THE SOURCE
As is the case with most of the native and mestizo chroniclers, little is known of the life of this important author who, in the interests of spatial economy, we shall call simply Chimalpahin. On internal evidence, all that we know is that he was born in Amaquemecan on May 27, 1579, and was educated in the Convento de San Antonio Abad in Mexico City, where he seems later to have performed certain sacerdotal administrative functions (Siméon, in Chimalpahin 1889: xii–xiii; Rendón 1949: 199). The year of his death is not known, but a terminus post quem is provided by the probable year of the composition of the seventh relación, 1629 (see Chimalpahin 1889: 37). From his own statements, his impressive genealogy can be worked out in some detail (Siméon, in Chimalpahin 1889: 196; Rendón 1949: 200). He was a direct descendant of members of the most powerful royal dynasties of the province of Chalco, in the southeast Basin of Mexico.
Of his writings, eight separate but closely related works, called relaciones, have come down to us. Passing through the successive hands of Sigüenza y Góngora, Boturini (Catalogue § VIII, 12), Aubin, and Goupil, they are now the property of the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris (Manuscrit Mexicaine Núm. 74), have been best described by Boban (1891, I: 27–31) and Jiménez Moreno (1938: 563–568), and have been published in sumptuous facsimile (Chimalpahin 1949). Whether these manuscripts are the holographs of Chimalpahin is not clear; their many mistakes make it more likely that they are seventeenth-century copies.
Of the eight relaciones, apart from the unpaleographized and untranslated facsimile versions, only three have been published. Siméon (Chimalpahin 1889) published the sixth and seventh, with Nahuatl and French transla- tion in parallel columns, and Rendón (1949) has published the fourth, with Spanish translation. The relación that interests us here, the second, is unedited; its latter portion (folios 15–67) constitutes the Memorial breve acerca de la
130 TOPILTZIN QUETZALCOATL tions from the Nahuatl are extant, one in German by Walter Lehmann (see Kutscher 1948: 408–409), and one in Spanish by Miguel Barrios (Chimalpahin, n.d.). Kutscher has summarized the contents of the Memorial breve in a brief article (1948), based on the former translation. I have used the Barrios trans- lation.
Chimalpahin was an annalist whose methods were similar to those em- ployed by the anonymous compiler, or compilers, of the Anales de Cuauhtitlan. He utilized independent chronicles (apparently based ultimately on pre-His- panic pictorial histories) from different places in the Basin of Mexico and attempted to fit them into a coherent, continuous chronological scheme— which resulted in the same kind of artificiality and distortion. As with the
Anales de Cuauhtitlan, it is necessary to carefully distinguish his various sources
before his writings can be critically utilized.
The Memorial breve has a somewhat misleading title (inserted in Spanish in the original manuscript); it is neither particularly brief nor is it dedicated solely, or even principally, to the history of Colhuacan. Many more of its fifty-two folios are devoted to a detailed account of the earliest history of the various separate groups that coalesced to form the province of Chalco, the history of the migrating ancestors of the Mexica, up to the “Babylonian Captivity” in Colhuacan, and a few brief snatches of Tetzcocan history. The history of the Colhuacan dynasty is only sketched out in the briefest and most laconic terms—but it is here that nearly all of the Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl material is found.
The Memorial breve, which is quite panoramic in its historical scope, may actually be only the first portion of a much more ambitious work, of which the latter part was left unfinished or has been lost. Its date is uncertain. It ends with a testimonial on land boundaries by one Miguel Quetzalmazatzin, which is dated 1607, but it is not certain that this can be also considered the date of the preceding Memorial breve.
