Aztecs!

[Crni Vuk]

religion(S) are, is an ethical system.

Ethical systems can exist without religion,
Religion cannot exist without and ethical system.

Whatever social context a religion allows interprets it's own ethical system.

I think you missed it when I said from a socio-political viewpoint. Religion is a system, an ethical system with the same function with a different name.

Depends as what ethics are definied. I am sure the Mayans and Aztecs had in relation with their religion a completely different viewpoint to ethics compared to a christian and western view, which if I may say was not that much better in the medieval time.

The Atzec have been quite surprised when Cortess and his men in disgust tourned their heads away when they sacrificed prisoners to honor the Spain Conquistadores when they have been still guests in the Aztec citiy Tenochtitlan. Though I am sure that neither Cortess or any of his missionaries feelt bad about to massacre the population and destroy a whole culture to a point where almost everything is loost.

 

[Wooz]

The Atzec have been quite surprised when Cortess and his men in disgust tourned their heads away when they sacrificed prisoners to honor the Spain Conquistadores when they have been still guests in the Aztec citiy Tenochtitlan. Though I am sure that neither Cortess or any of his missionaries feelt bad about to massacre the population and destroy a whole culture to a point where almost everything is loost.

Jigga what?

Hernan Cortes wasn't the only reason the Aztec empire fell.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Jigga what?

Hernan Cortes wasn't the only reason the Aztec empire fell.

for sure not, but he definetly played a important role in the defeat. Its just a single individual in many Spanish conquistas. The capture of Tenochtitlan the capital city of the Aztec empire was of course just the tip of the iceberg, but a important case notheless cause the Aztecs had no united central administration and relied only on their miliatary power without a professional military.

 

[Wooz]

Not to turn this thread too offtopic, another offtopic reply. If this discussion goes further, I'll just split it into another thread. Here goes.

a important case notheless cause the Aztecs had no united central administration and relied only on their miliatary power without a professional military.

I beg to differ. They had a very complex and effective administration, on most social matters. And most men were trained as warriors, or served in the military for a period of time. They were the frickin' Mesoamerican equivalent of Spartans.

I believe what you mean is that they didn't have an established command structure on the battlefield, which proved itself disastrous in the battle of Otumba, a battle miraculously won by the Spaniards by relying on their Tlaxcalan allies and capturing the Aztec commander in chief, causing most of the Mexica army to rout. But that one battle wasn't everything.

The Aztecs based their empire on military force, imposing heavy taxes over conquered lands. They expanded very rapidly, leading to an ever-increasing tax raise throughout some of their important vassals... which led to disgruntlement and even minor wars before the arrival of the Spaniards. The whole 'superior firepower/armor/cavalry' thing is overrated. The 500 conquistadores led by Cortes (Against the Crown's orders, I may add) would have been easily crushed by the Aztec army if it wasn't for the number of allies they eventually rallied against their Aztec opressor.

Furthermore, it wasn't as if Cortez landed and immediately brought the empire to its knees. He spent several months in Tenochtitlan before pillaging it with his men and fleeing, only to return later and conquer it after a very long and exhausting fight.

The conquista itself wasn't particularly bloody or cruel for the time's "standards". Bigger massacres happened in Europe during religious wars. Cortes and the few priests he had along didn't destroy a culture (arguably, it wasn't even 'destroyed' completely). It was the encomienda system and an outbreak of several diseases that inflicted the biggest horrors and losses on the native population. Lastly, not all missionaries were power-hungry zealots, bent on torturing the native population for worshipping 'the devil'. Whereas most of them arguably were, a few notable and influential exceptions had place, such as Fray Bartolome De las Casas, and several other clergymen that preserved Aztec and Maya writings, instead of destroying them as was the norm.

On topic?

Why, you ask, Babs? Easy. Exploiting other peoples' fears for money and power has been Big Business since the dawn of time. Sure, several different religious institutions have made a lot of good things over time, although there's always someone, somewhere, that uses the power to his/her own benefit.

And with the widespread of mass media in a very rich country during the mid-20th century... it suddenly became very easy to build empires on old ladies' checks.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Not to turn this thread too offtopic, another offtopic reply. If this discussion goes further, I'll just split it into another thread. Here goes.

a important case notheless cause the Aztecs had no united central administration and relied only on their miliatary power without a professional military.

