Bloodlust has been the driving force in the formation and persistence of empires since humanity’s manifestation. The Romans, Spanish, Mongols, and British are a small example of groups that both rose to power and expanded through the merciless slaughter of thousands, simply to satisfy their own greed and yearning to conquer. Yet for some reason it seems to be common Western practice to reflect upon these “great conquerors” and praise their accomplishments, while simultaneously berating the “savage” and “blood thirsty” civilizations of Central America, specifically the Aztecs. This is in its essence is both historically inaccurate and hypocritical, and no doubt the result of ignorance and denial. In his travel literature book Daily Life of the
…show more content…
While the primary motivation for war in other past civilizations was greed or political rivalries, sometimes under the guise of religious or just causes, sometimes not, the Aztecs were driven by what they perceived to be a necessity to maintain the balance of the world. They cite their religious beliefs back to the “Four Hundred Cloud serpents” who had lost their way in worshipping the sun, and as a result faced their demise at the end of the godly war. These people believed that waging war was what the gods wanted, and it is noted multiple times that they yearned for these practices to end. The main purpose of any war was to gain prisoners for sacrifice, which again, whilst now clearly abhorrent, was solely for religious purposes. “To keep the sun moving in its course, so that the darkness should not overwhelm the world forever, it was necessary to feed it every day with its food, ‘the precious water’—that is, with human blood” (Soustelle 96-97). The only way to avoid a global calamity therefore would be to find a way to select people as tribute—an act seen as honorable by all those …show more content…
Of course it must be noted that outside of their religious roots, war was also a tool for imperial use, but this also highlights the disparity between Aztec rule and those of Western empires. Instead of traversing the globe taking over people by force or trickery, the Mexicans were open to all and even kind to those who willingly joined them. They would be regarded as equals and allowed to keep their gods and practices, without even a tribute, as “everything would be based upon a friendly agreement” (Soustelle 206). When a group did decide to resist, which would eventually result in war, at least three rounds of ambassadors were sent with gifts and month long durations for decision until finally, war was inevitable. Even then the procedures were carried out very precisely with no side taking advantage of the other. “This whole behaviour, these embassies, speeches and gifts very clearly demonstrate the chivalrous ideal of the warrior in American antiquity” (Soustelle
While the primary motivation for war in other past civilizations was greed or political rivalries, sometimes under the guise of religious or just causes, sometimes not, the Aztecs were driven by what they perceived to be a necessity to maintain the balance of the world. They cite their religious beliefs back to the “Four Hundred Cloud serpents” who had lost their way in worshipping the sun, and as a result faced their demise at the end of the godly war. These people believed that waging war was what the gods wanted, and it is noted multiple times that they yearned for these practices to end. The main purpose of any war was to gain prisoners for sacrifice, which again, whilst now clearly abhorrent, was solely for religious purposes. “To keep the sun moving in its course, so that the darkness should not overwhelm the world forever, it was necessary to feed it every day with its food, ‘the precious water’—that is, with human blood” (Soustelle 96-97). The only way to avoid a global calamity therefore would be to find a way to select people as tribute—an act seen as honorable by all those …show more content…
Of course it must be noted that outside of their religious roots, war was also a tool for imperial use, but this also highlights the disparity between Aztec rule and those of Western empires. Instead of traversing the globe taking over people by force or trickery, the Mexicans were open to all and even kind to those who willingly joined them. They would be regarded as equals and allowed to keep their gods and practices, without even a tribute, as “everything would be based upon a friendly agreement” (Soustelle 206). When a group did decide to resist, which would eventually result in war, at least three rounds of ambassadors were sent with gifts and month long durations for decision until finally, war was inevitable. Even then the procedures were carried out very precisely with no side taking advantage of the other. “This whole behaviour, these embassies, speeches and gifts very clearly demonstrate the chivalrous ideal of the warrior in American antiquity” (Soustelle