Tetzcoco in the early 16th century: the state, the city, and the calpolli FREDERIG HICKS—University of Louisville In central Mexico at the time af the Spanish conquest, there were a numer of states in which she political hierarchy, concentrated in the civic oF ceremantal cencers, Was sup ported by the labor and goods provided by lower-class producers. These producers were usually grouped into urban wards or small dependent hamlets that had a corporate character of some sort (Bray 1972, Caso 1956; Calnek 1976) In this paper | investigate the ‘nature of these and other units and atcempt to show in what manner, and how closely, they ‘were integrated with the state apparatus. To do so, | examine one pre:tispanic city, Tetz- coca (madern Texcocal, with special attention to the territorial units of which it was com posed and their relation to the political hierarchy. These relations involve tribute, which in ATLEC Mexico was not only exacted by victorious states fromm the vanquished but was also the predominant feature of internal production relations (Carrasco 1978), Most tribute was in unskilled labor or agricultural products, but craft and service specialists also gave tribute. Because af the importance af such spectalistsin the urbanization process, they will receive spe The urban wards or small dependent communities were among the units of pre-Hispanic society that were often called caipalti? Some investigators, concentrating on the occur: rences of this ward in the traditional ethnohistorical sources, have sought to construct -mudels of the evolution of ancient Menican society ia which the cafpoli play a prominent part. They are frequently presented as survivals of autonomous, kin-based landholding groups of an earlier time, which gradually lost their power and autonomy aé society became increasingly stratified, state-organized, and urbanized (e.g, Kirchhotf 1955; Katz 1966479179, Kurte 1970:174-176, Rounds 197974 76). But ax many investigators have shove, the word calpatti did not refer to any one single kind of entity. It could refer to com: ‘munities of various kinds. on different levels of oraanization, from an extended family to anethnic oF national group (Carrasco 1971a:363-364; 1976 30-31; 1978:37; Castillo 1972.73; Kirchhoff, Odena, and Reyes 1976:148, Reyes 1979), Thus we cannot azzume that capil! Examination af the intemal structure and system of tribute in the pre-Hispanic city of Tetzcoco, Mexico, indicates that the city contained several kinds of ter ritorial groupings that ceceived the services af commoners, These commaners were organized into calpolli, which were basically groups with common tributary obligations They gave service either in food productian, unskilled Tabor, or specialized skilled work, but it waz ucuslly part time, compensated with lands for subsistence, and this pave the city a dispersed layout. [Aztec, calpulli,cratt specialization, tribute, urbanism) Copyright © 1982 by the American Ethrological Society ‘0934-0496/8210202302082 501 230 american ethnologistrefers to the same thing wherever it occurs, We will see that in Tetzcaco there were several kinds of groups that could, in the proper context, be called ca/patti. Among them were the small tibute-paying communities that constituted the basic production units above the household level. But | think the data tond to show that zhese can best be understood as relatively recent, perhaps samewhat ephemeral, units created by the lords to serve their in- cerests. Telzcoce and the kingdom of Acothuacan Located on the mainland in the eastern Valley of Mexico, Tetzcaco was one of the pri- cipal cities of Aztec Mexico, capital of the kingdom of Acolhuacan and 2 partner, with Tenochtitlan and Tlacapsn in the Empite ofthe Triple Alliance, Acolhuacan was centered in the eastern Valley of Menico, but i extended far to the northeast, to Cuauhchinanco (tiuachinango) and beyond, some 50 ken from Tetzcoco. Is supreme ruler was the king ttatohuan, ph tlatoave) of Tetzcoco, but st included 14 other cites, each with its own dependent communes and each with its own tlatohuan’ All ot them were, however, sub: rect tothe king of Tetzcaco (Gibson 1956: Hicks in press Since | must sometimes refer to historical antecedents, a brief synopsis isin order. The kings of Tetzcoco traced thel lineage back to the Chichimec leader Keotl who entered the Valley of Mexico with a band of followers sometime in the 11th or 12th century Kolot’s descendant Quinatzin ca. 1272-1330) was the ftstto establish a headquarters in the Tetzeoco area, and it was maintained there by his successors Techotalatzin ¢ 