THE TOPILTZIN QUETZALCOATL MATERIAL
The Memorial breve begins with the establishment of the “Chichimeca culhuaque” at Colhuacan in the year 10 Tochtli, which Chimalpahin equates with A.D. 670. No data are presented concerning their point of origin or their migration. It is also stated that the Xochimilca and those of Atlacuihuayan (Tacubaya) were already established upon their arrival. The Colhuaque soon became the overlords of Xochimilco, Cuitlahuac, Mizquic, Coyoacan, Ocuillan, and Malinalco. Forty-seven years later, in 5 Calli, Topiltzin Nauhyotzin becomes the first official ruler of Colhuacan (his birth is assigned to 2 Acatl, A.D. 675 in Chimalpahin’s computation). Before that time, the Colhuaque had only been governed by war captains. Nauhyotzin is succeeded in 3 Acatl (A.D. 767) by Nonohualcatl, who in turn is succeeded, in 3 Calli, A.D. 845, by Yohuallatonac. In the twelfth year of the latter’s
131 CENTRAL MEXICO: NAHUATL
reign, 1 Tecpatl (A.D. 857), a “triple alliance” is set up, with Colhuacan, Tollan, “on the right,” and Otompan, “on the left,” as the participating members (this is the first mention of Tollan). After a seventy-year reign, Yohuallatonac is succeeded by Quetzalacxoyatzin, who in turn is followed, in 7 Calli (A.D. 953), by Chalchiuhtlatonac. In 4 Acatl (A.D. 963), Hueymac is born to the prince Totepeuh, son of Chalchiuhtlatonac. Totepeuh becomes ruler twenty-two years later, in 13 Calli (A.D. 985). In the New Fire year, 2 Acatl (A.D. 987), Hueymac takes a bride, Maxio, in “Tototepec Metztitlan,” and in 8 Calli (A.D. 993), he is placed on the throne of Tollan.
In 4 Tochtli (A.D. 1002), it is stated that “Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcohuatl” is born in Tollan. There follows a somewhat obscure statement, however, that indicates that according to another version he was brought to Tollan from parts unknown (Barrios’s translation: “Pero no es verdad que vino del pecado (de los de Tullan) para que allí haya vencido a aparecer. ¿De dónde vino? Justamente no se sabe. Así van diciendo los viejos”). Back in Colhuacan, Totepeuh is succeeded in 2 Tochtli (A.D. 1026) by Nauhyotzin II.
In 5 Calli (A.D. 1029), it is stated that, according to one version, Hueymac died in this year and Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcohuatl succeeded to the throne of Tollan. Seven years later, in 12 Tecpatl (A.D. 1036), the evil omens of the coming destruction of the city commence. In 3 Tecpatl (A.D. 1040), Tollan cracks up and the dispersion of the Toltecs follows, with the consequent founding of new towns (only Cholollan is specifically named). Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcohuatl, however, remains eleven more years in Tollan before aban- doning it. In the year 1 Acatl (A.D. 1051), he journeys toward the eastern seacoast to “Poctlan Tlapallan,” saying that he would return to reestablish his kingdom. Chimalpahin parenthetically adds that the later rulers of Tenochtitlan were all cognizant of this prophecy, especially the second Motecuhzoma, who extended his hospitality to Cortés, believed to be the returning Quetzalcoatl.
He further states here that one of the causes of the abandonment of Tollan was a comet that appeared over the city, frightening its inhabitants. He also makes the important declaration that, upon Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcohuatl’s departure from Tollan, 342 years had passed since its foun- dation, which would take that event back to 3 Calli (A.D. 689) (it was not mentioned, however, in its proper chronological position in the account). The author then states that, after Quetzalcohuatl’s departure, the Toltecs (indicating that a substantial group of survivors remained) made Matlac- xochitzin the new ruler of Tollan, adding that nothing was known of his subsequent fate.
A variant account is next presented, in which Hueymac, in this same year, 1 Acatl (A.D. 1051), comes from Tollan in pursuit of his enemy, Quetzalcohuatl. After failing to discover him anywhere, he enters “Cincalco
132 TOPILTZIN QUETZALCOATL Chapultepec.” Chimalpahin seems to express his preference for this version, which would give Hueymac a continuous reign of forty-nine years up to the time of his disappearance and would further necessitate some kind of joint rule with Quetzalcoatl for a long portion of this period.
