Aztec Human Sacrifice: Cross-Cultural Assessments of the Ecological Hypothesis

Abstract

Ecological, religious, and social predictors of institutionalized human sacrifice are assessed through cross-cultural analysis. While human sacrifice has no significant correlations with measures of agricultural potential, protein, total food, food storage adequacy, and famine risk, there are significant positive correlations with population density, population pressure, and war for land and resources. Population pressure and war for land and resources have independently significant correlations with human sacrifice, and together account for 38% of its variance (multiple R = .62, p < 0.006). A measure of low hierarchical focus of religion provides significant additional explanation of variance (multiple R = .72, R2 = .51, p < .000), suggesting human sacrifice may play a role in ideological integration.

Full text

University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education
Aztec Human Sacrifice: Cross-Cultural Assessments of the Ecological Hypothesis
Author(s): Michael Winkelman
Source:
Ethnology,
Vol. 37, No. 3 (Summer, 1998), pp. 285-298
Published by: University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3774017
Accessed: 21/12/2009 14:10
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=upitt.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of Pittsburgh- Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education is collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Ethnology.
http://www.jstor.org

AZTEC
HU1\IAN SACRIFICE:
CROSS-CULTURAL
ASSESSMENTS
OF THE
ECOLOGICAL
HYPOTHESIS1
'm'
A
Michael
Winkelman
;
Arizona
State University
Ecological,
religious,
and social predictors
of institutionalized
human
sacrifice are
assessed
through cross-cultural
analysis.
While human
sacrifice has
no signifcant
correlations
with measures
of agricultural
potential, protein,
total food,
food storage
adequacy,
and famine
risk, there are
significant positive
correlations
with population
density,
population pressure,
and war for
land and resources.
Population
pressure and
war for
land and resources
have independently
signiflcant
correlations
with human
sacrifice,
and together
account for 38 per
cent of its variance
(multiple R
= .62, p < .006).
A measure
of low hierarchical
focus of religion
provides signifslcant
additional
explanation
of variance
(multiple R=.72,
R2=.S1,
pc.OOO), suggesting
human sacrifice
may play a
role in
ideological integration.
(SacrifWlce,
cannibalism,
religion, ethnology,
ecology)
Concern
with the explanation
of human
sacrifice and
cannibalism
gained heightened
interest with
Harner's (1977a,
1977b)
publications
on Aztec human
sacrifice
and
cannibalism.
Harner suggests
their
causes were related
to protein
scarcity
as a
consequence
of high population
pressure
in a distinctive
ecological
situation.
Ortiz
de Montellano
(1978,
1990) rejects
Harner's arguments
based
on Aztec dietary
information.
Price (1978),
Hassig (1990),
and Isaac
(1983) suggest
that human
sacrifice
was an epiphenomenon
reflecting
geopolitical
dynamics,
political
and
military
instabilities,
demographic
conditions, and
economic
production
and
distributlon
networks.
But these rejections
of the
ecological hypothesis
do
not
convincingly
support the
alternatives
proposed as the
causes of human
sacrifice
and
institutionalized
cannibalism.
Although
some reports
of cannibalism
are doubtful
(e.g., see
Arens 1979),
evidence for
both human sacrifice
and cannibalism
is
well
documented
in ethnographic,
historical,
bioarchaeological,
and clinical
literature2
(c.f.
Turner and
Turner 1995).
Cannibalism
in some nonhuman
primate
groups (Goodall
1977) suggests
that it may
play a role
in ecological
and social adaptations.
This
article reports
cross-cultural
analyses on previously
published
data sets
of
the Standard
Cross-Cultural
Sample (SCCS)
(Murdock
and White
1969) to assess
the
role of ecological
factors,
religious conditions,
and
social complexity
variables
in
predicting
human sacrifice.
The focus
is on legitimate
human sacrifice
carried out
by
religious leaders
as normative
social activities.
The
wide range of
measures examined
include: social
complexity
variables;
agricultural potential,
meat
protein, domestic
animals,
and total foods;
food storage
adequacy;
threat of famine;
population
pressure;
and environmental
circumscription
(assessed
through warfare
for land
and
resources).
The relationship
of religious
and social
complexity conditions
to human
sacrifice are
assessed to
illustrate the relevance
of other
social factors
to the incidence
of human
sacrifice, and
to suggest directions
for lFurther
investigations.
285
ETHNOLOGY
vol. 37 no. 3, Summer
1998, pp. 285-98.
ETHNOLOGY,
c/o Deparanent of Anthropology,
The University
of Pittsburgh,
Pittsburgh PA 15260
USA
Copyright 1998
The University of
Pittsburgh. All rights reserved.

