So, so, so much to reply to here. With several large replies I'm going to quote individuals one at a time and provide some of my insight and findings...
Great post Randy - well thought out arguments.
Like most of these lost treasure stories, there is a basis in fact. The Spaniards demanded, and collected, a vast booty (ransom) for holding Montezuma hostage, and when forced to flee Tenochtitlan, they attempted to carry away as much as they could, and lost most (almost all, but one account) in trying to cross the many bridges. However they had not been able to carry it all, and when the capital was re-conquered over a year later, the booty had vanished. The skeptics best explanation is that all of the treasure was thrown into the lake. As far as I know no one has ever found any of the treasure thus "thrown" or what was lost during the nochte del tristans retreat.
Agreed, there is no doubt that the treasure existed, and if it was ever recovered it was indeed a well kept secret. Given the enormous growth and industrialization of Mexico City, it seems to me if the treasure was held relatively close the the Aztec capital it would have been uncovered by now, minimally by some unsuspecting construction crew or road building endeavors. Too much was written about the Spaniards losing the treasure and next to nothing is recorded of them recovering it when they returned. The important thing to note here as well, is that much of what the Spaniards took they melted down into easily transported bards of metal. What they seized from the Aztecs, and what the Aztecs took back were vastly different in appearance. On the surface, it's possible a Spanish cache has been recovered and that it was unknown to have had Aztec origins. It's also important to note that in all likelihood the Aztecs hid many other things in their original Aztec form that the Spaniards had not found, so in theory the fabled hoard of Montezuma SHOULD be a mix of original Aztec items and Spanish made gold bars.
The legends of a vast treasure being spirited away, to various locations don't <doesn't?> seem to hold up to scrutiny. The trouble is, if this happened, the Spanish were not informed about it while it was happening so could not have documented it, and the Aztecs themselves did not either. However I suspect that there is something to the legend of Montezuma's Head, which of course could be a fairy tale, yet if it is based on a real event, it is a very good fit for the treasure of the Aztecs and a great hiding place. The trouble is that the early Spanish explorers into Arizona practically planted the ideas of Montezuma and Aztecs in the mouths of the local Indians, so raising doubts about the story. Hence there are quite a few places in Arizona named for Montezuma and the Aztecs, with little or no justification other than the ruins appear to have been the work of people far more civilized than the half-wild tribes contacted by the Spanish.
I think it's very possible that a crew of people, even a large one, could have left with no real CLEAR understanding of where they were going. that is to say, those that remained behind to face the Spaniards upon their eventual return may have known very, very little about where their treasure was going. It's pure speculation on my part, but I've always believed the people that left with the treasure also had no intention of returning, because doing so would put their work at risk.. the safest way to hide the treasure was to take it to some ambiguous "homeland" with no thought of returning. The people that stayed behind could no betray their position or geographic goal, and those that left would never be put in a position to reveal the same information.
Your assertion about place names being birthed by a combination of Spanish and Indian folklore is, in my estimation, spot on. But I don't think it stopped there. I think the inappropriate naming of sites (i.e. Montezuma's Well, Montezuma's Castle, etc.) likely gave birth to treasure legends based on nothing more than a name that was appropriated itself in not only limited fact, but despite the presence of one iota of evidence. I think the limited capacity of interpreters mingled with an odd assortment of history, tradition, and spiritual belief that endured and was the source of birthing so many more legends in the region by folks with even less understanding than the people who started the whole ball rolling.
On the other hand, perhaps it is not fair nor accurate to totally dismiss the idea that the Aztecs had some kind of friendly relationship with the Indians of Arizona and/or northern Sonora? The Hohokam certainly had some features of their civilization which resemble the achievements of the Aztecs, like having rather massive irrigation systems, solar calenders, and most intriguingly, ball courts of the same sort as found in the Aztec, and Mayan civilized states. Even the rubber ball used, is similar, though as far as I know only one has ever been found in Arizona. How was it that the Hohokam were playing a ball game not far different from that played by the Aztecs or Mayans? There are other bits of evidence that some kind of contact was taking place too, perhaps trade, in the form of beads, feathers, shells, turquoise.
