/QTDDTOTT/ Ask your questions here.
>the aztecs had no metallurgy
>the spanish plundered aztec gold
Can anyone explain this? Were there just boxes of unrefined gold sitting around in Tenochtitlan? Or if gold was cast by Aztecs into various things, then why didn't the Aztecs discover copper or tin or iron?
"Indigenous Americans have been using native metals from ancient times, with recent finds of gold artifacts in the Andean region dated to 2155–1936 BCE. and North American copper finds dated to approximately 5000 BCE. The metal would have been found in nature without need for smelting techniques and shaped into the desired form using heat and cold hammering techniques without chemically altering it by alloying it. To date "no one has found evidence that points to the use of melting, smelting and casting in prehistoric eastern North America." In South America the case is quite different. Indigenous South Americans had full metallurgy with smelting and various metals being purposely alloyed"
>the aztecs had no metallurgy
This isn't true at all though.
Also the image you posted is Inca not Aztec. Gold was always more associated with Peruvians than Mesoamericans.
>The emergence of metallurgy in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica occurred relatively late in the region's history, with distinctive works of metal apparent in West Mexico by roughly AD 800, and perhaps as early as AD 600.
>Metallurgical techniques likely diffused northward from regions in Central or South America via maritime trade routes
> Pre-Colombians knew the wheel and π but did not make use of it mechanically (only toys)
> except for the mayas, there was no written script only knots, but these so-called quipus could have the same complexity as written system
The first sentence is just false and I don't know where you have read it.
Aztecs had no iron metallurgy. Gold (and other metals they used) is significantly easier to handle. It would be correct to say that aztecs had "worst" metallurgy than the incans, though, as the andean area was more developed in this field since ancient times.
Careful guy, those crazy fuckers will stab you old style.
Were ottoman sultans white ?
Serious question there. If the ottoman come from Osman, who came from turkish tribes, they weren't white of course. But since the ottoman sultans only had legit children with christian slaves from their harem, and only these children could climb on the throne... After some generations, were sultans white ? Was Soliman white ?
And since the important people came from devshirme, and were originally slaves, was the ottoman empire actually ruled by white people ?
Generation after generation of European genes were definitely evident in some of the Sultans, yeah.
Aztecs had "writing" but it was pictographic and ideographic, not phonetic. The exception iirc is that some personal names and titles had phonetic components. Mayans did have a phonetic script. Inca quipu were for recording numbers moreso than a writing system, pretty amazing that they managed to be an almost proto-totalitarian society without a real script.
They are on different tectonic plates.
"White" is not some discrete taxon. There is a continuum of traits. Turks consider themselves white but to a European they generally wouldn't be considered so.
Ruling castes tend to have lighter skin in virtually all cultures. This phenotypic observation proves nothing about ancestry.
Yes, and? Europe and Asia are on the same plate but they're still considered different continents by many due to profound distances and culture. The selection of tectonic plates as a determining feature instead of continuous land or anything else is arbitrary, especially when it comes to discussion shit like the historical spread of metalworking technologies.
If you ever try to sit down and make bronze you will learn that it's not merely as easy as you might think. As said Mexico was poor in iron deposits. Lasty, gold makes for shit weapons. Despite what some of the vidya say.
From another perspective, there was no need for them to develop metallurgy before the spanish arrived. Obsidian weaponry cut through cloth, and flesh just fine.
Not to mention, a significant amount of aztec weaponry was designed to wound, not kill, so that the victim could later be sacrificed. Their culture of ritualized warfare would have been impossible if they just wanted to genocide everyone.
>Europe and Asia are on the same plate but they're still considered different continents by many
Not me. Eurasia is a continent. If Europe is a continent then India is a continent. The only reason Europe is a continent and not India is eurocentrism.
I don't care.
>Eurasia is a continent. If Europe is a continent then India is a continent. The only reason Europe is a continent and not India is eurocentrism.
Blah blah blah. This is off topic derailing bullshit.
The tectonic plate Mexico resides on is IRRELEVANT to understanding the prevalence of metallurgy in the Americas. Play semantic wank games all you want, it doesn't prove anything relevant to the original discussion and it still doesn't substantiate your unproven assumption that tectonic plates are somehow less arbitrary that continuous land or cultural barriers.
To humor you, though.
>If Europe is a continent then India is a continent.
India is actually on a separate plate to most of Eurasia, so your reasoning is inconsistent here.
Do you consider Cape Dezhnev in Russia to be part of North America, too, faggot? Do you consider the Philippines and the Caribbean to be continents because they reside on their own tectonic plates? I guess we'd better make Saudi Arabia a continent, too. Your method of dividing land is just as arbitrary as anything else despite your misplaced smugness.
I read a paper about a year ago which related the mayan number system to a phonetic system.
the zero reminds me a little of a a mouth pronouncing a consonant
I find this topic so very interesting but there is very little research and understanding because most of the information got lost and I dont really care about white peoples theories.
bc most of the 1st world still pictures precolombians as savages and I think theres a little more to it
They both hate Iran. Saudi hate Iran because they're a regional rival who they also differ religiously from, whilst America hates Iran because Iran ousted the American-appointed monarch there