286
ETHNOLOGY
THE
ECOLOGICAL
HYPOTHESIS
Harner
(1977a,
1977b)
rejects
anthropological
theories
that
reflect
Aztec
explanations
for
human
sacriElce;
i.e.,
that
sacriflce
was
required
by
their
religion
and
gods.
Based
on studies
of population
pressure,
Harner
(1970)
suggests
that
the
unparalleled
scope
of
Aztec
human
sacrifice
and
cannibalism
resulted
from
demographic-ecological
factors
which
created
protein
shortages
and
population
pressure:
unfavorable
agricultural
conditions,
seasonal
crop
failures,
the
lack
of
domesticated
herbivores,
the
depletion
of
wild
game
in
the
region,
food
scarcity,
famine,
and
environmental
circumscription
caused
by
limitations
on the
expansion
of
agriculture.
The
fertile
central
valley
of
Mexico
is
surrounded
by
poor
farming
land,
creating
an
environmental
circumscription
precluding
agricultural
expansion.
While
corn
and
beans
provide
complementary
vegetable
proteins,
their
lack
of necessary
fatty
acids
and
the
seasonal
scarcity
of
these
foods
made
these
sources
insufficient.
This
leads
Harner
to
hypothesize
that
cannibalism
provided
a significant
source
of
protein.
The
Aztecs
did
not
ordinarily
eat
people
from
their
own
polity,
but
practiced
warfare,
called
flowery
wars,"
as rituals
to
obtain
sacrificial
victims.
The
conquered
territories
nearby
were
a
convenient
source
of
victims.
Although
the
consumption
of
human
flesh
was
reserved
for
the
elite,
the
class
system
allowed
for
upward
mobility
of
great
warriors,
so
wars
to
obtain
victims
for
sacrifice
were
supported
by
a hungry
population
which
desired
both
prestige
and
protein
in
the
form
of
human
flesh.
Great
warriors
could
also
receive
the
right
to
consume
human
flesh,
which
was
shared
with
lineage
members.
Price
(1978)
characterizes
Harner's
hypothesis
of
cannibalism
based
on
chronic
protein
shortages
as unsubstantiated,
insuifficiently
distinguished
from
famine
and
lack
of
food,
and
undermined
by
the
fact
that
human
sacriiSlces
were
largely
consumed
by
the
elite
class
that
already
had
easy
access
to
other
meat.
Ortiz
de
Montellano
(1978)
presents
nutritional
resource
data
and
dietary
information
challenging
Harner's
hypothesis.
By
documenting
a
wide
range
of
meat
proteins
available,
the
enormous
food
tribute
they
received,
the
stores
of
food
maintained,
and
the
intensive
agricultural
techniques
employed,
he
argues
for
an
adequate
diet
for
the
Aztec
population.
Other
factors
mitigating
against
the
ecological
hypothesis
include:
1)
conquering
new
lands
for
agriculture
and
tribute;
2)
the
insigniElcance
of
the
total
human
protein
available
from
sacrifice;
and
3)
the
preponderance
of
human
sacrifice
during
the
annual
periods
of
food
abundance
from
harvests,
rather
than
during
periods
of
protein
scarcity.
Ortiz
de
Montellano
suggests
that
the
preponderance
of
human
sacrifice
during
harvest
periods
indicated
that
it was
za gesture
of thanks
and
reciprocity
to
the
godst
(1978:614)
rather
than
filling
a
need
for
protein.
RELIGIOUS
AND
SOCIAL
HYPOTHESES
Ortiz
de
Montellano
(1978,
1990)
attributes
the
Aztec
practice
of
human
sacrifice
to
their
belief
that
the
gods
required
it.
This
cosmological
hypothesis
is
obviously

AZTEC
HUMAN SACRIFICE: THE
ECOLOGICAL HYPOTHESIS
287
ttue but
uninformative. Religious justifications for
humarl sacriflce and cannibalism
do not alone
explain such beliefs arld behavior.
The individual Aztec warrior's
motivation for
participation in warfare for
sacrificial victims included the social
benefits accrued.
But such obvious linkages do not
inform us of the reasons human
sacrifice was
adopted as a mechanism for
allocating prestige and mobility. The
motivations for
self-sacrifice were undoubtedly
reinforced by religious beliefs that the
victims would go
to heaven. But why such
beliefs would be adopted remains
unaddressed. Their
beliefs may explain their
behavior, but leave unanswered the
question of why
the beliefs and practices were
adopted, and fail to identify the
psychosocial
functions of human sacrifice.
A dominant
perspective in social arlthropology,
influenced by Emile Durkheim,
is that religious
beliefs and practices derive from
and are reflective of social
conditions
(Bourguignon 1976; Bourguignon and
Evascu 1977; Davis 1971; Swanson
1960; Peregrine
1996; Winkelman 1986 1990,
1992)* If so, the determinants of
human sacrifice
should be sought in the social
conditions which struct:ure religious
beliefs. The
perspective that determinants of human
sacrifice are found in the social
conditions which
structure religious beliefs is
illustrated in assessments of the broader
economic networks
and political conditions
associated with Aztec sacriElce and
warfare (Price
1978; Hassig 1990; Isaac 1983).
These reject human sacrifice as a
motivator for Aztec
flowery wars (presumptively for
sacrificial victims), and thereby
dismiss the
importance of human sacrifice within
the broader context of state
activities, warfare,
economic systems, and class
stratification.
Price (1978)
characterizes cannibalism as a
stylistic trait and an epiphenomenon
which had little
effect on economic intensification,
warfare, political expaxlsion, and
social stratification.
Price suggests that the explanation
of Aztec human sacrifice and
cannibalism is to
be found in economic networks of
production and distribution,
patterns of state
redistribution, political and military
instabilities, and pacifications
of the nobility
Her model postulates that human
sacrifice reinforced existing
stratification and
political power, but she
acknowledges the lack of evidence for such
effects in her work.
Isaac (1983) hypothesizes that
human sacrifice served ideological
functions in Aztec
society by uniting the class
interests of nobles and upwardly
aspiring
lower-class warriorss but he fails to explain
why human sacrifice would be
adopted for such
integrative purposes.
Hassig (1990)
links Aztec human sacrifice to their
precarious economic position
and consequent
social and political adaptation. Their
flowery wars are analyzed as
a strategy of
empire-building which enabled greater
expansion by allowing dependent
areas to be
self-administered yet pay tribute, rather
than investing higher political and
administrative costs
to directly administer the
conquered areas. Hassig characterizes
the flowery wars as
a deliberate strategy to wear down
stronger enemies, rather than
as an
institutionalized procedure for obtaining
sacrificial captives. Price (1978) and
Isaac (1983)
similarly suggest that the flowery wars
reflected the shifting balances of
power in the
geopolitical dynamics of the Aztec Triple
Alliance and their inability to
conquer the
Tlaxcala-Pueblan Valley. Price suggests
that the inconclusive natllre of

