Aztecs did not sacrifice anybody! It is a joke!
Vagner Eifler
First, it is not my words - I did not believe it. They are Dr. Peter
Hassler's words, in his work "Human Sacrificies Among the Aztecs and
Other Indian Peoples - Reality or Fantasy?".
Think for yourself! I will give you the spanish text. I am looking
for other versions! Have fun!
# Sacrificios Humanos Entre los Mexicas y otros pueblos Indios:
# ¿Realidad o fantasía?
# Dr. phil. Peter Hassler ©1992 Berna, Suiza.
La base del presente trabajo es la investigación llamada
¿Sacrificios humanos entre Aztecas? - Un estudio critico de las fuentes
de la ideología (el titulo original en Alemán es: "Menschenopler bei den
Azteken? - Elne quellen-und ideologlekristische Studie'), publicada en
1992 en Berna,' Suiza por el Vorlag Peter Lang y escrita por el Dr.
phil. Peter Hassler. Por esta investigación el autor obtuvo el grado del
doctor en la universidad en Zurich, Suiza.
Introduccion
Se tiene por seguro los sacrificios humanos entre los mexicas y
otros Pueblos indios en Mesoamerica. Esto no se puede leer solamente en
los libros científicos sino también en los libros de escuela y las guías
turísticas como saben bien. Estos sacrificios tan mencionados sirven así
como la característica mas especifica de los Mexicas, teniéndolos por
los mayores sacrificadores y asesinos de todos los tiempos, según las
unas ciertas publicaciones. Por asombro, solo existen unos pocos libros
monográficos que tratan el sacrificio humano entre los Mexicas o en
general en Mesoamerica. En 1985 fue publicado "Sacrificios humanos entre
los Mexicas" por Yollotl González Torres. hay otro libro en francés y
uno mas en alemán con referencia a los mayas y finalmente existe una
colección de los artículos de una conferencia norteamericana sobre los
sacrificios publicada en ingles. Ademas se encuentra a innumerables
publicaciones menores.
Pero falta la profunda critica de las fuentes de todas estas
publicaciones. la critica de las fuentes es el método básico de la
fuente histórica. Con frecuencia se aceptaban casi sin critica los
testimonios de los conquistadores, de los misioneros españoles y de los
indios cristianizados que discriminaban la religión indígena
prehispanica como la obra del diablo. Aunque se deberían conocer bien
muchas objeciones criticas de antropólogos famosos sobre que tan famosas
son las informaciones de misioneros cristianos, y no hace falta subrayar
que los conquistadores no decían toda la verdad. "Todo esto demuestra la
necesidad urgente de hacer una profunda critica de las fuentes"
Testimonios Arqueológicos y Códices Precolombinos
Evidentemente ningún español observo ningún sacrificio humano. Sin
embargo, si hubieran existido entre los mexicas u otros pueblos indios
en Mesoamerica ¿donde están las fosas comunes? !Pues muy raros son los
hallazgos de esqueletos y huesos que Eduardo Matos Moctezuma encontró
durante sus investigaciones del templo mayor de Tenochtitlan y de
Tlatelolco.
Aunque hubiera tenido mas hallazgos de esqueletos y huesos no es
suficiente para probar la existencia de los sacrificios humanos: Hay que
darse cuenta que ni un muerto, ni un esqueleto tiene que ser resultado
de un asesinato. Según la criminología se sabe bien la dificultad de
deducir la causa de la muerte frente a una víctima sin haber atrapado al
autor y tener su confesión. Con referencia al sacrificio humano están
los arqueólogos en una situación parecida. Sobre todo hay que pensar que
en muchas culturas de todo el mundo se entierran a los muertos en zonas
sagradas. !También en Europa en las iglesias de importancia histórica se
encuentran sepulturas, que por cierto no se tratan de sacrificios!.
Tampoco objetos ceremoniales hechos de huesos humanos pueden servir
como pruebas para el sacrificio humano, lo cual nos lo demuestra el
culto del Budismo tantrico usando tambores de cráneos humanos y trompas
del hueso del fémur. Como en caso del izompantli, que se puede tratar de
un tipo de relicario.
Finalmente los esqueletos del cenote sagrado de Chichen-Itza no
prueban el sacrificio humano; se puede explicar con muchas otras razones
plausibles, como por ejemplo que se podrían tratar de sepulturas,
víctimas de guerra o de asesinatos o inclusive de accidentes. Ni
siquiera hay datos de Carbono 14 para saber con certeza de cual época
provienen los esqueletos encontrados (el autor en su investigación
(1992) no puede encontrar los resultados en la revista Radiocarbon que
es la revista de contiene los datos de los análisis del carbono 14).
