Chapter V: The Chichimec Period (2)

[V-25] The inhabitants of this province were known as Culhuas, and are not to be confounded with the Acolhuas, notwithstanding many of the old writers make no distinction between the two peoples.

[V-26] Veytia writes the names of those who governed at Culhuacan; Xiuhtemoc, with his wife Ozolaxochitl, and son Nauhyotl; and Catauhtlix with his wife Ixmixuch and son Acxocuauh. _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 18. Torquemada writes them respectively: Xiuhthemal, Oceloxroch, Coyol; Cocauhtli, Yhuixoch, Acxoquauh. _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 45. Boturini writes: Xiuchtimatl, Oceloxochitl, Coyotl; Cocoahtli, Yhyozochtl, Acxoquauhtli. _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., p. 232; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough_, vol. ix., p. 333.

[V-27] Brasseur states that according to the _Codex Chimalpopoca_, Acxoquauh was a younger brother of Nauhyotl; we have already seen this prince spoken of, however, as the son of Cocauhtli, Xiuhtemoc's associate; see note 26. Nonohualcatl, says Brasseur, was, without doubt, Nauhyotl's eldest son. 'C'est ce qui parait d'après la manière dont ce prince succéda au trône après Huetzin, avant Achitometl ou Ameyal.' _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 222.

[V-28] Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 222, objecting to the term usurpation in this connection, writes: 'La loi toltèque excluait du sang suprême tout prince qui se montrait d'avance incapable de l'occuper. C'était probablement le cas où se trouvait Pochotl. Ixtlilxochitl et Veytia, qui accusent Nauhyotl d'usurpation, avaient oublié ou ignoraient la loi de succession toltèque.' It is not probable, however, that Topiltzin either forgot or was ignorant of the Toltec law of succession, when he directed that his son should be associated with Xiuhtemoc when he came of suitable age.

[V-29] Also called Texochipantzin. Torquemada gives the name of Pochotl's wife Huitzitzilin, though whether he refers to the same lady is not certain. _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 56.

[V-30] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 18-23; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 340; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 220-3.

[V-31] The reader will recollect that Veytia affirms that Topiltzin Acxitl fled to his relative Acauhtzin, brother of Xolotl I., and ceded to him his right to Anáhuac.

[V-32] According to Brasseur, these or similar overtures occurred in the reign of Xolotl I. Xolotl's ambassadors, he says, 'avaient plus d'une fois pressenti Xiuhtemal à ce sujet, mais celui-ci, trop prudent et trop ami de sa patrie, appréhendant, sans doute, de rendre les Chichimèques trop puissants, avait constamment éludé ses propositions en faisant valoir les droits de Pochotl, à qui seul il appartiendrait de prendre une décision dans cette matière délicate, une fois qu'il aurait été mis en possession du trône.' _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 221.

[V-33] Year 1141. _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 30-5. 984 to 1190. _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 209, 342-3, 396, 452.

[V-34] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 45-6. According to Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 238, this lady was the eldest daughter of Pochotl. Tzontecoma was one of the Acolhua chiefs, as will be seen hereafter.

[V-35] The meaning of this request is not clear. It was probably Xolotl's design to get Huetzin into Culhuacan under pretense of learning the art of government--though it would seem he might have done this at his father's court--and then by some strategem place him upon the throne.

[V-36] _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 57-8. Ixtlilxochitl and Veytia give a different version of this affair of Huetzin's. Itzmitl, or Ixmitl, (known also as Tlacoxin, or Tlacoxinqui) proceeded to Tezcuco, where Xolotl was superintending the construction of a palace and garden, and reminded him of a promise of extra favors made to Tzontecoma, by way of compensation for the inferior bride which he had been compelled to accept; whereupon Xolotl gave the lordship of Tepetlaoztoc to his son Huetzin. This occurred, says Veytia, in 1207, more than 60 years after the Culhuacan war. _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 46-7; _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 341-2.

[V-37] See note 34.

[V-38] _Brasseur_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 237-51.

