Posted on 12/05/2006 11:45:28 PM PST by freedomdefender
The Latin American History as taught by the school systems in the 1960's had the Aztec tribe as the poorest and smallest of the tribes of that part of North America. They were landless until one day while wondering through a swamp, they came upon an eagle sitting on a cactus eating a serpent (snake). This was a vision that one of their elders had dreamed of previously. They made that swamp their home and became the great tribe that the Spanish Conquered a few hundred years latter. The eagle on the cactus eating the serpent is the symbol on the Mexican Flag. There is also a book Aztec, by Gary Jennings that is a great read once you get past the sexual descriptions of meaningless fiction.
Yes, satanism.
I was hoping that this movie would destroy the PC whitewashing of the satanic human sacrifices of Mayan civilization.
There's a reason why Mary visited Juan Diego.
1474 An Indian named Quauhtlatoatzin was born in Cuautitlan.
1476 Juan de Zumarraga was born in Spain.
1492 Christopher Columbus landed on an island in the Americas and named it San Salvador.
1514 The first Marian Shrine in the New World was established in the city of Higuey, first to be built on American soil.
1519 Hernan Cortez landed in Mexico.
1521 The capital city of the Aztecs falls under Cortez.
1524 The first 12 Franciscans arrive in Mexico City.
1525 The Indian Quauhtlatoatzin is baptized by a Franciscan priest. He received the Christian name of Juan Diego.
1528 Friar Juan de Zumarraga arrives in the New World.
1529 Juan Diego’s wife, Maria, became sick and died.
1531 Year of the apparitions to Juan Diego
1533 The first sanctuary was erected.
1541 Franciscan priest and early historian of New Spain “Motolinia” writes that some nine million Aztecs had become Christians.
1548 Death of Juan Diego.
I won't be seeing any more of his movies.
What kind of reaction do you get?
I own some of his movies--Braveheart, The Passion, The Patriot.... still thought he was one of the good guys...
..but after reflecting on his rage....and subsequent quotes he made against President Bush...and his predilection toward violent scenes...
...I know I will not see this movie....I don't care about this movie...
..and I don't really care for him anymore.
Well that's not very accurate considering there was a major city the capital of a major empire siting on that island in the swamp. See if you can find LA Capital: The Biography of Mexico Cit by Jonathan Kandell. It starts before the Aztecs took over and goes in to great detail about how they came to power, their religion, eating habits as well as their relations to other tribes. The book is about 700 pages in paperback with about 15% devoted to this topic.
Thanks, I'll check it out.
I know Gibson's movies have always been violent. I am, however, begining to feel that he is obsessed with it, and gets his jollies on luring others into watching it.
First he got a bunch of Republicans to watch "The Patriot."
Then he lured a bunch of Christians into watching "The Passion."
Now, apparently, he is luring multi-cultural kumbaya people into watching "Apocolypto."
And all the while he is laughing at all of us, because we are bankrolling his sick fascination with violence.
Count me out.
"The gods need you," explains David Carrasco, professor of religious history at Harvard.
Hmmm. *Science needs the freedom to clone embryos, embryonic stem cell research etc.
"They depend on human life for their own existence, there's this kind of reciprocity."
*Think of how many diseases we could cure if you would only support the sacrifice of the tiniest of humans - no one would even miss them.
In sacrifice, he adds, the people are becoming like gods.
*We decide whose life is valuable, and we can use the lives of those who we decide are inconsequential to attempt to make the important people, those with power and money, immortal.
Aren't you glad we live in the US in 2006 instead of Mexico at that time? Our country's culture *(4,000 abortions daily) is so much more humane and civilized than the the culture of those Mayan savages. Mel Gibson is just bonkers if he thinks that there is any comparison between the two. (Is sarcasm tag really necessary?)
[Professors say Gibson's Apocalypto is biased against Mayan bloodletting]
LOL! BWAahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaha!!!!!
Lord help me! Too stupid!!!!
Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!
sniff, sniff, sniff.
Perhaps the biggest reason the Aztecs fell was that Montezuma saw Cortez as the fulfillment of religious prophecy. His religion predisposed him to defeat as the Will of the Gods.
But for that Cortez would not have lasted two minutes once Montezuma gave the word to kill him and his small band.
In a Simpsons episode Mel machinegunned Congress.
Insert remark about the usefulness of religion in the exercise of power here.
I don't think that is what he is doing in this new movie though I haven't seen it. If it is at all accurate to the culture it will revel just how evil it was. More likely he did the movie as a kudo to the Catholic conquerers.
What the professor is saying about their beliefs is nontheless true. That is what they believed. Those chosen to be sacrificed generally believed it to be a high honor as well at least with the Mayas. The Aztecs were much more indiscriminate and brutal.
In fact, another factor in their loss to the Spanish was that their battle tactics stressed capture of the enemy rather than killing them in order that they could be sacrificed. This gave the Spanish an advantage having no inclination to do anything but kill the enemy in battle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.