How did Pre-Columbian civilizations fight wars? What were their battle tactics?

I recommend you read this book

amazon.com/Armies-Empires-Peoples-Americas-Conquistadores-ebook/dp/B00911RSUE/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1480829023&sr=8-1&keywords=armies of the aztecs incas

I may have it in pdf for you, I need to look though. Will get back to you.

...

I have an odd theory about the central figure (the one with the quechquemitl) in this mural.

A Mayan battle scene from Bonampak, c. 790 AD.

Some captives. Their hands are bleeding because their fingernails were torn out.

Let's hear it.

Another battle scene on a ceramic vessel, 600-900 AD

...

Another one.

Also here's a thing about macuahuitl I just found: woosterglobalhistory.org/LAcolonial/archive/files/23395812_33c717a7fb.pdf

Well I think the person there is a king or ruler dressed as a goddess (note his feminine attire). Some have speculated it is to weaken him, painted this way by his enemies who comissioned the mural. Women in Mesoamerica were considered passive and weak compared to aggressive and enegetic males. It was part of their concept of duality, and it's for this reason sometimes women were used as distractions in battles to 'soften the enemies attacks'. This is clearly seen in an image of naked Tlatelolcan women attacking the Aztecs of Tenochtitlan with breastmilk they squirt at them. Anyway, this may be the case but I believe the ruler may indeed have worn it and it may not just be propoganda.

Note that these murals from Cacaxtla were painted after the collapse of Teotihuacan in the epiclassic period, transitioning into the postlcassic. The fall of that city resulted in a power vaccum, which was temporarily filled by Xochicalco and Cacaxtla.The people who comissioned it were probably Olmeca-Xicallanco (no relation to ancient olmecs) and painted by Maya scribes. The style is an interesting hybrid of Maya and Central Mexican techniques. The two sides in battle in the mural are the jaguar and eagle factions. The eagle one is losing and it is the one with the leader dressed as a goddess. Now, rulers sometimes wore features of goddesses deliberately as a way to access their powers. This is not uncommon at all in Mesoamerican warriors (the Aztecs warriors sometimes wore attributes of the Moon and the goddess Tlazolteotl). This was seen as an act of penetration of the goddesses onto the male warriors. In this spiritual sexual fusion they attained their powers. Observing Teotihuacans downfall again, it's interesting to note that it seems to have collapsed from internal disputes of two factions (one which may have been led by refugees of another city that were housed in Teotihuacan and they conflicted with the local rulers as they gained more power).

This kind of adds to my other theory that Teotihuacan was the original Tollan in the legends of the Toltecs and that the fall of the Toltec people was a mix of events on the fall of Teotihuacan which occured prior. Over time the history of the fall of Teotihuacan I believe mixed with that of the Toltecs were that city too fell by two factions led by Quetzalcoatl and Tezcatlipoca. Curiously also the Aztecs burned many codices of the people that preceded them which may have contained knowledge of these events. So all we have to go by is the Aztec versions.

But back to the point, I Teotihucan may also have been finished off after this internal conflict by external forces. This also occurs in the legends on the fall of the Toltecs. Now Teotihucan had a central deity, which academics call the Great Goddess or Spider Woman. She features prominently and is seen as a fertility deity that brings rains. Some have attributed Tlaloc and Chalchiutlicue with her as well. I believe this leader clad in feminine attire possibly of a goddess may be dressed as her, represnting the citys patron deity. In many ways this all comes full circle in that he Olmeca Xicallanco had ties with the merchants the gulf coast, the Putun Maya. Which may have contributed in the collapse of the city. Which would be ironic since Teotihuacan originally invaded Tikal and introduced their style of warfare which Tikal later waged upon its Maya neighbors.

That's not cheese then, dumbness. That's dried, processed algae.

Also check em

>Dat nigga literally wearing a birthday suit
JAYSUS!

So are you saying this battle might depict the Olmeca-Xicalanca, or at least the branch of them in Cacaxtla, defeating the remnants of Teotihuacan? That would definitely be interesting, especially considering Teotihuacan's art was very abstract, so if this is a depiction of them it would give us a uniquely realistic look them.

>Teotihuacan originally invaded Tikal
This is the only thing I disagree with, I've heard of this theory but as far as I know most scholars now attribute Teotihuacan's influence at Tikal to political alliance, trade and emulation rather than conquest. That makes more sense to me considering projections of Teotihuacan's power usual limit it to the Mexican highlands.

>Army squads were organized in the following manner: The front lines were initially occupied by slingshot bearers and archers, which would go to the rearguard of the formation after the initial barrages. The lines behind them were occupied by storm-troopers with clubs and axes, then short-spear bearers and closing the formation long-spear bearers (up to 6 meters long).[17]

>During a battle on open ground, the Inca army would usually be divided into three groups. The main group would launch a frontal attack against the opposing force while the other two would flank it and circle around behind it to attack from the rear.[18] Before the hand-to-hand combat would start, the Inca army would use ranged weapons (slingshots, arrows and short spears) in order to break the enemy's lines. The army would also feign a retreat, then when the enemy attacked the Incas would counter-attack using a pincer movement.[19]