Was there any way the Aztecs could have defeated the Spanish and launched a counter-invasion of Europe where they rape so many white women they spawn ...


Warning: Attempt to read property "comment_date" on null in /var/www/wptbox/wp-includes/comment-template.php on line 1043

Warning: Attempt to read property "comment_date" on null in /var/www/wptbox/wp-includes/comment-template.php on line 1043

Warning: Attempt to read property "comment_date" on null in /var/www/wptbox/wp-includes/comment-template.php on line 1043

Was there any way the Aztecs could have defeated the Spanish and launched a counter-invasion of Europe where they rape so many white women they spawn a race of mestizos?

  1. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    No because they had no knowledge on How to build cannons, guns, metal armour or built ocean crossing ships (they only had canoes)

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      What if they captured some of the Spaniards and buckbroke them into telling their secrets?

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        They would have died of smallpox before they could get started.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      The smallpox crap is fake.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        >smallpox was fake
        agreed; variola was just monkeypox for straights at the time, even in messico.
        cocoliztli on the other hand was serious shit.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Could have easily defeated the Spanish, had they not been on such bad terms with all their neighbors. Granted, the Spanish probably wouldn't have tried anything without said neighbors backing them.

      Counter-invasion, probably not even if they reverse engineered the ships. Extracting info from the Spaniards () would only go so far, as even the crew only knew so much about how the ships were made, and it wouldn't magically make iron deposits show up around the Aztecs.

      Though if I recall, there is some nifty sci-fi involving just that scenario happening, resulting in a particularly blood thirsty space faring mankind some hundreds of years later. Wish I could remember the name.

  2. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Was there any way the Aztecs could have defeated the Spanish
    Yes by not being evil and instead allying with neighboring tribes rather than subjugating and sacrificing them.
    >launch a counter-invasion of Europe
    Highly unlikely, maybe if they hired Spanish mercenaries or captured ships and forced the crews to sail them back, but that would be a monumental feat near impossible
    > rape so many white women they spawn a race of mestizos
    Stop watching porn and stop acting like a degenerate.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Yes by not being evil
      Retarded normie. Imagine thinking Tlaxcalans gave a fuck about human sacrifice. As if the Mexican introduced the practice to Mesoamerica and weren't just hated for being the regional hegemon.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        *Mexica

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Stop watching porn and stop acting like a degenerate.
      so were spanish men being porn-watching degenerates when they did that to the americas?

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah bro, being stuck months at sea is the same as you conjuring up interracial fantasies onn your smegma-ridden computer keyboard. Fucking retard

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          >it's ok if my race does it but not if someone else does it
          Kill yourself. I mean that unironically.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            Holy based retard. Learn to read you dumb ape

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              Kill yourself homosexual. Imagine making excuses for a bunch of rapist degenerates.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >it's ok if my race does it but not if someone else does it
                Kill yourself. I mean that unironically.

                [...]
                [...]
                whoops forgot my image

                cont:

                [...]
                Moctezuma's actions make more sense with the above in mind,

                The Tlaxcaltecas had been the Mexica's punching bag for decades and the Conquistadors were a tiny force. Accepting diplomats from even hostile, enemy states was an expectation in Mesoamerican diplomacy. To deny Cortes (who claimed to be a emissary of a foreign king) entry or to ambush/attack them would be seen as not just arrogant, but cowardly to subject states, and part of what kept Mexica subject states in line was the perception of military power: Since the Aztec empire didn't actually directly manage their subjects, the whole system was a house of cards that relied on everybody viewing the Mexica as powerful and staying in line to keep their influence intact, if states stopped respecting or taking them seriously, others could follow and the entire thing could fall apart (which it did, eventually)

                From Moctezuma's perspective, they weren't a huge threat, attacking would be a diplomatic faux pass and an overreaction that could undermine his influence, and it was more in his interests to let them in, get intel on who they were, try to flaunt Tenochtitlan's opulence and flex on them to keep them humble and maybe convince them to become subjects, since beyond military power, a big part of influence building was to stress your power in other ways, including economically, so states would want to align with you and suck up for political marriages to get a piece of the pie.

                Cortes, Bernal Diaz, etc got gifts of princesses and noblewomen they interpreted as being concubines but were really attempted political marriages.

                3/3 for now

                Kek this reminds me of Whites getting replaced.

                If there is any race deserving of being wiped off the face of the earth its the fucking meso-american demon worshipping, human sacrificing cannibals of mexico. Fuck all those people. I literally hate all mexicans and latinos, TO THIS DAY they cut each other up over drugs, you only ever see the sickest fucking shit coming out of mexico and "latino" countries. I thank God every day they were destroyed. Death to mexico, death to the aztec empire, and God bless Hernan Cortez for bringing the wrath of God down upon such a depraved human race.

                If only he killed them all. Imagine being a fucking mexican or latino, fleeing your dead and dying civilization, showing up at the US holding random children as human shields so we cant send you back to the shithole where you people came from. God i fucking hate mexicans.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Nice meltdown tranny. You will never get your white demographics back.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Read the thread of replies again. Jesus fucking Christ to think there are animals like you roaming around...
                You are literally subhuman, in the most literal definition of the word.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Says the retarded homosexual making excuses for pedophilic rapists. Kill yourself before someone else does it you dumb piece of shit.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                I didn't excuse anyone, you low iq spastic. I don't know what to tell you, since you obviously can't understand the written word. Guess I'll just call you a sad and resentful product of race-mixing and go on with my day.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        But of course.

  3. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Why do you insist on spamming something you know is wrong?

  4. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    The only way natives would have survived the European invasions with preserved autonomy is to have undergone a population collapse driven by plague. They missed their window when the Vikangz decided colonization wasn't worth it, otherwise they would simply have to forge alliances with warring white empires like they did IOTL. Except now it's a war of attrition (which they would lose, but Europeans would eventually tire of sending people into a meat grinder).

  5. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Aztecucks were so inferior its not even funny. Imagine being some 5ft1 scrawny browncel and meeting a tall, muscular, well-spoken Spaniard, probably the first though was to let that man have sex with their wife in hopes that she would acquire megical powers

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      cortes was 5'4, aztecs were unironically taller

  6. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Athtecucks were tho inferior its not even funny. Imagine being thome 5ft1 thcrawny brownthel and meeting a tall, muscular, well-ethpoken Thpaniard, probably the first though was to let that man have thex with their wife in hopes that she would acquire megical powerth

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Your ancestors got buck broken by BVLL COCK

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Your ancestors got buck broken by BVLL COCK
        I'm not Spanish.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          >I'm not Sp-ACK!!

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >t. Juan Abdul Gallegos de la Maghreb

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      guys like that assraped your ancestors into existence

  7. 4 months ago
    S10241875

    The short answer is no.
    The long answer is no.