I think that assertion likewise has some wisdom in it. The Aztecs had firmer trade routes established than has been suggested (more on that in a bit). In fact, I firmly believe these trade routes provided the means for the treasure to be moved. They followed established routes that included access to water, shelter, food and allies. I believe they were also able to communicate the threat they faced. This is REAL speculation as well, but it's not hard to imagine the value of leaving a few people behind in these "stop points" to act as intelligence gathers and messengers should they be followed by the Spaniards. This would be an ideal way to cope with individuals who were injured or sick.
I have to respectfully disagree on the one issue, the various stories of a lost mine with an iron door, but will explain. I think the reason there are several such stories, is that this might not have been an uncommon practice, to seal up a mine with an iron door. It would be an effective way of keeping un-invited "guests" from sneaking in and high-grading ore, always a problem with precious metal mines but especially so with very rich deposits. So they could be talking about different mines, just that it was a good way to seal up the mine by installing a stout iron door, or as in the one case, a copper door. (which may be a bronze door - won't know until someone finds it) This is just my own opinion on the iron doors, can not prove or disprove it.
It's a good insight...my issue with this premise is that the mines in question are frequently "lost," which suggests they are remote or in difficult terrain. These sorts of places don't lend themselves to having a several hundred pound door being transported (inconspicuously no less) much less inventing a mechanism to mount the door efficiently. Every states in the SW has a story like this one, it stands to reason some of those are probably the mere product of a retelling of a story that was misunderstood.
Thanks for the insight here Blanco, I'm going to stay in this threat while speaking on other replies...
Spring,
I have to disagree with your assertion that the Aztec didn't know when the Spanish would return. On the "Noche Triste" in 1520, Cortez and his men retreated to Tlascalla, which is only about 30-40 miles from Tenochtitlan (as the crow flies). They stayed there with their loyal allies (the Tlascallans), until they regrouped and went back after Cuautemoczin. The entire time they were there, they were watched by Aztecs and their allies. So, while the Spanish were blind as to the actions of the Aztecs, the Aztecs knew hour to hour what the Spanish were up to.
The more tribes that were treated cruelly by the Spanish, began believing less and less in the Godliness of Cortez. When they stopped believing that, they turned on the Spanish, kidnapped some of their men and horribly tortured and killed them.
Some great points here Mike, particularly about what the Aztecs knew or didn't know. It seems likely that whether they expected a return of the Spaniards or not, the Aztecs would have likely taken all measures possible to prepare for that eventuality. Besides recovering their leadership, they also had to prepare defenses against their enemies who might perceive them vulnerable, while maintaining control of outlying tribes who may feel less compelled to pay tribute, to say nothing of "paying back" those tribes they controlled who had demonstrated a lack of loyalty or worse, had joined with the Spaniards.
Incidentally, the notion that Cortez and the Spaniards were viewed in a religious light has become a highly contested point. I assume you're referring to the notion that Cortez was believed to be Quetzalcoatl. Read "7 Myths of the Spanish Conquest," it's a wonderful and short (but dense) book about many misconceptions of the Conquest, many introduced and perpetuated by the Spanish deliberately. the "divinity" of Cortez is thought by many to be just such a thing. This is particularly intriguing when you consider the lengths Montezuma went to to dissuade the Spaniards from coming to meet him. Does it seem logical that the Aztec leader would do his best to pay his gods to stay away or would he welcome them?
Randy,
Great post, but what happened to Motecusuma (per Bernal Castillo) was nothing fuzzy nor misunderstood. Every time the Spanish or Motecusuma (imprisoned) would tell the people of Tenochtitlan something, they would go to the priests, who would then pray to the War God Huitzilopochtli. On the occasion of Motecusuma acting on behalf of the Spanish asking the Aztecs to cease the fight, his loving (really) subjects restarted the attack. The arrows and rocks started to fly, and Motecusuma got hit by one arrow and three sling stones.