[V-39] Aztlan 'était située au nord-ouest de la Californie.... C'est l'opinion d'un grand nombre d'écrivains. M. Aubin croit qu'ils habitaient la péninsule appelée aujourd'hui la basse Californie, et que là était Aztlan.' _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 292. Humboldt, _Vues_, tom. ii., p. 179, and _Essai Pol._, tom. i., p. 53, followed by Gondra, in _Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., pp. 6-7, 19, place Aztlan north of 42° N. lat.; Foster, _Pre-Hist. Races_, pp. 340-1, Vetancvrt, _Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p. 20, refer to the account of Oñate's explorations in New Mexico, _Doc. Hist. Mex._, série iii., tom. iv., pp. 32, 47-8, 111-12, 625, and point to the golden Copalla, with its rumored Aztec-speaking people. See also, _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, p. 454; _Schoolcraft's Arch._, vol. i., p. 68; _Ruxton_, in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._, 1850, tom. cxxvi., pp. 40-9. Fontaine, _How the World was Peopled_, pp. 149-50, reminds us that the Aztec _tl_ sound is found in the N.W., and considers the mounds in the N.E. to be evidences of Aztec wanderings. _Pickering's Races_, in _U. S. Ex. Ex._, vol. ix., p. 41; _Chevalier_, _Mexique_, pp. 54-5. Prichard, _Nat. Hist. Man_, vol. ii., pp. 514-16, regards the Moquis in Arizona as the most northern Aztec remnants. Clavigero, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., pp. 156-9, places Aztlan north of the Colorado River, in accordance with some maps of the 16th century, and regards this stream as the water said to have been crossed on the migration, whilst Boturini, _Idea_, pp. 126-8, holds this to be the Gulf of California. _Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., pp. 298, 301; _Rios_, _Compend. Hist. Mex._, p. 11. Orozco y Berra, _Geografía_, pp. 79-82, 134-5, traces Nahuatlaca routes north of Mexico. Duran, _Hist. Indias_, MS., tom. i., cap. 1, looks to Florida for the ancient home. Mendieta, _Hist. Ecles._, p. 144, identifies Aztlan with the later Chicomoztoc, like Acosta and Duran, but locates it in the Jalisco region. _Bartlett's Pers. Nar._, vol. ii., p. 283. Veytia, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 91, ventures a little farther north, to Sonora; see also, _Möllhausen_, _Reisen_, tom. ii., pp. 143-55. Gallatin, in _Amer. Ethno. Soc., Transact._, vol. i., p. 128, considers Aztlan to have been near Culiacan, but on p. 205, and in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._, 1851, tom. cxxxi., p. 281, he seems to favor the more direct north. Cabrera, _Teatro_, pp. 94-6, advances some argument for its location in Chiapas. See also, _Müller_, _Amerikanische Urreligionen_, pp. 532-3. Waldeck, _Voy. Pitt._, p. 45, remarks that the palm-tree on the migration-map indicates a southern origin, but Gondra, in _Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., p. 7, considers that this may be a thoughtless insertion of the painter. See remarks on pp. 216-18 of this volume, and pp. 681-4, 788-9 of vol. iv. For further remarks on position of Aztlan, and origin of Nahuatlacas, see: _Norman's Rambles in Yuc._, pp. 266-7; _Buschmann_, _Ortsnamen_, p. 54, et seq., _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Esquisses_, pp. 27-8; _Id._, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 191-7; _Id._, _Popol Vuh_, pp. clxxxiii.-cxcvi.; _Bradford's Amer. Antiq._, pp. 203-5; _Ruxton's Adven. Mex._, pp. 192-4; _Cremony's Apaches_, pp. 89-90; _Gregg's Com. Prairies_, vol. i., p. 284; _Smith's Human Species_, pp. 252-3; _Mayer's Mex. Aztec, etc._, vol. ii., p. 323.

[V-40] Gallatin, _Amer. Ethno. Soc._, _Transact._, vol. i., p. 205, thinks they may have had a share in the dismemberment of the Toltec empire, or may have seized the opportunity offered by the Toltec emigration to enter into the deserted lands. Cabrera states that they were driven from Aztlan. _Teatro_, p. 94.

[V-41] Duran gives the description of Aztlan given by Cueuhcoatl to Montezuma the elder: 'Nuestros Padres moraron en equel felice y dichoso Lugar que llamáron Aztlán, que quiere decir "Blancura." En este Lugar hay un gran Cerro en medio del agua, que llamaban Culhuacan, por que tiene la punta algo retuerta hácia abajo, y à esta causa se llama Culhuacan, que quiere decir "Cerro tuerto." En este Cerro habia unas bocas ó cuebas ó concavidados donde habitáron nuestros Padres y Abuelos por muchos años: alli tubiéron mucho descanso debajo de este Nombre Mexitin y Azteca: alli gozaban de mucho cantidad de Patos, de todo género de gazzas; de cuerbos marinos, y Gallinas de agua, y de Gallaretas; gozaban del canto y melodia de los Pájaros de las cabezas coloradas y amarillas; gozáron de muchas diferencias de grandes y hermosos Pescados; gozáron de gran frescura de arboledas, que habia por aquellas riberas, y de Fuentes cercadas de sauces y de Sabinas y de Alisos grandes y hermosos; andaban en canoas, y hacian camellones en que sembraban maiz, chile, tomates, huauhtli, frisoles, y de todo genero de semillas de las que comemos,' &c. _Hist. Indias_, MS., tom. i., cap. 27.

