Okay. This probably doesn't quite rank as a new topic, but I felt it needed to be stated. I've not been in this forum long, and I've been slowly trawling through old threads. Again and again I've come across references to Aztlan made by individuals listed as 'guest'. I assume 'guest' is a generic term for anyone who's since been expelled from this forum - am I right?
Anyway, I've read these postings with steam coming from my ears, but I guess that's the troll's job. The following points may already have been made but if so, I haven't gone that far back yet. So apologies if I'm repeating myself. Please direct any future Atlantis enthusiasts to the following.
First a quick word about the names involved. The Aztecs (probably meaning 'Heron People' or 'Those of the Heron Lineage') were the mythohistorical inhabitants of Aztlan. The inhabitants of Tenochtitlan were their descendants - the Mexica, Tenochca, or Culhua-Mexica, but no more Aztecs than I'm a Celt. W.H. Prescott's 'The Conquest of Mexico' (published in 1843) used the collective term Aztecs to denote the peoples of the Triple Alliance (a sprawling state comprising the Mexica, Acolhua, Tecpanecs, Culhua, Xochimilca, and Chalca culture groups, amongst others, of whom only the first lot claimed Aztec ancestry) presumably for convenience and to avoid the confusion of Mexica (in the preconquest sense) and Mexicans (in the postconquest sense). The name seems to have stuck, and although it could be argued as being historically valid in context of present-day discussion, it's overused and usually innacurate.
Aztlan (roughly 'Where There Are Herons') (it should properly be written with one of those wee slanty things over the second a) was the reputed mythic homeland of the Aztecs. It is described as being a town/city upon an island in a lake somewhere in the north. At no point has it ever been described in the context of oceans, and certainly not as being across 'eastern oceans'. The name Aztlan may derive either from a profusion of herons in said region, or more likely it serves as a typically convoluted Nahuatl metaphor implying 'The Place of Whiteness' (said herons being mainly white etc.) which, in this context, may mean somewhere representing a state of grace, ancestral innocence and purity - the usual stuff. One source (which typically I can't seem to find at present) claims an individual named Motecuhzoma ruled Aztlan. This ruler had two sons (Mexi Chalchiuhtlatonac and another who goes unnamed) who repeatedly quarrel, and as a result of some sort of power struggle, the former was expelled. Most of this story can be found in Fr. Diego Duran's Historia de los Indies de Nueva Espana, although there are other sources. Anyway Mexi Chalchiuhtlatonac led a group of his followers to the mainland whereupon they began their great migration (1111AD says Duran, 1069AD says Cronica Mexicayotl, 1155AD says Anales de Tlatelolco), choosing the name Mexica in honour of their leader (so the theory usually goes). Between then and the founding of Tenochtitlan in 1325, the Mexica led a nomadic existence travelling south towards the Valley of Mexico, hunting rabbits and deer, ocassionally settling before being driven away by angry locals, pinching dinner money and generally involving themselves with high-spirited acts of good natured violence.
It seems likely that the story served to provide an illustrious history for a group who were, after all, an uncultured bunch of Chichimec 'savages' (as the Tecpanecs saw them) from the northern desert, and certainly the cyclical aspects of the tale (from one island in a lake to another, the earlier Motecuhzoma etc) would indicate a degree of well... lieing. Some people (names available on request, I'll have to look for them first) suggest there might really have been an Aztlan. Mexcaltitlan in the state of Nayarit is one candidate, apparently. Others (I believe mainly authors associated with the Chicano movement, notably Rudolfo A. Anaya whose novel Heart of Aztlan is frankly a classic) suggest Aztlan may have been somewhere north of the Rio Grande, although whether Aztlan ever really existed is probably not so important as its status as a symbol both to the Mexica and, in the present-day, to the Chicano movement as a whole.
There is absolutely nothing in any source or historical record I have encountered to suggest that Aztlan was anything other than that which is described above. Issues of proof might not be entirely relevant here, given the pseudo-historical thrust of this story, although it should at least be mentioned that Nahuatl cultures (as were the Mexica) did indeed travel from the north before settling in and around central Mexico (see Eric Wolf Sons of the Shaking Earth). So next time some fool starts burbling on about Aztlan, Avalon, Atlantis, Atlantic City etc... just keep on hitting them until they stop.
Oh Lord. That feels good.
Aztlan
Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist, JPeters
Re: Aztlan
DOH!!!Cognito wrote:So, uh ... basically Aztlan was Atlantis and you're a Celt?
Sorry, W/A. Just couldn't help it!
I've got links
http://www.azteca.net/aztec/aztlan.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztl%C3%A1n
http://www.laputanlogic.com/articles/20 ... -9920.html
which more or less say what I done said with better word stuff, although I must admit I've not heard of San Felipe as a contender. also Mexcaltitlan (according to my Lonely Planet guide at least) has some vague qualification beyond politics, something to do with the underlying structure of the streets. Sigh. Back to google.
