6 ms·

How Aztecs Reacted to Colonial Epidemics

43 points by Thevet 6y ago

wombatmobile 6y ago
We Learned About the Aztecs From Their Conquerors—But New Research Is Letting Them Speak for Themselves BY CAMILLA TOWNSEND NOVEMBER 1, 2019 https://time.com/5715476/aztec-history-myths/ https://time.com/5715476/aztec-history-myths/
christkv 6y ago
The Aztecs pretty much the third reich of the new world can’t say they did not get what they deserved. Illness and epidemics have followed war and empire for ever just look at the history of plagues in Europe and enormous consequences it had for economy and political outcomes. The obsession of trying to pin guilt on one historic area or another is ridiculous. Last time I checked nobody has gotten a mea culpa from the mongols.
- mc32 6y ago
  A side note: when the Russian Empire expanded east that population movement also brought epidemics that decimated some populations that were not immune to them.
  - christkv 6y ago
    This whole need to create a narrative about all western history evil and then just ignoring history as a whole and that humans and human empires behave exactly the same no matter origin or creed is dishonest at best and malicious at worst.
    - Swenrekcah 6y ago
      I agree, it's a bit strange to pretend only colonial europeans were cruel. To the extent that cruelty is pointed out in order to make things better going forward, I'm all for that. But basically like you said, every empire throughout history was built on ruthlesness and cruelty, else it would not be an empire but a village. Our technology and knowledge today allows for better empires though, so we should demand better behaviour today.
      - christkv 6y ago
        In an ideal world we would have not empires but it’s not realistic due to human nature. Right now I would say there are two main empires. US and China and a set of second rate powers like the EU, India and Japan.
        kingkawn 6y ago
        The idea that any of us who are a product of this era of empire and its transparently hollow assumptions have a clue about “human nature” seems laughable
    - Frost1x 6y ago
      I think the need arises because it's often glossed over in public education--more of a corrective reaction. Western history, especially the US in US public education, often glosses over past atrocities committed. Maybe western civilizations aren't inherently more evil than others in some cases, but we also aren't inherently much less evil or were driven under some pure altruism as some may think.
      - mc32 6y ago
        But most education systems everywhere gloss over these kinds of things. Japan is a well known example, but do think Turkey indulges on the atrocities of the Ottoman Empire? Or the Chinese and their “internal” expansionism —now to be fair to the Chinese they often glorify things like the warring period and such, but it’s dressed differently.
        ivanbakel 6y ago
        What is the point of this whataboutism? Do you think that the revisionist policies of other countries somehow justify any ignorance on the part of people in the West with regard to their own history? There is no justification to the idea that a critical look at Western history is itself a criticism of Western countries as opposed to all others. The nations of the world are not all engaged in some zero-sum game of historical respect. Point-scoring, however, has a real and detrimental impact on discussions of history. It should only be used by people who hope to shut down any analysis of the realities of the past: and if you want to do that here, you should go elsewhere.
        Frost1x 6y ago
        I believe everyone should have similar education systems. The more we understand about others, our own history, and ourselves, the better we can make reasonable decisions in the future. If another country chooses to paint western civilization or the US negatively while ignoring their own baggage, then that’s their own ignorance. The same can be said about our civilizations painting others negatively awhile igoring our own past and engaging in hypocrisy. I believe education is the best path to progress forward and peaceful diplomacy, for everyone. Angry populations fed lies, foaming at the mouth for blood just doesn't seem like a good path forward and never has been.
    - disown 6y ago
      > This whole need to create a narrative about all western history evil You are building a strawman here. Nobody is saying all western history is bad ( as if there is such a thing really - there isn't ), but the west has been the source of most evil in the past few hundred years. > human empires behave exactly the same no matter origin or creed is dishonest at best and malicious at worst. No they have not. The greeks, japanese, romans, mongols, etc never had racial extermination campaigns like the british empire, the us empire, nazi germany, etc. That is a fairly new and uniquely western "ideal". That entire races had to be exterminated because they were native, aborigine, jewish, etc is something new. Sure cities were destroyed, people were persecuted, enslaved, etc in the past but you won't find many empires in the past that committed the atrocities that britain, nazis and we have. And the most evil singular acts in human history is easily hiroshima and nagasaki. And who committed those evil acts? You can argue that others would have been just as evil as the west if they had the power and I'd probably agree with that. But that isn't history, it's conjecture. And even if it was true, then it just shows we are no better than everyone else. Which runs counter to the dominant narrative that the west is "all good, perfect, civilized, etc". The narrative that the west is evil is needed because it's fundamentally true and we need to counter the dominant false narrative that the west is all good. How many millions have we butchered in iraq, vietnam, syria, central/south america, africa, etc all in the name of "western good"? Your sentiments are correct but you are misguided in your anger. You shouldn't be mad at the "west is evil" narrative. You should really be angry at the dominant "west is good" narrative.