  8. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Unrealistic expectations. That like saying Egyptian conquest of Jōmon Japan or Scythian invade Koreanic multi-kingdom.

  9. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    yes kill migrants on sight

  10. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    I dont think so. The Aztecs had alieanated themselves from all rival tribes. They all hated each other, they would raid, capture, sacrifice and then eat each other (literally). Imagine being a Spanish Soldier....holy shit balls, having these sick fucks putting human blood in your food, seeing bodies everywhere, towers of skulls, the gore going down the steps of their pyramids.

    Team White man all the way anons. Pedro de Alverado was absolutely elite for slaughtering all their elite warriors during their sick and twisted festival, in which they tried to sacrifice a young girl.

    The conquest of mexico is truly the stuff of legend. The only problem is the Spanish did not kill them all, now we are paying the price in the states because these beaners are coming here.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Based Pedro poster. I was among the first to shill his legacy on this board. It's not a racial thing either (mostly). Aztecs are just subhumanity simple as

  11. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Biggest problem was sudden dieases that not only decapitated their society causing succession crisis and vassal rebellions but aldo depopulation and weakened yheir warriors and army.

  12. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Thry could've defeated the Spanish had the Tlatoani not acted like a retard when the Spanish arrived at Tenochtitlan. Invading Europe, no, and there'd have not been any will or necessity to do so.

  13. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes. The same way alliances break. Tlaxcalan and other natives allying against the imposing spanish.

    Disease prevented any kind of recovering from the natives and doomed them for centuries.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      The smallpox crap is fake.

  14. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >could a group of low IQ retards suddenly retaliate against a high tech warrior nation across the ocean?

    OP, you're a fucken retard. Kill yourself

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      You will never have a real ethnostate

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >whitoids
      >warriors
      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        How did injun cucks lost miserably to few injuns then ?

        cortes was 5'4, aztecs were unironically taller

        Yet they got their race murdered and their women fucked by iberian bulls

  15. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
  16. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Was there any way the Aztecs could have defeated the Spanish and launched a counter-invasion of Europe where they rape so many white women they spawn a race of mestizos?
    Kek this reminds me of that alt his scenario DLC in CKII where the Aztecs invade Europe in the Middle Ages. Just imaging such silly nonsense is funny. Paradox are such retarded SJWs.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >imaging
      imagining*

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Kek this reminds me of Whites getting replaced.

  17. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Was there any way the Aztecs could have defeated the Spanish

    If by "The Spanish" you mean the Cortes expedition or subsquent ones that resulted in the conquest of former Aztec subject states or other Mesoamerican cities and kingdoms: Yes, absolutely

    Cortes's expedition was insanely reliant on a few key flukes, from coming across shipwrecked Spanish sailors who knew local languages acted as translators, to Tlaxcalteca officials narrowly deciding to ally with Cortes instead of finishing his forces off, to Moctezuma II letting them into Tenochtitlan against his advisor's wishes, to the fact that Smallpox broke out right when it did, etc

    Any one of those things not happening almost exactly when they did would have likely doomed Cortes's expedition, and as long as he fails before Moctezuma II's death, the Toxcatl massacre, and the smallpox outbreak, I think it's pretty likely that Spain wouldn't have invested as much in going all out on rapid colonization efforts: It was cortes's fluke succes that gave Spain tons of local infanstructure, manpower, and resources to launch further campaigns from without needing to actually launch mass invasion forces across the atlantic, and that made them realize how lucrative it could be with actual, rich civilizations to conquer

    If he fails then Spain likely won't see direct conquest as as worth the effort, and anything that does happen would be slower, more gradual, and give more room for disease resistance to build

    >and launched a counter-invasion of Europe

    No, not unless you're compeltely changing the course of world history even further back to the point where "The Aztec" as we know them wouldn't exist and Europe/Mesoamerica are completely different to begin with

    Even in my above hypothetical,you'd still likely see Mesoamerican civilizations subject to more indirect imperialism from European powers, just with more of their population, culture, and intuitions left intact, more like in India/Southeast asia

    1/?

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      cont:

      >Was there any way the Aztecs could have defeated the Spanish
      Yes by not being evil and instead allying with neighboring tribes rather than subjugating and sacrificing them.
      >launch a counter-invasion of Europe
      Highly unlikely, maybe if they hired Spanish mercenaries or captured ships and forced the crews to sail them back, but that would be a monumental feat near impossible
      > rape so many white women they spawn a race of mestizos
      Stop watching porn and stop acting like a degenerate.

      I dont think so. The Aztecs had alieanated themselves from all rival tribes. They all hated each other, they would raid, capture, sacrifice and then eat each other (literally). Imagine being a Spanish Soldier....holy shit balls, having these sick fucks putting human blood in your food, seeing bodies everywhere, towers of skulls, the gore going down the steps of their pyramids.

      Team White man all the way anons. Pedro de Alverado was absolutely elite for slaughtering all their elite warriors during their sick and twisted festival, in which they tried to sacrifice a young girl.

      The conquest of mexico is truly the stuff of legend. The only problem is the Spanish did not kill them all, now we are paying the price in the states because these beaners are coming here.

      >tribes
      >evil/being hated
      >raiding for sacrifices

      This is a misconception.

      There were no "tribes". Mesoamerican had urbanized state societies with cities and formal governments for thousands of years by this point, see pic; basically every society the Aztec bothered to conquer or interact with were city-states, kingdoms., and empires; not tribes. Secondly, wihile the Mexica of Tenochtitlan were warmongering expansionists but were hands off with the places they actually conquered, generally speaking. This is true of most large Mesoamerican empires, but the Aztec installed rulers or did slave raids or sacked cities or founded colonies less then even other empires and large kingdoms in the region.

      They basically just demanded taxes of economic goods, military service, and that roads not be blocked alongside a few other basic obligations, and subjects got left alone with their existing rulers, laws, customs, etc. Sacrifices was something everybody did, and were mostly captured enemy soldiers from wars.. The reason Cortes got allies is that this hands off system enabled subject states to both act indepedently and with their own political ambitions, so you regularly had subjects seceiding and launching coups and switching sides to try to improve standing or see what they could get away with.

      State X allying or pledging themselve as a subject to state Y (since subjects got left alone anyways) to take out their existing captial or political rivals, so then X could be in higher standing in Y's new kingdom, was a common method of political advancement. That's pretty much why Cortes and other conquistadors got allies, they were being played and used the same way states always did in Mesoamerica. The Aztec empire itself was founded this way.

