Holy Huitzilopochtli I can't believe you're still peddling this stuff after your last embarrassment. At least I can now put my degree to use.
The Aztecs were perpetually challenged by not having the infrastructure to reach either cost. This was problematic, as the Aztecs sources of protein were quite limited (indeed, there are a number of theories associating the mass scale sacrificing of people as a way of augmenting this.) Had they progressed technologically, perhaps-has already been suggested-they that not only were not conquered by, but managed to imitate, to some greater lesser degree, European technology.
They had roads to the coasts. Here's an example of a route, from Berdan's
Aztec Imperial Strategies, pretty much the penultimate work on them. He points out also that numerous tributaries' only obligations were road maintenance and road repair.
There were also navigable rivers, and 3-ton canoes that could carry more food than pickup trucks:
Mexicolore said:
At the other extreme, the largest canoes, made of straight-grained spruce trees, were 50 or more feet in length, capable of carrying either 60 passengers or 3 tons of maize. Little wonder that the Náhuatl word for canoe was acalli or ‘water-house’, from the two words atl (water) and calli or house: the Spanish noted that Aztec boatmen would often sleep in their travelling canoes on long journeys...
Not that the Mexicah specifically needed to get to the coast for fish, they were sitting on a massive lake, their part being mostly freshwater thanks to the dikes they built. Europeans unfortunately did not well understand how to maintain the dikes and prevent the lake from flooding, so they drained it. Here's how the basin looked in the Late Horizon, lake fully and obviously present. Pretty big isn't it.
Aztec sources of protein were in any case better than their counterparts across the sea. Animals are not the only source of protein, and even if that were true they had domesticated ducks, turkeys, and semi-domesticated rabbits and deer.
Also, they did in fact salt fish (yes it's an article about the Classic Maya, but
we also know salted fish was sold at Tlatelolco) and harvest tecuitatl. Anahuac was in fact a major production center of salt, particularly in the western lakes. Humans are furthermore not a good source of protein. It is true there was ritual cannibalism, but we know from primary accounts that it was optional and never more than an ounce of meat at a meal. Your "theory" was debunked decades ago. Here's some data from Sanders'
The Basin of Mexico: Ecological Processes in the Evolution of a Civilization, a book you should read, it addresses everything you've said.
You'll see there were no guinea pigs - these and cuy ranching did not spread as a domesticate further north than Colombia. Domesticated Turkeys have some disadvantages over guinea pigs, namely they take up a lot more space, so they were not necessarily raised in crowded Tenochtitlan or Anahuac itself. Rather they were imported from neighboring midland provinces. This is of course not including agricultural resources,
See Ross Hassig's
Trade, Tribute, and Transportation: The Sixteenth-Century Political Economy of the Valley of Mexico. I concur with you that Mesoamerican logistics technology was inferior to that of the old world - with no draft animals, it essentially reached peak efficiency (overland, anyway) with the invention of the
tumpline during the Archaic period (pre-1600 BCE). Nonetheless, it was adequate for Aztec needs. Here's what Hassig says on the subject in the aforementioned paper:
Tenochtitlan is only roughly 400 km away from the Gulf Coast, not exceeding this limit, and much of this distance had roads and waterways. We also know from colonial documents that fish and other food supplies were transported with pre-hispanic technology well into the seventeenth century, and the Codex Mendoza even gives documentary evidence of food imported from their provinces on the Gulf Coast. Otherwise they would have little to no reason to conquer that land. There's even a mountain called Macuiltepetl, "Fifth Mountain" because it was the fifth major landmark when heading to the coast from Anahuac by river.
The modern Mexican diet of rice & beans provides sufficient protein, but we all know that there wasn't any rice in the Americas then.
There indeed was rice in the Americas - wild rice - but it was gathered rather than farmed.
Anyway there were beans, among other crops, which had dense protein content. Here's the graphs:
Also I should note the graph for corn is without
Nixtamalization
Amaranth, though not commonly eaten today, in particular was very important in pre-hispanic times, accounting for possibly 80% of an Aztec commoner's carbohydrates, and it has about
1.3x times the protein of rice or maize per serving. The problem with people who peddle this """"theory"""" is they seem to believe that A) protein only comes from animals B) the only animals are cows, pigs, and goats and C) that Old World peasants were eating three steak dinners a day everyday. Let us not forget avocados, maguey, nopal leaves and prickly pears, which have decent protein density as well.
(2) The only Aztec ruins I know of in Florida are in Orlando.
Wow. I never thought someone so smart and respectable could start peddling Mormon hyper-diffusionist pseudoarcheology. I guess I shouldn't be that surprised since you're also repeating a debunked myth from 70 years ago. This is Ancient Aliens-tier stuff dude. Don't worry, I'm not saying it's your fault, I know it can be hard to avoid this stuff when just starting out. Florida's ancient monuments are attributed to their very own civilization, often the Calusa and other Southeastern variants of the Mississippian complex. I'm not sure how you can believe they were in Florida but somehow can't transport food more than a couple kilometers.
Moderator Action: It's important to take into consideration intent when responding to a forum post. With that in mind, please be respectful when addressing other forum members. Overtly rude, condescending, or derogatory comments are considered flaming/trolling. ~ LK 
) and 1) given that manflesh (as Christopher Lee's Saruman calls it) isn't that good a source of nutrients I wouldn't rely too much on such a theory. Also you have to take into account the fact that not everyone was allowed to eat humans and it was as a special occasion, which does not make it into a staple. Least of all with there being at least two hundred thousand people in Tenochtitlan alone and sacrifices maybe reaching a tenth of that number in the entire empire a year. The numbers just don't add up.
z
