 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| Non-fiction and essays |
||||||||||
| University essays |
||||||||||
| History Dissertation |
||||||||||
| ENCOUNTER IN THE NEW WORLD: SPANISH ATTITUDES AND ACTIONS TOWARDS INDIGENOUS PEOPLES, LATE 15TH TO EARLY 16TH CENTURY |
||||||||||
| Chapter Six: The Nature of the Indians When the Spanish encountered the strange peoples inhabiting the Indies, they were compelled to describe them in terms that related to themselves. Questions in the Spaniards’ minds most likely included: ‘Who and what are these creatures? How shall we treat them? Can they be Christianised and brought to a civilised way of life? How shall this be attempted, by war of by peaceful persuasion?’# They looked for ways in which they were similar, and more often, ways in which they were different. Such discussions on the nature of the Indian and how the Spanish should treat him characterised the early years of contact. This comparison inevitably led to ideas of superiority and inferiority, and in all areas, the Spaniard was deemed to be the superior form of humanity. Such firm beliefs in Indian inferiority and Spanish dominance led to the enslavement and subjugation of native peoples. To Spanish eyes, the Indians appeared remarkably backward and uncivilised. This in turn led to a renewed appreciation for the advanced state of European society. As Cocker suggests, when the ‘colonists gazed at the naked primitive with his simple weapons and rudimentary technology, they were brought to an appreciation, by contrast, of their own culture’s enormous achievement.’ The subsequent result of this ‘fundamental reaction’ was that Spaniards believed it to be in the best interest of the Indians to be elevated out of their backward state, ‘towards the twin blessings of Western science and the Christian faith.’# From the early years of the sixteenth century, this elevation would begin to occur, through the forced labour and enslavement of natives, coupled with a drive to Christianise them. Labour was seen as a basic function of civilised man. Many Spaniards saw the Indian as lazy and apparently uninterested in cultivating the land to his own benefit. Such an attitude was deplorable and against the divine will that had given man dominion over his environment. If the Indians were to become civilised, they would have to be taught the benefits of labour. This belief coincided with developing attitudes of the Spanish conquistadores towards labour. They had ‘inherited a taste for martial glory and religious conquest’ from medieval escapades against the Moors, and a subsequent dislike of physical labour.# The encomienda was employed early on in the conquest, with plantations granted to the loyal lieutenants of the conquistadores. Encomiendas involved the use of Indian labour, often resulting in great hardship and suffering. Pagden contends that it may well have been the ‘cultural and social demands of the encomienda’ which were responsible for ‘some of the features of Indian life which the Europeans found most reprehensible; suicide, infanticide, induced abortions [etc.]’.# Indians were often little more than slaves for the encomenderos, so they were often reduced to taking drastic measures to halt their suffering, or that of their families. In the Indian populations the Spanish found a source of manpower, who would also benefit from the civilising effects of hard labour. Some Spaniards saw the Indians’ well-endowed physical stature as being suited to manual labour as opposed to the political life that favoured the mentally superior Spanish. There were few advocates of fair treatment for the Indians, such as Francisco de Vitoria, who suggested that the Indians did not lack natural intellect but suffered from a lack of education. Once the Indians had been properly instructed, then they would be able to function equally with the Spanish in a mental aspect. Yet this view was not commonly held, and as Amerigo Vespucci had suggested in 1499, when the natives were encountered ‘they were all timid people of small intellect; we did what we liked with them.’# Such sentiments were widely held, as one Spanish soldier remarked that the Indians were ‘more stupid than asses’ and ‘refused to improve in anything.’# The belief in Indian inferiority was natural for the Spaniards, who were confident in the superiority of their civilisation, their culture, and especially, their religion. Another facet of Indian life that was most abhorrent to the Spanish was the practice of cannibalism, discovered or suspected among various Central and South American tribes. As these practices were sanctioned by Indian law and often a part of religious custom, the Spaniards felt this was another example of the fact that ‘the Indians’ mental world was in significant respects a seriously deficient one.’# There was contempt for the Indians’ peculiar habit of cleanliness, which to the Spanish was far too reminiscent of the ritual ablutions of Islam.# The sixteenth-century Spanish chronicler, López de Gómara determined that many Indians ‘were cannibals and knew nothing of justice; that they went shamelessly nude; that they “are like stupid, wild, insensate asses,” prone to “novelties,” drunkenness, vice, and fickleness; that, in short, they were the worst people God ever made.’# This was not an isolated view, and contempt for Indian ‘culture’ was enhanced further by other native practices, notably idolatry and human sacrifice. To the Spanish, the differences they perceived between themselves and the Indians often meant that the natives lost the semblance of humanity. As the Indian became more dehumanised, little more than savages or animals, it became easier to tolerate their subjugation. While some attempt was made to mould Indian religiosity into Christian fervour, for the most part, treatment of the Indians was shaped by a refusal to let their primitive form of civilisation threaten the furtherance of Christianity through Spanish expansion. Vivid descriptions of Indian savagery were employed to ‘facilitate the conquest and justify morally and politically any and all policies.’