(9avs of 11)
The two volume Catholic production, “The History of the Conquest of Mexico by the Spaniards” by Don Antonio De Solis is translated into every European language. This widespread interest is an glaring detail which supports the rising sense within me that understandings about Mexico are a significant key connection to understandings about all the people of the Central America, South America and especially newly white bread bred North America. (American Universal)Understandings about Mexico are essential to understandings about the mindset of Cristobal Colon, Córdova, Cortés, Vespucci, Lewis & Clark and many other Europeans who are painted pretty with sweet talk as discoverers, adventurers and explorers.
Mexico connects a lot of dots in all directions of geographic space and chronologic time. These understandings tell us again fundamentally who the American people were and who the first people were and ultimately how many tens of millions of people existed in the Americas and for much longer than a few thousand years when the white Europeans finally stumbled out of bed and got their sea legs.
Mexico, in its smallest and largest geographic sizes, serves as an incubator death place and birthplace for new cycles. In the Americas, Mexico is an Egypt just as Central America is an Aethiopia.
De Solis published his work about 150 years before Bancroft, upon whom we have placed many reliances. I was hopeful that De Solis' much earlier composition might provide even more unadulterated insights than Bancroft provided.
However my hope was diminished when the first words I read said:
“Hernan Cortés, the Fortunate Conqueror of the Mexican Empire. The Discovery and Conquest of that new World have enriched England with no small Share of the Wealth of it; which makes it a Point of Gratitude in Behalf of my Country to publish the Actions of this Hero, and renders him still more worthy of Your Grace's Patronage,”This is the thinking that comes from the whiteness context layered on the European context layered on the suboptimal context. Although Bancroft harbors much of the same mindset, he at least redeems some of his contradictions when he states:
”The Spanish cavaliers craved from the Indians of the South their lands and their gold. The Spanish missionaries demanded from the Indians of Northern Mexico and California, faith [trust us]. The French, English, Canadian, and American fur companies sought from the Indians of Oregon and New Caledonia, peltries [animal skins]. The Russians compelled the natives of the Aleutian Islands to hunt sea animals. The filthy raw-flesh-eating Eskimos, having nothing wherewith to tempt the cupidity of the superior race, retained their primitive purity.
We observe then three original incentives urging on civilized white men to overspread the domain of the Indian.
1. Thirst for gold, which characterized the fiery hidalgos from Spain in their conquests, and to obtain which no cruelty was too severe nor any sacrifice of human life too great; as though of all the gifts vouchsafed to man, material or divine, one only was worth possessing.
2. Following closely in the footsteps of the first incentive, and oftentimes constituting a part of it, was religious enthusiasm; a zealous interest in the souls of the natives and the form in which they worshiped.
3. Growing out of a covetous desire for the wild man’s clothing, Europeans sought to secure to themselves the peltries of the great Hyperborean regions of America. From the south of Europe the Spaniards lauded in tropical North America, and exterminated the natives. From the north of Europe the French, English and Russians crossed over to the northern part of America; and, with a kinder and more refined cruelty, no less effectually succeeded in sweeping them from the face of the earth by the introduction of the poisonous elements of a debased cultivation. (v1)Initiates will recognize these three as components of the poisonous pattern used in Africa and all over the world and is still be used against both the disfavored group and the slightly more favored group.
Pueblos
Pueblos are non-nomadic town and agricultural peoples of Mexico, New Mexico and Arizona. Pueblos (Spanish) means towns-people, people who live in permanent settlements of more durable housing than tents.
Strictly speaking, Pueblos applies only to people settled along the banks of the Rio Grande del Norte and its tributaries, between latitudes 34° 45' and 3C° 30'.
The Moquis, a collection of tribes of eastern Arizona are considered Pueblos but are referred to separately by their group name. (v1)
Pueblo became the name of the people and the name of the permanent solid houses. Then since pueblo people followed Montezuma, the term Pueblo also include the religion of Montezuma, thus pueblo refers to a culture.Language Again and Again and Again
Different language does not cause people to become different people. If so, then language overrides birthplace and genetics. Did different languages at the Tower of Babel, suddenly make all those people different people?
Do all the languages in Africa, even in the Nile Valley, make them different people?
We can use language to assist our understandings, but we should not allow language as a detail to confuse the greater fundamental truths.All this reminds us that miseducation of people worldwide, began long before the further miseducation of the Negro in North America and the continued miseducation of people in all countries. This then has most of us running around and bumping into each other like chichens with our heads cut off, yet still clucking up a storm using only our most recent memories.