      See: https://pastebin.com/VqW97h93

      2/3

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Was there any way the Aztecs could have defeated the Spanish
        Yes by not being evil and instead allying with neighboring tribes rather than subjugating and sacrificing them.
        >launch a counter-invasion of Europe
        Highly unlikely, maybe if they hired Spanish mercenaries or captured ships and forced the crews to sail them back, but that would be a monumental feat near impossible
        > rape so many white women they spawn a race of mestizos
        Stop watching porn and stop acting like a degenerate.

        I dont think so. The Aztecs had alieanated themselves from all rival tribes. They all hated each other, they would raid, capture, sacrifice and then eat each other (literally). Imagine being a Spanish Soldier....holy shit balls, having these sick fucks putting human blood in your food, seeing bodies everywhere, towers of skulls, the gore going down the steps of their pyramids.

        Team White man all the way anons. Pedro de Alverado was absolutely elite for slaughtering all their elite warriors during their sick and twisted festival, in which they tried to sacrifice a young girl.

        The conquest of mexico is truly the stuff of legend. The only problem is the Spanish did not kill them all, now we are paying the price in the states because these beaners are coming here.

        whoops forgot my image

        cont:

        Thry could've defeated the Spanish had the Tlatoani not acted like a retard when the Spanish arrived at Tenochtitlan. Invading Europe, no, and there'd have not been any will or necessity to do so.

        Moctezuma's actions make more sense with the above in mind,

        The Tlaxcaltecas had been the Mexica's punching bag for decades and the Conquistadors were a tiny force. Accepting diplomats from even hostile, enemy states was an expectation in Mesoamerican diplomacy. To deny Cortes (who claimed to be a emissary of a foreign king) entry or to ambush/attack them would be seen as not just arrogant, but cowardly to subject states, and part of what kept Mexica subject states in line was the perception of military power: Since the Aztec empire didn't actually directly manage their subjects, the whole system was a house of cards that relied on everybody viewing the Mexica as powerful and staying in line to keep their influence intact, if states stopped respecting or taking them seriously, others could follow and the entire thing could fall apart (which it did, eventually)

        From Moctezuma's perspective, they weren't a huge threat, attacking would be a diplomatic faux pass and an overreaction that could undermine his influence, and it was more in his interests to let them in, get intel on who they were, try to flaunt Tenochtitlan's opulence and flex on them to keep them humble and maybe convince them to become subjects, since beyond military power, a big part of influence building was to stress your power in other ways, including economically, so states would want to align with you and suck up for political marriages to get a piece of the pie.

        Cortes, Bernal Diaz, etc got gifts of princesses and noblewomen they interpreted as being concubines but were really attempted political marriages.

        3/3 for now

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          random question meso anon, why do some call tlaxcala a republic? I never undeerstood that. How did it work?

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            I will refer you to Milo's video on Tlaxcala for that, as well as the comment I've set up in the link to come up at the top, since both the video and the comment includes most of what I would say:

            Something even that comment doesn't really get into is that there's actually a fair amount of excavations at other "Aztec" (ruled by the Aztec empire and nahua populated, but not mexica/tenochtitlan) sites including rural villages that show that commoners in those cities and towns could have nominally elite goods too, like bronze sewing needles or polychrome pottery, they just didn't have as many as nobles/elites

            That also ties into the point being made in the comment about how how egalitarian/democractic or classist/monarchial Nahua cities were varied from city to city, and frankly makes me wonder how exceptional Tlaxcalteca access to elite goods really was (having a lot of plazas in mesoamerican cities or open spaces in palaces also isn';t that unusual, so i'm curious what about them in Tlaxcala is unique vs in other cities, the explanation in the video isn't as informative as i'd like), and what the researcher milo consulted meant when they said that Aztec commoners wouldn't have them. Maybe excavations in Tenochtitlan in particular show worse access to elite goods by commoners? The Mexica certainly have a reputation for classism, so maybe.

            >Cortes's expedition was insanely reliant on a few key flukes
            Okay, I'll be devils-advocate here . . .
            > from coming across shipwrecked Spanish sailors who knew local languages acted as translators,
            This probably would have happened anyway on account Spaniards had knocked around the Gulf Coast for some decades already, and even if they hadn't they'd have found some locals adept at languages to suss out Spanish after a few months.
            >to Tlaxcalteca officials narrowly deciding to ally with Cortes instead of finishing his forces off,
            This was a more-likely-than-not situation given how hard Tlaxcala hated and feared the Triple Alliance.
            > to Moctezuma II letting them into Tenochtitlan against his advisor's wishes,
            I admit, after the Tlaxcala episode, the advisors had good reason to distrust these foreigners. On the other hand, Moteczoma II had them in hand for some time. On the other-other hand, his court should have had them in firmer hand for longer.
            > to the fact that Smallpox broke out right when it did, etc
            Smallpox and the other plagues should have broken out earlier, as happened amongst the Maya and then VERY DRAMATICALLY amongst the Inca. I too wonder why these pestes did not spread up the Valley in, say, 1505-10.

            >This was a more-likely-than-not situation

            Not really: Xicotencatl II was only narrowly convinced to work with Cortes and ended up changing his mind later on (by then it was too late). Even with identical timing it would have been very possible for the alliance to not happen, and if Spanish-Tlaxcaltec contact happened even a year later, it is possible Tlaxcala would have been subdued: The Mexica had started to launch for real, actual invasions, not just flower wars, around the time the Spanish arrived.

            4/?

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Cortes's expedition was insanely reliant on a few key flukes
              Okay, I'll be devils-advocate here . . .
              > from coming across shipwrecked Spanish sailors who knew local languages acted as translators,
              This probably would have happened anyway on account Spaniards had knocked around the Gulf Coast for some decades already, and even if they hadn't they'd have found some locals adept at languages to suss out Spanish after a few months.
              >to Tlaxcalteca officials narrowly deciding to ally with Cortes instead of finishing his forces off,
              This was a more-likely-than-not situation given how hard Tlaxcala hated and feared the Triple Alliance.
              > to Moctezuma II letting them into Tenochtitlan against his advisor's wishes,
              I admit, after the Tlaxcala episode, the advisors had good reason to distrust these foreigners. On the other hand, Moteczoma II had them in hand for some time. On the other-other hand, his court should have had them in firmer hand for longer.
              > to the fact that Smallpox broke out right when it did, etc
              Smallpox and the other plagues should have broken out earlier, as happened amongst the Maya and then VERY DRAMATICALLY amongst the Inca. I too wonder why these pestes did not spread up the Valley in, say, 1505-10.

              cont:

              My response to the translator thing is similar: Sure, it's likely translators would have been a thing within a few years anyways, but by the time that happens the planet aligning situation Cortes had in his favor wouldn't be at play anymore: It is the sum of all these things adding up that enabled Cortes's success, and without those things occuring, I don't think it is clear Spain would bother with the trouble.

              Yes, they COULD ship thousands of troops and cannons and supplies over the Atlantic to directly conquer Mesoamerican states even without the ideal set of circumstances in their factor, but why would they? Spain was stills strapped for cash after the reconquestia, and we only know with hindsight how lucrative the conquests of the Americas would be. They could send armies to north africa or the near east for less effort and with more guaranteed returns. Cortes's fluke success is what gave them local manpower and resources and the proof of it being worth it for them to pursue further campaigns.

              >Smallpox and the other plagues should have broken out earlier, as happened amongst the Maya

              I'm actually not aware of an earlier outbreak among the Maya before 1519, you got more info?

              Anyways there's a few competing theories for where/when the smallpox outbreak first came from as it applies to the Cortes stuff, if it was spread a bit before Cortes's expedition landed, if somebody in his expeditio spread it, or if it was somebody in Pánfilo de Narváez's expedition. If it's the latter, then Cortes being stopped before Narváez gets involve would prevent that outbreak, at least in the short term.

              Could have easily defeated the Spanish, had they not been on such bad terms with all their neighbors. Granted, the Spanish probably wouldn't have tried anything without said neighbors backing them.

              Counter-invasion, probably not even if they reverse engineered the ships. Extracting info from the Spaniards () would only go so far, as even the crew only knew so much about how the ships were made, and it wouldn't magically make iron deposits show up around the Aztecs.

              Though if I recall, there is some nifty sci-fi involving just that scenario happening, resulting in a particularly blood thirsty space faring mankind some hundreds of years later. Wish I could remember the name.

              >had they not been on such bad terms with all their neighbors.
              They weren't, at least not more then any militaristically dominant state was, see

              cont:

              [...]
              [...]
              >tribes
              >evil/being hated
              >raiding for sacrifices

              This is a misconception.

              There were no "tribes". Mesoamerican had urbanized state societies with cities and formal governments for thousands of years by this point, see pic; basically every society the Aztec bothered to conquer or interact with were city-states, kingdoms., and empires; not tribes. Secondly, wihile the Mexica of Tenochtitlan were warmongering expansionists but were hands off with the places they actually conquered, generally speaking. This is true of most large Mesoamerican empires, but the Aztec installed rulers or did slave raids or sacked cities or founded colonies less then even other empires and large kingdoms in the region.

              They basically just demanded taxes of economic goods, military service, and that roads not be blocked alongside a few other basic obligations, and subjects got left alone with their existing rulers, laws, customs, etc. Sacrifices was something everybody did, and were mostly captured enemy soldiers from wars.. The reason Cortes got allies is that this hands off system enabled subject states to both act indepedently and with their own political ambitions, so you regularly had subjects seceiding and launching coups and switching sides to try to improve standing or see what they could get away with.

              State X allying or pledging themselve as a subject to state Y (since subjects got left alone anyways) to take out their existing captial or political rivals, so then X could be in higher standing in Y's new kingdom, was a common method of political advancement. That's pretty much why Cortes and other conquistadors got allies, they were being played and used the same way states always did in Mesoamerica. The Aztec empire itself was founded this way.

              See: https://pastebin.com/VqW97h93

              2/3

              . If anything the other city-states inside the valley of mexico benefitted from Aztec tax income into the valley and from their political marriages to tenochtitlan

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                Isn’t the smallpox Mayan thing the leading theory to their decline?

                I don’t know too much about it, but I’m pretty sure the leading theory is smallpox broke out and caused the collapse of the Mayan civilization.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                smallpox broke out after the conquest

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              random question meso anon, why do some call tlaxcala a republic? I never undeerstood that. How did it work?

              also there's some recent research that Monte Alban during some of it's early history may have had a more communal or egalitarian political system too.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        >That's pretty much why Cortes and other conquistadors got allies, they were being played and used the same way states always did in Mesoamerica
        There seems to be a habit among Mesoamericanists to frame the Spanish as being tricked whilst simultaneously getting exactly what they wanted and dominating those who were unfortunate enough to ally with them.

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          The two aren't mutually exclusive.

          Tlaxcala, Texcoco, etc were operating under the same political status quo that they always had been, but Spain wasn't playing the same political game. Actually, initially, (at least in some places, not so much in others) Spain WAS being relatively hands off: You only see things like racial caste systems or the complete dismantling of local political and administrative institutions many decades into colonialization. By the time the full implications of what they were enabling would have been apparent, it would have mostly been too late, especially because you had multiple epidemics and population collapses by then.

          I'm also not claiming that Cortes and other conquistadors were completely clueless either: From their perspective they were also playing multiple factions against each other: The fact that different officials and rulers and captains were using each other was mutial. But that Cortes was using "divide and conquer" as a tactic is something that's already widely disscussed, the fact that the Mesoamerican states he was working with was manipulating him too isn't as widely noted, and my interests and what I am more informed on is that angle, so that's what i'm focuisng on.

          I do think though, ust by virtue of him being in Mesoamerica and reliant on local infrastructure and him not being privy to the full diplomatic and political dynamics at play with all the different states he was interacting with, that it was more Cortes being played then the other way around: with Cempoala using him to take out a rival Totonaca captial, the Tlaxcaltecas and using him to depose turn Cholula into a puppet state, why Moctezuma II let him in Tenochtitlan, Texcoco and Tlaxcala using him to conquer specific cities that benefit them as subjects but not Cortes during the siege, etc

          6/?

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            I really kind of wonder if some mexica aristocrats ever disscussed where the funny pale people came from and weather they could vassalize the local tlatoani maybe even their funny religion came up once. Those moments will be lost to time. Like tears in the rain...

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              A lot of the tlamatini(scholars) were taught Spanish and how to write Nahuatl. Imagine a conversation between a monk and a Mexica priest immediately following conquest.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                This exists from the post conquest period - it might be in a Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies but I can't remember.

                By the way, anyone interested in mesoamerica read Aztec Philosophy by James Maffie, it's fucking amazing.

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            >That's pretty much why Cortes and other conquistadors got allies, they were being played and used the same way states always did in Mesoamerica
            There seems to be a habit among Mesoamericanists to frame the Spanish as being tricked whilst simultaneously getting exactly what they wanted and dominating those who were unfortunate enough to ally with them.

            cont:

            ...it's pretty inarguable that those were things that the local states were really spearheading and while Cortes was participating with the understanding he helping one local power against one another in a way that would benefit him, the full picture, deeper political implications and benefits to local powers wouldn't have been apparent.

            As you say, though, in the end it really didn't matter.

            >Was there any way the Aztecs could have defeated the Spanish
            No.

