Skulls of Native Americans executed by Gunshot found in Peru

An improvised common grave with the human remains of Peruvian Native Americans was found in Lima, Peru.

Multiple skulls, that date from the year 1500, had bullet wounds in the back of the head. Anthropologists say they were shot from a short distance and they were probably on their knees at the moment of their death

This shows how violent Spanish Colonizators really were

elpais.com/cultura/2007/06/20/actualidad/1182290405_850215.html

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cajamarca
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_massacres
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

looks weird, i always presumed a gunshot to the skull will crack the area around the hole

I'm pretty sure it's common knowledge except for stormtards that the conquistadors were huge dicks

Black powder pistols had much lower muzzle velocity.

b-b-but spanish aren't white when it suits me

makes sense, im still always surprised by how sturdy the human body actually is

This article reads like a bunch of revisionist bullshit to make the Conquistadors look like genocidal maniacs, and there's no real mention of the Indians "being on their knees" it just says they were killed closely which could have been just finishing the wounded in the ground. Oh and also it says that the aid of Indian Allies of the Spaniards is overlooked and barely mentioned in historiography, which is a dubious statement considering that the Spaniards themselves made the term "indios auxiliares" for describing those Indians that were friendly/ supporting in combat.

>This article reads like a bunch of revisionist bullshit to make the Conquistadors look like genocidal maniacs
but they are

yeah but they also had a much heavier projectile weight
it wasn't until the 60s when fuddy-ought-six and fudd-oh-eight was dropped in favor of a lighter (meaning faster) bullet

Wouldn't that mean there would be a bigger hole?

>This article reads like a bunch of revisionist bullshit to make the Conquistadors look like genocidal maniacs
wait, is there any doubt in that?

Not necessarily. A relatively low speed impact from a heavy object on a small area of skull produces a fairly clean hole.

See pic related, who died from a spiked warhammer.

nice

The Spanish didn't really kill the Natives for repopulating the lands with Europeans (unlike the Anglos), but rather converted them to Christianity and used them as slave labor and serfs (see the Mita/Encomienda systems). And there's the already known contact with unknown diseases such as cholera and typhus which wiped off a big portion of Natives.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cajamarca

okay

Bullshit.

It's not a matter of will but capacity.
Where there was low population density of natives the Spaniards exterminated them just like the Anglos did. (Cuba, Argentina, Uruguay, Florida, California)

Where natives had Empires numbering in the millions it was simply impossible to wipe them out without modern industrial methods unavailable in the 1500s. (Mexico, Guatemala, Bolivia, Peru)

In these territories extermination was not an option. Tenochtitlan alone had more than 1 million people. The only way to rule these lands was by conquering and making use of the existing native social and political structures. Which the Spanish did, through military conquest, divide and rule politics and outright terror, placing themselves at the top caste of the social pyramid.

You may notice this is also what the British did in India, a territory where outright extermination was also impossible due to the sheer number of people.

>I'm pretty sure it's common knowledge except for stormtards that the conquistadors were huge dicks
with huge balls

...

So do you have any proof that the Spanish had the will to exterminate the natives or are you just going off your gut?

It wasn't some master plan, it was convenience depending on the time and place.

Same as the British.

So in other words no proof just conjecture, gotcha.

lmao

Do you want links to the massacres?
These are well documented.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_massacres

>white people have no culture
try again sweetums

>do you want proofs?
>presents wikipedia page

>i literally can't read the references
user stop being retarded
Not even the guy you're talking to

There are citations at the bottom of the page. Frankly a brainlet like you doesn't deserve more effort from my part.

I know there are citations. You know there are citations. Why aren't you citing this evidence

Because the relevant information has been conglomerated into a neat package. Rather than sending you picking through dozens of sources, you have a single summary source that provides the resources for your to investigate further if you should so choose.

Who gives a fuck anyways. That happened 500 years ago

best comment. What are we all doing here

Who gives a fuck what happens 5 years ago.

>make the Conquistadors look like genocidal maniacs
No one has to put in any effort to do that. Conquistadors were genocidal assholes.

So when Indians massacred Europeans is that proof Indians possessed the will to genocide Europeans?

a lower velocivty would increase the chance of the bone breaking and splitting into fragments retar

stop comparing a spike with a bullet

>genocidal assholes
>literally the liberators of the enslaved populations of the New World, who were able to gather entire armies of Indian allies simply by showing up
>recognized the nobility of the indigenous aristocracy and granted them equivalent royal titles in the Spanish aristocracy

What brutes!

Why would they waste expensive shot and gunpowder for executions? Something doesn't add up

>landlord deposes your old dick landlord while talking about how he'll slave your soul.
>forces you to work for him for no pay, forces you to convert to a cult, kills 90% of your family, steals and plunders your property, burns your old bible and fucks your wife.
You're right, they were actually 2 faced brutes

I don't think it would make a big difference.
if anything I'd expect the spiked warhammer to have a bigger chance of cracking the skull.

Of course. Or do you think the Indians were beatniks?

It's hard to follow your point here.
This is a history board.

Spanish were assholes.
British were assholes.
Aztecs were assholes.
Incas were assholes.
Mayans were assholes.
And so on.

The first two had immunity to smallpox and Old World diseases as well as access to plate armor and gunpowder. The others did not.

Wouldn't it take fucking forever to execute lots of people by shitty muzzle loaders?

Why wouldnt they just stab them?

maybe this one's a squirmer

Interesting point user, I think in a similar fashion the masacres they did were well planed to cause terror on the native population not acts of crazy bloodlust.

