Aztec army

[Goliad]

A great post. I have been intrigued by Aztecs for a long time but usually end up confused about what is happening! I have read the Chronofus guide along with the Heath book a few others. I know if I 'm serious I should just dive into primary sources! Still I wonder if I could ask some questions about Aztecs to put me on the path to clarity ...

Commoners
Was there a commoner warrior caste? The sons of "Grey Knights" for example who followed their fathers in the profession. Would these commoner warriors have functioned like sergeants in a European medieval context, supporting the nobles of their particular ward? Or were all commoners just a general levy and some eventually randomly showed military skills and became more specialised?
So commoners could use Atl Atl, this was not a special weapon of the elite? Would they have used bows? Some things I have read suggest no Atl Atl, and just limited Aztec use of bows.

Potecha
So this class had their own rank progression and could wear feather suits? Were they part of the nobility? Most things I have read don't mention the Potecha in military context but usually say they were a special group of commoners and that only nobles could wear feather suits?

Nobles
Most of the information I read is on rank progression relates to the nobility. One recent study I saw suggested 1% of the population was noble while others indicate up to 20% If the latter figure then you could have a culture that allowed only "nobles" to wage war as the population was large and our Aztec armies could be made up of all those lovely feather suits. If the figure is 1% then should my army have a couple of guys in feather suits surrounded by commoners? I do see mention of sometimes only nobles being called up for war, which makes sense if the noble population was large.

Body Painting
Would the Aztecs have painted their bodies? All painted black? Some? None?

Warfare
Is there any idea of the extent to which Aztecs and their rivals engaged in wars of posts and skirmishes. I have seen mentions of "garrisons" which indicates some need to protect borders or engage in raids/counter raids. Or was warfare from flower wars to "hard" war pretty ritualised and formatted?

Interested to hear views. I might never collect Aztecs but these sort of questions keep vexing me!

[6milPhil]

As I mentioned above this guy has some interesting videos, and this one may well answer some of those questions...

Mayan postclassic

Thanks for all the pictures, great stuff. I've been working on these:https://imgur.com/a/Y1mZ3gc

[Huron34]

Good eveningGoliad,
If I opened this topic, it is precisely to have answers to these questions!

To begin, the word Aztec:
It describes all the tribe of central Mexico. As far as, I am concerned, for the moment, I am dedicated to the Mexicas.

Commoners:

the text speack of a stone rain, thrown simply with the hands, or with a sling, or arrows.
The Atl-Atl is used for hunting (ducks for example).
For the arc, the Mexicas, preferred hired mercenaries (otomis for example).

Grey knights, the texts do not mention feathers suits, for the Mexicas. Only skin of jaguars or chamois.
But in many codex , it is possible to see warriors accompanied by youngs porters . These warriors do not have of "Temilotl"(hair like Tequihua), or no trace of nobility.
Codex florentine, shown this warrior's kind with a feather outfit, half yellow and half blue!

In other codices, the same warriors wear colored outfits, but it is in feather or simply in coloured skin (red, blue, grey, yellow), and always no trace of Temilotl!

Pochtecas:
Study of the codex, clearly showns a feathered outfit (florentine codex)

Nobles:
I will lean for 20% of the population, because nobles have the right to many women. So many children of noble blood who in turn will do the same thing.

Body paint:
Are rare in the Mexicas. But on the contrary, they are numerous for the tlaxcaltec and otomi.

War:
The Mexicas are a warrior civilisation. Before the arrival of spanish, the Mexicas were invading the mayan territory.

If other people can answer us, please do not hesitate!!!

[Goliad]

Huron,

Thanks for the reply, your views certainly help inform my understanding! I must start reading codex seriously!

[cdm]

A great post. I have been intrigued by Aztecs for a long time but usually end up confused about what is happening! I have read the Chronofus guide along with the Heath book a few others. I know if I 'm serious I should just dive into primary sources! Still I wonder if I could ask some questions about Aztecs to put me on the path to clarity ...

The rules changed over time, so comments are contextual on the era you're interested in. Answers relate to the late aztec period near the Spanish conquest, specifically centred around the tenochs and tlatelolcans. Go back even a half century and things are markedly different.

Commoners
Was there a commoner warrior caste? The sons of "Grey Knights" for example who followed their fathers in the profession. Would these commoner warriors have functioned like sergeants in a European medieval context, supporting the nobles of their particular ward? Or were all commoners just a general levy and some eventually randomly showed military skills and became more specialised?
So commoners could use Atl Atl, this was not a special weapon of the elite? Would they have used bows? Some things I have read suggest no Atl Atl, and just limited Aztec use of bows.

