CHAPTER 9 Principles of Regional and Long-distance Trade in the Aztec Empire Frances F. Berdan Trade in Aztec Mexico: it consisted of Jong caravans of professional merchants ~ merchants laden with precious goods, merchants trekking through dangerous and hostile country, merchants concluding gla- ‘morous transactions with rulers of distant states. These are the well-documented and paradoxical pochteca, and this is the usual ‘twentieth-century image of Aztec trade. But it is a skewed and incomplete image. If trade is a peaceful “method of acquiring goods that are not available on the spot” (Polanyi 1975: 133), then, in the Aztec empire, there were several levels or “layers” (Polyani 1975: 136-42) which served this end. These included state-supported foreign trade, conducted beyond the bounds of the empire; guild-regulated intra-empire trade; regional trade; and local-level trade. The complexity of the Aztec domain required these many levels of “material provision- ing.” Not only must the ruler and his state machinery be provisioned, but also a mace- huall’s small household. While the basic fact is the same ~ both must be supplied goods which they cannot or do not fully produce themselves ~ the scale and types of requirements are quite different. Indeed, they are sufficiently different to call forth distinct styles of trade. ‘My ultimate goal in this paper is to account for these diverse styles of trade. This requires an examination of each type in terms of its essential contextual dimen- sions. These distinguishing dimensions include degree of specialization, types of participants, scale of operations, trading goals, usual exchange “vehicles,” types of goods traded, extent of state (or other) con- trol, and adaptability under changing im- perial conditions. ‘Types of Trading Ventures Foreign Trade While any trading activity carried on beyond the bounds of one’s own familiar territory may be considered “foreign trade,” Lam using this term quite specifically here to refer to Aztec state-sponsored trad- ing enterprises conducted beyond the bor- ders of the imperial domain. The principal actors in this business were the professional long-distance merchants, the colorful pochteca. These merchant specialists, organized into guilds,’ were ensconced in separate calpulli in the major Valley of Mexico cities (see Berdan 1978). Some of these merchant groups, at least by the sixteenth century, appear to have exer- cised a monopoly over state-supported for- eign trading ventures, We are told by the Tlatelolean informants of the Franciscan friar Bernardino de Sahagin that the poch- teca from only five Valley of Mexico cities Reprinted from Frances F. Berdan. 1988. Principles of Regional and Long-distance Trade in the Aztec Empire. In Smoke and Mist: Mesoamerican Studies in Memory of Thelma D. Sullivan, edited by J. Kathryn Josserand and Karen Dakin (British Archaeological Reports, International Series, no. 402, ‘Oxtord), pp. 639-56.were commissioned by the Tenochtitlan ruler to carry state goods to foreign districts; these were the privileged pochteca from the merchant calpulli of Tenochtitlan, Tlate- lolco, Uirzilopochco, Azcapotzalco and Quauhtitlan (Sahagin 1950-82: book 9, 17)2 To be more precise, only the merchants from Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco were actually entrusted with the Tenochca ruler’s: goods. The others traveled as their com- panions. While it goes unreported, these merchants (all from cities in Tepanec territ- ory) may have carried the goods of the ruler of Tlacopan in these ventures. Similarly, while merchants from seven other Valley of Mexico cities were supposedly. restricted from trading in the Gulf Coast lands beyond the imperial boundaries (Sahagan 1950-8: book 9, 48-9), they may have served else- where as extra-empire emissaries for the ruler of Texcoco ~ these cities were located in Acolhua country and in the southern lake- shore districts.’ Admittedly, this is specula- tion. But Sahagiin’s grouping of the cities corresponds fairly nicely to the geographical domains of the Triple Alliance capital Tenochtitlan, Texcoco and Tlacopan. ‘Whether under Mexica, Acolhua, or ‘Tepanec sponsorship, the pochteca operated as both state agents and private entrepre- neurs in undertaking their long and arduous journey to foreign lands. They were sent with the blessing, and some actual material wealth, of the Aztec government (Sahagin 1950-82: book 9, 7-8, 17). In the most fully documented case (see pp. 7-8), merchants from Tenochtitlan were given 1,600 quachtli (large white cotton cloaks) by the Mexica ruler, Ahuitzotl (ruled 1486-1502). They carried these cloaks to Tlatelolco where the pochteca of the two cities exchanged gifts and then divided the cloaks equally between them, With these, they purchased the elaborately decorated articles of clothing (undoubtedly in the bustling Tlatelolco mar- ketplace) which they