What does Sup Forums think of human sacrifice and the Aztec Empire?

What does Sup Forums think of human sacrifice and the Aztec Empire?

Other urls found in this thread:

mexicolore.co.uk/aztecs/home/clean-aztecs-dirty-spaniards
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

niggers doing nigger shit

A mighty and proud civilization.

subhumans

Long forgotten practice that should return on its greatest glory back again.
I don't think they sacrificed as many people as modern textbooks make it seem, non the less it was a nice way to prevent overpopulation.
I unironically think that misery was greater in places like France compared to Tenochtitlan.

I think, if the aztecs had been left alone, their culture could possibly have grown to cover most of the thin strips between the americas

As for the sacrifice?
That shit was messed up, but i doubt they would have let go of it before they were toppled

Conquistadors should have exterminated them completely instead of making rape babies i.e. modern mexicans

very interesting. it just an ancient dogma and ritual and shit. its fucking dumb if you bring up some moral compass for it

but spaniards are rape babies themselves, is a custom.

It was stupid

They sacrificed hot women

>What does Sup Forums think of human sacrifice
pic related i guess
yes i'm a relativist

their society went to shit due to lack of sacrifices

There's literally nothing wrong with killing your enemies or culling subugated ppl.

Ppl will die anyway, so why not let the best ppl, your ppl live and others perish?

True warrior society. American civilization had a huge lag, since tribes reached those parts way after the old world were colonized and already headed towards the neolithicum.

The Aztecs were on par with ancient civilizations, but to their misfortune the old world progressed far ahead.

Still, it was a dynamic culture. Sub-saharan Africa was filled with only copying or static cultures, not to mention the Abos, who actually managed to regress from the settler culture.

Would have been nice to see where could Aztecs haven gotten without a foreign invasion.

aztec sacrificed their own children and members of their own society too

it builds character, we should bring it back

they did because sacrifices kept the sun going.

t. Gengis "Baghdad Basher" Khan

this

>Muh gods command to not kill my enemies but capture and offer them in sacrifice
>Muh gods command to surrender if my commander is captured
>Muh gods forbid me to use siege weapons or any other kind of non first-hand combat to capture a position

As much as I would have liked to see them fight with cannons and steel weapons, they literally deserved what they got, they captured Cortes twice but ended losing him in Spanish retaliations.

They were savages and cannibals literally worse than niggers

Pretty barbaric.
Unlike... you know

The sacrifice part would have been ok if they did it as a pretext to cull degenerates and other undesirables.

I once read that there were teams of men competing in some sort of sport about which team could have the honor to be sacrificed. Sounds pretty retarded and seems like a counter to survival of the fittest, sacrificing physically fit young men.

this was before the age of evolution
they were trying to save the sun

th-that was DIFFERENT

horrible warriors

>Ppl will die anyway, so why not let the best ppl, your ppl live and others perish?
that wasn't the exact point of the sacrifices though
aztecs performed blood magic. sometimes a really big wish (such as a particularly harsh drought being stopped) would require the finest lad or lass to be killed and his/her blood spilled: even the ruler would shed blood from his tongue into a basket so his blood would be mixed to the sacrifices
but yeah killing your enemies instead of keeping them prisioners and having to feed and take care of them sounds like a great idea, doesn't it Himmler?

Good thing to see someone getting it, even more impressive it's a Hungarian.

download from dreamstime.com

seems two smallpox outbreaks can really turn tides

I've heard that the cities were more than overcrowded, so at times feeding that many people could be a problem, so you had sacrifices with a religious pretext. Not sure how true that is, but sort of makes sense

Aztec empire was already too big. They had trouble with feudal tribes rebellions.

sacrifices were also: conquer for us or be sacrificed.. pretty smaht

that sun does NOT look impressed. This is why the aztecs failed.

because of how close their enemies and allies were they were able to exact the price of conquest simply by having proxy wars, sacrifice were not a material necesity per se it supported their hierarchy

Are you talking about the tribes they kept alive just so they could have a source of sacrifice?

I don't know the specifics, but weren't they the alpha dog in the area?

spaniards are more savage tho

yes that's why everyone hated them and make the conquista easier as fuck to the spaniards

>weren't they the alpha dog in the area?
sorta, one tribe was able to resist them for a fairly long time can't remember which one but it a factor was that they had the ability to use copper.

...

>They had trouble with feudal tribes rebellions.
They actually expected them to rebel, just so they could wage war again and capture more warriors for sacrifice. That's the reason they didn't build any kind of fortress in the conquered regions and as the Spaniards noted they didn't even leave military garrisons.

Well, yeh, obviously, but i thought they were militarily superior enough to keep them down

What did they use the copper for?
Just regular spears and stuff?

axes, armor, spears, etc. Also, they really fucking hated the aztecs.

