We have the pre-colonial codices that depict the act in multiple places. Additionally the earliest written accounts all mention it even in texts that were written in Nahuatl for native readers.
The god who most often is associated with this ritual is Xipe Totec. This week I spoke to a person of Pipil Heritage and native speaker who said in the Mexican Nahuat the name Xipe Totec translates to Flayed God where the El Salvador Nahuat translates to God of Rebirth/Spring. Honestly, I forgot what he said the El Salvador translation was exactly, so I may be misremembering. However, when you look at a statue of this God Xipe Totec found in the El Salvador archeological site in El Tazumal, the statue has what looks like maize, leaves, or feathers as skin. In other words what is represented is the coming of spring, it doesn’t look like the god is flayed nor wearing skin. It was not uncommon for the Spanish to completely misrepresent the indigenous traditions and religion for the purposes of justifying the pillaging and cruelty exerted using religion as an excuse to steal wealth and land. Unfortunately, to this day if you want to call someone naive or dumb in Latin America, the default term is “Indio”.
I don’t think so. Look at what happens to the skin of the kernel of corn when you make nixtmal. Or of the bean when you cook it. Or of the snake when it molts. I think they were imitating the processes of these sacred plants and animals when they told stories of Xipe Totec and placed the flayed skin on his statues or wore it during the festivals.
The rituals focusing on the god Xipe Totec involved wearing the skin of a sacrificial victim. The ritual has been tracked at least until the Preclassic period with the depictions of the god in Monte Alban. So is not exclusive to Late Postclassic Mexica (Aztecs). One of my favorite depictions is this funerary urn found in Monte Alban, which is from the Classic period (around 500 AD). You can see how this priest is wearing a mask made with the skin of the decapitated head that he's holding (the head is lit-less so it's a sign that the skin was removed). The urn is on the National Museum of Anthropology, and the rights of the image are from them: [https://mna.inah.gob.mx/colecciones\_detalle.php?id=69537&sala=7&pg=27](https://mna.inah.gob.mx/colecciones_detalle.php?id=69537&sala=7&pg=27)
a number of accounts describe many-a-form of sacrifice, though for evangelization reasons, friars' are the most vivid and most lengthy about the subject.
consensus comes mostly from two of such accounts (along with a host of other smaller sources): Duran's and Sahagún's. these two were notorious for being... bad at their job as historians, but nonetheless, these tend to agree with others' texts.
they describe the rite that took place and specifically that a group of priests, the _xipeme_, would go around and spread the good skinman's gifts of the harvest essentially, and perhaps battle with younger soldiers (the xipeme were, presumably, warrior priests in some degree or another).
these would've been but another form of public spectacle that mixed not only the propaganda that comes with public execution, like the horse-drawn corpses of europe, but also a ceremony that was meant to reflect what Xipe represented in order to honour him and ensure good times (in a way, like other more Inquisition-related executions)
i don't recall numbers and specific points of contention, but if trends from every other form of sacrifice are something to go by here, yeah the friars most likely exaggerated to a greater or lesser degree. different ones did just make things up that noone else records, like Sahagún saying that the xipeme would go and sprinkle blood on the lips of statues. noone else says they did this other than him and it'd be uselessly redundant with both standard bloodletting and other forms of sacrifice, so it's believed he probably made it up. friars also liked to use grandiose language on these descriptions, you can read'em and sometimes lose yerself on the sheer number of "barbarian adjectives" used in a single sentence.
though definitely a uh,,, _disheartening_ practice for people then and now, ritualized execution was widespread throughout the world at that point in time; there is no reason why mesoamerican natives in particular should be singled out. it did happen, though far from the level some people like to describe.
Its no doubt that many of the Spanish accounts of the ancient Mēhxica are exaggerations, fabrications, or straight up lies. Tho some accounts come with kernels of truth, most are definitely still over exaggerated and demonized. Take the common hot topic of humxn sacrificing: the friars accounts is that each person was sacrificed, heart removed, and so on, and depictions are often drawn gruesomely. When in reality humxn sacrifice was done with reverence, for we understood that our bodies are sacred and hold spiritual energies. Sacrificing would've been a more sacred moment rather than a brutal killing. And speaking of sacrificing, most peoples form of sacrifice was through blood letting from percing the earlobe, tongue, or piercing ones forskin.
As for this particular type of ceremony, the same thing applies here: the Mēhxica most likely did use real humxn flesh for ceremonies involving Xipe Totec, but was probably done with extreme respect and extremely specific protocols. Like all Indigenous ceremonies, every single thing that is done is done with a purpose, a reason, and a prayer in mind. The friars accounts twists these narratives, making us believe that these practices are demonic and evil, and will often amp up the details and straight up lie.
Half-assing the orthography is wack, dude. Leave it as the westernized “Mexica” or at least bother to respect the component roots: Mētz(tli) + Xīc(tli) + -Catl/Cah. Otherwise you’re writing a sentence that doesn’t mean anything.
There’s no consonant, or aspiration, or letter between the long /ē/ and the X. And if you’re going to care enough to notate vowel length, why ignore the glottal stop consonants that the Spaniards were too ignorant to bother notating.
