|
Snickeringshadow posted:I wouldn't go that far. One of the lesser Inca lords reportedly had a flock of 50,000 llamas and alpacas. The difference is that, as herd animals like sheep, they spent most of their time wandering around the high mountains away from human settlements. As opposed to cows, which live on farms near people and poo poo all over the place. Yeah, they are very simple and elegant, and probably not accurate, but the overall shape of the reasoning seems sound to the layperson. They're simple answers that unfold and interact with other complex phenomena, to hopefully explain some of the complexity. Like Diamond's argument that not all species of animals are capable of being domesticated (that is, not just control over the animal, but control over its offspring). Or the north-south vs east-west hypothesis, that's probably not accurate at all, but the idea that technology and biology spreads along trade routes is sound. Plus, it's not just whether or not a technology can spread, but if there is fertile ground for that technology to take root. I can't imagine the primitive and relatively expensive metal tools could compete against the sophisticated stone tools. It was a matter of probability, it probably just never reached a tipping point, unlike on the eurasian-african continent, where that technology was incubated for long enough that societies that adopted it could outcompete those that didn't, forcing everybody to utilise it.
|
| # ? Jul 29, 2012 02:07 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2013 06:01 |
|
|
Mister Adequate posted:Could you talk a little about crime and punishment in Mesoamerican societies? How did they view crime? Something to be punished, or cured, or forgiven, and so on? Obviously this would vary from culture to culture and community to community, but this is an area I've not heard a single word spoken about in these societies so I'm curious about anything you can share. The only two societies where I'm qualified enough to talk about crime and punishment are the Aztecs and the Tarascans. Both states pretty much imposed the death penalty for all infractions. The Tarascans held a court once a year where the king heard cases from all over the empire. The kinds of crimes that warranted death included: -failing to pay taxes/tribute -failing to provide firewood for offerings to the gods -desertion from the army -theft -murder -hunting, fishing, or farming on land that didn't belong to you -entering the king's forest without permission. -public drunkenness or other "lewd behavior" like nudity (although women were allowed to be topless and men could avoid wearing pants) Suspects were considered guilty until proven innocent, and punishment was carried out by a blow to the back of the neck with a heavy club, or human sacrifice. The Aztecs had a similar system of justice, but death was carried out by strangulation using a garrote (e: That is, not by club or sacrifice). The Aztecs also added to the list of capital offenses: -Wearing jewelry as a commoner -Building a second story on your house as a commoner -Wearing cotton clothing as a commoner -consuming alcohol as a commoner (exceptions were made for elders >60 years of age) -consuming hallucinogenic drugs outside of a religious ceremony -adultery -homosexuality EDIT: The Aztecs also had multiple levels in their court system, and one could make appeals. Encryptic posted:One thing I am curious about that I haven't really been able to find any backup on - did a tribe called the Yaki ever exist in Mesoamerica/northern Mexico or is that a load of bunk? I've seen mentions of a "Yaqui" tribe here and there but not sure if that's the Yaki tribe Jennings references or if they were ever as infamously savage as the book claims they were. One of Gary Jennings's inaccuracies is that he tends to misspell names a lot. I'm sure it's actually spelled "Yaqui." However, I'm not really familiar with the Chichimec tribes of Northern Mexico, so I'm afraid I can't help much there. Sorry. Boiled Water posted:How come the mesoamericans didn't adobt metal tools, and has there been found any iron tools? The term "stone age", like the terms "medieval" or " renaissance" are really designed to refer to European (and sometimes Asian) chronology. Outside of those regions, the term doesn't really work. It was originally coined because stone and metal objects survive really well in archaeological contexts, and so they can be used as benchmarks to describe the time period you're talking about. It's important to realize that the ability to work bronze or iron doesn't say anything about a culture's complexity. Tribal societies in Sub-Saharan Africa worked iron, while Mesoamerican city-states only had stone and bronze. The only thing metallurgy says about a society is its ability to work metal. So terms like "stone age" or "bronze age" don't really apply to the Americas. That said, why they didn't work metal that much is a tough question. I had an economics professor as an undergrad who's favorite expression was "people think on the margins". Meaning, if somebody is thinking about adopting a new technology in favor of an existing one, they're not saying "Hey, this sucks right now but in 200 years it'll be awesome." People are only concerned with the immediate benefit the new technology provides. In Europe (and most of Asia), stone technology was based around cryptocrystalline silicates like chert and chalcedony. These stones, while capable of forming cutting tools, kind of suck. They're not very sharp and they break easily. Compared to these substances, bronze is substantially better. In Mesoamerica, people used obsidian. Obsidian does break easily, but it's razor sharp. Literally, it's sharper than modern razor blades. Bronze, on the other hand, is soft and doesn't hold an edge. This is especially true of early bronze working, which depends on arsenical bronze (copper-arsenic alloy). Even true bronze (copper-tin alloy) needs to be "use hardened", meaning it's really soft and malleable at first, but after you use the tool enough it gets harder. Now metal technology eventually improves as people learn better tempering techniques and eventually build furnaces capable of smelting iron. But in the beginning, bronze is a lovely technology. If you have a choice between using an arsenical bronze knife or an obsidian knife, you'd be better off going with obsidian. Snickeringshadow fucked around with this message at Feb 10, 2013 around 21:01 |
| # ? Jul 29, 2012 02:38 |
|
|
Snickeringshadow posted:-consuming alcohol as a commoner (exceptions were made for elders >60 years of age) What do we actually know about Aztec/Mesoamerican recreational drinking and drug habits? Was ban on alcohol exclusively an Aztec thing or were that kind of attitudes actually common in the region? If yeah, do we have any idea where that actually stemmed from and whether or not there were any substances that were considered kosher; I'm assuming at least tobacco products were widely accepted. Also, on what occasions were hallucinogenic drugs? Were they commonplace in all ceremonies or only certain bigger ones and how often were ceremonies held all in all? And yeah, regarding the Aztec executions, what kind of a club we're talking about here, macuahuitl or something else? I've always had a weird fascination for Mesoamerican weapons. Thanks, this is an awesome thread. I'm really enjoying this recent surge of good A/T history threads, goon knowledge is a great thing indeed.
