/his/, why was there no contact between mesoamerican and northamerican

>>1187687
What proximity?

there are more longitudal geographic barriers than latitudal ones

>>1187687
There might have been. Mississippian oral culture (we know oral culture to actually be pretty reliable for broad strokes like geological events, mass migrations, etc.) told of a boogeyman from the south. They would scare their children by saying if they didn't behave, a great feathered serpent would sail up the river and snatch them away.

Plus there are non-nahua skulls found in sacrificial sites, meaning having the larger north americans as slaves may have been a status symbol (you only sacrificed important people usually, meaning nobles and slaves and whatnot, as Tlaloc only wanted the richest and purest blood. anything else might be considered an insult)

Further, fine works of obsidian have been found all throughout the mississippi basin region, meaning the mayans/nahua probably traded raw materials at least. Also, the mesoamericans were the ones to breed corn from a grain into what it is today, and it spread throughout the continent despite having a huge fuckoff desert in between them and the nearest agriculturalists.

That said the Nahua people claim to have mass-migrated from the ethereal "Tula", which most anthropologists believe to be somewhere in the American southwest (related to Chaco/Anasazi cultures).

We'd know more if the spanish didn't make a point of burning all their books and killing anyone who could write their languages.

There is just a shit ton of lost American history. Obviously the mound builders lived more settled lives, but by the time colonists made it to those areas they were long gone.

No written language in many places plus small pox and other diseases sweeping through North America before colonists really pushed into it = lots of lost culture.

>>1187687
They weren't in close proximity and had an expansive desert of nothing separating them from Arizona and Texas. Moctezuma had an American Bison in his zoo but they likely obtained it through extensive trade and didn't actually know much about tribes North of the Rio Grande, nor did they care.

The Aztecs were related to the Apache and other tribes of the American Southwest. They moved south and conquered central Mexico.

>>1187687
It's very difficult to run into each other when there were so many geographic barriers that they were unwilling to cross.

>>1187802 (I'm not him)
To expand on that, there's evidence that there was trading between the Aztecs and the Pabloans. We've found central American tropical bird remains among Pabloan settlements and turqoise that's thought to come from Pueblo in Aztec areas.

The American world was much more localized than the Eurasian world. They didn't have domesticable animals, nor did they use the wheel. They just walked everywhere.

Imagine you're playing Civ, and you never build any mounted or wheeled units. Ever. In fact, you don't even build any roads. Exactly.

>>1187833
People moved around by canoe along the coasts too. It was actually the preferred form of travel in long distances. Maya jade is found in the Caribbean, Tarascans may have cone from south america, huastec gulf coast shell ornaments resemble those of spiro oaklahoma, and theres been suggested links between the huave and Colombians. Theres even suggestions of Nahua colonies in Panama.

Why are North American Indians taller than Mexican and South American indians?

>>1188030
>In fact, you don't even build any roads

But that's wrong.

>>1188182
>>1188030 (not either of you)
They built roads, but there weren't long roads between civilisations. Like, there were inter-aztec roads, but not roads that went up to Pueblo or down to Inca. Those projects were beyond the state of its day.

>>1188214
Inca roads were pretty big if one considers the size of their empire. There were definitely roads too that connected civilizations.

>>1188305
Tbh I was thinking of the Central Americans when I wrote that. I hadn't even considered that.

Nonetheless, Inca was huge. They absorbed every organised administration around them despite their use of just footmen on roads. They had no horse.

>There were definitely roads too that connected civilizations.
Which ones?

>>1187687
Alaska fag here, I think it was back in the early 2000s some of the Tlingit elders were talking about trade down to southern California, but were quick to stress it was nothing more than a few canoes that would be gone for years at a time. Any contact was minimal at best and I haven't been able to find a non-oral source

File: 1462919555571.jpg (70KB, 400x388px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 400x388px

>>1188175
>tfw pops is from Ecuador, he was 5'4" and I am too
>tfw my mom is Cuban so my dick is above average at least

>>1188429
Weird post

>>1188473
People from Spanish Speaking countries are hung

>>1188175
It's not always true. The western natives were small like the Navajo. Desert people gotta be small. The Woodland environment of the northeast and deep south provided lots of space, lots of ways to cool off, lots of food, and tons of natural resources. Being bigger had basically no disadvantages. That said, could just be a quirk of genetics like how germanics are bigger than most other indo-europeans.

>>1188523
Depends which one.

>>1188524
Since most North American tribes were quasi-incestuous, there was/is radical variation, even between tribes. The Pima, for example, look like fucking Samoans.

>>1188523
This. 5'10" Venezuelan packing 8.5 inches here. Only date Asians too so the difference is magnified.

>>1188523
As a man who's spent more time than regular investigating average penis size, that's not true.

>>1188524
You know what strikes me about this? I helped excavate and study the Windover site in florida, and did my graduate thesis on the remains found. There is striking sexual dimorphism. The average male height is something like 6'1" in 5000 BC, and the average female height is 5'3". I'm personally of the opinion that in a hunter-gatherer society that has more food than it could eat (these natives had an abundance of game, shoreline fish, shellfish, and wild plants to eat) men will get bigger. Like you said, if there is no disadvantage they will get bigger. This also has the side effect of women getting wider hips to be able to give birth to the bigger baby boys, so they shoot down in height.

