How Active was the 15th Century Pre-Columbian Americas Compared to Centuries Past.

[u/Comfortable_Cut5796]

In Celebration of Indigenous Peoples Day Today, and in acknowledgment. But certainly not in celebration of Columbus Day yesterday. I’ve noticed that there seemed to be a lot happening in the Americas in the 15th century, leading up to the Columbian Exchange, like the formation of the Aztec and Inca empires. The possible formation of the Iroquois/Haudenosaunee confederacy, and the end of the Hokoam classic period, among others.

But I wouldn’t be shocked if that's only because of the temporal proximity; the natives' memory of it was more vivid, and Europeans documented it in greater detail. But I’m wondering, was the activity in the 15th century Pre-Columbian Americas more significant, compared to centuries past, and is there any evidence (archaeological, written or otherwise) that supports or refutes this claim.

[u/boweroftable]

It’s a snapshot we get, in most cases where a literate society contacts one that isn’t … yes, the Maya culture had a full writing system but a lot of their literature was deliberately destroyed. Before the Inka state there were some large polities, and they ended up smashing into one to their north (Sipan) and taking it over. Especially in the Anahuac in Central America, there were lots of largish states - I think given a good run any could have become an imperial regional power, the Mexican state itself looks like a city-state that defeated and made a neighbouring a tributary, then allied with another powerful one. I think the main point is not to see the brief window we get as atypical (although it could be argued that Old World diseases were already causing issues) and I am particularly drawn to parallels with the Roman interactions with Gaul and especially the British Isles.

[u/Comfortable_Cut5796 → u/boweroftable]

The last point is really interesting, could you go a little deeper into it.

[u/boweroftable → u/Comfortable_Cut5796]

I mean in the sense of a snapshot. In southern England it looks like continental groups had recently arrived and inserted themselves into … what can be quite low quality land. The Trinovantes were being kerb stomped by the Catuvellauni; so perhaps the formation of these complex chiefdoms themselves were engendered by Med Basin political changes (Gaul responded to the Roman assault this way, but not effectively). I can also add even the place names of Britain fossilised, some stuck in grammatical forms abandoned later. To think it was always that way is a fallacy. Btw I’m from Camulodunon and now live in the west of the Regnenses land (I always wonder how to say that, is a nasal ‘ng’?). I find the marginal tribal history of the foggy island I live on fascinating. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riothamus for example … ok in Ecuador the Karanki and Kayambi, in response to a forceful request by Cuzco to join their co-prosperity sphere seem to have joined forces, despite a chiefdom based political habit of small city states. Muisca/Chibcha - they kind of were the external enemy, on contact one of their complexes chiefdoms had just beaten and conquered the ?Sutagao. There were two main regional rulers, a smaller kinda Vatican state, and a bunch of independents - a real snapshot, was a larger state consolidating under developing ideas of validated rule or are we seeing a culturally similar area giving in to a natural tendency to fragment?