|
| # ? Jul 29, 2012 15:46 |
|
|
Snickeringshadow posted:The term "stone age", like the terms "medieval" or " renaissance" are really designed to refer to European (and sometimes Asian) chronology. Outside of those regions, the term doesn't really work. It was originally coined because stone and metal objects survive really well in archaeological contexts, and so they can be used as benchmarks to describe the time period you're talking about. It's important to realize that the ability to work bronze or iron doesn't say anything about a culture's complexity. Tribal societies in Sub-Saharan Africa worked iron, while Mesoamerican city-states only had stone and bronze. The only thing metallurgy says about a society is its ability to work metal. So terms like "stone age" or "bronze age" don't really apply to the Americas. Does mesoamerican civilizations have a set of similar boundries?
|
| # ? Jul 29, 2012 15:57 |
|
|
Boiled Water posted:Does mesoamerican civilizations have a set of similar boundries? I'm not sure I quite understand the question. Are you asking what chronology we use in Mesoamerica? If that's what you mean we divide time like this: Archaic Period 8000 - 2000 BC: From the end of the ice age to the rise of agriculture. In this period people slowly shift from nomadic hunter-gatherers to settled forager-farmers Formative Period 2000 BC - 200 AD: Agriculture becomes more intensive, settled communities start aggregating into city-states. First "wave" of Mesoamerican civilization (Mokaya, Olmec, Zapotec) starts here. Classic Period 200 - 1000 AD: Second "wave" of Mesoamerican civilization. Things get even bigger-scale in this time period. Metropolis of Teotihuacan dominates central Mexico, Monte Alban controls large chunk of highland Oaxaca, and the Maya civilization flourishes in the lowlands of Guatemala and Belize. Postclassic Period 1000 - 1521 AD: Covers the civilizations that arise after the Classic period collapse. Toltecs followed by the Aztecs in central Mexico. Chichen Itzá followed by Mayapan in the Yucatan, the K'iche Maya in the Guetamala highlands, etc. Ends when Hernan Cortés sacks Tenochtitlan in 1521. Skeleton Jelly posted:What do we actually know about Aztec/Mesoamerican recreational drinking and drug habits? Was ban on alcohol exclusively an Aztec thing or were that kind of attitudes actually common in the region? If yeah, do we have any idea where that actually stemmed from and whether or not there were any substances that were considered kosher; I'm assuming at least tobacco products were widely accepted. Also, on what occasions were hallucinogenic drugs? Were they commonplace in all ceremonies or only certain bigger ones and how often were ceremonies held all in all? A lot of people have hypothesized that the earliest alcohol in Mesoamerica was maize beer, or "chicha". This might actually explain why maize agriculture was developed, since it wasn't very useful for food until about 800 BC. The idea is that initially this beer was available to everybody for ritual feasting. By the Middle Formative, however, people start shifting away from egalitarian societies (everybody's equal) to ranked societies (some people are more equal than others). Once that happens, booze starts getting restricted to the emerging noble class. As far as hallucinogens go, most of the hallucinogenic drugs we use today came from Mesoamerica. Magic mushrooms (Psilocybin mexicana) were available everywhere. Peyote was common in the north, and Salvia came from Oaxaca. The Maya got really creative when they figured out a large species of toad called Bufo marinus emitted an hallucinogenic toxin when stressed. (I don't know what idiot went around licking random toads to figure this out.) They favored pretty heavily in religious belief. The Popol Vuh (the K'iche Maya creation story) talks about how originally humans could observe the gods the same way gods could observe humans. The gods didn't like being spied on by mortals, so they obscured the divine realm "like fog on a mirror." Hallucinogens supposedly pierced this fog and allowed mortals to observe the divine realms. I don't know exactly how frequently they were used, but I know important ceremonies like the coronation of a new Aztec emperor, involved mushrooms. Seems a little freaky to me. I can't imagine what it would be like to watch a human sacrifice while tripping balls. E: yeah, tobacco was common too. While I don't think tobacco was officially restricted to the nobility, it would have been expensive enough that commoners would have considered it a luxury. Skeleton Jelly posted:And yeah, regarding the Aztec executions, what kind of a club we're talking about here, macuahuitl or something else? I've always had a weird fascination for Mesoamerican weapons. No problem. I love talking about this stuff. It was the Tarascans, not the Aztecs, that executed by club. And it looks to me like just an ordinary bludgeoning club. There's an illustration in an early colonial document called the Relacion de Michoacan that shows a Tarascan execution. I was going to post it here, but I can't seem to find the picture online. Snickeringshadow fucked around with this message at Jul 29, 2012 around 18:41 |
| # ? Jul 29, 2012 18:35 |
|
|
Snickeringshadow posted:I'm not sure I quite understand the question. Are you asking what chronology we use in Mesoamerica? If that's what you mean we divide time like this: This was exactly what I meant.
|
| # ? Jul 29, 2012 20:13 |
|
|
O. Ferfuxaik posted:Actually, it wasn't sheer luck. Most crowd diseases appear to have originated from domesticated animals. In the Americas, most good candidates for domestication were driven to extinction when humans first arrived, already armed with good weapons and hunting expertise. The exceptions aren't as likely to originate human crowd diseases as cattle, pigs, sheep etc are. For example, turkeys don't live in huge flocks and llamas never spread beyond the Andes or saw a very large total population compared to cows. So if both Mesoamericans and European had their herd animals, different crowd diseases would presumably be evolved from both sides and both civilizations will be wiped off by the other's disease? Sounds like a good plot for an alternate history novel to me. On the topic of food, it seems that Mesoamerican did not have much choice in terms of meat. Or am I mistaken on that front?
