AZTEC GoDS

Religion is probably the biggest divider in world history, but for those that believe in God it is central to our existence. Share your views.
User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby Tre » May 6th, 2010, 6:16 am

Sentenza wrote:Me neither, im open to any evidence, i just think its weird how different people claim other peoples cultures again and again.

I feel you man, similar to how the Arab identity mistakenly claims indigenous African cultures and black populations found in its north.

~J~
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1193
Joined: November 20th, 2006, 7:11 pm
Country: Canada
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: 408

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby ~J~ » May 6th, 2010, 12:40 pm

Tre wrote:I feel you man, similar to how the Arab identity mistakenly claims indigenous African cultures and black populations found in its north.

No disrespect but do you see the irony here?.....

But in all fairness Eurocentrists have also tried to mislead people into believing some indigenous populations of the Americas as being European, but there's absolutely no facts and back those claims.

Furthermore, Afrocentrists have been mislead by poor racialist European scholars of the past and in turn are misleading their kin. I guess I can't blame you if you skim the surface and see some similarities, I can see how you'd think the Olmecs must have been Black, however, there are no facts to back that theory, all evidence points to the Olmecs being indigenous to the Americas and are more then likely and ancestors of Mayans people of Southern Mexico and Guatemala.

~J~
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1193
Joined: November 20th, 2006, 7:11 pm
Country: Canada
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: 408

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby ~J~ » May 6th, 2010, 4:39 pm

~J~ wrote:Furthermore, Afrocentrists have been mislead by poor racialist European scholars of the past and in turn are misleading their kin.

Excuse me, I didn't mean to say that these particular Scholars are bad at what they do but rather that their Olmec theory is flawed in this instance.

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby Tre » May 8th, 2010, 8:53 pm

~J~ wrote:... I can see how you'd think the Olmecs must have been Black, however, there are no facts to back that theory, all evidence points to the Olmecs being indigenous to the Americas and are more then likely and ancestors of Mayans people of Southern Mexico and Guatemala.

You make it sound like the Mayans was homogenous like the Aztecs, when in fact they were just different sets (kingdoms) squabbin with one another. According to Peter A. Underhill he came across a Mayan with a African Y chromosome. If there was no Pre-Columbian African contact 'like you suggest J' then where did this Mayan come from??

“One Mayan male, previously shown (12) to have an African Y
chromosome, had the 194-bp C haplotype. Within native
Americans, the 186-bp C haplotype was observed in Eskimos,
Navajos, and some other North American Indian populations
(data not shown).”


http://www.pnas.org/content/93/1/196.full.pdf
A pre-Columbian Y chromosome-specific transition and its
implications for human evolutionary history

~J~
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1193
Joined: November 20th, 2006, 7:11 pm
Country: Canada
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: 408

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby ~J~ » May 9th, 2010, 3:16 am

Okay, fair enough.I guess I went about it not saying it quite right. my understanding is there was some type of relationship between the Olmecs and Mayans. It's believed Olmecs influenced 'em and they interchanged with one another, so it seems they were related in ways and shared ideas, so yes, they're not necessarily the same entities.

As far as the one Mayan individual having a African Y chromosome, I suspect and all but almost guarantee it's do to post Colombian admixture. I believe I posted a video/s that addresses that. here they are >>>

Part.1


Part.2

Sentenza
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 6509
Joined: January 17th, 2005, 10:48 am
Country: Germany
If in the United States: American Samoa
What city do you live in now?: WestBerlin
Location: Overseas

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby Sentenza » May 9th, 2010, 11:02 am

Tre wrote:I feel you man, similar to how the Arab identity mistakenly claims indigenous African cultures and black populations found in its north.


Well there are a lot of "Arabized" black people in the north who consider themselves Middle Easterners, but with Nubians for example its different they have some sort of local rivalry going on dissing each other and making jokes about each other, even though both are Muslim.
And yes, Arabs see themselves as the heirs and children of ancient egyptian culture, which i dont think is true, because its older then any arab tribe.

~J~
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1193
Joined: November 20th, 2006, 7:11 pm
Country: Canada
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: 408

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby ~J~ » March 4th, 2011, 4:47 am

Continuation.....

The videos speak for themselves and in fact have many citations to sources you can look into, they do a very good job at explaining Olmec probability and refuting African Pre-Colombian influence etc in the Americas.

