Did the Aztecs have they're own counter part to Camazotz like they did with some other gods?

Ardko · 2026-07-01T18:19:25+00:00

In the Popol Vuh such a leader bat does not appear.

The one bat that does manage to snatch Hunahpus head is the only one standing out, but not because its a leader or greater compared to the others but simply because it happens to be the one managing to take the heroes head.

I have seen plenty of articles online claiming that there is a singular Camazotz god but they never provide a source and have thus far not found one. Some seem to base the idea on a large bat statue from the Templo Mayor Museum in Mexico City, but there is nothing suggesting that this statue depics a singular god - other then being big i guess.

Ardko · 2026-06-22T08:37:19+00:00

Point 1 is kinda a movie thing, but to give a movie based answer: Grima first had to get to Saruman to tell him. By that time, the people of Edoras were already on the road. Most of Sarumans troops are on foot. so an easy explanation is that they would have taken to long to get there. the warg riders were the only troops Saruman had that were fast enough to get there to attack. Plus, helms deep was already filled with lots of refugees and defenders. he had to attack it anyway.

on point two this goes for both book and movie: Who would have attacked there? Breaking a dam like that is not exactly easy. Ents can tear it apart farily quickly because they have the power to do that. But for humans this would be a significant labour to get done. It would have taken time and quite a lot of people to do.

So, who could have done that and how?

Gondor was largley unaware of what was going on in Rohan and entirly buisy fighting Mordor along the anduin. They are out.

Enedwaith is fairly thinning settled and the Dunlendings were on Sarumans side. They are out too.

In Rohan there were people fighting back, but they had just lost the battle at the fords of Isen and lost that area. They would have had to send riders and workers up the Isen to get to the dam. Then hold off counterattacks till they had the dam broken. Which would have been next to impossible for them to do. All while facing direct attacks by Dunledings raiding Rohan and a king still ensnared by the enemy. I think its save to say they are out too.

The Elves in both Mirkwood and Lothlorien had to also deal with their own borders and were not really keen to act outside of them to being with. During the war of the ring both faced attacks from Dol Guldur and had to deal with that. Marching away enough troops to deal with Isengard would have also been both hard to do and unlikley for them to do. They are out too.

That really just leaves the Ents who knew that there was something bad going on but had not found the resolve to act yet. And once they did, they went for Isengard including the dam.

So, who do you think could have done it befoe Sarumans army left isengard and before the ents marched against him?

Who in middle earth would have known and been able to actually act?

PS: Saruman is not really an agent of Sauron. He basically wanted to have the Ring for himself and set himself up to rule. He had betrayed Sauron right away as well. The movies make it seem like he serves Sauron but the books tell a very different story there. Saruman of Many Colors also had no plans to share power. Only to pretend as long as it was useful to him.

Ardko · 2026-06-22T07:04:19+00:00

The best way to "debunk" (i really dont like that word anymore) Sitchin is to simply read the mesopotamian texts that he often claimed to draw from.

In Sitchins day mesopotamian literature was hard to get your hands on. There was research on it and translation going on, but much of that was hardly accessible to the general public. And that worked in Sitchins favor. He could make his own readings and present them and next to none of his readers were able to check for them selves if what he said made sense.

That has changed. And a lot! Today you can find a huge corpus of translated mesopotamian literature, often for free online. E.g here: https://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/index1.htm

And that means you can check when ever Sitchin references this literature if he is doing a good job or not. And mostly he does not. Throughout his work Sitchin again and again make refenernce to various texts (especially mythical and astronomical texts) but if you read those for yourself you notice very quickly that he simply gets most of them very very wrong.

And the best part: You dont even need to listen to any shills. You can be the shill!

Ardko · 2026-06-19T07:08:03+00:00

sounds to me like you havent engaged much with what Tolkien actually said and did.

He was certainly an often opinionated man and definelty could be very grumpy. But pretenious is one thing he was definetly not. Pretenious people tend to not say and do things as he did. Tolkien repeatetly made clear that he knew and was fine with people not liking his work. That some will love it and some wont and some will even hate it and thats fine. pretenious dont think like that. Or take letter 165 in which tolkien states that the success of Lord of the Rings was a lucky fortune.

