Indigenous people and their elders have reacted angrily to remarks Pope Benedict made during his trip to Brazil, calling the conservative leader of the Roman Catholic Church “arrogant and disrespectful” for saying that Indian people “willingly” converted to Christianity. Pope Benedict XVI made his first official visit to the Americas with a four day visit to Brazil, where he railed against premarital sex, Marxism, abortion rights and drug dealers while offering a tepid, moderate critique of capitalism… saying only that it had “failed” the poor of Latin America.

But the Pope’s alternative to the materialist realities of capitalism and globalization is to simply reinstate the power of the Church. Turning his back on Latin America’s Liberation Theology - those clergy and laity who champion social justice through a leftwing reading of Christianity - Benedict said, “The Marxist system, where it found its way into government, not only left a sad heritage of economic and ecological destruction, but also a painful destruction of the human spirit.”

Pope Benedict’s visit to Brazil no doubt inspired conservatives and traditionalists, but his words seemed to upset just about everyone else. Those most offended, and rightly so, where Brazil’s indigenous people. At a talk before Latin American and Caribbean Bishops made at the end of his visit, the Pontiff said that American Indians had “welcomed” the arrival of the Europeans 500 years ago, as they had been “silently longing” for Christianity. The Pontiff alleged that the Church had “purified” native peoples, and that a revival of indigenous spiritual beliefs would be “a backward step.” Moreover, the Pontiff said the Christian Church had not imposed its teachings upon the indigenous people of the Americas. Shockingly, the Pope made no mention of the documented violence and genocide in Latin America directed against native peoples by the Conquistadors and the Christian Church. As the Washington Post reported:

Indian leaders in Brazil said on Monday they were offended by Pope Benedict’s ‘arrogant and disrespectful’ comments that the Roman Catholic Church had purified them. Several Indian groups sent a letter to the Pope last week asking for his support in defending their ancestral lands and culture. They said the Indians had suffered a ‘process of genocide’ since the first European colonizers had arrived. (….) “The state used the Church to do the dirty work in colonizing the Indians but they already asked forgiveness for that … so is the Pope taking back the Church’s word?” said Dionito Jose de Souza a leader of the Makuxi tribe in northern Roraima state.

Pope John Paul spoke in 1992 of mistakes in the evangelization of native peoples of the Americas. Pope Benedict not only upset many Indians but also Catholic priests who have joined their struggle, said Sandro Tuxa, who heads the movement of northeastern tribes.”We repudiate the Pope’s comments,” Tuxa said. “To say the cultural decimation of our people represents a purification is offensive, and frankly, frightening. “I think the Pope has been poorly advised.”

Famed author and social critic Mike Davis, wrote in his book, Planet of Slums, that Photojournalist David Bacon is “a nonfiction Steinbeck, the foremost documentarist of the great human drama of the borderlands.” Bacon is concerned with the “issues of our times,” and over the years he’s been busy shooting photos of migrant workers, antiwar protestors, unionists, cultural activists, and many others. Of particular note have been Bacon’s photographs of immigrant farmworkers who labor in California’s agricultural fields, and Xispas has published some of these photos in the past. So it’s exciting to hear that he has a book of these images coming out, Communities Without Borders: Images and Voices from the World of Migration. People in the San Francisco Bay area can meet David Bacon when he presents a slide show on his works during a panel discussion on the issues of migration and work contained in his book. Other panelists will include Professor Emeritus Carlos Muñoz Jr. (UCB Department of Ethnic Studies,) and workers whose stories are presented in the book.

The book presentation and signing by photojournalist David Bacon takes place on Friday, January 19, 2007, from 5:00 to 7:00 pm. UC Berkeley Labor Center, 2521 Channing Way Berkeley, CA. For more information, call 510-643-7077. If you are unable to attend the event, you can make an online order of the book, Communities Without Borders, or visit Bacon’s extensive website.

Thirteen years ago, on December 31, 1993, the Zapatista Nacional Liberation Army (EZLN) took up arms and said, “Enough is Enough!” It was time to stop being robbed of a life without dignity. Today, Mexicans from Chiapas, Atenco, Oaxaca, the rest of Mexico, as well as those living on the other side, unite with the Zapatista demands for our right to work, land, housing, food, health, education, independence, democracy, justice, and peace. Danza Mexica Cuauhtemoc invites you to celebrate the Zapatista New Year 2007 - Sunday December 31st at 6PM until 6AM on January 1st. Parque de México (Corner of N. Main St. Y Valley Blvd.-Lincoln Heights.) There will be videos, food, music, and Aztec Dance. For more information, e-mail: dancuauhtemoc@yahoo.com. ¡Zapata Lives! ¡The Struggle Continues!