288
ETHNOLOGY
military
operations
made human
sacrifice an
ideological
mechanism
to explain
away
the failure
of military
conquest
under the
guise of
ritual
pursuits.
Moteuczoma's
characterization of the
wars as
rituals for
obtaining
captives and
providing
military
training for
soldiers is
seen as a
strategie ruse
to direct
the
Spaniards' attention
away
from Aztec
political
and military
weaknesses
(Isaac
1983).
While
there are
many
economic, social,
and
political
explanations for
Aztec
human
sacrifice, no
convincing
evidence is
offered as
to why they
should
have had
a
role in
these
processes. Why
should these
social
conditions lead to
human
sacrifice?
The flowery
wars did
serve as a
population-control
mechanism-reducing
population
pressures in
the Valley
of Mexico
by culling
young
males through
military
fatalities
(Prlce
1978)-and
undoubtedly
relieved
pressure on the
land tenure
system.
But why
use human
sacrifice as
a
justification and
mechanism?
If
population or
other
ecological,
economic, class,
or political
factors are
to be
demonstrated
as causes
of
religious practices
(e.g.
human
sacrifice), they
should be
shown to
have
systematic
relations in a
cross-cultural
sample.
Arguments
about
systemic
causes of
human
sacrifice and
cannibalism
based on
case
materials are
unconvincing on
methodological
grounds.
The failure
to establish
relationships of
human
sacriflce with
specific
ecological or
social
variables leaves
explanation
of the
behavior
open to
characterization
as social
pathology.
But if human
sacrifice is
to be
explained as
an
ecological,
economics
social, or
political
phenomenon, it
must be
demonstrated
through
systematic
cross-cultural analysis.
METHODS
This
study used a
subsample3
(Winkelman 1986,
I990, 1992;
Winkelman and
White 1987)
from the
Standard
Cross-Cultural Sample
(SCCS)
(Murdock and
White
1969) and its
data sets
for a
systematic
cross-cultural
assessment
of
ecological and
social
predictors of
human
sacrifice. The
subsample
included
societies of the
major
regions of
the world
and covered a
time span
from 1750
B C. to the
present
century.
Assessments
of human
sacriflce
were
derived from a
study
which utilized
formal
analysis of
coded
variables based
on
descriptive data
derived from
ethnographies (see
Winkelman
1992;
Winkelman
and White
1987 for
methodology).
Culturally
recognized
magico-religious
practitioner
statuses had
been
previously
assessed on
social,
political,
religious, medical,
cosmological and
ritual
characteristics,
including
forms of
sacrifice. The
present
study
compiled data
from the
individual
magico-
religious
practitioner
statuses to
determine the
societal
incidence of
human
sacrifice.
Human
Sacrzfce
Variable
The
present
research
assesses ritual
human
sacriE1ce rather
than
sacrificial
cannibalism.
As there
are different
forms of
human
sacrifice (e.g*
social
control vs.
social
pathology)
(Turner and
Turner 1995),
the present
study
distinguishes
legitimate
human
sacriElce (a
form of
normative
behavior,
involving
propitiation)
from

AZTEC
HUMAN SACRIFICE: THE
ECOLOGICAL HYPOTHESIS
289
malevolent human
sacrifice (immoral practices
attributed to sorcerers and witches).
These malevolent
beliefs (e.g., consuming body
parts, or the soul or spirit of the
victim) apparently
reflect attributions rather than
actual behavior and are not the
concern of this
study. Legitimate human sacrifice
is typically associated with
magico-religious
practitioners called priests. Priests are
elite sociopolitical functionar-
ies who also have
central roles in communal
religious activities associated with
propitiation and
calendrical agricultural rituals.
Seven societies
of the sample had human
sacrifice (Ovimbundu, Ibo, Kafa,
Roman,
Marquesans, Atayal, and Aztec). The
Romans were the only case in which
the practices of
human sacrifice were not carried out
by priests. In Rome, human
sacrifice was
carried out by a practitioner called
by terms translated as witch,
sorcerer, and
necromancer. In formal cross-cultural
analysis, this practitioner was
classified as a
shaman/healer, not a witch/sorcerer
(Winkelman 1986, 1992). This
practitioner's use
of human sacrifice involved efforts
to contact and influence the
spirit world,
making it a form of propitiation.
Analyses dropping Romans from the
sample produced
slightly weaker correlations,
suggesting its appropriate inclusion
here.
Ecological and
Social Variables
The ecological
hypothesis of human sacrifice,
which postulates humans to be a
food resource
utilized under adverse conditions,
requires assessing the factors
affecting food
availability (agricultural potential,
rainfall, natural disasters, risks of
famine, adequacy
of storage, trade networks for
food etc.). These ecological
predictors were
derived from previously published
SCCS data sets on agriculture
suitability (land
slope suitability of soil, climate, and
annual rainfall) (Pryor 1986);
subsistence
economy and supportive practices
(including intercommunity trade as a
food source, food
preservation and storage, food
surpluses, and subsistence variables
on contributions of
agriculture, hunting, fishing,
gathering, and domestic animals to
the food supply)
(Murdock and Morrow 1970);
political organization (Tuden and
Marshall 1972);
political participation and peace,
including decision-making processes
and political
fission (Ember, Russett and Ember
1993); measures of war for land
and resources and
unpredictable resource problems,
including threat of famine,
weather or pest
disasters, and chronic resource
problems (Ember and Ember 1992);
cultural complexity
(Murdock and Provost 1973);
settlemetlt patterns and community
organization
(Murdock and Wilson 1972); and
religious variables (Whyte 1978;
Murdock 1967;
Winkelman and White 1987;
Winkelman 1992).
RESULTS
Data were
analyzed with SYSTAT (1992)
utilizing the Tabless Correlation, and
Multiple
Regression programs. Measures of
cultural complexity (Murdock and
Provost 1973) were
used to identify general societal
conditions associated with human

