Talk:Sacrifice in Maya culture

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 11 March 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Votawh (article contribs). Peer reviewers: YumoLu, Jennyfayfay.

Attention needed

The article needs some serious reworking. The article refers to the penis as "the private part" and there are no citations whatsoever. I'll work what I can. HuronKing 9/6/06

I wasn't able to find any verifiable sources to back up the self-decapitations. The content of the article seems very non-professional. I think the article should definitely be tagged as potentially biased in the mean-time. I'll see what I can do about finding sources. -Glassdraggon Dec. 12, 2006

Holy moly this article is in bad shape - I'll see what i can do. -- Oaxaca dan 19:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Added some possible sources. Further verification still has to be done. -schmida Jun. 01, 2007

I removed this from the intro: RJFJR (talk) 21:03, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Spanish conquistadors came to the homeland of the Mayan people where gold, and other precious metals, jade and stones considered precious to the foreigners were used in the making of decorative ornaments.

Plagiarism and worse

The types of sacrifice section contains slabs of text copied verbatim and uncredited from the Gates translation of De Landa's. The relevant portions from this text are: "Apart from the festivals which they solemnized by the sacrifices of animals.. on occasions of great tribulation or need the priests or chilánes ordained the sacrifice of human beings. For this purpose all contributed, for the purchase of slaves. Some out of devotion gave their young sons. The victims were feted up to the day of the sacrifice, but carefully guarded that the. might not run away, or defile themselves by any carnal acts; then while they went from town to town with dances, the priests, the chilánes and the celebrants fasted.

"When the day of the ceremony arrived, they assembled in the court of the temple; if they were to be pierced with arrows their bodies were stripped and anointed with blue, with a miter on the head. When they arrived before the demon, all the people went through a solemn dance with him around the wooden pillar, all with bows and arrows, and then dancing raised him upon it, tied him, all continuing to dance and took at him. The impure priest, ventured, ascended and whether it was mars or woman wounded the victim in the private parts with an arrow, and then descended and anointed the face of the demon with the blood he had drawn; then making a sign to the dancers, they began in order as they passed rapidly, dancing, to shoot an arrow to the victim's heart, shown by a white mark, and quickly made of his chest a single point, like a hedgehog of arrows."

Even worse, this text has been "filled out" by completely fictional and lurid details about pre-teen boys without any references either. If I get a chance, I will try to fix this up, but in the meantime I'm placing a warning tag.--203.214.25.155 (talk) 21:28, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Decided the only course of action is a complete rewrite (I am above IP address user) and I have some time to try Johncoz (talk) 01:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I've completely replaced the original (btw I'm the same editor as 203.214.25.155 above). Couldn't really see much in the original worth saving, and the bits that weren't plagiarised were unsourced speculation, argument and opinion. The new piece is far from perfect, given the limited time I had available, but I think it's a reasonably solid foundation for further work and refinement. --Johncoz (talk) 09:03, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Neutrality and Sourcing

The Human sacrifice section is far from neutral in point of view and may contain original research. Examples:

The attitude of the chroniclers often seems to be not so much outrage at religious cruelty and murder, since they after all were from a world where pious public execution of the most brutal kind was a social norm, but indignation that it was being done in the name of false gods.

No source is given for the above info and it gives every impression of being original material/opinion of the editor.

De Landa fails to mention that he had initiated and overseen this Inquistion himself.

This appears to be criticizing De Landa's actions.Simon Burchell (talk) 10:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

On rereading this section I largely agree (these things happen when you start from scratch), and in addition it is really in the wrong section. Have moved and reworked the material. --Johncoz (talk) 17:45, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I had a quick scan through the changes and it looks much better now. It's nice to see someone working on such an important aspect of Maya culture. All the best, Simon Burchell (talk) 10:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Origins, Meaning and Social function

I feel the article should at least address these issues. There a several problems though, most obviously the lack of scholarly consensus once any level of detail is reached, and the risk of introducing OR as a result. But I think by following the NPOV guideline and sticking to statements "no one would seriously dispute" is probably the safest approach. The possible exception is perhaps the last sentence, which I have therefore heavily referenced and which I believe does represent a consensus, though different terms may be used ("consecration" is very common). However, I am not married to any of the formulations, and would be happy for any suggestions. --Johncoz (talk) 05:04, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Reassessment

I've dropped this from B to C:

• Inline referencing is rather sparse.
• It is still missing some important information and seems primarily focused on Postclassic practices with little mention of the Classic Period and none of the Preclassic. There is also no mention of the Classic Period practice of decapitating human sacrifices, or any hieroglyphic texts or artwork depicting this, some of which are quite famous (for example the quite famous reliefs at Toniná), the sacrifice of Uaxaclajuun Ub'aah K'awiil, king of Copán, by the king of Quiriguá etc. There is no mention at all of the Maya ballgame or associated sacrifices.