Terminología
El termino tecnico enla lengua nahuatl que se ha ralacionado con el
sacrificio humano es tlacamlctiliztli. Aunque es bien conocido que en
nahuatl existen terminos muy distintos para todos los sacrificios y
ofrendas, no hay palabra especial para el sacrificio del corazon, citado
con tanta frecuencia. Por ejemplo se dice nenacaztequiliztli para "el
cortar las orejas", nenacaxapotlaliztli para "el horadar de las orejas"
y netexapotlaliztli para "horadar los labios". Ademas, hay que darse
cuenta que tlacamictiliztli evidentemente no es un termino tecnico de la
lengua ritual porque su sentido es simplemente "matar a hombres". Este
asunto lo demuestran las siguientes palabras en nahuatl:
Seguan Alonso de Molina (1970) se dice mananmictiani aun "matador
de madre", nomamictia para "el matar a si mesmo" y motamictiani se llama
a un "matador de padre". Ningun traductor del nahuatl se habia dado
cuenta de por que se dice mictia ("matar", "asesinar") como "sacrificar"
cuando los indios mataban a los españoles, pero en caso contrario se
reproduce esta palabra como "matar".
Mitos y Rituales
Una palabras mas hay que aclarar: el mito y el ritual.
Brevemente se puede entender un mito como una palabra sagrada y un
ritual como una accion sagrada. Generalmente hay una relación estrecha
entre los dos. Sin embargo, hay que diferenciar estrictamente la palabra
de la accion para prevenir una confusión, como lo demuestran las
interpretaciones de los grabados concernientes a degollaciones por si
mismas como ritual, no conforme a la realidad a causa de su
imposibilidad. Hay que darse cuenta que a un acontecimiento mitológico
pueden corresponder acciones simbólicas durante el ritual. Así, una
matanza mitológica de hombres no necesita reactualizarse con un
asesinato ritual por fuerza.
Si a alguien no le basta la declamación del mito se le puede
celebrar un misterio, fingiendo la matanza de los representantes. Esto
pasa al fin del drama de los quiché llamada Rabinal Achi. Aunque unos
antropólogos afirmen que este asesinato fingido es un resultado de la
cristianización, no hay que olvidar que el drama del Rabinal Achi se
llama xahoh, "danza" en la lengua quiché. Hay que notar que en el Popol
Vuh este termino significa el arte de desmenuzar y renovar de los héroes
Hunahpu y Xbalanque. Por xahoh pudieron los héroes engañar y vencer a
los señores del Xibalaba. Y asi un xahoh significa mas que "danza",
conteniendo un sentido mágico e ilusorio. Entonces el mito de matar a
Tolgom y los correspondientes rituales escritos en los anales de los
Cakchiqueles demuestran que no mataban a los niños sino solo lo fingían:
el texto en Chakchiquel dice claramente que se usan los ramos tiernos
del sauce en vez de las flechas (Xa tunay chi quexevach ti qui cak) como
aparece en la investigación de Adrián Recinos (1974).
Supuestos modos de sacrificar y métodos quirúrgicos
1. ASERRAR EL ESTERNÓN.
requiere de una sierra circular.
2. CINCELAR EL ESTERNÓN.
requiere de martillo y cincel.
3. ABRIR EL ABDOMEN ABAJO DE LAS COSTILLAS.
requiere de cuchillo.
4. ABRIR Y EXTENDER EL ESPACIO INTERCOSTAL.
requiere de cuchillo y pinzas especiales
5. CORTAR EL CARTÍLAGO ENTRE COSTILLAS Y EL ESTERNÓN.
requiere de cuchillo
Si se hubieran tomado en cuenta los métodos posibles para extraer
el corazón como se conoce en la cirugía y en la autopsia, y si se
hubiera tratado de verificarlos por las fuentes, se hubiese debido
percibir que el diablo no danza en las ceremonias indígenas como dicen
los misioneros, sino que baila en las cabezas de estos que han creado
esta caricatura en la religión indígena.
El la cirugía moderna y en la autopsia se conocen cinco métodos de
la cardioectomia:
1. Aserrar el esternón con una sierra circular.
2. Cincelar el esternón con un martillo y cincel.
3. Abrir el abdomen abajo de las costillas con un cuchillo.
4. Abrir y extender el espacio intercostal con un cuchillo y unas
pinzas separadoras especiales.
5. Cortar el cartílago entre las costillas y el esternón con un
cuchillo.
Los primeros cuatro fueron descritos excelentemente por Roblezek y
Hales en Dumbarton, Oaks (1954). Pero los autores omitieron verificarlos
por las fuentes. Se contentaron con citar los testimonios obtenidos bajo
tortura de los mayas, que como anteriormente he mencionado no valen nada
como pruebas. Es el método numero 1 que Roblezek y Hales tienen por el
mas probablemente usado. Pero parece que ellos han olvidado que para
esto se necesita una sierra. Ademas en ninguna fuente se habla de una
sierra referente al sacrificio humano y tampoco existe grabados
ilustrando este método. Las fuentes concuerdan siempre en palabra y
grabado en el uso de un cuchillo (de pedernal). Pero solo con un
cuchillo se podría abrir el abdomen. Con referencia a esto hay que
objetar que las fuentes tanto en español como en nahuatl hablan en abrir
el pecho. Aún Bernardino de Sahagun sabe precisar "de tetilla a tetilla
o un poco mas abajo"; esto ademas no corresponde con el texto en nahuatl
solo unos pocos grabados dejan abierto si se trata en abrir el pecho o
el abdomen. Porque los grabados son bastante esquemáticos y vagos y no
pueden servir de pruebas para demostrar que los que se abre es el
abdomen. Ademas no se puede apoyar este método por una fuente escrita.
No hay ningún indicio en las fuentes para el método 2. Sobre todo
faltan hallazgos correspondientes, tanto como para los otros métodos.
Solamente el método 3 no dejaría huellas en el esqueleto. Hay que darse
cuenta, ademas, que la mayoría de las declaraciones sobre el sacrificio
humano son muy vagas, solo unas pocas contienen detalles.
Ya es extraño que se tengan a los mexicas por los asesinos mas
grandes de todos los tiempos, así como el de los supuestos sacrificios
humanos tengan la fama de ser su característica mas especifica, cuando
justamente el sacrificio del corazón esta tan escasamente documentado.
Otros tipos de sacrificio humano son todavía mas escasos como la
decapitación, el desollamiento y el sacrificio gladeatorio. Con
frecuencia la degollación es ilustrada como si se practicara con ayuda
de un cuchillo lo cual no es fidedigno. El desollamiento
(tlacaxipehualiztli) es descrito en las fuentes como si se pudiera
escapar de la piel como de un vestido: un solo corte desde la nuca hasta
los riñones debería ser suficiente para desollar la piel de una pieza
entera como ilustran las presentaciones de Xipe Totec. Ademas hay que
objetar que en otras culturas existen grabados de pellejos humanos si
tratarse de sacrificios humanos demostrando la imaginación y la libertad
artística.
Con referencia al sacrificio gladatorio o tlauauanaliztli y también
al tlacacalliztli, hay que notar que hay otras posibilidades para
interpretarlos, como iniciación o tortura, respectivamente como mito y
ejecución por ejemplo.
Simbolismo
En general, se ha tomado mucho menos en cuenta el simbolismo
indígena. Como se ha dicho antes, se practicaban y todavía se practican
rituales en México en que se matan plantas y piedras personificadas. El
corazón significa en todas las lenguas indígenas también un sentido
figurativo. Y no hay que olvidarlas numerosas metáforas. Así yollotli
eztli (literalmente "corazón y sangre") equivale al "cacao" y no indica
al sacrificio humano.
Es bien conocido el dicho: "tener el corazón en la mano" pero esto
no significa que fue sacado del pecho, como he dicho anteriormente. Así,
es comprensible que los españoles no pudieron ver un sacrificio del
corazón porque la extracción del alma no es un echo quirúrgico.
Representando un papel no se necesita matar hombres realmente, como
prueba los mencionados rituales de los Cakchiqueles, por ejemplo.
Finalmente hay que notar que se habla mucho de chamanes pero no de su
iniciación. Entonces la iniciación, culminándose con una muerte mística,
es muy importante en la vida de un chaman. Por esto hay que reflexionar
sobre una confusión de la muerte mística con los supuestos sacrificios
humanos.
Conclusión
Resumiendo, hay que notar que no cada grabado demuestra la muerte
de algún hombre debe tratarse en realidad de un sacrificio humano. Tanto
como que los hallazgos de huesos y esqueletos no son suficientes como
pruebas de la existencia del sacrificio humano. Ademas, hay que tomar
muy en cuenta el simbolismo y las metáforas indígenas, pues hay que
insistir en que "el extraer el alma del cuerpo"
no se trata de una acción quirúrgica.