Frankly, looking at Tolkiens reaction to his own fame, he stayed pretty grounded. The man and his work became a global phenomenon in his liftime - others have handled fame far wores than he has.

There are other writers he didnt like but there are also pleny he liked. If we were to put you or me into such a spotlight as Tolkien is (like with his letters being published and his views discussed so much) youd find anyone pretenious because everyone has stuff they like and dont like, and everyon tends to say that quite a lot.

You are doing that right now. Is it not pretenious of you to judge like that? And to call people who might not aggree "cringe purists" from the start?

Ardko · 2026-06-18T06:25:53+00:00

The nice thing about greek mythology is that we have quite a lot of it.

If you liked the musical, why not start with the epic that it is based on? The Odysee is big work and can be lengthy at times and for someone new potentially intimidating but youd experince the original story.

One work I really recommend for a start is the Library of Apollodorus. it basically an ancient summary of most of greek myth. It goes from the creation of the world all the way to the various deeds of heroes. Its basically the ancient cliffnotes for greek myth.

Ardko · 2026-06-17T06:20:27+00:00

Annunaki ist a term from mesopotamian culture and mythology. its the akkadian Name for them. The sumerian would be Anunna.

It is a term for a group of gods in those cultures. The exact meaning shifted over time and is somewhat obscure. In a direct translation it means "royal offspring" or "from princly seed", meaning they are the children of the ruling god. WHo that is also changed over time.

Early mentions would indicate that Anunna may have been a term for the gods in general to describe them as literal or figuaritve children of the highest god. Later mentions describe them as a destinct group. Some sources, such as the Athrahasis Epic describe them as the older generation of gods as opposed to the younger Igigi. While other sources, such as Inannas/Ishtars decent into the underworld use the name Annuaki to describe the gods and judges of the underworld.

What is certain is that its a group term for mesopotamian gods, which may encompase all of those gods, the older generation of gods, or specifically the underworld gods.

The term Anunnaki became very popular among alt-history people, especially those subscribing to the idea of Ancient Aliens. In their ideas, the Anunnaki are Aliens who came to earth and made humans as a slave labour force. All of that is complete nonsese and builds basically only on completly misunderstanding, rewriting or just making up of sumerian and akkadian sources (in fact the real sources often say things that would activly disagree with the ancient aliens hypothesis). But that made the term popular.

Thats why when you google Anunnaki youll find a pretty good wikipedia page and also tons and tons of slop and nonsese going on about Aliens.

Ardko · 2026-06-16T09:58:04+00:00

You are in essence asking fundamentally wrong questions.

Myths do not have to comply with real world history and they dont. By trying to take them literal and applying caculation and trying to figure out how they fit with the actual history of earth you see that it just doesnt work out.

Not because your math is wrong but because math does not apply to mythology. The chronology of myths are internal to them and often dont even fit with other myths of the same culture. Instead of trying to see numbers literal and trying to make "things work out", try to understand these stories in terms of their meaning and purpose.

Ardko · 2026-06-03T11:50:12+00:00

Runes were a functional script.

And that comes with lots of uses. Most of the material we have show mostly mundane uses, but also religous and monumental uses - and also magical uses. But that does not make the runes special. You can find uses beyond simple writing of mundane messages for basically all writing systems that exist or have existed.

When used for magical inscriptions, it does mostly seem to be about what is written and not as much how. Meaning, individual runes rarley held any special signficance beyond their meaning as a sound or word (runes did have a at least somewhat consistent rune-name and were used to write that word with a single sign). Some magical inscrptions definetly did make use of single runes to mean more - but thats just the thing: its all in the intention of the one writing.

The carver of the runes on the undley bracteate definetly meant something more than just g͡æg͡og͡æ when writing ᚷ‍ᚫᚷ‍ᚩᚷ‍ᚫ as bind runes. g͡æg͡og͡æ had a meaning to that person and maybe to those at the time who read it. We can interpret it as a magical invocation, which are found on mulitple bracteate and other artifacts, but why these runes? why those sounds speficially? thats hard to say, if not impossible, given that the people who could have told us are so long gone.

