Notes
241 notes introduction 1. with the term“Aztec,” i refer to the allied political organization between tenochtitlan and other city-states such as texcoco,tlacopan, xochimilco, chalco, and many others in the basin of Mexico. if a distinction is necessary among them, a regional or ethnicbased term such as“Mexica” or“texcoca” is used. 2. cortés (1993) and Díaz del castillo (1992) argue that the spaniards arrived to impose peaceful christianity and civilization on the bloodthirsty Mexica, and so avenge those who had been subjected to tenochtitlan. 3. ricard (1995:84–87) provides a brief history of the other religious orders such as the Dominicans and the Augustinians. 4. for more detailed information on franciscan millennialism, see baudot (1995:76–89) and lafaye (1976:32–37). 5. i am borrowing here the term“diffusionist”from carrasco (2000:55–62) who classifies the major studies about the origin of the toltecs and their god and ruler quetzalcoatl into three categories: diffusionist, symbolic, and historical design. According to him, the diffusionists have sought the origin of indian culture outside of the new world. They argue that some foreign, christian-like genius came to the new world and taught the indians religion and other cultural artifacts. 6. lópez Austín (1973) and Gillespie (1989:183–84) also study the similarities between the indigenous god quetzalcoatl and the christian apostle saint Thomas. 7. nicholson’s study (2001) is essential to understanding the role of quetzalcoatl before and after the conquest.He summarizes and studies almost all the colonial pictorial and alphabetic sources on quetzalcoatl in Mesoamerica. 8. from the beginning of the conquest, the origin of the indians was a serious issue for spanish intellectuals and friars in the sixteenth century. All of them agreed that the indians were descendants of Adam and eve, but there were various hypotheses on how and when they came to the new world. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, a Dominican friar, Gregorio García, summarized the debate on indigenous origin. see also brading (1991:196–200) for the historical context in which García’s book appeared. 242 notes to pages 3–28 9. baudot (1996:163–245) examines how most of olmos’s study remains in fragmented form, inserted in the works of other spanish chroniclers such as Mendieta and torquemada. 10. baudot (1996:141–42, 337, 347) demonstrates that las casas’s work on the indigenous history of new spain borrows liberally from olmos and Motolinia. 11. Alva ixtlilxochitl played an important role in the propagation of the tradition of the virgin of Guadalupe. He possessed the most important document, Nican mopohua (Here it begins) and was assumed to be its author (brading 2001:117–18). 12. other scholars such as nicholson (2001:125–29), lockhart (1991), and velazco (2003: 44–46) also noticed a strong colonial influence in Alva ixtlilxochitl’s chronicles. 13. brading (2001) examines how the creoles searched for their own native Mary, the virgin of Guadalupe. brading argues that the virgin of Guadalupe was actually created by the creoles who wanted to have their own native American virgin in order to promote their native land. 14. see also Keen (1971:260–309) and brading (1991:422–46) for enlightened philosophers ’ attacks on the Americas. 15. Phelan (1960), who studies the creole interest in the indigenous past in the eighteenth century, calls this creole interest “neo-Aztecism” and argues that the neo-Aztecism served as an origin of Mexican nationalism. 16. formoredetailedinformationonthepoliticalgroupsinnineteenth-centuryMexico,see bushnell and Macaulay (1988:61–71), Hale (1968:290–305), and brading (1985:70–81, 1991:648–50). 17. Jara (1989:366–75) provides more detailed study on Mier and his political use of the virgin of Guadalupe. 18. This edition does not provide a publication date. 19. in this context, i challenge the specific aspects of previous and current scholars’ work on nezahualcoyotl. 20. Keen (1971:464) studies the impact of the Mexican revolution on Aztec studies:“The Mexican revolution of 1910 to 1920 contributed immeasurably to the second discovery of ancient Mexico. what distinguished that revolution from previous efforts at social and political reconstruction of Mexico was the intervention of the indian and Mestizo masses.” He briefly mentions the achievements of most representative scholars in this period in Mexico (1971:463–508). chapter one 1. Archaeological evidence confirms that the native historiographical tradition,tlacuilolli, had developed by the first millennium bc. it is still being practiced in some regions of Mexico (brotherston...
OR