By the decree of Tlacaelel and the founding proper of Tenochtitlan, commoners were REMOVED from war within their tribal group, war becoming exclusively a noble endeavour. How far this extended into the Tlatelolcans is not clear, but appears to be the same. Whether this went further into the Texcocoans etc is less clear, but also probably the same at this late stage of the' empire.' However, during schooling any boys from non noble families that showed great aptitude were allowed to try the warrior lifestyle. If they proved skilled in war, managed 4 captives, they become lesser nobles. Never having the rights of full nobles, so they couldn't wear feather outfits etc, they had more rights than commoners. They became the 'grey knights' (probably a really bad translation of the actual name), but their sons became full nobles with all associated rights. Nothing is said of those who failed, probably they went back to farming or whatever their father's profession was. Nothing is also said of the captives non nobles took, as the captor's family usually ate the captive, but as they aren't nobles, and human flesh was forbidden, I assume they became tasty morsels for the ruling elite or calpulli elites instead. I assume they did get to keep the lock of hair of their captive as the nobles did.

Any weapon used by the aztecs was usable by anyone in war. This means nobles used bows, atl atl, javelins/darts, slings, rocks, magic puddings and anything else they were personally skilled at using. Codex images and textual evidence is explicit. How Hassig came up with some of his regrettable statements is an example of sloppy research becoming gospel in academic research.

Pochtecha
So this class had their own rank progression and could wear feather suits? Were they part of the nobility? Most things I have read don't mention the Potecha in military context but usually say they were a special group of commoners and that only nobles could wear feather suits?

They were a society aside from the rest, due to their travels and stranglehold on the import of luxury goods. They existed in their own clique above commoners, probably similar to regular nobles, but below the super nobles (ruling elite.) It would be interesting to know whether this became a tense relationship with the ruling elite or not by the end, as the relationship with calpullis and subject kingdoms had became. Their outfits are mentioned in the Primeros.

Nobles
Most of the information I read is on rank progression relates to the nobility. One recent study I saw suggested 1% of the population was noble while others indicate up to 20% If the latter figure then you could have a culture that allowed only "nobles" to wage war as the population was large and our Aztec armies could be made up of all those lovely feather suits. If the figure is 1% then should my army have a couple of guys in feather suits surrounded by commoners? I do see mention of sometimes only nobles being called up for war, which makes sense if the noble population was large.

There are nobles, nobles, and nobles. I lazily call them non warrior nobles, warrior nobles and super nobles (ruling caste nobles). Non warrior nobles had lots of restrictions such as no cotton, couldn't eat human flesh and a few other things such as roles and responsibilities and career paths. The outfits, roles, responsibilities and freedoms/taboos were slightly different between warrior nobles and super nobles. The question you really are alluding to is, if nobles generally were the warriors in an aztec army (rather than their victims, which is another story) what was their composition in suits, and styles. Remember that warriors and suits ranked in level from 0 to 7+ captives, and that for a warrior to achieve adulthood, he had to take 4 captives. He couldn't be married before then, so you can get an idea that captive taking was not uncommon. You also have to realise that mention is made of children and women counting as captives, so....having 4 isn't as difficult as initially expected) The question you are really then moving to is are the majority eagles and jaguars, and what might you think is the smaller proportion of 0-3 captive, and 5+ captives. Evidence from the Primeros also makes it clear that jaguars and eagles didn't just wear eagle and jaguar suits, but a wide variety of the suits you're expecting. The question remains unanswered as to when they wore what suits, as there is an example of one particular warrior wearing an eagle suit, a jaguar suit, and a suit made from parts of both. Suits may well be role based, or whim based on the day. I can't answer that from source evidence. Sitting beside all this is the priestly warriors. They also had a captive progression system very similar but slightly different at the top end to the noble warriors. How numerous were they, I don't recall enough evidence to even hint at it, but I would expect not significant in an army context.

Variety in your aztec army also comes from the subject kingdoms and their contingents who were constantly called upon to join in the army. Consider them like all the petty German contingents in a Napoleonic French army. Always there, very similar, but not exactly the same.

Body Painting
Would the Aztecs have painted their bodies? All painted black? Some? None?

