Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Texan5

In Mexico there were Indians and then there were the Aztecs. Most Indian tribes practiced limited human sacrifice, but the Aztecs used human sacrifice as a political tool to instill terror and fear in the competing tribes. The Aztecs were known for celebrations that led to the sacrifice of thousands of captives, and they used cannibalism for the sake of terror alone. Other Indians referred to the Aztecs as the “Sons of Dogs.” Cortes conquered 300,000 Aztecs with just six hundred Spanish soldiers, a few dozen horses and war dogs, and hundreds of thousands of Indian allies who absolutely hated the Aztecs. The Spaniards were not gentle with the native people, but they never came close to the kind of brutality the Aztecs had inflicted on the other Indians. European disease was the biggest destroyer of the people, and that was unintended.


37 posted on 10/09/2015 3:12:31 PM PDT by Jay Redhawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies ]


To: Jay Redhawk
European disease was the biggest destroyer of the people, and that was unintended.

Yes. As many as 90% of Native Americans died of Old World diseases. Most never even saw a white man when they succumbed.

Population history of indigenous peoples of the Americas

39 posted on 10/09/2015 3:24:21 PM PDT by Alas Babylon! (As we say in the Air Force, "You know you're over the target when you start getting flak!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Jay Redhawk

The Spaniards and the Aztecs deserved each other-they shared a lot of the same really bad characteristics-and unfortunately for the rest of the tribes, their rumble ended up including everyone. The Spaniards devised certain methods of torture as a terror tool, too...

Cortez’ native interpreter-and mistress-Malinche was the daughter of a tribal chief who was a bitter enemy of Moctezuma’s-so she was more than eager to assist in his takedown, but even though she let Cortez take their son back to Spain when he left, she refused to go there with him, so maybe she’d just used him to get revenge for her tribe-I suppose you could say they both got what they wanted out of the deal...


40 posted on 10/09/2015 3:26:36 PM PDT by Texan5 ("You've giot to saddle up your boys, you've got to draw a hard line"...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Jay Redhawk

These were Aztec allies. From the article...”Aztec-allied Texcocanos, or Acolhuas”.


45 posted on 10/09/2015 3:47:04 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

To: Jay Redhawk
Excellent post that most people don't know because the conquest of Mexico is mostly a source of present day propaganda.

To add to your post - The few hundred Spanish soldiers were not invulnerable in battle. Aztec weaponry was strong enough to pierce the armor the Spanish wore. The decisive advantage was the thousands of Indian allies.

“European disease” turned out not to be the biggest culprit in the native die off at that time. A few years ago the pathogen was ID’d as a hantavirus causing Hemorrhagic fever which is native to the New World. The same pathogen had caused a population crash before.

94 posted on 10/10/2015 4:49:15 AM PDT by Varda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson