The Aztec and Norse god of war are both missing one hand.

The Norse god named Tyr was the god of war. He was also known to be the god of single combat, heroism, Justice and Law. In some texts Tyr is identified as a son of Odin but his Proto-Germanic name Tiwaz suggests that he was once considered the father of the gods. One enemy of the Norse gods was named Fenrir who was also a god but in the form of a wolf. The gods attempted to chain up Fenrir but he knew of their plot. The wolf said he would not let himself be bound unless one of them put his hand in his mouth. Since Tyr was courageous he decided to put his hand into Fenrir's mouth while the gods bound him. Tyr lost his hand to the wolf and that is why he is shown only with one hand.




The Aztec god named Huitzilopochtli was the god of war. He was also known as the god of the sun, human sacrifice and patron of the city of Tenochtitlan. He originally was a tribal wizard god of the Nahuas people that had a lesser importance compared to Tlaloc and Quetzalcoatl. The Aztec ruler called Tlacaelel changed the religion of his time and elevated Huitzilopochtli divinity to that of Tlaloc and made him a sun god. What is interesting about this god is a legend recorded in the Aubin Codex. It says the Aztecs were originally from a place called Aztlan and it was Huitzilopochtli who ordered them to leave and find a new home which became Tenochtitlan. In Aztec iconography Huitzilopochtli is painted with a black face. He is adorned with various feathers possibly that of the humming bird and he is shown holding a scepter shaped like a snake. His other arm or hand is hidden behind a mirror sometimes fastened to four planks.




At first glance one would conclude the mirror was really a shield. All the images of this god show his hand hidden behind the mirror object and it is never seen. I just assumed this was his costume and his hand was always hidden inside the strange mirror-shield device. The following art of this war god shows a different view of the mirror on his hand.





My opinion about this mirror changed when I saw a certain piece of Mixtec art. The image shows a man with a small white mitt over his right hand. The man seems to be conversing with a lizard with six circles on his back. The image in the background appears to be a Meso-American ballcourt.



It is my belief that the white mitt is actually a prosthetic. I also believe the lizard in the picture is meant to be the same creature Huitzilopochtli holds in his good hand. Even though one creature is a snake and the other a lizard I think the importance is its reptile nature. The circles on the back of both creatures gave me this idea. The man in the Mixtec art appears to be the Aztec war god Huitzilopochtli. The mirror object in the Aztec war god's hand is probably a prosthetic also.

I find it strange that two completely different cultures both gave their war gods missing hands.
Might there be more mythological similarities between these two cultures?

Aztec mythology says there were four previous worlds, or suns prior to the current age of the fifth sun. Different types of cataclysms ended those ages. The first world was destroyed by flood, the second by violent winds, the third almost by fire and the fourth almost by famine. The Aztecs believed the fifth world would be destroyed by a giant earthquake.ecuip.lib.uchicago.edu...

Here are some interesting myths regarding the formation of the fifth sun and the consequence of its neglect.

"Quetzalcoatl would not accept the destruction of his people and went to the underworld where he stole their bones from the god Mictlantecuhtli. He dipped these bones in his own blood to resurrect his people, who reopened their eyes to a sky illuminated by the current sun, Huitzilopochtli."

"Should these sacrifices cease, or should mankind fail to please the gods for any other reason, this fifth sun will go black, the world will be shattered by a catastrophic earthquake, and the Tzitzimitl will slay Huitzilopochtli and all of humanity."

en.wikipedia.org...

The Norse also have a doomsday prophecy relating to the sun and earth shaking events. The prophecy states that on the day of Ragnarok all the gods go to war with one another. Odin, Thor, Tyr, Freyr and Heimdallr will do battle with Loki and his three children, Fenrir, Jormungandr and Hel. Loki and Fenrir will be released from their prison bonds on the day of Ragnarok when the earth shakes violently.

"High describes that the wolf* will first swallow the sun, and then his brother the moon, and mankind will consider the occurrence as a great disaster resulting in much ruin. The stars will disappear. The earth and mountains will shake so violently that the trees will come loose from the soil, the mountains will topple, and all restraints will break, causing Fenrir to break free from his bonds."