>>1188551
Yep, this is true. Mayans are really tiny, but Nahua are freaking huge, in today's populations at least.

quick random question what is the argument against having post IDs on boards like /his/?

I wanna know why there are no uncontacted tribes in Canada but there are in SA

>>1188715
Rainforest is thick and hard to manuever in if you don't know the land.

>>1188609
None. It astounds me that a board like /pol/ get's IDs but /his/ doesn't.

>High level discourse

>>1188715
Because the Amazon.
and because Canada is largely uninhabitable

>>1188609
It would completely kill the false-flag shitposting market.

>>1188609
I don't think there's much of one.

>>1188745
I think it's because people on /pol/ are bm and would go out of their way to troll and pretend to be other people. I'd like IDs on /his/, but it's not really a problem for us either.

Tfw there are no forest niggers living like tolkien elves/rangers up North.

File: Rogan_plate_1_birdman_HRoe_2012.jpg (290KB, 457x600px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 457x600px

>>1187802
>>contact between mesoamerican and northamerican native cultures
>There might have been.

There absolutely was.

File: Helgo-Buddha-viking.jpg (109KB, 736x1002px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 736x1002px

>>1188801
Goods can make their way through a series of intermediary traders. There was a Viking burial chamber in Sweden that had a statue of Buddha in it ca 900 or so. There is no way the Norse interacted with North Indians, so it probably got traded around a lot. I say might have because this may have been how the mesoamerican artifacts made their way to northern cultures. Remember, their boatbuilding was pretty primitive.

>>1188567
It's pretty dependent on the country desu.

File: Cahokia Mounds.jpg (559KB, 1512x1023px) Image search: [Google]

559KB, 1512x1023px

>>1188836

N.American Woodland Indians were working copper as far as 3000 B.C. but you can’t get pic related thru intermediary traders.

Clearly there was continued contact between N.American Woodland Indians and Mesoamerican Indians.

>>1187687
There was. Mexica figurines have been found pretty far up the Mississippi.

>>1188715
Valley of the Headless Men.

>>1188801
I know there is a pepe of this

>>1188175
Because of their environment. It's one of the reasons elephants and other large mammals are found in steppes and savannas instead of jungles.

>>1187687
What are you on? Aztecs and other related peoples were literally from north america.

>>1188030

Are you dumb? The mayans had a very complex road system through their kingdom.

File: North_America_satellite_orthographic.jpg (474KB, 1624x1748px) Image search: [Google]

474KB, 1624x1748px

>>1187687
It might not seem as big as other deserts, but it must be hard to travel through it on foot.

File: North_America_Winter_NPG-5006-1-2.jpg (180KB, 672x800px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 672x800px

>>1189677

>>1188609

post IDs would be good on /his/

Flags on the other hand would not.

>>1188801
Is this a Mesoamerican god?

>>1189687
t.leaf

>>1187687
Hey OP check out Chapter One "Follow The Corn" from An Indigenous Peoples' History Of The United States for some insight into this topic

>>1188175
Mayans were regularly 6'0 before the Spanish, but encomiendas turned their diet to shit so they just continued to shrink.

>>1187802
Do Tula = Chichimecs?

>>1192803
No, they *do* claim descent from them but they are genetically unrelated, based on recent population samples. That's just them wanting to be associated with a fierce warrior people.

>>1189687
>Aussie spotted

>>1192472
Can anyone confirm this?

>>1193495
Many major cities also received the Tula title, so, which one was considered in the samples? The lost-Tula that founded the lineage of Culhua from which the Aztec royalty claimed heritage?

>>1193581
I don't think they based their research on where was considered to be tula, only on where verifiably chichimec people lived.

>>1193611
Whole of Aridoamerica? Is there a link?

File: llama.gif (2MB, 371x331px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 371x331px

>>1188030
>They didn't have domesticable animals,
O really?

>they didn't use the wheel
'They' ('The American world' is pretty fucking vague) didn't use it for transport, but instead for mills and astronomical calendars.

>>1188715
>no uncontacted tribes
bullshit. Most so-called 'uncontacted tribes' have had more than enough contact for their liking, that's why they move away. Hunter-gatherer societies have very loose 'societies' to begin with. Imagine your dad's brother is tired of being second fiddle, and gets several women and a few other betas to run off with him 20 miles east and across the river. 100 years pass, there's the occasional hello or stick fight with the original relatives and suddenly it's an 'uncontacted tribe'

They are almost never totally unique language isolates, but splinter groups from other known tribes.

>>1193523
I was told that was the case when I went to Guatemala, but I may have been fed misinfo.

>>1193806
WE WUZ GIANTS N SHEEEEITTT

>>1193523
Diego de Landa the Spanish friar remarked that the people of the Yucatán in his relación written in the late 16th century, were very tall and robust. He theorized that the people grew tall because they were breastfed until late in age due to not having animal milk to feed on. So the people grew large. He also mentioned 3 times throughout the same document that the Maya women in the Yucatán had large breast.

>>1193974
Most European women at the time would have been quite flat due to poorer nutrition and little protein

>>1188715
amazon rainforest is much bigger and more dense than the canadian ones

>>1187687
But there was!!

