuscalco, 88 tamemes, 98–100, 115, 117, 118, 120, 124, 169, 236, 242, 253; in the Lienzo de Quauhquechollan, 99, 124, 125, 161, 163, 173, 181, 185–187, 201 Tanub, 287(n28) Tapia, Andrés de, 16, 43 Tarasca, 101, 278(n49) tasación, 109 Tascala, Juan de, 115 Tatelulco, 114 Taxisco, 88 Tecalco, 37, 39 Tecamachalco, 37, 39, 293(n11) Tecolotlan, 106, 107, 109, 194, 194, 195, 196, 197, 281(n71) Tecollotlan. See Tecolotlan Tecolutla. See Tecolotlan Tecpan Atitlan. See Atitlan, Tecpan Tecpan Izalco, 276(n20), 290(n59), 296(n17) Tecpan Pantitlan, 290(n59), 296(n18) Tecpanapan, 290(n59), 296(n18) Tecpatepec, 148 Tecuantepec. See Tehuantepec Tecuastlán, 195 Teculutan (Teculután). See Tecolotlan Teculutlan. See Tecolotlan Tecúm. See Tecún Umán Tecún Umán, 156–157, 287(nn28, 29), 289(n51) Tecuzistlan, 296(n18) Teguantepeque. See Tehuantepec Tehuantepec, 83, 87, 96, 114, 148, 149, 152, 200, 274(nn1, 3), 286(n18), 296(n18) Telles Xochitla, Gregorio, 65, 298, 302, 303 Templo de Çonmolli, 40 Tenochtitlan, 16, 17, 19, 39–43, 45, 65, 87, 95–96, 100, 114, 150, 213, 217, 240, 252, 293(n11), 298; conquest of, 100, 101, 235, 274(n1); Mexica of, 8, 104, 278(n53) Tenuch, 265(n5) Tenusco, 135 Tenustitlan. See Tenochtitlan Tenuxtitlan. See Tenochtitlan Teocuicac, 53 Teohquilhuastzin, Doña Luisa. See Xicotencatl, Doña Luisa Teopantlan, 37, 145 Teotihuacan, 212 Tepanatitan. See Atitlan, Tecpan Tepapayeca, 44, 109, 145, 265(n3) Tepapayecan. See Tepapayeca

370

Tepeaca. See Tepeacac Tepeacac, 37, 39, 41, 43–44, 213, 293(n11) Tepepul, 110 Tepesica, 96, 316 Tepeticpac, 272(n73), 284(n4) Tepexi, 100, 141, 142, 143, 150, 201, 293(n11) Tepolouatecatl, 232 teponaztli, 134 Tequicistlan, 107, 109, 192, 193, 195–197, 200, 292(n75) Tequipan Poyumatlan, 94, 106, 195 Tescuco (barrio), 114 Tetelan, 42, 265(n3) Tetliyacac, 265(n3) teuctlatoani, 265(n1) Teuhctlecozauhqui, 37, 217 Texac, 296(n18) Texas, 280(n65) Texas fragment. See Texas manuscript Texas manuscript, 103, 177, 294(n1) Texayacatl. See Tezayacatl Texcalticpac, 36 Texcoco, 10, 14, 17, 40, 43, 96, 217, 278(n53) Teyocan, 276(n20), 296(n17) Teyuca, 49, 300 Tezayacatl (barrio), 55, 68, 269(n52) Tezcatlpopoca, 51 tiangues, 41, 135, 285(n11) Tianguesillo, 167 Tianguisteca, 107 Tierra de Guerra, 91, 110 Tira de la Peregrinación, 217 Tira de Tepechpan, 284(n6) Título Chamelco, 296(n16) Título de Momostenango, 241 Título Nijaib I, 154, 156, 267(n30) Título Sacapulas, 296(n16) Títulos Primordiales, 262(n24) tiyanuizco. See tiangues Tizacapan, 49 Tizatlan, 103, 232–233, 272(n73), 284(n4) Tlacahuepantzin, 40 Tlacateccatl, 266(n18) Tlacaxipehualitztli, 40 Tlacochcalco, 60, 67, 276(n20), 296(n18), 302 Tlacopan, 40, 43, 278(n53) Tlacpanalqui, 65 Tlacuilulan, 296(n18) Tlalnahuac, 67, 302