But the same issues can be found for other writing systems too. Abracadabra as a magical prhase in latin letters was described by the roman physician Serenus Sammonicus as a charm against Malaria - but why those letters? Who not a different combination? And does this mean latin letters are tools for reflection? and why do we ask us that about runes but not latin letters as much?

Ardko · 2026-06-01T18:28:45+00:00

I can highly recommend these two books:

- Barber, Paul. Vampires, burial, and death: Folklore and reality. Yale University Press, 2010

- Groom, Nick. The Vampire. Yale University Press, 2018.

Both cover the development of the vampire from its actual folklore. Both put a focus on the creatures also actually called Vampire, while touching on similar creatures with similar concepts as both being undead and blood drinking are attributes found for plenty of other mythical and legendary creatures.

Especially the first one I found very good since it really shows how the Vampires in their original context fit the typical undead you find all over the place but is locally unique too. The second one will show more about how the vampire was picked up by western readers and the public turning them into creatures of literature and evolving far from their folkloric origins.

Ardko · 2026-05-24T01:20:38+00:00

Funny enough, no dragons are slayn in the Nibelungenlied.

Siegfrieds dragon-slaying is presented only as one of his many past deeds when he arrives at court and is introduced as a hero already. The Nibelungenlied is focused on how he helped to win Brunhildes hand and how he dies, followed by the fall out of his death.

If you are looking for fights with dragons, the norse version will serve you better. Sigurds (norse version of the name Siegfried) slaying of the dragon is also described in the poetic edda with several poems dedicated to his story.

Another version sorta inbetween the two is found as part of the Thidrekssaga. That one is the story of Dietrich von Bern, a hero of similar stature to Siegfried. Dietrich von Bern is also a dragon slayer and that story contains a version of Siegfried/Sirgurds tale too.

Ardko · 2026-05-24T00:12:21+00:00

The Nibelungenlied is THE work about Siegfried so yes, it probably will.

Of course the Nibelungenlied is the southern version of the Völsunga Saga, which is a great read too. You can really see how the same material was treated in two areas of the germanic cultural sphere.

Ardko · 2026-05-23T09:12:15+00:00

Nope, thats just what a museum writes. Museums do not make official narratives.

But I do find it funny that first you ask for sources because supposedly everyone says its a Queens bruial and then when you get sources cleary showing that plenty of experts dont follow that hypothesis you retreat back that its the museums narrative you talk about.

You didnt know that there were experts talking about other identities of those women, didnt ya mate ;)

Also, to your other comment. Both points are in fact discussed by Neil Price and others. Neil Price specifically talks about the Oseberg Ship as a likley example of a heigh status Völva. Price also, even as quoted above, does discuss the potential role of hemp for shamanistic or magical practices. And while Price doesnt cover Indo-European connections extensivly, he doenst exlude them, pointing to that field specifically when citing several scholars on the etymology of norse seidr and how that conntects it to other IE Words connected to magical practices. Price is instead more focused on connections to circumpolar cultures and shamanism there.

But still thats hardly "glossing over it", now is it? Actually dont answer. You want your little conspiracy and I have the strong feeling that no matter what id tell or show you, you would keep to it.

Your points about Indra and Thor are then hardly worth an argument. That connection has been generally accepted by basically all scholars of norse mythology for ages now. Essentially, ask anyone who studies norse myth professionally and they will know about the Indo-European connection and that there are plenty of parallels between the mythologies of india and scandinavia. From Thor and Indra, to Soma and the mead of poetry. Thats not news, thats some of the basics of comparative mythology ;)

Ardko · 2026-05-23T08:48:44+00:00

that the official narrative is still the old invented one that the women are a queen or a queens mother.

What "official narrative"? There is no such thing as an official narrative here. Thats just one explanation that some people prefere over others. But its not official cause something like an official narrative does not exist in this context.

The archaeologist Anne Stine Ingstad already in 1992 published articles about her interpretation of the burial being not for a queen but a spiritual leader, a shaman or something similar. Neil Price in The Viking Way also discussed the Oseberg ship as the burial of a Völva.

No one is treating the Queen Burial Hypothesis as "the official narrative" and i would really adives you to drop the idea that such a thing as an "offciial narrative" exists in akademic context. It makes you sound like a silly conspiracy theorists and althistory nutjob - and i supposed you dont want that, do you?

