Revisiting Eurocreole Narratives on the History of Colonial Latin America Revista Mexicana Del Caribe, Vol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Revista Mexicana del Caribe ISSN: 1405-2962 [email protected] Universidad de Quintana Roo México Chinea, Jorge Deconstructing the Center, Centering the Margins: Revisiting Eurocreole Narratives on the History of Colonial Latin America Revista Mexicana del Caribe, vol. VI, núm. 11, 2001 Universidad de Quintana Roo Chetumal, México Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=12801107 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative EXAMEN DE LIBROS DECONSTRUCTING THE CENTER, CENTERING THE MARGINS: REVISITINGEUROCREOLENARRATIVES ONTHEHISTORYOFCOLONIALLATINAMERICA JORGECHINEA CenterofChicago-BoricuaStudies WayneStateUniversity he1492-1992QuincentennialofEurope’scolonization T oftheNewWorldpittedsupportersanddetractorsof theso-called“ColumbianEncounter.”ThroughoutLatinAmerica governmentssponsoredcountlessexhibits,parades,conferences, andbookstocommemoratethe“discovery”ofAmerica.Progres- sivescholarsandcommunityactivistsalsotooktheopportunity topointoutthenegativerepercussionsofEuropeanexpansion- ismonnon-westernpeoplesacrosstheglobe.Since1992,anin- creasingnumberofinsightfulstudieshaverevisitedEurocreole constructionsofnationalandregionalidentitiesandhistoriesin LatinAmerica.Thisappealstemspartlyfromtheconvergence ofseveralinter-relatedfactors:widespreaddissatisfactionwith institutionalhistorieswrittenbyandabouttheEuropeanand Creoleelites;theconcomitantsearchforthesubmergedvoices ofsubalterngroupswhohavebeenmarginalizedinthecanoni- calnarratives;thegrowinginterestinthesignificanceofTrans- Atlanticandglobalexchangesandtheongoingrecastingofearly LatinAmericanhistorythatstressesdevelopmentsinthecolo- nialperiphery.Thisessayreviewsthreeworks,writtenwithinthe pastfewyears,whichtypifythesetrends.Despitedifferences inmethodologiesandscope,theseworksconfirmthelinksbetween history-makingandtheEuropeancolonizationofLatinAmerica. RMC,11(2001),261-273 [261] 262/JORGECHINEA JorgeCañizares-Esguerra’sstudy,HowtoWritetheHistory oftheNewWorld:Historiographies,Epistemologies,andIden- titiesintheEighteenth-CenturyAtlanticWorld (2001),isper- hapsthemostambitiousandcomprehensiveofthethree.This profuselyannotatedbookcanvassesavastcross-sectionofstud- iesfocusingonSpanishAmericaappearinginbothsidesofthe Atlanticduringthecourseoftheeighteenthcentury.Cañizares tracesmuchofthemoderntreatmentoftheoriginsandsettle- mentoftheNewWorldtoaparadigmaticshiftinEnlightenment historiographicalcircles.Accordingtotheauthor,theriseand widedisseminationofthemodernsocialandnaturalsciences contributedtotheemergenceofanewbreedof“philosophical travelers”innorthernEurope.Theyincludednaturalists,math- ematicians,philosophersandacademiciansoutfittedwiththe latestEuropeantheoriesofhumandevelopment.Thesearm- chairscholarssoughttooverturnwhattheyconsideredtobe thespuriousclaimsputforthbySpanishRenaissancewriterscon- cerningthehistoryoftheNewWorldanditspeople. Fromaboutthemiddleoftheeighteenthcentury,scholars mainlyinGreatBritainandFrancegrewincreasinglyskeptical