William Booth wrote a brilliant critique of Gibson’s film for the Washington Post, titled Culture Shocker: Scholars Say Mel Gibson’s Action Flick Sacrifices the Maya Civilization to Hollywood. The December 9, 2006 article reveals what archaeologists and scholars of the Maya are saying about the Hollywood version of Mesoamerican history - and by all accounts, Apocalypto gets failing grades. To read the full article, visit the Washington Post, in the meantime, here are a few excerpts:

“Apocalypto depicts the Maya as a super-cruel, psycho-sadistic society on the skids, a ghoulscape engaged in widespread slavery, reckless sewage treatment and bad rave dancing, with a real lust for human blood. Think: Caligula of the Yucatan. Follow the bouncing heads! This is a problem because most scholars, while acknowledging the violence of this pre-Columbian society, universally applaud the Maya as among the New World’s most sophisticated and subtle civilizations. They were, especially at their height around A.D. 800, remarkable Stone Agers who erected avant-garde cities and towering pyramids in the jungles of Mexico and Central America, created sumptuous art, practiced a precise astronomy and (yes, there’s more) developed not only a written language, but a heady cosmology of time and space, built around a complex, ordered society of maize, kings and gods. The Maya flourished for a thousand years. They were winners.

But Apocalypto’s focus on the more, shall we say, extreme hobbies of the Maya (i.e., removal of still operating body parts) is giving the community of Maya researchers the fits. The archaeologists are shouting: slander! They’re circulating statements and editorials and e-mails. ‘It is a shocking movie to us,’ says Stephen Houston, professor of anthropology at Brown University, and like the other Mayanists quoted in this article, a scientist who has spent years excavating sites in Mexico and Central America. (…) The main gripe, says Houston, is that Apocalypto will make a bad impression on the general public. ‘For millions of people this might be their first glimpse of the Maya,’ he says. ‘This is the impression that is going to last. But this is Mel Gibson’s Maya. This is Mel Gibson’s sadism. This is not the Maya we know.’ Some of the scientists have seen the movie, others have watched the trailers, read reviews or summaries. David Stuart, professor of Mesoamerican art and writing at the University of Texas, saw a rough cut of the film with Gibson and penned an unpublished editorial with Houston that suggests Gibson’s Maya are so evil that they were “a civilization . . . that deserves to die.”

Arthur Demarest, anthropology professor at Vanderbilt University, says, ‘I don’t care about some minor historical inaccuracies. That’s Hollywood. What I’m very worried about is how the Maya themselves will perceive the film.’ As Demarest points out, the Maya are not a extinct lineage. Their descendants, 6 million or more, are still living in Mexico and Central America. (The film does not open south of the border until next year). ‘I can promise you that there will be a massive repudiation of this film, not only as a work of fiction, but as a systematic and willful misrepresentation of the Maya,’ says David Freidel, archaeology professor at Southern Methodist University.”

The multi-million dollar promotional campaign waged for Apocalypto by Disney, the film’s distributor, has made much of the fact that Gibson employed Richard Hansen as the film’s consultant. An expert in Maya studies and a professor of anthropology at Idaho State University, Hansen helped promote the movie when he appeared on TV with Gibson on ABC’s Primetime special with Diane Sawyer (Disney owns ABC). William Booth’s Washington Post article makes note of the fact that Hansen is the president of the Foundation for Anthropological Research and Environmental Studies, which does preservation work and study in Guatemala. Interestingly enough, “Gibson, a generous contributor to the group, now serves on its board of directors.”

But lately, even Hansen has been distancing himself from Apocalypto. Booth’s Washington Post article quotes the anthropologist as saying, “there were things I didn’t like that they went ahead and did anyway,” and that “there was a lot of artistic license taken.” In the greatest of understatements, Hansen acknowledges the depiction of endless bloody human sacrifice by the Maya in the film does “give the feeling they’re a sadistic lot,” and adds, “I’m a little apprehensive about how the contemporary Maya will take it.”

Zachary X. Hruby, Ph.D., is a Maya expert, lecturer and research affiliate in the department of anthropology at UC Riverside. He divides his time between Southern California and Guatemala. National Geographic asked Hruby to pre-screen Apocalypto for them, and he gave it a thumbs down, saying, “The film feeds into old stereotypes about the Maya being savages. If it’s a hit, it could have a lasting effect on the way the public views the ancient Maya, and by extension, the modern Maya.” Hruby notes that in Apocalypto, “They are showing murals from the time of Christ, and saying that they were current in 1524. In the trailer for the film they actually repaint the famous Bonampak murals to show the king holding a human heart, instead of making a simple hand gesture.” Hruby’s comments are to be found on the National Geographic website in an article titled, Apocalypto Tortures the Facts, and in Apocalypto: A New Beginning or a Step Backward? published on mesoweb.com, a website dedicated to the scholarly exploration of the ancient cultures of Mexico and Central America. Here’s an excerpt from the mesoweb.com article, which everyone should read in its entirety:

“Although this film will undoubtedly create interest in the field of Maya archaeology by way of its spectacular reconstructions and beautiful jungle scenes, the lasting impression of Maya and other Pre-Columbian civilizations is this: The Maya were simple jungle bands or bloodthirsty masses duped by false religions, that their mighty but misguided civilization fell into ruin as a result, and their salvation arrived with the coming of Christian beliefs saddled on the backs of Spanish conquistadors. As we archaeologists struggle to accurately reconstruct ancient Maya society, obstructed by their decimation via Western diseases, destruction of their books, art, and history by Spanish friars, not to mention their subjugation and exploitation by the conquistadors, films such as Apocalypto represent a significant disparagement of that process. Further, inaccurate, irresponsible representations by Hollywood of indigenous peoples as amoral, inhuman, or uncivilized can only lead to greater misunderstanding and strife in contemporary society. This may be particularly important in a modern world where common ground is increasingly difficult to come by.”