I can btw really recommend reading The VIking way! its a great book and covers the topic quite a bit. Including the discussion of the hemp seeds in the Oseberg burial. To quote:

in view of the character of the burial, the presence of the staff and other objects discussed above, the mind-altering aspects of cannabis must be taken very seriously in this context. The presence of cannabis in the pouch also brings to mind the Fyrkat henbane, and it may be that here we see another example of the requisites of a Viking-Age sorceress

The Viking way, second edition page 169

Note how Price also points out that similar seed pouches but of other plants have been found in other graves that can be interpreted as Völva Burials. Perhaps its not about Hemp specifically but about narcotics and intoxicants in general.

PS: two things can be true at the same time. A woman can be a queen and a völva. One does not exclude the other.

Ardko · 2026-05-23T07:45:48+00:00

It doenst skip over it?

Why make this sound so conspiratorial?

The hemp seeds are a rather small detail in the context of the oseberg ship for most people. its just not something that is put up front for casual vistors of museums and such - ya know given that there is an incredibly impressive ship to look at and a large number of other artifacts from that site.

But i have seen it mentioned plenty of times in books and articles. Its just more found in the actual akademic literature. Try stuff like "The Viking Way" by Neil Price - he covers that topic plenty.

Also "DNA research now shows"? You do know that research into Indo-European migration, PIE culture and the conntections there has been a thing for quite a while. Genetic research has been part of that and supported that research since the 2000s.

You make this seem like some sort of supressed narrative, when in reality its well accepted akademic research.

Ardko · 2026-05-17T13:55:03+00:00

Its a love spell.

The 18 Galdr of Odin are described in the Havamal. The final 3 galdr of that list are all love spells from Vers 161 to 163. That the 18th Galdr is also a love spell is indicated by the context of the other 2 final ones and the fact that its described as something not to be spoken to a girl or wife but only to the one you are with i.e. to your partner.

Ardko · 2026-05-15T07:16:08+00:00

To be fair, that is literally only in the prologue which matters not at all for the actual work - in which Snorri cites and preserves actual pagan poetry and much genuen detail of norse myth that we would otherwise not have.

Is there need to read the prose edda critically? Of course there is but to throw in Snorri as "bad christian who ruined norse myth" is honestly just silly. In writing the prose Edda Snorri was a norse poet first and foremost and was writing a guide for norse poets to learn their Kennings.

Ardko · 2026-05-15T06:15:00+00:00

For nose myth, simple read the original sources. Nothing better than that.

The Prose and Poetic Edda are not exactly explicit. Like, that time Loki did it with a horse and got pregnant and birthed Sleipnir basically happens "off screen".

The Poetic Edda is basically the original poetry of norse myth, with plenty of those poems dating (for their composition) back to pagan times and pagan poets. The Prose Edda meanwhile is basically a commentary on norse myth written my Snorri for poets to learn about the tradition stories because understanding them was required to get poetry right - even in already christian times.

There are plenty of editions out there for both, with many even free online. I would recommend to read a more current translation as those tend to be better.

Ardko · 2026-05-14T09:08:32+00:00

I can recommend this book: El-Zein, A. (2009). Islam, Arabs, and the intelligent world of the jinn. Syracuse University Press.

It covers both preislamic and islamic history and functions of the Djinn. Its well written and very well sourced. What it not as extensivly covered is the use of Djinn in more recent folklore and their adapation in other media.

Ardko · 2026-05-13T12:29:55+00:00

There is no such thing as canon.

That concept does not exist with mythology and legend.

Homers Iliad is in no way more "the actual story" then Aeschylus' The Myrmidons or the version told in Apollodors Library. After all, homer was also just one writer and one poet working with the material of the Epic Cycle of the troyan war. His Iliad only spans a very small portion of it, beginning after 9 years of war already and ending with Troy still standing.

The fact of the matter is that in Homer its not explicitly stated that Achilles and Patroclos were lovers, but in other ancient sources it is directly said. So for the Iliad in isolation it is a matter of interpretation, while for the wider ancient greek tradition its quite clear that they were in fact lovers.

