Age of Exploration contact between Europeans and Native Americans led to an exchange of infectious diseases with extremely one-sided results: 90-95% of Americans died of disease within a few decades, essentially wiping out every civilization.
What would the world look like today if the inverse had happened? Would Europe have been overrun by Inca, Aztec, and Iroquois colonists?
>>906082
>horses, sheep, pigs, goats, and cows all domesticated in the Americas but no easily domesticable variants present in Afro-Eurasia
>civilization develops across the world at relatively the same time but progresses more quickly in Americas due to more non-farmers and more connectivity
>highly infectious diseases develop in Americas
>Caribbean becomes the heart of naval technological progress on Earth
>around the year 2100 a Mississippian people sails across the Atlantic in caravels and discovers the backward peoples of Europe
>disease spreads across Afro-Eurasia like wildfire
>similarly infectious American religions and ideologies spread across the "New World"
>by 2400 Europe, India, and East Asia are 75% American or greater
The Americans were pretty much living at the stoneage when it came from metal use, them being able to overrun the western world would require them to start producing and even be able to sail ships to cross the Atlantic and Pacific ocean with.
>>906082
How would they ship in enough soldiers to Europe? I mean even with 90% of Europe killed there are still a buttload of soldiers with more advanced weaponry.
The Spanish got lucky they had native allies, disease and some other things on their side because without those their tiny armies would have been assraped. If Spain had to send European style and size armies to the other side of the ocean it would be quite a logistical operation, i'm not seeing Aztecs pull that off with canoes
The Aztecs (Arguably the most "advanced" New World Civilization) were some 1,000 years behind Europeans at the time of Cortez (I used arbitrary measures going from the Greek Bronze age to Cortez in my calculations based on the Aztecs just getting the hang of actually melting copper when Cortez showed up).
The Inca, likewise, had gold, but were experiencing a Minoan peace (They already owned everything worth owning, all avenues for expansion required going through inhospitable mountains, inhospitable desert, or inhospitable jungles with no pack animals better than humans).
There is, in a sense, no way the New World can make up for that lost time. Even if we assume Europe doesn't get the sudden advancement due to discovering the new world, the Aztecs will still be wearing metal plate (a figure of speech) when Euro's are sending satellites up into space. The only conceivable way the New World can have any kind of sudden advancement is if they suddenly discover sailing, but that only gets them spreading around the new world faster.
And the New World did spread diseases, OP. Syphilis came from the Americas and did a lot of damage.
>>906138
They could have quickly adopted European-style oceangoing ships. The technology was delivered right to them.
>>906187
With next to no infrastructure. The Aztecs were using stone tools mind, and while they had complex trade networks, the Aztec """"Empire"""" was only this big.
>>906167
Every nation has enemies. Imagine the JSDF showing up on the doorstep of the Roman Empire. Rome had lots of peoples inside and outside its boarders that would jump at the chance to join up with an even more powerful military force just to give Rome a black eye.
>>906187
How though?
How would they be able to copy all the mechanisms that made up a European Carrack?
They would have to cut their wood in the right way, gain the right sorts of metals and be able to build drydocks to build the ships in.
>>906196
>With next to no infrastructure.
The Inca Empire had more advanced infrastructure than Spain.
>>906197
So that worked in Spanish favor but would it work the other way around?
Would Charles VII team up with a bunch of stone age, pyjama clad cannibals against his uncle the Duke of Burgundy or his cousin twice removed the king of England?
>>906185
>The Aztecs (Arguably the most "advanced" New World Civilization) were some 1,000 years behind Europeans at the time of Cortez
That's really not true, though. The Europeans had a lot of things the Americans didn't, but the reverse is also true.
>>906221
Such as?
>>906213
>a bunch of stone age, pyjama clad cannibals
Native Americans often viewed Europeans as hopeless primitives as well, but ultimately pragmatism tend to win out in these situations.
>>906213
>Would Charles VII team up with a bunch of stone age, pyjama clad cannibals against his uncle the Duke of Burgundy or his cousin twice removed the king of England?
The Spaniards regularly teamed up with moors to fight each other so I don't really see why not.
>>906231
Maybe in cultural, spiritual matters but I don't think they denied the material advantage those people possessed.