Independent
Variables
Spearman's
rho=
p
(one-tailed)
Land
Slope
-.09
ns
Suitability
of
Soil
.11
ns
Climate
and
Rainfall
.13
ns
Total
Suitability
.04
ns
Lowest
Sliitability
-.07
ns
Food
Supply
and
Famine
Threat
Measures
of
the
availability
of
a
range
of
food
supplies
and
resources
(Murdock
and
Morrow
1970;
Ember
and
Ember
1992)
were
not
significantly
correlated
with
human
sacrifice
(Table
2).
All
of
the
societies
with
human
sacrifice
had
means
of
food
storage,
but
flve
of
the
seven
experienced
seasonal
or
annual
variation
in
the
food
supply.
Three
of
the
seven
imported
food
through
intercommunity
trade,
but
four
had
inadequate
food
supplies
to
last
through
difficult
times.
The
majority
of
290
ETHNOLOGY
sacrif1ce.
These
societies
are
characterized
by
a
variety
of
social
conditions
and
are
typically
at
the
mid-range
of
levels
of
cultural
complexity.
None
of
the
original
cultural
complexity
measures4
(five-point
ordinal
scales)
is
signiElcantly
correlated
with
human
sacrifice;
the
measures
do
not
linearly
distinguish
societies
with
human
sacriE1ce
from
those
without.
All
seven
cases
of
human
sacrif1ce
are
found
in
societies
with
a
high
reliance
upon
agriculture
and
with
sedentary
and
relatively
permanent
and
fixed
residence
patterns.
All
of
the
societies
in
the
sample
with
human
sacrifice
relied
upon
domesticated
animals
(bovines
or
smaller
domesticated
animals)
for
food
sources,
but
they
were
not
pastoral
societies
and
did
not
heavily
use
milk
products.
Six
of
the
cases
were
at
the
highest
levels
of
population
density.
Agricultaral
Potential
Societies
with
human
sacrifice
have
a
major
reliance
upon
agriculture
and in
all
but
one
agriculture
contributed
more
than
any
other
food
source.
Gathering
contributed
less
than
10
per
cent
of
the
food
supply
in
all
cases
except
one,
but
all
relied
upon
hunting
and
gathering
to
some
extent.
More
than
half
of
the
cases
had
good
or
better
land
slope,
and
all
had
fair
to
good
land;
five
of
seven
cases
were
rated
as
having
excellent
climate,
and
all
had
high
levels
of
average
rainfall
(600
mm,
most
over
1,000
mm).
Neither
Pryor's
(1986)
agricultural
potential
measures,
nor
recodes
focused
on
poor
climate,
land,
or
agricultural
potential,
nor
summary
measures
of
agricultural
suitability
had
significant
correlations
with
human
sacrifice
(Table
1).
All
of
the
societies
with
human
sacrifice,
however,
had
low
or
fair
agriculture
potential
(as
opposed to
good
or
excellent),
and
all
were
in
the
mid-range
of
measures
of
agricultural
potential.
Table
1:
Correlation
of
Agricultural
Suitability
with
Human
Sacrifice

Independent Vanables
Spearman's rho= p< (one-tailed)
Hunting and Fishing
-.22 ns
Domestic Animal Food
.07 ns
Food Surplus via Storage
.03 ns
Storage Adequacy
.00 ns
Season/Annual Variation
.10 ns
Famine Threat
-.02 ns
Weather Threat
-.25 ns
Chronic Resource Problems
-.15 ns
Computed Variables:
S l l mm a ry Food Threat
- . 1 8 ns
Risk of Famine (Composite Measure)
-.26 ns
Total Meat Protein
.06 ns
Total Food
-.07 ns
Food Problems
-.10 ns
AZTEC HUMAN SACRIFICE:
THE ECOLOGICAL HYPOTHESIS
291
Table 2: Correlation of Pamine and
Food Supply Variables with Human Sacrifice
societies with human sacriflce had
low threats of famine, food problems due to
weather or pests, or chronic resource
problems (one exception on each variable),
with only one case of high risk of
famine (Aztec). The food shortage data (Ember
and Ember 1992) has limited
usefulness because of numerous cases of missing data
or unreliable codings for the
societies with human sacrifice. Over half of all the
ratings for these societies were
unlcnown or lacked sufficient rater reliability to
report. Given the uncertainty about
food reliability indicated by the missing data, this
information was used as a part of an
index on food uncertainty. Cases with missing
data were placed on a scale
(Summary Food Threat) between no/low resource
problems and moderate resource
problems. Human sacrifice had no significant
relationship to this recode nor to a
composite food resource scale based on the sum
of the recodes of resource variables
(Table 2). A similar scale was computed on
famine risk, utilizing Murdock and
Morrow's (1970) variables for food supply and
storage adequacy in combination with
the Embers' variables. This composite measure
of famine risk was nonsigniElcantly
associated with human sacrifice (Spearman's
rho=-.26), but in the opposite
direction predicted by the ecological hypothesis.
Sammary Food Ecology Measures
The measures reported above were
reduced in categories, weighted, and summed
into three major scales assessing food
resources: total meat protein (contributions of
hunting, fishing, domestic animals,
large herbivores); total food (meat protein plus
food import, total agricultural
potential, and food storage adequacy); and food
problems (threat of famine, weather,
resource problems, famine risk, poor land, poor

