![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Nigel Davis book, Human Sacrifice: In history and today is a historical and anthropological look at the history and meaning of human sacrifice throughout the world and the ages. I picked up this book after reading about the Shang human sacrifices in early China. Davis does mention the Shang burials, and they are in very many ways similar to the sacrifices and graves of Ur. Which I found very interesting and would like to look into further similarities. So far when I have read about people comparing other ancient societies with China it is always Greece.
Davis is himself an anthropologist and archaeologist specializing in the Aztecs. I think part of the reason he wrote the book was in response to the idea that most people have of the Aztecs as the biggest and most outrageous killers of all time. To contradict this idea he looks at almost every society throughout the ages, and describes the different, and more often very similar, ways and reasons behind human sacrifice. By the time he starts to talk about meso-america he has covered the subject in enough depth that what is said about the Aztecs is not all that new or shocking. He also points out the exaggerations and the unreliability of most of the accounts written by the Spaniards.
Definitely not a book for the squeamish as some of the stories do go into quite graphic detail, (the worst I think being the living dead of the Moche) however for the most part it seems that torture was the exception not the rule in ritual sacrifice. Davis focuses on the ritual and the religion behind such sacrifices. He looks at the commonest practices around the world, burying with the dead, as wives, slaves, and retainers, as building foundations, as offerings to river gods, as a representation of the god and as a scapegoat sacrifice for the sins of the people. He combats different ideas about sacrifice that were popular at the time (the book was written in 1981) and had been popular in the past. These included that human sacrifice was a "phase" that society went through early on before becoming enlightened. The best argument he gave against this was the case of India, which had seen an end of human sacrifice with the start of Buddhism, but saw a return in large numbers with the resurgence of Hinduism afterwords. He also argues against the idea of sacrifice as a bride for the gods. And against the idea of it being used as a kind of class warfare.
He looked at the role of the sacrificed person, how they were often treated with respect, and were given a reward in the afterlife, often one that could not be accomplished with an ordinary death. He sees the victim as a bridge between man and the gods. The word sacrifice meaning "to make sacred". He sees the rite as uniting the community and restoring equilibrium. He looks at it as a kind of salvation, very similar as to the sacrifice of Jesus, and other religions of Gods killed and reborn. Everything gets traced back to Osiris eventually. He also brings up the cult of the skull, or human head. Which apparently goes back to Neanderthal times. In my opinion he kind of romanticizes this idea, saying that early man had some intuitive knowledge that their brains were what gave them superiority over the animals and that's why the heads were so revered. Perhaps true. But he does a nice job linking this early cult to later sacrifices, and even canabalism.
The book is an interesting and insightful look at religion. Perhaps a darker side most people wouldn't find that interesting. But it's a series view on a subject that makes you look more closely at who we really are.
Davis is himself an anthropologist and archaeologist specializing in the Aztecs. I think part of the reason he wrote the book was in response to the idea that most people have of the Aztecs as the biggest and most outrageous killers of all time. To contradict this idea he looks at almost every society throughout the ages, and describes the different, and more often very similar, ways and reasons behind human sacrifice. By the time he starts to talk about meso-america he has covered the subject in enough depth that what is said about the Aztecs is not all that new or shocking. He also points out the exaggerations and the unreliability of most of the accounts written by the Spaniards.
Definitely not a book for the squeamish as some of the stories do go into quite graphic detail, (the worst I think being the living dead of the Moche) however for the most part it seems that torture was the exception not the rule in ritual sacrifice. Davis focuses on the ritual and the religion behind such sacrifices. He looks at the commonest practices around the world, burying with the dead, as wives, slaves, and retainers, as building foundations, as offerings to river gods, as a representation of the god and as a scapegoat sacrifice for the sins of the people. He combats different ideas about sacrifice that were popular at the time (the book was written in 1981) and had been popular in the past. These included that human sacrifice was a "phase" that society went through early on before becoming enlightened. The best argument he gave against this was the case of India, which had seen an end of human sacrifice with the start of Buddhism, but saw a return in large numbers with the resurgence of Hinduism afterwords. He also argues against the idea of sacrifice as a bride for the gods. And against the idea of it being used as a kind of class warfare.
He looked at the role of the sacrificed person, how they were often treated with respect, and were given a reward in the afterlife, often one that could not be accomplished with an ordinary death. He sees the victim as a bridge between man and the gods. The word sacrifice meaning "to make sacred". He sees the rite as uniting the community and restoring equilibrium. He looks at it as a kind of salvation, very similar as to the sacrifice of Jesus, and other religions of Gods killed and reborn. Everything gets traced back to Osiris eventually. He also brings up the cult of the skull, or human head. Which apparently goes back to Neanderthal times. In my opinion he kind of romanticizes this idea, saying that early man had some intuitive knowledge that their brains were what gave them superiority over the animals and that's why the heads were so revered. Perhaps true. But he does a nice job linking this early cult to later sacrifices, and even canabalism.
The book is an interesting and insightful look at religion. Perhaps a darker side most people wouldn't find that interesting. But it's a series view on a subject that makes you look more closely at who we really are.