>>906224
Better agriculture, better civil engineering, better medicine, an overall higher quality of life on average. Lots of things, really. It's not reasonable to demand a list...
>>906213
There wouldn't be a Charles VII or Rome or much of anything except for maybe some bronze age shit kickers in Afro-Eurasia because diseases being present in the Americas and not Afro-Eurasia means not much in the way of domesticable animals in Afro-Eurasia. Americas would discover primitive continents.
>>906224
The potato, which the Incas and their predecessors had bred for millennia to become an incredibly hardy and nutritious crop that ended up being a boon to Europe and eventually the world.
>>906240
>but I don't think they denied the material advantage those people possessed.
That's where you're wrong. Even the relatively primitive New England natives laughed at how inept the English settlers were. And the English, in turn, admired their superior buildings, (small) boats, farming techniques, etc.
>>906256
What?
We were discussing what happened if an Aztec or Inca guy landed in Wales in 1492 right? Then some mysteries Llama disease wipes out 90% of the population of Europe.
>>906251
>better medicine
Fewer endemic diseases means better health, but not better medicine.
>>906267
I was talking about Central and south America and those Spanish lads. I heard some English settlers fucked up a few times and died in the winter but that does not mean they did not posses material advantages.
>>906281
>We were discussing what happened if an Aztec or Inca guy landed in Wales in 1492 right?
No, we were discussing what would have happened if everything was the same up until 1492, except that American diseases were incredibly deadly to Europeans instead of vice versa. (I'm OP.)
>>906297
That's what I said didn't I?
What makes you think Europe would revert to the Bronze age out of nowhere?
>>906292
And the Natives possessed material advantages too. Knowing how to farm is a material advantage.
>>906292
>I was talking about Central and south America and those Spanish lads.
Well then that's even worse...
>does not mean they did not possess material advantages
They did, and also disadvantages. Europeans had steel and oceangoing navigation and so on, but they were certainly did not have categorically superior tech.
>>906301
>That's what I said didn't I?
No?
>What makes you think Europe would revert to the Bronze age out of nowhere?
I don't....
>>906251
How was their quality of life better, having the mess americans in mind?
>>906297
But that couldn't happen. Several very virulent plagues wouldn't just sprout out of the ground. Afro-Eurasia had more really nasty diseases because of domesticated animals.
>>906302
What are you saying here? European agriculture was yielding more than Native American agriculture. Can both have the advantage at the same time? I don't think that's the proper definition of the word.
>>906309
>Europeans had steel and oceangoing navigation and so on, but they were certainly did not have categorically superior tech.
Well those are the things the first wave of invaders brought with them didn't they?
>>906320
Then who the fuck is >>906256
>>906325
Well, their streets weren't filled with shit, for one. The Aztecs had a sewage system that separated solid waste from liquid. Although that ended up working to the Spaniards' advantage when they accumulated so many diseases.
>>906339
>What are you saying here? European agriculture was yielding more than Native American agriculture. Can both have the advantage at the same time? I don't think that's the proper definition of the word.
The Native Americans knew how to rotate the proper crops and let the soil rest to take advantage of the American climate. The Europeans were used to mono-cropping which was counter-productive and led to droughts. Hence in the Americas, the Natives had an advantage relative to the colonists.
>>906353
Didn't the Europeans use Ley farming though?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ley_farming
>>906353
Higher population density also meant that human activity had a higher impact on the environment. Large, static population nuclei takes a higher toll than a mostly nomad society with dispersed smaller settlements.
Also, biodiverstity is way greater in the tropics, cold climates are less productive. Work throughout the summer to have enough foodstuffs stored for the winter. The Americas in general didn't have that problem,
>>906346
>mfw Europoos can't poo in loo
>>906353
Europeans had been monocropping (well more or less) since the Bronze age by 1500 AD. It worked.
I said European rulers would view a native army as rather primitive to which you said Native Americans viewed Europeans as primitive, this can't be said to be the case of the first wave of Spanish invaders. They didn't look at the Spanish as being incapable of fighting. When cannons were blasting the capital they didn't take that moment to discuss the fine points of crop rotation and excellent nutritional value of potatoes.