            I agree long term complete victory was unlikely, see

            >Was there any way the Aztecs could have defeated the Spanish

            If by "The Spanish" you mean the Cortes expedition or subsquent ones that resulted in the conquest of former Aztec subject states or other Mesoamerican cities and kingdoms: Yes, absolutely

            Cortes's expedition was insanely reliant on a few key flukes, from coming across shipwrecked Spanish sailors who knew local languages acted as translators, to Tlaxcalteca officials narrowly deciding to ally with Cortes instead of finishing his forces off, to Moctezuma II letting them into Tenochtitlan against his advisor's wishes, to the fact that Smallpox broke out right when it did, etc

            Any one of those things not happening almost exactly when they did would have likely doomed Cortes's expedition, and as long as he fails before Moctezuma II's death, the Toxcatl massacre, and the smallpox outbreak, I think it's pretty likely that Spain wouldn't have invested as much in going all out on rapid colonization efforts: It was cortes's fluke succes that gave Spain tons of local infanstructure, manpower, and resources to launch further campaigns from without needing to actually launch mass invasion forces across the atlantic, and that made them realize how lucrative it could be with actual, rich civilizations to conquer

            If he fails then Spain likely won't see direct conquest as as worth the effort, and anything that does happen would be slower, more gradual, and give more room for disease resistance to build

            >and launched a counter-invasion of Europe

            No, not unless you're compeltely changing the course of world history even further back to the point where "The Aztec" as we know them wouldn't exist and Europe/Mesoamerica are completely different to begin with

            Even in my above hypothetical,you'd still likely see Mesoamerican civilizations subject to more indirect imperialism from European powers, just with more of their population, culture, and intuitions left intact, more like in India/Southeast asia

            1/?

            , but

            1. Wikipedia's numbers are wrong. There were 10k Mexica max, and there were thousands of Tlaxcalteca soldiers with the Conquistadors (probably 3k to 4k)

            2. The majority of the Mexica nobility (and by extension, higher ranking soldiers/officers) had died while unarmed during the Toxactl massacre, so the Mexica army was lacking experienced troops and officials. In fact, Matlatzincatl, the general, had apparently (there's some inconstant info here) never even led troops in battle before, and only had the job because his brother would have had he not been killed

            3. Mesoamerican (or at least Central Mexican) warfare was seasonal, with campaigns done in the winter so during the summer men could work at the farms for harvest. Otumba took place in July, they were raised in a rush, so much so that the troops from other adjacent towns and cities didn't even arrive in time to participate

            4. The Mexica hadn't faced calvary or cannons in battle before, the winning strategy the Conquistadors and Tlaxcala used here was to blow holes in Mexica battle lines and formations with Calvary charges and cannonfire, that the Tlaxcalatec could exploit. In subsequent engagements the Mexica adjusted their tactics

            5. TheConquistadors and Tlaxcaltec has just been BTFO during La Noche Triste, with Otumba taking place further into their escape after that. The Mexica may have been approaching Otumba less as a serious battle and more as a "cleanup" to capture enemy combatants for sacrifice

            7/?

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              i had read that battle of otumba was won thanks to horses
              tlaxcaltecs told spaniards about how once mexica banner holders were taken down, the rest of them would scatter around, which the spaniards exploited with their cavalry and so won without having to kill them all

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              cont:

              I really kind of wonder if some mexica aristocrats ever disscussed where the funny pale people came from and weather they could vassalize the local tlatoani maybe even their funny religion came up once. Those moments will be lost to time. Like tears in the rain...

              A lot of the tlamatini(scholars) were taught Spanish and how to write Nahuatl. Imagine a conversation between a monk and a Mexica priest immediately following conquest.

              This exists from the post conquest period - it might be in a Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies but I can't remember.

              By the way, anyone interested in mesoamerica read Aztec Philosophy by James Maffie, it's fucking amazing.

              We have some references to debates between Mesoamerican priests and Spanish missionaries, actually:

              >This way, you were sent by the lord, the great ruler; from there his Word is made known, from where our lords, the Holy Father and the emperor are
              >In front of us you have laid turquoises, bangles and here we admired them, as if they were rounded jade, which reflection has no shadow and no defect
              >Precious as wide quetzal feathers, really green ones
              >But us, what we can say now?
              >Given that we are the ones who provide shelter, we are the mothers and fathers of the people.
              >Perhaps here, in front of you, should we destroy our old life rules? Those that were held for so long by our elders and our women, those rules which they thought about so much, and which were so admired by the lords and rulers?

              The references to turquoise, bangles, and being like jade and quetzal feathers is basically the Mesoamerican priests saying they appreciate the theological value of what the missionaries are saying (see also newborn babies as being called fine feathers or pieces of jade or turquoise), but as evidenced by the rest, clearly wasn't convincing enoug

              Isn’t the smallpox Mayan thing the leading theory to their decline?

              I don’t know too much about it, but I’m pretty sure the leading theory is smallpox broke out and caused the collapse of the Mayan civilization.

              smallpox broke out after the conquest

              The Classic Maya collapse happened between 750-900AD. There's a few debated causes, but it was probably a combination of increasingly intensive warfare (there had just been a large series of wars between two major kingdoms and their allies), drought during the time, and switching to less sustainable forms of agriculture (possibly to cope with the droughts and refugees from other cities causing the places they moved to to be overpopulated, then leading to more collapses, etc)

              Worth noting also that the collapse really mostly impacted very large cities in the Central and Southern Yucatan Peninsula; medium sized towns and small villages were fine and large cities in the north actually grew in the aftermath. It's not like the entire civilization went away

              8/?

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                cont:

                No. The Spanish had Indian allies who were thoroughly fed up with the Aztecs. The purpose of an Aztec warrior was to capture his enemy for human sacrifice, not a war to capture territory. The belief that the White god Quetzalcoatl had come back according to prophecy hampered anything the Aztecs could do. Their technology was still in the Stone Age - they had no chance at all.

                >who were... fed up with the Aztecs.
                This is largerly a misconception, see

                cont:

                [...]
                [...]
                >tribes
                >evil/being hated
                >raiding for sacrifices

                This is a misconception.

                There were no "tribes". Mesoamerican had urbanized state societies with cities and formal governments for thousands of years by this point, see pic; basically every society the Aztec bothered to conquer or interact with were city-states, kingdoms., and empires; not tribes. Secondly, wihile the Mexica of Tenochtitlan were warmongering expansionists but were hands off with the places they actually conquered, generally speaking. This is true of most large Mesoamerican empires, but the Aztec installed rulers or did slave raids or sacked cities or founded colonies less then even other empires and large kingdoms in the region.