The Aztecs and other central Mexican peoples had direct contact with their neighbors to every direction. North of them lived the Chichimecs (or "dog people") who were nomadic hunter-gatherers. Their relationship with the Aztecs was not unlike the Germanic tribespeople and the Romans. Chichimecs, despite lacking cities, were seen as proud warriors who the Aztecs actually claimed descent from, and their large warrior population made them great auxiliaries.

Further north, the Aztecs were linguistically related to many peoples of the American Southwest, and there were direct trade networks between Puebloan cities and Mexican cities.

To the South, the Aztecs and other Nahua peoples interacted frequently with the Maya states, frequently subjugating them as vassals and demanding gold or slaves as tribute. There's some evidence that Maya craftsmen were employed or enslaved in Nahua cities.

To the east, it becomes increasingly clear that Mesoamerican peoples (both Central Mexican and Mayan) had extensive contact with Puerto Rico, Cuba, and Jamaica. The Taino peoples, traditionally assumed to be mostly nomadic, actually had permanent towns with Maya-style ball courts and paved pavilions. But because their homes were built of wood, ruins don't remain.

In addition, there's some slight evidence that indirect networks from Mexico all the way up to the Great Lakes gave the Mississippian people and potentially Northeastern societies some knowledge of the great kingdoms to the South.

>>1188175
Diet and lifestyle. The genetics are so similar that it really can't be anything else.

On a similar note, second-generation Mexicans are almost invariably taller than their parents.

>>1188524
The Dutch, who are the tallest human beings after Central-East Africans, were once stereotyped as diminuitive

>>1194217

Actually the Canadian boreal forest is larger than the Amazon.

>>1188593
>Mayans are really tiny, but Nahua are freaking huge, in today's populations at least.

You're so right, it's really odd. Is there a dietary difference between their cultures?

My guess is that because the Nahua people are much more Spanish-influenced, they eat more wheat rather than just corn. But I could be wrong!

recommend me some good history books on prehispanic america /his/, mayan, aztec, incaic, everything goes.

Im learning spanish so untranslated works wont be a problem

>>1187687
How north are we talking, here? In Arizona, some of the settlements had ball courts.

>>1188609
damn that's a good idea

>>1188715
The Amazon jungle is incredibly thick, and more densely-populated than Canada.

But "uncontacted" is basically a meme. Usually what happens is that a region becomes depopulated due to disease or modern deforestation, but certain people in more isolated pockets remain. These people would have previously had contact with the outside world through more incorporated indigenous people, but lose this contact when these intermediate peoples move to cities or die off.

>>1189950
No, dude, it's a statue.

>>1194256
>tfw when meeting Mexican ex-girlfriends' grandparents first time they came north.
Holy shit, they were almost literally midgets but not. I'd say the grandpa was something around 4'10'' (girlfriend was 5'3'' and she stood a good half-head taller than him), and the grandmother was a few inches shorter. I guess their age didn't help appearances, but I remember being astonished that people could be so small and not have a genetic flaw.

>>1194274
1491 and 1493, Charles Mann. Almost don't want to recommend him lest he became meme fodder for /pol/ trolls.

File: 640px-Nahuatl_dialects_map.png (315KB, 640x317px) Image search: [Google]

315KB, 640x317px

There was
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uto-Aztecan_languages#
Is entirely likely that Aztecs had their origin somewhere up northwards.

>>1194289
Of who?

>>1198152
it is know that Aztecs were originally (just a few hundred years before their first role as local hegemons) hunter-gatherers. This is what their own legends say, and what archeology seems to support. Probably they were from just immediately north, though.

It was the location (water, valley) that granted power. The region around Tenochtitlan had variously competing/allied city-states for centuries. Usually some environmental collapse occurred and the most powerful city-state imploded or was weakened and ripe for attack. The numbers of people may have shrunk, but they never really disappeared. The Aztecs were simply the ones in power when the Spanish showed-up.

File: uto-aztecan-language-map.jpg (54KB, 417x528px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 417x528px

>>1198443
Judging by the distribution of their tongue kindred, I imagine that they'd have their urheimat farther northwards. It still shocks me that the Comanche are a related ethnicity.

>>1198673
Doesn't mean the Comanche were always there either, though. They then likely moved north, too. In fact, the whole North American native-language distribution maps are a Balkan-style shuffled up checker-board (except in the extreme north of the Arctic/Sub-Arctic). Colonialism had something to do with that, but tribes did migrate around before whitey showed up. If a tribe split, then founder and settler groups could also shuffle around.

Based on the map, one might make a reasonable guess of somewhere in Sonora or Chihuahua as a linguistic 'heimatland'.

>>1199462
They also periodically pushed one another off of the best areas.

A bit off topic, but has anyone read this series?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_North_Americans

thoughts?

>>1188429
>>1188523
living through the pleasure that you give to a few women

yep, people from Spanish Speaking countries are truly plebs.

>>1187843
This isn't true about the Aztecs at all. They were a small tribe, indigenous to the geographic locality, and other, neighboring tribes didn't like them, because every time they made some agreement, the Aztecs would find a reason to break it based on some spiritual dilemma or vision. Then the Aztecs would come around capturing people, and the ones they didn't eat would be ritually sacrificed.