I don't deny what you say but I think you are missing the point if you compare the shortcomings of North America settlers with those of an army in central America nearly a century before. I'm comparing armies and the initial impression they would make on the others.
>>906381
Europe north of the alps used three field system with alternating cereal grains. The most advanced regions were just starting to use a four field system together with something resembling Ley-farming in the 15th century.
I believe the highest yielding areas were around southern Flanders and Artois where they reached 30 hectoliters per hectare, yields that would still be considered good until the Industrial revolution hit England.
>>906282
This is true actually. Cortes himself confirms this in a letter to the King, he wrote there was no need to bring doctors or physicians to the New World as there's were better. The Aztecs themselves were said to have up to thousands of different remedies from the most mild things to deadly sicknesses.
>>906432
*theirs
>>906432
Chinese traditional medicine has thousands of remedies too. That doesn't mean any of them work. That said, modern/European medicine often did more harm than good right up until the 1800's. A witchdoctor has a better chance of helping you if all he does is spit in your face a few times than a European doctor who thinks bleeding you is the best option.
>>906456
>That said, modern/European medicine often did more harm than good right up until the 1800's
My bullshit detector is going off.
>>906456
>what is natural medicine
You do realize that an enormous amount of modern medicine's drugs were discovered and isolated from traditional plant remedies, right?
If not, google bioprospecting.
>>906482
Are you discrediting the entire corpus of pre 1800 medicine of the basis of a single procedure?
http://www.medicaldaily.com/old-english-remedy-successfully-kills-antibiotic-resistant-staph-bacteria-328152
>>906482
And witch doctors and shamans who administer the right combination of herbs can actually cure shit.
Indigenous peoples have a vast wealth of empiric knowledge, gathered and passed on throungh the generations. It's more than just superstition, which is more than european physicians could boast of after the dark ages wiped out every last bit of traditional knowledge because of "heresy".
>>906513
>which is more than european physicians could boast of after the dark ages wiped out every last bit of traditional knowledge because of "heresy".
Please tell me you are joking.
>>906516
yeah, alright, hyperbole. still, my point stands
>>906471
And you of course realize many were useless, right?
>>906524
No not even a hyperbole, just plain wrong.
If anything European physicians did everything in their power to collect as much knowledge as possible.
>>906500
Not absolutely, simply generally.
>>906513
>Indigenous peoples have a vast wealth of empiric knowledge
No they don't. Just look at traditional Chinese medicine. It's virtually all bullshit. There was nothing emperical about medicine throughout most of human history
>>906534
Forgot pic.
>>906534
So you would rather not have any treatment at all over: Stitches, casts, splints, quarantine, bandages, anti-septics, antibiotics, sutures, abortive medicine, labor inducing medicine, painkillers, sleeping aids and essentially every surgical thing ever?
Are you a Luddite or a faith healer?
>>906545
If you already drowned it won't bother you to much will it? I'm not saying every cure or operation worked but i'd take 80% effective over no treatment at all. Especially when you realize simple cuts and bruises, broken bones etc are the most common injuries.
>>906138
>The Americans were pretty much living at the stoneage when it came from metal use
>>906581
>>906587
>>906581
>>906587
>>906592
When did the meme of stone age stuff start?
Or where the bronze/copper finds a really small minority of finds?
In Bronze age Europe/Middle East flint continued to be used alongside bronze for a very long time before bronze completely replaced it, or rather when iron replaced both.
>>906553
>using modern medicine to argue that medicine in the 1500s was good
If you caught an infectious disease it was better to just let your immune system do its thing. There simply was no way they could help you back then so doctors made increasingly invasive shit up, virtually all of which did more harm than good.
>>906604
...
Do you just refuse to open links and read or is the it some sort of personal crusade of you to make Europeans before 1800 look like Idiots?
>What do you get when you mix garlic and onions (or leeks), wine, and cow bile together, and brew it in a brass container before letting it sit for nine days? Besides a nasty mixture, you also get an old Anglo-Saxon remedy for a stye, an infection of the eyelash follicles. Researchers from the University of Nottingham in the UK have now revived this thousand-year-old remedy, and found it’s surprisingly good at eliminating the bacteria responsible for styes; one that’s become increasingly resistant to current antibiotics.
tada.