Finalmente, los grabados y pictogramas que ilustran la muerte de
algún personaje pueden tratarse de la representación de diferentes
fenómenos: por ejemplo una ejecución o un asesinato, pero también un
mito o la muerte mística durante una iniciación ritual. En suma, hay que
decir que no existen ni un solo testigo presencial autentico, ni se han
encontrado las fosas comunes de las supuestas hecatombes de las víctimas
(que necesariamente de vieron existir cuando algún cronista narra que
fueron miles de ajusticiados).
Tampoco hay libros rituales como se conocen el la India ni un
termino técnico en la lengua ritual de nahuatl para dichos sacrificios
del corazón, ni en otra lengua indígena. Tampoco hay una base mitológica
y descripción sin contradicción las posibilidades quirúrgicas de la
cardiectomia (aun en la época moderna) y/o a los grabados precolombinos.
Pero lo que si hay son mentiras, cuentos de "oí decir", cuentos
para niños, fantasías, justificaciones tanto de la conquista como de la
cristianización, especulaciones y teorías. la argumentación circular de
los antropólogos y arqueólogos es evidente: los conquistadores, como
también los misioneros, veían grabados, los cuales, sin entenderlos,
tenían por sacrificios humanos.
Adoctrinados por los misioneros, los indios cristianizados
denuncian la religión autóctona como obra del diablo. Y así, apoyándose
en los informes de los españoles sin critica a las fuentes, los
antropólogos y arqueólogos encuentran los mismos grabados o similares y
los toman por sacrificios humanos, a causa del mismo modo trivial de
interpretación.
Eso es como un gato que se muerde su propia cola. Por todo esto mis
investigaciones dan por resultado que la probabilidad de la existencia
de los sacrificios humanos institucionalizados entre los mexicas y otros
pueblos indios es tan pequeña que no se puede decir otra cosa que estos
sacrificios eran inexistentes.
El fenómeno no es el supuesto sacrificio humano en si mismo sino la
creencia imperturbable de su existencia y practica cotidiana por los
Mexicas y otros Pueblos Indios. Oponiéndose inclusive a todas las
contradicciones de las fuentes.
El 16 de Septiembre de 1810 empezó a sonar la campana, iniciando la
independencia de México. El año de 1993 fue proclamado por la ONU como
año internacional de los Pueblos Autóctonos. Por eso les pregunto
mexicanos, si después de 505 años de la adoctrinacion española ¿No será
ya tiempo de liberarse de los cuentos para niños de sacrificios humanos
y el canibalismo que difundían los españoles?
Para concluir mi trabajo les presento las siguientes palabras en
nahuatl del historiador indígena Chimalpahin Quauhtlehuanintin:
Yn quexquichcauh maniz
in cemanahuatl ayc ix pollihuiz
yn lienyo yn itauhca
in Mexico-Tenochtitlan
(Mientras exista
el mundo no acabara jamas
la fama, la honra
de Mexico-Tenochtitlan)
John A. Mooney
that human sacrifices took place. It would seem that, in his opinion, all
existing evidence of such occurences is inherently unreliable. Apparently
he would only be satisfied with lists of names and photographs during
actual sacrifices as admissable evidence, analogous to the record-keeping
of the German National Socialists.
For whatever it may be worth, I find the available evidence to be more
persuasive than Dr. Hassler's critique.
Vagner Eifler <pep...@ez-poa.com.br> wrote in article
<37064439...@ez-poa.com.br>...
> Hi sci.archaeology.mesoamerican-friends!
>
> First, it is not my words - I did not believe it. They are Dr. Peter
> Hassler's words, in his work "Human Sacrificies Among the Aztecs and
> Other Indian Peoples - Reality or Fantasy?".
>
> Think for yourself! I will give you the spanish text. I am looking
> for other versions! Have fun!
>
>
> # Sacrificios Humanos Entre los Mexicas y otros pueblos Indios:
> # ¿Realidad o fantasía?
> # Dr. phil. Peter Hassler ©1992 Berna, Suiza.
>
[snip]
jay...@my-dejanews.com
summarisation. It should not be taken as authoritative. Courtesy of Lotus's
Domino Translation Object.]
Human sacrifices Between the Indian Mexicas and other towns: Reality or
fantasy?
Phil Dr.. Peter Hassler ©1992 Bern, Switzerland.
The base of the present work is the called investigation human Sacrifices
between Aztecs? - a study I criticize of the sources of the ideology (I
title original in German is: " Menschenopler bei gives Azteken? - Elne
quellen-und ideologlekristische Studie '), published in 1992 in Bern, '
Switzerland by the Vorlag Peter Lang and written by the phil Dr.. Peter
Hassler. By this investigation the author obtained the degree of the doctor
in the university in Zurich, Switzerland.