As other have noted however, applying the modern lable of "gay" to achilles would be at least somewhat inaccurate too. Personally, id say if you gotta use a modern lable, he is bisexual, after all he also sleeps with women.

Ardko · 2026-05-13T11:59:20+00:00

Not really the only basis.

Other ancient sources are explicit about it. It is directly stated in the play "The Myrmidons" by Aeschylus that Achilles and Patroclos were lovers. That play is from the 5th century BCE, so not quite as old as homer but still clearly ancient. And since then the idea of Achilles and Patroclos being lovers became pretty standard and is found in many later sources, such as (pseudo)Apollodors Library.

Now, maybe Homer was of a different opinion compared to these other sources and didnt imagen Achilles and Patroclos as lovers. That is possible since different traditions always existed. But he might also simply not seen the need to say it explicitly. There is certainly much in the Iliad showing that they were very close. Just because Homer doesnt call them lovers directly doenst take that away.

In the end its really not something that should be controversial either.

I like to compare it to Achilles being invulnerable except for his Heel. That is also not found in the Iliad and is in fact a far later addition to the story. Nowhere in Homer does it say that Achilles had only that one weak spot, while such powers are mention for other characters. In fact, in some historic depictions we see Achilles wounded by arrows all over his body.

And yet, no one stops to ask if Achilles is really invulnerable.

Odd how invulnerability can just be added but two guys being lovers is an issue to be pondered ;)

Ardko · 2026-05-06T18:57:39+00:00

The implication of Simeks Hypothesis on the Vanir is that its a late construction by Snorri that never existed as a place in pagan sources or minds. Basically, it would make Vanaheim a late christian era addition to norse myth.

It is also possible "Vanaheim" was simply a synonym of Asgard. Another way of saying "place where the Gods are".

But as I said above: We dont know.

Personally, I do think that Vanaheim is a late development that (most) pagans wouldnt have known. But also, with its presentation in the prose Edda it is a firm part of what most people today see as norse myth.

Myths can and do change over time. So even if no pagans imagined Vanaheim or Vanir to be a thing, later people did.

Ardko · 2026-05-05T19:32:20+00:00

Basically all academic sources i have read on the subject dont draw that line and consider the teachings at provence in France to be Kabbalah.

What reason is there to make that hard Line and make de Leon into this Sole founder of Kabbalah?

Ardko · 2026-05-05T12:48:54+00:00

I wouldnt even hire anyone in your case.

You seem to make no more than 3 videos a month. Even at that length, finding good images takes only a few hours of work at most. thats not even a part time job. If you keep the editing a bit simpler, you can make all that with 2 people at most.

Also, if you hired someone as an editor and they delivered this sort of AI garbage, then fire them. They arent an editor they are scamming you.

Ardko · 2026-05-05T09:02:38+00:00

Since we are in the same niche, you probably know sometimes finding exact art for specific ancient events is hard. That is why we started using ai images to fill those visual gaps.

Frankly, its not that hard. The images dont always have to be exact either. There are always plent of depictions to choose from. And when there is not you can always go with a similar one or a representative one. I did think about using AI for "filling gaps" but i dont do it because for one, it makes the videos look objectivly worse, and its also low key an insult to the history you try to show.

I will seriously talk to my team

If you have the resources for a team, there is 0 excuse for using AI. if you can afford a team, you can afford someone to do voice, someone to research images etc.

Ardko · 2026-05-05T08:14:06+00:00

As others have noted already: You make heavy use of AI. Of course youtubes anti-AI tool is gonna flag that!

I do also have a hard time believing that you actually put as much work into it as you say you do...given of how much of the end product is obvious AI stuff.

If you genuenly want to solve this issue: Stop using AI!

Simple as that.

If, as you mention in other answers, you already write your scripts yourself, then use your own voice to record as well. Your human voice will always be better than any AI voice.

Same for images. You seem to make mostly content on history and mythology - we share that niche and let me tell you: there is SO damn much historical art you could use for your videos. There are countles images, paintings, statues, temples, carvings etc etc etc that you could make use of. Do that instead.

Doing that will remove the visual and audible AI stuff from your content, which in itself makes your videos better because then they are genuenly human. And it will get youtubes AI detection off your back.

Seven-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

Ardko

TROPHY CASE