Traci Ardren, is an assistant professor of anthropology at the University of Miami. Dr. Ardren has studied the Maya for over twenty years and has directed excavations at Chunchucmil, an ancient Maya trading center in the northwestern Yucatán peninsula that dates to the Classic period (200 - 900 A.D.) Dr. Ardren is well aware of the violent aspects of the ancient Mayan Kingdoms, but she takes Mel Gibson to task for his colonial mindset, and asks the question, “How can we continue to produce such one-sided and clearly exploitative messages about the indigenous people of the New World?” In her article, Is Apocalypto Pornography?, written for the Archaeological Institute of America and appearing in their publication, Archaeology, Dr. Ardren writes the following:

“I am not a compulsively politically correct type who sees the Maya as the epitome of goodness and light. I know the Maya practiced brutal violence upon one another, and I have studied child sacrifice during the Classic period. But in Apocalypto, no mention is made of the achievements in science and art, the profound spirituality and connection to agricultural cycles, or the engineering feats of Maya cities. Instead, Gibson replays, in glorious big-budget technicolor, an offensive and racist notion that Maya people were brutal to one another long before the arrival of Europeans and thus they deserve, in fact they needed, rescue. This same idea was used for 500 years to justify the subjugation of Maya people and it has been thoroughly deconstructed and rejected by Maya intellectuals and community leaders throughout the Maya area today.

[….] But I find the visual appeal of the film one of the most disturbing aspects of Apocalypto. The jungles of Veracruz and Costa Rica have never looked better, the masked priests on the temple jump right off a Classic Maya vase, and the people are gorgeous. The fact that this film was made in Mexico and filmed in the Yucatec Maya language coupled with its visual appeal makes it all the more dangerous. It looks authentic; viewers will be captivated by the crazy, exotic mess of the city and the howler monkeys in the jungle. And who really cares that the Maya were not living in cities when the Spanish arrived? Yes, Gibson includes the arrival of clearly Christian missionaries (these guys are too clean to be conquistadors) in the last five minutes of the story (in the real world the Spanish arrived 300 years after the last Maya city was abandoned). It is one of the few calm moments in an otherwise aggressively paced film. The message? The end is near and the savior has come.”

Professors of anthropology are not the only ones to rightly scorn Gibson’s film. J. Hoberman lambastes Apocalypto in a scorching review for the Village Voice: “Maybe the Mayans really did bounce human heads down the steps of their pyramids but, being as their civilization collapsed hundreds of years before the Spanish conquest, how would we know? ‘A lot of it, story-wise, I just made up,’ Gibson confessed to the Mexican junketeers who visited his set last year. ‘And then, oddly, when I checked it out with historians and archaeologists and so forth, it’s not that far off.” Or far out, for that matter. Irrational as it may be, Mel’s sense of history does have a logic: Jaguar Paw’s trip to hell ends when the Christians arrive.”

In his Violent Excess Mars Apocalypto, the movie reviewer for the Associated Press, David Germain, crowns Gibson as the “master of the epic snuff” film for the unrelenting gore and the scale of blood letting the director attempts to pass off as history. Noting how Gibson offers a distorted view of the ancient Maya, Germain writes “The panorama and bustle of the city are remarkably visceral, but the only sense Gibson provides of the heart of Mayan culture is that of a society of bloodthirsty lunatics.” Germain perceptibly gets to the core belief system behind Gibson’s film - which is not so surprisingly revealed in the film’s ending scene as the Spanish invaders come ashore prominently displaying a crucifix. Germain writes:

“What’s Gibson saying? That the Mayans already are rotting on the vine, so it’s just as well that self-righteous Europeans move in and start marking off their building lots? Like the more laughable violence of Apocalypto, the European arrival probably is best shrugged off and forgotten as just another weird apparition in a filmmaker’s grand but cruel and twisted vision.”

Grassroots opinions and reviews critical of Gibson’s film are starting to appear, and Xispas will continue to cover reaction to Apocalypto as the story develops. Gabriela Erandi Rico, a Doctoral Student in Comparative Ethnic Studies at U.C. Berkeley, wrote an essay about Apocalypto that is a review from a Native woman’s perspective. Circulating on the internet, it is as good a critique as you are likely to read anywhere, so we thought to reprint it here on the Xispas web log.