Introduction has by insurance the human sacrifices between the mexicas and
other Indian Towns in Mesoamerica. This cannot also be read only in
scientific books but in books of school and the tourist guides as they know
well. These sacrifices so mentioned serve as well as the characteristic but
specifies of the Mexicas, having them by the greater sacrificadores and
assassins of all the times, according to certain publications. By
astonishment, single few monographic books exist that treat the human
sacrifice between the Mexicas or in general in Mesoamerica. In 1985 it was
published " human Sacrifices between the Mexicas " by Yollotl Gonza'lez
Torres. is another French book and one but in German in reference to the
Mayans and finally exists a collection of articles of a North American
conference on the sacrifices published in ingles. Ademas is to innumerable
smaller publications. But it lacks the deep one criticizes of the sources
of all these publications. it criticizes it of the sources is the basic
method of the historical source. Frequently they were accepted almost
without criticizes the testimonies of the conquerors, the Spanish misioneros
and the cristianizados Indians who discriminated the prehispanica indigenous
religion like the work of the devil. Although many objections would be due
to know well you criticize of famous anthropologists on which so famous they
are the information of Christian misioneros, and does not make lack
emphasize that the conquerors did not say all the truth. " All this
demonstrates the urgent necessity to do a deep one criticizes of the sources
"
Archaeological Testimonies and Pre-Columbian Codices
Evidently no Spanish I observe no human sacrifice. Nevertheless, if the
mexicas or other Indian towns in Mesoamerica had existed between where are
the common graves? very rare is the findings of skeletons and bones that
Eduardo Matos Moctezuma found during his investigations of the greater
temple of Tenochtitlan and Tlatelolco. Although it had had but findings of
skeletons and bones it is not sufficient to prove the existence of the human
sacrifices: Account is necessary to occur that neither a dead, nor a
skeleton it has to be result of a murder. According to the criminology the
difficulty is known well to deduce the cause of the death in front of a
victim without to have catched the author and to have its confession. In
reference to the human sacrifice they are the archaeologists in a similar
situation. Mainly it is necessary to think that in many cultures worldwide
they are buried to deads in sagradas zones. in Europe in the churches of
historical importance are graves, that by the way they are not sacrifices.
Ceremonial objects done of human bones cannot either serve like tests for
the human sacrifice, which us demonstrates the cult to it of the tantrico
Buddhism using drums of human skulls and tubes of the bone of fe'mur. As in
case of izompantli, that it is possible to be treated about a type of
relicario. Finally the skeletons of the sacred natural well of Chichen-Itza
do not prove the human sacrifice; it is possible to be explained with many
other reasonable reasons, like for example that they would be possible to be
treated about graves, victims of war or murders or including of accidents.
Not even there are Carbon data 14 to know with certainty of as time the
found skeletons come (the author in his investigation (1992) cannot find the
results in the Radiocarbon magazine that are the magazine of contains the
data of the analyses of carbon 14).
Terminology
I finish tecnico enla Nahuatl language that has been ralacionado with the
human sacrifice is tlacamlctiliztli. Although well it is known that in
Nahuatl exists terminos very different for all the sacrifices and offerings,
is no special word for the sacrifice of the heart, mentioned with as much
frequency. For example it is said nenacaztequiliztli for " cutting the ears
", nenacaxapotlaliztli for " drilling of the ears " and netexapotlaliztli
for " drilling the lips ". Ademas, is necessary to realize that
tlacamictiliztli evidently is not I finish tecnico of the ritual language
because its sense is simply " to kill men ". This subject demonstrates the
following words to it in Nahuatl: Seguan Alonso de Molina (1970) is even
said mananmictiani " matador of mother ", nomamictia for " killing to if
mesmo " and motamictiani Llama to a " matador of father ". Ningun
translator of Nahuatl habia given account of so that mictia (" to kill ", "
to assassinate ") like " sacrificing " is said when the Indians killed the
Spaniards, but in opposite case reproduces this word like " killing ".
Myths and Rituals
words but are necessary to clarify: the myth and the ritual. Briefly a
myth like a sagrada word and a ritual like a sagrada action can be
understood. Generally there is a narrow relation between the two.