I beg to differ. They had a very complex and effective administration, on most social matters. And most men were trained as warriors, or served in the military for a period of time. They were the frickin' Mesoamerican equivalent of Spartans.
...

No doubts about that for a mesoamerican culture they had like most of them a well worked out civilication and a good internal management, but the aztec empire itself was not a united structure and had no central administration with their conquered territories.

Once a town or land to speak so was conquered they did not bothered so much to establish a whole own aztec societiy and imprint their own structure in to the province which was a bit different to the Inca. Cortess or the Spain Conquista in General used this against most of the mesomamerican cultures since they most of the time forced many of their conquered neighbours to pay taxes. If a province started a rebellion the control relied most of the time on militaristc decisions and not political ones in colaboration with local administrations. When I talk about professional military I am not talking about experienced soldiers or veterans from the flower wars. It is more about mercenaries like the Spanish Conquista, neither the Aztec or any other mesoamerican civilisation had a standing army or bothered much to keep control of their provinces with always standing forces which is different to many european kingdoms and empires that many times had a standing army. From how it seems the Aztec for example probably had no knowledge about the ambush in military sence as tactic.

I am no way a expert but from how it seems it happened just that with the fall of Tenochtitlan the whole Aztec empire seemed to have colapsed in a very short time which in comparision was not so much the case with for example the Roman empire which still remained for quite some time even after Rome was attacked and conquered a few times in its history, same for some other empires like the Holy Roman or Persian empire, or the French Kingdom which have a few times loost importan key areas. Of course thats a pretty simple explanation and its all in comparision with other european or asian empires and today there are of course a lot more things to consider as well like the epidemics or economical situation before the arrival of the Spain forces.

 

[victor]

Yeah, split Aztec thread please.

Very interesting replies, Welsh and Iridium. I understand things a little better now, I think.

 

[welsh]

Done

 

[GreyViper]

The Atzec have been quite surprised when Cortess and his men in disgust tourned their heads away when they sacrificed prisoners to honor the Spain Conquistadores when they have been still guests in the Aztec citiy Tenochtitlan.

Nah I might have been the fact the Atzec didn't burn their sacrifices on stake. Hence the disgust, the barbarians lacked the fines and style that Inquisition had, thud not deemed worthy and would become sacrifices themselves.

 

[Wooz]

with the fall of Tenochtitlan the whole Aztec empire seemed to have colapsed in a very short time which in comparision was not so much the case with for example the Roman empire

Thing is, the conquered territories didn't give much of a damn who they were paying the taxes to. In many cases, they just replaced Aztec overlords with Spanish ones. As you said, the empire lacked cohesion with its newly acquired territories.

 

[Crni Vuk]

with the fall of Tenochtitlan the whole Aztec empire seemed to have colapsed in a very short time which in comparision was not so much the case with for example the Roman empire

Thing is, the conquered territories didn't give much of a damn who they were paying the taxes to. In many cases, they just replaced Aztec overlords with Spanish ones. As you said, the empire lacked cohesion with its newly acquired territories.

Exactly that. Cause the Aztec autorities or kings did not bothered to establish social systems in the conquered territories that would be related to the aztec society. To compare it with the Ottomans or Romans for example they usualy encouraged reforms in conquered areas and the Ottomans most of the time have set own leaders in the politics of the provinces and for the Rommans it was common to not only conquere areas and hold it with the military but also build cities to show the glory and brilliance of their empire similar in architecture to Rome itself. Quite a few big German cities like Cologne can be dated back to that time and had a size and architecture no "German barbarian" (to speak so, its just meant figurative) has ever seen before. The target on a long term basis was it to assimiliate the conquered cultures in to the roman culture which even worked till a point where Germanic tribes left of the Rhine feelt more like "Roman" citizens then the Germans on the right side which have been most of the time untouched by the Romans. The assimilation went so far that whole Roman Armies had German tribes as mercenaries and that some Emperors had German elite guards.

The Aztecs never bothered to do anything similar which was not even welcome to the Aztec leaders and high nobility cause they used rebellions as opportunity to capture prisoners for human sacrifice.

I think the colapse of the Aztec empire was unavoidable, but I am somewhat inclined to think that with better internal structure and better administration regarding conquered cities it would not have lead to such a fast defeat by the Spanish Conquista which relied in their sterngth much on the native population.