“Gibson’s film is far from a tribute to the Maya. During the past week or so, tickets were distributed to U.C. Berkeley’s Chicana/o community in order to attract Mexican-Americans to view the Mel Gibson’s new film, Apocalypto. I was one of the lucky ones who actually got into Shattuck Landmark Cinemas in Berkeley, where movie-goers lined up for the free screening around the theater’s street corner. When I first heard about the film, I was struck by Gibson’s investment in a project “reviving” an ancient Mesoamerican civilization not only because as a Mexican Indian (P’urhepecha/matlatzinca), I have great respect for the Maya but also because I’ve been fortunate to visit Catemaco, the wondrous place where the film was shot and was thus interested in how the site was used to capture the plot of the film. Curiosity got the best of me although I was a bit apprehensive about Gibson’s ability to accurately portray a Native American society or to present Native people in a positive light. I was right.

I came out of the theater with mixed feelings—mostly awe, disgust, rage and indignity. Although I admit that I was visually awe-struck by the awesome aesthetic reconstruction of Maya architecture and by sitting through a film mostly casted by Native American actors and listening to a dialogue completely in the Maya Yucatec language, there were many elements of the movie I found deeply offensive.

The central aspect of the film was undoubtedly violence. While I understand that violence is necessary to keep the plot moving along in an action film and while I can even entertain the notion that shock value is a gripping method effective in capturing the audience’s attention, I thought the use of violence in this film was grossly sensationalized, sometimes inaccurate and often unnecessary. The scenes that most stand out in my mind were those of unjust bloody battles, outright violent murder (including of women and children) with heavy and sharp weapons, and of course, mass human sacrifice. While I can see how human sacrifice can be a good attention-grabber for an adrenaline-hungry audience, I thought Gibson made his point after we saw one head falling from the steps of the central Mayan pyramid and that it was not necessary to have to sit through several scenes of sharp obsidian blades plunging into human flesh to extract pulsating hearts followed by fierce decapitations of sacrificial victims…all while onlookers of the Mayan king’s loyal subjects cheered and demanded more. The killers were portrayed as sadistic and bloodthirsty while the victims were other frightened, naïve (and apparently weaker) Indians. This nonstop violent carnage throughout the movie combined with the highlighting of human sacrifice portrayed the Mayans as bloodthirsty savages. While the stereotype is a painfully familiar one for Native people, I find it quite ironic that Gibson thought we would be somehow flattered at his interest in reconstructing our past “reality” or that we would find it at all glorifying.

While sacrifice was, indeed, an important part of Aztec and Maya spirituality, many of the accounts given by Spanish soldiers and priests have been widely contested because of the bias coming from the source (conquistadores and Christian converters). The depictions in Maya and Aztec codices indicate that various forms of sacrifice were practiced and that they were, indeed, violent—but archeologists have been unable to find the mass numbers Spanish accounts claimed—proving that their alleged “eyewitness reports” (like Gibson’s representation) were gross exaggerations. Furthermore, it’s widely acknowledged by scholars who study the art of warfare that Mesoamerican societies like the Mayas and the Aztecs followed a strict set of rules of war. Their warrior societies did set out to find captives, yet the honor of the warrior was experienced in confronting another warrior on an individual basis and having him submit to his strength and valor—not, as Gibson portrays, in raiding villages or burning houses and definitely not in killing/raping women or disposing of children. Such cowardly acts would bring shame and dishonor to aspiring warriors.

The truth (one acknowledged by Gibson on his Apocalypto site) is that the Mayas were one of the greatest civilizations in the Americas. They were highly advanced in astronomy, architecture, the arts and mathematics. They gave the world the concept of zero, came up with the most advanced writing system in the Western Hemisphere and designed a calendar far more accurate than the Gregorian one we live by today. Out of all these aspects of Maya society, Gibson chose to highlight sacrifice…this is far from paying tribute to the Mayas for their contributions.

I understand that Gibson’s intent was to make a fast-moving action film; however, if carnage was what he wanted, why not focus on the extreme performance of human violence in the mass genocide of Mayas during the Spanish Conquest? Or perhaps, the systematic contemporary genocide Mayas have continued to suffer well into the 21st Century during the Central American civil wars at the hands of various governments? It’s ironic (yet not surprising) that one of the greatest civilizations is reduced to their violent practices while they themselves have been the worse casualties of ongoing violent warfare at the hands of European colonizers, their descendants and their imposed governments. I realize, however, that no one cares about the plights of contemporary Mayas; it’s much sexier in Hollywood to continue killing the dead ones. In Gibson’s film, for example, their racialized bodies are portrayed as disposable and to make matters worse, they are blamed for their own conquest!

The film opens with a quote by W. Durant, “A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within,” somehow suggesting that the divisions and warfare a decadent Maya society was wreaking on itself were what essentially led to its downfall. This quote makes sense at the end of the film, when Jaguar Paw’s run ends at his and his persecutors’ surprise upon witnessing the arrival of European ships. The Spanish conquistadores (who were historically savagely violent in their own regard) are presented as mere bystanders to Jaguar Paw’s persecution; religious symbolisms such as crosses and bibles in the hands of friars indicate that the Spanish have arrived to Christianize the heathens in order to save them from the savagery they inflict on each other. The quote on the film’s billboards, “No one can outrun their destiny,” can thus be read as the tragic truth that Jaguar Paw’s exhaustingly heroic escape back to this home in the jungle is really in vain because he will still face destiny at the hands of the newly-arrived Spanish colonizers (and he will thus probably be killed or keep running). Such is the epic story of our tragic hero!—still destined to be extinguished by the canals of history and modernity. Not quite a flattering portrayal for Maya/Native people.