(*Fenrir's son named Skoll will swallow the sun and his other son named Hati Hroovitnisson will swallow the moon. Some poems say Fenrir consumed the sun but others say his sons did.)
en.wikipedia.org...

"With the onset of Ragnarok, Loki is foretold to slip free from his bonds and to fight against the gods among the forces of the jotnar, at which time he will encounter the god Heimdallr and the two will slay each other."

en.wikipedia.org...

Another text explains how the day of Ragnarok will effect the sun on earth.

"Ragnarok mirrored in many ways the harsh reality of Viking life. Many of the elements contributing to the end of the world tie directly in to Norse experience. The event that heralds the end of the world is called Fimbulvetr [Extreme Winter], and is a winter that is so cold that even "the sun is of no use".

suite101.com...

All the reigning gods are to be killed on the day of Ragnarok. Their sons are to rule after them. But what about the sun that was consumed by Fenrir's sons? Before Odin's demise he asks the "mighty weaver" jotunn about any future sun. The Vafþrúðnismál poem reveals that answer.

"In stanza 46, Odin asks what sun will come into the sky after Fenrir has consumed the sun that exists. Vafþrúðnir responds that Sol will bear a daughter before Fenrir assails her, and that after Ragnarök this daughter will continue her mother's path."

en.wikipedia.org...

After the war is over the earth becomes healed and younger gods reign over the land and two human survivors repopulate the planet. If you want to know more details just search the internet on Norse mythology.

I want to give credit to ATS member Kantzveldt because an image in this thread titled "Mitla...Temple of the Devil and backdoor to Hell" got me going on this thread.

Very interesting, I've heard and seen of quite a few gods bearing resemblance to meso-american gods but this would be the first Norse reference. Thanks! Great post

S & F

Interesting comparison.
I found two statues of the Aztec god Huitzilopochtli . One is missing a hand and the other is not.





Also, He was apparently born with both hands and it also shows his mirror/shield...


Linky

reply to post by lostinspace


All the images of this god show his hand hidden


Ah, yes...hidden hand.


Occasionally he shows up around here...

reply to post by SLAYER69


Hi Slayer.

I wonder if the statue with the missing hand had the serpent or the shield in it. Either way both items would have put weight on the hand making it easy to break off.

Some of the art could have been created by followers who just assumed a hand was behind the shield. The older the art the closer to the truth I would presume.

reply to post by lostinspace


In ancient times when a great warrior was captured they would chop off his hand to weaken him; what is a great warrior without his strong hand for he can no longer fight.

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by lostinspace

 

In ancient times when a great warrior was captured they would chop off his hand to weaken him; what is a great warrior without his strong hand for he can no longer fight.

Good point. Then why would a culture continue to show their war god in a weakened position?

reply to post by lostinspace


it's more iconic to keep the masses happy

there's alot of documentation from early times why they would chop off the hands of great warriors and it's always about weakening a leader

Two reasons why the war gods could be missing a hand

1) lesson for their worriers not to get cocky. Even the greatest worrior can loose a battle. Along the same lines. Just because you are a great worrior doesn't mean you know it all. So don't try to overthrow the current ruler

2) aliens came to earth and their general only had one hand. All the cultures they visited made their god of war one handed.

They could rule with one hand tied behind their back??????

I couldn't help but notice that there is a resemblance between the missing hand and the egyptian symbol for life.

It represents the hidden hand. You really think America invaded Afghanistan and Iraq for "freedom"? That Hitler gained power solely through his motivational speeches? That WW1 was caused by the assassination of Franz Ferdinand?

There is always a hidden agenda behind every war, we don't get the spoils of war, we don't get weapons contracts or cheap oil, we steal resources than send our manufacturing jobs to the countries we bomb because the person that put that shrapnel in your ass is willing to work for 15 cents an hour with no bathroom breaks.

We don't get @#$% from war, but who does?

I gotta hand it to you, this thread is original.