>>906602
Metalworking was still picking up, but contact happened before it could become extremely widespread the same way that agriculture had.
>In Bronze age Europe/Middle East flint continued to be used alongside bronze for a very long time before bronze completely replaced it
They were pretty much still at this point.
>>906613
I never said disease, I said treatment. Big difference. Disease could mean anything like cancer and aids and we don't have an 80% cure rate at that.
>>906628
The thread is about disease. I was talking about disease. The fact that stone age peoples know that open wounds and borken bones are bad and had ways of treating them is a given.
Futhermore, just because modern medicine many times comes from chemicals found in nature doesn't mean primitives had any idea of it. As I said, jut look at Chinese medicine. Virtually none of it works and the idea that our ancestors had a better idea of how to treat disease than modern medicine is still pervasive and is hurting a lot of people today.
>>906620
As I said, I'm arguing about traditional medicine generally, not absolutely.
>>906646
>modern/European medicine often did more harm than good right up until the 1800's.
Medicine =/= disease
And like I have shown quite a few times now bloodletting was not the only cure in the book, modern research has indeed shown they had more or less effective antibiotics.
Christopher Columbus' letters to the Spanish kings about the Caribbean, first and third voyage respectively:
>"In all the islands, they have very many canoes, which are like rowing fustas, some larger and some smaller; some are greater than a fusta of eighteen benches. They are not so broad, because they are made of a single log of wood, but a fusta would not keep up with them in rowing, since their speed is an incredible thing. In these they navigate among all those islands, which are innumerable, and carry their goods. I have seen one of these canoes with seventy or eighty men in it, each one with his paddle."
>"Their canoes are larger, lighter, and of better build than those of the islands which I have hitherto seen, and in the middle of each they have a cabin or room, which I found was occupied by the chiefs and their wives."
Fernando, Columbus' second son, about the fourth voyage of his father:
>"by good fortune there arrived at that time a canoe long as a galley and eight feet wide, made of a single tree trunk like the other Indian canoes; it was freighted with merchandise from the western regions around New Spain. Amidships it had a palm-leaf awning like that on Venetian gondolas; this gave complete protection against the rain and waves. Underneath were women and children, and all the baggage and merchandise. There were twenty-five paddlers aboard, but they offered no resistance when our boats drew up to them"
>>906663
>more or less effective biotics
One salve is not comparable to penicillin. Most medicine until the scientific revolution was complete bologna and a few exceptions are simply that, exceptions. And generally the more invasive the medical procedure was the worse off the doctor made you.
>>906687
>Most medicine until the scientific revolution was complete bologna and a few exceptions are simply that, exceptions
>Stitches, casts, splints, quarantine, bandages, anti-septics, antibiotics, sutures, abortive medicine, labor inducing medicine, painkillers, sleeping aids and essentially every surgical thing ever?
I'd say those things alone account for the majority of what pre-industrial doctors were supposed to be able to cure with some regularity. Practical hands on stuff for everyday trauma. Getting a wound treated by a pre 1800 physicians would be preferable to dying would it not? Saying it did more harm than good is wrong and i'd state the inverse, that it did more good than harm. I'd take a doctor who disinfects a wound with established cures over a witchdoctor who spits in my face and slathers the wound with mud and some nice tetanus.
>>906719
Closing open wounds and splints go back a long way and are virtual no brainers. Everything else you listed either wasn't available in the 1500's, did more harm than good, or are non consequential (ie sleep aids).
Again, I call your attention to Chinese medicine, which is virtually all bogus. They aren't used because they have empirical backing. They are used because humans generally didn't know what they were doing.
Just in case you didn't already know this, homoeopathy is bullshit as well.
>>906719
>abortive medicine
>implying drinking mercury is good
>>906772
Well maybe the Chinese were just really shit. I mean they are still grinding up fucking ivory to cure impotency and are generally miserable.
Medieval European and Middle Eastern stuff had some empirical methods in it.
Anyways what was not available in 1500? If you're actually interested in the subject I recommend reading a book instead of flat out rejecting everything.