It wasn't copper, but bronze, and it was quite common in Mesoamerica.

garland wars kept their enemies poorer but not necessary less people since they needed them for making food for them

good post

why didn't the aztec make bronze axes/swords?

They had obsidian which is way sharper than bronze, so they probably didn't see a need to use anything else for swords.

>I seriously hope you guys don't do this

I would probably hate being sacrificed

I think i heard somewhere that some of the weapons they used were supposed to be holy

But if they hadn't, i guess they'd be toppled by another people that would become the new alpha dog

oh shit is that why indos are so ugly

...

they like blunt to capture
they didn't go to wars to kill everyone

obsidian is rarely used since you would maim and they might die

>leaf filth thinking its opinion matters
80% chance is a t*rkroach posting.

They certainly used axes, but as other anons said they preferred the obsidian edged sword for prestige/ritual purposes. They didn't use bronze swords for the same reason people didn't use them in the Old World: bronze is too hard and lacks the flexibility of iron to remain together after a few hard hits and same goes for the armor, which in the old world was only used by wealthy men in chariots. So at the end it was far more expensive than the obsidian sword and it didn't offer a real advantage against the light armors of Mesoamerica.

Well, seems that sacrifices and ritual cannibalism is what happens when you regard every living being as valuable as a man. You end up wondering why someone, either plant or animal, has to die everyday so others can live.
Representations like pic related show a very particular perception of the food chain.

Pic VERY related (and well worth the read 3bh)

>CHI's get this mad on an anonymous Bhutanese gravel grading forum

to be fair, they didn't have steel weapons or any real armor

If you match a guy with plate armor and a steel sword versus a guy with no armor and a weapon which is essentially nothing more than sharp glass, then obviously the one who's better equipped will win. Not to mention the advantage of horses and gunpowder.

there is some truth but andeans had pack animals but they still practiced human sacrifice

animal sacrifice does not replace human sacrifice or vice versa, some places used pack animals and sacrificed people only, or the opposite

Kinda looks like the sun in the flag of Uruguay.

>100 cavalry
>12 birgantines
>2 years of smallpox
No shit

I always wonder "what if the Dutch were the ones to conquer the Americas, but in the 21st century". Can you imagine how fucking weird it'd be, an army of people who are on average something like 185 cm facing a bunch of indios measuring 155 cm on average (or even less). The indios surely would have thought they were facing an entirely different species of literal giants.

Since the spanish said that the indios were of the same height as them, being some more tall and some less (just like them), they would probably have thought the same as 16th century spaniards.

>people have always been the same height, even 500 years ago

But the Spaniards in general are shorter than the Dutch, and most importantly 16th century Europeans were much shorter than 21st century Europeans.

Though it's interesting that they were the same height back then, it shows that the nutrition, diet and healthcare of the Aztecs weren't particularly worse than that of the Spaniards.

The Dutch (and most Europeans) in that time measured around 170 cm on average.

>Mestizo fairy tales

The whole white bearded man coming back from the east is a myth. Like in Columbus era people thought the earth was round tier myth

*flat lmao

It was the Tarascans and their bronze was not a factor, the Aztecs themselves had used bronze war axes, the tlaximaltepoztli, which they obtained as tribute from the Huastecs and the Mixtecs, they prefered their Macahuitl however as obsidian was sharper than their bronze and they knew to use it to good effect (eg decapitating horses) so it wasn't a technological advantage for the Tarascans which themselves traded bronze (axe-monies) with the Aztecs themselves.

The Aztec empire was founded as an alliance between three citiy states, one of it's founders was Nezahualcoyotl the ruler of Texcoco wich was a sort of Athens to Tenochtitlan's Sparta. It is known he had proposed a non sacrificial religion and that he followed it himself although he did allow others to sacrifice, this is a figure the Aztecs themselves greatly respected and is considered the greatest poet of the Nahua. There were certainly foundations on which Mesoamerica, and Aztec civilization in particular, could have evolved a new theology had it been left to its own devices.

Peña Nieto is basically Spanish, doesn't look too different from Pedro Sánchez

>HURR DURR WE WERE JUST DEFEATED BECAUSE OF THE SMALLPOX
Yes they literally got infected in the middle of the battlefield and then died in minutes because of the smallpox, lmao

>THE SPANIARDS HAD GUNS
Useless against light armored enemies. Most Spaniards fought with sword and rodela. The biggest weapon was the horse.

>MUH SHINY ARMORS
Most Conquistadors weren't heavy armored, max shit they wore was a steel cuirass but most used cotton and leather light armors.