|
| # ? Jul 30, 2012 03:10 |
|
|
Jeek posted:So if both Mesoamericans and European had their herd animals, different crowd diseases would presumably be evolved from both sides and both civilizations will be wiped off by the other's disease? Sounds like a good plot for an alternate history novel to me. On that topic did the mesoamericans have any diseases europeans had no resistance to?
|
| # ? Jul 30, 2012 10:59 |
|
|
There's some strong evidence that syphilis came from the Americas, although I don't think it's entirely settled?
|
| # ? Jul 30, 2012 14:41 |
|
|
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Yeah, syphilis probably came from the Americas. When it first jumped populations, it killed people in as little as a few weeks. Eventually the disease evolved to keep the host alive for decades so it has more time to spread. Jeek posted:On the topic of food, it seems that Mesoamerican did not have much choice in terms of meat. Or am I mistaken on that front? Dogs and turkeys were the only sources of domesticated meat, and they weren't frequent in the diet of commoners. However hunting and especially fishing did contribute meat as well. Through most of the Formative Period fishing comprised about as much of the diet as agriculture. That's one of the things that studying American civilizations has revealed. Most people going off the Old World model for civilizations assumed you needed agriculture before you could get cities. But both Mesoamerica and the Andes built their first cities around maritime resources more than agriculture. I think it's kind of ironic that as civilization developed, the quality of human diets decreased.
|
| # ? Jul 30, 2012 17:49 |
|
|
I got really interested in Mesoamerican and Andean cultures this past month, so I'm really glad this thread exists. I've got a few questions, not about any of the cultures in particular, but any you can answer. 1.) What was daily life like for a commoner? I remember reading that for the Incan empire, a lot of towns were specialized to do one task. Anything like that in Mesoamerica, or was it pretty much do what you could to survive? 2.) Could you talk more about the class distinctions? It seems if you were an Aztec commoner you couldn't wear nice things or have two floors in your house. I'm just curious if there was anything more to that. 3.) How were women treated? Were they a second class citizen? 4.) Have any more books you recommend? I'm always looking to add to my reading list. Sorry, I know those are really broad. Caustic Chimera fucked around with this message at Jul 31, 2012 around 01:34 |
| # ? Jul 31, 2012 01:20 |
|
|
So you already described crime and punishment a little, but who did the judging? Was it a priest's job or did they have someone else?
|
| # ? Jul 31, 2012 02:06 |
|
|
Can you tell us a little about the material cultures of the region? Like, I heard that elite troops were armored (or at least uniformed) in feathered suits. Did these suits provide a degree of protection against the macuahuitl? If Tenochtitlan was a Mesoamerican Venice, then what were their boats like? What about oceangoing vessels? Did Mesoamericans have any? You mentioned earlier that the spread of bronze seemed to indicate some kind of maritime trade. How did merchants move their goods from town to town? Backpacks? Laborers? Carts? Unrelated to tech: did later Mesoamerican civilizations keep any records of what happened to the earlier civilizations like the Maya city-states or the Olmecs? From what you've said, anything they wrote on the subject didn't survive, but do you think they knew, or had some idea, at least, of the overcultivation that killed the Maya cities, or whatever it was that did in the Olmecs? Do we know what did in the Olmecs? How much do we know about these cultures' gender relations and marriage traditions?
|
| # ? Jul 31, 2012 07:02 |
|
|
Okay, there's a lot of questions here. I'll try to get as many done as I can in one post, but if I don't get to one of your questions I'll try to get back to it later.Caustic Chimera posted:1.) What was daily life like for a commoner? I remember reading that for the Incan empire, a lot of towns were specialized to do one task. Anything like that in Mesoamerica, or was it pretty much do what you could to survive? Amongst the Aztecs (we have the most data available for them) classes were divided as follows: 1. Tlatoque: Royalty, kings of city-states. 2. Tecuhtin: Lords, hereditary rulers of districts or neighborhoods within cities or towns outside of cities. 3. Pilli: nobility, but without a specific title. 4. Cuauhpilli: a class of non-hereditary nobility exclusive to the Aztecs, prior to Motecuzoma II. Awarded based on merit. 5. Macehualtin: land-owning commoners (I'll go into more detail on these in a sec) 6. Mayeque: landless commoners or serfs 7. Slaves (those captured during wars that weren't sacrificed) Commoners (Macehaultin) made up the bulk of the population and lived as part of a neighborhood/district called a "calpulli" (nahuatl for "Big House"). These were usually composed of one or more extended families. Smaller towns/villages might only be composed of a single calpulli, while larger cities could have hundreds. Land was owned communally by the calpulli, rather than by a specific person or family. (A descendant of this institution can be seen in Mexico today in the ejido system.) Noble families, centered around a lord or "tecuhtli" managed one or more calpullis. Unlike in the European feudal system, the lords didn't own the land on which the commoners lived (it was owned by the calpulli itself). All the lord owned was the right to exact tribute from the calpulli. A lord might also have specific craftsman attached to his house that provided luxury goods for the lord. The calpulli wasn't an institution specific to the Aztecs, but appears to be one of the traits that is (nearly) universal to Mesoamerican cultures. Most calpullis centered around agricultural production, but in large cities you could also get specialist calpullis that produced specific goods for trade I've already described how at Teotihuacan these calpullis were lumped together in apartment compounds rather than clusters of houses. Caustic Chimera posted:3.) How were women treated? Were they a second class citizen? Grand Prize Winner posted:How much do we know about these cultures' gender relations and marriage traditions? As with most things, gender relations varied across time and space. The Aztecs and the Tarascans had the strictest gender codes. Both practiced elite polygyny (king has many wives) and marriages were arranged. Women really didn't have lots of rights in their societies, and the Tarascans actually declared war on some of their neighbors because they were ruled by Queens rather than Kings. (They probably declared war for other reasons, but they used that as an excuse.) The Maya were more open-mineded. While most rulers were men, they did have some very famous queens like Queen Xook (below):  (Queen Xook summons an ancestor spirit by burning some of her own blood) The most gender-equal society was probably the Mixtecs. In the Mixtec religion, every god had a male and female counterpart. And so amongst mixtec nobility, every lord also had a lady (they were monogamous). When a marriage