Skip to comments.SACRIFICE [Professors say Gibson's Apocalypto is biased against Mayan bloodletting]
Posted on 12/05/2006 11:45:28 PM PST by freedomdefender
Let's get right to the point, shall we? About halfway through Mel Gibson's movie "Apocalypto," which opens this week, viewers are treated to a stomach-turning scene of human sacrifice, set in a Mayan city around 1500. It's not revealing too much to say that the movie's hero is captured by a gang of marauders, bound, marched through the jungle, painted blue, and forced to the top of a pyramid where heads roll.
In a smaller version of the outrage and skepticism that preceded the opening of "The Passion of the Christ"is it historically accurate? is it anti-Semitic?scholars who study the ancient Maya are concerned that Gibson's film will distort the great civilization and demean its descendents, six million of whom still live in Central America. Yes, the Maya sacrificed humans to the gods, but these rituals were part of a complex worldview: the Maya believed that their bodies, their blood, were created by the gods and that they occasionally needed to repay this debt with human life. "The gods need you," explains David Carrasco, professor of religious history at Harvard. "They depend on human life for their own existence, there's this kind of reciprocity." In sacrifice, he adds, the people are becoming like gods. Based on the trailer, Carrasco believes that Gibson has made the Maya into "Slashers," and their society a "Hypermasculine fantasy."
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
A.k.a., cultural relativism. Apparently that great Prophet and Priestess Margaret Mead wouldn't approve of this movie either. Brutality is A-OK, as long as it's a part of a non-Judeo/Christian culture.
All I am giving is my opinion and the reason for my holding it.I am not trying to dissuade anyone else from going.
I would be interested in your opinion after you do see it.
Sure, that makes sense, seeing that it's coming from Newsweak.
Regardless of how the nay sayers paint it, the Maya used humans as a sacrifice to their 'gods'. Can't paint the picture in any other way unless you lie.
I'm glad someone got around to pointing this out, and while the film is about the Maya, efforts to portray them as terribly different from the Aztecs are more than a bit disingenuous.
I think you hit the nail on the head;it will be another film for those who have eyes to see. The movie may in many cases,open up those eyes that hitherto had been open but not really seeing. Why it may even open some that been shut entirely.
But IIRC the way I got it (did a semester down there) was that the decline around 900-1100 ad of the mayan centralized city-states was due to possibly climate change/drought/agricultural catastrophe or possibly the collapse of Teotihuacan created a domino effect, sort of the like the stock market collapse here in 1929.
But this was just the "urban civilization/trade centers" part of mayan culture, the people themselves survived scattered into smaller polities.
Regardless of the much-disputed causes, the decline of the big city-states supposedly might have actually helped ensure the survival of the maya peoples relatively intact ethnically after Spanish conquest, because they were more dispersed in the inaccessible parts like Quintana Roo (Yucatan was almost all dense jungle; still is pretty dense.) & the Guatemalan Highlands
Chichen & Uxmal & Coba if I recall correctly were all very much thriving in the post-classic period. Mayapan did get sacked in a revolt I think though. But the last Mayan city-state at Tayasal (Guatemala,founded by Itza Maya ) didn't fall to spanish colonial control until around 300 years ago.I know that one of the Bishops in charge of converting the maya ordered some important mayan codexes destroyed. (EEK!)
It's been my understanding that the great Mayan cities might have disappeared under the jungle canopy & Spanish rule, but the Maya people (genetically, linguistically & culturally related to the people who built the pyramids) are still there.
But I'm certainly no expert, hopefully someone on FR with better credentials will settle the question for us here.I have a feeling we'll be seeing plenty of threads about this because of the movie.
Cultural relativism gone mad.
Well, if South Park say it, it must be true!!!
Did our Lady of Guadalupe come to stop the Mayan sacrifices or was it a different time?
It was a classic.
This was what was claimed by those who investigated the phenomenon. There is no similiarity to Christians in the Arena since the ceremony was not designed to glorify the power of the state versus a subversive religious group. Nor were the victims considered enemies of the Volk as were the Jews.
Those chosen for this from within were honored and treated with great consideration and solicitude prior to the knife.
Christians have often spoke of the joy of being a martyr for Christ.
I will tell you that I knew people there, as well as a few familes here in the US who look very much like the people in the carvings (very short, squarish heads) and who believe themselves to be full-blooded non-mestizo Mayan. In fact, my parents' housekeeper is Quiche Mayan from Guatemala.
Which leads to the ironic conclusion that Montezuma did as well though the knowledge was coming from the satanic side.
He was a priest in the Aztec religion as well.
Of course, I am. There were 300. They wouldn't have been allowed to survive had not the Aztecs refrained from attacking them in the beginning before they had time to organize the opposition.
I've sometimes twisted the knife a bit by remarking that the Indians of Central America may have simply changed masters, but at least the Spaniards didn't eat them. I've yet to get an answer to that one either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.