"Liberators" wow user I hope you are some guy from spain that has engulfed heavy pro conquest propaganda. The tribute that was paid during the aztecs was increased by the spanish, people were removed by force from their lands to be closer to spanish authorities in Reducciones, ill made towns causing massive famine and dissease. This image is from a codex, it shows a spanish encomendero burning alive his native slaves for not giving enough tribute.

Fucking idiot they didn't have guns that long ago

Lol

Oh my god Who given a fuck would you have watched when you companioms got genocided alive for sacrifice by The fuclong Incas? I think Not and of you DID you iree a coward

Get out.

EXPULSE THE SPANISH GOD
KICK THE PENINSULARS
TAKI UNQUY WHEN

>Reward those that fought with you by giving them privileges and titles over land
>Subjugate those that opposed you by giving them work and education
Truly the savagery of these Spanish ASSHOLES is unparalleled in history!

>Do you think k the Indians were beatniks
Of course not, I just think that you devalue the phrase "genocidal asshole" when you throw it about willy-nilly, just like you devalue the word genocide when you apply it to bog-standard historical conquest.

If EVERYONE is a genocidal asshole then who the fuck cares, why point it out? You might as well call them "air-breathing fucktards".

If the allies get to be liberators for raping their way across Europe, imposing Communism, and massive social engineering schemes to neuter Germany, then I don't see why the Spanish shouldn't be considered liberators of the New World as well.

Liberty is a rough ride.

That's a cute boy, what's his name?

Because the allies were allied with communists before

>I don't see why the Spanish shouldn't be considered liberators of the New World as well.

They had no motivation to liberate anyone. They were looking for clay and gold.
Btw. even the contemporary spaniards were disgusted by some of the things the conquistadores did.

Calling invaders "liberators" is usually pretty obvious propaganda anyway.

The genocidal assholes are the ones that actually managed to deal significant damage to another culture/ethnicity/religion.
The others are just assholes that wished someone else was dead.

Are they sure this isn't just a trephined skull? The inca poked holes in people's skulls all the time, it was a cultural motif for Peruvians of that period

>aztecs religious bigot murderers
spanish religious bigot murderers

>Implying human sacrifice and execution are the same thing
Wew lad

> Gel Mibson "historically accurate" moovee
> ebil bloody indians thank god the spanish civiziled them lol

This is what /pol/ actually believes.

I never heard a corpse ask how it got so cold.

I think the point is that they were such a disgusting culture that you can't really blame the spaniards for wanting to eradicate them

Whitey must pay!

Honest question: how it isn't accurate?

Kinda like white degeneracy is getting cleaned up by Islam today.

>Thinks speaking the truth about blacks makes him brave.
>Thinks people speaking the truth about him are cucks.

Sounds about right.

We come here to go beyond high school history

Exactly

Who is he?

Are you talking about christianism? I don't see how it is eradicated.

The thing is that the europeans were the savages.

How can anyone deny this simple fact?

a shot from close, or any hit really from a 16th century pistol or musket leaves a very different mark, to say the least

is there a non sensationalist article in a professional publication?

The skull shows iron remnants around the hole. Other weapons could have left a much irregular fracture.

>Oh, please do note that we are burning you in THE NAME OF our religion, not as a sacrifice in our religion. The distinction is very important, you see. It's like how we VENERATE saints instead of worsh-
>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRGHHHH

>I don't understand basic English vocabulary so I assume every word means the same thing
Is this the definition of plebeian?

OP is probably a Mestizo ashamed of Iberian blood flowing through his veins.

EXCLUSIVELY FROM THE PATERNAL SIDE


JAJAJAJAJAJAJA

He's saying there's no difference in outcome whether its as a sacrifice to a diety or in the name of your religion. You are literally burning someone to death for your religious beliefs you fucking dolt.

The peruvian is of Germanic blood

Germanic >>>>>>per gap>>>>>>>dirty Moorish rape baby

>Castilians were brutal

this is news? they scared the shit out of their European contemporaries.

U r kewl user

>execution in a secular state is morally equivalent to human sacrifice because a human life is being taken to appease "spooks"
This is honestly what cultural relativists believe.

You.

Brainlet here.
Why didn't they just use their swords or daggers to execute the already captured people?

Those firearms were very slow to reload and ammo must have been very limited. Wasting them on kneeling prisoners makes little sense. And the process would be slow and laborious.

It seem strange that a 1500s army would behave like a death squad from the 1940s were one man would rapidly execute dozens prisoners with his Tokarev or Luger in a few minutes.

It isn't accurate in that the Indians in the movie were Maya, and the Mayan civilization had already collapsed by the time Spanish arrived.

However the fact that so much effort was put into doing the research to depict anachronistic Mayans leads me to believe the choice was deliberate, possibly as a means to show the movie is not actually trying to show historical reality but to create a parable rooted in metaphor. In which case having the natives be Mayans is like a big neon sign to get people to notice there's more to the narrative than the surface level.

I was talking about the accuracy of the movie. How is it inaccurate?

The article says that there are 72 corpses, one of them was killed by a bullet, two others have wounds that may be caused by guns.
Half of the bodies have marks that shown "an extreme violence", but not mention of fireguns (te text implies tha they were stabbed) and continues saying that most have corpses were wounded with native weapons.

The text says nothing about "executions".

>In which case having the natives be Mayans is like a big neon sign to get people to notice there's more to the narrative than the surface level.

yeah there are still Mayans around to cast, you have to go to southern Utah to find people speaking anything like Nahuatl and even then only a hand full of old folks.

thx

Retard

...