In 10 Acatl (A.D. 1047), Tollan and Otompan having been destroyed, a new “triple alliance” is organized, Coatlinchan substituting for Tollan, Azcapotzalco replacing Otompan, and with Colhuacan playing the domi- nant role. The narrative then shifts abruptly to the migration of the ances- tors of the Mexica from Aztlan/Chicomoztoc but continues throughout to present the chronology of the subsequent rulers of Colhuacan, whose names (but not dates) agree almost exactly with those in the Juan Cano Relaciones and the Anales de Cuauhtitlan (see complete lists in Lehmann 1938: 38–39). Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcohuatl reappears somewhat later in the narra- tive in an entry under the year 3 Calli (A.D. 1209). In this year the ancestors of one of the Chalcan groups, the “Eztlapictin Teochichimeca,” established themselves at Tizatepec, near Xochimilco. Chimalpahin takes this opportu- nity to employ one of his favorite devices, the flashback, this time to the period of the residence of this group in “Teotenanco Cuixcoc Temimilolco Yhuipan Zacanco,” where they remained for perhaps as long as three hun- dred years while on their migration from Aztlan/Chicomoztoc to the Basin of Mexico. The Toltecs were established in Tollan at this time. During the reign of Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcohuatl, the envy of the latter was aroused by the sumptuous temple that the Eztlapictin Teochichimeca had raised to their god, Nauhyoteuhctli, and the rich offerings brought to it. This shrine was almost identical to those erected by Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl himself in Tollan, with four edifices constructed of jade, precious feathers, turquoise, and red shell. Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcohuatl’s war against these devotees of Nauhyoteuhctli, in an attempt to capture the shrine and the richly attired idol, failed, however, and later the Eztlapictin Teochichimeca continued their migration, carrying the image of their god and oracle.
Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcohuatl occasionally reappears in Chimalpahin’s frequent chronological flashbacks, but only the last of these supplies any significant new information. This is found at the very end of the narrative (just before the inserted testimonial of Miguel Quetzalmazatzin), as part of a long recapitulation of various periods, beginning with the creation of the world (biblical), that had elapsed up to the time of the entrance of the migrating Mexica into Tizapan Colhuacan following the Chapoltepec defeat. Here it is indicated that the cause of the Toltec destruction was their great sins, leading to the appearance of the comet for eleven years. This was in the time of the ruler Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcohuatl, who was feared and re- spected throughout New Spain. The cognizance of this by the nine rulers of Mexico Tenochtitlan is again mentioned, and a statement of Motecuhzoma
133 CENTRAL MEXICO: NAHUATL
Xocoyotzin, the “superstitious,” is quoted to the effect that they (the rulers) were only the representatives, the lieutenants, of this great sorcerer and seer. Again, Chimalpahin states that eleven years after the abandonment of Tollan, Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcohuatl departed for the east, for the “towns of the sun,” to Tlapallan, where he was called by the sun. And the wise ancients still said, “He lives yet, he has not died. And he will come again to rule.” SUMMARY
(1) Topiltzin Acxitl Quetzalcohuatl is either born in Tollan or brought there from unknown parts in the year 4 Tochtli, A.D. 1002, while Hueymac, son of the incumbent ruler of Colhuacan, Totepeuh, is reigning; (2) accord- ing to one version, Hueymac dies in 5 Calli, A.D. 1029, and is succeeded by Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl, a great sorcerer and seer; according to another, Hueymac continues his rule, but the former also succeeded to the throne; (3) while ruler, Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl wages an unsuccessful war against the “Eztlapictin Teochichimeca,” then established in Teotenanco Cuixcoc Temimilolco Yhuipan Zacanco, in an attempt to capture the richly adorned idol Nauhyoteuhctli and his sumptuous temple; (4) in 12 Tecpatl, A.D. 1036, the portents of Tollan’s approaching destruction begin, and in 3 Tecpatl, A.D. 1040, the Toltec dispersion commences; (5) Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl remains in Tollan for eleven more years, then departs in the year 1 Acatl, A.D. 1051, journeying to the east to Poctlan Tlapallan, where he has been called by the sun; (6) before he disappears, he promises to return to reclaim his kingdom; (7) this prophecy was always recalled by the nine rulers of Tenochtitlan, especially Motecuhzoma II, who considered himself only the deputy of the departed ruler and who greeted Cortés as the returning lord of Tollan; (8) in the variant version of Hueymac’s end, he and Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl are great enemies, and, in the same year that the latter abandons Tollan, Hueymac also departs in pursuit of him; (9) failing in his aim of overtaking him, he disappears in “Cincalco Chapultepec.”
