Pictures of Aztec Money

[somehiker]

As trade goods prized mostly for personal decoration,shells were mainly supplied by coastal tribes who exchanged them with inland tribes.While there are some references to the Aztec having accepted shell as tribute (probably from other groups who did direct trade with coastal groups),it doesn't seem as though these (mostly cowry) shells played any part of great importance in Aztec commerce.As has been pointed out in previous posts,the Cacao bean was the dominant form of currency in central Mexico,with the copper implements being of lessor importance.The conch shell had a higher value though,because of it's religious/spiritual importance to the Aztec.
I don't really know much about shell money,other than what I've read in various periodicals and archaeological reports,but most seem to agree that the common finds of such shells within Hohokam sites indicates trade relationships with California and Baja coastal tribes,rather than with the Aztec.
While I do suspect that the Aztec may have roots in the Hohokam/Salado etc.,and that the growth of the Aztec empire may have facilitated and finalized the demise of the northern groups,that might be a subject for a more dedicated discussion thread.

Regards:SH.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[cactusjumper]

Wayne has, pretty much, described the use of shells by the Aztec correctly. I would only add that shells were traded from the Caribbean as far north as the central United States.

As for as them being money.......Money to the Aztecs was considered anything that they or someone else desired. Cacao beans were used as one of the main sources of trade because everyone loved chocolate. I believe that, in reality, the Aztec had no monetary system. Instead, they had one of the purest forms of a barter economy. The "hoe money" came into the Aztec society only in the last 1-200 years before conquest.

In "Aztecs Of Mexico", George C. Vaillant writes: "Barter was the only means of exchange, and value was established by desirability and rarity. Money, an exchange medium of fixed value, did not exist. However, something had to be found which would balance and inequality of exchange by being not too valuable to use in adjusting small transactions and at the same time universally wanted. The cacao bean answered this requirement and was easily portable as well." Page 128

Take care,

Joe

 

[FEMF]

Thanks SH and joe. SH I agree with you on the connections between the Hohokams demise and the Aztec accent.
Thanks again. That was very informative.
FEMF

 

[cactusjumper]

Thanks SH and joe. SH I agree with you on the connections between the Hohokams demise and the Aztec accent.
Thanks again. That was very informative.
FEMF

______________________________________

FEMF & Wayne,

It seems a bit of a stretch (timing wise) to believe the Aztecs had anything to do with the demise of the Hohokam. Why do you think they did?

Thanks,

Joe

 

[somehiker]

Joe:

Out of the box perhaps,but the timing does fit.
The end of the Sacaton Phase of the Hohokam around 1000CE,with a substantial depopulation and dispersal having occurred,co-incides with the beginning of the Aztec migration.
But the Hohokam bounced back,and they and other cultural groups in N.Mexico and the US Southwest began a new classic phase (1100-1450CE), characterized by patterns of population growth and increasing diversity of social structure,farming,construction and trade.
Some of this trade involved merchandise from the tropical regions of southern Mexico,including areas of Aztec domination.
By 1450CE, the Aztec were approaching their zenith of power,population,and demands for tribute from those they had conquered.
That tribute included slaves and those destined for sacrifice.Many of them,I believe were obtained though a system of slave trading,which used the same network of trade routes.Paquimé may have been a hub of that network,IMO.
It was also abandoned around 1450CE,possibly as the supply of human captives dwindled.

Regards:SH.

 

[cactusjumper]

Wayne,

"The end of the Sacaton Phase of the Hohokam around 1000CE,with a substantial depopulation and dispersal having occurred,co-incides with the beginning of the Aztec migration."

Being at the store right now, I don't have any sources at hand, but as I recall all of the tribes of power only lasted around 1,000 years. I believe that holds true for the Hohokam culture as well.

As I understand the Aztec people of that time, they were, basically, a nomadic tribe. When they arrived in the Valley of Mexico they were reduced to begging for crumbs of land and sustenance. I see them as being run out of their homeland, assuming they ever really had one, and being chased south into Mexico by stronger, sedentary tribes.

The Hohokam time of ascendancy had run out and any influence the Aztec may have had on their demise was a pure coincidence of timing as they passed through the Hohokam lands.

All of the above is pure speculation and opinion, based on what I have read and retained......which is probably not much.

Take care,

Joe

 

[somehiker]

Joe:

Here is a timeline,composed from various sources,of those cultures in the southwestern US who may have had contact/trade with the Mexica/Aztec..
Only one of these cultures,the Hohokam,experienced a sudden decline in population at the same time as the Aztec's own historical account places their departure to the south from Aztlan.That account was originally recorded only slightly 500 years after the event.