alliance was created, the two noble estates joined to become one polity until the death of both the lord and the lady. The result is that if the lord died for whatever reason, you could get rather powerful principalities ruled by a woman. With Mixtec lords dying in battle all the time, this actually happened quite often. On the level of commoners, women actually had a rather powerful impact on commerce and trade. Mesoamericans didn't consider precious metals intrinsically valuable, so instead they used bolts of cloth of standardized length as the basis for their currency. The thing is, all of this cloth was made by women. So in effect, women literally made money. On the one hand, this gave women some power, but on the other it also made women into a commodity. Lords would often examine the quality of a woman's textiles before agreeing to marry her. Grand Prize Winner posted:Can you tell us a little about the material cultures of the region? Like, I heard that elite troops were armored (or at least uniformed) in feathered suits. Did these suits provide a degree of protection against the macuahuitl? Elite soldiers in Mesoamerican armies (at least in later times) were armored with a kind of quilted cotton armor that was about 2 inches thick. It would have been about as tough as leather, so it could have prevented a glancing blow, but a direct hit with a sword or spear would have gone through. Elite troops often covered this armor in decorative costumes affiliated with one military order or another. The maya also used rounded wooden bucklers, while central mexican troops in the classic period used a square, flexible shield that was only really useful for deflecting arrows. By the Postclassic period, the most common shield was a round shield made of wood and/or leather with a feather fringe on the outside edge (again, designed to deflect glancing blows from arrows). Edit:  (An illustration showing Aztec arms and armor) Carts weren't really useful for Mesoameircans because they didn't have animals to pull them. Instead they used a kind of backpack attached with a tumpline rather than shoulder straps. This line went over the top of the head and placed the pressure downward on the spinal column rather than on the shoulders. (It's actually better for the back, if done correctly). Their boats were usually either rafts, canoes, or a kind of really big canoe called an acalli. Supposedly an acalli could hold up to several hundred people. For commerce, usually canoes were strapped together like pontoons and wooden planks were laid on top to form a raft. These vehicles were the basis of both freshwater and ocean-going crafts. Obviously, the smaller canoes would have been the only ones able to navigate the canals in Tenochtitlan. I remember reading somewhere that the Inca (from south america) had a primitive form of sail, but that may be bullshit. Either way, sails weren't a technology Mesoamericans had. Edit: loving tables... Snickeringshadow fucked around with this message at Jul 31, 2012 around 18:25 |
| # ? Jul 31, 2012 18:21 |
|
|
Okay, part 2:Caustic Chimera posted:4.) Have any more books you recommend? I'm always looking to add to my reading list. I've already mentioned a few specific books here. I guess the basic introductory-level textbook on Mesoamerica that almost every class on the subject uses is Ancient Mexico and Central America by Susan Toby Evans. It's a big book though (600 pages), and as a textbook, it can get a bit dry. To be honest, this is kind of a tough question for me. I'm not really all that familiar with publications aimed at a general audience. Rose Wreck posted:So you already described crime and punishment a little, but who did the judging? Was it a priest's job or did they have someone else? Amongst the Tarascans, the king alone was responsible for judging capital offenses. Once a year they held a festival where over several days the king heard cases and handed out sentences. In other Mesoamerican cultures, I assume the lords were responsible for the commoners underneath them, but that's a guess. I'm not entirely sure. Grand Prize Winner posted:Unrelated to tech: did later Mesoamerican civilizations keep any records of what happened to the earlier civilizations like the Maya city-states or the Olmecs? From what you've said, anything they wrote on the subject didn't survive, but do you think they knew, or had some idea, at least, of the overcultivation that killed the Maya cities, or whatever it was that did in the Olmecs? This is a tough question. While Mayan hieroglyphs changed substantially after the Classic Period collapse, the older glyphic texts inscribed in the ruins probably would have been intelligible to the literate members of the Maya population. While I'm not aware of how much the Postclassic Maya knew of their Classic Period ancestors, I imagine they would have to have known something. The Olmec are a different story. Their civilization was discovered relatively recently and even we don't know that much about them. While I don't know the specific causes of the Olmec collapse, localized climate change probably had something to do with it. The modern Isthmus of Tehuantepec is very arid and doesn't have much fresh water. The fact that there were cities there in ancient times tells me that this wasn't always the case. The Olmec also went through their own complicated history where different Olmec city-states were dominant at different points in time, so perhaps it wasn't one big collapse but multiple collapses. We do, however, have some very good examples of historical records from the Aztecs and the Mixtecs. These histories vary from modern western histories in a number of qualitative ways. Like Greek accounts of the Trojan War, or biblical accounts of King David, it's really difficult to separate the history from legend. The Mixtecs, for example, record an event that scholars call the "War of Heaven." This war is so steeped in legend that for a long time scholars thought it was just a myth. Then, an archaeologist named John Pohl (from his book In the Realm of Eight Deer) did a study where he surveyed the Mixtec highlands and collected all of the indigenous names for geographical features and their locations relative to archaeological sites. He then matched these places with the names given in the Mixtec codices, and found that the places mentioned in the "War of Heaven" are actually real places. Moreover, some of the sites supposedly destroyed during this "mythical" war were actually abandoned about the time of the war. John Pohl argues that the War of Heaven is actually a mythologized account of the Classic Period collapse.  (Page from the Codex Zouche-Nuttall showing the War of Heaven. Note the supernatural warriors in the top right corner descending to earth from the celestial world to join in the fighting) The Aztecs also had some historical records about the ancient city of Tollan. (Meaning "Place of Reeds") We now know that this city of Tollan was actually the archaeological site we call Tula. But when you read some of the Aztec accounts, they don't quite mesh. They describe the Mesoamerican ideal of the perfect city. A large, gleaming metropolis and a place of pilgrimage to the entire Mesoamerican world, with tribute and trade goods providing the city with anything its citizens could ever want. It appears that the Aztec accounts aren't just describing Tula, but they seem to be including traits more appropriate to Tula's predecessor in central Mexico, Teotihuacan. The idea that the Aztecs could confuse the two actually makes a lot of sense. Teotihuacan, Tula, and the Aztec capital Tenochtitlan were all really powerful city-states located in central Mexico that headed tributary empires with influence felt throughout Mesoamerica. Mesoamericans saw time as cyclical, not linear. To them, these weren't three separate cities at different points in time; they were the same city, Tollan, being reincarnated over and over again as history repeated itself. The Aztecs weren't the only ones who bought into this. The Mixtecs had dealings with ancient Tula, and when they first encounter the Aztecs, the Mixtec codices record the name of the Aztec capital as "Place of Reeds" (or Tollan.) The Aztecs, for their part, actively encouraged this identification of themselves as Tollan reborn. Modern archaeologists excavating at Tula and Teotihuacan have found looters trenches dug by the Aztecs. They actually looted these archaeological sites to bring artifacts back to their capital and paint themselves as the inheritors of the ancient Tollan tradition. Snickeringshadow fucked around with this message at Jul 31, 2012 around 19:36 |
| # ? Jul 31, 2012 19:34 |
|
|
I think this thread is really cool, and I was wondering if you knew much about something thats always been my favourite little story about European/Mesoamerican relations. It may be a little beyond the intention of the thread because its not quite maya related, but could you talk about gonzalo guerrero? I know only the basic.story and how his refusal to help cortez is pretty much responsible for malintzin. I would love to know more about the story and some interpretation of it, etc
|
| # ? Jul 31, 2012 20:35 |
|
|
Quantumfate posted:I think this thread is really cool, and I was wondering if you knew much about something thats always been my favourite little story about European/Mesoamerican relations. It may be a little beyond the intention of the thread because its not quite maya related, but could you talk about gonzalo guerrero? I know only the basic.story and how his refusal to help cortez is pretty much responsible for malintzin. I would love to know more about the story and some interpretation of it, etc I'll tell you what I know of the story. In 1511, a Spanish ship traveling between Panama and Cuba hit a storm off the coast of the Yucatan and sank. A group of survivors made it to shore near the Maya port of Tulum and were promptly captured by soldiers from Ecab (a small Maya kingdom in the eastern Yucatan.) Most were sacrificed, but two managed to escape: Gonzalo Guerrero and Geronimo de Aguilar. Both were subsequently captured by another Maya king and sold into slavery. Geronimo de Aguilar was a priest who had a lot of contempt for the "pagan" Maya. He remained a slave until Hernan Cortes landed on the island of Cozumel. Guerrero was a soldier, however. When his master (the King of Chetumal?) found this out he put him to work in the army, where he eventually climbed the ranks and became an officer. He married a Maya woman (some say the daughter of one of the Kings), got face tattoos and piercings, and otherwise assimilated into Maya culture. Later, a conquistador named Juan de Grijalva arrived at the kingdom of Campeche. Word spread quickly throughout the Yucatan about these foreigners. Gonzalo Guerrero heard about it and went to his new king and told him that the Spanish weren't to be trusted. They claimed they were here in peace, but Guerrero said they were really here to conquer. Guerrero's king sent word to the king of Campeche, who promptly attacked (and kicked the poo poo out of) Juan de Grijalva. Grijalva's men, after taking heavy casualties, fled back on the boats and left. Later, Cortés arrived at the island of Cozumel off the coast of the Yucatan. This time, word reached the other marooned Spaniard, Geronimo de Aguilar. Aguilar convinced his master to free him so that he could return to his people, but before he left he paid a visit to Gonzalo Guerrero and asked him to come with him so they could go home. Guerrero basically told him that he was at home; he had a family and a position in Maya society and didn't want to give it up. So Aguilar went to Cozumel and became Cortés's first translator. Cortés then went to Campeche. The King of Campeche, confident after his victory over Grijalva, subsequently attacked Cortés. This time, however, the Spanish inflicted heavy casualties on the Maya and the king was forced to negotiate. The king noticed the Spaniards seemed intent on collecting gold, so in a brilliant move he basically told the Spanish "Well, we don't have any more gold. But if you go further west, there's these guys called the Mexica, and they have a lot of gold." He even gave him a translator, a slave woman named Malintzin. (Aguilar translated Spanish to Yucatec Mayan, and Malintzin translated Yucatec Mayan into Nahuatl. As you can imagine, this caused a lot of translation errors.) This was basically a ploy to turn the Spanish against the Aztecs and get them away from Campeche, and it worked for a time. Guerrero, for his part, is believed to have died fighting the Spanish when they returned to conquer the Yucatan, though I don't think anybody knows that for sure. EDIT: I should also say, that in part due to the warning Guerrero provided, the Spanish never caught the Yucatan off guard like they did with the Aztecs. The Maya fought tooth and nail against the Spanish conquest. The last Mesoamerican city-state to fall to the Spanish was the Maya city of Tayasal in Snickeringshadow fucked around with this message at Jul 31, 2012 around 21:41 |
| # ? Jul 31, 2012 21:14 |
|
|
Can I PM a question? Edit- vvv ah well ass is my canvas fucked around with this message at Aug 1, 2012 around 01:00 |
| # ? Jul 31, 2012 22:27 |
|
|
I would say yes, but I don't have platinum.  sorry.
|
| # ? Jul 31, 2012 22:44 |
|
|
I know your specialty is Mesoamerica, but do you know anything about the Mississippian Culture? Would the Mesoamerican civilizations and the eastern North American tribes (like the Mississippians) have had any knowledge of each other? Snickeringshadow posted:Depending on what pre-Columbian population estimates you use, 90-95% of the population of the Americas died within a century of contact. No civilization can survive that. That's an apocalypse. Given how quickly these diseases spread, you would have to sink every boat on its way to the Americas until 20th century vaccines could be developed. And you already answered the question I really wanted to ask: I've heard estimates of the percentage of the population killed by the epidemics varying between 50% to 95% and was wondering what the current consensus in the field was. Apparently it's the higher end. Yikes. The effects of the much less lethal Black Plague on European society are documented pretty well, I can't even imagine the effect that an epidemic that kills 95% of the populace would have on a civilization. Were most of those deaths attributable to a variety of European diseases, or was it mostly all smallpox?