[V-42] _Ramirez_, in _García y Cubas_, _Atlas_; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom., i., p. 78; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., pp. 157-8; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p. 17; _Villa-Señor y Sanchez_, _Theatro_, tom. i., p. 3; _Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., pp. 399-300. The date of the departure is shown by the maps to be Ce Tecpatl, which is calculated by Chimalpain, Gallatin, Gama, and Veytia to be 1064, based on the hypothesis that the adjustment of the calendar in the year Ce Tochtli, which took place during the journey, corresponds to 1090. Brasseur would probably assign a later date, since he writes: 'Les annales mexicaines nous montrent généralement les premières tribus de cette nation à Aztlan en l'an 1 Tecpatl, 1064.' _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 292.

[V-43] Chicomoztoc is placed by Clavigero about twenty miles south of Zacatecas, but is regarded by Duran, Acosta, and others, as identical with, or within the region of Aztlan. According to Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 293, they arrived here 1116. Hellwald, in _Smithsonian Rept._, 1866, p. 339, agrees with this date, by making them arrive at Chicomoztoc 26 years after their departure from Aztlan, which, he says, took place in 1090. Veytia, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 92, states that they arrived 104 years after their departure. On the Gemelli map Oztotlan, 'place of grottoes,' is given as a place where they halted for a long time, from 160 to 200 years after leaving Aztlan, and may be the same as Chicomoztoc. Camargo, in _Nouvelles Annales des Voy._, 1843, tom. xcviii., p. 145, says that the Tlascaltecs, who according to most authors were one of the Nahuatlaca tribes, arrived at Chicomoztoc in the year 5 Tochtli.

[V-44] See _Acosta_, _Hist. de las Ynd._, pp. 455-6; _Herrera_, _Hist. Gen._, dec. ii., lib. ii., cap. x.; _Duran_, _Hist. Indias_, MS., tom. i., cap. 2; _Carbajal Espinosa_, _Hist. Mex._, tom. i., pp. 228, 247; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 151; _Hellwald_, in _Smithsonian Rept._, 1866, p. 339; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 78; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p. 17; _Motolinia_, _Hist. Indios_, in _Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom. i., pp. 7-9; _Pimentel_, _Cuadro_, tom. i., p. 154; _Purchas his Pilgrimes,_ vol. v., p. 864; _Gemelli Careri_, in _Churchill's Col. Voyages_, vol. iv., p. 482; _Humboldt_, _Vues_, tom. ii., pp. 168-71; _Sahagun_, _Hist. Gen._, tom. iii., lib. x., p. 145. Brasseur de Bourbourg gives as the tribes that left Aztlan: the Huexotzincas, Chalcas, Xochimilcas, Quitlahuacas, Malinalcas, Chichimecas, Tépanecas, and Matlaltzincas. _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 292.

[V-45] _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 78-9; _Hist. de las Ynd._, p. 454; _Hist. Indias_, MS., tom. i., cap. 2. On Boturini's map the hieroglyphs of the eight tribes are seen at Chicomoztoc for the last time; the priests or leaders of the Aztecs alone pursue the remainder of the course. As the Aztec hieroglyph does not appear to be included among these eight, it might be assumed that the Aztecs were composed of certain families belonging to one or more of the eight tribes, but this does not appear to be the view taken by the authorities. Gondra, in _Prescott_, _Hist. Conq. Mex._, tom. iii., pp. 25-6, remarks that the map indicates a consultation of six of the families with their god, and the departure of two. The non-recurrence of the tribal hieroglyphs he explains by saying that the families are henceforth designated only by the chiefs who lead them. This map cannot, however, be expected to be more accurate than the sources from which Torquemada, Acosta, and others, derived their information.

[V-46] Quetzalin according to Brasseur, who adds: 'Dans le texte, il y a _Huetzalin_, ce qui est probablement une faute du copiste.' _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 263. This chief may possibly be the same as Huitziton.

[V-47] Veytia names this chief Xochimilco, which Brasseur says 'ne peut être qu'une erreur.' _Id._, p. 264.