                They basically just demanded taxes of economic goods, military service, and that roads not be blocked alongside a few other basic obligations, and subjects got left alone with their existing rulers, laws, customs, etc. Sacrifices was something everybody did, and were mostly captured enemy soldiers from wars.. The reason Cortes got allies is that this hands off system enabled subject states to both act indepedently and with their own political ambitions, so you regularly had subjects seceiding and launching coups and switching sides to try to improve standing or see what they could get away with.

                State X allying or pledging themselve as a subject to state Y (since subjects got left alone anyways) to take out their existing captial or political rivals, so then X could be in higher standing in Y's new kingdom, was a common method of political advancement. That's pretty much why Cortes and other conquistadors got allies, they were being played and used the same way states always did in Mesoamerica. The Aztec empire itself was founded this way.

                See: https://pastebin.com/VqW97h93

                2/3

                >The purpose...was to capture his enemy for human sacrifice, not a war to capture territory
                This is also a is misconception. Yes, capturing enemy soldiers was a practice, and it was how soldiers advanced through the ranks, but the entire idea there is that it was impressive and a relatively rare thing to do in normal wars, which were absolutely fought over territory and economic resources. Gaining tax-paying subject states that had access to luxury and economic goods was the main driving force in Aztec expansionism. There were also flower wars, which were more ritualistic and had a greater emphasis on captive taking, but even these had pragmatic uses: https://desuarchive.org/his/thread/13893450/#13897468

                >White god Quetzalcoatl had come back
                Also a myth. Quetzalcoatl being white/bearded/blond or Cortes being mistaken for him is something that largerly only shows up in accounts from decades after the conquest, by which point Spanish friars were trying to tie Quetzalcoatl to jesus and saint thomas to make conversion easier, you see catholic themes of original sin being inserted retroactively into Aztec legends too (see https://desu-usergeneratedcontent.xyz/co/image/1611/96/1611962437371.jpg ). Cortes himself doesn't say anything about him being seen as quetzalcoatl. see also pic

                >Stone Age
                4 for 4, huh?

                The Mesoamericans smelted bronze, firstly. But the entire idea of stone-bronze-iron ages as stages of technological development is stupid and aren't what they were intended for. Mesoamerican urbanism, water mangement systems, medicine, botanical sciences, etc were all more comparable in complexity to Classical Antiquity or Medieval Europe (or beyond, for botany/medicine/sanitation, see: tbharchive.org/co/thread/132813900/#132826709) then Bronze age societies, even if they used mostly stone tools, didn't use the wheel for transportation etc

                9/10

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                No. The Spanish had Indian allies who were thoroughly fed up with the Aztecs. The purpose of an Aztec warrior was to capture his enemy for human sacrifice, not a war to capture territory. The belief that the White god Quetzalcoatl had come back according to prophecy hampered anything the Aztecs could do. Their technology was still in the Stone Age - they had no chance at all.

                cont:

                It's possible to be more complex in some areas then others. There are also some tribes in africa that developed steel metallurgy without ever using bronze but still lived in small vilages without infanstructure or organized goverments. What "age" are they in? It's a dumb metric.

                i had read that battle of otumba was won thanks to horses
                tlaxcaltecs told spaniards about how once mexica banner holders were taken down, the rest of them would scatter around, which the spaniards exploited with their cavalry and so won without having to kill them all

                Right, that's part of it as well: They would use calvary charges and cannon fire to target higher ranking soldiers and officers who had back mounted banners, which, in additon to demoralizing them, blew holes in their battle lines, and then the Tlaxcaltecas could move in and exploit the chaos.

                10/10 for now

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Spanish friars were trying to tie Quetzalcoatl to jesus and saint thomas to make conversion easier
                Any idea why to St. Thomas specifically?

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                from "The Allure of Nezahualcoyotl"

                >these friars found several significant similarities between christian and indigenous religious practices, such as the use of the cross, fasting, and self-sacrifice...spanish friars focused on quetzalcoatl as the most suitable candidate among the indigenous gods because in his numerous representations, this god bore a cross on his headgear, wore a conical bonnet like the papal tiara, and carried a curved stick shaped like a bishop’s crosier. in addition, the religious practices attributed to him, such as rejection of human sacrifice, fasting, singing, and dancing, were also very similar to those of the christian religion.

                Worth noting that some of the things being pointed to here, such as Quetzalcoatl's rejection of sacrifice (which is also technically from a Toltec figure who was heavily associated with him or seen as an incarnation of him, may in fact be revisionism the Spanish themselves weaved into things retroactively. Also the "Curved stick" here is a representation of a speech scroll/spirals, which are representions of speech, song, poetry, or wind, tying into quetzalcoatl's symbolic associations (see also the spiral conch shell pendant, conches also producing sound and wind, etc)

                Also, another comparsion various friars made was between Aztec ritualistic cannibalism (which was partially predicated on the fact that sacrifice victims were at times seen as becoming the god they were sacrificed to, so you weren't actually commiting cannibalism) and tzoalli (effigies of deities made of amaranth dough and honey and allegedly-but-probably-not blood of sacrifice victims which were eaten in some religious ceremonies) and Christian communion

                As for why Thomas, Cursory googling suggests it was because he was a wanderer and it ties into myth of Quetzalcoatl being white/bearded and being jesus or another christian figure coming from eurasia (which, again, was likely something these same friars helped spread as a myth)

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      cont:

      [...]
      [...]
      >tribes
      >evil/being hated
      >raiding for sacrifices

      This is a misconception.

      There were no "tribes". Mesoamerican had urbanized state societies with cities and formal governments for thousands of years by this point, see pic; basically every society the Aztec bothered to conquer or interact with were city-states, kingdoms., and empires; not tribes. Secondly, wihile the Mexica of Tenochtitlan were warmongering expansionists but were hands off with the places they actually conquered, generally speaking. This is true of most large Mesoamerican empires, but the Aztec installed rulers or did slave raids or sacked cities or founded colonies less then even other empires and large kingdoms in the region.

      They basically just demanded taxes of economic goods, military service, and that roads not be blocked alongside a few other basic obligations, and subjects got left alone with their existing rulers, laws, customs, etc. Sacrifices was something everybody did, and were mostly captured enemy soldiers from wars.. The reason Cortes got allies is that this hands off system enabled subject states to both act indepedently and with their own political ambitions, so you regularly had subjects seceiding and launching coups and switching sides to try to improve standing or see what they could get away with.

      State X allying or pledging themselve as a subject to state Y (since subjects got left alone anyways) to take out their existing captial or political rivals, so then X could be in higher standing in Y's new kingdom, was a common method of political advancement. That's pretty much why Cortes and other conquistadors got allies, they were being played and used the same way states always did in Mesoamerica. The Aztec empire itself was founded this way.