Ivan van Sertima was a main proponent for this, it's my understanding that he refused to reply to Mesoamericans scholars who article was published in Current Anthropology. they refuted his theory, and in fact most scholars dismiss Sertima conclusions as pseudoscience and purely speculation that has no foundation or historical evidence to back such claims.

I can post more videos or articles that do a good job on explaining this further.

About your question Tre... again, Pre-Colombian as in before 1492. are you talking about the Washitaw or Yamasee 'Black Indians'? I'll get back to you about this later.

mayugastank
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1708
Joined: July 4th, 2008, 9:41 pm
Country: United States
If in the United States: Arkansas
What city do you live in now?: Whittier

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby mayugastank » March 18th, 2011, 5:02 am

Tre is a head case.

The 3 main racial categories are surely the well known caucasians/mongoloids/africans...........they number the highest in populations as well.......is it any wonder that at leats a smidget of the African genes would be found amongst Americas early inhabitants? To up them in any numbers here is lunacy! and everyone knows the Americas Americans are actually mongolians who crossed the bering straight. Shoot I learned that in kingergarden......and I didnt even learned to spell der.......dummy.

mayugastank
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1708
Joined: July 4th, 2008, 9:41 pm
Country: United States
If in the United States: Arkansas
What city do you live in now?: Whittier

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby mayugastank » March 18th, 2011, 5:14 am

The truth is the “Out of Africa” theory offends racist and those that impute racial meaning into cultural practices because it proposes that blacks entered Europe as the first modern humans.




So......this modern man who was originally from Africa had the same culture and looks and skin tone as present day Africans? The creation story of Genesis ( granted its early mans interpretation of events as best as he could explain them) says that Cain after killing his brother was worried that he would be killed by man who resided on the outskirts of his home................who was this man that Cain feared and what race was he? If modern man originated from Africa --the Genesis story surely has truth to it......but the Garden of Eden was supposedly located in the Iraq( mesopotemia area) this also explains the Sumerian culture as mans first modern culture...remeber the Sumerians vividly speak about the beginings of man and Africa is not mentioned as the birthplace of man at all. Their story which is currently the oldest story on Earth says that man originated in the lands of the middle east---that man was created and they also mention a sort of man who he was created from...........(the missing link?cavemen?) The book of Job also speaks of a remnant of Cavemen who lived on earth ----and were descendants of what man used to be............again with the story that their were differing races from the gate.

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby Tre » March 20th, 2011, 1:06 am

~J~ wrote:Continuation.....

The videos speak for themselves and in fact have many citations to sources you can look into, they do a very good job at explaining Olmec probability and refuting African Pre-Colombian influence etc in the Americas.

Ivan van Sertima was a main proponent for this, it's my understanding that he refused to reply to Mesoamericans scholars who article was published in Current Anthropology. they refuted his theory, and in fact most scholars dismiss Sertima conclusions as pseudoscience and purely speculation that has no foundation or historical evidence to back such claims.

Actually it was a Mexican scholar and archeologist by the name of 'Jose Maria Y Serrano' that discovered, excavated the Olmec heads and based on first hand knowledge concluded...
"I concluded that there had doubtless been blacks (Negroid) in this region, and from the very earliest ages of the world."
Jose Maria Y Serrano


You are misguided ~J~

Here you got your OWN people trying to educate you man, but instead of deferring to their expertise you would rather pick arguments with the Afro centrist.

The only people I know of whom make the term “Afro centrist” to be a negative term are usually hate groups or just plain HATERS, similar to the HATE you feel (at least that's what you tell us) every time you see a black man dating a fine ass latina!

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby Tre » March 20th, 2011, 1:10 am

mayugastank wrote:Tre is a head case.

The 3 main racial categories are surely the well known caucasians/mongoloids/africans...........they number the highest in populations as well.......is it any wonder that at leats a smidget of the African genes would be found amongst Americas early inhabitants? To up them in any numbers here is lunacy!

Here we go with the racial BS.
How do you think the rest of the world became populated Mayuga?? Where do you think your SO-CALLED MONGOLIANS ORIGINATED FROM?
Africans are responsible for Mongolians... you just never heard of Leucistic Albinos or Partial Albinos.

mayugastank wrote:and everyone knows the Americas Americans are actually mongolians who crossed the bering straight. Shoot I learned that in kingergarden......and I didnt even learned to spell der.......dummy.

