[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.The missionaries were meant to gradually famil-iarize their indigenous disciples with Spanish society and its rules.EdwardSpicer has pointed out, that the concept of Indians as, ultimately, fullcitizens of the Spanish Empire was generally accepted as the basis of mis-sionary work. 24 Thus for a relatively short period, Indian communitiesbenefited from the sheltering that was afforded to them by the missionariesas well as by being temporarily exempt from the payment of certain trib-utes.Yet in return the Natives had to put their labor force into the serviceof the missionary societies.However, over time it got increasingly difficultfor the orders to protect the Indians and especially their land as the latterwas beginning to get scarcer in New Spain and thus became more desirableand sought-after.This led to increasing attempts to get to indigenous lands,sometimes through illegal means.So at the beginning of the seventeenthcentury, the Crown offered the colonists the chance to acquire legal titlesto land they already de facto held by means of payments.This so-calledcomposición de tierras effectively reduced Indian landholdings and legallydeprived Natives of lands that had initially been taken from them illegallywhile benefiting colonists as well as the Crown s coffers.Towards the end ofthe colonial era Spanish haciendas thus surrounded many Indian communi-ties, including those that had been under missionary protection.And evenwithout the encomienda many Indians found themselves tied into laborarrangements through debt peonage.However, this I hold was not a goalof colonial Indian policy but rather the result of a shortcoming thereof.Itbenefited individual Spaniards more than the Crown which commonly triedto achieve a balance between aiding its subjects (from which it often bene-fited financially) and keeping them from assuming too much power (whichsometimes coincidentally also helped the Indians).Indigenous assimilationand Christianization, it would seem, were secondary rather than primarygoals of colonial Indian policy.The primary importance of these measureswas the exploitation of Indian labor to benefit Spain.A more stringent anddetermined protection of the Indians as such could have helped their situ-ation and fulfilled Christian requirements in more than just the letters ofthe laws while still preserving many of the Crown s interest.However,as this protection was not extended to indigenous peoples for, I suggest,mainly pragmatic and often financial reasons which took precedenceover Christian duties.As for instance the composición de tierras suggests, the matter of landownership was a difficult one and also an area where indigenous peoplesgot drawn into Spanish power struggles.Following a papal charter, legallythe Spanish Crown considered (vacant) lands as its own.25 According to the 90 Indigenous Peoples in the United States and Mexico, 1620 2000doctrine derived therefrom, only the Crown could distribute lands, to indi-viduals as well as to communities.This principle did, however, to an extentaccept indigenous ownership of lands, which by right of discovery only theCrown was entitled to extinguish, usually through the consent of the Indi-ans in question.26 But in practice, Charles Gibson has emphasized, thisprinciple was not adhered to. 27 As María Teresa Vázquez has summed upthe situation: Although the Spanish Crown endorsed the right of Indians to theirlands, at the same time it decreed itself as the holder of rights to all landsand waters in the colony, and treated unevenly the property rights of theSpanish and those of Indians.Spanish properties could be sold, alien-ated, transmitted; Indigenous property could not.Furthermore, whenthe Crown decided that lands in Indigenous towns or cities were baldíosmeaning abandoned or not worked, it rescinded the Indigenous rightsand granted the lands to new owners, generally Spaniards. 28And all too often law or principles were not conformed to and so themanners in which the Indians lands were usurped were multifold.At first the land question was of only minor importance in colonialMexico because of the great decrease in population numbers, due mainlyto diseases, overwork, and malnutrition, which vacated large stretches ofland.Originally, the Spanish colonists were attracted primarily to CentralMexico with its zones of dense settlement and thus readily available laborforces.29 Nonetheless, the land question existed, as Frans Schryer has shownby determining that much though not all of Indian resistance against thecolonizers focused on retaining or repossessing land, as well as on opposingforced labor or taxes.30 Resistance thus specifically opposed these measuresthat can tentatively be identified as a central element of colonial Spain sIndian policy.In quelling such resulting unrest, officials usually resorted tobrute force only if negotiations failed as the destruction of the indigenouscommunities would have meant the annihilation of a valuable labor forceand that was far from desirable to the colonial power, even though it wouldhave contributed to the clearing of lands.Policies changed towards the end of the colonial period, whenHabsburg rule, which, as Weber has concluded, had forced its paternal-istic rules unevenly, was replaced by that of the Bourbon s. After 1700, Weber argues, Bourbon Spain narrowed, but never closed, the still sizablegap between policy and practice. 