The Spanish
Atlantic System: Discovery and Context
from an Ethnohistorical Perspective
In
attempting to understand the complex perspectives present in the Spanish
Atlantic System of the 15th through 19th centuries, the
historian must take into account the myriad of voices and viewpoints present,
understanding that some voices are weaker than others and perhaps not even
heard. Traditional historical analyses
might look at sweeping political movements and military conquests alone when
writing a narrative of events. However,
an ethnohistorical approach insists that all aspects of society are
interrelated and that historians must take an holistic, interpretive approach. This would include all aspects of everyday
life: sexuality, marriage, childhood,
magic, myth, and ritual from all viewpoints.[1] Looking holistically at the Spanish Atlantic
System, we find a complex web of culture, religion, law, and history. From Mexico to Central and South America, the
Spanish created the “largest professional bureaucracy to govern, tax, and
control…” the native population.[2] Ethnohistorical analysis requires the
historian to examine all perspectives; not only that of the Spanish and historical
Spain, but also the African and Amerindian view. Unfortunately, most primary sources we have
from the period are Spanish in origin.
How can we also see the perspective of the other peoples involved? Often, we have to analyze source material
“against the grain” to ferret out the details that are not obvious.[3] As one example in studying traditional female
roles of the Yucatec Maya, Inga Clendinnen states that by “reconstructing the
boundaries drawn around male activities…” we can then get a better idea of what
the role of women was like in societal life.[4]
Who
were the voices present when the Spanish first arrived on the shores of the
Caribbean Islands, Mexico, Central America, and South America? It would be easy to assume that there were
two: that of the Spanish and that of the
Amerindians. But that would be
simplistic. Among the Spanish there were
people of various societal levels, the same as the native peoples. We have already inferred that there were
different roles between men and women, but besides these, there were differing
ideas and as a result, differing actions.
There were those Spanish “conquistadors” who were intent on crushing any
resisting indigenous population, and there were those who resisted this idea
and were vocal about the need for less severity. The Dominican friar, Fray Bartolome de Las
Casas is perhaps most famous in his writings about how best to deal with the
native Amerindians. He particularly
spoke out against a ceremonial custom known as the Requirement. This formulaic statement was required to be
read by the Spanish commander to the indigenous population prior to invasion
and demanded their submission to the Spanish Crown and the Catholic
Church. If they refused, the Spanish
commander had the authority to conquer their lands and take as property their
people. The Requirement served both a political
as well as military role[5] and was based historically
in the Islamic legal system of conquest.[6] The Requirement laid the framework for the
Spanish to create a political system that also incorporated a poll tax system
that was likewise based on the Islamic Jizya.[7] Fray de Las Casas spoke out against the
use of the Requirement, noting its historical basis in Islam. Others who also condemned severe treatment of
the native peoples include Francisco Roldan, who was Chief Justice of
Hispaniola while Christopher Columbus and his brother held power over the
island. In a letter to Cardinal Jimenez
de Cisneros, the Archbishop of Toledo, dated around 1499, Roldan complains of
the treatment he has received at the hands of Columbus’ brother, who he
identified with the position of Adelantado, as well as his treatment of
the natives of the island. The Adelantado,
he reports, “began to act with such severity that he caused the people to
fear and hate him…”[8] Roldan goes on to relate a peace treaty with
a local leader that he had concluded.
According to Roldan, Columbus’ brother stated that he (Roldan) did not
have the authority to conclude a treaty and therefore it was not valid. The Adelantado proceeds to seize the
native leader along with his wives and children.[9]
What
can we infer about native peoples’ perspectives of the European encounter? In the above related series of events, it
would be obvious (and safe) to assume that the natives must have viewed the
Spaniards as not trustworthy, having reneged on an established peace treaty. They had already been severely mistreated
even before this. But is this the only
voice we can discern amongst the native population? From the writings of another friar, Fray Bernardino
de Sahagun, who was with Cortez when they encountered the Aztec (Mexica)
culture, we learn that Cortez was assisted in his conquest of the Mexicas by
another group of natives, known as the Tlaxcalans.[10] In fact, we know that throughout Central and
South America, Spanish invaders “consolidated wealth, power, and status by
making strategic alliances with powerful indigenous ethnic groups.”[11] What were their perspectives of the coming
Spanish conquest? What forces caused
them to align themselves with the Spaniards?
