>>10402458

(Please read from the start)

Now let’s continue about Teotihuacan:

“Collapse

Scholars had originally thought that invaders attacked the city in the 7th or 8th century, sacking and burning it. More recent evidence, however, seems to indicate that the burning was limited to the structures and dwellings associated primarily with the ruling class.[34] Some think this suggests that the burning was from an internal uprising. They say the invasion theory is flawed, because early archaeological work on the city was focused exclusively on the palaces and temples, places used by the upper classes. Because all of these sites showed burning, archaeologists concluded that the whole city was burned. Instead, it is now known that the destruction was centered on major civic structures along the Avenue of the Dead. The sculptures inside palatial structures, such as Xalla, were shattered.[35] No traces of foreign invasion are visible at the site.

Evidence for population decline beginning around the 6th century lends some support to the internal unrest hypothesis. The decline of Teotihuacan has been correlated to lengthy droughts related to the climate changes of 535–536. This theory of ecological decline is supported by archaeological remains that show a rise in the percentage of juvenile skeletons with evidence of malnutrition during the 6th century, which is why there is different evidence that helps indicate that famine is most likely one of the more possible reasons for the decline of Teotihuacan. The majority of their food came from agriculture: They grew things such as maize, beans, amaranth, green tomatoes (tomatillos?), and pumpkins, but their harvest was not nearly sufficient to feed a population as big as it is believed have lived in Teotihuacan.[36] This finding does not conflict with either of the above theories, since both increased warfare and internal unrest can also be effects of a general period of drought and famine.[37] Other nearby centers, such as Cholula, Xochicalco, and Cacaxtla, competed to fill the power void left by Teotihuacan's decline. They may have aligned themselves against Teotihuacan to reduce its influence and power. The art and architecture at these sites emulate Teotihuacan forms, but also demonstrate an eclectic mix of motifs and iconography from other parts of Mesoamerica, particularly the Maya region.

The sudden destruction of Teotihuacan was common for Mesoamerican city-states of the Classic and Epi-Classic period. Many Maya states suffered similar fates in the coming centuries, a series of events often referred to as the Classic Maya collapse. Nearby, in the Morelos valley, Xochicalco was sacked and burned in 900 and Tula met a similar fate around 1150.

There is a theory[39] that the collapse of Teotihuacan was caused by the devastation of its agriculture by the 535 CE eruption of the Ilopango volcano in El Salvador.”

“Culture

Archaeological evidence suggests that Teotihuacan was a multi-ethnic city, and while the official languages used by Teotihuacan is unknown, Totonac and Nahua, early forms of which were spoken by the Aztecs, seem to be highly plausible.[40] This apparent regionally diverse population of Teotihuacan can be traced back to a natural disaster that occurred prior to its population boom. At one point in time, Teotihuacan was rivaled by another basin power, Cuicuilco.[40] Both cities, roughly the same size and hubs for trade, both were productive centers of artisans and commerce.[40] Roughly around 100 BC however, the power dynamic changed when Mount Xitle, an active volcano, erupted, and heavily impacted Cuicuilco and the farmland that supported it. It is believed that the later exponential growth of Teotihuacan's population was due to the subsequent migration of those displaced by the eruption.[40] While this eruption is referenced as being the primary cause for the mass exodus, recent advancements of dating have shed light on an even earlier eruption.[41] The eruption of Popocatepetl in the middle of the first century preceded that of Xitle, and is believed to have begun the aforementioned degradation of agricultural lands, and structural damage to the city; Xitle's eruption further instigated the abandonment of Cuicuilco.

By the Tzacualli phase (ca 1–150 CE) , Teotihuacan saw a population growth of around 60 to 80 thousand people, most of which are believed to have come from the Mexican basin.[42] Following this growth however the influx of new residence slowed, and evidence suggests that, by the Miccaotli phase, ca 200 CE. , The urban population had reached its maximum.”

• Page 291 –

>>10412815

(Please read from the start)

“In 2001, Terrence Kaufman presented linguistic evidence suggesting that an important ethnic group in Teotihuacan was of Totonacan or Mixe–Zoquean linguistic affiliation.[43] He uses this to explain general influences from Totonacan and Mixe–Zoquean languages in many other Mesoamerican languages, whose people did not have any known history of contact with either of the above-mentioned groups. Other scholars maintain that the largest population group must have been of Otomi ethnicity because the Otomi language is known to have been spoken in the area around Teotihuacan both before and after the Classic period and not during the middle period

Teotihuacan compounds show evidence of being segregated by class, of which three social strata could be distinguished.[45] High elites, intermediate elites, and the laboring class's dwelling spaces differ in ways that are supportive of these class divisions.[45] Residential architectural structures seem to be differentiable by the artistry and complexity of the structure itself.[45] Based on the quality of construction materials and sizes of rooms as well as the quality of assorted objects found in the residency, these dwellings might have been lived in by higher status households.[45] Teotihuacan dwellings that archaeologists deemed of higher standard appear to radiate outwards from the Central district and along the Boulevard of the Dead, although there doesn't appear to be neat zonation into highly homogeneous districts.

