Quote:
But when someone is arguing that a civilization is "advanced" (one of the three most advanced in the world, in fact), pointing out that said civilization was conquered with the modern equivalent of a dozen national guardsmen who got lost on their way to the store to buy beer kinda *is* relevant.
So you want to claim that the Aztec defeat at "a dozen national guardsmen" proves how unadvanced they were... and also, the fact said said guardsmen used tens of thousands of other warriors ALSO proves how unadvanced they were
Quote:
Possibly. Lots of other impressive looking ruins were present in South America and had been abandoned since long before the Spanish arrived.
I wouldn't say "lots". Most significantly, you had Mayan ruins (who were in the finishing stages of being assimilated into the Aztec culture) and Olmec artifacts from the civilization that led into the Veracruz culture. Key point here being that both groups were succeeded by more advanced groups. Funny how that works, huh?
Quote:
If said civil war allowed some other culture to so completely conquer them *and* anyone else who might normally have risen in their place in the same area, then yeah it was certainly a contributing factor.
Which, of course, you have no idea about. The groups allied with Cortes weren't pulled out of a bag, they were under the umbrella of Aztec culture and the idea that they would have taken Tenochtitlan and that would be the end of the Aztec civilization is just... stupid.
Quote:
you can absolutely say that relatively speaking the Maya were significantly more advanced than either the Aztecs or the Incas.
First off, I have to laugh at your phrase "absolutely say that relatively speaking". Much like good ole Gingrich and "fundamentally", I can always tell when you're getting desperate and outgunned -- you start sprinkling in the "absolutely"s and pray to God that we'll just accept your (almost always erroneous) authoritative stance as gospel. "Absolutely relatively"? Are you serious?
Secondly, "absolutely relatively" speaking aside, no. The Mayans were not "significantly more advanced".
Quote:
But they'd have been just as lacking in advancement, right?
The Aztecs were picking up bronze working at the time (other smaller tribes had learned it and the Aztecs were absorbing the knowledge through their expansion). It's been suggested that the Spanish conquest came just as the Aztec bronze age was about to begin. The Inca were already working with bronze (pins, small tools, pry bars, etc) but had yet to nail down the ratio of tin to make weapons. So, again, no. You're not right.
Seriously, maybe you should have tried learning past 5th grade. You might have even gotten an award for knowing something!
Edited, Jan 24th 2012 11:07pm by Jophiel