Cultural Preservation of Indigenous Ways
By
Nicholas Jones
In fourteen hundred and ninety two Columbus sailed the ocean blue and found this land, land of the Free, Beloved by you, beloved by me. This is an age old rhyme that most children are taught in grade school when learning of how Europe conquered the Americas. The Spanish swept in, conquered, took all the gold, and then systematically converted every last Indian to Catholicism. Except, that’s not true. We know this by examining evidence presented by several different authors, my favorite being the Myth of Completion by Matthew Restall. Through research I’ve found that there was often times a double conversion, meaning the Spanish converted the Indians, and at the same time, the Indians converted the Spanish. There was a mixing of peoples; in Spanish we call this Mestizaje.
In my research I’ve found that men were often times converted more completely then their female counterparts. This is not an absolute, as we know from studying history absolutes don’t work and are never true. There are patterns of it showing in early colonial New Spain and Hispaniola. We see evidence from several sources throughout history. One such source is the St. Augustine Pattern; which was proposed about St. Augustine in present day Florida.
Using the St. Augustine pattern first we see that Spaniards would often times take native women as concubines, wives and servants. We know from research that anything viewed in the open or anything considered public by Spanish standards was viewed as masculine and anything that was not public or considered private was feminine. We find that at the dinner table Spaniards would use metal plates, and decorations of a Spanish nature, but the food they ate was indigenous and often times made with indigenous utensils as eating was often done so that others could see you i.e public, but the food could not be seen i.e. private. In the article Gender, Race, and Labor in the Archaeology of the Spanish Colonial Americas by Barbara L. Voss we see this put into practice with “Deagan showed that indigenous women actively participated as agents of cultural change, and that colonial cultures were transformed as much as, and at times perhaps more than, indigenous cultures.” (Voss). The article goes on to state “Such areas of low visibility, female associated … would be expected to exhibit the strongest Indian characteristics …” (Voss). Finally the article states “Artifacts recovered from each household were first divided into artifact classes … each of which was associated with gender … aboriginal influence is most strongly evident in the kitchen (women’s activity). (Voss). This is proof that even when subjugated to Spanish authority be it by religious figures, or through marriage or domestic servitude women influenced activities remained largely unchanged in these cases.
We also find evidence of this when Friars and other religious figures are dealing with women in general. This is prevalent in Mexica Women on the Home Front as noted in regards to priestly duties “ … [T]he identity of Mexica woman … became a contested domain…” (Burkhart). Burkhart goes on to say that “Women’s domestic life was a subject about which the early friars had little knowledge and much fear … One reason for this avoidance was a fear of women … For a friar to rub elbows with a native women in such a close and dimly lit quarters might give rise to the temptation in his own mind and to suspicion in the minds of others.” (Burkart). This too proves that native women were insulated from the church because as I’ve shown the early friars were afraid of the native women. The Christian ideas being promoted by the Spanish were a double edged sword in this case as it attempted to change the ideas of Indians and also insulated the women from these changes by virtue of simply following it’s own rules.
In the book Indian Women of Early Mexico we continue to see this pattern as Stephanie Wood shows us with Nahuatl Testaments of Rural Women. In this chapter farming and women’s role in farming, owning land etc are looked at. We see that “As concerns Spanish and indigenous terms for measures, some variation appears in the ay men and women used certain terms. While approximately the same proportion of women as men referred to the indigenous quahuitl, a rod or stick of undetermined length, a somewhat greater proportion of men than women counted their lots by the Spanish surco …” (Wood). Wood goes on to say “What accounts for these differences? Diverging degrees of exposure to the new culture is a more compelling explanation that some “female” reluctance to accept foreign ways.” (Wood). Again proof that women were insulated from the Spanish on multiple levels because they were female. Lastly, I would like to point out the following as proof “ Women’s significant through lesser role in stock raising argues against cultural conservatism on their part; they were not reluctant to take on the care of European animals.” (Wood 175). Again, this is very strong evidence that the women of colonial Mexico were shielded from the Spanish influence more so than their male counterparts.
Finally we see that gender roles are contrary to Spanish norms. One such case is that written by Susan M. Deeds in Indian Women in Jesuit Missions, which is another chapter from Indian Women of Early Mexico. In this chapter we see that as the Jesuits came in and “The intensification of agriculture near mission villages and the introduction of livestock … Men hunted and primarily women gathered although these activities became circumscribed as the non-Indian population increasingly encroached on the wilderness areas. Forced draft labor took men away from mission villages to work rotations in Spanish mines … women stayed behind to tend their fields … colonial demands often necessitated a practical flexibility in the allocation of tasks.” (Deeds). This is further evidence that women were insulated, left behind in many cases; and did not receive the influence of the Spanish, it was indeed the men.
In conclusion, we see that the women of early colonial Mexico are indeed sheltered to a degree in many aspects of life when it comes to the changes brought by the Spanish and their way of life. It is extremely evident that the changes are not uniform between the sex’s due largely to the fact that European males thought it was taboo to deal with females they were not married to or related to as I’ve shown so far.
The “Conquest of Mexico” was incomplete, especially in the case of women, as I’ve shown here. As I’ve stated before, this was not uniform obviously. There are examples of a more complete change in Hispaniola where you see more pottery made by slaves, used in the preparation of food. I find it curious that places like St. Augustine and Hispaniola, which are relatively close to each other, are so very different. I think it is a testament to the Human race that we are indeed very different and not uniform, even when offered the same cases, we react sometimes very differently.
