The Wealth and Poverty of Nations: Why Some Are So Rich and Some So Poor (W W Norton & Company; 1998)

(Nora) #1

(^104) THE WEALTH AND POVERTY OF NATIONS
tered and sprinkled on the idols, their bodies rolled down the steps and
butchered to furnish culinary delicacies to the Aztec aristocracy.
This last practice embarrasses politically correct ethnologists, who see
in such descriptions of cannibalism a justification for foreign contempt
and oppression.^4 (It was certainly that for the conquistadors, who were
disgusted when their Mexican hosts showed hospitality by saucing their
guests' food with the blood of victims sacrificed right before their
eyes.) Some have tried to argue that the whole business of cannibalism
is a myth, a Spanish invention. Others, ready to concede the anthro­
pophagy, have pointed to occasional Spanish lapses—as though mea­
sures of desperation are comparable to institutionalized behavior;^5 or
have tried to argue that this was the only way for the Aztecs (or at least
the aristocracy, who had a quasi-monopoly of human flesh) to get
enough protein in their diet. The best one can say for such nonsense,
especially as applied to the privileged members of Aztec society, is that
it shows imagination.*
(Ironically enough, the Europeans would later find themselves ac­
cused of cannibalism by the Chinese, who preferred to think of for­
eigners as barbarians anyway.^6 In China, such rumors served as a barrier
to contact between natives and foreigners. In Africa, where cannibal­
ism was not unknown, the Portuguese warned the locals against an al­
leged English appetite for human flesh, in the hope the natives would
send these interlopers packing, or perhaps do worse. And the Chinese,
undiscriminating in their superiority, said as much of the Portuguese.
Barbarians are barbarians.)
These mass sacrifices had precisely the effect desired by our Mexican
Darth Vader: they sharply lowered Aztec enemies' will to resist. But the
losers naturally nursed their hate. Aztec ceremonies also created a sup­
ply problem: where to get enough victims. In war? But that meant in­
cessant fighting. In the prisons or among the slaves? But that meant an
intensification of oppression and potential instability. With the con­
nivance of the rulers of allied/subject peoples? This was the device of
the so-called flower wars, where aristocratic collaborators from other
nations watched behind flower screens as the Aztecs staged simulated



  • It would seem, however, that the Mexicans were astonishingly inclusive in their diet,
    finding animal protein in dogs, guinea pigs, and worms, among other fauna. The
    worms have become something of a cult item for aficionados of pre-Columbian Amer­
    ican cuisine, if we are to believe an article on the subject published in 1990 in the mag­
    azine of American Airlines. As a kindness, I shall not cite the name of the author, who
    brags that he tried some of his worms live and was bitten on the tongue for his temer­
    ity.

Free download pdf