The story of Noah rescuing the animals, and the flood, portrayed in the bible, has always struck me as an explanation for something bigger, more "high tech". Since one would imagine its impossible to transport "two of every animal", on a wooden ship, over the sea's etc.. while the whole world was having a giant flood. It seems to be a better explanation that it was a interplanetary "sleeper" ship. Which used cryogenic means to freeze the animals/people, and transport them from our old world (which was destroyed by the floods), and to the "new world" (earth). This would explain the Aztecs mythology for there being "multiple worlds" that we have lived on, and its quite possible that their "Gods" were simply more advanced humans.


A quote from the bible, which uses the plural "our" to describe the image that man was created in, has always struck me as meaning that there was multiple beings who were involved in our conception/creation. The fact that it says "in our image" would also indicate that we look a-lot like them, or at least similarly. So one could imagine that these more advanced "humans" are the beings we worship as "Gods". A good example at how this could be possible, is how explorers who go to unexplored part's of the world, are sometimes worshiped by the inhabitant's as "Gods", and they often get molded into the natives prophecy's of a foretold "God" coming to their people's.


It would also explain how a "God", could lose his arm, since one could imagine an actual God wouldn't be held back by physical problems that we humans have. Who needs a body even, if you can create all this? So it makes a-lot more sense to me, that we are all natural "creations" of the Universal "program code", phenotypes of a central genome, and that some beings simply feel the need to play the part of "Gods" for their own purposes.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
S & F

I'm not knowledgeable enough on this subject to address anything else, but this looks more like the hand broke off instead of being left off intentionally.

Originally posted by bluemirage5

Good point. Then why would a culture continue to show their war god in a weakened position?

Maybe the god is so powerful that losing his hand doesn't matter? but we know the story of tyr losing his hand so it doesn't fit into this theory, he sacrificed it being courageous.

There is nothing in any of those pictures that indicate the Aztec god is missing a hand. It is hidden behind a shield, which in no way implies that it must therefore be missing.
The one statue of said god clearly shows him with two hands, which contradicts your argument. As for the other statue, it is blatantly obvious that the hand was BROKEN off, and that the statue wasn't built with that hand missing.
Furthermore, there is absolutely zero evidence that the one piece of Aztec art you show which actually DOES portray someone with a missing hand is a portrayal of that god. You are making a HUGE assumption in that case.

There is nothing to this other than a series of huge assumptions and giant leaps of faith.

reply to post by lostinspace


The fact that there are such strong similarities between the Norse legends and those of the Aztecs is something that forms part of the thesis, in "Hamlet's Mill," that ancient societies passed on the stories of an historical astronomical conflict between the planets in the form of what we now understand as myth. "Hamlet's Mill" is a very interesting book. I commend it to all ATS'ers. It is available as a free e-book on a number of websites.

reply to post by 007Polytoks


There are aspects of Sumerian legends, discussed by Zechariah Sitchin in "The Twelfth Planet," that are relevant to your thoughts. I find his arguments very plausible.

Originally posted by 007Polytoks
A quote from the bible, which uses the plural "our" to describe the image that man was created in, has always struck me as meaning that there was multiple beings who were involved in our conception/creation. The fact that it says "in our image" would also indicate that we look a-lot like them, or at least similarly.

In the instances in which God APPEARS to speak in the plural in regards to itself, it uses the intensive plural. In other words, it has a plural ending, but the verbs and adjectives which accompany it are all singular. Intensive plurality refers to a SINGLE object or person, with the plural ending simply implying the greatness of said individual. Thus, it does not mean "gods," but rather "great God."

Before he says "Let us make man in our image," it says in the original Hebrew "And (he) Elohim said."
The speaker is a singular individual. Had it referred to multiple entities, it would have used the Hebrew phrase meaning "And (they) Elohim said."
Every single time the phrase "Elohim said/ spoke" appears in the Bible, it uses the Hebrew phrase meaning "(he) God said/ spoke" in the singular, and never "(they) God said/ spoke" in the plural.

So, your entire point is based upon a completely false foundation/assertion.

Interesting, there must be a connection.

That also explains why Hollywood keeps dropping hints and leaving us clues.
It's up to us to connect the dots.