      See: https://pastebin.com/VqW97h93

      2/3

      [...]
      [...]
      whoops forgot my image

      cont:

      [...]
      Moctezuma's actions make more sense with the above in mind,

      The Tlaxcaltecas had been the Mexica's punching bag for decades and the Conquistadors were a tiny force. Accepting diplomats from even hostile, enemy states was an expectation in Mesoamerican diplomacy. To deny Cortes (who claimed to be a emissary of a foreign king) entry or to ambush/attack them would be seen as not just arrogant, but cowardly to subject states, and part of what kept Mexica subject states in line was the perception of military power: Since the Aztec empire didn't actually directly manage their subjects, the whole system was a house of cards that relied on everybody viewing the Mexica as powerful and staying in line to keep their influence intact, if states stopped respecting or taking them seriously, others could follow and the entire thing could fall apart (which it did, eventually)

      From Moctezuma's perspective, they weren't a huge threat, attacking would be a diplomatic faux pass and an overreaction that could undermine his influence, and it was more in his interests to let them in, get intel on who they were, try to flaunt Tenochtitlan's opulence and flex on them to keep them humble and maybe convince them to become subjects, since beyond military power, a big part of influence building was to stress your power in other ways, including economically, so states would want to align with you and suck up for political marriages to get a piece of the pie.

      Cortes, Bernal Diaz, etc got gifts of princesses and noblewomen they interpreted as being concubines but were really attempted political marriages.

      3/3 for now

      based mesoanon saving the thread from blacked obsessed schizos

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      The smallpox crap is fake.
      All replies below are spam. All posters below are mentally retarded and have Down syndrome, and cannot read.
      All replies below are spam. All posters below are mentally retarded and have Down syndrome, and cannot read.
      All replies below are spam. All posters below are mentally retarded and have Down syndrome, and cannot read.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Cortes's expedition was insanely reliant on a few key flukes
      Okay, I'll be devils-advocate here . . .
      > from coming across shipwrecked Spanish sailors who knew local languages acted as translators,
      This probably would have happened anyway on account Spaniards had knocked around the Gulf Coast for some decades already, and even if they hadn't they'd have found some locals adept at languages to suss out Spanish after a few months.
      >to Tlaxcalteca officials narrowly deciding to ally with Cortes instead of finishing his forces off,
      This was a more-likely-than-not situation given how hard Tlaxcala hated and feared the Triple Alliance.
      > to Moctezuma II letting them into Tenochtitlan against his advisor's wishes,
      I admit, after the Tlaxcala episode, the advisors had good reason to distrust these foreigners. On the other hand, Moteczoma II had them in hand for some time. On the other-other hand, his court should have had them in firmer hand for longer.
      > to the fact that Smallpox broke out right when it did, etc
      Smallpox and the other plagues should have broken out earlier, as happened amongst the Maya and then VERY DRAMATICALLY amongst the Inca. I too wonder why these pestes did not spread up the Valley in, say, 1505-10.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        The smallpo x crap is fake.
        All replies below are spam. All posters below are mentally retarded and have Down syndrome, and cannot read.
        All replies below are spam. All posters below are mentally retarded and have Down syndrome, and cannot read.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Mesoanon, i just wanted to tell you that i am right now immensely grateful for your posts have this evening led me down an interesting path relating to metaphysics, in particular through the book recommendations of this other anon at

      This exists from the post conquest period - it might be in a Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies but I can't remember.

      By the way, anyone interested in mesoamerica read Aztec Philosophy by James Maffie, it's fucking amazing.

      • 4 months ago
        Anonymous

        I haven't read maffie's book myself yet, but I have read some interviews with him about his teotl metaphysics models and spoken to some other mesoamerican history nerds and researchers about it.

        I would keep in mind that some Mesoamericanists are skeptical of his reconstruction of Aztec theology of gods being natural processes and the worldview/cosmology operating on a monist model where everything is just teotl moving and interacting in different ways, since many Nahua accounts do talk about deities as animate entities.

        The way I'd look at it, pending me reading it myself and/or diving deeper into it, is that his model is probably a interesting reconstructive lense to look at Nahua theology and accounts through, one that could yield some interesting insights and may yield some legitmate connections and correct understandings of Nahua thought, but also on the whole is probably not 1:1 represenative of the way any one Nahua person or theologist actually thought about things.

        Like, how a academic analytical lense or model of how American culture works might bring up interesting and useful points, but no actual random american actually thinks about the world in that way, if that makes sense?

        • 4 months ago
          Anonymous

          Mesoanon, i just wanted to tell you that i am right now immensely grateful for your posts have this evening led me down an interesting path relating to metaphysics, in particular through the book recommendations of this other anon at
          [...]

          I'll also add that I think most Mesoamericanists agree that "Teotl" DOES also refer to a broader supernatural concept and energy force beyond just "deities"; and the Maya, Zapotec, etc had a sort of cosmic energy concept a la polynesian mana too, but the exact role it played and how the gods tied into that is very much up for debate, maffie's model is just one reconstruction/synthsis of things, and a rather radical one at that.

          He builds a lot off of Leon Portilla's work, which was fundamental for really getting work on Aztec philsophy going, but is looked on more criticially now, especially in relation to say Ometeotl as a omnipotent creator god (it probably wasn't even a real diety that was worshipped), or like whitewashing of Aztec priesthoods and poets as being anti-war or renforcing what is now believed to be revisionism by Texcoca chroniclers about how Texcoco and Nezahualcoyotl was this bastion of intellectualism and progressivism and rejected sacrifice in contrast to the barbaric mexica, when of course warfare and sacrifice (and poetry and the arts) were things both cities did, and played an important role in Nahua intellectualism

          I wouldn't say to avoid the works of either, just to go in knowing what the criticisms of their work are

          Within 20 years of the first Europeans landing >70% of natives were dead from diseases. They had no chance and that's a good thing.

          No, you don't see that much population collapses till like 50 years in, and that was after substantial occupation and campaigns and stuff that could have not been if stuff played out differently.