Recent Mitochondrial DNA testing debunks the whole Bering Strait theory. In fact test result show that specific types of DNA that exist in Tuvas, Mansi, Chukchi and Siberian Eskimos, are absent in other Native Americans.

Furthermore, three sub-clades [DNA groupings] - C1b, C1c and C1d - that incorporates nearly every Native American group in the New World is absent in Asia. Thus supporting the theory that every single group can trace their distant past back to Africa.


Sources: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Ad ... ne.0000829
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/ingman.html

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby Tre » March 20th, 2011, 1:18 am

mayugastank wrote:The truth is the “Out of Africa” theory offends racist and those that impute racial meaning into cultural practices because it proposes that blacks entered Europe as the first modern humans..
So......this modern man who was originally from Africa had the same culture and looks and skin tone as present day Africans?


Well first theres no such thing as cultural hegemony. .. as far as looks and skin tone as present day Africans... You tell me Mayuga? All we have to do is look at the first wave of migration out of Africa the Aboriginals. Are their looks and skin tone the same as present day Africans?
ImageImageI ran into some aboriginals when I was in Sydney, I was looking to hook up with these white chicks at a club, but when I arrived there was this group of niggaz (aboriginals), near the club entrance. They were going around harassing white couples, and yelling racial epithets at them. While all this was going on I'm texting these females trying to get them to meet me outside, and their texting me to meet them inside the club. I didn't want to admit I just didn't want to deal with these niggaz whiling out near the club entrance. I was about to get back into my car and leave when I heard one of these niggaz (aboriginals) call out to me 'AMERICAN!' I was going to just ignore him, but then another aboriginal saluted me with the black fist, so I'm like Oh OK., they just trying to get to know a nigga. They started asking questions like what do black people in the US think about blacks in Australia. They asked me what part of the US I'm from, and when I mentioned LA... their eyes got really big! They didn't know a whole lot about other states, but because of Hip Hop they know about New York, Atlanta and L.A. One of them asked me if Obama gives us (blacks) free money. I had to explain to him that Obama is the president of everybody and not just black folks here in the US.

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby Tre » March 20th, 2011, 1:31 am

mayugastank wrote:The creation story of Genesis ( granted its early mans interpretation of events as best as he could explain them) says that Cain after killing his brother was worried that he would be killed by man who resided on the outskirts of his home................who was this man that Cain feared and what race was he? If modern man originated from Africa --the Genesis story surely has truth to it......but the Garden of Eden was supposedly located in the Iraq( mesopotemia area) this also explains the Sumerian culture as mans first modern culture...remeber the Sumerians vividly speak about the beginings of man and Africa is not mentioned as the birthplace of man at all. Their story which is currently the oldest story on Earth says that man originated in the lands of the middle east---that man was created and they also mention a sort of man who he was created from...........(the missing link?cavemen?) The book of Job also speaks of a remnant of Cavemen who lived on earth ----and were descendants of what man used to be............again with the story that their were differing races from the gate.


The Out Of Africa theory is based on REAL science, not stories from the bible Mayuga. Humans evolved over the last two million years in Africa and then gradually migrated to Europe, Asia, the South Pacific, and the Americas. There is ample evidence of this process, skeletal remains have been found and dated scientifically, along with the advancement of modern day Mitochondrial DNA testing .

I don't agree with your analysis on races Mayuga, but I do agree that from day one when albinos first appeared on the scene that indigenous groups have always viewed their arrival as something unnatural and suspicious. When black Africans with defective OCA2 genes suddenly started producing mulatto or European type offspring. No doubt this caused a great amount of fear and anxiety among many African tribes. While some tribes embraced and cared for their mulatto offspring, other African tribes excommunicated them, while others actively sought to maim and mutilate them. During the second (OOA) migration event, circa 50,000 B.C. eventually many of these Albinos left Africa looking for relief from the hot Sun. I don't doubt Mayuga that some of our bruthas that migrated 'Out of Africa' came into contact with archaic beings (Neanderthals), and was probably raped by them. Only to return to the interior of Africa time and time again, changed, wrecking havoc against its indigenous populations.
Image
Who knows what motivates or is hidden in the deep recesses of a mans mind ~Mayuga~ but like the old saying goes, 'You can never go home again.'
Don't think the maiming and mutilation of Albinos, for use in rituals, to an unknown god, was isolated to Africa.
Africa is just a microcosm of what was happening in other parts of the world.