were to trade with the rulers of outlying districts. The fact that the pochteca carried as “state goods” the highly embellished lite clothing rather than the more “negotiable” quachtli punctu ates the political overtones of this foreign ‘exchange. The pochteca exchanged ‘Mexica ruler’s goods directly with of foreign districts for precious items of posedly equal value: jade, turquoise mo shields, shells, tortoise shell cups, wild mal skins and a variety of feathers i the prized quetzal (Sahagiin 1950-82: bo 9, 17, 18-19). Throughout, these remained the property of the ruler, and merchants served as his agents; an escort was even provided the merchants their hosts as they traversed hostile forei territory. It has all the trappings of a cal arrangement enacted for mutual This “mutual benefit” was not without economic rewards. The very exchange exclusively elite goods between Me emissaries and foreign rulers. served “move” these luxury items across boundaries. While low-value subsiste goods may move fairly readily across borders, the elite-consumables would easily penetrate those same borders in lar quantities (see below). Also, like the fax Kula Ring, might there be additional e nomic accompaniments to this formalize exchange? On these expeditions, pochteca also carried personal goods purposes of sale - they were private ent preneurs as well as state agents. offered costly goods (such as golden laces and ear plugs) for the distant elite, am less expensive items (such as rabbit fur a pointed obsidian blades) for the commoners of those districts. While the formalized aspect of pochteca foreign exchange suggests a “port of trade’ context, the inclusion of additional private merchant goods for exchange implies ‘marketplaces (Berdan 1978: 194-5). Saha gin, elaborate in his description of the state= level transactions, regrettably fails to men= tion the nature of transactions involving the personal goods of the merchants. However, an unpublished document in the Archivo General de las Indias (AGI 1541: Justicia 195) mentions that Mexican Indian mer chants in 1541 were trading in marketplaces (tianguiz) in these areas “as was their cus- tom.” In addition, contentions are made that these merchants regularly took advantage ofse local inhabitants in their economic deal- fees, a characteristic also noted by Duran 91967: vol. 2, 357-8). This suggests that sech trade was a pre-conquest pattern, and "at the location for exchanges involving the personal goods of the pochteca were the sarketplaces in these foreign areas. Local eersons involved in such trade apparently ‘sere of both nobility and commoner status, ‘sven the types of goods carried by the Mexica merchants. According to the 1541 document, these merchants obtained cacao j these marketplaces. This is consistent ‘sith the somewhat problematic statement Sy Sahagin that the pochteca possessed sacao in their personal inventories after seturning from their trading ventures 1950-82: book 9, 27, 30).4 In general, the state and private pochteca ares had a conspicuous characteristic: they were high-value, low-bulk items. It seems shat the pochteca placed a premium on real- ing a high return from their lengthy and dangerous ventures, ventures in which trans- port by foot and canoe posed “expensive” problems. Under these circumstances it can ‘Se anticipated that the 1,600 Mexica ruler’s loaks (quachtli) would be immediately exchanged by the pochteca for the more Sighly valued decorated cloaks, thus redu- «ing the bulk while at the same time offering prestigious rather than strictly utilitarian sextiles. Similarly, all of the elite goods, and most of the “ordinary” wares carried 5 private merchandise of the pochteca were manufactured, some of precious or Bighly localized materials such as gold, obsi- dian, and copper. The manufacturing “step” serves to add value to any unembellished ‘em, again (as with the decorated cloaks) without adding to its bulk. Other goods carried by the Mexica merchants for the Gulf Coast commoners consisted of items such as cochineal, rabbit fur,’ sewing need- les, alum® and various herbs (Sahagin 1950-82: book 9, 8, 18), all of which may ave been in great local demand with few other avenues open for supplying the region. Slaves were also brought to these districts by special high-ranking Mexica merchants — while they seem to have been in general AZTEC REGIONAL AND LONG-DISTANCE TRADE 193 abundance in the Gulf coastal and Yucatan area, they were also in high demand year- round as agricultural laborers and for trans- Port services (Scholes and Roys 1968: 29). Endemic warfare throughout the Yucatan peninsula produced a steady supply of cap- tives for slavery, but it appears that slaves from distant regions were preferred over those from nearby areas: “since they [the Yucatecan towns] ordinarily fought with the neighboring provinces, they sold their captives and for their own service