most opressive pre modern state or nation ?

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
20,091
SoCal
#22
Sparta and the Aztecs
Oh, yeah, I've heard that the Aztecs were literally brutal as hell due to practices such as human sacrifice and that it was thus a good thing for the Spanish to conquer them and eliminate their craziness--with the argument being that more Aztecs would have died in the long(er)-run as a result of Aztec brutality than as a result of European diseases.
 
#23
Oh, yeah, I've heard that the Aztecs were literally brutal as hell due to practices such as human sacrifice and that it was thus a good thing for the Spanish to conquer them and eliminate their craziness--with the argument being that more Aztecs would have died in the long(er)-run as a result of Aztec brutality than as a result of European diseases.
Well I guess its a good thing that the Spanish eventually realized that it was impossible for them to control the religious affairs of the native peoples absolutely and started to look the otherway
 

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
20,091
SoCal
#25
Well I guess its a good thing that the Spanish eventually realized that it was impossible for them to control the religious affairs of the native peoples absolutely and started to look the otherway
What'd the natives do after the Spanish began looking away?

I guess that would be a good choice, notice how keep listing relatively small societies, even the Aztecs were an "Empire" it wasn't that big and more of an unequal alliance and tribute extraction system.
Even Venice, Genoa, and Pisa were empires in spite of being small, no?
 
Sep 2013
619
Ontario, Canada
#27
Ancient Assyria was so brutal that eventually neighboring countries and captive societies, pissed off with its aggressive policies, collectively invaded or rebelled and ended it by 609 BCE.

But prior to that it was 300 years of cruelty and unimaginable violence, most atrocities recorded in their own boastings inscribed on the behalf of victorious kings. For instance, when Seenacherib took Babylon in 689 BCE he destroyed it so completely that he found it a city and left it a meadow. We know this because he said so himself in the celebratory inscriptions.

People were massacred, their homes destroyed, and some of them were put living on stakes, all for the growing glory of the Assyrian Empire as they spread across the Fertile Crescent. It was a level of brutality never before seen, and only rarely emulated afterwards, as say under the Huns or the Mongols, though those wielded power for a far shorter period of time than Assyria.
 
Feb 2019
417
Thrace
#29
Ancient Assyria was so brutal that eventually neighboring countries and captive societies, pissed off with its aggressive policies, collectively invaded or rebelled and ended it by 609 BCE.

But prior to that it was 300 years of cruelty and unimaginable violence, most atrocities recorded in their own boastings inscribed on the behalf of victorious kings. For instance, when Seenacherib took Babylon in 689 BCE he destroyed it so completely that he found it a city and left it a meadow. We know this because he said so himself in the celebratory inscriptions.

People were massacred, their homes destroyed, and some of them were put living on stakes, all for the growing glory of the Assyrian Empire as they spread across the Fertile Crescent. It was a level of brutality never before seen, and only rarely emulated afterwards, as say under the Huns or the Mongols, though those wielded power for a far shorter period of time than Assyria.
I read in an article that the Assyrians themselves were possibly suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder because of the unspeakable atrocities they committed. Truly the most violent society in recorded history, yet they can hardly be blamed considering how efficient their ferocity has been.