The opinions of the soon to be conquered Mexicas seems apparent in Fray
de Sahagun’s writings, who compiled an extensive work which he wrote from the
viewpoint of the native Mexicas. The
Mexicas originally thought the Spaniards were gods coming from heaven. They referred to the Africans who were with
them as “soiled gods.”[12] Curiously enough, they initially sent
magicians to them in an attempt to drive the Spaniards away through
spells. When this did not work, the Mexicas
felt that the Spaniards were invincible.[13] Later, when Cortez’ real intent was
discovered, and violence ensued, the natives were “crushed by terror” and
believed that the Spaniards were “wild beasts.”[14]
While
many of the native peoples in the “New World” viewed the Spaniards as “beasts,”
back in Spain, intellectuals wrestled with the same question about the
Amerindians. They questioned how to
categorize them, whether as “beasts,” who were incapable of living in civilized
society, “barbarians,” those who were best kept separate from civilized
society, or “brothers,” those capable of accepting Christianity and being
restored to civilization.[15] The overwhelming consensus was to accept the natives
as brothers, however many still viewed and treated them as not much more than a
“beast.” At best, a population to be
ruled over and taxed, profiting from their resources and their labor. However, we cannot oversimplify history as
one set of events and one perspective.
To understand history, we must look at the multiple voices that speak to
us, sometimes through their own words and sometimes as inference through
others’ words. When we piece these
together, we then get a wider, yet still incomplete, picture of what occurred.
[1]
Green, Anna and Kathleen Troup, The Houses of History, New York: New
York University Press, 1999, 174
[2]
Greene, Jack and Philip Morgan, Atlantic History: A Critical Appraisal,
New York: Oxford University Press, 2009,
55
[3]
Green, Anna and Kathleen Troup, The Houses of History, New York: New
York University Press, 1999, 179
[4]
Clendinnen, Inga, “Yucatec Maya Women and the Spanish Conquest: Role and Ritual
in Historical Reconstruction,” in The Houses of History, New York: New
York University Press, 1999, 184
[5]
Seed, Patricia, Ceremonies of Possession in Europe’s Conquest of the New
World, 1492-1640, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, 70
[6]
Ibid, 74
[7]
Ibid, 79
[8]
Roldan, Francisco quoted from Letter to Cardinal Jimenez de Cisneros, dated
circa 1499, as presented in John H. Parry & Robert G. Keith, eds., New
Iberian World: A Documentary History of the Discovery and
Settlement of Latin America to the Early 17th
Century (Times Books, 1984), Vol. II: The Caribbean, 228-231
[9]
Roldan, Francisco, Letter to Cardinal Jimenez de Cisneros, dated circa 1499, as
presented in John H. Parry & Robert G. Keith, eds., New Iberian World: A
Documentary History of the Discovery and
Settlement of Latin America to the Early 17th
Century (Times Books, 1984), Vol. II: The Caribbean, 228-231
[10]Sahagún,
Fray Bernardino de. Historia general de las cosas de Nueva España.
Edited by Francisco del Paso y Troncoso. 4 vols. Madrid: Fototipia de Hauser y
Menet, 1905, Accessed September 8, 2021, Book 12, Ch 24. https://www.historians.org/teaching-and-learning/teaching-resources-for-historians/teaching-and-learning-in-the-digital-age/the-history-of-the-americas/the-conquest-of-mexico/florentine-codex
[11]Greene,
Jack and Philip Morgan, Atlantic History: A Critical Appraisal, New
York: Oxford University Press, 2009, 57
[12]
Sahagún, Fray Bernardino de. Historia general de las cosas de Nueva España.
Edited by Francisco del Paso y Troncoso. 4 vols. Madrid: Fototipia de Hauser y
Menet, 1905, Accessed September 8, 2021, Book 12, Ch 8.
https://www.historians.org/teaching-and-learning/teaching-resources-for-historians/teaching-and-learning-in-the-digital-age/the-history-of-the-americas/the-conquest-of-mexico/florentine-codex
[13]
Ibid, Book 12, Ch 8
[14]
Ibid, Book 12, Ch 18
[15]
Greene, Jack and Philip Morgan, Atlantic History: A Critical Appraisal,
New York: Oxford University Press, 2009,
59
No comments:
Post a Comment