Image
You can see similar rituals practiced by the Aztecs, where you have a God Huitzilopochtli instructing his people to sacrifice ALL albinos and light-skinned people in order to ward off potential doom.

~J~
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1193
Joined: November 20th, 2006, 7:11 pm
Country: Canada
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: 408

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby ~J~ » March 23rd, 2011, 12:41 am

Mayuga, African skin tone variation is/was the most diverse on earth and cultures are just as vast. it's my understanding that scholars can't tell you exactly how these first modern humans looked exactly. on the flip side a Jehovah's witness buddy said man was born along the Tigris–Euphrates river in Mesopotamia.

~J~
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1193
Joined: November 20th, 2006, 7:11 pm
Country: Canada
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: 408

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby ~J~ » March 23rd, 2011, 1:16 am

Tre wrote:Actually it was a Mexican scholar and archeologist by the name of 'Jose Maria Y Serrano' that discovered, excavated the Olmec heads and based on first hand knowledge concluded...

"I concluded that there had doubtless been blacks (Negroid) in this region, and from the very earliest ages of the world."
Jose Maria Y Serrano

Okay lets say he believed that, fine. we're talking 1860's here scholars have come a long way in learning about it since then and I'm telling you most believe Olmecs are native. there's just isn't 100% understanding of the culture as of yet to confirm that but there's little to no reason to inject the out of African theory if the Natives fit the bill just fine and all evidence points to as such. remember Occam's Razor "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity".

Eurocentrics have tried to claim native culture too. I focus on 'Afrocentrics' because they're the ones at the forefront in preaching this theory, I don't believe you're a bad guy Tre but apparently some of 'em have an agenda for whatever reasons to absorb native culture as African and it ain't right.

User avatar
AirportWorker1
Straw Weight
Straw Weight
Posts: 25
Joined: March 23rd, 2011, 5:08 pm
Country: United States
If in the United States: Arkansas
What city do you live in now?: WestLosAngeles

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby AirportWorker1 » June 18th, 2011, 10:20 pm

mayugastank wrote: To point out African populations of 2% and claim they have had an impact on Mexican culture is looney.

Tre wrote:Seriously 'Mayuga' how you can make statements like this when Mexico credits a black man 'Huitzilopochtli’ for naming them??
(Mexico comes from the name Mexica).

Huitzilopochtli wasn't a black man.In fact he wasn't even a real man but a myth,Tenoch's dream...

Say NO to Afro-centrism that's spreading like wild fire without much backing other meaningless absurd data.

Sentenza
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 6509
Joined: January 17th, 2005, 10:48 am
Country: Germany
If in the United States: American Samoa
What city do you live in now?: WestBerlin
Location: Overseas

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby Sentenza » June 20th, 2011, 2:24 pm

AirportWorker1 wrote:Huitzilopochtli wasn't a black man.In fact he wasn't even a real man but a myth,Tenoch's dream...

Say NO to Afro-centrism that's spreading like wild fire without much backing other meaningless absurd data.


Every "centrism" ist flawed. Because the world simply doesnt revolve only around certain people. As a matter of fact it doesnt need mankind at all.

User avatar
AirportWorker1
Straw Weight
Straw Weight
Posts: 25
Joined: March 23rd, 2011, 5:08 pm
Country: United States
If in the United States: Arkansas
What city do you live in now?: WestLosAngeles

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby AirportWorker1 » June 21st, 2011, 11:33 am

That was smart.


keyword: Afro-centrism

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby Tre » August 5th, 2011, 2:22 am

Like Sentenza says you will find errors on all sides of the spectrum, whether it's Afrocentric, Eurocentric, or what ~J~ espouses in his thread..."Indigenocentric thought"???
Actually Eurocentrics and Indigenocentrists are very similar. Both philosophies compliment one another and are very cozy with each other (like the MM & AB in our prison system). Both philosophies combine old colonial and antiquated anthropology with racist ideology from the past. A great example of this is the lie perpetrated by both Eurocentrics and Indigenocentrist that regardless of the fact that black people from Africa traveled 9,445 miles across oceans to New Guinea 40,000 years ago ... that no black people managed to migrate to America which is only 4,000 miles from the west coast of Africa???