The laboring classes, which in and of itself was divided, was constituted from farmers and skilled craftsmen to the outer rural population of the city.[46] The inner situated craftspeople of various specialties were housed in complexes of apartments, distributed throughout.[46] These encampments, known as neighborhood centers, show evidence of providing the internal economic backbone for Teotihuacan. Established by the elite to showcase the sumptuary goods that the resident craftsmen provided, the diversity in goods was aided by the heavy concentration of immigrated individuals from different regions of Mesoamerica.[46] Along with archaeological evidence pointing to one of the primary traded items being textiles, craftspeople capitalized on their mastery of painting, building, the performance of music and military training.[46] These neighborhood communities closely resembled individual compounds, often surrounded by physical barriers separating them from the others. In this way, Teotihuacan developed an internal economic competition that fueled productivity and helped create a social structure of its own that differed from the internal, central structure.[46] Aforementioned craftspeople specialized in performing typical actions which in turn left physical evidence in the form of bone abrasions.[46] Based on the wear of teeth archaeologists were able to determine that some bodies worked with fibers with their frontal teeth, insinuating that they were involved with making nets, like those depicted in mural art.[46] Women's skeletons provided evidence that they might have sewn or painted for long periods of time, indicative of the headdresses that were created as well as pottery which was fired and painted. Wear on specific joints indicate the carrying of heavy objects over an extended period of their lives. Evidence of these heavy materials is found in the copious amounts of imported pottery, and raw materials found on site, such as rhyolitic glass shards, marble and slate.[46] The residences of the rural population of the city were in enclaves between the middle-class residences or the periphery of the city while smaller encampments filled with earthenware from other regions, also suggest that merchants were situated in their own encampments as well.”

>> This zoning of the population according to their “occupation” reminds me terribly of Ancient Egypt, where it was the same thing.

• Page 292 –

>>10412820

(Please read from the start)

“Religion

In An Illustrated Dictionary of the Gods and Symbols of Ancient Mexico and the Maya, Miller and Taube list eight deities:[47]

• The Storm God[48]

• The Great Goddess

• The Feathered Serpent.[49] An important deity in Teotihuacan; most closely associated with the Feathered Serpent Pyramid (Temple of the Feathered Serpent).

• The Old God

• The War Serpent. Taube has differentiated two different serpent deities whose depictions alternate on the Feathered Serpent Pyramid: the Feathered Serpent and what he calls the "War Serpent". Other researchers are more skeptical.[50]

• The Netted Jaguar

• The Pulque God

• The Fat God. Known primarily from figurines and so assumed to be related to household rituals.”

>> This is very interesting because it’s the first time I hear about 2 SERPENTS and not just one. And from what I am reading, apart their different roles, it also seems there is a difference in their importance and rank. So (I’m wondering) is there is a good serpent and a bad serpent?

“Esther Pasztory adds one more:

• The Flayed God. Known primarily from figurines and so assumed to be related to household rituals

The consensus among scholars is that the primary deity of Teotihuacan was the Great Goddess of Teotihuacan.[53] The dominant civic architecture is the pyramid. Politics were based on the state religion; religious leaders were the political leaders.[54] Religious leaders would commission artists to create religious artworks for ceremonies and rituals. The artwork likely commissioned would have been a mural or a censer depicting gods like the Great Goddess of Teotihuacan or the Feathered Serpent. Censers would be lit during religious rituals to invoke the gods including rituals with human sacrifice.”

>> So here again we have a merger between the political power and the religious power in one person = King-priest. We also have cannibalism. If I’m not mistaking, so far, it’s the first culture/civilization that we encountered in this thread that the LEADING deity is female.

“Teotihuacanos practiced human sacrifice: human bodies and animal sacrifices have been found during excavations of the pyramids at Teotihuacan. Scholars believe that the people offered human sacrifices as part of a dedication when buildings were expanded or constructed. The victims were probably enemy warriors captured in battle and brought to the city for ritual sacrifice to ensure the city could prosper.[56] Some men were decapitated, some had their hearts removed, others were killed by being hit several times over the head, and some were buried alive. Animals that were considered sacred and represented mythical powers and military were also buried alive, imprisoned in cages: cougars, a wolf, eagles, a falcon, an owl, and even venomous snakes.

Numerous stone masks have been found at Teotihuacan, and have been generally believed to have been used during a funerary context,[58] although some scholars call this into question, noting that masks "do not seem to have come from burials".

• Page 293 –