I don't mean this as criticism - the article is coming along nicely, it's just in need of further expansion, hence the C rating. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 08:43, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that feedback. I have to admit I may be quickly coming to the limit of my paygrade on some of these issues. Decapitation shouldn't be too hard, but the ballgame stuff sees reliable sources all over the shop. Even the case of 18-Rabbit has a few twists:

"Suicide, as described in the third variation of carotis-bloodletting above, may in addition be understood as an act of bravery in a situation characterized by ultimate and unequivocal defeat. This was probably the case with Waxaklahun u Bah K'awil of Copan and with Pat Buts' K'awil of Seibal." (which implies something like seppuku rather than sacrifice)

Nonetheless, I'm chewing through the literature and when I feel more confident that I understand the landscape I'll see what additions I can make. Johncoz (talk) 15:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I dropped in a reference re the ballgame into the new Further Reading section, hopefully this will help you out. I've never heard of Uaxaclajuun Ub'aah K'awiil committing suicide before - from all that I have read, it seems fairly clear that he was sacrificed at Quiriguá after being captured. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 15:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I've just finished reading that interesting paper, which takes as given that the retrospective reconstruction of Popal Vuh can be generalised as an explanation of the Classic myths of the ballgame. Other published sources are not so sure. The challenge is to get a sense of the weight of the different interpretations so they can be presented in a balanced way. More reading to do ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johncoz (talk • contribs) 16:23, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Reference to Aztecs

There's a line in the first paragraph that says "The maya people would sacrifice their prisoners. The prisoners were most often from neighboring tribes. These sacrifices made them feared and hated by all the other tribes." Should this read "the aztec people...?" PorkchopLarue (talk) 01:09, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Also, there's a line which says "neighboring Aztec communities". The Aztecs were more than 500 years after the Maya, so I reworded it. Darkraix13 22:59, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Toltec-Maya

Does anyone have any evidence to support heart removal sacrifice during the classical era in either the Peten or Guatamala regions? All the evidence for it I've seen is limited to the Post Classic Yucatan. It seems to have arrived at Chichen at the same time as other distinctly Central American traits such as the four-staircase pyramid. The so called "Toltec-Maya" culture. The Classical Maya certainly sacrificed people in large numbers, but I only have sources pointing to strangulation or decapitation. If someone can provide a good cite for classical era heart sacrifice I'll leave things as they are, otherwise I'm going to go through the page and try to clarify the apparent distinctions between the Classical rituals and Post Classic Rituals. 80.68.52.236 (talk) 11:47, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Stelae 11 and 14 at Piedras Negras in western Petén on the north (Guatemalan) bank of the Usumacinta both depict heart sacrifice. Stela 14 is dated to the Late Classic. See for example Sharer & Traxler The Ancient Maya 6th ed. p.724. Piedras Negras was abandoned in the early 9th century, so both stelae predate the Postclassic. Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 17:00, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

"despite his being a central villain of the Black Legend..."

This phrase, referring to Diego de Landa, struck me as POV-pushing. I can claim no expertise in the history of the Mayas and the Spanish conquest, aside from reading all of the related articles on WP out of curiosity. But as the respective articles seem to suggest, the Black Legend is a historiographical theory which claims a counter-factual demonization of the Spanish conquest by its political enemies; on the other hand, the article on de Landa makes his numerous misdeeds against the Maya pretty clear, with a lot of good evidence to back them up.

It would seem inappropriate to invoke the Black Legend with someone whose actions are so well documented. It trivilizes de Landa's very real wrongdoing by invoking a political controversy that doesn't seem to apply to him directly. To me, it seems a bit like calling Joseph Stalin "a central villain of the anti-communist hysteria in early 1950's United States." Well yeah, certainly true, but he also was a brutal dictator responsible for millions of deaths.

At any rate, I won't change it myself, since as I've said I only know what I read on WP about these subjects. But I hope someone with some responsiblity for this article will keep my observation in mind. Junggai (talk) 18:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

The Two Bancroft Boys

Save for the writer's name, there is no reference. Could this be a Pipil custom? Then it is out of place in this article.131.211.214.99 (talk) 18:19, 26 September 2012 (UTC)