# The Spaniards felt that in subjugating the Indians and repressing their culture, they were redeeming the New World to make it fit for European civilisation, regardless of the cost in indigenous civilisation and lives. Replacing idolatry formed part of the Spaniards’ justification for conversion. While some Spanish writers such as Las Casas and Oviedo saw at least some worthwhile features in the natives’ ‘notable religiosity’, for the great majority of Spaniards, the worship of idols, coupled with human sacrifice, was too far removed from acceptable bounds of religious behaviour, and Spanish governors sought to eradicate such practices. In the later sixteenth century, Judge Guzman in Colombia visited the village of Iguaque to determine that the inhabitants ‘were good Christians, and to see that they did not keep old shrines and idols. To extirpate all idolatrous practices, Guzman commanded that anyone among them who maintained such shrines or temples dedicated to the devil declare it openly.’# Few Spanish writers would have argued over the objectives of converting the natives, though the means to achieve conversion were a source of fierce debate in the sixteenth century. In Spanish documents concerning the conquest of Mexico, the Indians were occasionally regarded with admiration, and at other times, as nothing more than subjects of the Spanish, to be exploited as it suited their European superiors. While it is apparent that Díaz and Cortés showed a notable lack of respect for Indian religious practices in particular, there were some aspects of Indian culture that received their praise. Cortés expressed his impression of the natives he had encountered in Central America, noting that: ‘the natives of these parts are of much greater intelligence than those of the other islands; indeed, they appeared to us to possess such understanding as is sufficient for an ordinary citizen to conduct himself in a civilised country.’ This sentiment appears to suggest a certain level of equality between the Indians and the Spaniards. The idea is quickly clarified by the next sentence: ‘It seemed to me, therefore, a serious matter at this time to compel them to serve the Spaniards as the natives of the other islands do.’# Cortés saw a pressing necessity to bring the (slightly) more advanced Aztecs under Spanish dominion so that these Indians could be involved in promoting the glory of Spain and Christendom in the New World. Even unruly natives were regarded as subjects of the Spanish crown, as Cortés described: ‘I ordered that those who were taken alive should be branded with Your Highness’s mark, and once those belonging to Your Majesty had been set aside the rest should be distributed amongst the men on the expedition.’# If death was not the reward for Indian insurrection then, as Cortés declared, branding and enslavement would follow. According to Díaz, another common practice was the gift of Indian chieftain’s daughters to the conquistadores as a tribute in return for peaceful treatment. Díaz describes how ‘The daughter of the great chief Cuesco received the name of Dona Francisca; she was very beautiful, for an Indian, and Cortés gave her to Alonso Hernandez Puerto Carrerra. I do not remember the names of the other six, but Cortés gave them to different soldiers.’# Firstly, this demonstrates the use of individual Indians as bargaining pieces, the granting of women in exchange for loyalty. At the same time it illustrates the practice of assimilation through names. Much in the same way as the Indian girl was renamed ‘Dona Francisca,’ so too the lands of the New World were given new names, such as New Spain. This practice demonstrates an attempt to impose Spanish civilisation onto the Indians and their lands through the terms of reference used by Spaniards, and other Europeans. The natives of the Americas were characterised by the majority of Spanish by their difference from European civilisation. This ‘otherness’ stemmed partly from the great geographical separation between Europe and the New World, and by a tendency to associate the unknown with the inferior. This was reinforced by natives who seemed little removed from animals and who engaged in barbaric practices like cannibalism. The Indians were thought of as barbarians and compared to the uncivilised ancestors of European civilisation, such as the Scythians, who reputedly had engaged in cannibalism. Spain and Europe represented the ‘province of rational government and moral order’ while the New World was the ‘exterior,’ a realm of ‘irrational savagery and immoral wickedness.’# The middle ages witnessed the establishment of a firmer European identity, formed around the ideal of the Christian society. Those who were on the periphery of Europe, either geographically or intellectually became stereotyped groups of ‘others.’ These groups, including Jews, heretics and lepers, were identified as different, discriminated against, and excluded from mainstream society. Classen suggests that after the ‘xenological paradigm had been established…stereotyping and ‘othering’ people from different races and religions, it could always be reactivated as soon as the Europeans came into contact with other peoples…so the American Indians since the late fifteenth century.’# Upon encountering the Indians, the Europeans were faced with a completely unknown race of beings, who they could only barely describe as human. If the Indians were seen by some Spaniards as less than human, through the absence of identifiable European practices and religion, this would enable the conquistadores to treat them with greater brutality. The idea of the Indians’ otherness would be crucial in shaping the encounter between Spaniards and natives in the New World. |
||||||||||
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |