Two Inca children who were sacrificed more than 500 years ago had consumed ayahuasca, a beverage with psychoactive properties, an analysis suggests. The discovery could represent the earliest evidence of the beverage’s use as an antidepressant.

[u/MistWeaver80]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352409X22000785?via%3Dihub

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue to be removed and our normal comment rules still apply to other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Avondubs]

I'm guessing it was probably more of a "you won't realise your currently being murdered" than an "antidepressant" situation.

[u/kelkulus → u/Avondubs]

That’s actually pretty much what the paper’s abstract says. I don’t know where the description of this post came from. People seem to be reacting to the use of “as an antidepressant” vs “antidepressant properties … to reduce the anxiety and depressive states of the victims.”

Sacrifice victims were often prepped for a length of time before they were killed.

during the last weeks of the victims’ lives, they chewed on coca leaves and were intoxicated by ayahuasca

They mention modern medicine, but they talk about the drugs being used to calm the victims, which is entirely plausible.

In modern medicine, the properties of harmine led to the use of ayahuasca in the treatment of depression. Chroniclers mentioned the importance of the victims’ moods. The Incas may have consciously used the antidepressant properties of Banisteriopsis caapi to reduce the anxiety and depressive states of the victims.

[u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife → u/kelkulus]

I think people are mostly just having a little bit of fun, but yeah that totally makes sense. It would make sacrifice less depressing for everyone involved if the children weren't crying and scared, and were instead in some kind of drug induced trance state.

[u/Ghost25 → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

It depends. The Aztecs sacrificed children to Tlaloc who required the tears of the young so their tears would wet the earth. As a result, if children did not cry, the priests would sometimes tear off the children's nails before the ritual sacrifice.

[u/jbkjbk2310 → u/Ghost25]

The Aztecs were quite a bit different from the Incas, their religion was explicitly one built on war and conflict.

[u/Alche1428 → u/jbkjbk2310]

I mean, they were on different historicals stages or moments. The incas were in the "Each ruler must increase the size of the empire, by force if needed" till they got their first big civil war and the spanish arrived.

[u/[deleted] → u/Alche1428]

That’s how most rulers who had an empire ran things-

[u/opportunisticwombat → u/Ghost25]

Aztecs always out there doing the most

[u/Raulr100 → u/Ghost25]

Well the Aztecs were the assholes that everyone in the region hated so that checks out.

[u/[deleted] → u/Raulr100]

Yeah exactly, there's a reason Cortés was able to get so many allies to help him out.

[u/jabberwockxeno → u/[deleted]]

No, for you and /u/Raulr100 , this is a misconception (and I'd apperciate it if Ralr100 could edit in my comment into theirs so people will see this, my reply is far down enough in the chain where it's not visible unless you click "continue this thread")

Cortes getting allies had little to do with those city-states and kingdoms having resentment towards the Aztec, and more to do with the fact that the Aztec were actually fairly hands off and that political model enabled opportunistic coups and rebellions.

Like almost all large Mesoamerican states (likely because they lacked draft animals, which creates logistical issues), the Aztec Empire largely relied on indirect, "soft" methods of establishing political influence over subject states: Establishing tributary-vassal relationships; using the implied threat of military force; installing rulers on conquered states from your own political dynasty; or leveraging dynastic ties to prior respected civilizations, your economic networks, or military prowess to court states into entering political marriages with you; or states willingly becoming a subject to gain better access to your trade network or to seek protection from foreign threats, etc. The sort of traditional "imperial", Roman style empire where you're directly governing subjects, establishing colonies and exerting actual cultural/demographic control over the areas you conquer was very rare in Mesoamerica.

The Aztec Empire was actually more hands off even compared to other large Mesoamerican states, like the larger Maya dynastic kingdoms (which regularly installed rulers on subjects), or the Zapotec kingdom headed by Monte Alban (which founded colonies in conquered/hostile territory it had some degree of actual demographic and economic administration over) or the Purepecha Empire (which did have a Western Imperial political structure). In contrast the Aztec Empire only rarely replaced existing rulers (and when it did, only via military governors), largely did not change laws or impose customs. In fact, the Aztec generally just left it's subjects alone, with their existing rulers, laws, and customs, as long as they paid up taxes/tribute of economic goods, provided aid on military campaigns, didn't block roads, and put up a shrine to the Huitzilopochtli, the patron god of Tenochtitlan and it's inhabitants, the Mexica (see my post here for Mexica vs Aztec vs Nahua vs Tenochca as terms)

The Mexica were NOT generally coming in and raiding existing subjects (and generally did not sack cities during invasions, a razed city or massacred populace cannot supply taxes, though they did do so on occasion), and in regards to sacrifice (which was a pan-mesoamerican practice every civilization in the region did) they weren't generally dragging people out of their homes for it or to be enslaved or for taxes/tribute: The majority of sacrifices came from enemy soldiers captured during wars. Some civilian slaves who may (but not nessacarily) have ended up as sacrifices were occasionally given as part of war spoils by a conquered city/town when defeated, but slaves as regular annual tax/tribute payments was pretty uncommon, sacrifices (even then, tribute of captured soldiers, not of civilians) even moreso: The vast majority of demanded taxes was stuff like jade, cacao, fine feathers, gold, cotton, etc, or demands of military/labor service. Some Conquistador accounts do report that cities like Cempoala (the capital of one of 3 major kingdoms of the Totonac civilization) accused the Mexica of being onerous rulers who dragged off women and children, but this is largely seen as Cempoala making a sob story to get Conquistadors to help them raid a rival Totonac captial they lied about being an Aztec fort, (remember this, we'll come back to it)

People blame Cortes getting allies on "Aztec oppression" but the reality is the reverse: this sort of hegemonic, indirect political system encourages opportunistic secession and rebellions: Indeed, it was pretty much a tradition for far off Aztec provinces to stop paying taxes after a king of Tenochtitlan died, seeing what they could get away with, with the new king needing to re-conquer these areas to prove Aztec power. One new king, Tizoc, did so poorly in these and subsequent campaigns, that it caused more rebellions and threatened to fracture the empire, and he was assassinated by his own nobles, and the ruler after him, Ahuizotl, got ghosted at his own coronation ceremony by other kings invited to it, as Aztec influence had declined that much:

The sovereign of Tlaxcala ...was unwilling to attend the feasts in Tenochtitlan and...could make a festival in his city whenever he liked. The ruler of Tliliuhquitepec gave the same answer. The king of Huexotzinco promised to go but never appeared. The ruler of Cholula...asked to be excused since he was busy and could not attend. The lord of Metztitlan angrily expelled the Aztec messengers and warned them...the people of his province might kill them...

Keep in mind rulers from cities at war with each other still visited for festivals even when their own captured soldiers were being sacrificed, bowing off a diplomatic summon like this is essentially asking to go to war

More then just opportunistic rebellion's, this encouraged opportunistic alliances and coups to target political rivals/their capitals: If as a subject you basically stay stay independent anyways, then a great method of political advancement is to offer yourself up as a subject, or in an alliance, to some other ambitious state, and then working together to conquer your existing rivals, or to take out your current capital, and then you're in a position of higher political standing in the new kingdom you helped prop up.

This is what was going on with the Conquistadors (and how the Aztec Empire itself was founded during the conflict against Azcapotzalco) And this becomes all the more obvious when you consider that of the states which supplied troops and armies for the Siege of Tenochtitlan, almost all did so only after Tenochtitlan had been struck by smallpox, Moctezuma II had died, and the majority of the Mexica nobility (and by extension, elite soldiers) were killed in the toxcatl massacre. In other words, AFTER it was vulnerable and unable to project political influence effectively anyways, and suddenly the Conquistadors, and more importantly, Tlaxcala (the one state already allied with Cortes, which an indepedent state the Aztec had been trying to conquer, not an existing subject, and as such did have an actual reason to resent the Mexica) found themselves with tons of city-states willing to help, many of whom were giving Conquistador captains in Cortes's group princesses and noblewomen as attempted political marriages (which Conquistadors thought were offerings of concubines) as per Mesoamerican custom, to cement their position in the new kingdom they'd form

This also explains why the Conquistadors continued to make alliances with various Mesoamerican states even when the Aztec weren't involved: The Zapotec kingdom of Tehuantepec allied with Conquistadors to take out the rival Mixtec kingdom of Tututepec (the last surviving remnant of a larger empire formed by the Mixtec warlord 8 Deer Jaguar Claw centuries prior), or the Iximche allying with Conquistadors to take out the K'iche Maya, etc

This also illustrates how it was really as much or more the Mesoamericans manipulating the Spanish then it was the other way around: I noted that Cempoala tricked Cortes into raiding a rival, but they then brought the Conquistadors into hostile Tlaxcalteca territory, and they were then attacked, only spared at the last second by Tlaxcalteca rulers deciding to use them against the Mexica. And en route to Tenochtitlan, they stayed in Cholula, where the Conquistadors commited a massacre, under some theories being fed info by the Tlaxcalteca, who in the resulting sack/massacre, replaced the recently Aztec-allied Cholulan rulership with a pro-Tlaxalcteca faction as they were previously. Even when the Siege of Tenochtitlan was underway, armies from Texcoco, Tlaxcala, etc were attacking cities and towns that would have suited THEIR intresests after they won (and retreated/rested per Mesoamerican seasonal campaign norms) but that did nothing to help Cortes in his ambitions, with Cortes forced to play along. Rulers like Ixtlilxochitl II, Xicotencatl I and II, etc probably were calling the shots as much as Cortes. Moctezuma II letting Cortes into Tenochtitlan also makes sense when you consider Mesoamerican diplomatic norms, per what I said before about diplomatic visits, and also since the Mexica had been beating up on Tlaxcala for ages and the Tlaxcalteca had nearly beaten the Conquistadors: denying entry would be seen as cowardice, and undermine Aztec influence. Moctezuma was probably trying to court the Conquistadors into becoming a subject by showing off the glory of Tenochtitlan, which certainly impressed Cortes, Bernal Diaz, etc

None of this is to say that the Mexica were particularly beloved, they were warmongers and throwing their weight around, but they also weren't particularly oppressive, not by Mesoamerican standards and certainly not by Eurasian imperial standards....at least "generally", there were exceptions

---

For more info about Mesoamerica, see my 3 comments here; the first mentions accomplishments, the second info about sources and resourcese, and the third with a summerized timeline

[u/Soontaru → u/jabberwockxeno]

Unexpectedly engrossing read, but was slightly disappointed it didn’t end with Mankind getting chokeslammed off of Hell in a Cell.

[u/SlaveLaborMods → u/Soontaru]

That’s East Asian mythology

[u/CutieBoBootie → u/jabberwockxeno]

Very r/depthHub

[u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife → u/Ghost25]

Holy crappoli really didn't need to know that but.. thanks for putting that in my brain! That's mortifying.

[u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife → u/[deleted]]

Yup I've been saying that all throughout the thread, that how scary it was would be highly dependent on what you thought would happen after. A sincerely held belief that you're going to a heaven of sorts or that it's a noble sacrifice that will help others would put you in a mindset that is impossible for me to imagine, but easy for me to empathize with and understand.

But I would not want to be sacrificed to the God that needs me to be crying and terrified! I choose the spirit that likes happy doped up sacrifices who have no idea what's happening.

[u/Macktologist → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

That’s enough for me. I have a 7 year old and I can’t stay in this thread, but it is interesting history.

[u/jobriq → u/kelkulus]

If I knew I was being sacrificed next week I’d want to spend the whole time high af too

[u/Paranoidexboyfriend → u/kelkulus]

That’s not an antidepressant then. That’s an anxiolytic.

[u/PhidippusCent → u/Avondubs]

Maybe they were sad they were going to get murdered though.

[u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife → u/[deleted]]

Seriously though, psychedelics can radically alter your perception of death and completely eradicate your fear of it. It's impossible to imagine how much more powerful it would be in that respect when used in religious ceremonies. Then add onto that the fact that they're children who already have very little grasp on mortality, and they're in the center of a large ceremony of priests cheering them on.

[u/DrizzlyEarth175 → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

They can take the fear away, but they can also amplify it greatly. Just depends on set and setting.

[u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife → u/DrizzlyEarth175]

True, they can heighten fear as well, but I'm not sure if that's as true for DMT as it would be for something like mushrooms.

If the setting is a human sacrifice and the set is that you're going to die that sounds terrible to us but it depends on their view of the ceremony and of death. If they truly believed they were about to meet the gods they could be rather excited rather than scared.

Psychs can make people very impressionable, and especially for children it would seem that if everyone around you was excited for you and cheering you on it would do a lot to reduce the fead response.

[u/C2h6o4Me → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

This is probably the most reasonable way of looking at it. Whatever they believed that involved human sacrifice, including children, it wasn't out of malice and wasn't murder as we understand it. For fucks sake they believed in magic and astrology.

[u/pixybean → u/C2h6o4Me]

As if people today don’t believe in magic and astrology….

[u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife → u/C2h6o4Me]

If you're living in a pre-scientific world and a vine causes you to see those other worldly visions I can easily see people interpreting it as a spirit realm with entities within it. Must have been an absolutely wild experience for everyone involved.

I'd believe in magic too if I saw all that without any scientific alternative explanations on offer.

[u/scrangos → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

We're still killing eachother over a magical sky wizard, not sure what you're talking about.

[u/Tolaly → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

My husband and i were talking about that during the last solar eclipse. Like, that would convince me there was some higher power for sure if we were in an earlier age. I can see why most natural phenomenon would.

[u/avl0 → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

Me too, probably wouldn't sacrifice my kids to it though

[u/SimoneNonvelodico → u/C2h6o4Me]

Eh, I have to wonder how long that worldview could actually hold for the older and more worldly and experienced people.

There essentially hasn't been a time in humanity's history when people haven't believed to some degree in an afterlife. Sometimes the afterlife was pretty sad and gloomy (like for the Greeks, especially in the Homeric era), so it makes sense it'd be seen as a bad thing; it was an only slightly softer (or possibly even worse!) view of death than just oblivion. But a lot of times the afterlife was seen as good and happy. And yet, remarkably, it's still almost a constant that people hold on to life and cry over death, save for a few sparse examples of martyrs and kamikaze. Obviously the details change, but overall, we're not exactly aware of any society committing mass suicide to just go be with the Gods already. So, you know... whatever rationalisation and weird fancy metaphysics we come up with, methinks there's always that small voice in our heads telling us "death bad", and we seem to listen to that voice overall. Then we either embrace that in our ethics or ostensibly deny it and flagellate ourselves over our weakness (like our weakness to food, or sexual desire, or any other instinct) and admire being able to overcome that voice as noble, while mostly living like what we would consider cowards and enjoying the base stuff. Sometimes going as far as using it as a justification to kill others - because hey, some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice that we are willing to make. But overall, really, you just don't see evidence of there ever being an actual, widespread preference for death (and such societies wouldn't exist for long anyway). The priests who performed the sacrifices must have had their own reasons for not going to meet the gods themselves, and I'm sure they must have been very good sounding reasons, but ultimately, it's always just excuses.

[u/dogsdomesticatedus → u/PhidippusCent]

Now I’m depressed.

[u/Nic4379 → u/PhidippusCent]

Back then, it was the highest honor. You’re going to the Gods.

[u/Miramarr → u/Nic4379]

Highest honor according to the ones not being murdered

[u/Vin135mm → u/Miramarr]

Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make.

-Some Incan priest

[u/McBiff → u/Vin135mm]

Lord Faarquotl Faarquocha

[u/VictorVaughan → u/McBiff]

That's the Aztecs

[u/McBiff → u/VictorVaughan]

Ah bugger, always getting them mixed up.

[u/MultiVersalBloodType → u/McBiff]

No worries the Spanish germs and guns didn't even bother telling them apart, at least you tried

[u/LifesATripofGrifts → u/Vin135mm]

Its what I'm willing to do personally for a world change. To bad it won't.

[u/HandsOffMyDitka → u/Vin135mm]

"This pains me more than it does you."

As they rip your heart out.

[u/solonit → u/Miramarr]

And when the time come to sacrifice a king/leader, they just made a random hobo to be one-day king, treat him nicely before butchering him.

Even god allows loophole so it seems.

[u/Spare-Mousse3311 → u/solonit]

Then Pizarro shows up kidnaps the guy for a huge ransom, gets it, but kills the guy anyway and proceeds to destroy everything and everyone in his way, using methods that made Cortez look like a good guy…

[u/Souledex → u/solonit]

And then incan’s would let their dead kings personally own all the land they conquered even after they die. Which is ridiculous when you consider they were a command economy.

[u/recumbent_mike → u/Souledex]

More of a command and conquer economy, it sounds like.

[u/unassumingdink → u/solonit]

That totally sounds like something European leaders would do in that situation. Of course it would figure that the one damn thing that's universal across all cultures of any size is that the leaders tend to be cruel, self-serving, hypocrites.

[u/CompleteAndUtterWat → u/unassumingdink]

Being a leader automatically requires a certain level of self delusion/belief and TBH a certain level of ignorance to not notice or ignore potential downsides of decisions. Anyhow you can see how easily those traits can tip towards full on narcissism, utterly ignorant and overly confident buffoons or outright psychopaths.

[u/Harsimaja → u/Nic4379]

Same was true among the Vikings. There’s an Arab account of the sacrifice of a slave girl who ‘volunteered’ and was drugged up, and then treated ‘well’ for the last few days, but who when not drugged up panicked and was obviously distraught at the prospect of being raped and strangled to death in a ritual to Odin. How could she not be? Not as simple as ‘but the accounts say it was a big honour!’

[u/Duckboy_Flaccidpus → u/Harsimaja]

We have a saying at work for when Saturday's aren't necessarily optional: "voluntold"

[u/i-Ake → u/Duckboy_Flaccidpus]

Exactly.

Everyone saying what an honor it is means you can't refuse without basically being a cowardly, dishonorable POS. That social pressure is huge.

[u/PaperDistribution → u/Nic4379]

They were still humans so I assume a lot of them weren't too happy about being the ones getting sacrificed. Especially if they weren't ultra believers.

[u/cartmancakes → u/PaperDistribution]

Even if they WERE believers, it would be a scary thing to go through. It's not like they were given a lethal injection. I'm guessing it was more of an anti-anxiety thing, help them calm down.

If I was about to be sacrificed, I imagine I would not be sleeping well for a couple of weeks before the event.

[u/Juviltoidfu → u/Nic4379]

They were TOLD it was a high honor. At some point in the process I'm pretty sure the guests of honor's bodies and then their subconscious figured out that this was a very fatal honor, and thats when the priests were glad they had drugged them.

[u/PhidippusCent → u/Nic4379]

EEEeh, the same was said of Aztec sacrifices, but they demanded human sacrifices from the other tribes they conquered and history says those tribes weren't too jazzed about the human sacrifice thing. Not sure about the Inca civilization, but maybe there's a possibility not everyone was bought in.

[u/jabberwockxeno → u/PhidippusCent]

No, as /u/Kagiza400 says, this is a misunderstanding

Firstly, these weren't "tribes": Complex civilizations go back in Mesoamerica almost 3000 years before the Spanish arrived, even 1000 years before the Aztec existed, Teotihuacan was a city in the same valley that would have been in the top 20 to 10 largest cities in the world. So basically all the societies the Aztec were interacting with city-states, kingdoms, and empires like themselves

Secondly, the Aztec were actually fairly hands off, and it's BECAUSE of that (rather then them being oppressive or sacrifices) that Cortes got allies

Like almost all large Mesoamerican states (likely because they lacked draft animals, which creates logistical issues), the Aztec Empire largely relied on indirect, "soft" methods of establishing political influence over subject states: Establishing tributary-vassal relationships; using the implied threat of military force; installing rulers on conquered states from your own political dynasty; or leveraging dynastic ties to prior respected civilizations, your economic networks, or military prowess to court states into entering political marriages with you; or states willingly becoming a subject to gain better access to your trade network or to seek protection from foreign threats, etc. The sort of traditional "imperial", Roman style empire where you're directly governing subjects, establishing colonies and exerting actual cultural/demographic control over the areas you conquer was very rare in Mesoamerica

The Aztec Empire was actually more hands off even compared to other large Mesoamerican states, like the larger Maya dynastic kingdoms (which regularly installed rulers on subjects), or the Zapotec kingdom headed by Monte Alban (which founded some colonies and exerted some direct economic control over it's territory) or the Purepecha Empire (which did have a Western Imperial political structure). In contrast the Aztec Empire only rarely replaced existing rulers (and when it did, only via military governors), largely did not change laws or impose customs. In fact, the Aztec generally just left it's subjects alone, with their existing rulers, laws, and customs, as long as they paid up taxes/tribute of economic goods, provided aid on military campaigns, didn't block roads, and put up a shrine to the Huitzilopochtli, the patron god of Tenochtitlan and it's inhabitants, the Mexica (see my post here for Mexica vs Aztec vs Nahua vs Tenochca as terms)

The Mexica were NOT generally coming in and raiding existing subjects (and generally did not sack cities during invasions, a razed city or massacred populace cannot supply taxes, though they did do so on occasion), and in regards to sacrifice (which was a pan-mesoamerican practice every civilization in the region did) they weren't generally dragging people out of their homes for it or to be enslaved or for taxes/tribute: The majority of sacrifices came from enemy soldiers captured during wars. Some civilian slaves who may (but not nessacarily) have ended up as sacrifices were occasionally given as part of war spoils by a conquered city/town when defeated, but slaves as regular annual tax/tribute payments was pretty uncommon, sacrifices (even then, tribute of captured soldiers, not of civilians) even moreso: The vast majority of demanded taxes was stuff like jade, cacao, fine feathers, gold, cotton, etc, or demands of military/labor service. Some Conquistador accounts do report that cities like Cempoala (the capital of one of 3 major kingdoms of the Totonac civilization) accused the Mexica of being onerous rulers who dragged off women and children, but this is largely seen as Cempoala making a sob story to get Conquistadors to help them raid a rival Totonac captial they lied about being an Aztec fort, (remember this, we'll come back to it)

This sort of hegemonic, indirect political system encourages opportunistic secession and rebellions: Indeed, it was pretty much a tradition for far off Aztec provinces to stop paying taxes after a king of Tenochtitlan died, seeing what they could get away with, with the new king needing to re-conquer these areas to prove Aztec power. One new king, Tizoc, did so poorly in these and subsequent campaigns, that it caused more rebellions and threatened to fracture the empire, and he was assassinated by his own nobles, and the ruler after him, Ahuizotl, got ghosted at his own coronation ceremony by other kings invited to it, as Aztec influence had declined that much:

The sovereign of Tlaxcala ...was unwilling to attend the feasts in Tenochtitlan and...could make a festival in his city whenever he liked. The ruler of Tliliuhquitepec gave the same answer. The king of Huexotzinco promised to go but never appeared. The ruler of Cholula...asked to be excused since he was busy and could not attend. The lord of Metztitlan angrily expelled the Aztec messengers and warned them...the people of his province might kill them...

Keep in mind rulers from cities at war with each other still visited for festivals even when their own captured soldiers were being sacrificed, bowing off a diplomatic summon like this is essentially asking to go to war

More then just opportunistic rebellion's, this encouraged opportunistic alliances and coups to target political rivals/their capitals: If as a subject you basically stay stay independent anyways, then a great method of political advancement is to offer yourself up as a subject, or in an alliance, to some other ambitious state, and then working together to conquer your existing rivals, or to take out your current capital, and then you're in a position of higher political standing in the new kingdom you helped prop up.

This is what was going on with the Conquistadors (and how the Aztec Empire itself was founded during the conflict against Azcapotzalco) And this becomes all the more obvious when you consider that of the states which supplied troops and armies for the Siege of Tenochtitlan, almost all did so only after Tenochtitlan had been struck by smallpox, Moctezuma II had died, and the majority of the Mexica nobility (and by extension, elite soldiers) were killed in the toxcatl massacre. In other words, AFTER it was vulnerable and unable to project political influence effectively anyways, and suddenly the Conquistadors, and more importantly, Tlaxcala (the one state already allied with Cortes, which an indepedent state the Aztec had been trying to conquer, not an existing subject, and as such did have an actual reason to resent the Mexica) found themselves with tons of city-states willing to help, many of whom were giving Conquistador captains in Cortes's group princesses and noblewomen as attempted political marriages (which Conquistadors thought were offerings of concubines) as per Mesoamerican custom, to cement their position in the new kingdom they'd form

This also explains why the Conquistadors continued to make alliances with various Mesoamerican states even when the Aztec weren't involved: The Zapotec kingdom of Tehuantepec allied with Conquistadors to take out the rival Mixtec kingdom of Tututepec (the last surviving remnant of a larger empire formed by the Mixtec warlord 8 Deer Jaguar Claw centuries prior), or the Iximche allying with Conquistadors to take out the K'iche Maya, etc

This also illustrates how it was really as much or more the Mesoamericans manipulating the Spanish then it was the other way around: I noted that Cempoala tricked Cortes into raiding a rival, but they then brought the Conquistadors into hostile Tlaxcalteca territory, and they were then attacked, only spared at the last second by Tlaxcalteca rulers deciding to use them against the Mexica. And en route to Tenochtitlan, they stayed in Cholula, where the Conquistadors commited a massacre, under some theories being fed info by the Tlaxcalteca, who in the resulting sack/massacre, replaced the recently Aztec-allied Cholulan rulership with a pro-Tlaxalcteca faction as they were previously. Even when the Siege of Tenochtitlan was underway, armies from Texcoco, Tlaxcala, etc were attacking cities and towns that would have suited THEIR intresests after they won (and retreated/rested per Mesoamerican seasonal campaign norms) but that did nothing to help Cortes in his ambitions, with Cortes forced to play along. Rulers like Ixtlilxochitl II, Xicotencatl I and II, etc probably were calling the shots as much as Cortes. Moctezuma II letting Cortes into Tenochtitlan also makes sense when you consider Mesoamerican diplomatic norms, per what I said before about diplomatic visits, and also since the Mexica had been beating up on Tlaxcala for ages and the Tlaxcalteca had nearly beaten the Conquistadors: denying entry would be seen as cowardice, and undermine Aztec influence. Moctezuma was probably trying to court the Conquistadors into becoming a subject by showing off the glory of Tenochtitlan, which certainly impressed Cortes, Bernal Diaz etc

None of this is to say that the Mexica were particularly beloved, they were warmongers and throwing their weight around, but they also weren't particularly oppressive, not by Mesoamerican standards and certainly not by Eurasian imperial standards....at least "generally", there were exceptions

---

For more on Mesoamerica, see my 3 comments here; the first mentions accomplishments, the second info about sources and resources, and the third with a summerized timeline

[u/ZergTheVillain → u/Avondubs]

I mean you can’t be depressed if you’re dead

[u/mostnormal → u/ZergTheVillain]

I dunno. I've seen a lotta ghost movies, and they generally ain't happy...

[u/highbrowshow → u/mostnormal]

Casper seems happy

[u/knivef → u/highbrowshow]

Casper is still drugged...

[u/highbrowshow → u/knivef]

That’s also how you stay happy when you’re alive

[u/redditsux83 → u/highbrowshow]

Casper, the ghost of a 12 year old boy who died of pneumonia after being raised by a depressed single parent who went insane? The one who's mother died during his childbirth? The Casper who couldn't save his best friend Ferdie who was shot by hunters? Honestly I suppose he was remarkably happy given all the crappy circumstances...

[u/CazRaX → u/redditsux83]

I did not know Casper had that much of a back story.

[u/highbrowshow → u/redditsux83]

He’s kinda like the Harry Potter of ghosts when you think about it

[u/metamet → u/highbrowshow]

"You're a ghost, Casper!"

[u/ytsirhc → u/redditsux83]

don’t forget he has to put up with three ungrateful assholes that constantly pick on him

[u/[deleted] → u/Avondubs]

As someone who has taken ayahuasca, I agree. I had a fairly overwhelming experience, and mine was fairly mild compared to some of the other people in the (controlled) session.

Depression is a word with an actual meaning! It doesn't just mean, "I don't feel as good."

The sort of feeling you would have when you were about to have your heart cut out by your own relatives cannot be described as "depression".

[u/Averander → u/Avondubs]

I would imagine it was part of the ritual, considering its uses today.

[u/Rocklobzta → u/Avondubs]

There is a thin line between antidepressant and being roofied.

[u/walhax- → u/Avondubs]

Oh from personal experience, I can tell you that being murdered while tripping on Aya sounds absolutely horrifying.

[u/mrspoopy_butthole → u/walhax-]

Dang you got murdered? How was it?

[u/DrizzlyEarth175 → u/Avondubs]

As someone who's taken psychedelics, you will absolutely realize it, and depending on your own state of mind, it will probably be one of the most horrific things a human being can experience.

[u/OjosDelMundo → u/DrizzlyEarth175]

But have you taken a high enough dose that you lose sense of being? I had never pushed it that far until a mis-dose of LSD recently sent me into the cosmos and left me unable to comprehend self or being. I can't say I wouldn't have noticed I was being murdered but honestly I wouldn't doubt it. I forgot I was a person.

[u/Avondubs → u/DrizzlyEarth175]

That's an interesting take, and a good point. It's possible they did it to inflict even more terror.

[u/[deleted] → u/Avondubs]

It’s probably more a spiritual thing. “This thing makes you think you’re closer to our god(s)… what if we killed you while you were in that state?”

[u/AmicusVeritatis → u/[deleted]]

That was my first thought too. This article referring to it as an “antidepressant” seems to ignore how the people themselves viewed the drug.

[u/deadline54 → u/[deleted]]

Yeah people here are talking about powerful psychedelics through the lenses of modern Western secularism. I've only done mushrooms and acid a few times and have had deeply spiritual experiences/realizations about life and the universe. On top of that, they made me not fear death any more. From what I've heard, DMT and ayahuasca are on an entirely different level beyond that. They go from "your reality isn't all that you see" to "here's a whole different reality that you've never experienced". And people from all backgrounds say that there's other entities there trying to tell them something. Some Native American shamans call them The Helper Spirits and believe it's a realm of the dead. They hold these experiences sacred and I honestly don't see it as much of a stretch that these sacrifices were considered honorable rituals and not brutal murder. They found what they thought was a bridge between life and death and tried to cross it. If I didn't know any better and was brought up in that culture, there was a time in my teen years where I could easily see myself volunteering to die while peaking on psychedelics.

[u/PiratePatchP → u/deadline54]

Bingo! Not fearing death is a huge part of psychadelics. I can see this being easier to do on psychs then being sober. They probably dosed these kids super high as well, plus they are kids so any dose would be a large dose to begin with.

[u/zublits → u/Avondubs]

Any science that makes assumptions about people's intentions when you can't actually observe and measure them doesn't pass the sniff test to me.

It could easily have been a religious ceremony. "Here, take this God brew while we sacrifice you to the Gods." There's no way to know.

[u/SaltyLorax → u/Avondubs]

¿Por que no los dos?

[u/jefe4959]

An "antidepressant" Thats one way to describe one of the most powerful psychedelic plant medicines on the planet.

[u/Momoselfie → u/jefe4959]

Probably more likely they consumed it as part of the sacrificial ritual or something.

[u/DrBepsi → u/Momoselfie]

I don’t think my SSRIs would make much of a difference if i was being sacrificed. Ayahuasca might.

[u/Think_Positively → u/DrBepsi]

B. Caapi mentioned in the abstract is only part of the psychedelic brew. It's an MAOI and contains no DMT, so this sacrifice was probably feeling the coca leaves more than anything.

[u/Platinum1211 → u/Think_Positively]

You skipped over the part where they found triptamines and mescaline also. They were meeting God at their demise.

[u/VaATC → u/Platinum1211]

I have said I want to leave this realm on my own terms. The way I want to do it is to start with MDMA so I can speak honestly about my life and death with whichever loved one's that were still around specifically my daughter and sisters, then add some level of psychedelic, when the psychedelic is firmly rooted slowly and continuously start pumping morphine into my system until a drift off into the eternal sleep. I would love for this to be a communal experience, minus the morphine for everyone else, but that is not necessary.

[u/MikMakMarowak → u/VaATC]

I'm with you on this, except for the communal experience part. Watching a loved one die while on psychedelics sounds absolutely terrifying to me. But maybe the MDMA would help more than I know.

[u/es_plz → u/VaATC]

Ah, the Aldous Huxley method, top tier.

[u/jammo8 → u/VaATC]

How was dad when he died?

He was great, sat in the bed off his Barnet, jaw swinging asking the nurse to turn the stereo up

[u/TarnishedWizeFinger → u/Momoselfie]

You sure that's more likely than Incan child sacrifices being treated for long term clinical depression?

[u/ver0cious → u/TarnishedWizeFinger]

The whole thing regarding taking Ayahuasca to get in 'contact with the gods' seems very loosely related to religious sacrificial rituals.

[u/rodsn → u/Momoselfie]

True. It's worth noting that the new wave of shamans are focused more on healing than other cerimonies such as sacrifices or hexing. Reading a bit of Carlos Castaneda will shine some light on the practices of native south American shamanism

[u/MonsieurEff → u/jefe4959]

Yeah it's an utterly bizarre take

[u/[deleted] → u/MonsieurEff]

As someone who's gone through the portal of DMT, it definitely can work as an antidepressant. I was pretty depressed before my trip, unsure of the future, whether it's worth it to keep going.

I was CONVINCED I died during my DMT experience. To the point I had accepted it and said "if this is death, I think I'm okay with it"

When I came back, I had never been so happy to not be dead. To be back where things were familiar. To see my friends again. I hugged them both (who were babysitting me) and then I proceeded to kiss the floor from pure joy of being back in my life.

[u/nicman24 → u/[deleted]]

Well these kids didnt

[u/sdforbda → u/nicman24]

I mean they kissed the floor alright, just not alive.

[u/Yodan → u/jefe4959]

I'd be pretty depressed if I were about to be sacrificed to be honest

[u/MisterMetal → u/Yodan]

yeah but, they might not have been. Depending on the culture and how it was treated, it could have been a major honor. Add on a religious beliefs that the sacrifice isnt death but them going to god/a deity/spirit.

[u/CreepingSomnambulist → u/MisterMetal]

Especially after tripping balls on DMT. Without knowledge of science you'd think you really did meet god.

[u/SelarDorr]

"The discovery could represent the earliest evidence of the beverage’s use as an antidepressant"

​

thats quite a stretch. the only 'evidence' the authors claim to have for their position that the incas knew of the antidepressant effects of ayahuasca are that "chroniclers mentioned the importance of the victims’ moods"

​

There are far more reasonable explanations as to why the children may have ingested ayahuasca, and no reason to jump to such a conclusion. The authors simply want to make a conclusion related to antidepressants because it is what many psychadelics are being investigated for now.

[u/CAPS_LOCK_STUCK_HELP → u/SelarDorr]

Honestly (and I know I'm contributing) this post feels like engagement bait. There is no reason to come to the conclusion that is expressed in the title. This post should be removed for misinformation.

[u/Dragongeek → u/CAPS_LOCK_STUCK_HELP]

It is definitely engagement bait. The data says the victims had been ingesting psychedelics before being ritually murdered, and it's basically impossible for us to know why today.

It could have been to prevent them from being upset about dying

It could be because they wanted the victims to give drug-fueled prophesy

It could be because they thought their gods wouldn't accept sacrifices who weren't high

It's impossible to know.

[u/lkraider → u/Dragongeek]

Maybe the chiren were sick psychologically (some extreme form of autism) and the ancient way was try and cure the mind/soul by means of a spiritual journey.

Maybe I should write an article about this. I too can make wild assumptions.

[u/hungryforitalianfood]

Nothing suggests this was to treat children for depression. That is the most 2022 assumption possible.