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 00:29 |
|
|
There are plenty of Western post-apocalyptic fantasies out there, think The Stand and our current obsession with Zombies. Except in all those stories, society is rebuilt in the image of the precursors, instead of something culturally alien.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 04:28 |
|
|
I recall learning that when the Polynesians were settling the Pacific (up to around 700 CE), that they typically brought with them a cache of crops to help them survive. Among the typical assortment of Asian crops, like taro, banana and breadfruit, one of them was the sweet potato, an indisputably American crop. Is there any evidence of contact between the Polynesians and either Mesoamerica or South America in the Americas?
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 05:16 |
|
|
Asian Yams and American Sweet Potatoes and Potatoes are different species. I do remember hearing somewhere about pre-Columbus trade between Siberia and Alaska, with metal artefacts being found along the coast. I can't find a source, how credible is this?
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 06:57 |
|
|
Sucrose posted:I know your specialty is Mesoamerica, but do you know anything about the Mississippian Culture? Unfortunately, I know next to nothing on the Mississippian culture, so I really don't know. Sucrose posted:Were most of those deaths attributable to a variety of European diseases, or was it mostly all smallpox? The first outbreak of smallpox in Tenochtitlan killed 50% of the city's population. Other diseases had heavy tolls, but smallpox hit first and hardest. ookuwagata posted:I recall learning that when the Polynesians were settling the Pacific (up to around 700 CE), that they typically brought with them a cache of crops to help them survive. Among the typical assortment of Asian crops, like taro, banana and breadfruit, one of them was the sweet potato, an indisputably American crop. Is there any evidence of contact between the Polynesians and either Mesoamerica or South America in the Americas? From hearsay, there was actually one crop believed to be adopted by the polynesians from the Americas. I believe the estimated point of contact is in southern california. This is just what I heard though, I haven't read any credible journal articles on the subject. They could have also made contact with Mesoamerica or the Andes, but the odds of us finding any evidence for a single visit by polynesians is next to nothing. Phobophilia posted:I do remember hearing somewhere about pre-Columbus trade between Siberia and Alaska, with metal artefacts being found along the coast. I can't find a source, how credible is this? I don't know. However, the current theory for the population of the Americas is that groups from Siberia hopped along coastal islands in watercraft. I see no reason why this couldn't have continued after the land bridge flooded. The Aleutian archipelago connects the two continents, after all.
|
| # ? Aug 1, 2012 14:51 |
|
|
Giant Isopod posted:When I went on a tour of Chichen Itza the tour guide was very emphatic that it was the winners sacrificed. All the books and literature we got on the same trip said the opposite, so I'm pretty curious as well. 
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 00:05 |
|
|
If you don't mind answering another question, I'm really curious about fashion of the various cultures. The pictures were interesting, but was that daily wear? What did their day to day clothing look like? And since apparently cotton was for rich people, what did commoners wear material wise? Also any clue on modesty norms? You did say the Tarascan men could go pantsless.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 17:48 |
|
|
For the Aztecs men wore long, wrap-around loincloths and squared capes. The women wore long wrap-around dresses and a huipil, an embroidered blouse. Tarascan men wore tight fitting breeches and a tunic. Their women wore tight fitting short skirts with checkered patterns and a mini-mantle that failed to cover their breasts. And someone had asked about similarities between Mississippian cultures and Mesoamerica. There are similarities found in religion which may be due to the fact that it followed the path maize took as it spread throughout North America. The religious aspect followed after the spread of maize, however, not with it. So while East Coast natives had maize, the religious connotations that Mesoamerica had did follow with. This may have been because of the collapse of Cahokia which had adopted some of the aspects as it built its own empire. Check out the book below on Cahokia for an okay overview and then delve into the subject more if you're interested. Some users mentioned they wanted a list of literature. I have a running list of books I like to give people to check out if they are interested. Aztec: The Aztecs by Michael Smith Daily Life of the Aztecs by Jacques Soustelle The Broken Spears by Miguel Leon-Portilla The Aztec World by Elizabeth Brumfiel and Gary Feinman Maya: Chronicle of the Maya Kings and Queens by Simon Martin and Nikolai Grube Maya Cosmos by David Freidel and Linda Schele The Code of Kings by Linda Schele and Peter Matthews The Classic Maya by Stephen Houston and Takeshi Inomata New Perspectives on Urbanism in the Old and New World by Joyce Marcus and Jeremy Sabloff Houses in the Landscape by Julia Hendon The Memory of Bones: Body, Being, and Experience among the Ancient Maya by Stephen Houston (pronounced House-ton), David Stuart, and Karl Taube New Perspectives on Human Sacrifice and Violence in Mesoamerica by Vera Tiesler and Andrea Cucina Interpreting Ancient Figurines: Context, Comparison, and Prehistoric Art by Richard Lesure Palaces of the Ancient New World by Susan Toby Evans and Joanne Pillsbury The Archaeology and Politics of Food and Feasting in Early States and Empires by Tamara Bray Inca: The Last Days of the Incas by Kim MacQuarrie The Incas by Terence D'Altroy Misc: 1491 by Charles C. Mann Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond Brutal Journey by Paul Schneider Tariacuri's Legacy The Prehispanic Tarascan State by Helen Pollard The Conquest of Michoacan by J. Benedict Warren Cahokia by Timothy R. Pauketat (take it with a grain of salt, use it as a stepping stone for more research) As an aside, Snickeringshadow, I would not go around claiming contacts between the American Southwest, West Mexico, and Ecuador. While there are indicators that may point to such a thing, there is no definitive proof. That does not mean proof cannot be found, just keep your eyes out. You are not the only who thinks this, however. You have allies scattered here and there (like me), we just need the hard proof to make it fact. Ironically I also am a grad student wishing to pursue research in Western Mexico. Here's the kicker for irony, I'm in Denver.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 18:47 |
|
|
Amazing thread, OP. You clearly love what you're studying and it shows. I have a question but it's a bit...meta? It's more about the field of mesoamerican studies than any particular facet of mesoamerican civilizations. Basically, I know Mormons believe that some Mesoamerican people are related to characters/nations depicted in their sacred text (The Book of Mormon). Now, I'm sure that this is an view that will get you laughed out of any reputable archaeology program, but do you know of any cases of Mormon archaeologists or apologists disputing or attempting to discredit mesoamerican studies? Do Mormons attempt to influence mesoamerican research? Or is it just a wacky idea that you and your colleagues hear about from time to time?