Independent
Vanables
Pearson's
r=
p <
(one-tailed)
Population
Density
Recode
.40
.01
Population
Pressure
Based
on
Storage
Adequacy
.51
.000
Population
Pressure
Based
on
Meat
Protein
29
05
Population
Pressure
Based
on
Total
Food
49
.001
Popiation
Pressure
Based
on
Famine
Risk
20
ns
Population
Pressure
Based
on
Food
Problems
.22
ns
292
ETHNOLOGY
climate,
and
poor
agriculture
potential).
None
of
these
summary
scales
had a
significant
correlation
with
human
sacriflce,
thus
providing
little
evidence
in
favor
of
the
ecological
hypothesis.
The
nonsignificant
negative
correlations
with
weather
threat,
resource
problems,
and
risk
of
famine
suggest
the
opposite
relationship
between
food
supply
and
human
sacrifice
of
that
predicted
by
the
ecological
hypothesis.
Popalation
Density
and
Population
Pressure
Murdock
and
Provost
(1973)
provide a
measure
of
population
density
ranked at
five
levels,
from
less
than
one
person
per
square
mile
(psm)
through
100
psm.
The
societies
with
human
sacrifice
all
have
higher
levels
of
population
density,
with
all
but
one
society
with
human
sacrifice at
26+
psm.
There
was a
significant
Pearson
correlation
of
r=
.40 (p
<
.01)
with a
binary
recode
(population
<
/=
vs.
> 26
psm).
Population
pressure
measures
were
derived
by
dividing
population
density
by
food
resource
measures
and
the
inverse of
famine
risk
and
food
problem
variables.
These
assessments
emphasize
the
pressure
created
by
large
populations
with
serious
food
resource
limitations
or
high
famine
risks.
Human
sacrifice
was
significantly
and
positively
associated
with
the
population
pressure
measures
based
upon
total
food
supplies
(r-.49,
p<.OO1),
adequacy
of
food
storage
(r=.S1,
p<.OO1),
and
meat
protein
(r=
.29,
p <
.05),
while
the
population
pressure
measures
based
on a
summary
of
food
problems
and
resourcesS
and
famine
risk
were
positively
but
nonsignificantly
correlated
with
human
sacrifice
(Table
3).
Table
3:
Correlation
of
Population
Pressure
with
Human
Sacnfice
Environmental
Circamscription
One
cause
of
Aztec
cannibalism
postulated
by
Harner
is
environmental
circumscription.
The
lack
of
availability
of
good
agricultllral
land
in
nearby
areas
further
exacerbated
food
shortages
The
measures
of
Ember
and
Ember
(1992)
provide
proxy
assessments
of
environmental
circumscription
in
their
measures
of
warfare
for
the
seizure
of
resources
and
the
use
of
land
obtained
in
warfare.
These
original
variables
were
recoded
to
binary
variables
reflecting
the
absenee/presence

Independent Vanables
Spearmans rho-
p (one-tailed)
Internal
War for Land
.44
.007
External
War for Land
.20
ns
Overall
War for Land
.30
.04
Internal
War for Resources
. 37
.02
External
War for Resources
.17
ns
Overall
War for Resources
.30
.05
Overall
War for Land and
Resources .35
.02
AZTEC HUMAN
SACRIFICE: THE ECOLOGICAL
HYPOTHESIS
293
Table 4: Correlations of
Environmental Circumscription
with Human Sacnfice
of such
conditions, and the
individual summary
measures for overall land and
resource
seizure through war were
summed into an overall
measure of war for land
and
resources. The individual
summary measures of
internal warfare for land and
resources as well as combined
measures, were positively and
significantly associated
with
human sacrifice (Table 4).
The measure of local
political fission was also used
as an
assessment of (a lack of)
environmental
circumscription. While there was no
significant association with local
political fission, six of
the seven societies with
human
sacrifice were without local
political fission,
consistent with the hypothesis of
environmental circumscription.
Both population pressure
(based on storage adequacy)
and the
overall measure of war for
land and resources have
independently significant
contributions to the prediction
of human sacrifice
(population pressure r=.51,
p<.001;
overall war for land
and resources r=.35,
p<.02; multiple R=.62,
p < .006).
But limited explained
variance (38 per cent)
indicates that other factors are
also
responsible for human
sacrifice.
The
hypothesis of general
social explanations of human
sacrif1ce is not, however,
supported
by the present
research. Inclusion in the
regression equation of ten
measures
of cultural complexity
(Murdock and Provost
1973; see note 4), including
variables
found predicting
magico-religious practices in
previous studies (Winkelman
1986,
1992) (fixity of
residence, agricultureS political
integration, and social
stratification), provided no
significant increases in
explained variance in human
sacrifice
beyond that accounted for
by the ecological
variables (population pressure
and
environmental
circumscription). This rejects the notion
that human sacrifice is
a general
adaptation to conditions
of increasing societal
complexity. But the relatively
limited
explanation of variance by
the ecological measures
(38 per cent) indicates that
there are
still substantial
determinants to be identif1ed.
The
present study's f1ndings
illustrate the relation of
sacriElce in general, and
human
sacrifice in particular to
socioeconomic
conditions: the absence of all
sacriiice
only in hunting and
gathering societies; human
sacrifice found in complex
rather
than simple agriculxral
societiess but not in pastoral
societies; and the lack of
a linear
association of human
sacrifice with measures of
complexity, with human
sacrifice
occurring in the
mid-range of cultural
complexity. Societies with human
sacrifice
always had priests, but
never had shamans (as
determined in Winkelman