- readarticle 6y ago
  This is actually an article recounting a few primary sources on the ground at the time of contact, and almost immediately mentions the Aztecs’ enemies in Tlaxcala and Chacla along with a cemetery study of the Mixtec—who suffered some of the worst of Aztec dominion—to describe the interplay between the effects of colonial policies and the “virgin soil” of the new world’s immune systems, which, naturally, weren’t limited to the “third reich” state in control at the time of contact.
  - baxtr 6y ago
    I like how your username fits your comment
  - christkv 6y ago
    I guess you skipped the conclusion at the end of the article which is a completely subjective and biased opinion. Centuries of colonial exploitation and violence have made the indigenous peoples of both Americas disproportionately vulnerable to current epidemics. What current is epidemics is this person fabulating about? COVID ?
    - watwut 6y ago
      > What current is epidemics is this person fabulating about? COVID ? Hmmm ... I wonder ... what could it be ... And i mean, admit the article is not just about Aztecks, but also about groups dominated by them.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  They were rather brutal warlike lot but to compare them to the third reich needs justifying - can you say why?. Also saying they got what they deserved is to condone genocide, and also to ignore what the conquistadors inflicted on them. Conquistadors were appalling people.
  - christkv 6y ago
    The conquistadors were opportunistic adventures who by luck happened into the most hated civilization in Mexico and was smart enough to leverage that hate to overthrow that empire. Epidemics are not genocide by any measure of definition. Empires then do what empires do which is to extract value out of their new holdings. Just like the Aztecs did before them. https://www.history.com/news/aztec-human-sacrifice-religion https://www.history.com/news/aztec-human-sacrifice-religion
    - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
      You give the conquistadors too much of a pass, and you don't say why the aztecs were "most hated civilization in Mexico". > Epidemics are not genocide by any measure of definition I suppose, but conquistadors liked their slaves, they used torture freely on anyone they felt like, they compared tenochtitlan to venice IIRC - and then set about destroying it. The native mexicans were subhumans to them (because they weren't christians I think was the main reason) and they treated them with incredible brutality. You whitewash the conquistadors by calling them "opportunistic adventure[r]s".
      - christkv 6y ago
        You are applying you modern bias to history. Whitewashing is religious term and shows a clear unwillingness to accept any narrative that does not fit a narrow domestic view of reality.
        throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
        And yours is the only unbiased view I'm sure. Whitewash: "to gloss over or cover up (something, such as a record of criminal behavior)" (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whitewash https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whitewash) I'm unaware of any religious aspect to the term. > and shows a clear unwillingness to accept... ... to accept your point of view, yes, correct. Provide facts and then we can talk.
- dang 6y ago
  You started a flamewar and then fed it. That's not cool. HN is for curious conversation, not ideological battle certainly not genocidal flamewar. Please don't do this again. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
roenxi 6y ago
It seems suspicious to me that the Europeans had a whole host of diseases that could wipe out a civilisation but the Americans had nothing comparable to affect Europeans. By symmetry, I expect there was some other force at work. Slavery/forced labour/wars and large-scale resettlements does sound plausible.
- martindbp 6y ago
  Eurasia is a bigger interconnected breeding ground for germs, plus more domesticated animals. "Guns, germs and steel" explains this in depth.
  - jacobush 6y ago
    Every reference to Guns, germs and steel should come with a cave-at.
    - solstice 6y ago
      Such as?
    - Munksgaard 6y ago
      What's the caveat? I just read it and thoroughly enjoyed it.
    - martindbp 6y ago
      What point of the book related to spread of disease do you have a problem with specifically? Every prominent book has critics, especially in non-hard sciences, that doesn't mean the book is wrong generally. As a general probabilistic diffusion framework, it makes total sense to me.
      - jacobush 6y ago
        It's the other points being made, one could get the idea that germs made Europeans stronger, but on the other hand, less germs could give a civilization a developmental edge. Europe lost probably hundreds of years of progress to the Black Death.
treis 6y ago
Am I the only one disappointed that an article entitled "How the Aztecs Reacted...." Contains seemingly no information about how they reacted?
- dmix 6y ago
  It’s mostly the authors reaction to western colonialism on western historical records. Especially the... odd ending of the article which seemed to have forgotten what the article was supposed to be about. Or maybe the headline was just deceiving.