During a time when the portrayals of Native Americans in the mainstream media are scarce, all representations of Native people make a statement. This is what’s scary about continuing to see films like Apocalypto being undertaken by directors like Gibson. Indian cultures continue being capitalized upon by Hollywood and Indians continue being disposable, exotic (and in this case violent) others. Indigenous scholars like Vine Deloria and Shari Hundorf have already theorized why it’s so easy to appropriate and commodify the identities and histories of Native Americans. As a population, which has been continuously preyed upon, dispossessed and colonized, we are particularly vulnerable to such feats. The only good thing Apocalypto did for Native people was to leave money in indigenous communities in Mexico, expose audiences to the Maya Yucatec language (thus enlightening them), and of course, give jobs and jumpstart careers for a few indigenous actors. Otherwise, it’s just another example of a white man’s gaze following and misrepresenting American Indians.”

[ UPDATE: Dec. 6th - Indigenous activists in Guatemala condemn Gibson's film as "racist." The views of the Mayan activists in Guatemala are reported in a Washington Post article titled, Maya say Gibson movie portrays them as savages. ]

How accurate is the cinematic fantasy, Apocalypto, a film by Mel Gibson that presents his version of the end of Mayan civilization? Scholars on the Maya and other Mesoamerican civilizations are not holding their breath. Despite the Hollywood movie’s dazzling look, the film contains numerous factual errors. If you want an accurate examination of Mayan civilization, there are many absorbing scholarly books on the topic written by experts, but if you don’t care about facts and will settle for an action adventure set in an exotic location - Apocalypto is for you.

Apocalypto presents the viewer with Gibson’s take on the fall of Mayan civilization, and he attributes this collapse to corrupt rulers desperate to hold on to power by any means. According to Gibson, Mayan elites used religion as a means to control and manipulate the people, and the film focuses on the director’s view that the practice of ritual human sacrifice - which the movie depicts as having been performed on a massive scale, was one of the primary reasons for the downfall of the Maya. That is what raises the eyebrows of archaeologists and scholars - since there is absolutely no evidence that the Maya practiced human sacrifice on a massive scale. Gibson’s contention reveals his religious bias, he sees the Maya as victims of a controlling religious cult - but sees his own religious dogma as “the one true faith.” The film’s official website even uses the tagline, “When the end comes, not everyone is ready to go”, which can also be construed as a clear reference to the end times and one’s acceptance of the Christian savior.

It is well understood by the scientific community that the Maya did conduct rituals involving blood as a supplication to their gods. In prayer, Mayan priests and political elites pierced their earlobes, tongues, lips and even genitals, offering the drawn blood to favored deities. Everyday worship also involved making prayers to agricultural gods and goddess, providing deities with offerings of food, flowers, and other forms of tribute. During special observances or events, individuals were sacrificed by priests who cut out the hearts of the victims - but this practice was limited and not conducted to the magnitude depicted in Gibson’s film. While Archaeologists agree that warfare played a major role in the life of Mayan Kingdoms, they also agree that Mayan religious practice played no significant role in the collapse of their civilization. Gibson’s assertion to the contrary is pure conjecture on his part - and further evidence of his own zealous religious beliefs.

Jewish critics of Gibson’s previous film, The Passion of the Christ, were fearful that movie would reinforce anti-Semitism, with some making the charge that the film itself was an exercise in Jew-bashing. Those accusations took on new life when an inebriated Gibson let loose a flurry of anti-Semitic diatribes against L.A. County Deputies during his arrest for drunk driving in July, 2006. “F**king Jews. The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world”, was among the vitriol Gibson shouted at his arresting officers, and while Gibson apologized for his outlandish behavior - it’s still understandable why many Jewish people and their friends will not be flocking to see Apocalypto.

The Walt Disney Co. is the distributor for Apocalypto, and they are investing big money into reshaping Gibson’s public image from that of an anti-Semite loudmouth to that of a sensitive master film director. An aggressive promotional campaign for the movie began Thanksgiving evening, when Gibson appeared on the Disney owned ABC network with Diane Sawyer in an hour long special on the film. Sawyer abandoned the role of journalist to become one of Disney’s marketers - politely asking Gibson softball questions that would allow him to promote his film. At one point Gibson said the local amateur Mexican actors and stand-ins he worked with were ashamed to speak Mayan Yucatec (the film is being shot in Veracruz, Mexico), but then arrogantly proclaimed that he had “made the language cool again” - a supposed fact that inordinately pleased him. With an equally bigheaded attitude, Gibson explained that he taught the actors, many of them descendents of the ancient Maya - how to dance like their ancestors. Where Gibson was schooled in the art of ancient Maya dance and how he became an expert in the field remains a mystery.