Image

In my best Will Smith from "Bad Boys 2" voice, "That's that BS right there"!!! (lol)

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby Tre » August 6th, 2011, 2:10 am

AirportWorker1 wrote:Huitzilopochtli wasn't a black man.In fact he wasn't even a real man but a myth,Tenoch's dream...

We'll so is Tenoch for that matter... including Tenochs dream... its ALL myths!
In any event, Huitzilopochtli was REAL enough for the 25 million Aztecs that worshipped him! He was also REAL for the 600 Spaniards and their native allies that marched into the city of Tenochtitlan with the intent of destroying the black gods temple, images and statues!
Oftentimes myths are derived from distorted accounts of real historical events and people, storytellers repeatedly elaborating on a historical event until the heroes in those events become god-like! I once saw a Aztec god on a flying carpet, no doubt he was derived from an outside influence... individual or culture that they (the Aztecs) came in contact with...

Image
The (Aztec) God 'Homoyoca'

User avatar
AirportWorker1
Straw Weight
Straw Weight
Posts: 25
Joined: March 23rd, 2011, 5:08 pm
Country: United States
If in the United States: Arkansas
What city do you live in now?: WestLosAngeles

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby AirportWorker1 » August 27th, 2011, 11:51 am

Tre wrote:
AirportWorker1 wrote:Huitzilopochtli wasn't a black man.In fact he wasn't even a real man but a myth,Tenoch's dream...

We'll so is Tenoch for that matter... including Tenochs dream... its ALL myths!
In any event, Huitzilopochtli was REAL enough for the 25 million Aztecs that worshipped him! He was also REAL for the 600 Spaniards and their native allies that marched into the city of Tenochtitlan with the intent of destroying the black gods temple, images and statues!
Oftentimes myths are derived from distorted accounts of real historical events and people, storytellers repeatedly elaborating on a historical event until the heroes in those events become god-like! I once saw a Aztec god on a flying carpet, no doubt he was derived from an outside influence... individual or culture that they (the Aztecs) came in contact with...

Image
The (Aztec) God 'Homoyoca'

You must have some serious issues if you sincerely believe that a fully grown warrior popped out of a creatures womb armored to the teeth to kill his brothers and sisters for plotting to kill their mother...

Did the Aztecs (Mexica) worshipped Huitzilopoctli? Yes.Mexica were astronomers that seen him as a personification of the sun.Just as the Egyptians did with
Horus.

Now Tenoch is a different story.It was documented in their Codex of how and when they arrived at the promised land.To dismiss it as just a myth is foolish...



lol.and where did you come up with 25 mil number?

~J~
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1193
Joined: November 20th, 2006, 7:11 pm
Country: Canada
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: 408

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby ~J~ » August 28th, 2011, 1:04 am

AirportWorker, You're pissing in the wind debating/refusing this guy. the dude seem to believe the Black man is apparently the creator of just about everything historical. again, I can concede that the first modern human beings (until further notice) was likely out of South/West Africa, something Tre would've no problem whatsoever agreeing with.
I don't know if he got issues with Mexicans or what but his grasping at straws of "Black Olmecs" myths don't impress me none. so until modern Olmec scholars present significant evidence/artifacts to ties Tre arguments together, then we can reassess Olmec origin.

~J~
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1193
Joined: November 20th, 2006, 7:11 pm
Country: Canada
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: 408

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby ~J~ » August 28th, 2011, 1:09 am

~J~ wrote:I can concede that the first modern human beings (until further notice) was likely out of South/West Africa, something Tre would've no problem whatsoever agreeing with.

I meant East Africa.

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby Tre » August 28th, 2011, 11:00 pm

~J~ wrote:... I can concede that the first modern human beings (until further notice) was likely out of South/West Africa, something Tre would've no problem whatsoever agreeing with.

But what you cant concede ~J~ (or your Indigenocentric perspective won't allow you to concede) is that dark skin is the original state of modern humanity.
~J~ wrote: I don't know if he got issues with Mexicans or what but his grasping at straws of "Black Olmecs" myths don't impress me none. so until modern Olmec scholars present significant evidence/artifacts to ties Tre arguments together, then we can reassess Olmec origin.

Huh? Issues with Mexicans?? I actually respect your position ~J~ I just don't agree with it! I think its cool that we can go back and forth without having to bad mouth each other, but don't take my position so personally. I don't think liking or disliking Mexicans have anything to do with anything. Fact are facts... key Olmec areas like Veracruz has always been heavily concentrated by Africans and African Caribbean types. So until they come across evidence that disputes and predates the African skeletal evidence already found in Olmecland... I stand by my position. The presence of Black people in the Pre-Columbian Americas is copious. Just Google: Bonampak murals.

