Human Sacrifice — What Really Happened?
What have you concluded from this case study about scholarly interpretations of Mexica human sacrifice? Have we found an accurate explanation/interpretation of the practice, or have we brought too much of our own interest/obsession into our study of this topic? Explain.
I believe that we are only touching the surface on the matter of Mexica human sacrifice and what really happened. The sources provided were very helpful in giving us several different point of views, yet they all vary or contradict each other. However, I did notice a theme among these sources and the fact that human sacrifice did happen… to some extent.
In the essay titled, “The Enigma of Aztec Sacrifice” by Michael Harner, he gives some statistics. The number of human sacrifices ranging from 20,000 a year, to 80,000 a year, or even 250,000 a year. But there is no hard evidence that links to these numbers being even remotely realistic. Harner also suggests that human sacrificing occurred as a disguise for cannibalism, as it was a necessity given their lack of food. Two other sources, “Understanding Aztec Human Sacrifice” by Patricia Anawalt and “Did ‘Mexika Human Sacrifice Exist?” by Kurly Tlapoyawa refute these claims. Both sources trying to fix our common misconceptions surrounding Aztec human sacrifice. Also suggesting that the original first-hand accounts by Spanish Conquistador, Bernal Diaz, is wrong. That it was exaggerated to demonize the Mexica people and to justify the actions of Cortes’ army. Through archaeological digging and research, they have only found 170 skulls at Tenochtitlan. This makes us wonder what happened to the tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of skulls that were mentioned before.
Most of our knowledge on Aztec human sacrifice comes from the Spanish point of view. A couple of conquistadors that were searching for wealth, and upon seeing the Mexica practices, felt that their religion was being attacked. This so called “primary source” could have been altered in their favor, making me feel skeptical in accepting those accounts. The secondary sources seem more open-minded about the topic, trying to dispel such negative views we have on the Mexica practices. They all pose such interesting theories and I still do not know who to believe. Whatever the case, the Mexica people were living in a whole different world. So, their religious views are obviously going to be different. Whether their practices were justified, I do not know because we do not have enough information in regard to the who was being sacrificed. Being able to compare/contrast the different sources definitely helps us bridge the gap in coming up with reasonable conclusions.