There you have it. The death of Moctezuma/Motecusuma by an eye witness; Bernal Diaz del Castillo.
Mike
The Aztec version of this story has the Spaniards executing Montezuma, not him falling prey to the angry volley of stones from the mob. This was documented by Bernardino de Sahagún and is further obscured by the fact that both parties (Aztecs and Spanish) had reasons for killing Montezuma and reasons for blaming the other party. he fact is "history" is generally written by the victor and the true events of Montezuma's death will never be fully understood or known because they are buried in the sands of time and the agendas of the parties involved. Something else to keep in mind, and I haven't researched this so it's anyone's guess, but there was some speculation Diaz may have been an invented character and that Cortex himself penned that account. *shrugs*
Thanks for the feedback though Mike, it's always good to have multiple vantage points to consider things from and I enjoy the level of thought and insight provided by folks kind enough to respond.
That brings me to Springfield...
The arguments begin with the assumption that large quantities of gold, jewels, etc. were removed to a secure location to put them out of reach of returning Spanish conquerors. However, the Mexica didn't know when the bad guys were returning, nor, apparently, did they have more than a limited trade connection into today's American Southwest. Occam's razor dictates the simplest solution generally prevails. To me, that means the goods were most likely hidden somewhere closer rather than farther away from Tenochtitlan. I would speculate the goods were secreted quickly and within, say, 50 or 100 miles away, in a place they were already familiar with.
I think you vastly underestimate the trade network of the Aztecs. There is ample evidence of the Axtec utilization of trade networks that spanned as far as Arizona and New Mexico. A wonderful example of this is The Blanding Sash. The Blanding Sash is a greened macaw feather and squirrel skin sash found in the 1950s (I believe) in of all placed, the Canyonlands region of the state of Utah. The Aztecs traded a great many things including shells, pearls, animal hides and perhaps (as suggested) even live animals as it is believed the Macaws may have been held living by Pueblo peoples, but clearly had to come by way of trade. Keep in mind also, the Aztecs had an entire merchant class of folks that were established and respected.
Makes sense, but I don't remember reading Ameridian tales relating to a quite large army of Mexica trekking through their parts of northern Mexico or the American Southwest. The same people told stories of much smaller Spanish expeditions a scant 20 years later - why not about the treasure train?
I have to confess, my understanding of SW Indian lore is pretty limited. My source materials for such things are poor as well. Treasure magazines frequently mention Indian stories in a vague, nebulous way without a scrap of documentation, support, or bibliographic data to review and confirm. that said, J. Frank Dobie specifically noted the relationship of several tribes relative to Montezuma's treasure including the Yaqui, Papago, Pecos and Pima. Whether or not these stories exist, have been preserved, etc is anyone's guess. My assumption is the presence of the figure Montezuma in several Pueblo tribes cosmology might reflect a merging of an oral history of the travelers which over time became a distinct part of their religious and spiritual way of thinking. Fact gives way to legend, legend gives way to religion. Keep in mind the Spaniards represented a threat to the people...a threat they may have been warned about by th Aztecs moving the treasure Northward. there are some very pragmatic reasons why the Spaniards may be remembered in away the Aztecs were not.
Concerning any Mexican rumors - if the Mexica were questioned by the returning Spaniards about the whereabouts of the gold, I suspect they might have pointed north and said, 'Thataway, boss'. The Ameridians used that trick to send Coronado all the way to Wichita in 1542.
I agree and touched on this earlier in this post. The best way to hide something is to have the only people know be the one's who hid it. I think the survivors, after securing the treasures, either stayed close to guard it until they passed away, their duty fulfilled or casually spread out and were adopted by other tribes and their history was forgotten as was their rationale for returning.