Surrounding tribes actually allied against the Aztecs and pushed the Aztec "home domain" far into a swamp-infested terrain no one else really wanted. The Aztecs adapted quickly to their new home and over a few short generations were masters of swampland agrarianism, producing enough (non-human) food to support a healthy, strong population. The Aztecs then came out of the "corner" into which they'd been pushed and proceeded to wtf pwn everything nearby.

>>1199947
this was always the funniest part of the Aztec.
>Thank you for considering our alliance and giving your daughter to our chief in marriage.
>NP. Where she btw?
>Oh here come the happy couple now :DDD
>Some guy wearing your daughter's skin dancing around the fire.

>>1199947
>They were a small tribe, indigenous to the geographic locality, and other, neighboring tribes didn't like them, because every time they made some agreement, the Aztecs would find a reason to break it based on some spiritual dilemma or vision.
You are talking about the Mexica, which were the last tribe to migrate. Many other city states also shared an Aztec origin, for example the Tlaxcalans who were famous enemies of the Mexica. The king of Azcapotzalco who lost a daughter to the Mexica was ruler of the Tepanecs, who also had an Aztec origin.

>Then the Aztecs would come around capturing people, and the ones they didn't eat would be ritually sacrificed.
According to Sahagún (Historia General, 2nd book, chapter 2) the captives were sacrificed and then eaten. In the chapter 21 he mentions that the warrior who captured the enemy didn't eat the flesh, because since the moment of the capture that was considered his own flesh, instead, he shared it with his superiors, friends and relatives.

>>1200050
I just don't feel some of the Aztec cultural myths are entirely accurate, a little like understanding Torah in a literal fashion (Not to take away from it at all, I really feel there's 100% truth in a round-about way, but incomplete) mostly because of archaeological evidence of the primary structures in those cities (which were built and abandoned long before those people to whom you refer started to occupy the area) but also because some of it just doesn't make sense. The implication some (or any) groups migrated "from the north" as hunter-gatherers is a bit bleak, unless they were subsisting off chupacabra and tarantulas. (trippy cactus ftw), but most importantly no one around there had any cultural history to tell about some group of nomads who would wander about and eat/sacrifice people. It's not how the southwestern american natives were and this would, I think, have been a significant aspect of their own cultural development, pre-aztec era, enough to be noteworthy.

I think there was a sizeable empire, I think drought or some other natural event (could have even been spiritual) caused the population to scatter to surrounding areas, I believe it's true some returned to the lakes sooner than others, but I don't believe the "Mexica" were as disparate from the rest of these people the way the legend implies. I think they were many tribes in a loose confederacy against outside threats, and this group which would eventually culturally and militarily dominate the region were as I depicted above.

inb4 calling me Mormon. Please don't, I don't believe those stories, either.

File: Tlaloc_Coll_Goupil.jpg (777KB, 730x1189px) Image search: [Google]

777KB, 730x1189px

Tell me about Tlaloc, why does he wear the mask?

>>1187687
>why was there no contact between mesoamerican and northamerican native cultures even given their proximity?

But there was contact, Iroquois people adopted some aspects of mesoamerican religion like ritual human sacrifice and cannibalism for example.

Also Aztecs or Mexicas were one of the several native immigrant cultures from North America that moved to central Mexico and that were collectively called "Chichimecas" by the Spaniards.

>>1200159
I don't know that Tlaloc was a "he" rather than a "they". I know the tribes in the Yucatan had a similarly named deified being. People speculate the reason for the odd appearance of these, but I don't know anyone really has the answer.

>>1200162
>Also Aztecs or Mexicas were one of the several native immigrant cultures from North America that moved to central Mexico and that were collectively called "Chichimecas" by the Spaniards

yeh, see, this kind of statement doesn't make sense to me at all. The Spaniards weren't around in the 13th century to collectively call anyone anything and the locality of Mexico City is in North America. I know it's what you'd read in an encyclopedia, but it's a bit revisionist.

>>1200183

Unlike the largest civilizations like Maya, Aztec and Inca whose some conquistadors showed admiration because of their architecture, arts and technical achievements (an Spaniard colonist which name I don't remember right now said the Inca Empire was equal to the Roman Empire), Spaniards considered hunter-nomads the worst kind of people they ever witnessed, they were un-godly savages that deserved to be put down and they didn't even imagined they were different peoples with unique languages or cultures so they just put them all in the same "chimicheca" category.

>>1200203
Well, it's probably good they didn't have the full understanding that those huge temples around which the Aztecs dwelt weren't built by them, but they later occupied.

The Inca, though, yeh... damn, they had some amazing architecture all over the tops of mountains.

>>1199947
Someone needs to make a version of the Jew meme with an Aztec murdering people and saying "Why do they persecute us so?"

FFS they thought it would only rain if they tortured and killed screaming and terrified crying children

File: Tenochtitlan-Le-Marche-de-Tlatelolco-01.jpg (289KB, 874x640px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 874x640px

>>1200212
>those huge temples around which the Aztecs dwelt weren't built by them
??

>>1200162
Citation needed on that Iroquois part

>>1187687
there actually was contact between Meso-America and Oasis-America(region where the Pueblo come from)

>>1200183
>The Spaniards weren't around in the 13th century to collectively call anyone anything
No, but they were around in the 16th century when they adopted the exonym with which the Aztecs referred to the tribes in Aridoamerica.