Nevertheless, it is necessary to differentiate strictly the word from the
action to prevent a confusion, as they by themselves demonstrate the
interpretations to it of the engravings concerning degollaciones like
ritual, not according to the reality because of his impossibility. Account
is necessary to occur that to a mitolo'gico event can correspond symbolic
actions during the ritual. Thus, a mitolo'gica slaughter of men does not
need to reactualizar itself with a ritual murder by force. If to anybody
the declamacio'n of the myth is not enough to him can be celebrated a mystery
to him, pretending the slaughter of the representatives. This happens to the
aim of the drama of the called Quiche's Rabinal Achi. Although
anthropologists affirm that this false murder is a result of the
cristianizacio'n, is not necessary to forget that the drama the Rabinal Achi
Llama xahoh, " dance " in the language Quiche'. It is necessary to notice
that in the Popol Vuh this I finish means the art to crumble and to renew of
the heroes Hunahpu and Xbalanque. By xahoh the heroes could deceive and to
overcome to the gentlemen of the Xibalaba. and asi xahoh means but that "
dances ", containing a magical sense and ilusorio. Then the myth to kill to
Tolgom and the corresponding rituals written in annals of the Cakchiqueles
demonstrate that they did not kill the children but single they pretended
it: the text in Chakchiquel says clearly that the branches are used to tier
to us of the willow instead of the arrows (Xa tunay chi quexevach you qui
cak) as it appears in the investigation of Adria'n Recinos (1974).
Supposed ways to sacrifice and surgical methods
1, TO SAW the BREASTBONE.
it requires of a circular mountain range.
2, TO CHISEL THE BREASTBONE.
it requires of hammer and chisel.
3, TO OPEN THE ABDOMEN UNDER THE RIBS.
it requires of knife.
4, TO OPEN AND TO EXTEND THE COSTAL SPACE.
it requires of knife and special clamps
5, TO CUT to the CARTILAGE BETWEEN RIBS and the BREASTBONE.
it requires of knife
If the methods possible had been taken into account to extract the heart
as it is known in the surgery and the autopsy, and if it had been to verify
them by the sources, had been due to perceive that the devil nondance in the
indigenous ceremonies as they say the misioneros, but that it dances in the
heads of which they have created this caricature in the indigenous religion.
The modern surgery and in the autopsy five methods are known cardioectomia:
1, To saw the breastbone with a circular mountain range. 2, To chisel the
breastbone with a hammer and chisel. 3, To open the abdomen under the ribs
with a knife. 4, To open and to extend the intercostal space with a knife
and special separating clamps. 5, To cut to the cartilage between the ribs
and the breastbone with a knife. The first four were described excellently
by Roblezek and Hales in Dumbarton, Oaks (1954). But the authors omitted to
verify them by the sources. They were contented with mentioning the
testimonies obtained under torture of the Mayans, that as previously I have
mentioned are not worth anything like tests. It is the method I number 1
that Roblezek and Hales have by but probably used. But it seems that they
have forgotten that for this a mountain range is needed. Ademas in no
source is spoken of a referring mountain range to the human sacrifice and
this method does not exist engravings either illustrating. The sources
always agree in word and engraving in the use of a knife (of pedernal). But
single with a knife the abdomen could be opened. In reference to this it is
necessary to object that the sources as much in Spanish as in Nahuatl they
speak in opening the chest. Still Bernardino de Sahagun knows to down need "
tetilla to tetilla or a little but "; this ademas does not correspond with
the single Nahuatl text in few engravings leave open if it is treated in
opening to the chest or the abdomen. Because the engravings are quite
schematic and vague and they cannot serve as tests to demonstrate that those
that are opened are the abdomen. Ademas cannot be supported this method by
a written source. There is no indication in the sources for method 2,
Mainly lack corresponding findings, as much as for the other methods. Only
method 3 would not leave tracks in the skeleton. It is necessary to occur
to account, ademas, that most of the declarations on the human sacrifice is
very vague, single few contain details. He is already stranger that is had
to the mexicas by the great assassins but of all the times, as well as the
one of the supposed human sacrifices have the fame of being his
characteristic but it specifies, when exactly the sacrifice of the heart
this so barely documented. Other types of human sacrifice are still but
little like the decapitation, the desollamiento and the sacrifice
gladeatorio. Frequently the degollacio'n is illustrated as if it practiced
with the help of a knife which is not trustworthy. The desollamiento
(tlacaxipehualiztli) is described in the sources as if it was possible to be
escaped of the skin like of a dress: a single cut from the nape of the neck
to the kidneys it would have to be sufficient to desollar the skin of a
whole piece as they illustrate the presentations of Xipe Totec. Ademas is
necessary to object that in other cultures engravings of human pellejos
exist if to be itself human sacrifices demonstrating to the imagination and
the artistic freedom. In reference to the sacrifice gladatorio or
tlauauanaliztli and also to tlacacalliztli, is necessary to notice that
there are other possibilities to interpret them, as initiation or tortures,
respectively like myth and execution for example.
