WI: Hernan Cortez and his men are massacred by the Aztecs

Yes, because we all know that we can trust Medievals to bother even with getting the details of another religion right. They turned Islam from a rationalist faith that's centered on the Abrahamic God to some Bizarre knock-off of Christianity worshiping Mahomet, Termagant, and Apollyon. And I would hope specifying what their lies about Judaism were would not be necessary on a forum like this.

Because people who turn the strictly Monotheistic Islam into Ye Olde religiion of Apollyon, Termagant, and Mahound-worshipers are definitely capable even of recognizing Abrahamic doctrine or caring about it. :rolleyes: Medieval Christians turned Islam and Judaism into things that a person who wished to preserve some hope about human nature would hope were made on drugs. They'd not even need to bother with any sense of truth about the Aztecs, which even as evil as they were......
Fascinating little rant about the horrible wicked nasty evil evilness of the Christian Church, but what does it have to do with the point both those posters were making?

They've got a perfectly valid point that 16th century Europe is going to get worked up over Aztec religious practices, especially since any stories that get back to Europe are going to end up being exaggerated and sensationalized.
 
If they distorted religions like Islam or Judaism, imagine what they will do with a religion that the Aztecs had. They will probably say that Satan himself rules over Aztecs.

My point is that they don't have much to distort but they would anyway. They waged war on the Muslims under lies that wouldn't need much for the Aztecs. But saying that they would is a given.

Fascinating little rant about the horrible wicked nasty evil evilness of the Christian Church, but what does it have to do with the point both those posters were making?

They've got a perfectly valid point that 16th century Europe is going to get worked up over Aztec religious practices, especially since any stories that get back to Europe are going to end up being exaggerated and sensationalized.

My point is that the Europeans used sensationalization as it was, and that they didn't much care about other *Abrahamic* religions, and so the idea that Abrahamics would be horrified at it is an anachronistic backdating of an idea that was mainly present among more learned Muslims then.
 
Now if the Aztecs had ASB help ....
I've actually read that. My dad had it stowed away in some long forgotten box. It's okay, but there are no sequels. Just unfinished as far as I know.

And no, there would be no religious crusades against the Aztecs. My god, it's like some of you have some kind of bone to pick. The Europeans were aware of developed nations in Africa that practiced mass human sacrifice before Columbus even discovered America. There was no crusade on Benin. The Portuguese even had regular dealings with them, rather friendly. No clue why they'd be so horrified about Aztecs instead.

Something else to consider; how many ideologically-driven conquistadors and crusaders do you think went to conquer Tayasal until it finally fell in 1697? After all, despite being Mayan they did practice Mexican-style sacrifice and the Spanish were aware of their existence for all that time.
 
Last edited:
And no, there would be no religious crusades against the Aztecs. My god, it's like some of you have some kind of bone to pick. The Europeans were aware of developed nations in Africa that practiced mass human sacrifice before Columbus even discovered America. There was no crusade on Benin. The Portuguese even had regular dealings with them, rather friendly. No clue why they'd be so horrified about Aztecs instead.
A full-out religious crusade is not in the works, but there are certain to be all kinds of lurid tales that (accompanied by equally exaggerated tales of Aztec wealth) will encourage further adventurism against the Aztecs. IIRC, the Aztecs are less advanced than Benin but substantially wealthier, and unlike with the Aztecs, there are no convenient locations for Europeans to build their forces for an attack against Benin.

You are correct that European states would be pragmatic about the religious differences, but sooner or later one of them is going to take a crack at breaking the Aztecs, which will probably be successful. An outlaw on the run from the Spanish government managed to destroy the Aztecs OTL (with massive amounts of native help), and a European state has a lot more resources they could bring to bear.
 
Cortez was no mere outlaw. He was a high-ranking captain. He had over a thousand men with him when he left to Mexico. And he was smart to boot. Random adventurers are just going to a quick death if they attempt to follow in his footsteps. Also, there is the fact that the "disappearance" of Cortez's entire expedition is going to severely discourage the "adventurous" types. Spain is more likely to demand tribute and make a vassal out of the Aztecs, and perhaps even support them as they'd seem the strongest of the Mesoamericans by far. Even if they did bother to gather an army and conquer them outright, which is not a given, they would almost certainly be much more "gentle" and humane about it than a bunch of degenerate conquistadors, the lowlifes of Spanish society.

Also, remember my Tayasal point? Performed sacrifices just like the Aztecs, but it took roughly 100 years after taking Tenochtitlan to get around to sending an expedition there, and almost another century to send enough to conquer it. Not much proof of religious adventurism there I see.
 

Typo

Banned
The Aztec had gold

lots and lots of gold

and they were pretty easy to defeat

therefore everyone wants an excuse to take their gold, that where religion comes in
 
The Aztec had gold

lots and lots of gold

and they were pretty easy to defeat

therefore everyone wants an excuse to take their gold, that where religion comes in
Exactly what I was going to say. it's not just religion that would prompt attacks against the Aztecs, it's the combination of religion and lots and lots of gold that appears to be relatively easy to take.
 

The Sandman

Banned
Exactly what I was going to say. it's not just religion that would prompt attacks against the Aztecs, it's the combination of religion and lots and lots of gold that appears to be relatively easy to take.

Along with the other consideration: lots of warfare in Europe.

This does two things; it puts pressure on everyone's finances, especially those of the Hapsburgs, and it provides an ample supply of trained soldiers/mercenaries to chuck at the Aztecs until they implode.

At a minimum, every European nation that wants a piece of the Mesoamerican riches is going to be sending "advisors" to any local faction that looks particularly pliable. Not to mention the presence of missionaries in the region, which is going to add Japanese-style complications to the area; some rulers are going to convert, either because they find the foreign religion aesthetically pleasing or because they find it easier to get the Europeans to send them useful stuff that way.

And the Christian converts are going to have one big advantage over the leaders that stick with Mexica/Maya religion: no need to take captives. If one of the main purposes of your warfare is to provide worthy sacrifices for the gods, and those sacrifices have to be performed at consecrated temples back home, then your tactics are inevitably going to be altered by your need to make sure that you capture enough of the enemy's soldiers to fill the quota for your priests.

In European-style warfare, on the other hand, the only reasons to take captives are to not have to expend the effort to kill them in battle, and to encourage your enemy to also take prisoners instead of just massacring your soldiers when you lose. The second case isn't going to apply in Mesoamerica, where your opponents are in fact taking captives specifically to kill them in a religiously appropriate way. The first case might still apply, but it's also easier to produce those situations if you can put the enemy into a position where it's clear that you'll kill them all if they keep fighting in lieu of surrender.

Because of this, European tactics are going to be better at destroying field armies; not because of some sort of general cultural superiority, but because destroying field armies is the whole point of European tactics in the 1500s in a way that it is not for Mexica/Maya tactics.
 
Interesting....it seems that before the Spanish heard of the wealth of Mexico, they heard of the 'Empire of Gold' to the South....the Inca...while Balboa was at Panama. For that matter it would be Peruvian Silver and Gold that was the main bulk sent overseas to fund the Spanish Empire. Whereas major Mexican mines/minerals are in Western Mexico, something not discovered untill 1540ish.

Perhaps of turning northward if Cortes is defeated, if proven or thought that Mexico had very little gold or that they recieved their gold from the south, they would turn on the Inca while ignoring Mexico....this also seems likely because the Taino recieved their trade mostly from the Maya who were much more southern then the northern mesoamerican states, so naturally it seems they would follow the trail of gold....
 
Last edited:
Top