Independent
Variables
Spearman's
rho=
p<
(one-tailed)
High
Gods
(present
vs.
unimportant/absent)
.16
ns
Gods
and
Spiritss
Both
Male
and
Female
.42
.004
Mythical
Founders,
Both
Male
and
Female
.30
.05
Witches,
Both
Male
and
Female
.32
.04
Low
Religious
Cohesion
(computed)
.49
.001
294
ETHNOLOGY
1986
and
1992).
Human
sacriElce as
a
religious
activity
is
related
to
other
religious
and
social
conditionsO
Further
assessment
of
the
relationship
between
human
sacrifice
and
religious
beliefs
was
based
on
Murdock's
(1967)
variable
on
high
gods
being
present
and
important,
and
Whyte's
(1978)
data
on
the
relative
status
of
males
and
females
in
religious
beliefs.
Many
of
the
societies
with
human
sacrifice
had
religious
beliefs
characterized
by
the
relative
equality
of
male
and
female
roles,
and
six
of
seven
had
high
gods
absent
or
unimportant.
The
unimportance
of
high
gods
in
these
complex
societies
with
human
sacrifice
is
inconsistent
with
general
findings
of
high
gods
associated
with
social
complexity
(Swanson
1960;
Davis
1971;
Peregrine
1996).
This
suggests
that
since
human
sacrifice
was
associated
with
societies
without
hierarchical-
ly
integrated
religious
systems,
human
sacrifice
may
create
religious
integration,
as
suggested
by
Isaac
(1983)
and
Price
(1978).
Murdock
and
Whyte's
original
variables
were
recoded
into
binary
variables
representing
the
lack
of
high
gods
and the
relative
equality
of
male
and
female
religious
figures
(gods
and
spirits,
mythical
founders,
and
witches).
Some
of
these
individual
measures
were
positively
and
significantly
correlated
with
human
sacrifice
(Table
5).
A
summary
measure
of
low
religious
hierarchy
(computed
by
summation
of
the
binary
recodes)
had
the
strongest
correlation
(Spearman's
rho=.49,
p<.001).
Inclusion
of
this
summary
religious
measure
of
low
religious
hierarchy
in
multiple
regression
along
with
the
two
ecological
measures
(population
pressure
and
environmental
circumscription
[overall
war
for
land
and
resources])
accounted
for
significant
additional
variance
in
human
sacrifice
(multiple
R=.72,
R2=.S1,
F
ratio=14.4,
3,
41
df,
p<.000,
13
per
cent
increase;
51
per
cent
total
variance
explained
with
inclusion
of
the
religious
measure).
The
low
religious
hierarchy
measure
entered
the
equation
before
the
environmental
circumscription
measure,
suggesting
its
stronger
predictive
power.
Table
5:
Correlation of
Religious
Variables
with
Human
Sacrifice
AZTEC
HUMAN
SACRIFICE
IN
CROSS-CULTURAL
PERSPECTIVE
The
cross-cultural
analyses
support
the
general
hypothesis
of
ecological
contributions
to
the
explanation
of
human
sacrifice.
Some
of
the
ecological
conditions
Harner
hypothesizes
as
leading
to
Aztec
cannibalism
are
correlated
with
human
sacrifice
cross-culturally.
In
contrast
to
Harner's
hypothesis,
however,
all
societies
with
human
sacriElce
had
domesticated
food
animals,
but
the
reduction
of
wild
game

AZTEC
HUMAN SACRIFICE: THE
ECOLOGICAL HYPOTHESIS
295
is suggested by
these agricultural societies with
high population density still
depending upon
hunting and fishing in the overall diet.
Measurements of crop failures
and famines are not
significantly associated with
human sacrifice, and the nonsignifi-
cant correlations
with resource problems and famine
risks are the opposite of the
ecological
prediction. The Aztecs, however, were high
on many of these measures.
The signiElcant
correlations of human sacrifice
with population pressure and
environmental
circumscription assessments (warfare
for larld and resources) support
the ecological
hypothesis. Prices argument that
Harner's hypothesis is not
sufficiently
distinguished from famine or lack of
food is addressed in this cross-
cultural analysis.
The lack of correlation of human
sacrifice with famine, resource
adequacy, and food
threats indicates that the causes
of human sacrifice are not a
direct function of
food availability per se. Societies
with human sacrifice appear to
have the opposite
relationship to food supply, taking
steps to assure food adequacy
through food
storage and importation. The significant
prediction of human sacrifice
by specific
ecological variables clarifies the general
ecological conditions Harner
hypothesizes as
leading to Aztec cannibalism. The
ecological effects on human
sacrifice are not
directly from the availability of
resources (food scarcity), but from
population
pressure. The significantly stronger
prediction of human sacrifice by
population
pressure, rather than population density,
indicates that the causes are not
the sheer number
of people per se, but rather the
stressful conditions that density
creates under
resource scarcity and unreliability.
But ecological
factors alone are insufficient, as
well over half of the variance
remains to be
explained. In addition to these ecological
influences, measures of a lack
of religious
hierarchy are also significantly associated
with the incidence of human
sacrifice. Religious
beliefs do reflect societal
conditions which apparently have a
significant effect in
motivating the adoption of
human sacrifice. The correlations
alone do not reveal
the psychosocial functions of the
religious activities. They suggest
that human sacrifice
is a mechanism for achieving a
form of religious integration in
societies lacking
integrative hierarchical systems of
belief. The motivations for human
sacrifice and for
cannibalism are illustrated by the
broader psychocultural dynamics
of sacrifice with
respect to intergroup social
relations. The psychosocial effects of
cannibalism are
suggested by the Aztecs' dynamics
of in-group and out-group
relationships with
respect to consumption for
sacrifice- whether one is consumed
(victim) or
co-consumer. Since the Aztecs did not
consume members of their own
group, uniting with
them in wars for sacrificial
victims and cannibalistic practices
was a mechanism
for establishing in-group
membership. The functions of sacriflce
in creating an
integration of people are illustrated by
its serving as a mechanism for
permitting class
mobility of the warrior and his
relatives. This extension of the right
to consume human
flesh to family members signals
a very basic level of social
* fi
nc uslveness.
These
systematic correlations of human sacrifice
with ecological and religious
conditions illustrate
that such practices should be
understood in the context of social
determinants of
behavior, rather than as forms of
social pathology and aberrance.