purchased slaves from more distant regions, who could less easily escape to their homes” (Roys 1972; 68). While the pochteca tended not to carry and deal in bulky items, they did traffic in bulk. They traveled, armed, in long cara- vans. This provided them with some mea- sure of protection, and also made their substantial capital investment worthwhile. For not only were the goods of the ruler and those of the individual merchant packed, but also those of other pochteca unable to undertake that particular venture (Sahagiin 1950-82: book 9, 14). Expeditions were very well organized, both at home and on the road. The guilds contained specific merchant ranks, well documented by Sahagin. This ranking sys- tem conditioned much of the individual Pochteca’s day-to-day life and long-term goals. Certain rights and responsibilities were restricted to merchants of particular standing: to name a few, the principal mer- chants received and traded the ruler’s goods, “expedition leaders”* organized the details of trading ventures and assumed respons- ibility for the neophyte youths traveling with the caravan, “burden-carrying mer- chants”” were of relatively low standing and were required to carry some wares on their own backs. If the accounts related to Sahagiin by the Tlatelolean merchants are to be taken at face value, the guilds strictly controlled trading activities, accumulation of wealth, feasting and its attendant rise in social station, training, and the expectations and value orientations of their members. The elders were forever admonishing their underlings to behave in a proper pochteca14 F.F BERDAN manner. This is, of course, the “official script,” and the actual behavior applied to these ideals may have been somewhat more casual and flexible. Nonetheless, if only out of self-interest, long-distance foreign trading ventures were planned carefully and carried the blessing of the state. ‘As military conquests repeatedly extended the boundaries of the empire, foreign trad- ing, by definition, moved farther from the Triple Alliance capitals, into more distant regions. In this sense, Chapman's (1957) hypothesis that tribute replaced trade is indispurable. It is documented that Aztec merchants and state emissaries had traded goods in subsequently conquered outlying districts through market transactions and through strictly political connections with local rulers at least since the time of Mote- cuhzoma Ithuicamina (ruled 1440-68). For example, Cohuaxtlahuaca, before its conquest by the Triple Alliance, possessed a rich and attractive market, Merchants from Tenochtitlan, Texcoco, Chalco, Xochimilco, Coyoacan, Tlacopan, and Azcapotzalco obtained gold, feathers, cacao, fine gourd bowls, clothing, and thread made from rab- bit fur in this market (Duran 1967: vol. 2, 185). Atone time, during the reign of Mote- cuhzoma Ilhuicamina, 160 merchants from these cities are recorded as being present in that market (Durén 1967: vol. 2, 185). The killing of these same merchants motivated the Triple Alliance forces to conquer Cohuaxtlahuaca. Professional merchant activity is also recorded in the district of Tututepec prior to its conquest by the Triple Alliance during the reign of Motecuhzoma Xocoyotzin (ruled 1502-20): the lapidaries of the city of Mexico, of Tlate- lolco, and of other cities heard that in the provinces of Tototepec and Quetzaltepec there existed a type of sand good for working stones, together with emery to polish them until they became bright and shining. The stone workers told King Moctezuma about this and explained the difficulties in obtaining the sand and emery from those provinces, and the high prices that were asked, Moctezuma sent messengers then to Tototepec and Quet- zaltepec, asking as a favor that the sand. sent to the master artisans. He stated he would send them things in return, since wishes this to be an exchange. (Durdn 1964: 229-3 Difficulties in conducting transactions to satisfaction (or advantage) of the Ten« tan ruler (as representative of the lapi interests) and subsequent mistreatment the emissaries were offered by the Tri Alliance as reasons for the conquest of province. A further example of tribute replai trade involves Aztec dealings with poala in the province of Cuetlaxtlan, they [the Aztecs} decided to send messengers to Cempoala in the province of Cuetlaxtla, asking the rulers there to send them some conch shells, live turtles and scallops and other curious sea products, since these people lived right next to the ocean. The Aztecs had heard about these objects and wished them for the cult of their god. 4 (Durdn 1964: 113-14) The Aztec officials carried with them g for exchange. Yet they were killed, at the encouragement of the Tlaxcallan’ rulers, who accused the ruler of Cuetlaxtlan of being a subject of the Aztecs; this underlines the political overtones of these exchanges. Guild-regulated intra-empire trade These