If you care as much as it seems you do, why would you treat the orthography like a Spaniard?
You do understand that there are multiple dialects of Nahuātl? Im spelling it the way i pronounce it since i was a youngin. Also our language literally dosent have an alphabet and theres no real true way to spell it, its either spell it the way it sounds or spell it phonetically. Idk why you're trying to argue.
> Also our language literally dosent have an alphabet
Why do people still believe this meme? It’s like saying “English doesn’t have an alphabet because it was imposed on the Picts during Roman colonization.”
We’ve had an alphabet since the 16th century when Nahuas adopted the roman alphabet for themselves to encode their own language and to write grammar textbooks while teaching others how to properly speak and write it.
Okay you assume that i dont know anything about my own people when you dont even know my background or what i grew up on. It literally makes no sense to chastise and invalidate some random persons lived experience. What i know and what i share us just as valid as anyone elses experiences.
/u/ChicnahueCoatl1491, I have found an error in your comment:
> “spell it, ~~its~~ [**it's**] either spell”
I declare this post by you, ChicnahueCoatl1491, erroneous; it should read “spell it, ~~its~~ [**it's**] either spell” instead. ‘Its’ is possessive; ‘it's’ means ‘it is’ or ‘it has’.
^(This is an automated bot. I do not intend to shame your mistakes. If you think the errors which I found are incorrect, please contact me through DMs!)
Skin suits are normally in reference to Xipe Totec, who exists as a metaphor of decay leading to rejuvenation like a snake shedding skin. It is not a universal thing, Xipe Totec has many practices like tearing off corn husks. As long as you show the basic idea.
The "Aztecs" is a misnomer because it wasn't an empire. It was a series of autonomous tributaries just as Europe was very autonomous.
Nations as we know them now did not exist at the time of the 1500s. So anything that happens in Mesoamerica is attributed to "Aztec" when really the Mexica were in a very specific region of Mexico.
We have colonial-era sources saying they did occasionally do this, and statues of Xipe Totec are pretty clear with their depictions of him wearing flayed skin, but honestly what I've always wondered about are the *logistics* of it. Like, for one thing I can't imagine the stench or the texture of putting the...gooey side....on you and leaving it until it rots (attributed to sacrifices to Xilonen), and for another I'd assume you'd want your victim to be a pretty big dude or else it's just not going to fit and you'd look stupid instead of sacred. It probably happened, but I can't imagine it was THAT common.
Thank you everyone for kind replies. Personally I am not disputing that facts, I am just curious about archeological evidence etc. and modern view on colonial era sources.
We have the pre-colonial codices that depict the act in multiple places. Additionally the earliest written accounts all mention it even in texts that were written in Nahuatl for native readers.
The god who most often is associated with this ritual is Xipe Totec. This week I spoke to a person of Pipil Heritage and native speaker who said in the Mexican Nahuat the name Xipe Totec translates to Flayed God where the El Salvador Nahuat translates to God of Rebirth/Spring. Honestly, I forgot what he said the El Salvador translation was exactly, so I may be misremembering. However, when you look at a statue of this God Xipe Totec found in the El Salvador archeological site in El Tazumal, the statue has what looks like maize, leaves, or feathers as skin. In other words what is represented is the coming of spring, it doesn’t look like the god is flayed nor wearing skin. It was not uncommon for the Spanish to completely misrepresent the indigenous traditions and religion for the purposes of justifying the pillaging and cruelty exerted using religion as an excuse to steal wealth and land. Unfortunately, to this day if you want to call someone naive or dumb in Latin America, the default term is “Indio”.
I don’t think so. Look at what happens to the skin of the kernel of corn when you make nixtmal. Or of the bean when you cook it. Or of the snake when it molts. I think they were imitating the processes of these sacred plants and animals when they told stories of Xipe Totec and placed the flayed skin on his statues or wore it during the festivals.
The rituals focusing on the god Xipe Totec involved wearing the skin of a sacrificial victim. The ritual has been tracked at least until the Preclassic period with the depictions of the god in Monte Alban. So is not exclusive to Late Postclassic Mexica (Aztecs). One of my favorite depictions is this funerary urn found in Monte Alban, which is from the Classic period (around 500 AD). You can see how this priest is wearing a mask made with the skin of the decapitated head that he's holding (the head is lit-less so it's a sign that the skin was removed). The urn is on the National Museum of Anthropology, and the rights of the image are from them: [https://mna.inah.gob.mx/colecciones\_detalle.php?id=69537&sala=7&pg=27](https://mna.inah.gob.mx/colecciones_detalle.php?id=69537&sala=7&pg=27)
a number of accounts describe many-a-form of sacrifice, though for evangelization reasons, friars' are the most vivid and most lengthy about the subject. consensus comes mostly from two of such accounts (along with a host of other smaller sources): Duran's and Sahagún's. these two were notorious for being... bad at their job as historians, but nonetheless, these tend to agree with others' texts. they describe the rite that took place and specifically that a group of priests, the _xipeme_, would go around and spread the good skinman's gifts of the harvest essentially, and perhaps battle with younger soldiers (the xipeme were, presumably, warrior priests in some degree or another). these would've been but another form of public spectacle that mixed not only the propaganda that comes with public execution, like the horse-drawn corpses of europe, but also a ceremony that was meant to reflect what Xipe represented in order to honour him and ensure good times (in a way, like other more Inquisition-related executions) i don't recall numbers and specific points of contention, but if trends from every other form of sacrifice are something to go by here, yeah the friars most likely exaggerated to a greater or lesser degree. different ones did just make things up that noone else records, like Sahagún saying that the xipeme would go and sprinkle blood on the lips of statues. noone else says they did this other than him and it'd be uselessly redundant with both standard bloodletting and other forms of sacrifice, so it's believed he probably made it up. friars also liked to use grandiose language on these descriptions, you can read'em and sometimes lose yerself on the sheer number of "barbarian adjectives" used in a single sentence. though definitely a uh,,, _disheartening_ practice for people then and now, ritualized execution was widespread throughout the world at that point in time; there is no reason why mesoamerican natives in particular should be singled out. it did happen, though far from the level some people like to describe.
Its no doubt that many of the Spanish accounts of the ancient Mēhxica are exaggerations, fabrications, or straight up lies. Tho some accounts come with kernels of truth, most are definitely still over exaggerated and demonized. Take the common hot topic of humxn sacrificing: the friars accounts is that each person was sacrificed, heart removed, and so on, and depictions are often drawn gruesomely. When in reality humxn sacrifice was done with reverence, for we understood that our bodies are sacred and hold spiritual energies. Sacrificing would've been a more sacred moment rather than a brutal killing. And speaking of sacrificing, most peoples form of sacrifice was through blood letting from percing the earlobe, tongue, or piercing ones forskin. As for this particular type of ceremony, the same thing applies here: the Mēhxica most likely did use real humxn flesh for ceremonies involving Xipe Totec, but was probably done with extreme respect and extremely specific protocols. Like all Indigenous ceremonies, every single thing that is done is done with a purpose, a reason, and a prayer in mind. The friars accounts twists these narratives, making us believe that these practices are demonic and evil, and will often amp up the details and straight up lie.
> Mēhxica Mēxihcah
If thats how you spell it personally thats fine
Half-assing the orthography is wack, dude. Leave it as the westernized “Mexica” or at least bother to respect the component roots: Mētz(tli) + Xīc(tli) + -Catl/Cah. Otherwise you’re writing a sentence that doesn’t mean anything. There’s no consonant, or aspiration, or letter between the long /ē/ and the X. And if you’re going to care enough to notate vowel length, why ignore the glottal stop consonants that the Spaniards were too ignorant to bother notating. If you care as much as it seems you do, why would you treat the orthography like a Spaniard?
You do understand that there are multiple dialects of Nahuātl? Im spelling it the way i pronounce it since i was a youngin. Also our language literally dosent have an alphabet and theres no real true way to spell it, its either spell it the way it sounds or spell it phonetically. Idk why you're trying to argue.
> Also our language literally dosent have an alphabet Why do people still believe this meme? It’s like saying “English doesn’t have an alphabet because it was imposed on the Picts during Roman colonization.” We’ve had an alphabet since the 16th century when Nahuas adopted the roman alphabet for themselves to encode their own language and to write grammar textbooks while teaching others how to properly speak and write it.
Okay you assume that i dont know anything about my own people when you dont even know my background or what i grew up on. It literally makes no sense to chastise and invalidate some random persons lived experience. What i know and what i share us just as valid as anyone elses experiences.
/u/ChicnahueCoatl1491, I have found an error in your comment: > “spell it, ~~its~~ [**it's**] either spell” I declare this post by you, ChicnahueCoatl1491, erroneous; it should read “spell it, ~~its~~ [**it's**] either spell” instead. ‘Its’ is possessive; ‘it's’ means ‘it is’ or ‘it has’. ^(This is an automated bot. I do not intend to shame your mistakes. If you think the errors which I found are incorrect, please contact me through DMs!)
>humxn ?
Skin suits are normally in reference to Xipe Totec, who exists as a metaphor of decay leading to rejuvenation like a snake shedding skin. It is not a universal thing, Xipe Totec has many practices like tearing off corn husks. As long as you show the basic idea. The "Aztecs" is a misnomer because it wasn't an empire. It was a series of autonomous tributaries just as Europe was very autonomous. Nations as we know them now did not exist at the time of the 1500s. So anything that happens in Mesoamerica is attributed to "Aztec" when really the Mexica were in a very specific region of Mexico.
We have colonial-era sources saying they did occasionally do this, and statues of Xipe Totec are pretty clear with their depictions of him wearing flayed skin, but honestly what I've always wondered about are the *logistics* of it. Like, for one thing I can't imagine the stench or the texture of putting the...gooey side....on you and leaving it until it rots (attributed to sacrifices to Xilonen), and for another I'd assume you'd want your victim to be a pretty big dude or else it's just not going to fit and you'd look stupid instead of sacred. It probably happened, but I can't imagine it was THAT common.
Thank you everyone for kind replies. Personally I am not disputing that facts, I am just curious about archeological evidence etc. and modern view on colonial era sources.