296
ETHNOLOGY
Turner
and Turner's
(1995) assessment
of cannibalism
in the
American Southwest
led
them to
reject explanations
based on
social pathology.
They
(Turner
and Turner
1995:13)
point instead
to
violent social
control,
possibly
initiated
by socially
pathological
individuals.
t The
correlation
of human
sacrifice with
population
pressure
indicates
that population
dynamics
are important
contributory
factors
to the
development
of these
practices.
These social
dynamics
producing
human
sacrifice are
not, however,
a general
function
of increasing
social
complexity.
CONCLUSIONS
Harner's
original
hypothesis
of ecological
causes
of Aztec
human sacrifice
and
cannibalism
receives
partial
but significant
support
from the
present cross-cultural
analysis.
There are,
however,
additional
determinants
of human
sacrifice
that remain
to be identified.
The hypotheses
of systemic
economic
social,
and political
factors
involved
in the complex
of
Aztec warfare,
human
sacriElce, and
cannibalism
suggest
directions
for future
work to
identify
additional factors
that
predispose
societies to
human
sacrifice.
While discussions
of
Aztec human
sacrifice
and cannibalism
have
typically
emphasized
these
as unique
features of
Aztec society,
the cross-cultural
analyses
presented
here suggest
that the
Aztecs typify
patterns
of human
sacrifice
found
cross-culturally.
But
the Aztecs
might have
been particularly
motivated to
consume
human
flesh as a
consequenee
of ecological
and population
pressures.
In
eomparison
to other
societies
with human
sacrifice,
the Aztecs
were
extreme in
several
measures:
the only human
sacrifice
society
in this sample
with a
high risk
of
famine;
the highest
on several
measures
of population
pressure;
in
the highest
category
of population
density
(over 500
persons
per square
mile); and
the highest
levels
of overall
warfare for
land and
resources.
So while
Aztec human
sacrifice
conforms
to typical
cross-cultural
patterns,
the
magnitude
of their sacrifice
and
cannibalism
may
reflect their
extreme
conditions
on many ecological
variables.
NOTES
1. I tharlk
David Jacobs
for his
encouragement
to pursue this
research project.
I also
thank him and
Doug White,
Michael
Harner, Christy
Turner,
Carol Ember,
and Rob Le Veille
for helpful
suggestions,
and Cindy
Winkelman
for her assistance
with
data analysis.
2. Acosta
Saignes
1950; Benson
and Boone 1984;
Bergmann
1992; Boal
1982; Brown
1991; Gohain
1977; Gonzalez
Torres
1985; Green
1975; Hamerton-Kelly
1987;
Hogg 1966;
Hughes 1991;
Levenson
1993; Lewis
1986;
Loeb 1964;
Macoby 1982;
Roman Berrelleza
and
Alberto 1990;
Sagan 1974;
Sugiyama
1995; Taahill
1975;
Tierney 1989.
3. A
25 per cent stratiEled
random
45-society
subsample of
the SCCS was
used in the
present study.
Societies
in the subsample
include:
Africa: Nama
Hottentot, SKung
Bushmen,
Ovimbundu,
Ibo; Circum-
Mediterranean:
Wolof,
Fulani, Pur,
Kafafl Amhara,
Tuareg,
Babylonians,
Romans,
Kurd; Eurasia:
Samoyed,
Toda, Kazak,
Garo, Vietnamese,
Semang,
Tanala, Japanese,
Chukohee;
Insular
PaciElc: Iban,
Alor, Kirnam,
Lesu,
Pentecost,
Marquesans,
Trukese, Atayal;
North America:
Montagnias,
Kaska,
Twana,
Paiute, Hidatsa,
Creek,
Zuni, Aztec;
South America:
Bribri, Callinago,
Saramacca
Jivaro,
Tupinamba,
Cayua,
Mapuche. Societies
with legitimate
human
sacrifice
are: Ovimbundu,
Ibo, Kafa,
Romaxl,
Marquesans,
Atayal, and
Aztec.