>>906786
>blowing smoke up your ass for for drowning
>bleeding you with leeches or lacerations
>mercury as a cure-all
These are not exceptions. The shit that actually did more good than harm or did anything at all were the exceptions.
>>906527
Of course. Still, herbalism has its uses, and it laid the foundations for modern medicine. The problem is that serious pharmaceutical research costs millions to develop a new molecule, and most pharma corps are not willing to funnel that kind of money into traditional medicine, and having people know that a certain herb that you can pick for free in the woods can trean an ailment is bad for business.
The largest issue with herbs is that the therapeutical molecules are not identified and isolated, standardized nor purified, so the therapeutical dosage is mostly backed with empyrism, which is ultimately frowned upon.
>>906825
Are you seriously a homeopathy fag?
>>906799
>blowing smoke up your ass for for drowning
Well they didn't have tobacco in 15th century Europe so you can throw that one out of the window.
>bleeding you with leeches or lacerations
Yeah Galen was not a perfect man but he still advanced the science of medicine.
Fun fact: My aunt actually had bloodletting as treatment for a high iron content of her blood.
>mercury as a cure-all
That's China you are thinking off and you still haven't replied to my question.
PS, i'm not >>906825
>>906799
http://digventures.com/2015/06/medieval-medicines-dug-up-by-archaeologists/
To lazy to google, let alone read a book...
>>906847
Antibiotics as we know them today weren't available. As I said earlier, one salve doesn't compare to penicillin. If you want to list it then you should put a footnote instead of constantly implying it in any way compared the miracle that is modern antibiotics. You can call pouring alcohol on a wound an antibiotic, but that doesn't mean you should. Also mercury was used by the Greeks and Persians and was indeed an effective means of abortion. The problem is that it is fucking mercury.
Most traditional medicines are bullshit. The few that do anything many times do more harm than good. "Thousands of different [traditional] remedies" means thousands that do nothing, hundreds that do more harm than good, and a handful that may actually be beneficial.
>>906832
>herbalism is the same thing as homeopathy
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3560124/
http://www.rain-tree.com/plantdrugs.htm#.VvswV9J94dU
Aspirin, atropin, quinine, morphine, codein, cocaine, lysergic acid, ergotamine, limonene, menthol, prussic acid, statines, camphor, peni-fucking-cillin and all its derivatives...
Painkillers, antibiotics, vasoconstrictors, muscle relaxants were all isolated from fucking plants and fungi, the bioctives are there, you just gotta identify what works for what, determine therapeutical dose ranges, extract and purify them.
Well OP, the Europeans had an advantage with sea-worthy ship building and metallurgy, so unless you want to really switch this up, the Euro-centrism we all know and love would still be present, though not as overwhelmingly so. Imagine if they quickly modernized ala Meiji era Japan and started using firearms bought by Spain's enemies? That would've been something.
To all these people with any faith in Doctors pre 1800's
From Wikipedia:
>From the 1600s through the mid- to late 1800s, the majority of childbed fever cases were caused by the doctors themselves. With no knowledge of germs, doctors did not believe hand washing was needed.
>Hospitals throughout Europe and America consistently reported death rates between 20% to 25% of all women giving birth, punctuated by intermittent epidemics with up to 100% fatalities of women giving birth in childbirth wards.
A quarter of everyone born killed their mother for the 200 years of "modernized" medicine before germ theory.
They tried, but when it came to diseases caused by bacteria and viruses, doctors did plenty of harm. Antiseptics were not widespread nor well understood. Antibiotics did not exist as we now understand it, and some SELECT doctors had strange methods that worked (bread mold in the bandage, ect). If they couldn't cut it off, tie it to a stick, or sew it back up, you were out of luck and probably spent all your money on having a quack tell you to drink mercury and pray.
As far as "traditional medicine" goes, your odds were dubious. Herbal "medicines" number in the hundreds of thousands with only a good handful proving to be truly effective. Once again-- anything dealing with disease was no match. If you had mild diarrhea or you had a huge boil on your face the local shaman could patch you up no problem.
>>906926
>Wikipedia
Anyways that wouldn't have been much of an issue because midwives delivered babies before 1600. Semelweis noted that Midwives actually had beter child survival rates than doctors.