Yes. Priestly warriors, all exposed flesh in black. Add blood to ears for effect, if you had mad painting skills.
Commoners, no, never until they achieve tequihua rank, and then...? No evidence either way, but I'd say yes.
Nobles, yes to the exposed body only. Evidence is limited, and Mendoza regrettably is a poorly explained document fraught with some discrepancy between an exact picture image, and pictures that tell a story without having to draw on words to help explain. People take these images literally, because that's how our modern society reads images these days. Take for example all the warriors in the warrior list having a temilotl hair style and shoes, from rank 1 to 4, even though textually from other sources we know they didn't get this till rank 4, and had other styles at 1, 2, and 3 captive and no shoes. Now look at all the sculpted figures of commoners wearing the temilotl style and shoes and wonder if these people really can keep their claim to be the most deeply researched range of aztecs in production. (I'm not looking at you, TAG)

The pictures tell us this is a tequihua (shoes and temilotl) at captives 1, 2, and 3 with his rank outfit. This throws into question whether ranks 1,2, and 3 had body paint despite what the image shows. However, the prior image in the warrior list shows a tequihua plus apprentice travelling off to war, both shown in full body paint. I lean to the yeah paint them all camp, but it's hard to paint well anyway, and I'd certainly not bother anyone who didn't body paint them. Facial painting patterns are known, but evidence is extremely limited. If you are excited enough to try, use the facial painting of Tezcatlipoca, and other gods. Contingents drawn from each calpulli could easily have the facial style of their respective calpulli god which would really set them all apart (aside from just having their calpulli banner on the unit leader). Otomi rank has at least one example of facial painting style, and the cauachic are often depicted with no face paint with the rest of the body in black. (edit: texts say one half of his head was painted blue, and the other half red, or yellow. While half and half makes us think left blue, right yellow, refer some images of say huitzilopochtli whose face is banded yellow and blue, or Tezcatlipoca with bands of black, blue and yellow) Leaders (and assumedly super nobles) also are usually shown with black body paint and unpainted faces. Whether this is artistic stylisation or simply that the pattern changed on needs and the face is just left bare, *shrug*.

Any captive sacrifice vignette should all be body painted depending on the god sacrificed to, the victims style based on the god. Plenty of great examples in the Primeros, etc

Warfare
Is there any idea of the extent to which Aztecs and their rivals engaged in wars of posts and skirmishes. I have seen mentions of "garrisons" which indicates some need to protect borders or engage in raids/counter raids. Or was warfare from flower wars to "hard" war pretty ritualised and formatted?

Sure is. Heaps. Flower wars were intended to be ritualised, and had specific fields of battle used each year as the meeting place. Monty 2 is famous for getting his butt kicked and trying to resort to cheating to win them. He still got trounced. Chalk one up to prophecy, or karma.

Hope that's vaguely useful without too much info for a brief overview. There are further nuances, but that should do for most regular gamers to push lead around.

Edit: added cuachiqueh face painting

[zippyfusenet]

Thanks for the thread, guys. I haven't had much to add, but your figure painting is excellent, Huron, and I've enjoyed all the knowledge that's been posted.

Since Mayas have come up, I'll post this pic of some terra cotta figures that are on display in the Dayton (Ohio, USA) Art Institute. Many items in the DAI Pre-Columbian Gallery come from private collections and were bought on the antiquities market, so unfortunately have no context, but these are evidently late Mayan.

[6milPhil]

Excellent, perhaps it's time for a seperate Mayan thread?

[Goliad]

cdm, thanks for the excellent information - it really helps create a good idea of what a later Aztec force might look like (I think)! I'm picturing a few groups of Aztec warrior each about 50% 4 captive warrior and the rest a split of 0 - 3 and 5+ warriors with maybe a few commoners included in the ranks. Maybe a very small group of priests and/or additional 6+ warriors kept in reserve. There would maybe be an equal number of allied units to fill out the force, along with maybe a small group or two of missile armed commoners/others (would the porters have had such a battle role? - bring a sling and have a shot or two at the enemy to build experience?)

[Huron34]

Good evening everyone,
Here my first aztec warriors (8 years ago)
Warriors priests according to the codex Mendoza. Of course, there are mistakes

Novice warrior: face must be unpainted
Warrior with coton arnour, no wear sandals

[Huron34]

Momoyactli warrior: Momoyactli too high banner (error wargamme)
It should be in the back (at kidney height). Look codex

[Huron34]

others

[Huron34]

And coyote priest warrior

[FierceKitty]

My Mexicans got thumped again yesterday. They're pretty, but, oh, stone age weapons against modern stuff...

[FierceKitty]

The wife was leading the Conquistadors, and is not letting me forget that she's won three in a row.

[cdm]

I'd personally not be too concerned over Aztec toy soldier 'correctness,' except in academic conversation. Accurate, considered research on the military system just doesn't exist in any public way at the moment. My life doesn't have time to even put my basic scribblings online in a way someone might find it useful. Your figures look great, and deserve to get some table time.

I'd love to see some Mayan discussion, but I am very under qualified to participate. Certainly happy to learn insight from a serious researcher. I have a stack of Eureka figures waiting to be painted one day when I figure out what to do with them.

FierceKitty, seems like the rules are accurately reflecting history