There we go (if it's worked). That's Mexcaltitlan. Hardly proof, I know, but you get the point.
Aztlan
According to the Chicano Movement I currently live in Aztlan (Southern California). Mi hermano y yo llamamos este lugar "Mexico Occupado".Aztlan is often appropriated as the name for that portion of Mexico that was taken over by the United States after the Mexican-American War of 1846, on the belief that this greater area represents the point of parting of the Aztec migrations.
Natural selection favors the paranoid
I think a "guest" is just someone who has not registered. Even registered users Will be shown as guests if they do not log in. You probably are automatically logged in if you use the same computer all the time.
The Atlantis myth has been so beaten to death that any original grain of truth to it was probably lost long ago. But my own opinion is that is was in the Mediterranean.
The Atlantis myth has been so beaten to death that any original grain of truth to it was probably lost long ago. But my own opinion is that is was in the Mediterranean.
-
Minimalist
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 16035
- Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
- Location: Arizona
I watched a show on PBS recently. On "Secrets of the Dead" they had a two part presentation called "Catastrophe".
Some scientists tracked down a mega-explosion of Krakatoa in 535 AD.
They were able to link this eruption with the decline of civilization that brought on the Dark Ages. Pretty interesting.
A few minutes were spent showing the disastrous results around the globe though, and they concluded that the end of the civilization that built Teotihuacan also resulted due to the two years "without a summer" that resulted from the eruption.
Carl Sagan is the first person that I know of that used the term "nuclear winter". He was referring to the results of a nuclear war but it seems that volcanism is the cause of the same thing.
If the world had to endure two years without a summer today, it would still be pretty bad.
Some scientists tracked down a mega-explosion of Krakatoa in 535 AD.
They were able to link this eruption with the decline of civilization that brought on the Dark Ages. Pretty interesting.
A few minutes were spent showing the disastrous results around the globe though, and they concluded that the end of the civilization that built Teotihuacan also resulted due to the two years "without a summer" that resulted from the eruption.
Carl Sagan is the first person that I know of that used the term "nuclear winter". He was referring to the results of a nuclear war but it seems that volcanism is the cause of the same thing.
If the world had to endure two years without a summer today, it would still be pretty bad.
I read that somewhere myself, plus so far as I know it was roughly contemporary with the large-scale influx of Uto-Aztecans filtering southwards into the Valley of Mexico and this tide of "northern barbarians" only served to make matters worse. Possibly migration of said "northern barbarians" (at least some of whom probably became the Toltecs) was itself prompted by the same climatic event. Whilst on this subject, I'm dying to find a nice neat way of fitting the Anasazi into all of this, but I think they dissappeared around 900AD (anyone?). If the Anasazi turned out to be the ancestral Aztecs it'd be like three Christmases at once for me in my sad little world, but I suspect it ain't so.Beagle wrote:A few minutes were spent showing the disastrous results around the globe though, and they concluded that the end of the civilization that built Teotihuacan also resulted due to the two years "without a summer" that resulted from the eruption.
(two hours later)
http://www.crystalinks.com/anasazi.html
Sure enough, it ain't so.
Yup. From previously mentioned link:
I swear, one of these days I'll be man enough to make a post without mentioning bloody language streams.
Plus the language streams of the general region seem to support it (Zuni, Hopi, Navajo (I think) are all Uto-Aztecan.Many modern Pueblo tribes trace their lineage from settlements in the Anasazi area and areas inhabited by their cultural neighbors, the Mogollon. For example, the San Ildefonso Pueblo people believe that their ancestors lived in both the Mesa Verde area and the current Bandelier.
I swear, one of these days I'll be man enough to make a post without mentioning bloody language streams.
Pueblos
When I visited the Red Willow Tribe at the Taos Pueblo, New Mexico, they told me that Anasazi were incorporated into their tribe. Further, they mentioned that their Pueblo had been occupied for a about a thousand years.Many modern Pueblo tribes trace their lineage from settlements in the Anasazi area and areas inhabited by their cultural neighbors, the Mogollon. For example, the San Ildefonso Pueblo people believe that their ancestors lived in both the Mesa Verde area and the current Bandelier.
Natural selection favors the paranoid
Hi guys! Sorry to be such a phantom poster, but... could not resist a little hit-n-run.
Forester
Navajo (Dine) is rooted in the Athabaskan Languages family, as is Apache. It seems that my mother's ancestors were late-comers to the Southwest.Plus the language streams of the general region seem to support it (Zuni, Hopi, Navajo (I think) are all Uto-Aztecan.
Forester
Oh, and sorry about the lack of introducutions, War Arrow, I am being rude. No criticism was intended, it is just that I have not had much time to post here. I share your interest in Meso-American pre-Columbian cultures, and have been reading your posts with interest. I will try to reply more often.
Forester
Forester