no Tes T o Pages 102–110 • 219April 24, 1534; April 30, 1535; July 6, 1536; April
10, 1537; June 15, 1537; March 19, 1538; June 18,
1540; May 23, 1542; the clash between native
gobernadores and audiencia judges midcentury is
to be found in Vicenta Cortés Alonso, ed. and
trans., Pintura del gobernador, alcaldes y regidores
de México: Códice Osuna.
- Chimalpahin, Codex Chimalpahin, gives
both the date of 6 House, or 1537, in the
Gregorian calendar (2:41) and the date of 7
Rabbit, or 1539 (1:41). If we accept the native
span as the correct count (6 House–7 Rabbit),
then he acceded somewhere between the end of
January 1537 and the end of January 1539. - Castañeda de la Paz, “Historia de una casa
real”; Tezozomoc, Crónica mexicayotl, 161; on
the housecleaning by Cuauhtemoc, Tezozomoc,
Crónica mexicayotl, 163–164. - Pérez-Rocha and Tena, La nobleza indígena,
38–39, give his biography. - Tezozomoc, Crónica mexicayotl, 151, says
that the assassin was Motelchiuhtzin himself,
but Castañeda de la Paz, “Historia de una casa
real,” 5, clarifies that it was his son. - Pérez-Rocha and Tena, La nobleza indígena,
29–35, for biography; Chimalpahin, Codex
Chimalpahin, 1:149, says Pedro Moctezoma
was native of San Sebastián Atzacoalco, where
his son don Martín Motlatocazoma was born.
Castañeda de la Paz, “Historia de una casa
real,” 5–6, discusses the reasons that Pedro
Moctezoma was not elected to power. See
also Amaya Garritz, “Ejectutoria a favor de
don Diego Luis Moctezuma: Testamento del
príncipe Pedro Moctezuma.” - Pérez-Rocha and Tena, La nobleza
indígena, 41–42, 99–102. - Tezozomoc, Crónica mexicayotl, 164.
- Castañeda de la Paz, “Sibling Maps,
Spatial Rivalries.” - James Lockhart, “Postconquest Nahua
Society and Culture Seen through Nahuatl
Sources,” in Nahuas and Spaniards: Postconquest
Central Mexican History and Philology, 12. - See for instance Peter W. Parshall, The
Woodcut in Fifteenth-Century Europe; Peter W.
Parshall and Rainer Schoch, Origins of European
Printmaking: Fifteenth-Century Woodcuts and
Their Public. - Elena Isabel Estrada de Gerlero, Donna
Pierce, and Clare Farago, “Mass of Saint
Gregory,” offers a summary of the literature. - Pablo Escalante Gonzalbo, Los Códices
mesoamericanos antes y después de la conquista
española, 103–199. - Gerlero, Pierce, and Farago, “Mass of Saint
Gregory,” 97–98. - For instance, Peter W. Parshall, “Imago
Contrafacta: Images and Facts in the Northern
Renaissance”; Caroline Walker Bynum,
“Seeing and Seeing Beyond: The Mass of Saint
Gregory in the Fifteenth Century”; Esther
Meier, “Ikonographische Probleme: Von der
Erscheinung Gregorii’ aur ‘Gregormesse.’”- Translation modified from Gerlero, Pierce,
and Farago, “Mass of Saint Gregory,” 96. - For example, Pérez-Rocha and Tena, La
nobleza indígena, 99, 101, 103, 105, 125. - The government of Santiago Tlatelolco
was ruled independently by don Diego Mendoza
(named after the viceroy), beginning in 1549.