index Tlalolintepec, 296(n18) Tlamacazcatepec, 296(n18) Tlamimilolpan, 42 Tlapiltepec, 293(n11) Tlaxcalilla (parish), 113 Tlaxichco, 276(n20), 296(n17) tlaxilacalli, 265(n1) Tloquetlatecuhtli, 36 Tlotlitotzintetzone, 51 Tochimilco, 38, 40, 42, 48, 51, 70, 265(n3) Tochteopa. See Tochteopan Tochteopan, 47, 57, 67, 69, 302, 303 Tocheteupa. See Tochteopan Tochtlan, 85 Tolkien, 205 Tolteca, 87, 278(n46) Tonalamatl de Aubin, 243 Tonatiuhco, 265(n3) Torquemada, Juan de, 39, 40, 46, 264(n17), 265(n5), 266(n15), 267(n32) Totomihuacan, 37 Totonicapan, 3, 86, 93, 109, 156, 161, 161, 169, 170, 287(n29), 288(n36), 296(n16), 336; Central Mexican caciques at, 112, 113, 114, 115; K’iche’ lords of, 84, 114, 237; Mapa of, 222, 245, 248, 254; San Cristóbal, 283(n91); San Miguel, 112–113, 162, 164, 222, 237, 241 Totonicapán, Título, 296(n16) Toxicocolli, 284(n5) Triple Alliance, 8, 40, 43 Trujillo, 281(n78) Tubías, Francisco, 282(n83) Tuçapan, 265(n3) Tucayucan Amatlan, 85 Tujaleb, 81 Tula, 271(n65) Tunis, 15 Turçois, Antonio de, 299, 300 Tututepec, San Pedro, 289(n52) Tuxpan, 261(n14) Tuzantlan, 85, 275(n12) Tz’ibampec, 154 Tzutujil. See Tz’utujil Tz’utujil, 81, 88, 127, 133, 291(n69) Tzacualpa, San Miguel, 168 Tzapotitlan. See Zapotitlan Tziquinalá, 296(n18) Tzitzol, 81 tzompantli, 240 Tzonteconapan, 173, 174–176, 184, 187, 191, 296(n18)

Ulmecatl, 265(n5) Usagre, Diego de, 83, 87, 90–91, 276(n19) Usmatecat, 115 Uspantlan, 94, 106, 108, 180, 195, 197, 292(n77) Utatlan, 1, 83, 87, 88, 90, 97, 163, 170, 172, 184, 200, 241, 276(n24), 279(n56), 288(n33), 289(nn50, 51, 53), 296(n16); lords of, 156, 172, 287(n29) Uzmatla, 113, 237 Vargas, Lorenzo de, 280(n63) Vasques, Pedro, 282(n88) Vazquez de Tapia, Bernardino, 43 Velasco, José María, 78, 273(n14), 305 Velasco, Luis de, 233 Velázquez de León, Juan, 103 Veracruz, 12, 16, 41, 70, 76, 100, 102, 272– 273(n7), 279(n60) Verapaz, 90, 94, 106, 107, 194–197, 200, 296(n16), 325 Vermayen, Jean de, 261(n18) Villa Alta, San Ildefonso, 3, 231 Vivar, Luis de, 281 Volcán de Agua, 183–184, 185, 186, 188– 190, 200, 222, 227, 291 Volcán de Fuego, 183, 291(n73) Volcán de Santa María, 154 Warburg, Aby, 22 Woensdregt, Rosanna, 7, 273(n11), 290(n61) Xe Laju[j] Noj, 154, 158, 247 Xela (Quetzaltenango), 163, 287(n30) Xelaju(j) (Quetzaltenango), 88, 155, 287(n30) Xelhua, 265 Xepach, 155 Xepau, 65 Xequilquel, 288(n33) Xequiqué, 158 Xetulul (Zapotitlan), 152, 155 Xicalancatl, 265(n5) Xicalango, 16, 41, 135 Xicontecatl. See Xicotencatl Xicotencatl, 7 Xicotencatl (Tlaxcalteca lord), 103, 232–233, 235, 280(n63) Xicotencatl (Xicoténcatl), Diego, 302, 303 Xicotencatl, Doña Lucía, 103, 119, 280(n63) Xicotencatl, Doña Luisa, 103, 119, 276(n22), 279(n61), 280(n63)

371

index Xihuimitotzin, 51 Xilajú. See Xelaju(j) Xillopanco. See Xilopango Xilopango, 190, 296(n18) Xochimilca, 96, 112 Xochimilco, 108, 109; Santo Tomás, 114 Xochinuiuacan, 53 Xochiteopan, San Francisco, 47 Xochitepec. See Suchitepequez, San Antonio Xochitlahuatzin, 266(n18) Xochiyaoyotl, 40. See also Flower War(s) Xocotenanco, 296(n18) Xolotl, 217 Xopilli, 284(n5) Xoxtla (barrio), 55, 269(n52) Yaoteuacan, 42 Yaqui (Yaqui winak), 97, 155, 278(n46) Yçucar. See Izucar de Matamoros Yexotzinco, 49 Yeyetcatepango, 49 Ygualtepec, 100 Yirulinapa. See Quilizinapa

372

Yllañes, Juan Manuel, 234, Yllañes copy (Lienzo de Tlaxcala), 239, 240, 241 Yllescas, Hernández de, 83, 109 Yohuallatonac, 36, 37 Yopicalco, 276(n20), 296(n17) Ypolito, Pantaleon, 282(n88) Ytzucan. See Izucar de Matamoros Yucatan, 12 Yzquintepeque. See Escuintla Yzucar. See Izucar de Matamoros Zapotec, 9, 85, 96, 219, 260, 268, Zapoteca(s), 85, 96, 282(n81) Zapotitlan, 88, 152, 154, 155, 200, 276(n20), 287(n24), 296(n17) Zentzonapan, 296(n18) Zequechil. See Sequechul Zequechul. See Sequechul Zinacan. See Sinacan Zinquinalá, 115 Zonacapan, 276(n20), 296(n17) Zurrilla, 107, 109