Diane Sawyer’s co-host was John Quinones, who reported from the Maya heartland of Guatemala in a series of remarkably uninformative and misleading “special reports.” In one such commentary focusing on the squalor and poverty suffered by large numbers of Maya in Guatemala, Quinones actually said their misery was due to the “excesses of their ancestors.” That utterly despicable remark fits the imperialist pattern of blaming the oppressed for their own misery. Quinones’ reports did not mention the Spanish invader’s murder and plunder of the indigenous peoples that truly did take place on a massive scale, nor did it mention the indigenous being ravaged by small pox, venereal diseases, and other plagues introduced by the Spanish conquerors - afflictions that took the lives of hundreds of thousands. The entire legacy of a brutal colonial rule was ignored. In passing, Quinones did mention that in the 1980’s over 200,000 Maya were killed by the Guatemalan army during the nation’s bloody counterinsurgency war, but he didn’t mention the U.S. arming, financing and training of the Guatemalan army. At any rate, his mention of the massive number of deaths that occurred during the genocidal war of the 1980’s was simply a footnote, as if it had little significance to the Maya and their way of life.

The Walt Disney Co. has intentionally aimed Apocalypto at Latinos, hiring the oldest Latino marketing agency in the entertainment industry, The Arenas Group, to help popularize and sell the movie. The Beverly Hills-based Arenas arranged screenings of the film to the L.A. Latin Business Association, which afterwards conferred their “Visionary Award” to Gibson. Disney spokesman Dennis Rice said: “We think this movie plays to a wide audience and that there’s going to be a tremendous amount of interest generated from the Latino community, especially the Mexican community, because this is a story about their ancestors.” The elite sector of Latino politicians and businessmen in Los Angeles have been invited to advance screenings, including L.A.’s Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. The omnipresent Chicano actor, Edward James Olmos, attended a screening, and gave the film a good review, but he made an interesting remark in doing so. Olmos said, “Basically, if you watch Elia Kazan’s movies, I could surely watch Mel Gibson’s movie. I think more damage was done understanding what Elia Kazan did than what Mel Gibson did. That’s his problem and he has to live with it.”

Olmos was of course referring to director Elia Kazan having co-operated with the McCarthy era witch hunts of the 50’s, the repressive nationwide anti-communist campaign that also destroyed the careers of hundreds of Hollywood professionals. Kazan testified before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), giving them the names of fellow studio professionals who were supposedly communists or left-leaning sympathizers. To this day the name of Kazan can’t be brought up without getting into a discussion over his being a genius or a rat fink informant. You can view Kazan’s masterwork, On The Waterfront, as a morality tale about a common working man overcoming the corruption of big crime bosses, or as an autobiographical self-justification for Kazan’s own odious behavior before HUAC. That Olmos would compare Kazan to Gibson is appropriate, and while Olmos can separate the personal behavior of the two from their artistic accomplishments - many others cannot.

The United American Indians of New England (UAINE), is a Native-led organization of Native people and their supporters who battle against racism and support Indigenous struggles - not only in New England but throughout the Americas. They have organized against the Pilgrim mythology perpetuated in Plymouth and protested the use of racist team names and mascots in sports. In 1970, United American Indians of New England declared US Thanksgiving Day a National Day of Mourning. In the words of UAINE activists;

“The first official ‘Day of Thanksgiving’ was proclaimed in 1637 by Governor Winthrop. He did so to celebrate the safe return of men from Massachusetts who had gone to Mystic, Connecticut to participate in the massacre of over 700 Pequot women, children, and men. About the only true thing in the whole mythology is that these pitiful European strangers would not have survived their first several years in ‘New England’ were it not for the aid of Wampanoag people. What Native people got in return for this help was genocide, theft of our lands, and never-ending repression.”

Over the years, participants in the National Day of Mourning have buried Plymouth Rock a number of times and boarded the Mayflower replica - placing ku klux klan sheets on the statue of William Bradford. The Indigenous people’s tradition of mourning on ‘Thanksgiving Day’ continues, and this year will be the 37th annual National Day of Mourning. A march and protest has been called for Nov. 23rd, 2006, to take place on Cole’s Hill, directly above Plymouth Rock in Plymouth, MA. UAINE activists have released a statement regarding the event:2006 National Day of Mourning:

Since 1970, Native Americans have gathered at noon on Cole’s Hill in Plymouth to commemorate a National Day of Mourning on the US thanksgiving holiday. Many Native Americans do not celebrate the arrival of the Pilgrims and other European settlers. Thanksgiving day is a reminder of the genocide of millions of Native people, the theft of Native lands, and the relentless assault on Native culture. Participants in National Day of Mourning honor Native ancestors and the struggles of Native peoples to survive today. It is a day of remembrance and spiritual connection as well as a protest of the racism and oppression which Native Americans continue to experience. Join us as we dedicate the 37th National Day of Mourning to our brother, Native political prisoner Leonard Peltier. Add your voice to the millions world-wide who demand his freedom. Help us in our struggle to create a true awareness of Native peoples and demonstrate the unity of Indigenous peoples internationally. Help shatter the untrue glass image of the Pilgrims and the unjust system based on racism, sexism, homophobia and war.