COMMENT
Although not quite as difficult as the accounts of Alva Ixtlilxochitl to work with, this version of his contemporary, Chimalpahin, presents some genuinely challenging problems. Parallels for nearly all of the individual elements in Chimalpahin’s account of Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl can also be found in the sources we assigned to our first category, but they have been juggled and rearranged in a somewhat disconcerting fashion. Although we encounter here again the names of the three standard preeminent figures of Toltec history, Totepeuh (-Mixcoatl), Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl, and Huemac, they stand in an entirely new relationship with one another. The first has become a Colhuaque ruler who is the father of the third, not the second, and Huemac is named as acceding to the throne of Tollan before Topiltzin
134 TOPILTZIN QUETZALCOATL Quetzalcoatl himself. The latter’s own antecedents are obscure. He and Huemac are contemporaries and enemies, and Huemac leaves Tollan in his pursuit. Tezcatlipoca’s persecutions of Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl, Huemac, and the Toltecs in general are not mentioned. The account of Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl’s flight is sketchy but fairly standard. Only the place-name Poctlan, linked with that of Tlapallan, is new. Chimalpahin’s chronology of the Colhuaque and Toltec dynasties, especially the great antiquity he at- tributes to the former, will not be commented upon here, being reserved for a later discussion.
Explaining the anomalous features of this version of the tale is difficult. Can we detect the hand of Chimalpahin himself here—or are we dealing with an authentic pre-Hispanic variant of the history of Colhuacan and Tollan? Unless some new information comes to light concerning the source (or, better, sources, since, by his own statement, he was drawing from at least two distinct traditions) upon which Chimalpahin based his account, it is doubtful that this question can ever be satisfactorily answered. Its similarity, in three important points—(1) the coming, in one version, of Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl from parts unknown to Tollan; (2) his contemporaneity with Huemac; and (3) his persecution by the latter—with another late sixteenth- century account, that of Muñoz Camargo (via Torquemada), is perhaps significant. On the other hand, the lack of the white skin, beard, and prosely- tizing activities usually ascribed to Quetzalcoatl in the longer later accounts is also noteworthy (explained by the extreme sketchiness of Chimalpahin’s treatment of our hero?).
As will be brought out below, the great antiquity assigned in the Memo-
rial breve to the dynasty of the Colhuacan of the Basin of Mexico agrees with
no other source. Some distortion, therefore, might also be expected in Chimalpahin’s account of Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl. The best clue, I believe, is provided by the obscurity of his origin. As we have seen, in the most reliable early accounts there is nothing really obscure about either his parentage or place of origin, however much these may differ from source to source. With the exception of Olmos, an unknown or “foreign” origin for our hero is only encountered in the sources of the category now under consideration, all dating from the later sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries (Sahagún’s silence is a special case). Obvious Christian influence has been at work in all of these accounts. The same influence is probably present, to a somewhat lesser degree, in this Memorial breve account of Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl—cer- tainly not surprising in view of the compiler’s known education and later career, as well as his manifest interest in and knowledge of biblical matters. Again, however, whether this presumed distortion was due to Chimalpahin himself is uncertain; he may only have been faithfully copying his sources.
135 CENTRAL MEXICO: NAHUATL
the later history of the Toltec-Colhuaque dynasty, since, from the time of the fall of Tollan, it agrees so closely with both the Juan Cano Relaciones and the Anales de Cuauhtitlan. I am inclined to be quite skeptical, however, of the validity of its early part, especially that involving the chronology and famil- ial relations of Totepeuh, Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl, and Huemac. It stands strik- ingly apart from the (probably separately compiled) accounts in these two earlier sources, whose general reliability is supported by many lines of evi- dence. This, at least, would be my somewhat negative hypothesis until fresh evidence appears. For this reason, together with its late date, I have placed Chimalpahin’s version of the Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl of Tollan Tale in this category of later accounts possessing secondary value.
This completes the survey of the most important sources from the Nahuatl-speaking area of Central Mexico that contain relevant data con- cerning our hero. Since most of the ruling dynasties of the leading polities of this region at the time of the Conquest claimed Toltec descent, it is not surprising that the rich body of traditional lore surrounding Tollan and its past glories, which seems to have usually included the Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl of Tollan Tale, was preserved in various versions throughout this wide area. It also follows that not only in Central Mexico but wherever in Mesoamerica the stamp of Toltec influence is clearly apparent, some reminiscences of their great priest/ruler are likely to be present. The remainder of the basic data presentation section, therefore, will consist largely of following out “the tracks of the Toltecs” into those areas of Mesoamerica where linguistic, ethnohistorical, and archaeological evidence makes it probable that Toltecs and Toltec-connected dynasts—and/or their strong influence—must have penetrated.