aboutSpanishrepresentationsoftheNewWorldthatstress- edthehighlyevolvedstateofdevelopmentoftheAztec,Maya andIncacivilizations.Charles-MariedelaCondamine,Adam Smith,theAbbéRaynal,CorneliusdePauw,andWilliamRobert- son,amongothers,struggledwithreconcilingtheimpoverished conditionofeighteenth-centuryAmerindianmasseswiththeir supposedlyprosperous,enlightenedandtechnologicallysavvy forebears.Theybroughttobeartheconsiderableweightofthe latestscientificbreakthroughsinanattempttosortout“facts” fromfiction.BysubjectingtheSpanishtractsonAmerindian societiestorigorousscrutiny,theyconcludedthattheirauthors musthaveeitherexaggerated,misinterpretedormadeupagood partofwhattheyreported. Philosophicaltravelersarguedthatsixteenth-andseven- teenth-centurySpanishaccountsoftheNewWorldwereriddled withseriousmethodologicalanddocumentaryflaws.Forinstance, theyrejectedclassicalanalogieswhichpresentedtheAztec,Maya andIncapolitiesastheNewWorldequivalentoftheGreek, RMC,11(2001),1-49 RMC,11(2001),261-273 DECONSTRUCTINGTHECENTER,CENTERINGTHEMARGINS:REVISTING.../263 RomanandEgyptiancivilizations.Somequestionedtheappro- priatenessofdrawingparallelsbetweenEuropeandtheAmeri- cas.Suchfacilecomparisons,theymaintained,wereatoddswith thecrudewritingmethods,rudimentaryagriculture,andlackof amonetarysystemfoundamongtheAmerindians.Theyalso doubtedtheobjectivityofAmerindianinformantsanddismis- sedthehistoricalworthinessofhieroglyphic-typesources,such asIncaquipusandAzteccodices.Inshort,enlightenmentwrit- ersinnorthernEuropecametoviewthefoundationalclassicsof LatinAmericanhistory—writtenbythelikesofJuandeTorque- mada,BernandinodeSahagún,ToribiodeBenaventeMotolonía, JosédeAcosta,PedroCiezadeLeón,Martired’Anghiera,Fran- ciscoLópezdeGómara,AntoniodeHerrerayTordecillas,and GarcilasodelaVega—aslittlemorethanfablesfabricatedby untrainedobserversusinguntrustworthysourcesandovercome byperceptualdistortionsandnational/religiousprejudices. HavingdiscreditedthebulkofearlycolonialSpanishhisto- riographyoftheNewWorld,philosophicaltravelersnextturned theircriticismonitsinhabitants.AsCañizarescarefullydocu- ments,hereagaintheyreliedheavilyonscientifictoolsofanaly- sis.NorthernEuropeanscientistsinsistedthatevidencefrom geology,zoologyandbotanyhintedattherecentformationand settlementoftheNewWorld.Therefore,theyportrayedthe Amerindiansasevolutionary“latestarters”and“earlyhumans, literallyfrozenintime”(p.50).Thissuggestedtothemthat Amerindianshadattainedatbestanelementaryknowledgeof theirenvironment.TheypointedtotheAmerindians’“undevel- oped”mind,whoselimitedpowersofabstractionallegedlydid notextendbeyondtheconceptualizationofchild-likepictures, incoherentsignsandother“primitive”typesofnon-alphabetic symbols.Suchethnocentricassertionswenthand-in-handwith theelaborationofracialtypologiesthatrankedhumansaccord- ingtoarbitraryscalesofsocio-culturaldevelopment.Thus,for Georges-Louis-Leclerc,ComtedeBuffon,theNewWorldinhab- itants—Amerindians,creolesandmixed-bloods—weredegener- ate,lazy,andeffeminate. Bytappingunpublishedandunder-utilizedSpanisharchival materials,CañizaresdemonstratesthatEnlightenmentscholars RMC,11(2001),261-273 264/JORGECHINEA acrossSpainrespondedvigorously,butambiguously,tothecharges