Symbolism
In general, has taken much less in account the indigenous symbolism. As
it has been said before, they practiced and still they practice ritual in
Mexico in which personified plants and stones are killed. The heart also
means in all the indigenous languages a figurative sense. And it is not
necessary to forget them numerous metaphors. Thus yollotli eztli (literally
" heart and blood ") is equivalent to the " cacao " and it does not indicate
to the human sacrifice. Well the saying is known: " to have the heart in
the hand " but this it does not mean that it was removed from the chest, as
I have said previously. Thus, he is comprehensible that the Spaniards could
not see a sacrifice of the heart because the extraction of the soul is not I
throw surgical. Representing a paper it is not needed to really kill men,
like test the ritual mentioned ones of the Cakchiqueles, for example.
Finally it is necessary to notice that it is spoken much of chamanes but not
of his initiation. Then the initiation, culminating itself with a mystical
death, is very important in the life of chaman. By this it is necessary to
reflect on a confusion of the mystical death with the supposed human
sacrifices.
Conclusion
Summarizing, is necessary to notice that each engraving does not
demonstrate the death of some man must be in fact a human sacrifice. As much
because the findings of bones and skeletons are not sufficient like tests of
the existence of the human sacrifice. Ademas, is necessary to very take into
account the indigenous symbolism and metaphors, because there is to insist on
which " extracting the soul of the body " is not a surgical action.
Finally, the engravings and pictogramas that illustrates the death of
some personage can be the representation of different phenomena: for example
an execution or a murder, but also a myth or the mystical death during a
ritual initiation. In sum, it is necessary to say that they do not exist nor
a single eyewitness I authenticate, nor have been supposed the common graves
of hecatombes of the victims (who necessarily of saw exist when some cronista
narrates that thousands were of executed).
There are no ritual books either as know India nor I finish technical in
the ritual language of Nahuatl for these sacrifices of the heart, nor in
another indigenous language. Either there is a mitolo'gica base and no
description without contradiction the surgical possibilities of cardiectomia
(even at the modern time) and/or to the pre-Columbian engravings.
But what if there is they are lies, stories of " I heard say ", stories
for children, fantasies, justifications as much of the conquest as of the
cristianizacio'n, speculations and theories. the circular argumentation of
the anthropologists and archaeologists is evident: the conquerors, like
also the misioneros, saw engravings, which, without understanding them, had
by human sacrifices. Indoctrinated by the misioneros, the Indians
cristianizados denounce the native religion like work of the devil and thus,
supporting itself in the information of the Spaniards without he criticizes
to the sources, the anthropologists and archaeologists find the same
engravings or similars and take them by human sacrifices, because of the
same trivial way of interpretation. That is like a cat that bites its own
tail. By all this my investigations they give by result that the
probability of the existence of the institutionalized human sacrifices
between the Indian mexicas and other towns is so small that another thing
cannot be said that these sacrifices were nonexistent. The phenomenon is not
the supposed same human sacrifice in if but the imperturbable belief of its
existence and practices daily by the Mexicas and other Indian Towns. Being
against including a all the contradictions of the sources. The 16 of
September of 1810 began to sound to the bell, initiating the independence of
Mexico. The year of 1993 was proclaimed by the UN like international year of
the Native Towns. For that reason to them I ask Mexican, if after 505 years
of adoctrinacion Spanish it will not be already time to free of the stories
for children of human sacrifices and the cannibalism that spread the
Spaniards?
In order to conclude my work I present/display the following words to them in
Nahuatl of the indigenous historian Chimalpahin Quauhtlehuanintin:
Maniz Yn quexquichcauh in cemanahuatl ayc ix pollihuiz yn lienyo yn itauhca
in Mexico-Tenochtitlan
(While the world exists did not finish jamas the fame, honors it of Mexico-
Tenochtitlan)
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
ClockWFT
>From: Vagner Eifler <pep...@ez-poa.com.br>
>Date: 4/3/99 9:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <37064439...@ez-poa.com.br>
>
>Hi sci.archaeology.mesoamerican-friends!
>
> First, it is not my words - I did not believe it. They are Dr. Peter
>Hassler's words, in his work "Human Sacrificies Among the Aztecs and
>Other Indian Peoples - Reality or Fantasy?".
It is so important that "our side" be blameless, ins't it?
quir...@aztec.asu.edu
cloc...@aol.com (ClockWFT) wrote:
> It is so important that "our side" be blameless, ins't it?