Cultures

Freemont/750-1500 CE/Utah/Clear Creek/Range Creek

Anasazi/750-1350 CE/Chaco Canyon/Mesa Verdi

Mogollon/150-1370 CE/Mimbres/1000-1150/Gila Wilderness, Mimbres River

Valley, along the Upper Gila river, Paquime and Hueco Tanks, an area of

low mountains between the Franklin Mountains to the west and the Hueco

Mountains to the east. Gila Cliff Dwellings National Monument in

southwestern New Mexico

Sinagua/500-1425 CE/Walnut Canyon/Tuzigoot/Montezuma Castle/Montezuma

Well

Patayan-Hakataya/700-1550 CE/Gila River, Colorado River and in the Lower

Colorado River Valley/Lake Cahuilla and Baja,California

Hohokam/300 BCE-1100 CE(Sacaton Phase) + 1100 CE-1450 CE(Classic

Phase)/Casa Grande(1250-1450)/Snaketown (550-1100 CE)/Salt/Gila/San Pedro

and Santa Cruze river basins/platform mounds and ballcourts/canals and

terrace farming/MezoAmerican trade

Salado/1150-1450 CE/Tonto Basin/Besh Be Gowah/platform mounds (pyramidal)

with ascendant structures and corbaille archways.

Aztec Timeline:

Mexica (Aztec)/Southward migration from Aztlan 1015-1248/first settlement

1248-Chapultepec/second settlement 1299-Tizapan/final settlement 1325-

Tenochtitlan/Cortez arrives 1519/Tenochtitlan falls to Cortez 1521

 

[cactusjumper]

Joe:

Here is a timeline,composed from various sources,of those cultures in the southwestern US who may have had contact/trade with the Mexica/Aztec..
Only one of these cultures,the Hohokam,experienced a sudden decline in population at the same time as the Aztec's own historical account places their departure to the south from Aztlan.That account was originally recorded only slightly 500 years after the event.

Cultures

Freemont/750-1500 CE/Utah/Clear Creek/Range Creek

Anasazi/750-1350 CE/Chaco Canyon/Mesa Verdi

Mogollon/150-1370 CE/Mimbres/1000-1150/Gila Wilderness, Mimbres River

Valley, along the Upper Gila river, Paquime and Hueco Tanks, an area of

low mountains between the Franklin Mountains to the west and the Hueco

Mountains to the east. Gila Cliff Dwellings National Monument in

southwestern New Mexico

Sinagua/500-1425 CE/Walnut Canyon/Tuzigoot/Montezuma Castle/Montezuma

Well

Patayan-Hakataya/700-1550 CE/Gila River, Colorado River and in the Lower

Colorado River Valley/Lake Cahuilla and Baja,California

Hohokam/300 BCE-1100 CE(Sacaton Phase) + 1100 CE-1450 CE(Classic

Phase)/Casa Grande(1250-1450)/Snaketown (550-1100 CE)/Salt/Gila/San Pedro

and Santa Cruze river basins/platform mounds and ballcourts/canals and

terrace farming/MezoAmerican trade

Salado/1150-1450 CE/Tonto Basin/Besh Be Gowah/platform mounds (pyramidal)

with ascendant structures and corbaille archways.

Aztec Timeline:

Mexica (Aztec)/Southward migration from Aztlan 1015-1248/first settlement

1248-Chapultepec/second settlement 1299-Tizapan/final settlement 1325-

Tenochtitlan/Cortez arrives 1519/Tenochtitlan falls to Cortez 1521

_______________________________________________

Wayne,

Many thanks for that concise synopsis of related Aztec connections with northern tribes. Were there any other important events that took place in the Southwest during the time line (233 Years) of the Aztec migration? Is any of that history tied to Aztec influence, in your opinion?

Other than the obvious timing, is there any other single piece of evidence that ties the two cultures rise/fall together? It's likely that you could be correct, but I would like to see more than a possible coincidence of timing before hitching up to that particular wagon.

Take care,

Joe

 

[FEMF]

Joe:

Here is a timeline,composed from various sources,of those cultures in the southwestern US who may have had contact/trade with the Mexica/Aztec..
Only one of these cultures,the Hohokam,experienced a sudden decline in population at the same time as the Aztec's own historical account places their departure to the south from Aztlan.That account was originally recorded only slightly 500 years after the event.

Cultures

Freemont/750-1500 CE/Utah/Clear Creek/Range Creek

Anasazi/750-1350 CE/Chaco Canyon/Mesa Verdi

Mogollon/150-1370 CE/Mimbres/1000-1150/Gila Wilderness, Mimbres River

Valley, along the Upper Gila river, Paquime and Hueco Tanks, an area of

low mountains between the Franklin Mountains to the west and the Hueco

Mountains to the east. Gila Cliff Dwellings National Monument in

southwestern New Mexico

Sinagua/500-1425 CE/Walnut Canyon/Tuzigoot/Montezuma Castle/Montezuma

Well

Patayan-Hakataya/700-1550 CE/Gila River, Colorado River and in the Lower

Colorado River Valley/Lake Cahuilla and Baja,California

Hohokam/300 BCE-1100 CE(Sacaton Phase) + 1100 CE-1450 CE(Classic

Phase)/Casa Grande(1250-1450)/Snaketown (550-1100 CE)/Salt/Gila/San Pedro

and Santa Cruze river basins/platform mounds and ballcourts/canals and

terrace farming/MezoAmerican trade

Salado/1150-1450 CE/Tonto Basin/Besh Be Gowah/platform mounds (pyramidal)

with ascendant structures and corbaille archways.