leveledbythephilosophicaltravelers.Fromtheirperspective, therewasmuchmoreatstakethantheintegrityofSpanishRe- naissanceauthors.EnglandandFrancehadwrestedsignificant portionsoftheNewWorldfromSpainduringtheseventeenth andeighteenthcenturies.Consequently,Cañizaresnotes,“the realizationthatcolonialempireswerelostorwonbythosewho controlledthedescriptionoflandsandpeoplemovedauthorsto placeurgentcallsfortherenewalofSpanishhistoriography, cartography,andbotanicalstudies”(p.134).Historiographical reforminSpaintookonapeculiarpatrioticzeal,leadingtoex- hausting,protracteddeliberationsonhowbesttoredeemthe nation’svilifiedreputation.TheCountofCampomanes,thepow- erfulheadoftheAcademyofHistory,favoredbringingSpainin linewithmodernhistoricalstandards.JuanBautistaMuñóz,who filledthepostsofRoyalCosmographerandChronicleroftheIn- dies,advocatedtheuseofprimarysourcesandarevivalofSpan- ishhumanistscholarship. CañizaresshowsthatpatrioticSpanishhistorianstriedto turnthetableontheircriticsbydeployingthesamewriting techniquesandEurocentricargumentsthatthephilosophicaltrav- elershadmarshaledagainstSpain.PedrodelaEstala,forex- ample,arguedthatsensorydeprivation,notdeception,caused theSpaniards,whohadpreviouslylivedintherelatively“primi- tive”Caribbean,tooverstatetheachievementsoftheAztecs andIncas.JuanNuix,aJesuitexiledinItaly,tracedthecharges ofSpanishbarbarityagainsttheAmerindianstoLasCasas,whom herejectedasabiasedandunreliablewitness.Healsoattrib- utedthedemographiccollapseoftheAmerindiansthe“infan- tilesusceptibilityofthenatives”toEuropeandiseases.Another Jesuit,RamónDiosdadoCaballero,excusedCortés’sbrutalityin MexicoasjustifiableretaliationbySpaniardsthreatenedbybands ofcannibalisticsavages. ThecontroversysurroundingthehistoryoftheNewWorld alsomovedclerical-CreolewritersinSpanishAmerica,mainlyin MexicoandPeru,tojointhegrowinginternationaldebate.Ac- cordingtoCañizares,thesewriterswerenointellectualcopy- cats.Quitethecontrary,theycreativelysoughttoteardown RMC,11(2001),261-273 DECONSTRUCTINGTHECENTER,CENTERINGTHEMARGINS:REVISTING.../265 theconclusionsreachedbythephilosophicaltravelersonthe groundsthatfewhadeversetfootontheNewWorldorhad livedtherelongenoughtodelvedeeplyintothehistoryandcul- tureoftheAmerindiansocieties.Boastingtheirletteredstatus, theyassignedverylittleweighttoinformationthatthenorth- ernEuropeanshadacquiredfromAmerindianplebeians,thecas- tasandlaySpaniards.LikeSpanishscholarswhoexaltedthe achievementsoftheirArabprecursorstobolstertheirnation’s malignedimage,clerical-Creolepatriotsdrewinspirationand ideasfromthepre-colonialandearlycolonialAmerindiannobil- ity,withwhomtheybecamecloselyidentified.Consequently, theyembracedhistoriographicalreformtopropupthenegative portrayaloftheirimaginary“kingdoms”andtofurthertheiraris- tocraticpoliticalaspirations. JudgingbyCañizares’findings,itisdifficulttoavoidthe conclusionthatphilosophicaltravelersderivedtheirunderstand- ingofthehistoryoftheNewWorldfromdevelopmentstaking placechieflyinMesoamericaandtheAndeanworld.Withthe glaringexceptionofAlexandervonHumboldt,thenorthernEu- ropeansseldombroughtupthehistoryoftheSpanishAmerican colonialperiphery,exceptinbroaddiscussionsabouttheevolu- tionoftheNewWorldandits“backward”dwellers.Inthisthey