4 ms·
Tenochtitlan didn't have walls because it already had natural defenses (water); so that's a particular case.
by insane_dreamer 2y ago
Tenochtitlan didn't have walls because it already had natural defenses (water); so that's a particular case.
- ch4s3 2y agoNeither of the other city states in the Aztec Triple Alliance had walls either and they weren’t built on islands.[1] They seem to have had some walled precincts to separate sacred spaces from common areas but now broader system of defensive walls. Much like Ancient Rome they had large and well organized armies. [1] https://www.public.asu.edu/~mesmith9/1-CompleteSet/MES-SAA-06.pdf https://www.public.asu.edu/~mesmith9/1-CompleteSet/MES-SAA-0...
- otabdeveloper4 2y agoI'm not sure Tenochtitlan was technically a city. The defining characteristic of a city is that it can't feed itself. (Hence the "urban" vs "rural" dichotomy.) Correct me if I'm wrong, but Tenochtitlan was a closed system and used to have farms on the lake and the islands.
- ch4s3 2y agoI’m not sure that’s a good definition of a city, and not one I’ve seen elsewhere. I’ve read quite a lot about urban planning and Tenochtitlan would fit right in with English garden cities of the early 20th century. It also had a larger population than almost any city in Europe at the time, and certainly the Spanish called it a city.