The thing is, I'm not trying to be an asshole and insult Mexicans, which most of them don't descend from the absolutely massacred Aztecs, but from the Spanish allies like the Tlaxcala, but today it has become practically the norm to try to belittle any historical Spanish achievement, and it's tiresome.

The Spaniards, while they were conquering México they were also defeating France in Italy and the Turks in the Mediterranean, the two biggest military powers in the Old World. The Tercios were literally steamrolling everywhere and this military supremacy lasted for over a century. We didn't just win because the Aztecs were savages, the Spaniards of the time were simply a military superpower.

That's a very crude representation of a macahuitl, they used prismatic blades. Pictured is a drawing from the last known specimen.

>Peña Nieto is basically Spanish, doesn't look too different from Pedro Sánchez
>this is what mestizos unironically believe

The trauma is big.

>Yes they literally got infected in the middle of the battlefield and then died in minutes because of the smallpox, lmao
They got infected when Cortes went to fight some cunt in Cuba while there was an outbreak there, (why do you think there are no natives left in Cuba) and came back to the City only to find Pedro de Alvarado chimping out and almost barely making it out of Tenochtitlan. They wouldn't come back to the City in 2 years, in those same 2 years there were several outbreaks inside the city. Why do you go against documented facts? Illiterate imbecile.

The Aztecs were fucking awesome, it's a shame that modern Mexico is dominated by Spanish culture instead of their real culture.

>Honestly believes smallpox had nothing to do with the downfall of the Aztecs
It killed off 1/4th of the main city's population, cunt. Most Aztecs died from smallpox than anything else.

>Guns were useless
Guns and cannons were extremely useful, the Aztecs had nothing to defend themselves from it.

>Armor
It still played a role against the Aztecs. While what they were able to accomplish is impressive considering the short time they existed, they were still in the bronze age while Spain was more advanced.

I have no doubt in my mind that without Smallpox and the few conflicts between leaders, the Aztecs could have held their own against the Spanish and allies.

>Can't even stand the smallpox
>imagine if we brought the bigpox

Fucking primitive savages I swear

>Yes they literally got infected in the middle of the battlefield and then died in minutes because of the smallpox, lmao
no, but they certainly died from that in the siege of Tenochtitlan

>Useless against light armored enemies. Most Spaniards fought with sword and rodela. The biggest weapon was the horse.
Agreed on the last part, but you're disregarding the cannons and that's was the only reason they won against the Tlaxcalans and convinced them to get an alliance.

>Most Conquistadors weren't heavy armored, max shit they wore was a steel cuirass but most used cotton and leather light armors.
they still had steel weapons against wooden weapons

Not to downplay the Spanish feat, but had the natives faced cavalry before they wouldn't have survived battles like Centla or Otumba. They still had the biggest balls of all time for making a charge of 5 horsemen.

>the Aztecs could have held their own against the Spanish and allies.

Meanwhile in the real world the Spaniards were literally steamrolling the modern and heavy armored armies of France.

>MUH LA RAZA

Fucking delusional Chicanos.

>WE WUZ
Spaniards had success in Mexico because aztecs were dicks to everyone in the region so the butthurt tribes literally fought along the spaniards.

>Spanish
>Steamrolling

You can't downplay an empire of 22 million people, where most men were trained to be warriors from a young age. The entire Spanish forces weren't in the Americas as the time, so yes, I honestly believe the Aztecs could have lasted against the Spanish.

I wasn't born in this states, nor is this some pride shit.

>Yes they literally got infected in the middle of the battlefield and then died in minutes because of the smallpox, lmao
Actually they did fall sick in the midst of war, the siege of Tenochtitlán lasted 3 months during which time the epidemic hit the city badly. Things were made worse as the Spaniards cut off the city's two aqueducts (they didn't drink from the lake) and corpses littered much of the lake system.
>Useless against light armored enemies. Most Spaniards fought with sword and rodela. The biggest weapon was the horse.
Only high ranking warriors wore armor, also you're missing the point that Spanish arquebusiers were effective shock troops, guns weren't taken to the new world as a novelty toy, they had an effective role in battle, particularly against peoples unfamiliar with them.
>Most Conquistadors weren't heavy armored, max shit they wore was a steel cuirass but most used cotton and leather light armors.
A steel cuirass and helmet alongside leather armor are pretty effective protection in fact.

No one is trying to diminish the feat of Cortés and his men but you're going full retard here, by the standards of his own time Cortés did a lot of ruthless dishonorable shit (there's a reason he was considered disreputable in Spain) also most mixed peoples in Mexico descend from peoples part of the core of the Nahua core of the Aztec empire, the Tenochtla Mexicah chief amongst them as this is where the Spaniards established new Spain's capital. The Aztec alliance was an alliance between three city states, not just Tenochtitlan, and each of these had further associated smaller towns and territories, Aztec civilization spread through the whole of not just Anahuac (Mexico City), but what are today the Mexican states of Puebla, Hidalgo, Morelos, Edo. de México and parts of Guerrero and Veracruz. It was by far the most densely populated region of the pre-columbian Americas. The Tlaxcalans gained a privileged status and remained in their own land, CONT

I don't.

