Where did the Aztecs come from?

piegrande

Bronze Member
May 16, 2010
1,051
667
There has been controversy about the origin of the Aztecs. Oral tradition said they left the lake where they once lived, something about other tribes being angry at their primitive heart surgery, heh, heh. Suggestions have included Utah and other places. Recently, the Mexicans themselves have said, near Guadalajara in Jalisco.

In 2020, my wife and I did an ancestral DNA test. 23andme (this is not a recommendation, this is just the one we used) shows places where in ancient times your ancestors lived. I was looking at the results, and thought, hey, that would be nice. Too bad we don't know any people of Aztec ancestry; we could test them and find out their origin.

One day, it came over me. Idiot!!! My wife is Aztec ancestry, mixed of course with Spanish, and I have her report on my desk! I had to laugh at my own stupidity. We live on property once owned by Moctezuma II, known to the Spanish as Montezuma.

Yes, they came from near Guadalajara. Probably over by the ocean not far away.
 
OP
P

piegrande

Bronze Member
May 16, 2010
1,051
667
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #2
I want to repeat something I have posted before. I studied this issue over more than 30 years, reading not just treasure books, but when possible, the Aztec writings and Cortes letters to the King of Spain, as well as talking to the descendants of Moctezuma II in this village.

I make no secret in my belief the treasure of Moctezuma II is here. I also have solid reasons to believe there was more than one treasure. Each emperor may have had his own. MII inherited much of his from his grandfather, via his father who was not an Emperor. So, I think some who think they are chasing the treasure of Montezuma (MII) are actually chasing the treasure of previous Emperors. So, different legends may be true, just not the same treasure.
 

pepperj

Gold Member
Feb 3, 2009
28,734
95,829
Detector(s) used
Deus, Deus 2, Minelab 3030, E-Trac,
Primary Interest:
Relic Hunting
Have heard from different sources (programs/podcasts) that these ancestral DNA tests have to be taken with a grain of salt.
 
OP
P

piegrande

Bronze Member
May 16, 2010
1,051
667
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #5
I have spent a lot of time on DNA ancestral testing, probably starting maybe 20 years ago. Back then they could only tell you about the Y-markers on male data, and if I plugged in my own data, and did it the second time it would tell me the two were probably related within the last couple hundred years.

Then, they came out with data for women, passed from mother to daughter, again almost no usable data came from it.

Then, finally, they came out with something that is actually usable. It might not be perfect. For example, a great-grandson known very well was labeled as a distant cousin. But, that is only one error out of 1500 kinfolk identified.

So, now while it is not perfect, it is nearly so.

I suspect those who talk about salt have actually not used it.
 
OP
P

piegrande

Bronze Member
May 16, 2010
1,051
667
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #6
My daughter is around 54. When she was a little girl, a high school student in our rural city was found murdered at a local shopping center. A few years ago, using ancestral data they found the man who did it. I would say that is not consistent with talks of salt.
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Discussions

Top