Aztec Timeline:

Mexica (Aztec)/Southward migration from Aztlan 1015-1248/first settlement

1248-Chapultepec/second settlement 1299-Tizapan/final settlement 1325-

Tenochtitlan/Cortez arrives 1519/Tenochtitlan falls to Cortez 1521

Thanks SH
Your sure good at more than just hiking, Ha, Ha. Joe was right about my post, but your on the right trail with your research. Thanks for sharing, and more Please.
FEMF

 

[cactusjumper]

FEMF,

I believe it's pretty well accepted that the rapid decline of the Hohokam was brought about by reduced crop production, caused by long periods of drought. Such simple answers are sometimes very difficult to accept.
A book that may illustrate these changing weather patterns and their effect on agriculture in Southern Arizona is,
"Gila: The Life and Death of an American River" by Gregory McNamee......Interesting read.

Take care,

Joe

 

[FEMF]

FEMF,

I believe it's pretty well accepted that the rapid decline of the Hohokam was brought about by reduced crop production, caused by long periods of drought. Such simple answers are sometimes very difficult to accept.
A book that may illustrate these changing weather patterns and their effect on agriculture in Southern Arizona is,
"Gila: The Life and Death of an American River" by Gregory McNamee......Interesting read.

Take care,

Joe

Hello Joe
Arizona has a long history of drought/flood cycles, we're in a major one now. Archeologist are great, but I'm looking at this more in line with Historians and how they prove or disprove a line of reasoning, similar to Say's Law, and I believe SH is following along simiar lines of reasoning. No I have not read that book, sounds interesting.
Thanks Joe.
FEMF

 

[somehiker]

Joe:

I don't think the answers to what may have caused the decline in population were easily found.
And it likely took the researchers years to uncover,analyze and study the clues,before the root cause of the decline in population became clear.
So it's not at all difficult to accept a prolonged drought as the primary motivation for a mass migration,such as that described by the Mexica.
The same thing happens almost every year,somewhere throughout the world,where large groups of refugees are driven from their homelands due to the very same reason.Many wind up far from home,even as far away as Canada and the US and create new communities,as with the Aztec in Tenochtitlan.

"Many thanks for that concise synopsis of related Aztec connections with northern tribes."

It's only a list of the advanced cultures in the Southwestern US,which existed at the time of the Aztec migration,with time spans and locations.
Timeline references are usually used to establish the possibility of relationships between events.

"As I understand the Aztec people of that time, they were, basically, a nomadic tribe."

Can you expound on this ?

Regards:Wayne

 

[cactusjumper]

Joe:

I don't think the answers to what may have caused the decline in population were easily found.
And it likely took the researchers years to uncover,analyze and study the clues,before the root cause of the decline in population became clear.
So it's not at all difficult to accept a prolonged drought as the primary motivation for a mass migration,such as that described by the Mexica.
The same thing happens almost every year,somewhere throughout the world,where large groups of refugees are driven from their homelands due to the very same reason.Many wind up far from home,even as far away as Canada and the US and create new communities,as with the Aztec in Tenochtitlan.

"Many thanks for that concise synopsis of related Aztec connections with northern tribes."

It's only a list of the advanced cultures in the Southwestern US,which existed at the time of the Aztec migration,with time spans and locations.
Timeline references are usually used to establish the possibility of relationships between events.

"As I understand the Aztec people of that time, they were, basically, a nomadic tribe."

Can you expound on this ?

Regards:Wayne

Hi Wayne,

Seems like a good possibility since no prior "home" seems to have been found for them, despite their own legends. All tribes started out as nomadic.

No people can settle in one place for any length of time, without leaving evidence that they were there.