>>906855
There were many more than seven medical medicines and procedures used in Europe during that time period. The ones listed were exceptions gathered from across many regions of Europe across hundreds of years.
>acting condescending about a google search
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-belofsky/crazy-historical-medical-_b_3516415.html?slideshow=true#gallery/305768/3
>>906912
And? That doesn't mean traditional medicine knew about them. Traditional medicine is largely quackery.
>>906940
>has a problem with wikipedia
>doesn't say a word about the random website page linked to by another anon simply because he agrees with it
>>906847
Leeches are successfully used in modern medicine to reactivate circulation to reattached appendages and wounds, drain superficial blood clots, edema and gangrene.
>>906941
There is bloodletting, one harmless bit of bogus from Bald eyes leechbook and one greek thing. The rest is scientific revolution bogus not stemming from the 15th century.
>>906962
Those aren't complete sentences. I don't understand what you are trying
>>906941
>Only one copy exists of Bald’s Leechbook, written in the ninth century. “For one be moon-mad” it suggests, “take a dolphin’s hide, make it into a scourge, beat the person, he will soon be better.” Most notably, the Leechbook speaks of “elfsickess," an affliction caused by tiny, invisible elves shooting tiny, invisible arrows: "For elfsickness...go on Wednesday evening when the sun is setting where you know dwarf elder to be growing...no matter what frightful thing or man should come towards you say no word to him...dig out the plant, let the knife remain…wash it and make it into a drink...let him drink the drink afterwards, it will soon be better for him."
kek
>>906946
They didn't know what was IN them, they just knew they worked, because of hundreds of years of trial and error.
As with every other empyric knowledge system, there's a lot of errors, misconceptions and quackery, especially when mysticism is thrown into the mix, but you can't simply dismiss the importance of plants in modern medicine.
>>906983
That's the thing though, traditional medicine isn't empirical by today's standards. They didn't observe anything nor were they rigorous. They fed a child something, the kid got better for some unrelated reason, so they started feeding all the children it for decades on.
>>906082
The world would be way more shitty with less Europeans. Most places would still be in the stone age without European expansion.
Admit the truth.
>>907039
On the other hand, I've always wanted to know what the mayans would have done if they'd reached pre-industrial tech. What-ifs are good imagination exercises.
>>907039
The premise is flawed from the beginning. Pandemic tier diseases come from domesticated animals. The only way Europe wouldn't be the one spreading disease to the Americas is if Afro-Eurasia lacked domesticated animals. In which case it would be the Europeans in the bronze age, not the Americans.
>>906995
And ocasionally they correctly linked causality. Not always, but once in a while they'd nail it and a valid precedent would be set. One of the problems in bioprospection is successfully separating chaff from fact.
>>907146
A broken clock is right twice a day.
>>907182
Take scurvy, for example, european empyric preventive medicine. Barrels of apples for sailors in long voyages. What's in the apple? Who the fuck knows, eat the goddamned fruit regardless so you won't die.
>>907251
I'm not arguing that them not knowing how chemistry works is relevant. I'm arguing that their methodology or lack there of was fundamentally flawed and that most medicines and procedures did nothing or in case of invasive procedures or toxic medicines did more harm than good.
>>906185
Total disregard for the Hopewell folks. They dabbled in iron!
>titicaca
>poopé
spaniards were such shitposters back then
>>907104
This anon gets it.
I'm passing by to say that even though medicine wasn't as advanced like europe, natives people like the incas had some interesting knowledge.
Like they used cinchona(they call it quina) to cure malaria, later this was actually replicated by the jesuits and exported all over the world.
Or that they made a type of fermented potato called tocosh that is a natural antibiotic because of the penicillin that is produced during the fermentation process.
Medicine at the time of the Incas was called Hampi and medic was Hampi Hamayoc. The doctor acted to heal the sick, knowing that fact as alliyachini; relief of disease was quespicupuni and save him from death was causaricuni; when the patient was out of danger was called quispichisca. Recovering without medic was aliyacuni. The important thing was to regain the lost health or allillay to prolong life or causayninchic.
They know how to perform the procedure bleeding or circacuy, carried out by the bleeder or Circay Camayoc with a lancet. They know the purge procedure or upiyana hampi, very effective for the expulsion of parasites. The Hampi Camayoc also examined the tonge to make the diagnosis of the disease.