1330-14051 and ixthxochit 1405-10) The city asit was known tthe time ofthe Spanish conquest, however, wa laid out by Nezahualeayotl (* 1431-72) ater he recovered bis kingdom from Tepanec domination. The Tepanec of Azcapotzalco had conquered Acolhuacan and most ofthe rest of the Valley of Mexico in the early 15th century; but by 1428, ftlxochit’s son and heir Nerabualcoyed in alliance withthe euler of Tenochtitlan modern Mexico Cityh overthrew the Tepanec and defeated Azcapotzaleo. Now tree of foreign domination, Kings Nerahvaleoyotl of Tetzcaco and Itzcohuatl of Tenochtitlan iointly planned the rebuilding of theit respective capitals, and inital construction was ar red ut withthe atsistance of workers and artisans from each others’ kingdoms. The two cities thus shared many features, but they had different geographical settings and different political conditions to adapt to. Once thet respective kingdoms were secated, the to alles hegan a eves of conquests, in which they were son joined by the small Tepanec city fof Tlacopan (moder Tacuba, creating what has come to be known as the Empire of the Triple Alliance, Nexahualcoyot! was succeeded in Tetzcoco by his son Nezahualpill 1472-1515), and Nershualpilrs son Cacama ruled atthe time of the Spanish conquest 4519 (Alva ftlikdchitl 1975-77; Torquemada 1975, 177{f; Dibble 1951; Carrasco 397161 Tetzeoce was evidently nota tahtly nucleated city, Several early accounts indicate that the houses ofthe city were scattered aver a wide aea, extending from the lakeshore tothe foothills beyond Tetzcatzinco, a distance of aver 12 km (Motolinia 1971206; Torquemada 1975, 130; Alva belisbchit 1975-77, 1223), | have sttempted to trace the bouncaries of the city proper on the map (Figure 1) by determining, insofar as passible, the locations at small communities cleadly idenified as “barios” of the city of Tetzcoco (Table 1) as distinct fram places that belonged to adiacent cities or which were towns “in their own right" rather than parts of Tetzcoco.’ The city’s boundary in the northeast remains uncer aan, These deta indicate that the city, at lest ints political sense, had an area of just under 80 ker? Somewhat over 100,000 people probably lived within this aree (Hicks in press) Tetzcoce: state, city, cafpoll? 231Figure 1-The city of Tetzcoco at the ime of Spanish contact. Lacaliies within brackets are approx imate locations, probably cowect within 2 kr, athers ate probably correct within 1 km. (Base mape Secretaria de Programacién y Presupuesto, Carte Topogrifice 1:30000, sheets T4821 and E4831 with lakeshore based on Goneslen Aparicio 1973) Although there was 2 tightly nucleated zone around the royal palaces, the city consisted for the most part af numerous small clusters af houses, with here and thece a nable’s estab- lishment, distributed among cultivated fields. Parsony’s (1971) settlement pattern survey supports the early Spanish accounts inthis respect. Such a dispersed settlement pattern is rot really unusual in preindustrial cities, as Tigger (1972) has shown. When we have seen what was within Tetzcoco’s boundaries, | think it will be clear that this was the city in a functional sense as well as a political ene, and that the relationship between the state, the city, and the cafpotli was such as to make a dispersed settlement pattern necessary nobles, commoners, and tequit! ‘The Azcec economy was based primarily on tribute, which was given by commoners to nobles. Nobles (ait. nl. pipiltin) were such by virtue of their birth into a noble lineage {tlacamecayath. A noble had the right to control lands and to receive the services of com: ‘moner subjects, but only if they were granted to him by his king ot other superior. All com moners were the subjects of nobles; if not to a particufac noble, then to the king directly ‘The word for commoner, macehualli (pl. macehwaltin), actually means “subject,” and it can be anplied to a noble if referring to him as someone else's subject. A macebuafti could be advanced by his lord to a position of importance, but he could nat have lands and subjects of his own, His lord could, however, assign some of his own subjects to watk for him Macehualtin were normally provided by their lords with lands to work for their subsistence Carrasco 1971a, 1976, Cartasco and Broda 1978; Castillo 1972) Tequitl cefers to the set of obligatory tasks, or “job.” that every person had, over end above such tasks as he or she might engage in for the family’s subsistence or recreation Theoretically, everyone in Aztec society had 2 tequitl, even kings: theicrequit! was to rule 232 american ethnologist