Since 1970, the National Day of Mourning has been a solemn, spiritual and highly political day. While most of us will not be able to travel to Plymouth Rock to join with our Indigenous sisters and brothers - we can still offer our support. Show your solidarity with the first people’s of this land, by joining them in fasting and prayer. Since it is a time when families and friends gather, take the opportunity to rededicate ‘Thanksgiving’ to all Indigenous peoples - acknowledging their humanity, bravery and contributions to civilization [ You can read more about UAINE at their website - www.uaine.org ]

Mexican archeologists believe they may have found the tomb of an Aztec Emperor, if so it would be the first imperial burial site of an Aztec leader ever to have been discovered.

Last October Xispas wrote about the discovery of major Aztec ruins in Mexico City, which included the unearthing of a gigantic carved stone slab. Since then archeologists have meticulously cleaned the monolithic carving, and have confirmed the relief sculpture as a representation of Tlaltecuhtli, Earth Goddess and ruler of the underworld. When the discovery was made in October, 2006, it was evident that it was an important find, but archeologists are now saying it may be one of most important ever made.

Archeologists believe the monolithic stone of the Earth Goddess may actually be a grave marker for Emperor Ahuizotl, who ruled the Aztec Empire from 1486 to 1502. At a Nov., 16th press conference, Eduardo Matos, the country’s chief archeologist and director of all excavations of Aztec ruins in Mexico City, said, “We think this could be a gravestone covering the place where this ruler was laid to rest.”

Ahuizotl was the father of Moctezuma, the sovereign overthrown by the Spanish invaders in their conquest of the Mexica/Aztec Empire that took place from 1519-1521. All previous stone carvings of Tlaltecuhtli have been found ritualistically buried face down in the earth - this is the first carving to be found face up. In the claw of her right foot is a carved representation of a rabbit and ten dots, the Aztec glyph for 10 Rabbit, or 1502 - the year of Emperor Ahuizotl’s death. If archeologists are correct in thinking they’ve found an imperial burial chamber - then there are certainly many staggering discoveries that will soon come to light [ Read more about this story. ]

The most significant archeological find in many decades has been made this month in Mexico City. Archeologists have unearthed in the capital a gigantic 12 ton stone slab at the site of the ancient Aztec Templo Mayor, and many think the monolith may in fact cover a burial chamber where artifacts of great importance will be found. The huge stone which has a surface area of 46 feet, has yet to be fully uncovered, but it seems to be a carved portrayal of the Aztec earth goddess, Tlaltecuhtli. Next to the buried slab, archeologists found a 15th century alter decorated with relief carvings of the rain god Tlaloc, as well as carvings of an unidentified deity related to plants and fertility. The alter and the monolithic stone are still being excavated at the time of this writing, but many experts are saying this find represents one of the greatest archeological discoveries in Mexican history.

In 1978, while installing underground cables beneath the streets of Mexico City near the capital’s spacious Zocalo and national cathedral, electricity workers found an immense stone disk carving of the Aztec moon goddess, Coyolxauhqui (She Who Wears Bells on Her Cheeks). Immediately archeologists knew they had found the actual remains of the Aztec’s Great Temple of Tenochtitlan - since it was already understood that the moon goddess stone lay at the bottom of that temple’s enormous staircase. It had long been thought that the Great Temple had been totally destroyed and the cathedral built directly over the buried ruins, but finding the 10 foot wide, 8 ton carving of Coyolxauhqui launched the excavations of the area that continue to this day.

In 1987 the Museo del Templo Mayor was established on the site of the Great Temple, and today it houses a magnificent collection of over 7,000 objects excavated from the immediate area. Arizona State University maintains an excellent website in English about the Templo Mayor museum, or you may choose to view the beautiful official website of the museum (Spanish only). Unfortunately, neither museum has updates on the latest finds written about here, but you can read the latest news about the Tlaltecuhtli monolith at the National Geographic website, or from a number of other news resources.

A number of movies that rewrite the history of the Americas are in the works, with their focus being on the prehispanic civilizations of Mexico. Antonio Banderas, star of Zorro and now Take the Lead, will play the infamous Hernan Cortes in Conquistador. The independent film directed by Brazilian filmaker Andrucha Waddington (Me You Them, House of Sand) and written by Nicholas Kazan (Reversal of Fortune,) tells the “story of the expedition that sailed west from Cuba in 1519 in hopes of expanding the Spanish Empire. Cortes and his band of soldiers came upon what is now Mexico and swiftly brought about the destruction of the Aztec empire led by Moctezuma.” This swashbuckling film now in production at Hollywood Gang Prods., has a budget of over $40 million - but most likely the money won’t help the producers get the story right.