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby Tre » August 28th, 2011, 11:08 pm

AirportWorker1 wrote:You must have some serious issues if you sincerely believe that a fully grown warrior popped out of a creatures womb armored to the teeth to kill his brothers and sisters for plotting to kill their mother?

hmmmm... did you miss the part where I said myths are often exaggerated or distorted? So, what do you think exaggerated or distorted means?

AirportWorker1 wrote:Did the Aztecs (Mexica) worshipped Huitzilopoctli? Yes.Mexica were astronomers that seen him as a personification of the sun.Just as the Egyptians did with
Horus....?

The worship of black gods was a common occurrence in Pre-Columbian art and culture. One of the oldest surviving Aztec manuscripts depicts the god Huitzilopochtli as black.

As stated by Aristotle, "Men create the gods after their own image."
AirportWorker1 wrote:Now Tenoch is a different story.It was documented in their Codex of how and when they arrived at the promised land.To dismiss it as just a myth is foolish...?

Did you miss the part where I said Tenoch is believed by many historians to be in that same realm of mythology you place Huitzilopochtli in?? Both are derived from the exact same sources "Aztec Codices" You either accept it all, or don't accept any of it. I have no problem if you believe Huitzilopochtli is fictitious, but using one fictitious character (Tenoch) to dispel another fictitious character (Huitzilopochtli) is like concluding we'll Mickey Mouse must be fake because Donald Duck dreamed him up? In any case, whether you believe Huitzilopochtli or Tenoch to be real people or myths is inconsequential to this thread since one can believe both. Like in the case of the Homo-god (Homoyoca), I don't believe any real god needs a flying carpet to fly (fictitious), but I do believe the god represents a real life individual, or culture that they (the Aztecs) came in contact with. Unless you want to believe "Arabs" are trying to steal Aztec culture too?

AirportWorker1 wrote:lol.and where did you come up with 25 mil number?

The 25 mil number is an estimate that UC Berkeley scholars, geographers, demographers, and historians agree was the Aztec population when the Spanish arrived in 1519, they base their estimate on tribute records, geographical studies, and the carrying capacity of the land in accordance with a preindustrial setting.

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby Tre » August 28th, 2011, 11:11 pm

~J~ wrote:Okay lets say he believed that, fine. we're talking 1860's here scholars have come a long way in learning about it since then and I'm telling you most believe Olmecs are native. there's just isn't 100% understanding of the culture as of yet to confirm that but there's little to no reason to inject the out of African theory if the Natives fit the bill just fine and all evidence points to as such. remember Occam's Razor "entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity".

lol ... of course you don't want to link native culture with the "Out Of Africa Theory" because if you did your arguments would fall apart. Instead of repeating the lie that there is no DNA evidence, linking Africans with native culture, when we know European, and Native American ethnic groups are a part of our ancestral gene pool. You would be forced to accept the fact that the DNA studied and presented in the "Human Genome Project" provides proof that Mexico and central America from the very beginning has always been a "Ancient Melting Pot" of different groups, ethnic types and cultures from all over the world. You would also have to accept the fact that black people is not something regulated to a particular (culture) border or continent.

User avatar
AirportWorker1
Straw Weight
Straw Weight
Posts: 25
Joined: March 23rd, 2011, 5:08 pm
Country: United States
If in the United States: Arkansas
What city do you live in now?: WestLosAngeles

Re: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<>AZTEC G(())DS

Unread postby AirportWorker1 » September 30th, 2011, 4:31 pm

Tre wrote:Blah blah blah blah
One of the few surviving Aztec manuscripts that does not show European influence is ‘The Codex Borbonicus’ which was painted by Aztec priests shortly before or after the Spanish conquest of Mexico. In the ‘Codex Borbonicus’ the black god Huitzilopochtli is featured as 1 of the original 13 gods, many of whom are black. The worship of black gods was a common occurrence in Pre-Columbian art and culture. The Aztecs sometimes favored gods from other cultures and included them as a part of their pantheon/familia.

Image
Digital image of the god Huitzilopochtli from the Codex Borbonicus

Here's the actual picture from Codex Borbonicus of Huitzilopochtli...

