Global History I - Unit 8 ICP

Mr. Jacobs @Trinity

Aztecs

A tribal group that became a prime power in Mexico w/ Tenochtitlan as the capital

Economy / Hierarchy / Gender Roles

Agricultural, this means their economy was based on crop production and their hierarchy was typically nobles/landowners and peasants… as expected. Thus, you can also assume that they had agricultural gender roles, that is, everyone had to work… War happened often so there was a merit-based hierarchy as those that capture people move up in the hierarchy!

Hierarchy and Nobles

Nobles usually ended up staying in their general spot, as they taught their progeny in SCHOOLS how to capture people and retain their spot in the social ladder.

Capturing

they needed as many people as possible to help with labor. their goal when fighting, in fact, is to capture. this is why the people who capture the most people are at the top of the social hierarchy.

Human Sacrifice

they spared some captives for the gods and used them for human sacrifice! this is yet another reason why they favor capturing over killing

Obsidian Club

The preferred weapon of the Aztecs. it hurts plenty, but it is blunt and knocks out instead of killing the opponent: as you can see, for a group that needs workers and has a lot of wars, this is the perfect weapon for getting captives.

Nahua

the tribal group, Aztecs are one of the subgroups of this larger group…

Nahuatl

the language that the Nahua speak

Mexica

what the Aztecs call themselves

Lake Texcoco

the lake where the Aztecs decide to build Tenochtitlan

Triple Alliance

3 groups (including Tenochtitlan and its neighbouring cities) that become allies around Lake Texcoco

Views of the Other

besides the other tribes of the Nahua people, there is not a lot of other interactions w/ others… this is b/c of geography. one way there is a impassable desert and the other way there are the Mayas, there’s not much room for expansion however

benefits of Lake Texcoco (part 1)

access to fish, irrigation, that was one of their motives

legitimacy (part 2)

it was the capital of the old nomadic tribe (forgot which) so taking over gives them a claim of legitimacy: they are going back to the old

temples were also built for legitimacy, proving they were favored by the gods

good defense (part 3)

as it’s built on a lake, it will be really hard for enemies to get to them… however, the downside is that they’re trapped. hope no sieges happen! (foreshadowing 🙄 )

Montezuma

king of the Aztecs, he wants peace between the tribes which makes the peasants angry with him… why? well, they want to move up the hierarchy and no war means no captives! the Spanish choose then to show up and there’s no better time to convince the peasants to revolt against Montezuma 🙁

When was Columbus’ first voyage?

In 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue. 💀

Columbus’ goal

Find a trade route westward to India

Who is Columbus?

he is celebrated today in what is still called Columbus Day… but he should not be. Why? Well… we’ll touch on that later

Why is he seen as a hero?

If legitimacy comes from the past (which it does), then America’s comes from the English, but now America is independent: so, they need to find new heroes, but the heroes can’t be alive so no one knows their bad qualities. Thus, Columbus became a loyal and brave hero… which is very far from the truth.

Examples of the transition from English → American

Columbus Day… also known as Indigenous Peoples Day

Kings College (English) → Columbia Uni (American)

Caribbean Islands (economy, hierarchy, gender roles)

there was very little trade as it was a forest society. it was an egalitarian hierarchy with women able to work (looser gender roles, as expected)

Caribbean Islands (religion, military)

no centralized religion and no armies. however, there were two big religions: Carib and Taino, which have been basically wiped out by today.

What happens when Columbus arrives?

As a second- or third-born son, he went on this voyage since his older brother was the heir to his father’s lands. His only option was to travel and make land for himself; thus, when he saw the Native Americans and realized they weren’t Indians, he immediately thought of plantations.

European Views of the Native Americans

first, the Native Americans are seen as “noble savages“, they thought these people are worth converting. however, Native Americans did not realize the concept of private property and they “stole“; thus, the Europeans used that to view the NAs as animals and prove that their enslavement is justified… so plantations were created. D:

Why was Columbus a bad choice to represent the heroes of America? (SOURCE)

As the NAs are seen as “barely human“, there are written records of Columbus supports “doing the thing“ (e.g. sexually assaulting) several Carib women.

1494 Tordesillas Treaty

Pope gives east to Portugal and west to Spain to stop the war (he thought he had the power to give away the world to major powers and did not know about the Americas)

When the war ended, what happened?

Second- or third-born noble sons voyage in search of land to call their own: their family already bequeathed their lands to the firstborn. they want money through plantations (ahem, Columbus) and to settle down with (ahem, NA wives). the NAs were also forced into labor in plantations… so they weren’t too hyped about Christianity :)

What do the Spanish king+queen want from those in the Americas? (SOURCE)

1. they need churches in the Americas

2. they want converts so treat the NAs nicely

3. they want to ensure that people follow them (ha)

4. treat the Indians well (only here bc people don’t)

5. marriages should be willing between Spaniards and NAs (which also means people are forcing NAs to marry them)

Do the Spaniards listen to their king and queen a continent away?

Heck no!

Hernán Cortes

he was obviously a second- or third-born noble son that had to get land for himself. so, he joined the conquistadors and decided to voyage. he hears of the Aztecs and wants their GOLD (motive). They organize an expedition. The governor wants to lead expedition, but Cortes steals supplies he needs to get there and goes to Veracruz w/o the governor’s approval

What advantages did the Europeans have over the Aztecs? (weaponry)

1. they had cannons that are hard to get around

2. they had a gun called the harquebus that is not effective, slow to load, best sued as a club and very difficult to master 💀 (at best, one round can be shot that is preset before mayhem is unleashed…)

3. they had swords which were better for killing than the obsidian clubs Aztecs used… a small advantage that allows the Europeans to buy time

4. The Aztecs were aiming to capture, while the tactics of the Europeans were to KILL. However, the Aztecs learned fast that capturing won’t work as well on the battlefield, so they adjust. Small advantage that doesn’t last long

How did they beat the Aztecs?

First, they had commitment. Cortes did treason so he can’t go back unless they come back with the gold of the Aztecs. They had weapons, tactics, alliances, animals and diseases on their side…

What advantages did the Europeans have over the Aztecs? (disease)

1. biological warfare with domesticated animals (horses, war-dogs) → the Europeans were used to the diseases these animals spread but the NAs that never encountered domesticated animals were vulnerable to these diseases and they dropped like flies.

What advantages did the Europeans have over the Aztecs? (alliances)

many NAs were happy to join the fight against Aztecs, they converted to Christianity

how did they conquer the language barrier?

luck mainly. although they speak different languages, a Spanish priest who was captured was there for a while and learned Mayan (Geronimo)… there was also a Nahua woman who spoke Mayan and Nahuatl. Thus, Cortes told Geronimo, Geronimo told La Malinche, and La Malinche told the NA chief

Who was the first Mestizo in the Americas?

Son of Hernán Cortes and La Malinche

POV of La Malinche

Cortes portrays La Malinche as a side character despite the fact that he had sexual relations with her. For the NAs however, she was an important figure, some might have thought of her as the leader. In the artwork, she is always front and center right next to Cortes. In fact, they might see her as more of a leader than Cortes! Think about it: she’s not just a translator for them, she’s in the middle of a battle giving orders. sure, she might just be relaying Cortes’ orders, but some of those were probably her own that she had to come up with on the spot. She was the one speaking to the NA allies and communication is key on the battlefield.

STAR STAR STAR STAR STAR STAR STAR STAR

From this point on, this will most likely be on the In-Class Paragraph. Study this and make sure you know it. If you don’t remember, wax eloquent on either the Aztecs, Cortes and/or La Malinche OR Columbus and the NAs in the Americas! These are definitely key topics, including this one which is about the Valladolid Debates!

Answer: STAR

STAR

How does history “justify“ enslavement? (⭐)

They either use the Bible, logic, or go back to the old ideals.

Ham (⭐)

Son of Noah (the ark guy); he saw Noah passed-out drunk and told his brothers.. they came and covered him up. However, Noah wasn’t the bad one here: he was chosen by God! The bad one is Ham and all of his descendants are forevermore cursed!

Justification using Ham (⭐)

Africans were sons of Ham and their dark skin shows that they are cursed; thus, enslavement is fine!

Valladolid Debates (⭐)

Sepulveda vs. De Las Casas on the topic of Native Americans: to convert or to enslave?

Montaigne, of Cannibals

Side Note: he was a historian that rejected hierarchal ideas and thought that NAs were pure. This just proves a contrast: he uses Plato while Sepulveda uses Aristotle; he says that nature is the savagery of NAs and Sepulveda says nature is the hierarchy of Europeans 🤯 He brings up cannibalism to prove their savagery. Surprisingly, Sepulveda does so too to prove how they are unnatural. 😒

SEPULVEDA (⭐)

According to him, a hierarchy is natural. “The strong and dumb labor and the smart rule as master“. Thus, Natives should be put to work as they are not natural. NAs are seen as barely human. He also brings up cannibalism… thus, it’s ok to enslave the Natives.

DE LAS CASAS (⭐)

Montaigne would argue this better… LOL. Anyways, he sees NAs like lambs and the conquistadors like wolves—the bad guys. He gives statistics of falling Native populations and argues that they are worthy to convert. however, he is a bit condescending as he is paternalistic: seeing the NAs as children… “they are fine and a bit savage, but they have the right to exist and will do fine if we give them a chance” (basically)