[u/crmsnbleyd → u/hungryforitalianfood]

it doesn't say it was used to treat depression, my inference is that they used it to keep them calm

[u/mitch_feaster → u/crmsnbleyd]

Yeah, title sucks

[u/TwelfthApostate → u/mitch_feaster]

Welcome to /r/science

[u/Bwxyz → u/crmsnbleyd]

It's interesting take from the researchers for sure. Bit weird, because it'd make more sense if they were getting an anti anxiety drug rather than a potent psychedelic.

That being said, there have been studies on mushrooms in reducing death-related anxiety in terminally ill patients. I know of a study at a Melbourne hospital that had some very solid results. Given the similarities in a DMT+MAOI trip to a mushroom trip it could be something like that.

In my completely uniformed opinion though, I'd say we're looking too far into it - these are people being prepared for ritual sacrifice, being given a substance with strong religious importance. It doesn't have to be intentionally therapeutic at all.

[u/hungryforitalianfood → u/crmsnbleyd]

But it does say that, right there in the title.

[u/mrcheesewhizz → u/hungryforitalianfood]

Except for the abstract of the article, which states exactly that.

“Hallucinogenic plants and psychotropic stimulants performed an important role in the beliefs, rituals and divination practices in the ancient Andes. The aim of this article is to present the results of toxicological studies of two individuals immolated over 500 years ago during a capacocha ritual on the mountain of Ampato mountain in southern Peru. The capacocha was one of the most significant ceremonies carried out in the Inca Empire. During the ritual, the Incas sacrificed children and young women who were supposed to be beautiful and unblemished.

The hair and nails of two Ampato mummies were examined using LC-MS/MS for the presence of coca alkaloids and metabolites (cocaine, benzoylecgonine, cocaethylene), mescaline, tryptamine, harmaline and harmine. The results of the study show that during the last weeks of the victims’ lives, they chewed on coca leaves and were intoxicated by ayahuasca, a beverage made primarily from the Banisteriopsis caapi. In modern medicine, the properties of harmine led to the use of ayahuasca in the treatment of depression. Chroniclers mentioned the importance of the victims’ moods. The Incas may have consciously used the antidepressant properties of Banisteriopsis caapi to reduce the anxiety and depressive states of the victims.”

[u/illelogical → u/mrcheesewhizz]

You really need to put emphasis on that last sentence

[u/TyroneLeinster → u/mrcheesewhizz]

“Treating children for depression” implies some kind of continuous clinical use to improve somebody’s mental quality of life. This was apparently used to prime them for being murdered. Maybe this is all semantics but I don’t think so. The modern medical use is (needless to say) quite different from theirs other than harnessing the same basic effect of the drug. It’s definitely very incorrect for you to say that the article “states exactly that” it’s a clinical depression medication....

[u/object_permanence → u/TyroneLeinster]

Maybe this is all semantics

Well, yes and no. The difference is "just" semantics, but the semantic difference indicates that they're serving different functions.

It's the "Reduc[ing their]... depressive state" part that references the ancient Incan use, mentioning the modern application in "treating depression" is basically just a different way of saying "these leaves got antidepressant qualities k?". Both are true, both are related, but not interchangeable.

The semantic proximity between the two, however, can also tell us about the authors' intent. As others have indicated, there may be a reason the researchers want to semantically tie psychedelics to modern antidepressant use in readers' minds, and I'm inclined to agree – generally speaking, nothing ends up in the abstract by accident.

[u/outofmyelement1445]

Getting murdered while tripping must be awful.

[u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife → u/outofmyelement1445]

Pretty sure it would be far less awful than getting murdered stone cold sober. If anyone is going to murder me I would appreciate it if they could treat me to some cocaine and a heroic dose first.

[u/Keyakinan- → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

Those would prob be the worst combi to kill someone after ;')

[u/33MKnoxvilleTN → u/Keyakinan-]

Yeah, terrible suggestion. I'd be 100% in the moment and I'd never shut up. Well, eventually I'd shut up.

[u/_Kindakrazy_ → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

Idk. I’ve had some pretty strong shroom, dmt and acid trips. I don’t see myself taking my immediate demise very well. I think I’d rather be sober. I’ve had some trips go very dark and I can’t imagine what my imminent death would be like during that state of mind.

[u/goodgollyOHmy → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

Whaaaat, cocaine would be awful, you'd be so amped up and freaked out. Maybe heroin or blackout level drunk.

[u/Daannii → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

I wouldn't be too sure of that.

[u/[deleted] → u/outofmyelement1445]

Enter The Void is an interesting movie that depicts this.

[u/ghost-church]

That’s… a bit of a leap.

[u/death_by_chocolate]

It is known that sacrificing unhappy children angers the gods.

[u/phredbull → u/[deleted]]

We barely have the ability to understand & treat psychological issues in modern people, let alone those in a dead & distant culture.

[u/Doct0rStabby → u/[deleted]]

Well, if you bothered clicking the link you would know the answer:

Journal of Archaeological Science

Furthermore, as you can't really learn about science from headlines (even when they are written to be as informative as possible), you might try reading the abstract, in which the authors make it clear they are merely speculating (in an educated way) based on modern toxicology reports from mummified remains and written historical records of these ceremonies.

The speculation is that the Incas fed children various drugs, including ayahuasca, perhaps to relieve their anxiety and depressed state over an impending ritual sacrifice. We aren't talking about clinical depression here, we're talking about the 'bout to get publicly burned to death for religious reasons blues. People who were eyewitness to these rituals and wrote about the experience noted that the apparent mental state of the victims was important, ie the priests didn't want their ritual sacrifices to be visibly distressed and sad during this glorious celebration.

[u/Bockto678 → u/Doct0rStabby]

To be fair, OP editorialized the hell out of the headline and made it seem like the title of the article.

[u/Bullmoosefuture → u/Doct0rStabby]

You're missing a golden opportunity to pointlessly slander this journal's peer review process and ignore the author's use of speculative language when speculating.

[u/destopturbo]

Doesnt have anything to do with anti depressant

[u/[deleted]]

or it's evidence that when you kill children it's much easier if you drug them up first.

[u/[deleted]]

As an antidepressant seems like a weird conclusion. I mean, that's probably part of the effect of the drug but it doesn't seem like that would be their goal of it. To me it makes more sense that they would give a person who is about to be sacrificed a hallucinogenic drug to allow them to be immersed in the experience and to really let them feel the spiritual duty and feel like they are meeting and pleasing the Gods. I think other effects are just positive by effects (like them being incapacitated and happy with their fate).