Image

http://www.famsi.org/research/graz/borb ... age32.html

Codex Borbonicus
(Bibliothèque de l'Assemblée Nationale, Paris)

Doesn't look nothing like that Afro-centric artwork that backs up your gibberish.lol


"Huitchlipultli was born,carring a shield which was called teucueli,with one dart(arrow); both were blue (sheild and dart),and his (Huitchlipultli) face was
as if it were painted,and he wore on his head a plumage of pasted feathers;his left leg was thin and also feathered,and both thighs were painted alike in
blue".....-Sahagun's BookIII,Paragraph I.
Notice that Tre's Afro-centric pic,Huitzilopochtli's left leg is not thin as opposed to the actual pic from the Codex.


Next time try to provide some viable sources so that I may refute your claims.I know,you've mentioned "UC Berkeley scholars, geographers, demographers, and historians".But I want actual names,texts,or links.None of that Afro-centric shit either.

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby Tre » October 16th, 2011, 1:08 am

Image
You only skimmed the surface my dude. If you had actually went through the codex, and dug a little deeper you would have realized my picture is a digital representation, a composite of both gods of war found on page 36. I don’t see how my reproduction takes away or changes the fact that ‘Huitzilopochtli’ (one with his mask, the other without his mask) is portrayed as dark-skinned.

In fact if you google ‘Huitzilopochtli’ you can find various reproductions of your pic too from the exact same codex.
I am familiar with this specific pic of Huitzilopochtli, it’s used on many Aztlan Movement websites…
Image
Its funny how they all conveniently (just like you) ignore the black god(s) on page 36 of the codex. In the Aztlan movement they've brought in the Aztec heritage as part of their philosophical inspiration, for them there are no black people in the Aztec culture. La Raza comes first to these guys. They see themselves as a race unto themselves, and there's really not too much room for anybody else.
Image
“It is important to emphasize that the set of symbols used to designate a particular god was not fixed; a good deal of variation was possible. Huitzilopochtli could "wear" his hummingbird nahualli as a headdress, as a back device, or not at all. His shield could be decorated with a quincunx of feathers or remain plain.[17] These are but two of the many possible variations of the basic symbols suggesting the fluidity of the concept of the god. Rather than being a fixed, static entity in the minds of those who manipulated the symbol system, each god was clearly a set of traits, each to be "used" as it was needed.”

Markman, Roberta H., and Peter T. Markman Masks of the Spirit: Image and Metaphor in Mesoamerica. Berkeley: University of California Press, c1989 1989
AirportWorker1 wrote:
"Huitchlipultli was born,carring a shield which was called teucueli,with one dart(arrow); both were blue (sheild and dart),and his (Huitchlipultli) face was
as if it were painted,and he wore on his head a plumage of pasted feathers;his left leg was thin and also feathered,and both thighs were painted alike in
blue".....-Sahagun's BookIII,Paragraph I.

Another main staple of the god is his shield with five dots, illustrating the five directions of space. The pic you provided doesn’t show this.

ImageImage
But like the author expressed these concepts are far from fixed. So I wouldn’t get too caught up in that narrative you supplied me, otherwise you may miss the obvious (which you did), there are variances of Huitzilopochtli throughout the Borbonicus.
AirportWorker1 wrote:
Doesn't look nothing like that Afro-centric artwork that backs up your gibberish.lol

Wow… just ignore all 4 pages of the codex where the black god is featured, and focus on the 1 page (34) where you have some random light skin dude impersonating the god (God impersonator), that’s very euro-centric of you, I might add. Whether you believe the Aztecs numbered in the 25 million, 15 million, or 10 million, my main point is that the god of war was extremely popular in the Aztec circle of gods. Certain ethnic groups participated in Aztec festivities in different ways. In the case of Huitzilopochtli everyone wanted to play him or be him, but of course certain ethnicities were more adept at playing him than others. Aztec festivities are reminiscent to a Day of the Dead or Halloween party… whereby you’ll always have that one popular divinity or character that everyone wants to be, and each individual in attendance will have his own swag, take on the character. However there are some things that will remain consistent in order that you may identify the god being played. In the case of Huitzilopochtli, you will always find him bearing a serpent of wood (raised high up in his hands), called Ezoam’itl, and throughout the Borbonicus (with few exceptions), you will see him portrayed as black! Which brings up your picture….
Image
What you have pictured here is a scene called the Aztec ‘New Fire Ceremony’ that occurs every 52 years and culminates in a sacrifice. In fact if you look at the entire picture and not just the section you want us to see. You would see a bonfire being created for just that purpose. Likely, the man you see standing before you is the god impersonator about to be sacrificed.