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 18:55 |
|
|
I've never heard of any Mormon archaeologist trying to discredit others. It's kind of hard to do since their own research does not churn up any real proof.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 19:21 |
|
|
Caustic Chimera posted:If you don't mind answering another question, I'm really curious about fashion of the various cultures. The pictures were interesting, but was that daily wear? What did their day to day clothing look like? And since apparently cotton was for rich people, what did commoners wear material wise? Also any clue on modesty norms? You did say the Tarascan men could go pantsless. Men typically wore a loincloth and mantle/cape or tunic. The mantle was often just a cloth tied around the shoulders and wrapped around the body for warmth. When working or in hot weather, they would often ditch the mantle and just wear a loincloth.  (A colonial era illustration showing men wearing loincloths and mantles). Tunics were normally reserved for more specific uses, such as covering for armor during war. Among the Tarascans, the loincloth was optional if you were wearing a mantle or tunic. Tarascan men would often "go commando", so to speak. The Aztecs considered this proof of the inferiority and promiscuity of Tarascan culture. (The Aztecs considered a loincloth essential, and not wearing one was considered "public nudity", punishable by death) Women's dress was usually a bit more modest. They wore a cloth skirt with a particular kind of dress called a quechquemitl. This is a rectangular cloth placed over the shoulders that covered the torso. Amongst most mesoamerican cultures, both a skirt and a quechquemitl was considered required wear for women. Going without either was considered nude. However, there are several cultures in the more tropical lowlands where women would routinely go topless, wearing only a skirt.  (A modern indigenous woman wearing a quechquemitl) Ornamentation, including necklaces, ear-spools (like modern "gauged earrings"), and lip studs were usually common among (and often restricted to) the nobility. Hair styles varied substantially over time, but both men and women usually wore their hair long. In some cultures men would tie their hair up in topknots, not dissimilar from those worn in ancient Japan. Facial hair was common among some cultures, but most Mesoamericans considered it unattractive. Those born with beards often shaved them. The one really strange culture was the Huaxtecs from the mountains on the northeastern corner of Mesoamerica. They wore clothing for warmth, but during hot days both men and women would go completely naked. They're the only culture that I know of that lived in cities but didn't wear clothing. Verendus posted:As an aside, Snickeringshadow, I would not go around claiming contacts between the American Southwest, West Mexico, and Ecuador. While there are indicators that may point to such a thing, there is no definitive proof. That does not mean proof cannot be found, just keep your eyes out. You are not the only who thinks this, however. You have allies scattered here and there (like me), we just need the hard proof to make it fact. Ironically I also am a grad student wishing to pursue research in Western Mexico. Here's the kicker for irony, I'm in Denver. The idea of inter-regional contacts has been very controversial for decades, but most experts I talk to today are pretty convinced of it. Hellen Pollard, Chris Fisher, and as I already mentioned, Dorothy Hosler, three prominent West Mexican scholars, have pretty much accepted the idea that metallurgy came from Ecuador. Steve Lekson's theory that the American Southwest had close ties with Mesoamerica during the age of Chaco Canyon is much more controversial, though think I noted that in my post on that topic. Regardless, geologists have confirmed that much of the turquoise used in Mesoamerican art came from the American Southwest. So there had to be some kind of trade, even if its by proxy with nomadic chichimecs. You're right in that we have no "proof" of direct contact, but I think that's a tough thing to find in archaeology. All you can really get is a bunch of circumstantial evidence. So you're in Denver? Wow, small world. What university specifically? If you find yourself ever visiting the CSU campus in Fort Collins, see if you can track me down in the Mesoamerican archaeology lab. I have a feeling I'll be spending a lot of time there this semester. Maybe we can go get a beer or something. Radio Talmudist posted:Amazing thread, OP. You clearly love what you're studying and it shows. The mormon group doing archaeological research on the Maya is the New World Archaeological Society. I'm not all that familiar with them, but from what I understand, they're kind of moving away from that whole "lost tribes of Israel" hypothesis since the evidence doesn't fit it. In recent decades they've actually started doing really good research. I also hear (again, just hearsay) that there have been some recent political conflicts between the New World Archaeological Society and the mormon church, which funds them. Mostly due to the fact that mormon archaeologists aren't willing to push the official interpretation any more.
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 19:30 |
|
|
I'm at UC Denver studying under Christopher Beekman. If I ever do find my way down to Fort Collins, I will. By the way, a little bird told me that Fisher got the funds to do more of his LiDAR stuff. Are you going to be able to help him out on that?