          See

          >Was there any way the Aztecs could have defeated the Spanish

          If by "The Spanish" you mean the Cortes expedition or subsquent ones that resulted in the conquest of former Aztec subject states or other Mesoamerican cities and kingdoms: Yes, absolutely

          Cortes's expedition was insanely reliant on a few key flukes, from coming across shipwrecked Spanish sailors who knew local languages acted as translators, to Tlaxcalteca officials narrowly deciding to ally with Cortes instead of finishing his forces off, to Moctezuma II letting them into Tenochtitlan against his advisor's wishes, to the fact that Smallpox broke out right when it did, etc

          Any one of those things not happening almost exactly when they did would have likely doomed Cortes's expedition, and as long as he fails before Moctezuma II's death, the Toxcatl massacre, and the smallpox outbreak, I think it's pretty likely that Spain wouldn't have invested as much in going all out on rapid colonization efforts: It was cortes's fluke succes that gave Spain tons of local infanstructure, manpower, and resources to launch further campaigns from without needing to actually launch mass invasion forces across the atlantic, and that made them realize how lucrative it could be with actual, rich civilizations to conquer

          If he fails then Spain likely won't see direct conquest as as worth the effort, and anything that does happen would be slower, more gradual, and give more room for disease resistance to build

          >and launched a counter-invasion of Europe

          No, not unless you're compeltely changing the course of world history even further back to the point where "The Aztec" as we know them wouldn't exist and Europe/Mesoamerica are completely different to begin with

          Even in my above hypothetical,you'd still likely see Mesoamerican civilizations subject to more indirect imperialism from European powers, just with more of their population, culture, and intuitions left intact, more like in India/Southeast asia

          1/?

          I will refer you to Milo's video on Tlaxcala for that, as well as the comment I've set up in the link to come up at the top, since both the video and the comment includes most of what I would say:

          Something even that comment doesn't really get into is that there's actually a fair amount of excavations at other "Aztec" (ruled by the Aztec empire and nahua populated, but not mexica/tenochtitlan) sites including rural villages that show that commoners in those cities and towns could have nominally elite goods too, like bronze sewing needles or polychrome pottery, they just didn't have as many as nobles/elites

          That also ties into the point being made in the comment about how how egalitarian/democractic or classist/monarchial Nahua cities were varied from city to city, and frankly makes me wonder how exceptional Tlaxcalteca access to elite goods really was (having a lot of plazas in mesoamerican cities or open spaces in palaces also isn';t that unusual, so i'm curious what about them in Tlaxcala is unique vs in other cities, the explanation in the video isn't as informative as i'd like), and what the researcher milo consulted meant when they said that Aztec commoners wouldn't have them. Maybe excavations in Tenochtitlan in particular show worse access to elite goods by commoners? The Mexica certainly have a reputation for classism, so maybe.

          [...]
          >This was a more-likely-than-not situation

          Not really: Xicotencatl II was only narrowly convinced to work with Cortes and ended up changing his mind later on (by then it was too late). Even with identical timing it would have been very possible for the alliance to not happen, and if Spanish-Tlaxcaltec contact happened even a year later, it is possible Tlaxcala would have been subdued: The Mexica had started to launch for real, actual invasions, not just flower wars, around the time the Spanish arrived.

          4/?

          [...]
          cont:

          My response to the translator thing is similar: Sure, it's likely translators would have been a thing within a few years anyways, but by the time that happens the planet aligning situation Cortes had in his favor wouldn't be at play anymore: It is the sum of all these things adding up that enabled Cortes's success, and without those things occuring, I don't think it is clear Spain would bother with the trouble.

          Yes, they COULD ship thousands of troops and cannons and supplies over the Atlantic to directly conquer Mesoamerican states even without the ideal set of circumstances in their factor, but why would they? Spain was stills strapped for cash after the reconquestia, and we only know with hindsight how lucrative the conquests of the Americas would be. They could send armies to north africa or the near east for less effort and with more guaranteed returns. Cortes's fluke success is what gave them local manpower and resources and the proof of it being worth it for them to pursue further campaigns.

          >Smallpox and the other plagues should have broken out earlier, as happened amongst the Maya

          I'm actually not aware of an earlier outbreak among the Maya before 1519, you got more info?

          Anyways there's a few competing theories for where/when the smallpox outbreak first came from as it applies to the Cortes stuff, if it was spread a bit before Cortes's expedition landed, if somebody in his expeditio spread it, or if it was somebody in Pánfilo de Narváez's expedition. If it's the latter, then Cortes being stopped before Narváez gets involve would prevent that outbreak, at least in the short term.

          [...]
          >had they not been on such bad terms with all their neighbors.
          They weren't, at least not more then any militaristically dominant state was, see [...]. If anything the other city-states inside the valley of mexico benefitted from Aztec tax income into the valley and from their political marriages to tenochtitlan

          • 4 months ago
            Anonymous

            The time bomb was ticking once those diseases were introduced. Nothing but the Europeans never coming could have changed the way it played out in the end.

            • 4 months ago
              Anonymous

              Read the posts I reffered you to. The epidemics likely would not have been as bad without a sustained spanish presence established so rapidly and with the actual political instability of campaigns, warfare, the drop in sanitation standards, etc.

              If what I outline happens and Spain doesn't really bother to pursue large scale direct conquests and there's more gradual indirect imperalism instead, then the outbreaks wouldn't be as devastating.

              • 4 months ago
                Anonymous

                The time bomb was ticking once those diseases were introduced. Nothing but the Europeans never coming could have changed the way it played out in the end.

                The smallpox crap is fake. It's pathetic how retarded and gullible both of you are.

  18. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    They didn't have a Armada

  19. 4 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      remember what they took from you

  20. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Has this ever happened in history?

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      There are millions of spics outbreeding Whites in ShartMartica every day, so yes.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      the Arabs did it 630-730.

  21. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    No fucking way.

    But it would have been interesting if mesoamericans and incas formed an union or something and traveled to west africa from Brazil.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      >incas

      >moche pottery

      hmm.

  22. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    The poster above me sucks dick for bus fare.

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Hehe

  23. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why are you LULZdiots so obsessed with rape mixing?

    • 4 months ago
      Anonymous

      Ask yourself what type of people live with race mixing and rape as a fundamental piece of their identities?
      Protip: theyre not european

  24. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Was there any way the Aztecs could have defeated the Spanish
    No.

  25. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    yes, surely a low tech civilization from the jungle could immediately learn to survive on a boat long enough to navigate an ocean, read maps, locate and invade spain

  26. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    No. The Spanish had Indian allies who were thoroughly fed up with the Aztecs. The purpose of an Aztec warrior was to capture his enemy for human sacrifice, not a war to capture territory. The belief that the White god Quetzalcoatl had come back according to prophecy hampered anything the Aztecs could do. Their technology was still in the Stone Age - they had no chance at all.

  27. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    No.

    First of all the Aztec "Empire" was more like an Aztec "Hegemony" they had to basically reconquer everybody every time they had a succession. This is also why Cortez got so many allies, because in addition to Tlaxcalans who never admitted hegemony so many others stopped being part of the empire when Montezuma died. The Aztec emperors would have to spend almost all their time reconquering their "empire" so they would never have the time to send a fleet to cuba let alone europe.

  28. 4 months ago
    Anonymous

    Within 20 years of the first Europeans landing >70% of natives were dead from diseases. They had no chance and that's a good thing.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *