Massive Aztec human skull rack found in Mexico City

a reply to: Marduk

Do you have any info on Iran also? I found a 10.000 BC stretch mark

a reply to: Marduk

Ive found in some resources that gypsies arent what we think they actually are. Well were, now i have no idea what they are.

originally posted by: yulka
a reply to: Marduk

Do you have any info on Iran also? I found a 10.000 BC stretch mark

Iran grew out of a town called Susa
en.wikipedia.org...
In Sumerian texts
etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk...

Let Susa and the land of Anšan humbly salute Inana like tiny mice

it is described as a vassal state to Uruk
en.wikipedia.org...


you should probably start a new thread

a reply to: yulka

See, that's not entirely correct. The Aztec were much more than that.

Its why i asked what i asked. How could a leadership murder so many of its own and still build an empire like theirs? Something doesn't seem to connect.

Another question is: where did they come from? The entire hemisphere was kind of like a boiling cauldron, with peoples moving in great migrations. I believe it was the Comanche (maybe Apache...i can't recall for certain) that were from Canada just a few hundred years ago. They ended up in West Texas/Easter New Mexico when Columbus landed.

The way the Aztec seem to be enamored with great earthworks....it reminds me of the Mound Builders.

Were they aggressive when they arrived? Or as a result of moving into hostile areas?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Its why i asked what i asked. How could a leadership murder so many of its own and still build an empire like theirs? Something doesn't seem to connect

Somewhere, cant remember the link, its a religious purpose of sacrifice to, dont know what their god was called but lets just say mother earth. WW1 and WW2 wont make any sense either, much less in a few hundred years. Easiest way to enslave anyone actually is put them in the little box of fourth dimension. Easiest way to get them in is by threat or by force.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: yulka


Its why i asked what i asked. How could a leadership murder so many of its own and still build an empire like theirs? Something doesn't seem to connect.

They believed that sacrifice nourished the Gods who created the world they lived in. Without nourishment the world would end. Being sacrificed was seen as a great honour and the dead could expect to reach the second highest heaven.
This tends to make sense only when you remember that all ancient cultures were religious fundamentalists. So the dead were transformed into gods themselves, which is the reason that they had skull racks. The skulls were considered divine
en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Marduk

What was the god called?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

The Aztecs were an interesting lot, for sure. I've entertained the idea that they didn't actually build Tenochtitlan; they just conquered the previous inhabitants and took it from them. Sometimes I have trouble reconciling those massive stoneworks with a group like the Aztecs. Don't get me wrong, they were quite advanced in many respects, but their civilization was short-lived and it was already undergoing extreme societal degeneration after only a few hundred years. It doesn't make any sense that a high culture capable of building a stone city on the water would fall apart so quickly- by the time Europeans arrived they had already fallen quite far. They literally fought wars for the sole purpose of capturing slaves to sacrifice. Something about that just seems "off" to me, like their priorities as an empire/civilization were extremely skewed. The facts just don't lend themselves to the idea that the Aztecs were as advanced as we imagine, and more to the notion that they conquered and appropriated an older civilization.

There are similar stories about other contemporary Mesoamerican cultures undergoing similar types of stagnation. The Tlaxcalans, for instance, were just sitting on huge stores of grain in their cities, doing basically nothing. There was just a lot of weird degeneration and stagnation going on in Mesoamerica.

I knew a guy who used to say that the Aztecs conquered and "ate" the old city-builders, obviously as a joke, but it's still interesting he would say that.

Have you read about the Flower War? Possibly one of the strangest conflicts I've ever studied. The entire thing was a bid to subjugate rebellious city-states by killing the least amount of people possible. Entire battles were fought as "rituals" with only a few men dying in token shows of strength. Why? Because the Aztecs wanted the largest possible amount of men to capture for sacrifice.

The whole style of conflict is totally alien to me, nothing like warfare in Eurasia. Maybe I am biased because of my "Western" perspective on war.

Either way, it's worth reading about. You can look at the Wikipedia article for cursory overview:

en.m.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Talorc

Sometimes I have trouble reconciling those massive stoneworks with a group like the Aztecs. Don't get me wrong, they were quite advanced in many respects, but their civilization was short-lived and it was already undergoing extreme societal degeneration after only a few hundred years. It doesn't make any sense that a high culture capable of building a stone city on the water would fall apart so quickly- by the time Europeans arrived they had already fallen quite far. They literally fought wars for the sole purpose of capturing slaves to sacrifice.

The answer may be found in environmental stress, shorter rain falls or even drought may bought many to the braking point and thus hastened their demise.

originally posted by: yulka
a reply to: Marduk

What was the god called?

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Marduk

aaah

I was in Mexico City a few months ago.

It's so interesting how they found the temple and pyramid there in the middle of the city. If they really wanted to reveal the whole empire, they'd have to tear the whole city down.

You can walk through the ruins in the middle of the city, and there is also an incredible museum they've built next door which holds all the artifacts they're finding as they excavate.

I was on an Aztec tour for two weeks and walked away from it with a new found respect for the Aztecs.

And yes, sacrifice was certainly a part of their culture. The explanation the archaeologists give never seem to really do it for me.

I don't think we can really understand it.

The Spanish certainly didn't. It's one of the biggest reasons they labeled the cultures they stumbled upon in South America as "barbaric."

a reply to: MRuss

The Spanish certainly didn't. It's one of the biggest reasons they labeled the cultures they stumbled upon in South America as "barbaric."

Yeah so said the culture that spawned a Tomas de Torquemada and the Spanish Inquisition.

So, after doing some reading on the Aztec/Mexica people last night, it appears as though there could have been some stealing of a prior culture. Somewhere along the way one of the Aztec leaders destroyed old records and wrote the Mexica into them. Kind of like you see happening in Egypt from time to time.

Another interesting parallel is Moctezuma, the leader that the Spaniards' Cortez met, had early in his reign tried to establish a monotheistic state religion.

In any event, it is possible that the exploits of the Aztec were not as great as believed. They were a dynasty that was maybe 150 years old.