Submitted by MeatballDom t3_10lmt79 in history
dhrisc t1_j607nog wrote
Reply to comment by offu in Dozens of pre-Hispanic Zapotec tombs found in San Pedro Nexicho in Mexico by MeatballDom
Aztec history is fun to me because it really is so recent but it gets treated like its ancient. It put everything into context when i learned that teotihuacan was already an abandoned mystery (at least to them) by the time the aztecs showed up.
offu t1_j60b6j8 wrote
I absolutely love that the Aztecs were fascinated with Teotihuacan.
Similar claims are made today about the Inca as though they were ancient, when we know there were ancient civilizations along the Peruvian coast thousands of years prior link
Or this 3,000 year old Chinese text talking about old writings “‘What did the ancient classic "Zhou Shu(周書)" mean by the sentence that Zhong and Li caused the heaven and earth to disconnect from each other?’ “. So 3,000 years ago the Chinese were talking about ancient stuff. link
Or people being shitty tourists 2,000 years ago link
I love ancient people, and people don’t change that much.
Khwarezm t1_j61bhvw wrote
The Incas held a polity called Tiwanaku in high regard that came before them, even though their own empire had more in common with a different state called the Wari empire.
Tiwanaku is super weird btw, it gets called an empire but it doesn't really seem to have much in common with any other empire that comes to mind, including the Incas, there's not much sign that it was a militaristic state and instead it almost comes across as an extremely popular religious centre.
Eldrxtch t1_j649v6y wrote
this also makes me think of Homer’s Iliad. That was an ancient Greek writing about even more ancient greeks
secretly_a_zombie t1_j60slqn wrote
The Aztecs, Mayas, Incas are "ancient" in the way that their way of life is similar to other ancient empires. What makes them interesting is that they're huge "ancient" empires living in close to modern day. It's like being able to step into Babylon and/or the Assyrians. Except we have more than buried ruins and scattered texts, we have actual cities, documents describing meeting these people and how they lived, actual recent descendants, it's getting to peek into ancient life.
Not trying to detract but these empires really are on a level on their own in just how interesting and helpful they are to understanding human history.
Bem-ti-vi t1_j61iyin wrote
How was life in Tenochtitlan or Inka Cusco more similar to the ancient Middle East than other places/times?
bjbark t1_j62g20o wrote
The tools they used were more similar to the tools used in ancient Middle Eastern societies, which would effect many aspects of life. Their weapons were largely made of wood and sharpened stone. They had no practical applications for the wheel. Only scant evidence exist for any use of sails. Not to say they didn’t have advanced or complex societies, but only the Maya and Olmec had a Bronze Age, and none had reached the Iron Age by the time the Spanish arrived.
Bem-ti-vi t1_j62j6ps wrote
>Their weapons were largely made of wood and sharpened stone
And the Assyrians largely used metal weapons.
>They had no practical applications for the wheel.
[The Assyrians did](https://arkeonews.net/chariots-in-neo-assyrian-army/#:~:text=Chariots%20were%20the%20most%20significant,(888%2D884%20BC).
>but only the Maya and Olmec had a Bronze Age
The Stone Age/Bronze Age/Iron Age paradigm is based on a specific European historical process that is very different from what happened in many other parts of the world. Pretty much none of the Americas fits this model. Many societies - the Muisca, Aztec, Mixtec, and others - had complex and advanced metallurgical traditions even as they generally didn't use those technologies for utilitarian purposes. Others, like the Purepecha and Inka, made use of metal weapons and tools in certain contexts while still using stone and wood in others, often again while dedicating the most complex metallurgical processes to religious and ostentatious creations.
The three-age system often breaks down in many parts of Africa and Southeast Asia, too. If you're interested in reading more about contemporary archaeologists' critiques of this system, I'm happy to share some articles.
There's no denying that Indigenous American societies such as those of the Maya, Zapotec, Chimor, and others were highly complex. So were those of the ancient Middle East. But they weren't as generally similar as I think is being argued on the basis of them both not fitting the Iron Age or characteristics of 16th century Western Europe.
missanthropocenex t1_j62acvn wrote
Reminds of the whole Cleopatra was closer to our time than the ancient Egyptians timeline thing.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments