>>That assumes military genius was necessary.
I am not saying military genius was necessary to hide the gold. But, the military genius was present therefore would have been used once Moctezuma was dead.
>>One could easily argue, why bother hiding a treasure so close to where the Spanish had been one might not reasonably expect it to be safe.
True. but in an uncharted primitive area of 300,000 square miles in harsh mountains, it can be awfully hard to find anything. I note in the USA where people are looking, it is apparently necessary to set up signs visible miles away. The gold hunters spend lots of time looking at photos including satellite photos hoping to find a clue. Carvings or painted signs. The terrain here isn't much different.
>>and subjigate other tribes but no the numericly inferior Spaniards.
The only reason the Spanish won was the help of the thousands of warriors from tribes who had been abused and tortured by the Aztecs. The Spanish alone weren't a significant force. And, Cortes well knew it. He was also a military genius, and a political genius. He knew how to get the other tribes on his side.
I forget where I read it, but I did read a paper which said while Cortes thought the tribes were helping HIM conquer the Aztecs, the tribes thought Cortes was helping THEM conquer the Aztecs. They had no idea the large number of people available to come over from Spain. They had assumed once they conquered the Aztecs with the help of Cortes that they could then drive away the Spanish. It didn't work out real well for them.
>> In my mind, it's highly possible some aspects of oral tradition simpy are not shared outside of a select few, perhaps these stories exist but are not shared as openly as other tales.
In support of this, I have noticed that the most detail comes directly from my wife's family. Those who were raised on the Moctezuma property. The oral tradition of the buried treasure of Moctezuma is all over town, but the most detail comes from the Moctezuma direct descendants.
They are the only ones who reported the gold found in 1910 with the skeleton. For example, the people who own the old picture post card from 1908 with the damaged church tower almost certainly do not know that the new one was built with the gold that was discovered around 1910 on the property.
The people in this town are somewhat close-mouthed in a way. Or, at least my wife's family is. My wife said she would even be punished as a little girl if she told someone they had eaten chicken for supper. Her grandma told her that it's no one's business what we eat. Thump! Beat! Hit!
My wife is in her 70's and is still very close-mouthed. She is always criticizing me for telling too much about myself. Even though the sorts of things I tell would be normal in the USA. As a result, I make friends much more easily here than she does.
>>Or they can accept them as one more possibiity that's just as difficulty to verify or authenticate as any other.
If I dared to out this location, much of what I am saying could easily be authenticated or verified. My obvious need for tight security is what precludes the verification of at least the oral tradition aspect. If you visited here, and won the confidence of the people and listened to their oral tradition for a while, that would be apparent that the oral tradition exists even though that does not prove the gold exists.
And, Google searches for this location supplies considerable information on the Moctezuma family history in this region.
###
Before I forget again, let me repeat my theory that there was more than one treasure. The one Moctezuma II had came from his father. His [great]grand-father was Moctezuma I. [three men], neither father of II nor son of Moctezuma I, was Emperor between them. [edited: Moctezuma I was great-grandfather of II. and three rulers were between them.]
The fact that the father of II, who was not Emperor, received it from I then was allowed to leave it as heir to II indicates it was personal property of [great-]grand-father; then father; [then 2 uncles] then son, rather than being property of the Empire itself.
The one where I live is clearly that treasure that was owned by II. So, since I can't imagine the men in between not having their own treasure accumulated during their time as Emperor, there had to have been several treasures. Again, nothing else makes sense.
And, another treasure may well have been moved North for reasons having nothing to do with the Spanish. And, maybe not at the time of the Conquest. At the time of the Conquest was not a time to be sending thousands of people off on treasure burying errands.
So, I cannot only believe there was more than one treasure, but am totally convinced of it. Nothing else makes sense.
I now realize there is more to the Aztec government than a total dictatorship by the Emperor. I think I once read that the Emperor had to be elected from the most important men. Which also agrees with different Emperors having their own treasures.
Now, did the Emperor get money from the government activities? Or, as Emperor did he own certain properties which produced his income? Or, was he sort of a person with a lease to certain properties in addition to his own properties? The only thing we can be sure of, is he was most definitely not owner of everything and everyone.