same pochteca, as members of mer chant guilds, also traded extensively within the Aztec imperial territory. Indeed, it may be that most of their energies were directed to intra-empire trading ventures - they were generally safer (although not without its hazards, as the elders warned the neo- phytes), distances were less, and, as the empire expanded, many precious high value goods became available to traders who never crossed the imperial borders (Matricula de Tributos 1980: folios 105 10°, 12%, 12%, 13, 14%, 15°). ‘The hypothesis by Acosta-Saignes (1945) and Chapman (1957: 122) that trade pre~ ceded tribute also states that once an areaAZTEC REGIONAL AND LONG-DISTANCE TRADE 19s was conquered by the Aztecs, trade by pro- fessional merchants usually ceased there. However, there is evidence that pochteca traded in marketplaces within the empire The suggestion that merchants from Mixcoac, Texcoco, Uexotla, Coatlichan, Otompan, Xochimilco, and ‘Chalco were prohibited from trading outside the empire necessarily implies that, of the professional merchants, these at least traded within the empire. We know that they traveled at least as far as Tochtepec on the southeastern edge of Aztec control ~ they would not have trekked so far without some anticipated gain en route. That professional merchants traded within the empire is confirmed by a statement which records the rebellion of the district of Tizauhcoac in which merchants from the cities of Texcoco and Tenochtitlan were killed (Alva Ixtlilxochitl 1965: vol. 2, 272). A similar instance of a rebellion involved the Huasteca (Duran 1967: vol. 2, 327). Indeed, Alva Ixtlilxochitl (1965: vol. 2, 190-1) states that provinces conquered by Texcoco were obligated to permit merchants to traffic within the confines of those pro- vinces, quite as a matter of policy. Duran mentions that merchants traveled “to all the markets of the land, bartering cloth for jewels, jewels for feathers, feathers for stones, and stones for slaves, always dealing in things of importance, of renown, and of high value” (1971: 138). One such market was that of Tepeaca. This city, upon its con- quest by the Aztecs, was required to hold a market on a designated day. A wide variety of goods, including rich cloaks, stones, jewels, feathers of different colors, gold, sil- ver (and other metals), skins of jaguars and ocelots, cacao, rich loincloths, and sandals were to be sold in that market (Duran 1967: vol. 2, 162). Given the types of commodities to be available (luxury prestige goods), itis highly likely that Valley of Mexico profes- sional merchants frequented this market. It may well have been established for purposes of making many “tropical” luxuries more accessible to those very merchants. Pochteca (in their many “guises”) are mentioned as purveyors of some goods in the great Tlatelolco market (Sahagan 1950-82: book 10 passim). They seemed to specialize, again, in items of high value and prestige: gold, decorated cloaks, feathers, cotton, cacao, and slaves (see ibid. pp. 59, 61, 63-4, 75). They ranged from the princi- pal merchants (ueicapan tlacatl) who dealt in fine, decorated cloaks, to the wealthy slave dealers (tecoani) to undistinguished pochteca (dealing in gold and feathers) and oztomeca (providing bulky goods from the tierra caliente, such as cotton and cacao). These merchants, having traveled to distant parts to obtain such luxuries (or having commissioned other merchants to do so for them), would certainly frequent the most urban of all marketplaces, with its great concentration of potential noble buyers. Some of these merchants were the same as those who traveled outside the empire on state missions. However, in their dealings in marketplaces within the empire, state “policies” affected them only indirectly: the state could mandate specific marker place supplies, as at Tepeaca; it demanded market taxes of them as sellers of mer- chandise (see Berdan 1975: 208-9); and it required that the demand for their goods be limited to those of appropriate status. The guilds would have had a more direct impact con their daily life: assuring that their goals be material gain, but insisting that they not publicly display such gain when successful; controlling access to wealth through pre- scribed ranks, yet insisting that such wealth be dissipated through “rank-qualifying” feasts. These modes held whether trade was conducted within the imperial bounds or beyond them - under these constraints, it would have been difficult for a guild mer- chant to operate in an independent manner, even though his primary trading vehicle was the marketplace. Regional and local-level trade There can be little doubt that professional ‘merchants operated within the confines of the empire, although determination of the actual categories of merchants involved and the extent of their enterprises is necessarily imprecise. Professional merchant middlemen