Evening Republican, Volume 59, Number 92, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 9 May 1917 — NEW LIGHT ON THE AZTEC [ARTICLE]

NEW LIGHT ON THE AZTEC

Professor Says Montezuma Was Not a King, But Merely War Chief of a Confederacy. The overturning of traditions which has been brought about by American ethnologists, who by th? study of Aztec life have come to the conclusion that Montezuma was not a king, but only a war chieftain; that the famous Aztec empire was not on empire at all, but only a loose confederacy of democratic Indian tribes, ts subscribed to by Prof. T. T. Waterman of the University of California, who has just issued a paper on “Bandelier’s Contribution to the Study.” Montezumas “palace” was not a palace, but only war headquarters forthe tribe, according to Waterman. “Montezuma,” he says, “was only an elected war chief. He had not power to declare war, this being the prerogative of the tribal council. The choice of the war chief, was, however, limited to one group, which consisted of a whole family of lineage, but son did not follow father unless elected. The sons of the war chiefs were brought up as private citizens. “The head war chief, such as Montezuma, was of no higher rank than the coadjutor, who held the extraordinary title of Snake Woman. The functions of the man who held this office are not clearly known, but apparently an important part of his office was the gathering and housing of tribute. " “Misunderstanding of Aztec life has arisen,” says Waterman, “from the fact that the Spanish conquerors did not realize the fundamental differences between Indian and Spanish society. Land was not owned by individuals, but by the clan. To the Aztec society was essentially democratic, while Spanish society was essentially feudal.”