When the Spanish conquistadors first saw the island city of Tenochtitlán (now the capital - Mexico City), they couldn’t believe their eyes. It was the largest city on earth at the time, and it’s huge gleaming temple pyramids looked out over a metropolis that was sectioned by an intricate system of canals and roads. Tenochtitlán rivaled Venice, Italy, for its beauty - and it certainly made Seville, the home city of the conquistadors, look small and insignificant. The Aztec capital had immense gardens, schools, libraries, and marketplaces. It was a place rich in architectural wonders, ritual celebrations, and magnificent wealth. The Spanish could not accept that “savages” would have been so graced by God, and seeing all the works of the Aztecs as simply the work of the devil, set out to totally destroy Tenochtitlán. They smashed every pagan idol, burned and toppled every building, sent the people into slavery (those not decimated by European diseases,) and built their “New Spain” from the ruins of the mighty Aztec city. The meeting of the two sophisticated cultures and the bloody clash between the antagonists gave birth to Mexico.

In fact, the people never called themselves “Aztecs,” they instead referred to themselves as Mexika (Meh-shee-kah or “The people of Mexi,” a legendary warrior-priest from ancient times.) Mexika creation stories tell us the people originally came from Aztlan (The place of the white heron - what many believe to be the greater southwest of the present United States.) The word Aztec was eventually derived from the name, Aztlan. But it’s doubtful any of this will be told in the Banderas/Waddington/Kazan version of the conquest of the Mexika.

Meanwhile, Mel Gibson, fresh from the success of his bloody Passion of the Christ, will direct and produce his own version of pre-Hispanic history, Apocalypto. The film is supposedly based on the Maya civilization that existed in 1000 BC, but since Gibson wrote the script for the film, and Disney will be distributing it, some have questioned the authenticity of Gibson’s version of history. Shooting is now underway and the film is scheduled for release in the summer of 2006.

The name of the film gives some insight into the perspective of Gibson’s production. Apocalypto is a Greek word meaning “unveiling,” that a Maya word or concept was not chosen hints at a yet another Eurocentric view of the ancient Maya. Moreover, Gibson is offering a vision of the Maya that he wishes the audience to accept as fact - a vision that is hotly contested by scholars, anthropologists, and archeologists. These experts differ over the extent to which human sacrifice was practiced by the ancient Maya - and only in the last few decades has it come to light that the Maya may have engaged in the practice to any significant degree. However, Gibson’s film portrays corrupt Maya monarchs who use fear to control the masses in an attempt to hang on to power; commanding the people to build more temples and sacrifice more people else the gods destroy the world. This is not a viewpoint or theory supported by scientific research, but one made of whole cloth by Mr. Gibson. His Apocalypto has no religious message to it - so it is said - but that seems doubtful considering Gibson’s Passion of the Christ.

Not to be left out of the rush to re-write history, Ron Howard will be directing The Serpent and the Eagle for Paramount Pictures. Advance publicity for the movie states it is a “Tale of Spanish Conqueror Cortez who attacked the Aztec nation and plundered its riches with the help of an Aztec princess-turned-slave.” There’s no start or release date set for this film, but you can expect to see it in movie houses by 2007. Also currently in pre-production is Aztec. With a script by writers Jeff Schaffer and Ted Humphrey, and production by The Montecito Picture Company, the advance publicity for this film states; “Set in 1519 at the height of the Aztec civilization, the project revolves around a slave named Tez who plays a brutal ball game called Ullamalitzli, in which the loser is sacrificed. Tez and his team must play the game and try to stay alive long enough to orchestrate a plan to escape the capital city of Tenochtitlan with a fortune in gold.”

What is immediately obvious to any student of history is that the sacred ball game of Ullamalitzli was not a sport per se - and it certainly was not played by slaves. The Montecito Picture Company would have you believe that Ullamalitzli was some ancient form of Rollerball. Ullamalitzli was played by the nobility and the ritualized game had deeply religious connotations. The hundreds of magnificent stone ball courts constructed across ancient Mexico illustrate how important the ritual was to prehispanic peoples. Two opposing teams would attempt to bounce a rubber ball through stone rings inset in the walls of the court, with the ball representing the sun. The entire game was a ritualized battle between the forces of light and darkness, and to an agricultural people that is no small matter.

The game was also associated with fertility and the earth’s productivity, as the captain of the loosing team was sacrificed - his blood fertilizing the earth and giving strength to the Sun God. It was considered an honor, not a punishment, to be sacrificed to the Sun so that the world would continue. Another factual error contained in the script would be the desire of the slaves to escape “Tenochtitlan with a fortune in gold.” The Mexika referred to gold as “the excrement of the gods,” and it was just a medium of exchange, no more valuable than other objects of trade and barter. What the Aztecs truly cherished and considered priceless were turquoise and feathers - but a movie about escaped slaves making off with with a fortune in feathers doesn’t sound like a box office hit, so history must be rewritten Hollywood style.

It is said that Cortés once told the Aztecs that the conquistadors “suffered from a disease of the heart which is only cured by gold.” Apparently Hollywood film studios and distributors suffer the same ailment. One can only hope that the above mentioned movies will never see the light of day, and if they are released, will be greeted by a storm of protest. The glorious civilizations constructed by the indigenous people of Mexico, from the magnificent splendor of Teotihuacan to the extraordinary empire of the Aztecs, is certainly cinematic material, and it all deserves to be made into a major motion picture. But justice and history both demand the tale be told by indigenous people, and not by those who conquered them.