43 points by Thevet 6y ago

We Learned About the Aztecs From Their Conquerors—But New Research Is Letting Them Speak for Themselves BY CAMILLA TOWNSEND NOVEMBER 1, 2019 https://time.com/5715476/aztec-history-myths/ https://time.com/5715476/aztec-history-myths/

christkv 6y ago

The Aztecs pretty much the third reich of the new world can’t say they did not get what they deserved. Illness and epidemics have followed war and empire for ever just look at the history of plagues in Europe and enormous consequences it had for economy and political outcomes. The obsession of trying to pin guilt on one historic area or another is ridiculous. Last time I checked nobody has gotten a mea culpa from the mongols.

mc32 6y ago
A side note: when the Russian Empire expanded east that population movement also brought epidemics that decimated some populations that were not immune to them.
- christkv 6y ago
  This whole need to create a narrative about all western history evil and then just ignoring history as a whole and that humans and human empires behave exactly the same no matter origin or creed is dishonest at best and malicious at worst.
  - Swenrekcah 6y ago
    I agree, it's a bit strange to pretend only colonial europeans were cruel. To the extent that cruelty is pointed out in order to make things better going forward, I'm all for that. But basically like you said, every empire throughout history was built on ruthlesness and cruelty, else it would not be an empire but a village. Our technology and knowledge today allows for better empires though, so we should demand better behaviour today.
    - christkv 6y ago
      In an ideal world we would have not empires but it’s not realistic due to human nature. Right now I would say there are two main empires. US and China and a set of second rate powers like the EU, India and Japan.
      - kingkawn 6y ago
        The idea that any of us who are a product of this era of empire and its transparently hollow assumptions have a clue about “human nature” seems laughable
  - Frost1x 6y ago
    I think the need arises because it's often glossed over in public education--more of a corrective reaction. Western history, especially the US in US public education, often glosses over past atrocities committed. Maybe western civilizations aren't inherently more evil than others in some cases, but we also aren't inherently much less evil or were driven under some pure altruism as some may think.
    - mc32 6y ago
      But most education systems everywhere gloss over these kinds of things. Japan is a well known example, but do think Turkey indulges on the atrocities of the Ottoman Empire? Or the Chinese and their “internal” expansionism —now to be fair to the Chinese they often glorify things like the warring period and such, but it’s dressed differently.
      - ivanbakel 6y ago
        What is the point of this whataboutism? Do you think that the revisionist policies of other countries somehow justify any ignorance on the part of people in the West with regard to their own history? There is no justification to the idea that a critical look at Western history is itself a criticism of Western countries as opposed to all others. The nations of the world are not all engaged in some zero-sum game of historical respect. Point-scoring, however, has a real and detrimental impact on discussions of history. It should only be used by people who hope to shut down any analysis of the realities of the past: and if you want to do that here, you should go elsewhere.
      - Frost1x 6y ago
        I believe everyone should have similar education systems. The more we understand about others, our own history, and ourselves, the better we can make reasonable decisions in the future. If another country chooses to paint western civilization or the US negatively while ignoring their own baggage, then that’s their own ignorance. The same can be said about our civilizations painting others negatively awhile igoring our own past and engaging in hypocrisy. I believe education is the best path to progress forward and peaceful diplomacy, for everyone. Angry populations fed lies, foaming at the mouth for blood just doesn't seem like a good path forward and never has been.
  - disown 6y ago
    > This whole need to create a narrative about all western history evil You are building a strawman here. Nobody is saying all western history is bad ( as if there is such a thing really - there isn't ), but the west has been the source of most evil in the past few hundred years. > human empires behave exactly the same no matter origin or creed is dishonest at best and malicious at worst. No they have not. The greeks, japanese, romans, mongols, etc never had racial extermination campaigns like the british empire, the us empire, nazi germany, etc. That is a fairly new and uniquely western "ideal". That entire races had to be exterminated because they were native, aborigine, jewish, etc is something new. Sure cities were destroyed, people were persecuted, enslaved, etc in the past but you won't find many empires in the past that committed the atrocities that britain, nazis and we have. And the most evil singular acts in human history is easily hiroshima and nagasaki. And who committed those evil acts? You can argue that others would have been just as evil as the west if they had the power and I'd probably agree with that. But that isn't history, it's conjecture. And even if it was true, then it just shows we are no better than everyone else. Which runs counter to the dominant narrative that the west is "all good, perfect, civilized, etc". The narrative that the west is evil is needed because it's fundamentally true and we need to counter the dominant false narrative that the west is all good. How many millions have we butchered in iraq, vietnam, syria, central/south america, africa, etc all in the name of "western good"? Your sentiments are correct but you are misguided in your anger. You shouldn't be mad at the "west is evil" narrative. You should really be angry at the dominant "west is good" narrative.
readarticle 6y ago
This is actually an article recounting a few primary sources on the ground at the time of contact, and almost immediately mentions the Aztecs’ enemies in Tlaxcala and Chacla along with a cemetery study of the Mixtec—who suffered some of the worst of Aztec dominion—to describe the interplay between the effects of colonial policies and the “virgin soil” of the new world’s immune systems, which, naturally, weren’t limited to the “third reich” state in control at the time of contact.
- baxtr 6y ago
  I like how your username fits your comment
- christkv 6y ago
  I guess you skipped the conclusion at the end of the article which is a completely subjective and biased opinion. Centuries of colonial exploitation and violence have made the indigenous peoples of both Americas disproportionately vulnerable to current epidemics. What current is epidemics is this person fabulating about? COVID ?
  - watwut 6y ago
    > What current is epidemics is this person fabulating about? COVID ? Hmmm ... I wonder ... what could it be ... And i mean, admit the article is not just about Aztecks, but also about groups dominated by them.
throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
They were rather brutal warlike lot but to compare them to the third reich needs justifying - can you say why?. Also saying they got what they deserved is to condone genocide, and also to ignore what the conquistadors inflicted on them. Conquistadors were appalling people.
- christkv 6y ago
  The conquistadors were opportunistic adventures who by luck happened into the most hated civilization in Mexico and was smart enough to leverage that hate to overthrow that empire. Epidemics are not genocide by any measure of definition. Empires then do what empires do which is to extract value out of their new holdings. Just like the Aztecs did before them. https://www.history.com/news/aztec-human-sacrifice-religion https://www.history.com/news/aztec-human-sacrifice-religion
  - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
    You give the conquistadors too much of a pass, and you don't say why the aztecs were "most hated civilization in Mexico". > Epidemics are not genocide by any measure of definition I suppose, but conquistadors liked their slaves, they used torture freely on anyone they felt like, they compared tenochtitlan to venice IIRC - and then set about destroying it. The native mexicans were subhumans to them (because they weren't christians I think was the main reason) and they treated them with incredible brutality. You whitewash the conquistadors by calling them "opportunistic adventure[r]s".
    - christkv 6y ago
      You are applying you modern bias to history. Whitewashing is religious term and shows a clear unwillingness to accept any narrative that does not fit a narrow domestic view of reality.
      - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
        And yours is the only unbiased view I'm sure. Whitewash: "to gloss over or cover up (something, such as a record of criminal behavior)" (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whitewash https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whitewash) I'm unaware of any religious aspect to the term. > and shows a clear unwillingness to accept... ... to accept your point of view, yes, correct. Provide facts and then we can talk.
dang 6y ago
You started a flamewar and then fed it. That's not cool. HN is for curious conversation, not ideological battle certainly not genocidal flamewar. Please don't do this again. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