AZTEC
HUMAN
SACRIFICE: THE
ECOLOGICAL
HYPOTHESIS
297
4. Variables
included are: writing
and records, fixity of
residence,
agriculture, urbanization,
technological
specialization, land
transport, money, population
density, political
integration, and social
stratification .
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Acosta Saignes, M.
1950.
Tlacaxipeualiztli; un complejo
mesoamericano entre los
caribes. Caracas.
Arens, W. 1979.
The Man-Eating Myth:
Anthropology and
Anthropophagy. New
York.
Benson, E., and E.
H. Boone (eds.).
1984. Ritual Human
Sacrifice in Mesoamerica.
Washington DC.
Bergmann, M. S.
1992. In the Shadow of
Moloch: The Sacrifice
of Children and Its
Impact on Western
Religions.
New York.
Boal, B. M. 1982.
The Konds: Human
Sacrifice and Religious
Change. Wilts.
Bourguignon, E.
1976. Possession. San
Francisco.
Bourguignon, E.,
and T. Evascu. 1977.
Altered States of
Consciousness within a
General Evolutionary
Perspective: A Holocultural
Analysis. Behavior
Science Research
12(3):197-216.
Brown, S. S. 1991.
Late Carthaginian
Child Sacrifice and
Sacrificial Monuments
in Their Mediter-
ranean
Context. Sheffield.
Davis, W. 1971.
Societal Complexity
and the Nature of
Primitive Man's
Conception of the
Supernatural. Ph.D.
dissertation, University of
North Carolina. Chapel
Hill.
Ember, C., and M.
Ember. 1992. Warfare,
Aggression, and
Resource Problems:
Cross-Cultural Codes.
Behavior
Science Research
26(1-4):169-226.
Ember, C., B.
Russett, and M. Ember.
1993. Political
Participation and Peace:
Cross-Cultural Codes.
Cross-Cultural Research
27(1&2):97-145.
Gohain, B. C. 1977.
Human Sacnfice
and Head-Hunting in
North-Eastern lndia.
Gauhati.
Gonzalez Torres, Y.
1985. E1 sacriElcio
humano entre los
mexicas. Mexico.
Goodall, J. 1977.
Infant Killing and
Cannibalism in
Free-Living Chimpanzees of
the Gombe Stream
Reserve.
Animal Behavior
Monographs 1:161-311.
Green, A. R. W.
1975. The Role of
Human Sacrifice in the
Ancient Near East.
Missoula.
Hamerton-Kelly, R.
(ed.) 1987. Violent
Origins: Walter
Burkert, Rene Girard and
Jonathan Z. Smith
on Ritual
Killing and Cultural
Formation. Stanford.
Harner, M. 1970.
Population Pressure
and the Social
Evolution of Agriculturalists.
Southwest Journal
of
Anthropology 26(1):67-86.
1977a.
The Ecological Basis for
Aztec Sacrifice.
American Ethnologist
4:117-35.
1977b.
The Enigma of Aztec
Sacrifice. Natural
History 86(4):47-51.
Hassig, R. 1990.
Aztec Warfare. History
Today 40:17-24.
Hogg, G. 1966.
Cannibalism and Human
Sacrifice. New
York.
Hughes, D. D.
1991. Human Sacrifice in
Ancient Greece.
New York.
Isaac, B. 1983. The
Aztec "Plowery
War": A Geopolitical
Explanation. Journal
of Anthropological
Research
39:415-32.
Levenson, J. 1993.
The Death and
Resurrection of the
Beloved Son: The
Transformation of Child
Sacnfilce
in Judaism and
Christianity. New Haven.
Lewis, I. M. 1986.
Religion in Context:
Cults and Charisma.
New York.
Loeb, E. M. 1964.
The Blood Sacrifice
Complex. New York.
Maccoby, H. 1982.
The Sacred
Executioner: Human Sacrifice
and the Legacy of
Guilt. New York.
Murdock, G. P.
1967. Ethnographic
Atlas. Pittsburgh.
Murdock, G. P., and
D. Morrow. 1970.
Subsistence Economy
and Supportive
Practices: Cross-Cultural
Codes 1.
Ethnology 9:302-30.
Murdock, G. P.,
and C. Provost. 1973.
Measurement of
Cultural Complexity.
Ethnology 12:379-92.
Murdock, G. P.,
and D. White. 1969.
Standard
Cross-Cultural Sample. Ethnology
8:329-69.
Murdock, G. P.,
and S. Wilson. 1972.
Settlement Patterns and
Community
Organization: Cross-Cult-
ural Codes
3. Ethnology
11:254-95.

298
ETHNOLOGY
Ortiz
de
Montellano,
B. 1978.
Aztec
Cannibalism:
An
Ecological
Necessity?
Science
200:611-17.
1990.
Aztec
Medicine,
Health,
and
Nutrition.
New
Brunswick.
Peregrine,
P.
1996.
The Birth
of the
Gods
Revisited:
A Partial
Replication
of
Guy Swanson's
(1960)
Cross-Cultural
Study
of
Religion.
Cross-Cultural
Research
30(1):84-112.
Price,
B. 1978.
Demystification,
Enriddlement,
and
Aztec
Cannibalism:
A Materialist
Rejoinder
to
Harner.
American
Ethrlologist
5(1):98-115.
Pryor,
P. 1986.
The
Adoption
of
Agriculture:
Some
Theoretical
and
Empirical
Evidence.
American
Anthropologist
88:879-97.
Roman
Berrelleza,
R., and
J. Alberto.
1990. Sacrificio
de
ninos en
el Templo
Mayor.
Mexico
DP.
Sagan,
E. 1974.
Camibalism:
Human
Aggression
and
Cultural
Form.
New
York.
Sugiyama,
S.
1995.
Mass
Hulman
Sacrifice
and
Symbolism
of the
Feathered
Serpent
Pyramid
in
Teotihuacan,
Mexico.
Tempe.
Swanson,
G.
1960.
Birth of
the
Gods.
Ann Arbor.
SYSTAT
for
Windows.
Version
5
Edition.
1992.
Evanston,
IL.
Tamahill,
R.
1975.
Flesh
and Blood:
A
History
of the
Cannibal
Complex.
New
York.
Tierney,
P. 1989.
The
Highest
Altar:
The
Story
of Human
Sacrifice.
New
York.
Tuden,
A., and
C. Marshall.
1972.
Political
Organization:
Cross-Cultural
Codes.
Ethnology
11:436-64.
Turner,
C., and
J.
Turner.
1995.
Camibalism
in the
Prehistoric
American
Southwest:
Occurrence,
Taphonomy,
Explanation
and Suggestions
for
Standardized
World
Definitions.
Anthropologi-
cal Science
103(1):1-22.
Winkelman,
M. 1986.
Magico-Religious
Practitioner
Types and
Socioeconomic
Conditions.
Behavioral
Science
Research
20(1-4):17-46.
1990.
Shaman
and
Other
"Magico-Religious"
Healers:
A Cross-Cultural
Study
of Their
Origins,
Nature,
and Social
Transformations.
Ethos
18:308-52.
1992.
Shamans,
Priests
and
Witches.
A Cross-Cultural
Study
of Magico-Religious
Practitioners.
Tempe.
Winkelman,
M., and
D. White.
1987.
A
Cross-Cultural
Study
of
Magico-Religious
Practitioners
and
ASC:
Data
Base.
HRAP
Research
Series
in
Quantitative
Cross-cultural
Data,
Vol. 3,
eds.
D.
Levinson
and
R.
Wagner.
New
York.
Whyte,
M. K.
1978.
Cross-Cultural
Codes
Dealing
with the
Relative
Status
of
Women.
Ethnology
17:21
1-37.