When I first starting reading “The Enigma of Aztec Sacrifice” by Michael Harner, I very much doubted that the Aztecs were cannibals. After all, I had never heard about them doing that from school, media, books, or anywhere else. When he told the story of the men who witnessed it first hand, though, I began to wonder if maybe they actually did cannibalize. Then he began discussing the few herbivorous, domesticable animals in the area, and I thought “What does this have to do with cannibalism?” I had a bit of an ‘ah-ha!’ moment when he mentioned the lack of sufficient game in the area to support their nutritional needs, as well as the frequent famines that made living off of vegetables impossible, especially for a growing population. He mentioned that they did it because they were lacking certain nutrients, which made me suspicious again. I wondered how they could possibly know they needed those nutrients. He went on to say that humans oftentimes…show more content… It seemed a little extreme when other food is available for consumption. Harner then mentioned that even the wealthiest Aztecs would sometimes fall victim to famine, even sometimes selling their children into slavery to save themselves. It made much more sense then. It seemed strange to me that poor people were also allowed to feast on the meat. I thought it would have been considered some sort of sacred event only the most ‘important’ members of the society would be allowed to take part in. I doubted they cared about the poor people, especially if they were starving because of overpopulation. Less people meant more food, right? Nope, he doused my suspicions again, explaining that the poor who brought in the new ‘catch’ were rewarded with three of the limbs, making everyone strive to perform better in battle. That made a lot of sense to me, it did benefit the nobles, after
