   |
| Quetzalcoatl's Benevolent Religion |
|
|
He never admitted sacrifices of the blood of humans nor of animal, but rather only of bread and roses, flowers and perfumes, and of odors. [Also] he watched and prohibited with much efficacy wars, thefts, murders and other harms which they did to each other. Whenever wars were mentioned before him, or other evils concerning the wrongs of men, he would turn his face and cover his ears so that he would neither see nor hear them. ( Slightly differing versions of this passage occur in Bartólome de las Casas, Apologética Historia Sumaria, 2 volumes, edited Edmundo O'Gorman, (Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 1967), 1:644; Torquemada, 1943, 2:50; and Mendieta, 1971, 92.) Parts of this theme also appear in texts written by natives. The Florentine Codex indicates that Quetzalcoatl required little of them: "you shall offer him, you shall sacrifice before him only serpents, only butterflies." (Sahagún 1950-75, 10:160.) In the Anales de Cuauhtitlan the conflict over human sacrifice becomes the reason for the exodus of Quetzalcoatl from Tula: It is told that, when Quetzalcoatl lived, the devils repeatedly tried to trick him that he would perform human sacrifices, killing men. But he always refused and did not condescend, for he greatly loved his vassals, who were the Toltecs. Rather his sacrifice was always of snakes, birds and butterflies which were killed. It is told that for this reason the devils were angered, and they began to ridicule him when they told him what they wished, in order to disturb him and make him flee, which in truth happened. (Anales de Cuauhtitlan, 1975, 8.) The similarity in these accounts concerning the items sacrificed (snakes, birds, butterflies) seems to be tapping some common indigenous theme. In spite of these close parallels among these two texts written by Nahuas, in Nahuatl, Quetzalcoatl's extreme aversion to human sacrifice falls under suspicion. The first hint that this is a distorted theme come from the Anales de Cuauhtitlan itself. It is the only source which gives the aversion to human sacrifice as the reason for Quetzalcoatl's departure. All other sources agree that the cause was either drunkenness or some breach of ritual purity. The case for these latter elements as part of the real native legend is quite strong, in stark contrast to the single attestation of the refusal of human sacrifice in the Anales de Cuauhtitlan. Nevertheless, it might still be considered a valid native option, were it not for other incongruities. Quetzalcoatl's distaste for human sacrifice is put to question by other sources. The Histoyre du Mechique and the Leyenda de los Soles both recount expanded versions of a part of the Quetzalcoatl legend which also appears in the Anales. The Anales merely reports that Quetzalcoatl goes in search of the bones of his father. Each of the other two give much more detail about the death of Quetzalcoatl's father which surround the event reported in the Anales. In the Histoyre: [Quetzalcoatl's brothers] returned to look for Quetzalcoatl and they made him believe that his father had been changed into a rock, persuading him also that he sacrifice and offer something to this rock, such as lions, tigers, eagles, little animals, butterflies, for he would not be able to find these animals. And as he did not wish to obey them, they wanted to kill him, but he escaped from among them and climbed a tree, or something like it, on top of that same rock and shot arrows at them and killed them all. Having done this, others came seeking him with honors and they took the heads of his brothers and emptied the skulls to make drinking cups. ("Historia de Mexico" In Teogonía e Historia de los Mexicanos, ed. Ángel María Garibay Kintana, (Mexico: Editorial Porrúa, 1973), 113-4. This translation also translates the title. I use the French title of the original for better recognition. ) This is a far cry from the Quetzalcoatl of the friars who covered his eyes and ears so as not to be reminded of death. The inclusion of the sacrificial animals also shows a tie to other reported tales of Quetzalcoatl, providing an entirely different context for the butterfly sacrifices. Even more important for the clarification of Quetzalcoatl's relation to death and sacrifice is the account found in the Leyenda: His uncles were greatly angered, and shortly they left. Going before Apanecatl who came out quickly. Ce Acatl (another name for Quetzalcoatl) rose and split open his head with a smooth and deep cut, from which blow [Apanecatl] fell to the ground below. Immediately [Quetzalcoatl] caught hold of Solton and Cuilton. The beasts blew on the fire and he killed them quickly. They gathered them together, cut a little of their flesh, and after they tortured them they cut open their chests. ("Leyenda de los Soles" In Codice Chimalpopoca, translated and edited by Primo Feliciano Velázques, Mexico: Imprenta Universitaria, 1975, 125. While human sacrifice is not explicitly stated, the implications are evident. Not only were the chests opened, but the fire is also reminiscent of a form of Nahua human sacrifice. The close correspondence between the accounts in the Histoyre and Leyenda indicate a common relationship to the native lore, while the abbreviated account of the same event given in the Anales is more closely related to Spanish treatments of the subject. From a subjective point of view, the details given in the Histoyre and the Leyenda are rich and non-European. It is difficult to imagine those tales coming from a Spanish mind. It is therefore likely that the aversion to human sacrifice is a later addition to the Quetzalcoatl cycle, since two important and reasonably pre-Hispanic portions of the tale cycle have Quetzalcoatl a protagonist in murder, and likely in human sacrifice. The pressures which altered this aspect of the Quetzalcoatl tales were prevalent everywhere the Spaniards went in Mesoamerica, for the practice of human sacrifice was pan-Mesoamerican. In Central Mexico, the native response was to purport that Quetzalcoatl had refused human sacrifice, and it was some other devil which had made them do it. In other cultural areas of Mesoamerica, the same forces produced the same results, but with a very interesting twist. For at least one native reporting in 1581 from Mérida, Yucatan, the scapegoat for the Mayan idolatry was this very Quetzalcoatl himself: It is said of the first inhabitants of Chichen Itza that they were not idolaters until Ru ralcan [Kukulcan, the Maya equivalent of Quetzalcoatl] the Mexican captain entered these parts. This one taught them idolatry and the necessity, as they say, he taught them to idolatrize... [Before] they had heard of a creator of all things, of the creation of the heaven and of the earth, and of the fall of Lucifer, of the immortality of the soul, of heaven and of Hell and of the universal flood. (Cristóbal Sánchez, "Relación de Tecuato y Tepacan (1581)" In Colección de Documentos inéditos relativos al descubrimiento, conquista y organización de las antiguas posesiones Españoles de Ultramar, (Madrid: Establecimiento Tipográfico Sucesores de Ribandeneyra, 1898), 11:121.) The general characteristics of this passage are identical to those from Central Mexico. The former native religion was very close to the Catholic, and only some devil made them fall from it. The passage is a good native example of a distortion by selection. Both Central Mexico and the Maya lands were under the same pressures of the Conquest, which produced similar results in the recorded form of their lore on human sacrifice. However, where Quetzalcoatl is the hero in Central Mexico, he is the devil himself for the Maya. With that single exception the passage could have come from Central Mexico. The uniform pressures of the Conquest created a widespread response which took the form of presenting the natives as fallen Christians. The evidence of this passage strongly suggests that it is the pressures of the Conquest which created the benevolent religion motif. The difference in the role of Quetzalcoatl is entirely due to the political realities of the two areas. It might be suggested that the human sacrifice is related to a historical person, and that the benevolent Quetzalcoatl is a different entity. The legendary material does not support such a division. The division among the sources is between native and Spanish descriptions of Quetzalcoatl, not in differing aspects of Quetzalcoatl's figure. As will be seen below in a discussion of the Pyramid of the Feathered Serpent at Teotihuacan, these elements of human sacrifice have a better historical attestation than does the benevolent religion theme. |
||
| by Brant Gardner. Copyright 1998 |
Pressures similar
to those which told of monotheistic religion for Quetzalcoatl at Tula also appear to have significantly shaped
the reported form of Quetzalcoatl's religion. The Spaniards were clearly repulsed by the frequent human sacrifices
which were part of the Nahua religion. They found Quetzalcoatl's religion much more palatable. A passage attributed
to Andrés de Olmos illustrates the standard version of Quetzalcoatl's religion:|
|
 |