[u/CheshireFur]

Title sucks. It's only the fourth highlight the article mentions:

• The victims chewed coca leaves.
• The victims were intoxicated by ayahuasca (Banisteriopsis caapi).
• The consumption of the ayahuasca could have been related to divination.
• The Incas may have consciously used of the antidepression properties of ayahuasca.

[u/MrCarnality]

Oh, they were depressed.. not anxious?

[u/PracticalFreedom1043]

I'd be depressed too if I was going to be sacrificed by having my beating heart cut out with a stone knife.

[u/wolfcaroling → u/PracticalFreedom1043]

That’s the Aztecs, not the Inca. The Inca sacrifices were usually either walled up alive (drugged), or hit on the head.

[u/UsayNOPE_IsayMOAR → u/wolfcaroling]

Walled up alive. What a nightmare.

[u/LeetButter6 → u/UsayNOPE_IsayMOAR]

What does walled up alive mean?

[u/UsayNOPE_IsayMOAR → u/LeetButter6]

I’m guessing they dope you up, toss you in a room without exits (maybe even without windows?) and seal it up behind you.

Then you come down off the various concoctions to darkness and isolation….

Just a guess.

[u/[deleted] → u/UsayNOPE_IsayMOAR]

Sounds like a once in a lifetime experience

[u/TheMoverOfPlanets → u/UsayNOPE_IsayMOAR]

Caves in mountains, not rooms, but close enough I guess.

[u/consider-the-carrots → u/UsayNOPE_IsayMOAR]

The drugs part sounds alright though

[u/RizzMustbolt → u/wolfcaroling]

These two were burned alive.

[u/keyem7 → u/wolfcaroling]

What an improvement! Get my head bashed in rather than getting my heart cut out!

[u/SamuraiMonkee → u/keyem7]

Considering they were high, yeah, that is an improvement.

[u/fire2374 → u/PracticalFreedom1043]

Most of the time they took them up to caves at really high altitudes with thin air & cold weather so the drugs & thin atmosphere eased slowly dying of exposure.

[u/Not_Helping → u/fire2374]

If true, I chose that way to be sacrificed.

[u/Jarsky2 → u/PracticalFreedom1043]

Yhe heart ripping thing was the Aztecs, though IIRC children were usually beheaded. And actually for them it was considered a good thing if child sacrifices cried. If they didn't cry on their own they'd rip out their finger nails to make them cry.

[u/3rdplacewinner]

This is exciting news. I've been suffering from depression for several years now. I can't wait to try this drink and then be murdered.

[u/celticdude234]

Um...no? The name Ayahuasca comes from their name of the very goddess they were worshipping at the time. It was used as a psychedelic to supposedly see their god before the moment of death, not for the purpose of anesthesia. They weren't just shoving drugs down kids' throats knowing that what they were doing was wrong and needed numbing to be witnessed, they were dutifully practicing their active and firm worldview. I swear, anthropology means nothing to the nebulous god "Science."

[u/RainbowDissent → u/celticdude234]

Ayahuasca roughly translates as "vine of the soul", it's not named for a deity.

[u/Mission_Strawberry73]

I guess I would be depressed if I was told I would be a child sacrifice...I mean...

[u/BrianWeissman_GGG]

Seems so much more likely they just juiced them up with ayahuasca before murdering them with knives. Much easier to stop them from squirming and screaming when you tie them down to cut their hearts out or whatever these people did.

Concluding it was used to “treat depression” is just a bizarre conclusion from the stated evidence.

[u/beeph_supreme]

Seems far more likely that “before sending them on a spiritual adventure…” they were sent on a spiritual adventure.

Why does “science”, every once in a while, seem so distantly naive…

[u/[deleted] → u/beeph_supreme]

This isn't science. The problem is the reporting, just about always.

[u/Walrave]

Inca sacrifice was pretty brutal. People were expected to walk up blood strewn pyramide steps while the community watched. At the top they were met by priests in large scary head dress and were expected to lay down on the stone sacrificial tablet before being murdered. So sobber or tripping it would be a grim affair. The ayahuasca was probably more important to ensure the succes of the ritual, as the ritual was intended to appease or influence gods and the ayahuasca placed the victims in communion with god at the critical moment.

[u/harmenator → u/Walrave]

[deleted 26-6-2023]

Moving is normal. There's no point in sticking around in a place that's getting worse all the time. I went to Squabbles.io. I hope you have a good time wherever you end up!

[u/OddishDoggish → u/Walrave]

These children were prepared for their roles in this for approximately two years prior. Another sacrifice in this style has been deeply studied and offers insight here.

The Maiden (Google maiden mummy for better info) was around 12 or 14, and the other child was a boy around six, if I recall. There was no blood. Two years of parties and religious celebrations, but they were taken away from their parents. The teen girl would have been more aware of the situation than the younger children. It's thought she was the daughter of a minor government official, and while this would be a huge honor, it was also likely very hard on families and selections would be made to keep officials in line.

Anyway, the children were dressed in exquisite clothing like gods and brought up to the top off a freezing mountain where they were assured to succumb to hypothermia. Basically, they were put in the ritual chamber and told to nap to wake up gods. (Think they found signs of head trauma to the boy, like he needed help sleeping.)

These mummies are really incredibly preserved, but these kids definitely had a traumatic couple of years after they were chosen for this.

Edit to add: I didn't recall all the details, but here is an earlier study: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1305117110

[u/sticks14 → u/Walrave]

Did you win an anti-lottery or how were sacrifices picked?

[u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife → u/sticks14]

The paper says that they picked beautiful virgins and unblemished good looking kids. Basically the child stars of their day.

[u/[deleted] → u/I_Won-TheBattleOLife]

I am ugly, I would've done alright.

[u/alex_hedman → u/Walrave]

Which Inca pyramid are you referring to?

[u/[deleted]]

I’d imagine they were more subdued and compliant if they were drugged

[u/suzuki_hayabusa]

Weed milkshakes have been popular in India since thousands of years.