The Festival of the Toxcatl

**Kyriakos** · July 17, 2014, 01:14 PM

I was reading a bit about the grand festival of Toxcatl, which is argued to have been the main Aztec feast. It was centered on the (surprise) ritual sacrifice of a young man who was chosen for this one year before (as part of the previous feast) and until then lived as an impersonator of the god Tezcatlipoca.

The actual sacrifice would begin with the removal of the heart, using an obsidian dagger, but the body would then be decapitated and have all limbs cut off, flayed, and the remains were to be eaten by high-ranking Aztecs.

I have a few questions about this very charming and cheerful festivity:

A) Questions about the impersonator

1) Was the impersonator (original Aztec term for him is Ixiptlatli) always a prisonner of war?
2) Did the impersonator realise what would happen in the end of his year as a god?
3) Why would the Aztecs ritually kill an impersonator of a god (Tezcatlipoca) who they regarded as pretty much a gruesome monster that asked to be empowered by human blood so as to keep fending off supposedly even worse monsters from attacking the humans?
4) Did the impersonator take part in the last bits (well, not a pun) of the feast of the previous year, by being given to eat from the body of the previous impersonator?

B) Questions about the etymology of Toxcatl

1) Did that festivity's name mean 'drought' or something related to smoke/mirrors?
2) Was there any previous mesoamerican festivity which can be said to have served as a basis for the Toxcatl?

*

Thanks for any help

**Cyclops** · July 17, 2014, 05:16 PM

Look this ritual sacrifice stuff has some parallels in Europe IIRC.

There's a theory many bog-bodies are rulers sacrificed by their people. Kingship often has a sacral component with Kings depicted as gods themselves (especially true in Egypt), or playing the part of a god ("marrying" goddesses etc). IIRC Herodotus records a ritual from Babylon where a criminal took the place of the King for a short period each year (an inauspicous time) perhaps another example of a substitute sacrifice?

In Hawaii Captain Cook may have been identified with a particular seasonal deity who was related to harvests (and his unseasonal return mnay have sparked hostility that contributed to his death, although a lot of it was to do with simple cultural miusunderstanding). The idea of an annual harvest god who dies and rises annually is present in many cultures, most notably Dumuzi/Tammuz, the lord who dies and is ressurected in ancient Mesopotamia.

I think sacrificial victims were probably proud to be elevated in status, they may have been promised an amazing afterlife so they were probably willing victims.

**Kyriakos** · July 18, 2014, 03:45 AM

Thank you for the reply, and the one in the Palaiologoi thread too

**Sir Walter** · July 18, 2014, 09:28 AM

Unfortunately I don't know that much about Aztec sacrifices in the context of this festival, but in other Aztec rituals, like the Ōllamaliztli ball game, artwork portrays ritual sacrifice as a part of high-level games performed by seemingly practised players, as well as captives. This seems to add to the idea of sacrifice as a part of life for Aztec people themselves, not just their prisoners, which was also noted in other pre-Columbian cultures like that of the Incas, who often brought up specific children as sacrifices, telling them that this was an honour and a gift rather than an act of cruelty.

Cyclops is right too, similar behaviour was frequently observed in other areas of the world in the past as well. I think that the Celts had a festival of sorts in which a young man was elevated to the status of a god for a day, honoured and allowed his pick of the young girls and so on, before being burned at the end of the festivities. But now that I've said that I can't actually find a source for where I got that idea (and lots of accounts of Celtic religion are from biased Greek and Roman sources anyway) so maybe don't quote me on it.

**Kyriakos** · July 18, 2014, 09:55 AM

The most famous ones in the old world likely were the Hellenistic accounts of the Oven-idol of Baal in Phoenicia, where children were placed and were slowly killed by the flames inside the idol (and later on the analogous Roman ones about Carthage).
Some of the historians of that era use the phrase 'sardonic laughter' to describe the silent cry of the victims, which was as if they were trying to smile, but their state obviously was very bitter.

Also such practises were tied to 'Saturn' (Cronos), as were the ones by the Getae people in Thrace (particularly along the two ends of the Danube there). For example 3rd century BC mathematician/historian Mnaseas of Patrae argued that the Getae were in reality worshipping Cronos, while thinking their god was 'Zamolxis'.

**Sir Walter** · July 18, 2014, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by Kyriakos

The most famous ones in the old world likely were the Hellenistic accounts of the Oven-idol of Baal in Phoenicia, where children were placed and were slowly killed by the flames inside the idol (and later on the analogous Roman ones about Carthage).
Some of the historians of that era use the phrase 'sardonic laughter' to describe the silent cry of the victims, which was as if they were trying to smile, but their state obviously was very bitter.