On the Santiago Tlatelolco rulers, see María
Castañeda de la Paz, “Filología de un ‘corpus’
pintado (siglos xvi–xviii): De códices, techiloyan,
pinturas y escudos de armas”; Castañeda
de la Paz, “Historia de una casa real,” 5n20;
Rebeca López Mora, “El cacicazgo de Diego de
Mendoza Austria y Moctezuma.” - Sahagún, Florentine Codex, bk. 9, ch. 21,
93–97. - Gerónimo de Mendieta, Historia
eclesiástica indiana, ed. Joaquín García
Icazbalceta, bk. 4, ch. 13, 410. - Feather workshops are mentioned in the
Spanish text of the Florentine Codex, which
has been published as Bernardino de Sahagún,
Historia general de las cosas de Nueva España,
ed. Alfredo López Austin and Josefina García
Quintana, 2:582 (bk. 9, ch. 21). - Alessandra Russo, “Plumes of Sacrifice:
Transformations in Sixteenth-Century Mexican
Feather Art”; Alessandra Russo, “Image-plume,
temps reliquaire? Tangibilités d’une histoire
esthétique”; Louise M. Burkhart, “The Solar
Christ in Nahuatl Doctrinal Texts of Early
Colonial Mexico.” - Torquemada, Monarquía indiana, vol. 1,
bk. 3, ch. 26, 303; Josefina Muriel, “En torno a
una vieja polémica: erección de los primeros
conventos de San Francisco en la ciudad de
México, siglo XVI,” 8. - Caso, “Los barrios antiguos de
Tenochtitlan y Tlatelolco,” 12–13. There is
another Amanalco in Santiago Tlatelolco that
may also have been a site for featherworking,
since the Florentine mentions that the
featherworkers’ neighborhood is adjacent to
that of the long-distance traders, or pochteca,
who lived in Tlatelolco in the pre-Hispanic
period. But Santiago Tlatelolco was not ruled
by Huanitzin, so the origins of this featherwork
were more likely in the workshops within
his domain. - Collection history is covered in Gerlero,
Pierce, and Farago, “Mass of Saint Gregory.” - García Icazbalceta, “Historia de los
Mexicanos,” 254. - Albrecht Dürer, Diary of His Journey to
the Netherlands, 1520–1521, 53–54. - Mauss, The Gift; E. M. Brumfiel,
“Materiality, Feasts, and Figured Worlds in
Aztec Mexico.”- Durán, History, 124.
- Gell, Art and Agency, 68–69, 71.
- Cortés’s gift shipments discussed in
Alessandra Russo, “‘Everywhere in This New
Spain’: Extension and Articulation of an Artistic
World.” - In October of 1539, Culoa Tlapisque, a
high priest of Culhuacan, told inquisitors that
Huanitzin was in league with the keepers of
the sacred bundle of Huitzilopochtli; González
Obregón, Procesos de indios idolatras y hechiceros,
123–124. In January of 1540, perhaps to incur
favor with Bishop Zumárraga, Huanitzin turned
over to the Inquisition one Martín, who had in
his possession some gold jewels and costumes,
including “un moscador de pluma” (a feather fan)
that belonged to Martín Ocelotl, a convicted
idolator; González Obregón, Procesos de indios
idolatras y hechiceros, 49. See Patricia Lopes
Don, Bonfires of Culture: Franciscans, Indigenous
Leaders, and the Inquisition in Early Mexico,
1524–1540. - Luis González Obregón, ed., Proceso
inquisitorial del Cacique de Tetzcoco, 102–103.
Alessandra Russo also discusses the featherwork
as a response to the auto-da-fé in “Recomposing
the Image: Presents and Absents in the Mass
of Saint Gregory, Mexico-Tenochtitlan, 1539,”
a work that came to my attention while this
book was in press. - Calnek, “ Tenochtitlan-Tlatelolco,” 153–155.
- Bejarano, Actas de cabildo, January 29, 1552;
September 5, 1542. Both San Lázaro and the
“tiánguiz de los mexicanos,” but not the tecpan,
are described on this site in García Icazbalceta,
“Historia de los Mexicanos,” 244, a document
dating to around 1534. - My early dating of the tecpan contradicts
the text of the Códice Cozcatzin, a late
seventeenth-century manuscript copied from
earlier material. It records that the tecpan was
built and the market was established in 10
Rabbit (1554). However, this is not a completely
reliable source, as we know that the market
mentioned in the text was established in 1533.
Ana Rita Valero de García Lascuráin, Los códices
de Ixhuatepec: Un testimonio pictográfico de dos
siglos de conflicto agrario, 126. - Valadés, Retórica Cristiana, 475.
- James Kirakofe, “Architectural Fusion
and Indigenous Ideology in Early Colonial
Teposcolula”; Susan Toby Evans, “The Aztec
Palace under Spanish Rule: Disk Motifs in the
Mapa de México de 1550 (Uppsala Map or Mapa
de Santa Cruz).” - Torquemada, Monarquía indiana, vol. 3,
bk. 16, ch. 2, 212. - Carlos Flores Marini, “El tecpan de