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 20:05 |
|
|
Verendus posted:I'm at UC Denver studying under Christopher Beekman. If I ever do find my way down to Fort Collins, I will. Yeah, he actually now has a full LiDAR map of his site, Sacapu Angamuco. And it is wicked cool. Right now most of the work is in correlating survey/GIS data with the LiDAR data, and I'll probably get to do some of that starting in the spring. I'm very excited; I've never really done any GIS work, so this will be a new experience. Beekman works in Jalisco, right? I really don't know much about Jalisco. Didn't the shaft-tomb culture have some presence there? What time periods/cultures is he studying?
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 22:40 |
|
|
Oh man, that is going to be so much fun. You've seen the Caracol stuff, right? Not that you have to deal with jungle, but still. Last I heard he was working in Jalisco. I'm not entirely sure what he's working on now. I'm just a first year grad student. And I don't know too much about the shaft tomb culture other than that made shaft tombs in Western Mexico. I just finished my undergrad at SUNY Albany where most of the Meso studies were Mayan. They had an Aztec guy, but he mainly taught grad classes. What I know of Western Mexico I've had to go out and comb through databases and libraries which isn't much. I'm hoping Beekman can help me out. What are your research interests in Western Mexico?
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 23:07 |
|
|
It's already been explained well why weapons made of stone were preferred over bronze but I don't understand why nobody made bronze armour. Wouldn't metal helmets, shields and mail, no matter how soft, be superior to plain cloth?
|
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 23:24 |
|
|
Originally, I wanted to study the effects of endemic warfare on Matlatzinca and Otomí refugee communities living along the Tarascan/Aztec frontier. The Tarascans basically took all the refugees fleeing the Aztecs and gave them land along their eastern border, provided they agreed to garrison the border forts. I thought it would be interesting to see how their culture changed as a result of this relocation. Unfortunately, the La Familia Michoacana cartel has decided to turn that entire region into a giant series of pot farms. So walking around those mountains with a GPS and a camera taking samples would not be an especially bright idea. I have no desire to get shot by Mexican drug cartels. So now I'm kind of in the same boat as you. Chris Fisher works mostly in the Early Postclassic Patzcuaro Basin, just prior to the rise of the Tarascan Empire. So I'll probably end up doing something there for the MA thesis. Beyond that, I'll figure it out as I go. EDIT: IM_DA_DECIDER posted:It's already been explained well why weapons made of stone were preferred over bronze but I don't understand why nobody made bronze armour. Wouldn't metal helmets, shields and mail, no matter how soft, be superior to plain cloth? I don't know. I would imagine that it became a sort of chicken-and-egg thing. Why build better armor if your current armor defended fine against most attacks with current weapons? The quilted cotton armor could have withstood most weapon strikes except a direct hit with a melee weapon. And at that point, your wooden shield would help too. I also think the tropical climate probably made heavy armor somewhat impractical. Even the conquistadors ditched most of their metal armor (except breastplate and helmet) after they arrived. Finally, walking around in plate mail slows you down a lot. Most of the heavy armored troops of Europe fought on horseback, and Americans had no horses. Snickeringshadow fucked around with this message at Aug 2, 2012 around 23:31 |
| # ? Aug 2, 2012 23:25 |
|
|
Verendus posted:Oh man, that is going to be so much fun. You've seen the Caracol stuff, right? Not that you have to deal with jungle, but still.
|
| # ? Aug 3, 2012 00:52 |
|
|
Snickeringshadow posted:Originally, I wanted to study the effects of endemic warfare on Matlatzinca and Otomí refugee communities living along the Tarascan/Aztec frontier. The Tarascans basically took all the refugees fleeing the Aztecs and gave them land along their eastern border, provided they agreed to garrison the border forts. I thought it would be interesting to see how their culture changed as a result of this relocation. grover posted:Can you post some of the research you're talking about? https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...LcrNov0g7YCrH4w
|
| # ? Aug 3, 2012 01:15 |
|
|
Verendus posted:That is unwise, to be sure. I wish I had known about Fisher when I was applying for school otherwise I would have applied to CSU. My main interests are state formation of the early Tarascan Empire along with long distance trade they conducted. My advise: Go meet with him. Just because you're not at the same university doesn't mean you can't collaborate with him, especially since FoCo's only an hour and a half away from Denver. Chris Fisher's a good guy. While I can't speak for him, I bet if you showed enough interest he'd be open to having you work on a project. Verendus posted:[url]https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:bQ3eoJBCWokJ:http://www.caracol.org/include/file...LcrNov0g7YCrH4w[/url] For the tl;dr crowd, LiDAR is an advanced mapping technology that uses lasers mounted on high-altitude aircraft to map structures of things underneath trees and dirt. For archaeologists, this is pretty much the coolest thing ever. It allows us to see entire cities before we excavate them, as this work at the Maya city of Caracol shows. By correlating it with GPS/GIS data, you can easily use a hand-held gps device to show your relative position within the city while exploring. Snickeringshadow fucked around with this message at Nov 9, 2012 around 06:00 |
| # ? Aug 3, 2012 01:51 |
|
|
Snickeringshadow posted:For the tl;dr crowd, LiDAR is an advanced mapping technology that uses lasers mounted on high-altitude aircraft to map structures of things underneath trees and dirt. For archaeologists, this is pretty much the coolest thing ever. It allows us to see entire cities before we excavate them, as this work at the Maya city of Caracol shows. By correlating it with GPS/GIS data, you can easily use a hand-held gps device to show your relative position within the city while exploring. grover fucked around with this message at Aug 3, 2012 around 02:01 |
| # ? Aug 3, 2012 01:55 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2013 06:01 |
|
|
Either of you want to expand on this shaft tomb culture? (I assume that's this? ) I've never heard of that before and that article was pretty interesting.IM_DA_DECIDER posted:It's already been explained well why weapons made of stone were preferred over bronze but I don't understand why nobody made bronze armour. Wouldn't metal helmets, shields and mail, no matter how soft, be superior to plain cloth? Wouldn't that be hot as all hell in that area? Heat has always been a problem with armor.
|
| # ? Aug 3, 2012 16:41 |
|
