ABSTRACT
This chapter examines the role of ideology in the Aztec state. It contributes to the debate over the ways in which systems of inequality are constructed and maintained. I have argued that dominant groups exercise power through coalitions of factions, that is, alliance groups that can use coercion to enforce their will on others (Brumfiel 1994a, 1994b). This position is challenged, however, by those that emphasize the ability of ideology to engineer consent without the use of coercive force. David Clarke never expressed a position regarding either power or ideology in prehistoric societies. But he did vigorously advocate asking new questions about prehistory and making explicit, experimental efforts to answer them. It is in David Clarke’s honour, then, that I offer the following discussion. (Editor’s note – this contribution was originally presented as the third David Clarke Memorial Lecture at Peterhouse College, Cambridge University, in 1997.)
For the purpose of this discussion, ideology can be defined as a system of values and ideas that promotes social behaviour benefiting some classes of interest groups more than others (Gilman 1989: 68; Thompson 1990: 73). Ideology has been regarded as a crucial factor in the persistence of social inequality. According to Shanks and Tilley (1982: 132), relations of inequality are frequently sustained by ideologies which deny, explain, or justify forms of social interaction that produce advantages for some and frustration for others. In the grip of such ideologies, subordinate groups may actively reproduce their own subordination. Subordinate groups may be so influenced by ideologies that they are unable to critique, resist, or reform their societies. Abercrombie et al. (1980) have labelled this the ‘dominant ideology thesis’.