Not only did they die here and there, but 2000 hard working porters had to eat, drink and sleep along the way. The Mexica typically stole whatever supplies they needed along the way as they conquered tribes all over Mexico. I imagine they'd follow the same MO moving north toting the gold. Imagine all the bearers, support people, animals, supplies, etc. necessary for an expedition this size. Where are the widespread local tribal traditions that describe all this and support the legend?
That's a good question, and frankly it's one I'd very much like to answer. My main interest in the Montezuma Treasure is not to prove it, not to find it, but to preserve the traditions. How many people in Del Rio, TX or Dove creek, CO or Taos, NM realize they have a huge treasure legend in their backyard? Not many, because those stories have been lost, trivialized, scoffed at as our culture becomes more "sophisticated." It seems likely to me that many important stories and histories have been lost, even in American Indian populations to many of the same influences. My point is the lack of stories doesn't prove it didn't happen, though it would go along way to proving they had if the stories happened. In my mind, these stories may exist and not shared openly or frequently, HAVE been shared and I simply haven't come across them, or have been lost if they indeed existed. It is definitely something I'd like to be much, much more definitive about but uncovering those stories might be a book in itself.
I do think your'e right in your assessment that if they had come, a party that size could take whatever they wanted or intimidate local tribes into providing for their needs. I also think that's precisely how they carried it out.
Try telling that one to the Taos community in particular, and a number of other Pueblo traditionalists in the Rio Grande basin. In fact, I had a conversation about exactly the same topic with a native anthropologist at Taos Pueblo this past summer. The 'North American Montezuma' (don't know if the original name is identical to the Mexicas' or not - may be different) was/still is revered there. Their traditions describe their Montezuma as having been descended from white people who came to the Southwest from the east and moved south to Mexico long before the time of the Spanish Conquest. That's what the Taos woman told me and I have no reason to think she doesn't have a good reason to believe it.
(Off topic: she also was of the opinion that the Mexica migrated to Mexico from Cahokia in the Mississippi Valley, through Chaco Canyon, then on south.)
Interestingly, I have one lead I've never followed that talks about a large group of people taking boats up the Mississippi River and hiding a large amount of treasure there as well. the thought of the Aztecs taking boats sailing the Mexican Coast and up the river would certainly answer some of the logistical records but is likewise not supported by any oral tradition I'm aware of. It's a possibly that has as much validity as any other I suppose.
I'd love to believe the vanquished Mexica army carried tons of gold to a secret hiding place in Chicomoztoc, their ancient homeland. However, I haven't seen any definitive mention of the feat anywhere except in treasure hunting lore, and an operation that large ought to have left evidence in its wake. It seems likely to me that the gold was hidden in central Mexico.
There is also the possibility of both. I've had it suggested the large gold was hidden close to the Aztec capital (within 200 miles) while a smaller band carried items of importance...records specifically and religious artifacts...much farther North. Don't get me started on the legends of a lost city in the Grand Canyon either, though they're an important part of the overall theme of the region as it related to Aztec gold.
That said, the original source of all this gold seems as yet to be unspecified. I'm more interested in the idea that the gold mine(s) that supplied the Mexica may exist in North America.
Richard Marks in his book on Cortes mentions this, he actually send troops with Native guides to the sources of the Aztec gold though I don't recall hearing anything about them reporting back. I highly recommend the Marks book to anyone researching the Spanish Conquest as it's detail oriented but presented in a smooth and flowing fashion. Great stuff...
Springfield, as with the others, I very much appreciate your feedback. It's always good to hear from a skeptic, helps illuminate the flaws in my thinking and gives me ample aspects to explore in greater detail. In the end it's always good to receive insights from others who have different experiences, points of view and ways of thinking on such things...
As always, look forward to responses...
Just kidding amigo, your logic is sound, but there is another argument too, that being to remove the treasure as far out of reach of the invading Spaniards as possible. Not saying this is what they did, just that either idea has benefits and drawbacks.