The actions of the invading Spanish army are documented. Read the work of
Bernal Diaz del Castillo in "The True History of the Conquest of New Spain."
He reports the slaughter of hundreds of people in the first battle on Terra
Firma in present day Campeche. This slaughter was conducted to impress upon
the "first vassals of his Majesty in New Spain" the power of their new
masters.
An excellent example of human sacrifice is Diaz's account of the Spanish
entry in Cholula. All the notable people had gathered in the main plaza to
greet the foreigners. I imagine this would be a bit like a great crowd
gathered to see aliens from another world. Everybody important in the
Cholulan society would have been there. This part is not my imagination.
The Spanish rode in and summararily murdered the entire mass of people. They
allowed no one to escape from the enclosure alive. Everyone was murdered.
You can read the words of one of murderers in his "true history." This
scenario was repeated on many occasions by other Spanish conquerors, in Peru,
La Florida, Guatemala. It was a tactic of conquest. It was human sacrifice
and genocide. And we have the written words of the perpetrators as evidence.
They wrote them to further glorifiy their accomplishments!!!
What is noteworthy in this debate is the language used to describe the
actions of the parties. The conquerors' views have prevailed in the
discussion to this day. We do not discuss Spanish "human sacrifice" even
though it is evidenced. The academic community promolgates the idea of Native
American "human sacrifice" (and they continue to add to the list of ancient
societies that they believe practiced it) without any actual evidence. Where
is the discussion of how criminals were punished? Was there capital
punishment? If so, by what means?
The fact that the conquering Spanish said that there was human sacrifice is
accepted as fact. This is not critically reviewed. It does not seem to
matter that almost every writing from New Spain were rewritten by the
propagandists in the Council of the Indies in Spain. It does not seem to
matter that it was illegal to write anything whatsoever about the ways of the
Indians, except with permission and review by the Council of the Indes. It
does not seem to matter that the information relied upon was created and
manipulated to propagandize in its day.
April 22 is fast approaching. It is the 422nd anniversary of the decree to
confiscate the writings by Sahagun, and making illegal writing about anything
in New Spain. Ten years ago a friend and I decided to call April 22 "Cover
Up Day." We were delighted when Nixon picked Cover Up Day for his last day.
Only a new review of and critical inquiry into the history of the conquest
and the sources of the basis of our contemporary "belief" in ancient human
sacrifice can end the effects of the cover up that began on April 22, 1577.
When "I, The King" was penned at the bottom of the Royal Dcree of April 22,
1577 the cover up began. When it will end remains to be answered.
I commend those who are investigating this area.
ekb...@my-dejanews.com
True Story of the Conquest of New Spain". And I've read today the chapter
about the Cholula incident. It is true that they attacked all of those
present in the enclosure, but Bernal wrote previously that this happened two
or three days after they had arrived in Cholula, and only after they got
proof, from three different sources, that they were going to be attacked.
Bernal also wrote that Cortes warned the Cholulans who had given word of the
attack not to come to the enclosure on that day.
Being Mexican, I've heard a lot about the conspiracy to present the Spaniards
as honest men who were only deffending themselves from the "savage" aztecs. To
be honest, in my heart I want Bernal to be a liar, but now that I am reading
what he wrote it is extremely difficult to tag him as one. There are a lot of
accurate descriptions of places, customs and facts in his book. The best I can
do is believe that he didn't understand fully what he saw, and that maybe he
exaggerated some things.
You should stop a little before presenting his book as proof of the
blodthirsty lust of the Spaniards; after all, he also says that the aztecs
ate human meat and engaged in sodomy and incest. And if you accept one as
truth then you are also giving credit to the other.
Ekbalam.
quir...@aztec.asu.edu
Different cultures have different customs. The Spaniards had the custom of
slaughtering people in the process of conquering them. They certainly did not
respect other cultures or try to understand other cultures. They rationalized
their atrocities, as do all conquerors.
His book is definite proof of the slaughter at Cholula and others sites.
This does not mean that the conqueror understood the customs of the Aztecs.
We must accept as truth the parts of the story that we know he understood.
When he says they cut the fat of a dead Indian to sear the wounds of a horse,
I believe him. When he comments on Aztec customs I know that his comments are
based on the knowledge and thinking of a sixteenth century Spaniard, a
conquistador, a devout Catholic, and an extremely loyal subject of the
Spanish Crown. He was no anthropologist, but he did know how to cut the fat
from a dead Indian to heal the wounds of a horse. This much is true.