Just my uninformed opinion, although there are many sources for the statement. Too busy at home this morning to go through my books, but a quick search here in the store brought this:

MesoamericaIn the middle of the first millennium CE, the first waves of tribes speaking the forefather language of the Nahuan languages migrated south into Mesoamerica. They were nomadic hunter-gatherers and arrived in a region that was already populated by complex societies at a highly advanced technological level. Under the influence of classic Mesoamerican civilizations such as the Teotihuacanos, the Maya, the Totonacs and the Huastecs the proto-Aztecs became sedentary agriculturalists and achieved the same levels of technology as their neighbouring peoples. They held on to their language, many of the" were developed as a synthesis between Mesoamerican societies and Aztec traditions, although today it cannot easily be discerned which parts come from where. Aztec society was not isolated from the larger Mesoamerican context, and in fact, most aspects of it were similar in structure to what existed in the surrounding societies.[SUP][1][/SUP]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztec_society

Take care,

Joe

 

[FEMF]

Joe:

I don't think the answers to what may have caused the decline in population were easily found.
And it likely took the researchers years to uncover,analyze and study the clues,before the root cause of the decline in population became clear.
So it's not at all difficult to accept a prolonged drought as the primary motivation for a mass migration,such as that described by the Mexica.
The same thing happens almost every year,somewhere throughout the world,where large groups of refugees are driven from their homelands due to the very same reason.Many wind up far from home,even as far away as Canada and the US and create new communities,as with the Aztec in Tenochtitlan.

"Many thanks for that concise synopsis of related Aztec connections with northern tribes."

It's only a list of the advanced cultures in the Southwestern US,which existed at the time of the Aztec migration,with time spans and locations.
Timeline references are usually used to establish the possibility of relationships between events.

"As I understand the Aztec people of that time, they were, basically, a nomadic tribe."

Can you expound on this ?

Regards:Wayne

Hello SH
My Bad, Sorry for speaking for you. I believe Archeology is very Important to our knowledge of History by adding dots to the time lines that Historians also use to prove or disprove their lines of reasoning to connect the dots of history.
What I'm trying to say is that Historians use Archeologist discoveries to prove or disprove their lines of reasoning.
I'm no expert, but I use my own life experiences and both Disciplines to connect the dots in my interpations, until someone like Joe or Scott proves, or shows that I'm wrong and I accept it and move on. Thanks SH and joe for the back ground Info.
FEMF

 

[cactusjumper]

FEMF,

I have a wonderful leather bound copy of Charles Di Peso's book on the native settlement of San Cayetano.
He spent years gathering the data and most of it is excellent Information on the natives and how they lived in that area.

Unfortunately, he was wrong about where it was located and was later discredited, (Seymour 1993) Seymour found the site on the correct (east) side of the river, which is historically correct.

Awaiting the next turn of the spade, that will be the accepted site of San Cayetano Del Tumacacori. In other words, many archaeological conclusions are subject to change.

What you have written is a very reasonable approach.

Take care,

Joe

 

[somehiker]

Joe:

There are many historical examples of mass migrations of peoples in search of a homeland or "promised land".The challenges involved in such endevour has always required the adaption of hunting and gathering as a means of survival during such journeys.

With a broad enough brush,the Israelites of the Old Testament,the Mormons of 1836-1869,and even the Hobos of the 20's and 30's could be called "nomads".While the decription may not be accurate,it does make a complicated history easier to understand for those seeking simple answers to their questions.

"No people can settle in one place for any length of time, without leaving evidence that they were there."

IMO,the evidence exists,labled Hohokam and possibly by other names from the timeline as well.It's been excavated,collected and studied for years.One major site has been closed to further study.

Regards:Wayne

 

[cactusjumper]

Wayne,

All true but those with much more knowledge and understanding, than I, of Aztec history have labeled them "nomadic". Personally, I feel the name fits what happened over the 200 or so years while they migrated. As I stated, they all started out as nomads.

It's an interesting topic to discuss, especially with someone as knowledgeable as yourself, and FEMF.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Listening

Don Jose de La mancha

 

[FEMF]

Joe:

There are many historical examples of mass migrations of peoples in search of a homeland or "promised land".The challenges involved in such endevour has always required the adaption of hunting and gathering as a means of survival during such journeys.

With a broad enough brush,the Israelites of the Old Testament,the Mormons of 1836-1869,and even the Hobos of the 20's and 30's could be called "nomads".While the decription may not be accurate,it does make a complicated history easier to understand for those seeking simple answers to their questions.

"No people can settle in one place for any length of time, without leaving evidence that they were there."

IMO,the evidence exists,labled Hohokam and possibly by other names from the timeline as well.It's been excavated,collected and studied for years.One major site has been closed to further study.

Regards:Wayne

Hello SH
Are you alluring to Snake Town? The picture is a Hohokam arrow head I'm comparing to my second printing of Excavations At Snaketown "Material Culture" If you even stop near by, a Pima from the Tribe will stop to question you about why your in the area, and tell you to get out of that part of the reservation!
FEMF
P.S. Where is my picture?

 

[somehiker]

FEMF:

Snaketown is the site I was referring to.
Archaeologists and Historians no longer have the rights that they once enjoyed.

Patience my friend.
While in the process of cropping and enlarging the item,I noticed something else which I need to have a closer look at.
I wouldn't want to give anyone else the chance to see it first....

Regards:SH.