You're viewing a single thread.
Aztecs didn't value gold all that much. If they put through the effort to smuggle anything it would have been cacao seeds or quetzal feathers.
Yep. Cacao seeds were used like currency.
Currency to buy what? To buy gold of course, which was a famous Aztec staple. They were very fond of it. Never heard the expressions "I hunger for gold", "as delicious as a gold ingot", "this cake must be made of gold"? All proofs of the sacred place of gold in the Aztec kitchen. It is known, look it up on YouTube.
You had me going for a second.
Got any utube videos about it?
I'm sorry, I only have a uarticle about it.
https://bigthink.com/sponsored/aztec-mesoamerican-chocolate-money/
As that article says, the Aztecs eventually realized that money that grew on trees was not the best idea.
Above everything, they valued human sacrifice, mainly from other nearby nations, which they would regularly raid for people to sacrifice. The Aztecs had every opportunity to just conquer these other, weaker nations, and specifically didn't so that they could farm them for human sacrifices.
When the conquistadors came over looking for gold, these weaker nations pointed to the Aztecs. Yeah, the Aztecs had gold, but the more important thing was getting the Europeans to point their boom sticks at the Aztecs, which they did.
After having subjugated the Aztecs, the Europeans were like, "Okay, maybe we can slow down here and turn these people into a vassal state," but those weaker tribes were like "Fuck that, the Aztecs are weak enough now for us to destroy them," and they took their revenge by completely annihilating the Aztecs.
The Aztecs were massive assholes, pretty much had it coming when it came to being obliterated, and the final blow was handed to them not by European conquerors, but by the enemies they'd made right next door.
I think the nation/tribe that were the Spanish collaborators you're referring to was Tlaxcala which were the target of habitual Flower Wars for captuered warrior sacrifice. The pleas of the Tenochca, the residents of Tenochtitlan, fell on deaf ears to the only other major power in the region the Purépecha Empire.
While Aztecs valued human sacrifice to a great extent it was due to the benefits it's bestowed in Mixtec-Pueblo culture. It was a source of not only spiritual reverence, but also military and economic superiority. It also had non domestic function as a diplomatic tool to visiting nobles and bounty haulers / tax collectors. Not to mention it served as a form of community entertainment in a similar fashion to European public executions.
As far as saying Europeans tried to slow down to make the Americas a vassal state is a misconception. Disease wiped out an apocalyptic amount of people. Following the fall of Tenochtitlan small pox ravaged the Valley of Mexico and all along the Gulf Coast. This nearly wiped out all infrastructure and Spain tried to subjugate the rest. Hilariously trying to impose a 30% tax written in Spanish and using that as a legal justification for military actions.
Oh sure, disease, I forgot about disease. How could I forget about that?
Anyway - Yes, there were public executions in Europe. Yes, other Mesoamericans employed human sacrifice. But the Aztecs did it to an exponentially higher amount, and with extreme cruelty.
I am confident in saying that the practice of human sacrifice is wrong, and that the imagined "benefits" were not achieved by state-driven mass murder.
European executions could be excessively cruel. Being burned alive, drowned, stoning, crucifixion, being eaten alive by rats escaping hot coals, or being locked in a cage to die from exposure is on the same level as having one's heart cut out or being shot with arrows. Europeans would impale men on pikes and the Tenochca would rack skulls, apples to oranges but it's all the same fruit.