Summary
Acacitli (Nahuatl for "reed hare";[1] pronounced [aːkaˈsiʔtɬi]) was a Mexica chief and one of the "founding fathers" of Tenochtitlan, the capital of the Aztec Empire.
Acacitli | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Died | 1167 Tulpetlac |
| Predecessor | Cuauhtlequetzqui |
| Successor | Citlallitzin |
| Children | Queen Tezcatlan Miyahuatzin |
| Relatives | Huitzilihuitl (grandson) |
According to the Crónica mexicayotl, his daughter Tezcatlan Miyahuatzin was married to Acamapichtli, the first tlatoani of Tenochtitlan, and gave birth to King Huitzilihuitl.[2]
The cuauhtlatoani edit
Temporality edit
The two main versions that expose its temporality come from the same historian: Domingo Chimalpahin, deposited at the Memorial of Colhuacan, The [3] the Seventh Relation,[4] and the Journal respectively. [5]
The Memorial de Colhuacan shares (and complements) its conclusions with the Seventh relation, for they establish that there were nine cuauhtlahtohqueh ('interim leader/ruler') who guided[6] to the Mexica from 1116 (1-Tecpatl) comparing computations with the beginning of the migration presented in the Codex Boturini to 1312 (2-tecpatl)[7] To try to give more historical depth to the facts, although the Memorial of Colhuacan creates a kind of "lagoon" equivalent to a New Fire Ceremony, 52 years (from 1188 to 1240)[8] This creates confusion considering that lately, there have been attempts to spread connections between the indigenous calendar and symbology from a Western vision that leave aside the original conception recorded in the sources. According to this version, he was the third cuauhtlahto who became cuauhtlahto in the year 12-house and died in the year 13-caña. If so, he ruled for 15 years; settling seventeen years after his arrival in Tula in 1153 and died four years after his arrival in Atlitlalaquian in 1167.
On the other hand, the Journal provides a clearer and more coherent list based on older sources calculating in the Indigenous way, from which the inconsistencies of the periods of the other lists are observed and studied. In the same manner as the previous list, he was converted cuauhtlahto in the year 12-house and died in 13-cane, governing for 15 years. The account of the tonalpohualli might certainly seem the same, but it is not. This list advocates placing 12-house in 1205 and 13-cane in 1219, that is, 52 years later.'
The Annals of Tlatelolco present a different list that does not clear up the problem in its entirety, taking into account that Rafael Tena (translator and paleographer of the edition of CONACULTA in 2004) proposed an incorrect chronology, but agrees that there were nine cuauhtlahtohqueh. Starting from the year 8-casa 1253 and going back to the year 1-acatl 1155, he was placed as successor of Cuauhtlequetzqui in 1205 (12-casa) established in Tlemaco to Apanteuctli, who replaced Acacitli until his death in 1236 (4-tecpatl) in Apazco.
It is also useful to mention that it is preferable to bring the cuauhtlahtohqueh in the historically true since 1240; First, the sources themselves indicate events that are excessively mythologized, incoherent, contradictory and not very corroborable in reality. [9]
See also edit
Notes edit
- ^ a b Berdan & Anawalt (1997): p. 5.
- ^ Chimalpahin (1997): pp. 36–37.
- ^ original title of this section of the Différentes histoires originals (Ms. Mex. 74-BnF) that succeeds the Second Relation and precedes the Third Relation is "Brief Memorial on the Foundation of the City of Culhuacan" (in the original fol. 15r: Memorial breue sobre la fundaçiô de la ciudad de Culhuacan), so it is an abbreviation.
- ^ The relations, are a copy of the Mexican History in Nahuatl (by Chimalpahin himself, written before the first ones) so the information does not differ. In his relations, there are attempts to project and insert his history in a broader chronological framework, hence also in the work of Chimalpahin parallels of events are established between America and Europe, this also causes the Mexica chronology to extend into the past towards even more remote times and most of the inconsistencies arise.(Hernández Maciel 2019).
- ^ There are other versions (one by Chimalpahin) that do not expose Acacitli, so they will not be mentioned.
- ^ Originally there were seven Cuauhtlahtohqueh, but in the attempt at a kind of "insertion or appropriation of the history of the region" the Mexica established a mathematical model of government intimately linked to (and used) of the Toltec, the binomial of nine (9). It was eventually standardized to nine cuauhtlahtohqueh, which explains the symbolism of the anthroponyms of the cuauhtlahtohqueh from the third to the fifth, which, according to the Memorial of Colhuacan complemented on this occasion by the Diary give us to understand that they are "filler": Citlallitzin: 'venerable star' (1219–1234), Tzimpantzin: 'venerable standard-bearer' (1234–1235) and Tlazohtzin: 'venerable appreciated' (1235–1239). (Hernández Maciel 2019, p. 1).
- ^ Calendric-symbolic binomial that represents the end/beginning of an event or events, so other sources point to the foundation in this year.
- ^ That instead, the Third relation (from the same Chimalpahin) clarifies this "gap" by placing Iztacmixcoatl, who would be the "initiator" of the first Mexica royal lineage.
- ^ Well, that's how the sources interpret it.
References edit
- Berdan, Frances F; Patricia Rieff Anawalt (1997). The Essential Codex Mendoza. Berkeley: University of California Press. pp. 5. ISBN 0-520-20454-9.
- Chimalpahin Cuauhtlehuanitzin, Domingo Francisco de San Antón Muñón (1997). "Mexican History or Chronicle". Codex Chimalpahin: society and politics in Mexico Tenochtitlan, Tlatelolco, Texcoco, Culhuacan, and other Nahua altepetl in central Mexico: the Nahuatl and Spanish annals and accounts collected by don Domingo de San Antón Muñón Chimalpahin Quauhtlehuanitzin. Edited and translated by Arthur J. O. Anderson and Susan Schroeder. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press. pp. 25–177. ISBN 0-8061-2921-2.
- García Granados, Rafael (1952). "3 Acacitli". Diccionario Biográfico de Historia Antigua de Méjico. Méjico: Instituto de Historia. pp. vol. 1, p. 2.
- Hernández Maciel, Francisco Jesús (2019). ¿Se equivocó Chimalpahin? La manera indígena de contar el tiempo [Was Chimalpahin wrong? The indigenous way of counting time] (in Spanish). Guadalajara, México: Estudios cronológicos.
External links edit