File: 9789681664343-us-300.jpg (19KB, 300x442px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 300x442px

>>1200292

Sauce is this book, it may be biased because it was written by Mexican historians but they are schoolars from Latin America's best college, UNAM, don't know if there is an English translation yet

>>1200284
>FFS they thought it would only rain if they tortured and killed screaming and terrified crying children
Thats because the gods(alliums) came to harvest humans for their breeding programm and gave them stuff as compensations.
What stayed in the collective memory: suffering of humans makes the gods happy.

>>1200124
Well the common accepted area of origin is around Jalisco, which was close to where the nomadic chichimecs lived.

>>1200177
The appearance evolved from the Olmec jaguar rain deity. Theres an image that shows the evolution of rain deities like Chaak of the Maya or Cocijo of the Zapotecs.

>>1200333
Alfredo Lopez Austin is one of the most respected academics like Miguel Leon Portilla.

File: 1463850954068.jpg (95KB, 960x750px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 960x750px

>>1199976
Did that kind of shit actually happen? Really curious.

>>1187687
I think a better question is how the fuck the Aztecs got so mental. How can you build a powerful and functioning society that is based around murder (warfare, sacrifice, religious stories, etc)?

>>1200472
Yeh, like I said, Maya had "Tlaloc", too, and it had nothing to do with the jaguar. There's not a real way to say this is right or wrong.

>>1200557
It's commonly understood they did this in at least one specific event, yes. It led to the banishment of the Mexica, about 190 years before the Spanish encounters.

>>1200557
According to the legends yea. What sucks is we only get certain point of views since the Aztecs burned the books of the old powers in the region which may have included the Toltecs. They did it to rewrite history during the reforms of Tlacaelel when they sought to legitimize their reasons for conquest of others and make their patron Huitzilopochtli the Sun. In the new ideology they declared themselves the chosen people and children of the sun. And they needed human sacrifice to maintain world order and replenish the suns power in its daily struggle with nightly forces. And their city, Tenochtitlan now Mexico City was the navel or center of the world.

>>1200574
They were no bloodier than other empires.

>>1200557
It's a legend, but it's the national legend of the aztecs themselves. It says a lot that even themselves represented themselves like that.

>>1200596
I think cutting out people's hearts and wearing your enemies' skin is pretty high level stuff.

>>1200598
Its to show off. Its like when the Aztecs claimed to sacrifice tens of thousands in one day to bless the new temple. It was just Aztec propaganda to make themselves appear badass and powerful

From what I understood, they did sacrifice to energize the teotl and the cosmos (teotl would be the same as cosmos)

Look for the Popol Vuh, it's Maya though, not Nahua.

>>1200641
I know, but it's assyrian tier.

>>1200641
It was showing off not to scare enemies but to fudge the numbers. It's akin to a firm say thing they earn $100 million in profits when they only earn $10 million. They are both exaggerations but the context is completely different.

>>1188030
t. jared diamond

>>1193974

Very tall and robust meant like 1.6mts for XV century spaniards.
Source: I'm mexican, i have been to a lot of museums that showed spaniard clothes and armor and i can tell you that they were nowhere near 6feet, not in those times. A 6 ft tall person would have looked like goliath to them.

>>1200625

I think burning people alive at the stake is pretty high level too. Stoning women is high level too. The various tortures the chinese used were mental and lets not even talk about mongols. They all functioned anyway.

>>1200652
The Aztecs sacrificed because the energies that they, the victims, contained. They did it to continue the weaving of the cosmos lads.

>>1200124
why do you assume ritualistic cannibalism and sacrifice were always part of the 'Aztec' canon? People in the Italian peninsula didn't always follow Jesus either.

>>1201039
This is true too. Nezahualcóyotl for instance banned human sacrifice in many places. And Quetzalcóatl did not like human sacrifices. For all we know there may have been philosophies and ideologies that questioned human sacrifice and/or were against it.

>>1201231
I'm reading a book on Aztec metaphysics, will see what it says about that.

>>1200574
Ask the Muslims

>>1200574
No lad, they needed teotl (energy) otherwise the big mossy-haired one turns everything towards entropy (not exactly). The Aztecs were fighting against entropy and thus they needed to have good teotl (and that comes from the brave warriors not the cowards) to energize the cosmos (teotl).

>>1201231
I remember reading in 1491 that the Aztec priests and nobles had a rather extensive belief system resembling post-vedic hinduism in some ways. The whole "rip n tear" stuff was more so what the peasants were able to comprehend. I remember reading somewhere that when a few Aztec priests were assembled to debate catholic priests they threw it on purpose and just muttered ooga booga tier stuff so they wouldn't be killed by their new rulers.

>>1201302
So they believed in slaughtering people for energy? Great.

>>1201493
2003 was a good year

>>1201493
Not great, but yeah that's what they thought, they also let their willies bleed and the women their tongues and possibly also mutilated their vaginas

>>1188348
>Tlingit

This brings to mind Dentalium shells. Dentalium is a kind of mollusc, forms these little white tube like shells. Native Americans used to use them as beads in jewelry.