And they encouraged the daily bath for good health.
Pulse taking became known as tictic-ñic-circa, existing words for the strong, weak and arrhythmic beats.
They had name for a lot of diseases and also for physical defects. Organs with very small alterations and various pathological states known as severe disease were identified. The life center was located in the heart called soncco. They defined it like this: "organ that feels, that beat and is present through sensations; when man desires, rejects, suffer, enjoy, fear, love". But the vital principle goes beyond the limits of the body to reach the YUYAC or rational soul that was different from the souls of animals and vegetables.
>>906082
This are some examples of their medical vocabulary:
Usputay - hemorrhage; quessa - pus; rupay uncuy - fever; toque - sweat quepnay - vomit; quechay - diarrhea; quella - scar, coyoyo - contussion; pusullu - bleb; Chupu - abscess; uanucuy - gangrene. The veins were called circa and the arteries mamancirca.
The parasitse were called kuyca so Kuycaita Onccoy is a disease that was caused by parasites.
The main diseases had been:
Tuberculosis, malaria, peruvian wart, tetanus, typhus, syphilis, rheumatism, epilepsy, cancer. In Huayna Capac times smallpox.
The sleep was analyzed regarding perceptions of daily life, such as pain, heartburn, tickles, numbness, cramps and paralysis.
It is also surprising their neuropsychiatric terminology. It start from the rational soul Yuyac. Then, arteries and veins with nerves and the spine, the heart, emotional states and head disease. Is impressive the list of mental diseases.
Utik is preferably used to designate acquired mental states, psychological disorders consecutive to actions exerted on the subject by the etiological factors of mental alienation. Utik becomes the crazy or the mad.Uticayak derived from Utik means insane, while Utik chanak means berserk.
Upa means awkward or foolish indicating various states of mental inferiority.
Now regarding the treatment of diseases can be classified medicines:
Of animal origin such as fresh meat of vicuna, dove heart, the blood of the condor, vicuña, vizcacha and fox; fat of rhea, condor and quirquincho; kidneys of tapir and llamas; the iguana crop; the placenta and wool of llamas; broth from shrimp and woodpecker; hummingbird infusion; ascuntuy larvae.
>>906082
Therapeutics based on plant is enormous: the choclla, oca, moco-moco, aloysia citriodora , itapallo, quinoa, hacaguaguani, haquimasci, cochayuyo, zarzaparilla, lignum vitae, molle, calaguala, yuca, pinco-pinco, muña, chuquincalla, paico, pacal, millu, shilinto, chuchuchu, pencacuc, añu, isaña, soyco-soyco, chulli, guaricona, chuquicanlla, guariconda, punctu-punctu, pitahaya, harmico, chulco-chulco, huamanripa, huachangana, haratuc, sallica, olluco, lucuma, tarco, achuma, chauca-chauca, huillca, cachos, coro, tulma, amancae.
Chilca was used for rheumatic and matecllu for diseases of the cornea. The tabaco was aspired in powder form to cure pain head. Coca was utilized as a analgesic and quina was used as a febrifuge. The corn liquor or potion was used for various diseases of the kidneys and urinary tract.
The ancient andeans were great herbalists.
Mineral medicines were gold and silver, the lodestone, sulfur, lead sulfide, clay, tuff, oil, gypsum, the land itself and even arsenic in measured doses.
Regarding the trepanation of the skull there is evidence from the Paracas culture.
The most accepted theory appears to be that originated to cure very common head injuries in wars. Gold plate was used to perform neurosurgery, reaching an average in Inca times of survival to 70-80% of cases, proven by the growth of the periosteum afther the operation.
The Dr. Esteban Roca even performed neurosurgery in patients using Inca surgical instruments !!
This brief presentation is to demonstrate the tremendous scope of medicine of precolumbian andes, being conscious the incas of the vital importance of health in the Tahuantinsuyo synthesized in the wise words of Inca Pachacutec: Hampi Camayoc that ignores the virtues of herbs or knowing some, does not seek to know all, then he knows little or nothing.
Do you guys have any info about Texcotzinco?
33:40
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q9I8vNuIjw