Reminds me of the brazen bull in Greek legend, which I'm sure is related. The problem with the accounts of the Punic rituals is of course the bias, as occasional sacrifice may have been performed in times of great confusion while it wasn't normally practised. That seems to have been the situation in Minoan civilisation; an excavations of a temple buried in the aftermath of the Santorini eruption and earthquake discovered that while there were few human remains in general found in what are taken to be the sacrificial chambers, there was the body of a young man who died shortly before the buildings collapsed. He was found on what appears to be an altar, in the foetal position with a knife nearby. Fire damage to his bones and ornately dressed remains of priests nearby seem to indicate that the youth was killed in some sort of ritual, but one both not normally practised and also actually interrupted in its later stages by the very natural disaster that precipitated it.

Obviously most of what is drawn from the forensics is conjecture, but there does seem to be a general indication that human sacrifices were carried out as emergency measures rather than a more regular part of religious life. Going back to the original point about the Aztecs, there would thus seem to be a difference between the two as while Aztec art often depicts the sacrifice of humans, whether Aztec or from neighbouring areas, in a way that isn't glorified in Mediterranean culture after the end of the Bronze Age.

Originally Posted by Kyriakos

Also such practises were tied to 'Saturn' (Cronos), as were the ones by the Getae people in Thrace (particularly along the two ends of the Danube there). For example 3rd century BC mathematician/historian Mnaseas of Patrae argued that the Getae were in reality worshipping Cronos, while thinking their god was 'Zamolxis'.

Good old interpretatio graeca. They said that Moloch and Ba'al were Cronos too, of course. Roman Saturnalia, with inverted roles of gods and sacrifices, could also originally have been linked with darker ideas, though obviously it was very much toned down by the historical period, and just about the only instance I can think of is the pairs of Gauls and Greeks in the Forum Boarium after Cannae (again, like above, this is more human sacrifice as a last-ditch attempt to please the gods than a regular ritual).

**Kyriakos** · July 19, 2014, 11:28 AM

^

Also worth noting that Zamolxis was deemed as some sort of deity 'of borders/limits', much like the Etruscan/Roman 'Janus Bifrons', and later gnostic theology first centuries AD 'deities'. Iirc one of the latter was even termed as 'methorion pneuma', which means 'spirit of the borderlines'. Rather dark an idea (gnostic theology had cooler/more ominous gods, such as the Demiourgos/Demiurge)

**Spear Dog** · July 21, 2014, 09:44 PM

Originally Posted by Kyriakos

1) Was the impersonator (original Aztec term for him is Ixiptlatli) always a prisonner of war?
2) Did the impersonator realise what would happen in the end of his year as a god?
3) Why would the Aztecs ritually kill an impersonator of a god (Tezcatlipoca) who they regarded as pretty much a gruesome monster that asked to be empowered by human blood so as to keep fending off supposedly even worse monsters from attacking the humans?
4) Did the impersonator take part in the last bits (well, not a pun) of the feast of the previous year, by being given to eat from the body of the previous impersonator?

Working from memory:

The Aztec/Mexica practised a form of ritual warfare that was compulsory for their 'client' states - being those kingdoms subject to Mexica rule - to participate in; known in translation as " The Flowery Wars". These wars were governed by an honour code not unlike medieval european chivalry and for the Mexica, prisoners were more the goal than the slaying of enemies. There has been some suggestion that high caste Mexica social groups not usually concerned with warfare were required to fight as auxilaries in these wars.

The prisoners taken by the Mexica in the Flowery Wars were always sacrificed (Not sure about the enemies taken prisoner by the other Kingdoms, but I have an inkling they likewise sacrificed their prisoners - it was a sort of exchange system). There does not seem to haven been any artifice that they were anything but sacrifices. Deaths in the Flowery Wars were also considered to be sacrifices. One artifice that did exist however, was that to be selected in this way for a sacrifice was a great honour - it is likely therefore that the surrogate god sacrifice victim would have been selected due to their conduct in the Flowery War and were being honoured for bravery and valour.

One such famous warrior was Tlahuicole, warchief or King of the Tlaxcala, commonly known as Tlahuicole Tlaxcala. After being captured at the end of a twenty day battle (that sounds very much like a Flowery War, but I can't be sure of this), he was seconded into the Mexica 'army' and fought several battles until his sense of honour could take no more and he demanded death by sacrifice. His status and esteem were recognised in that he was 'awarded' a form of gladiator death-by-combat sacrificial death.

Why the Meso-Americans practiced such gruesome and excessive sacrificial rituals is open to speculation as their culture was pretty much wiped out before it could be interrogated, and what explanations there are come from european sources, usually 'missionary' priests with a vested interest in undermining pagan practises, or from rare Aztec writings that justify the actions of their psychopathic priestly caste.

I would speculate that a traditionally tolerated agricultural ritual, practiced in a restrained manner, got out of control when it was manipulated as a socio-political tool for the purposes of maintaining the privileged position of a none productive elite.

It is likely that the chosen surrogate god sacrifice participated in the ritual cannibalism, as this would have provided a continuation from one sacrifice to the next that could be exploited with metaphysical explanation.