The thing about them is they only live in the Pacific Northwest, going down from Alaska, Western Canada, and as far as Northern California. They're hard to get too. The live at certain depths, and it took specially trained divers to dive to these depths during certain parts of the year, centered mostly in the Salish Sea.

Because they made beautiful jewelry, and probably because they were really hard to get a hold of, they became a trade good, practically a currency. So while they only came from a relatively small geographic area and in limited supply, they ended up being traded all over North America. I wonder how far south they got too. So while it might have been unlikely to expect a member from, say, a Tlingit tribe to end up all over in the Mayan civilization, everybody at least traded with each other, so there must have been at least some contact, even if it was just trade goods exchanging many hands.

>>1187687
There is contact, they use similar weapons which suggests trade.

>>1200574
They were a tribute empire. Sort of like a huge mafia demanding protection money from smaller people, and it only makes you more powerful. They would march their armies into other cities and towns, kill a bunch of the men, rape the women, take all their good stuff, and demand allegiance. Wait a few years and then do it again.

The strength of the system is that as long as you have a big and loyal army, you can extend your borders far and quickly. The weakness is there are a bunch of people that hate you. The Aztec were constantly having to suppress rebellions, and it's probably the single biggest reason the Spaniards conquered the Aztecs so quickly and efficiently, there were so many tribes willing to ally with Spain.

>>1201534
They (some North-American tribes and Aztecs) seem to share the idea of the Fifth Age also

>>1201305

>debating catholic priests

aztec priests:
>"argument argument argument"
catholic priest:
>mathew 12:30 says other wise
aztec priest:
>"argument argument argument"
catholic priest:
>john 6:34 says otherwise

It's impossible to debate people who have a sacred book because the book itself says it is true.

>>1188348
IIRC Let the Seas Make a Noise mentions Tlingit slave raids on California.

>>1200625
>>1200574
>>1200596
London executed about the same amount of people that the entire aztec empire tributes per captia per year, and at least the aztecs treated their sacrifices well prior to the sacrifice, as well as to the remains.

Obviously, this was not the case for london prisoners, and the executions there were just as bloody as you imagine the aztec sacrifices are.

All the Aztecs wanted was to keep the teotl going

>>1202010
True desu. They did nothing wrong.

>>1201567
What's that?

>>1187687
There was some trade by independent traders, but it wasn't exactly easy for there to be large-scale relations when there is extremely dense forests filled with aggressive tribesmen in the way.

http://mayaincaaztec.com/mainaztr.html

>>1193523
>lamarckism
Of course it's fucking wrong.

File: Miguel Covarrubias Rain Gods.gif (47KB, 449x495px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 449x495px

>>1200472

>>1193784
this post amused me more than it should have.

>>1201302
So blood for the blood god, skulls for the skull throne?

>>1202005
Punishment and fact of life is a very different context to murder.

File: Tzitzimitl.jpg (26KB, 200x281px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 200x281px

>>1203613
More like "If we don't sacrifice people we will be raped by skeleton futa with rattlesnake dick"

>>1187802
I live in a city called Tulare. Am I aztec?

>>1187843
The Apaches were Na-Dene, while the Mexica / Aztec / Nauha were Uto-Aztecan.

>>1202407
>>1203613
They (Aztecs) believed in cycles, in which the world (sun actually) was destroyed and recreated. They believed the Fifth Age was the last one, and would not be recreated, thus they had to sacrifice in order to keep the teotl flowing

>>1204482
Flowing = going

>>1203994
>implying even 1/5th of the people london executed at the time actually did anything close to wrong enough to deserve being killed
>implying there weren't killings just as religiously motivated

>>1205484

There was an awful lot of murder, sectarian violence, and family feuding going on in 16th century London.

File: 1441436874777.jpg (123KB, 500x614px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 500x614px

>>1201508
>men drive stingray barbs through their foreskin
>not mutilation
>possible stingray to the labia
>definite genital mutilation guys

>>1200287
He's probably confusing the Tenochtitlan with Teotihuacan, which was actually a lot larger but was in ruins by the time the Aztecs arrived and they copied a lot of stuff from it. To this day we don't really know who built Teotihuacan, or even its real name, Teotithuacan was what the Aztecs called it, meaning the place where men become gods, because they thought it was built by gods or men that ascended after finishing it.

>>1200159
He was a big guy

>>1208356
for you

>>1208190
Oopsie :DDDD, I do not understand what mutilation means.

>>1205484
As usual, ritual killings are always about political/social control. Tyburn or the stone pyramids aren't much different in their roles -- maintaining the balance of natural harmony and blah blah blah. They had different cultural excuse for it, but it's basically the same idea. Without it, angry God(s), chaos.

>>1194271
>>1188593
Could well be partly environmental. The mayan homeland is really quite different from the west - it's all jungle. I'm immediately thinking of the physionomy of amazon tribes, etc. The west is far more grassland/desert/arable.

>>1201896
>matthew 12.30
"Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.

>john 6:34
"Sir," they said, "always give us this bread."

Those both actually kinda work.

>>1208694
The Maya homeland is actually more diverse than just jungles. Grasslands, savannahs, pine forest covered mountainous terrain was to the south in Guatemala Highlands. In some áreas it was more lagoon, marshland like in Acalan and Pacific coastal territory.