roenxi 6y ago

It seems suspicious to me that the Europeans had a whole host of diseases that could wipe out a civilisation but the Americans had nothing comparable to affect Europeans. By symmetry, I expect there was some other force at work. Slavery/forced labour/wars and large-scale resettlements does sound plausible.

martindbp 6y ago
Eurasia is a bigger interconnected breeding ground for germs, plus more domesticated animals. "Guns, germs and steel" explains this in depth.
- jacobush 6y ago
  Every reference to Guns, germs and steel should come with a cave-at.
  - solstice 6y ago
    Such as?
  - Munksgaard 6y ago
    What's the caveat? I just read it and thoroughly enjoyed it.
  - martindbp 6y ago
    What point of the book related to spread of disease do you have a problem with specifically? Every prominent book has critics, especially in non-hard sciences, that doesn't mean the book is wrong generally. As a general probabilistic diffusion framework, it makes total sense to me.
    - jacobush 6y ago
      It's the other points being made, one could get the idea that germs made Europeans stronger, but on the other hand, less germs could give a civilization a developmental edge. Europe lost probably hundreds of years of progress to the Black Death.

treis 6y ago

Am I the only one disappointed that an article entitled "How the Aztecs Reacted...." Contains seemingly no information about how they reacted?

dmix 6y ago
It’s mostly the authors reaction to western colonialism on western historical records. Especially the... odd ending of the article which seemed to have forgotten what the article was supposed to be about. Or maybe the headline was just deceiving.