[V-48] _Id._ Ixtlilxochitl and Veytia place the arrival of the Xochimilcas in Tlotzin's reign. _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 458; _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 88. Duran says they were the first to leave Chicomoztoc, and the third to arrive in Anáhuac. This writer gives a number of places founded by them besides Xochimilco. _Hist. Indias_, MS., tom. i., cap. 2., 13. Acosta says they were the first to arrive. _Hist. de las Ynd._, p. 488.

[V-49] _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 88-9; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 458; _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 263-4.

[V-50] Now Cuernavaca.

[V-51] _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, pp. 92-3, 141-3.

[V-52] Many writers who do not directly connect the Acolhuas with the Nahuatlacas, assert that they came from the same region, and were of the same race. Clavigero places the ancient home in Teoacolhuacan, near Amaquemecan. Veytia considers them to be the descendants of Toltec colonists who were settled along the Pacific coast. Ixtlilxochitl affirms that they were neighbors of the Huehue Tlapallan Toltecs and of Chichimec stock.

[V-53] '_Citin_, pluriel de _Citli_, lièvre, nom apparemment d'une tribu du Nord, comme les Pied-Noir, les Serpents, etc.' _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 232. Rios, _Compend. Hist. Mex._, p. 7, says they derived their origin from the family of Citin or Ulcua. Motolinia says of the Acolhuas: 'Este nombre los quedó de un valiente capitan que tuvieron ... Acoli, que así se llama aquel hueso que vá desde el codo hasta el hombro, y del mismo hueso llaman al hombro Acoli.' He was very brave, and taller than other men. _Hist. Indios_, in _Icazbalceta_, _Col. de Doc._, tom. i., p. 11. Gomara, _Conq. Mex._, fol. 301, says that they claimed descent from a valiant chief named Chichimecatlh, who once tied a strap round the arm of Quetzalcoatl, near the shoulder. This was regarded as a great feat, for it was said that he that could bind a god could bind all men.

[V-54] Brasseur de Bourbourg says nothing about the Otomís coming in with the Acolhuas and Tepanecs at this time.

[V-55] This, according to Torquemada, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 51-4, who is followed by Brasseur, was Coatetl, daughter of Chalchiuhtlatonac, or Chalchiuhtlanetzin, lord of Chalco, who, says Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 231, 'paraît avoir été l'un des frères ou des fils de Nauhyotl II.' According to other authors, Tzontecoma's bride was named Cihuatetzin, and her father was a Toltec, lord of Tlalmanalco. Each of these names is spelled in a great variety of ways. See _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 341, 395, 452; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 39-43; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., pp. 136-7; _Granados y Galvez_, _Tardes Amer._, pp. 19, 142-3; _Müller_, _Reisen_, tom. iii., p. 45; _Müller_, _Amerikanische Urreligionen_, p. 526; _Villa-Señor y Sanchez_, _Theatro_, tom. i., p. 3; _Orozco y Berra_, _Geografía_, p. 92.

[V-56] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 233-4.

[V-57] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 236-7.

[V-58] See note 27.

[V-59] Named also Huetzin, says Brasseur.

[V-60] Veytia, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., p. 47, writes the names Tlotzin Pocothl, Toxtequihuatzin, and Atencatzin. Ixtlilxochitl, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 210, Tlotzinpochotl, Huixaquentochintecuhtli, Coxanatzin Atencatl; on p. 342 he differs in the following: Toltzin, Toxtequihuatzin, Atencatzin Apotzoetzin; on p. 395, Tloxtequihuatzin; on p. 461, Tlotzinpochotl, Atzotgocoltzin, Totzin. _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 62, Tlotzin, Quauhtequihua, or Tochintecuhtli, Popozoc. _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 141, Apopozoc. Nopaltzin had also another son, named Tenancacaltzin, who in later years gave much trouble to the emperor Quinantzin, and who, according to the Spanish authorities, was a bastard. Brasseur, however, finds reason to believe that this prince was Nopaltzin's legitimate son by a former marriage. _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 254.

[V-61] _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., pp. 342, 395, 452; _Veytia_, _Hist. Ant. Mej._, tom. ii., pp. 47-9; _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 63; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 141.

[V-62] Commenting upon the statement of Ixtlilxochitl, _Hist. Chich._, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 211, that Xolotl abandoned to Tlotzin not only the revenues of the province of Chalco, but also of several other provinces as far as Mizteca, Brasseur writes: 'Il y a évidemment exagération; jamais les armes de Xolotl n'allèrent aussi loin, et il est douteux même que les provinces renfermées dans la vallée lui fussent toutes tributaires.' _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 258.

[V-63] _Brasseur de Bourbourg_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 262.

[V-64] See _Id._, tom. ii., pp. 266-71.

[V-65] _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 59-60; _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 343; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., pp. 138-9.

[V-66] See _Brasseur_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 265. This writer and Torquemada are the only authorities who use the name Ameyal at any time.

[V-67] See note 27.

[V-68] Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 272, writes: 'C'était probablement sur la promesse de recevoir la main de sa (Achitometl's) fille que Huetzin avait renoncé au trône de Culhuacan.'

[V-69] Spelt also Yanex, Yacazozolotl, Yacatzotzoloc, and Ixcazozolot.

[V-70] Among these were Ocotox, or Acotoch, and Coacuech, who, according to _Ixtlilxochitl_, in _Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq._, vol. ix., p. 212, were disaffected towards the empire because agriculture had been forced upon them and tribute exacted in field produce; Quauhtla, lord of Oztoticpac, and Tochin Tecuhtli, lord of Coyuhuacan, who had fallen into disgrace in the following manner: Chiconquauhtli, Xolotl's son-in-law, died suddenly, and was buried without notice being sent to the emperor. Xolotl thereupon dispatched Tochin Tecuhtli, to offer condolence to the widow, his daughter, and to appoint Omicxipan, a noted noble of that province, governor. Tochin Tecuhtli did as he was ordered, but instead of returning to Xolotl with a report of his mission, he went to Huetzin of Coatlichan. To punish this disrespect, or treason, as Torquemada calls it, Xolotl deprived Tochin Tecuhtli of his lordship of Coyuhuacan and exiled him to Tepetlaoztoc. _Torquemada_, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., pp. 58, 65; _Clavigero_, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., p. 142; _Vetancvrt_, _Teatro Mex._, pt ii., p. 15; _Brasseur_, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., pp. 267-9.

[V-71] This is the account given by Brasseur, _Hist. Nat. Civ._, tom. ii., p. 274. Most writers do not mention this expedition to Culhuacan.

[V-72] See note 70.

[V-73] Ixtlilxochitl, p. 212, says he fled toward Pánuco, and afterwards, p. 343, states that he was pardoned and re-instated. Torquemada, _Monarq. Ind._, tom. i., p. 65, affirms that the rebel chief was slain in battle, and that his allies fled to Huexotzinco, where they died in misery. Clavigero, _Storia Ant. del Messico_, tom. i., pp. 142-3, follows Torquemada. We must accept the former version, however, as Yacanex subsequently re-appears upon the scene.

[V-74] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., p. 277.

[V-75] 'Para que en ella y su contorno mandase en calidad de soberano.' _Veytia_, tom. ii., p. 56. He could scarcely have been sole lord of Tezcuco, for Veytia himself says that Tlotzin reigned there.

[V-76] _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 212, 396-7; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 50-8; _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 65; _Sahagun_, tom. ii., lib. viii., p. 278; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 271-7.

[V-77] _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., p. 277.

[V-78] The exact year in which Xolotl II. died is uncertain. Brasseur, whose chronology I have followed, does not give the date, though he says it occurred some years after the death of Huetzin, which occurred in 1154. Xolotl, says this author, at his death, 'ne pouvait guère avoir plus de cent ou cent dix ans, et, en calculant les années de son règne, à commencer de son arrivée dans l'Anahuac, il aurait pu durer tout au plus de soixante à soixante-cinq ans.' _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 277-8. Veytia, tom. ii., p. 69, writes that Xolotl died in 1232. Torquemada, tom. i., p. 60, says that he was nearly 200 years of age when he died. Ixtlilxochitl, pp. 212, 343, 397, 452, says, 117 years after his departure from Amaquemecan, in the 112th year of his reign in Anahuac, and gives, as usual, several dates for Xolotl's death, namely: 1075, 1127, 1074, and 1121. _Rios_, _Compend. Hist. Mex._, p. 7, says that he died at the age of 160, after a reign of 99 years.

[V-79] Torquemada, tom. i., pp. 61-2, gives the speeches delivered on the occasion.

[V-80] _Torquemada_, tom. i., p. 66; _Ixtlilxochitl_, pp. 212-13; _Clavigero_, tom. i., pp. 140-2; _Veytia_, tom. ii., pp. 71-3, 78; _Rios_, _Compend. Hist. Mex._, p. 8; _Brasseur_, _Hist._, tom. ii., pp. 281-8.

[V-81] We have seen that according to the account given by Veytia, and others, of the events which led to the first trouble between the Chichimecs and the people of Culhuacan, Achitometl succeeded to the throne immediately after the death of Nauhyotl, no mention being made of the reigns of Huetzin or Nonohualcatl. See pp. 303-4.