What About Alva Ixtlilxochitl?

The following is modified from a response I wrote to someone who asked me about Fernando de Alva Cortés Ixtlilxóchitl's writings as evidence of Aztec monotheism. Apparently in some circles, Alva Ixtlilxochitl's statements are used as proof of Aztec monotheistic thought. Because he was descendent of Aztec nobility, the general argument is that Alva Ixtlilxochitl's histories and their espoused views must be accurate and true to Aztec beliefs. I think that the following adequately demonstrates that his histories are anything but free from influences that would be considered quite Eurocentric.

Fernando de Alva Cortés Ixtlilxóchitl was a mestizo and the great grandson of the last tlatoani of Texcoco, Ixtlilxochitl II. Ixtlilxochitl II was one of the first willing Alcolhuan converts to Christianity - in fact, he was baptized as "Don Hernando" by Cortes himself. Cortes then installed Don Hernando Ixtlilxochitl II as the tlatoani of Texcoco. Why did Texcoco need a new tlatoani? Because the tlatoani of Texcoco at the time of Cortes' arrival, Cacamatzin, was strangled by Cortes' soldiers. After being appointed by Cortes, Ixtlilxochitl II told his people that they would convert or be killed. Ixtlilxochitl II was, in my opinion, a great traitor to his people (the leaders of the Mexica Movement would probably agree). But what about his great grandson?

His great grandson, Fernando de Alva Cortes Ixtlilxochitl, was responsible for writing several "histories." He wrote these at the behest of the Spanish viceroy ruling Mexico at the time. The main reason why he was commissioned was because he was viewed as both a decendent of the former rulers as well as being quite safely ensconsed in Spanish culture (as well as being raised Christian, he had been educated at a college founded by the Spaniards). Fernando Ixtlilxochitl was a very strong believer in Christianity and the bias is very apparent in his histories. A large portion of his work is dedicated to praising Don Hernando Ixtlilxochitl II for the great help he gave to the conquistadors and the important role he played in the conquest. While he does criticize the conquistadors, his criticisms focus on the fact that the Spaniards did not continue to reward those who had assisted them in the conquest, such as his own great grandfather, but rather treated them like all the other native people. Aside from his personal biases, his histories often diverge quite markedly from the records of native people alive at the time of the conquest and before. Most of his work is very fragmentary and the chronology he gives for events with known timelines is very off. This isn't very surprising since he was appointed as a historian more due to his status and unique position rather than due to knowledge level or talent.

Fernando Ixtlilxochitl was also very eager to present his ancestors in a light that he believed made them appear more "civilized" and palatable to the new Christian era. At the time, there were two common approaches to indigenous religion under the pressures of Christianity - outright demonization of the beliefs, or Christianization of them. This Christianization was often done by people with good intentions in mind - after all, the church was very apt to censor anything that was considered to encourage any sort of "idolatry." Even some of the Spanish friars who made accounts of the native religion (such as Sahagun) were threatened by the Inquisition because the church feared that even the records of its own clergy might somehow encourage the continued practice of the native religion. Because of that, often the only safe way to record anything that cast native peoples in a positive light was to make them appear to be more safely European and Christian in values and beliefs. This was hardly something unique to post-conquest Mexico - you can see examples of the same kind of thing being done by historians around the world anytime Christianity overcame a cultural religion. Alva Ixtlilxochitl was considered so highly by the church that even today he bears his own entry in the Catholic Encyclopedia.

People are welcome to come to their own conclusions about the validity of his histories, but before you make a decision you should be aware of these facts regarding both his direct ancestors and his own background. Many people would take his histories at face value simply for the fact that Nezahualcoyotl was one of his distant ancestors, not looking at the reality of his life and background. For the reasons I have mentioned here, he is rarely used as a source by any reputable historians, whether regarding religion or even the facts of the conquest and native life. When his works are used, it is usually due to his presentation of poems supposedly written by Nezahualcoyotl. For many reasons, although these poems are very beautiful and certainly worth appreciating, they are probably post-conquest compositions which were attributed to Nezahualcoyotl to add validity to them. That's a topic in and of itself, but anyone who is interested in the subject, or the subject of Nahua monotheism for that matter, may be interested in reading "The Allure of Nezahualcoyotl" by Jongsoo Lee.