Don't be stupid, sooner or later we would have send more men if it was necessary.

The Spaniards of the time were so brutal and confident in their military prowess that one Spanish general asked just for 15.000 castillian soldiers to conquer the entirety of China. You just don't achieve 116 years virtually undefeated in major battlefields by having luck.

>we

Who is we?

What's to say there would have been a difference after the Aztecs got experience fighting the Spanish? I'm saying the Aztecs could have stood a chance if they weren't dealing with every other shit that was thrown at them.

the current Mexican state of Tlaxcala, except for a few who were later encouraged to settle in the Bajío, most ]Mexicans descend from this core of the Aztec empire, this is like you claiming only the peoples of Latium were Romans.

Seriously man, México comes from Mexicah, the original kingdom of México in New Spain roughly corresponds to the Aztec empire, nevermind the Aztec ethnicity, Nahua, was far more extended and remains today the most numerous of all Mexican Americans by far if you exclude the Maya.

The only reason the Spanish ended up on top is because all of the Mexica/Aztec client states hated them, and took the first excuse they could to revolt. Most of the fighting was between Injuns and the Spanish only won because the Injuns suffered one of the most depressing collapses of civilization in history.

When the sun rose after discontinuing blood sacrifices to keep it going, rhe basis of their whole religion fell apart. Their grand empire fell collapsed after a brutal war, their pristine imperial canal city became a cesspit of death and disease, and the vast majority of their population was being wiped out disease, which back then most saw mystically, as punishment from above. It was as apocalyptic as it gets, they literally thought it was the death of man

No, this is a black legend, the Tlaxcaltec treason aside and Spanish dominance over the Totonacs of the Vera Cruz area most peoples remained faithful to the empire until the fall of Tlatelolco and the surrender of the last tlatoani, Cuauhtemoc.

All Mesoamericans performed human sacrifices and were involved in warfare, the Aztecs were simply top dog, not a ruthless opresor as later revisionists and apologist of those who sided with the Spaniards tried to make it.

You would have had to go north amongst the Chichimeca to find peoples who did not perform human sacrifice, down south the post decline Maya also practiced it.

A lot of it was disease, Spanish user. Spaniards rarely bathed, and were used to disease over the course of dozens of generations. In contrast, Aztecs (but not Mixtecs and other groups) usually bathed. A weakened population leads to a weakened army desu. There wasn't as much contact between Spain and the Aztecs before this. Also, Montezuma was a dumbass and thought that Cortez was the god Quetzalcoatl. This gave the Spanish the ability to enter the capital and attack from within.

It wasn't hatred, those who allied with the Spaniards did so for their own benefit, see

>What's to say there would have been a difference after the Aztecs got experience fighting the Spanish? I'm saying the Aztecs could have stood a chance if they weren't dealing with every other shit that was thrown at them.

The shit that I have to read, my God.

Fucking chicanos and AOE Aztecboos.

Nah, Moctezuma did not believe Cortés was a god, that's another myth, it seems he and Cortés did actually bond and become friends despite Cortés later making a captive out of him.

Pillar Men and vampire masks, of course :^)

Sure thing user, whatever you say.

Keep in mind you honestly believe smallpox had nothing to do with the downfall of the Aztec empire, and believe you were part of the Spanish Conquistadors in the 1500's.

>we
I kek'd when I read that

I think I am going to make several meme arrow copypastas to explain the conquest of Tenochtitlan better given the amount of misinformation ITT.

Altough that is autism for another day.

Still speculation is pretty much useless on that matter, history went down the way it did and Mexico was born from it, which might not have been the case in many other scenarios.

I forgot about that being debunked. But my other point is still valid.

AWAKEN MY MASTERS!

>Keep in mind you honestly believe smallpox had nothing to do with the downfall of the Aztec empire
I never said that, I know it killed millions (although the total numbers are arguable)

It's just that it is constantly used as another of so many excuses to belittle the Spanish feat.

>we
Was just talking about Spain.

Yes, the Aztecs bathed compulsively, it doesn't mean people like the Mixtecs were pigs, temazcal was widespread through the whole of Mesoamerica, at any rate I'm not sure hygiene was a factor (other than the Aztecs being forced to drink from the lake during the siege of tenochtitlan, bathing doesn't prevent smallpox nor typhus.

mexicolore.co.uk/aztecs/home/clean-aztecs-dirty-spaniards