File: image.png (2MB, 1407x719px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1407x719px

>>1188593
>This also has the side effect of women getting wider hips
>tfw no thick nahua gf

>>1195068
Good choices.

>>1195068
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bghLhJ-c8os

This was pretty good.

>>1210544
This reminds me of the tale of Huemac, the Toltec king of Tollan who had his aids seek out a woman with the fattest ass he could find (4 hand spans wide) because his wife's was too small (one hand span wide). The people from where the wife was from were so furious it provoked a war and his reign ended in Greek tragedy style. And also sparked the fall of Tollan.

>>1208190
It's mutilation, but the point was to draw blood from these áreas for it's sacred symbolism in their very esotreric rites and complex world view.

>>1188609
The default on an anonymous image board should be to keep things anonymous unless forced. There is no reason to force IDs so anonymous we remain.

File: 1459209963395.jpg (24KB, 240x251px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 240x251px

>>1215905
holy fuck, this can't be real

>>1188175
Probably the same reason the Germanics are taller than the Mediterraneans. Hunter-Gatherers have a much better diet than primitive farmers (lots of protein vs lots of carbs), which allows them to grow bigger.

The problem is that it also entails a much higher mortality rate, demands a population that can control a wide territory per member and lowers the ability for full-scale warfare organization and mobilization.

File: san bartolo mural.jpg (1MB, 2400x1596px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2400x1596px

>>1208190
>>1201508

iirc they just stabbed the ends of their dicks and the Spanish mistook it for circumcision.

>>1220056
And considering too they had no horses or animals to mount. Must have been a bitch to be a nomad on foot in the desert.

>>1208727
>"Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.
pretty culty

>>1204105
He meant the Comanche

>>1199947
His statement goes back further in time, when Uto-Aztecan was a single identity and language.

>>1188523
Peer-reviewed statistical studies have shown no correlation between race/ethnicity and penis size.
There is a minor correlation between penis size and height, but it is still low significance.

>>1221554
You forgot that the adjusted penis perception is larger for smaller people.

>>1187687
There were some, that being said they were like weren't that close to each other and they're separated by a desert, minimal interaction by the way of the Anasazi and proto-Anasazi cultures.

>>1220003
It absolutely is.

>>1201896
This is a fun and accurate analogy for arguing with AELIAN.

This thread has been amazing to read. Being from Oceania I have no concept of native american tribes.

Here's a question: To what extent are the people of the Easter Islands related to the historical people of Latin America (Not sure what this word is. 'Mesoamerican'?)

I imagine this would be a much broader question, given that they themselves are Polynesians who are obviously not American, but I wonder all the same. It may also be a completely retarded question that is answered by 'A gajillion years ago, when Polynesia was part x'. I do know for a fact that some of their festivals combine Pacific Island festivities and also Chilean culture, though this might be new.

We talk about the Inca and Maya and Aztecs, all of whom roughly lived in Mesoamerica, but what about modern-day Chile and Argentina? Were there natives there? What were their traditions, relative to the aztecs?

File: 13308230_10209382399099290_3259349029407909440_o.jpg (167KB, 1228x2048px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 1228x2048px

>>1223092
Here's the correct pic.

>>1223111
There was natives everywhere. In Chile, the most formidable were the Mapuche. Deep south you had the Ona and Yamana. And the Inca were far away from the Mesoamerica area btw.

What is everyone's opinion on eight-deer jaguar claw? He comes off to me like the Toltec Alexander.

File: 1464464740711.jpg (255KB, 717x979px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 717x979px

>>1223111
>inca
>mesoamerica
>but what about modern-day Chile and Argentina?

The Incans WERE in what is now Chile and Argentina

>>1223317
I thought the Incans were in what you'd call Colombia.

>Google search reveals that they were indeed in Chile

welp ok then

What about the Easter Islands?

>>1223442
Nope. There may have been some oceanean (tongan) mariners who landed on the Pacific coast by chance and were assimilated, but there is actually more evidence of East Asians (chinese and japanese) having landed and been assimilated.

File: 1459624892853.jpg (12KB, 258x245px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 258x245px

>>1223113
>HISTORY IS SO DULL THEY SAID
>IT'S ALL NAMES DATES AND BATTLES THEY SAID

>>1223442
Actually mainly Perú, a little bit in Pasto, Colombia, they didn't move further because other natives resisted

>>1223113
holy crap this is great

>>1223113
>the ass was fat

>>1223113
>several sorceresses made fun of Huemac for his inability to get women whgo were fat enough, Huemac then hade sex with these sorceresses

lost it

>>1223113
Huemac confirmed high test

File: Screenshot 2016-06-02 03.09.00.png (29KB, 328x157px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 328x157px

>>1226059
his name fucking translated to Big Hand

>>1227917
For you.

>>1210544
she thicc

>>1227917
Maybe that's why he couldn't find a four-hand-span butt.

>>1187687

>>1188030
>didn't have wheels
They did, on toys. They just didn't have beasts of burden.

>>1223113

>Several sorceresses made fun of Huemac for his inability to get women who were fat enough. Huemac then had sex with these sorceresses
kek

What's the last part about? Was homosexuality a big deal among many Mesoamerican cultures?

>>1231541
Did they have Wheelbarrows?

