article on Aztecs

[Brant Gardner]

[Mel]
Some list members expressed an interest in an article of some 15
misconceptions about the Aztecs.  It can be found in the journal Wicazo
Sa Review, Spring 1995, Volume XI, No. 1 by Associate Professor at the
Univ of Texas, Austin, Dr. Arnold Carlos Vento.  The title of the
article is Aztec Myths and Cosmology:  Historical Religious
Misinterpretations.  The 15 misinterpretations, according to the article
include: 1) polytheism among native cultures, 2) the concept of Hell,
Mikltan, 3) fatalism 4) native belief of the Spanish as Gods, 5)
Ketzalkoatl as a Messiah, 6) imperialism 7)slavery, 8) chiomoztok as the
seven cities of gold or Aztlan, 9) cannibalism, 10) human sacrifice by
bloodthirsty priests, 11)drunkenness, 12) myth of the debased woman, 13)
myth of Aztlan in the US, 14) European etymology of the word America,
and 15	) Nahuatl as a name for the national language or culture.

Any discussion and enlightenment for me on behalf of any scholars
generally, or specifically, after reading the article, would be
appreciated by me.

[Brant]
Of course it doesn't do justice to an article to respond to titles only, but
since I haven't read the original, that is all I can go on. On some of these
I have no information because I haven't done much work on the topics, but
what I understand I will share:

1) polytheism among native cultures,

I am not at all sure why this would be listed as a historical
misinterpretation. I can only guess that the author must be defending some
type of monotheism on the basis of Nezahualcoyotl's prime god. Polytheism is
a system of belief in more than one god, and it is difficult to imagine that
the many named deities could be easily dismissed. To my knowledge, there is
no known pre-contact culture that did not have multiple deities.

In Tenochtitlan mythology there is the same evidence for stories moving
across named deities that is also seen in ancient Greece - which was also
polytheistic. Nezahualcoyotl's "theology" has the markings of a late
codifying/regularizing of mythology, something enabled by the nature of the
city states.

2) the concept of Hell, Mikltan,

I would agree that equating Mictlan with the Christian Hell is an
oversimplification, and leads to misconceptions.

4) native belief of the Spanish as Gods,

This depends upon the definition of "gods." The Florentine Codex uses
"teotl" as a description of the Spaniards. The blacks with them were
"teucacatzactic" which I understand to be black gods or dirty gods - with
reference to their dark skin.

The Nahua word we translate as god is "teotl," but that doesn't mean that
there is a direct semantic correspondence between the two ideas. So it may
be true that the natives did not worship the Spaniards, but the best
evidence suggests that "teotl" was applied to them. I can't speak to the
Maya perceptions.

5) Ketzalkoatl as a Messiah,

I have spent years tracing this one down, and the Quetzalcoatl/Messiah
correlation is entirely dependent upon post-conquest Spanish (and later
others) misinterpretations of the native myths.

9) cannibalism,

I suppose there is sensationalist cannibalism, where humans are used as
dietary supplements. In that sense I don't think it existed. However, there
is anthropologically understood cannibalism, which is part of a sacred rite
(as opposed to lunch!). That did exist. I would be surprised if anyone were
to seriously deny that this type of cannibalism existed.

10) human sacrifice by bloodthirsty priests,

This one is kind of telling by the modifier. Human sacrifice, yes.
Bloodthirsty priests? We are stuck on definitions again. They were operating
completely within their religious system. It is impossible to reliably deny
that there were sacrifices. That they were the result of a degenerate
society is certainly deniable.

11)drunkenness,

I am not sure what this one refers to, but the very strong penalties for
drunkenness suggest that it was a known problem, and one sufficiently severe
to warrant severe penalties. One may presume that the penalties prevent the
breach, but it never seems to be so. Laws come after the fact, in an attempt
to control problems. Therefore, I would say that drunkenness must have been
a problem, albeit one they were attempting to control.

I have no comments on the others.

______________________

Brant Gardner
Albuquerque, NM
nahualli at highfiber.com
www.highfiber.com\~nahualli