The growth of the Empire of the Triple Alliance, or Aztec empire, is recounted in a number of sources, and all of them describe how it was built through wars of conquest waged by the allied cities of Tenochtitlan (modern Mexico City), Tetzcoco (Texcoco), and Tlacopan (Tacuba). These conquests began with the overthrow of the Tepanec empire in 1428, and did not end until the Spanish conquest in 1519. The Mexica of Tenochtitlan and their allies fought and vanquished other states, and demanded tribute and submission as a price for peace. Yet recent analyses have also given us a picture of the empire as an alliance between the ruling elites of the subject states and those of the imperial centers, in which the former derived substantial benefits from being in the empire. They were dependent on the continued patronage of the imperial rulers (Brumfiel 1983), but they were given valuable gifts by these same rulers, they participated with them in lavish feasts, they received lands, and they could count on imperial support as they exploited the common people of their own realms (Smith 1986, Calnek 1982). They retained considerable autonomy, including the command of their own military force, and Hassig (1985:92ff) has characterized the empire as “hegemonic.”

A question immediately arises. If the ruling elites of the subject states derived such benefits from being in the empire, why was it necessary to wage war against them to force them into it? Part of the answer may lie in the processes by which states were incorporated into the empire, and the ways they were politically restructured once they were in it.