>>1232442
Huge. When Aztecs find out you're a homosexual they iirc they disembowel the bottom and fill the abdominal cavity with ash, and the top they just stab to death.
Why do you think homosexuality is such a huger deal in Latin America than it ever was in Spain?

>>1223111
Easter Islanders were ethnically and genetically Polynesians. It's generally agreed the the society (and island's ecosystem) collapsed because they chopped down all the trees, and then there was a civil war between competing cult sects.

When Europeans found the islands, there were only a couple hundred stragglers from this society left. They were stuck on the island, utterly unaware of the outside world, and had lost the ability to read and write (Easter Islanders at their peak had a writing system), and had also lost a lot of specific knowledge about their earlier 'parent' society. They still had taboos and legends about the stones and such, but clearly the history was lost.

Anyway, they had zero relation to mainland native Americans. They were both completely unaware of each other.

Today, Easter Island has loads of Chileans, sort of like how mainland whites invaded Hawaii (in this case they're brown and swarthy Sudacas).

As others said, there were other native groups on the mainland. None really lived full-time in the very southern extremes of the continent, but they might have gone on hunting and fishing trips.

There were quite a few advanced societies (for their time) in Chile/Peru even before the Inca.

>>1187687
There was trade

>>1192472
Are you fucking stupid? That's not how evolution works

>>1188030
>nor did they use the wheel
MUH WHEEL!

>>1233718
>evolution

What? It's commonly understood that caloric restriction stunts growth. North Koreans, for instance, are still ethnically Korean and certainly haven't "evolved" in the span of 60 years, but since they live in perpetual famine conditions they're three inches shorter on average than their Southern counterparts.

File: Territorial_Organization_of_the_Aztec_Empire_1519.png (3MB, 3613x2265px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3613x2265px

Was human sacrifice with the Aztecs just a Mexica/Tenochtitlan thing, or did the Acolhua/Texoco and Tlacopan do it too?

I know most mesoamerican cultures did to a degree, but I means in terms of the degree the Aztecs were known to, if that was just the one of the 3 main city states or all 3

>>1203613
Very much, yes. The God-emperor needs psykers to sustain the status quo and keep the warp open, and that's essentially what teotl is, the gods keeping the wind blowing, the clouds raining, and the seasons changing.

>>1188836
>There is no way the Norse interacted with North Indians
Not saying you're wrong anon but whenever it's been said that there was 'no way' something in the past happened, (barring absurd stupid shit like ayyylmao's building the pyramids) there were many times it did. Like there was 'no way' Vikings came to America

>>1234668
They were excellent Mariners, it was certainly within the realm of possibility. I'm not saying rando norse travellers never walked about and ended up in India but they didn't even have non-religious writing before they Christianized. Not to say Christianity was the source or the reason they got writing, it was just what plugged them into the rest of Europe which already had the Roman alphabet entrenched. But there is no logical reason why they would circumnavigate africa and make it to India in boats. And there is also no evidence or reason why they would have traded with the Indians themselves. They had no religious reason to travel, and they barely traded with anyone outside the baltic until they were christianized (again, just "became more like the rest of europe", I'm not one of those christianity shitposters). Further, given their general ignorance/disinterest of the peoples even to the continental south (prior to the "Viking age") why would they make an overland trek like that? They didn't have a central government, had very little in the way of institutional commerce, and few pack animals to even make a caravan. If there was *any* "vikings" that traded with the wider world outside scandinavia it would have been the Kievan Rus, but they could get anything they wanted from their neighbors the Steppefuckers and the Byzantines.

>>1234775
Alright. Gotcha anon

File: 1379021274995[1].png (246KB, 830x711px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 830x711px

>>1234219
So basically pic related.

>>1235641
Sort of. More along the lines of "there is a limited amount of money, and when you kill these people the gods get more money to spend on infrastructure to make more money"

Something like that. They were very big into cycles, everything went in cycles of four. All that has happened happened before, time moves in predictable ages, etc. They have a very refreshing philosophy on history and those who knew their history were considered very worthy of respect, as they held the keys to the future, essentially. Which is pretty spot-on if you ask me.

File: book34.jpg (103KB, 317x475px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 317x475px

>>1235661
I read in this book (pic) that they believed they were in the Fifth Age. In each Age the sun would get destroyed and reborn but not in the Fifth. The only way to prolong the Fifth Age was sacrificing people to keep the teotl going.

>>1187687
no writing , no communication , culture travel horizontally not longitudinally

>>1235788
>no writing

>he didn't even read the first 5 posts in the thread

>>1235700
>tfw you realize the Aztecs did not exist in linear chrono-spacial relations with the rest of us, and someone reset the gaia engines.

File: Codex_Mendoza_folio_64r (1).jpg (342KB, 800x1147px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 800x1147px

Can somebody give me the run down on the poltical structure of the valley of mexico prior to and including the war of succession that resulted in the birth of the aztec triple alliance?

I know a good amount of the aztecs empire itself, but not how the the area was prior to them and how they came about beyond the tl;dr of tenochitlan allied with texoco and tlacopan.

I'm also interested in >>1234160 and would like to know more about the specifc inter city state relation during the lifepan of the aztec empire itself

>>1188523
Yeah, because everyone knows simply speaking Spanish adds a few extra inches to your cock.