Image
"Often in Aztec ceremonies, a person was chosen to play the role of a divinity for a time before being sacrificed to that divinity. The impersonator, or Ixiptla, was thought to become infused with the divinity’s "essence."

Christina M. Elson and Michael E. Smith ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEPOSITS FROM THE AZTEC NEW FIRE CEREMONY. Department of Anthropology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY

User avatar
Tre
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 426
Joined: May 8th, 2005, 6:19 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby Tre » October 16th, 2011, 1:22 am

AirportWorker1 wrote:That was smart.


keyword: Afro-centrism

This is really ignorant. I guess I shouldn't be surprised, this coming from someone that only scratches the surface and has a big hang-up with the word 'African-Centric' or Afro-Centric, because the word 'AFRO' is in it...lol. All you're doing is exposing yourself, letting me know how biased you are against any black person adding their perspective on anything you obviously feel close or attached to.
AirportWorker1 wrote:Next time try to provide some viable sources so that I may refute your claims.I know,you've mentioned "UC Berkeley scholars, geographers, demographers, and historians".But I want actual names,texts,or links.None of that Afro-centric shit either.

I really don’t get your fixation with the 25 million estimate? What is it? Is the number too small, too large for you? Is your afro phobia kicking in again? Or do you just enjoy arguing over irrelevant shit? I tell you what.. if you have your own personal number then post it already... or tell me your favorite expert(s) on the subject? It's really not all that serious to me man!

Image
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat0.htm

This seems to be a pattern with you.. your fixation over irrelevant shit. First it was your fixation with the word Afro-centric because the word Afro is in it (lol), then it was your Xenophobia over my pics of Huitzilopochtli, never mind the fact that my pics are a reproduction from the exact same codex as your impersonator god. Now you got this fixation over a fucking estimate??? I think you are missing the main point (stay focused now), Huitzilopochtli was a BIG fucking deal to alot of fucking Aztecs!!!

In 1946 Sherburne Cook, a demographer specializing in American Indian populations, estimated an over-all annual mean of 15,000 victims in a central Mexican population reckoned at two million. Later, however, he and his colleague Woodrow Borah revised his estimate of the total central Mexican population upward to 25 million. Recently, Borah, possibly the leading authority on the demography of Mexico at the time of the conquest, has also revised the estimated number of persons sacrificed in central Mexico in the fifteenth century to 250,000 per year, equivalent to one percent of the total population. According to Borah, this figure is consistent with the sacrifice of an estimated 1,000 to 3,000 persons yearly at the largest of the thousands of temples scattered throughout the Aztec Triple Alliance. The numbers, of course, were fewer at the lesser temples, and may have shaded down to zero at the smallest.

http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/azt ... rifice.htm

whiskeyjack
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1018
Joined: September 6th, 2007, 8:17 pm
Location: Everywhere in Canada

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby whiskeyjack » November 13th, 2011, 11:20 pm

Why would you guys want to claim the God of Death and Sorrow as "Black"?

Fuck it make he's white, apparently no one knows death and destruction better than us!!!!!

KILL KILL KILL

~J~
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1193
Joined: November 20th, 2006, 7:11 pm
Country: Canada
If in the United States: California
What city do you live in now?: 408

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby ~J~ » November 24th, 2011, 2:03 am

whiskeyjack wrote:Why would you guys want to claim the God of Death and Sorrow as "Black"?

Coming from a guy who also believes Jesus is Black what do you expect?

whiskeyjack
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1018
Joined: September 6th, 2007, 8:17 pm
Location: Everywhere in Canada

Re: AZTEC GoDS

Unread postby whiskeyjack » December 5th, 2011, 1:20 pm

I still dont understand how a country 10X the size of mine still has a large majority of people who are worried about religon. It doesnt matter what colour a god is, if they are as divine and powerful as us the last thing we should worry about is the colour of the skin they choose to represent themselves as.

Has anyone stopped to think that the majoirty of gods that are being worshipped or have been worshiped in history are in definition "Tyrants"?


Return to “Religious Thought”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests