The history of the various cultural and ethnic societies in the world is a very important concept of understanding how different people were civilized. However, in your paper, you seem to imply from the first paragraph that it’s being discovered. Some disclosures currently show that Nahuatl culture still exists, while other sources claim that the society was wiped out. Do you have any reason to either support other sides? I also see the sentence that history is continually being discovered as very interesting, may which way is this being done? Essentially the history of the Nahuatl was only passed on to the next generation by word of mouth. This means that probably most of its history before the world war must have been distorted. Currently, there is a lot of trouble in understanding certain occurrences that base their origin on deep history even before man was able to write or document certain important information. I agree that the conquest of Nahuatl by the Spaniards is a very important event in history that needs to be studied and understood properly. Being purported to be one of the oldest history books, “the Broken Spears” written by Leon-Portilla originally in 1962 presents a better understanding of what took place or is believed to have taken place. This makes sense because, before the world war periods, the Aztecs in Mexico passed on their history by word of mouth. They left no record of details of what happened in their history and civilization.
Since the city that the Aztec was buried and destroyed beyond recognition has there been a way to get some of the artifacts to show its existence? I believe that your easy implies that there are a lot of things that are yet to be discovered in the history of the Spaniard conquest and that from history, it’s believed that Aztecs had very powerful empire that had grown because they believed in religion and some strong culture. the Spaniards arrived in the current Mexico, they were able to wipe out the entire population with their weaponry and disease. This is therefore to imply that the Aztec culture was killed, or was it? I want to rise some critical question may arise, does this really hold to scrutiny? Is Aztec culture really dead? This could be biased history since it’s the Spaniard account that basically survived.
Your paper indicates that Aztec were very religious and thought that Quetzalcoatl had returned when they were invaded by Spaniards. The Spaniards perceived the inhabitants as barbaric when they saw then sacrifice human beings. In this way they thought of snatching their gold and riches and forcing Christianity on them. I see this as a confrontation of two expanding empires with two very dissimilar and radical cultures. Was Aztec culture inferior? Essentially culture is a very strong fact that even if political organization was ended, I believe that the culture of Nahuatl survived to the present day. I believe that though Spaniards seemed powerful in all aspects and that Aztec religion was an advantage to Spaniards (as they were thought to be gods), the needed the natives to enslave them so that they could benefit by creating anew colony on their verge to expand.
From your presentation, I believe what you have highlighted can be very important to understand the way the world is operating today. As you implied religion is a very powerful motivator. The world continues to witness people do very cross crimes and unthinkable acts to humanity in the name of religion. So is it fanaticism or religion? Just as the conflict of Aztec and Spaniards over natural resources, we also witness today nations engage in conflict because of the desire for oil. As the world changes, the needs changes and so is the cause of war. In the capitalist economy, money is believed to be sustainer of life.