31 However, event his new regime nevermanaged to stick to one uniform Indian policy, and labor, trade, diplomacy,war and others continued to coexist, often called upon through primarily Indian Policy in Mexico 91practical calculations to the benefit of the conquerors.32 Colonial Indianpolicy was to a large extent motivated through reasons other than merehumanitarian ones, as Horst Pietschmann has shown convincingly.33 Eco-nomic and political issues were at the heart of colonial policy, accountingfor its central importance.During the colonial era, Spanish policy towardsthe Indians was ostentatiously aimed at integrating the indigenous peoplesinto a Spanish-dominated society the colonial power was keen to construct.However, while some Spaniards may genuinely have believed this to be anachievable and beneficial goal, in general these were not genuine attemptsto assimilate the Indians as the Spanish idea of the new society rather envis-aged two repúblicas, with the Spanish one outranking that of the Indians.34In practice, it seems to have been more important to integrate the Nativesinto the colonizers economic system than to incorporate them into Spanishsociety or even the Catholic belief system.Throughout the colonial period, land and labor were important issuesshaping the interactions between colonizers and colonized, with labor ini-tially taking precedence.However, with the increasing scarcity of availablelands towards the end of the colonial period the focus shifted and this trendcontinued after Mexican Independence.INDEPENDENT MEXICOIndependence saw an instrumentalization of the indigenous populationfor the purpose of justifying the attempts to shake off Spain s control [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl przylepto3.keep.pl
.The missionaries were meant to gradually famil-iarize their indigenous disciples with Spanish society and its rules.EdwardSpicer has pointed out, that the concept of Indians as, ultimately, fullcitizens of the Spanish Empire was generally accepted as the basis of mis-sionary work. 24 Thus for a relatively short period, Indian communitiesbenefited from the sheltering that was afforded to them by the missionariesas well as by being temporarily exempt from the payment of certain trib-utes.Yet in return the Natives had to put their labor force into the serviceof the missionary societies.However, over time it got increasingly difficultfor the orders to protect the Indians and especially their land as the latterwas beginning to get scarcer in New Spain and thus became more desirableand sought-after.This led to increasing attempts to get to indigenous lands,sometimes through illegal means.So at the beginning of the seventeenthcentury, the Crown offered the colonists the chance to acquire legal titlesto land they already de facto held by means of payments.This so-calledcomposición de tierras effectively reduced Indian landholdings and legallydeprived Natives of lands that had initially been taken from them illegallywhile benefiting colonists as well as the Crown s coffers.Towards the end ofthe colonial era Spanish haciendas thus surrounded many Indian communi-ties, including those that had been under missionary protection.And evenwithout the encomienda many Indians found themselves tied into laborarrangements through debt peonage.However, this I hold was not a goalof colonial Indian policy but rather the result of a shortcoming thereof.Itbenefited individual Spaniards more than the Crown which commonly triedto achieve a balance between aiding its subjects (from which it often bene-fited financially) and keeping them from assuming too much power (whichsometimes coincidentally also helped the Indians).Indigenous assimilationand Christianization, it would seem, were secondary rather than primarygoals of colonial Indian policy.The primary importance of these measureswas the exploitation of Indian labor to benefit Spain.A more stringent anddetermined protection of the Indians as such could have helped their situ-ation and fulfilled Christian requirements in more than just the letters ofthe laws while still preserving many of the Crown s interest.However,as this protection was not extended to indigenous peoples for, I suggest,mainly pragmatic and often financial reasons which took precedenceover Christian duties.As for instance the composición de tierras suggests, the matter of landownership was a difficult one and also an area where indigenous peoplesgot drawn into Spanish power struggles.Following a papal charter, legallythe Spanish Crown considered (vacant) lands as its own.25 According to the 90 Indigenous Peoples in the United States and Mexico, 1620 2000doctrine derived therefrom, only the Crown could distribute lands, to indi-viduals as well as to communities.This principle did, however, to an extentaccept indigenous ownership of lands, which by right of discovery only theCrown was entitled to extinguish, usually through the consent of the Indi-ans in question.26 But in practice, Charles Gibson has emphasized, thisprinciple was not adhered to. 27 As María Teresa Vázquez has summed upthe situation: Although the Spanish Crown endorsed the right of Indians to theirlands, at the same time it decreed itself as the holder of rights to all landsand waters in the colony, and treated unevenly the property rights of theSpanish and those of Indians.Spanish properties could be sold, alien-ated, transmitted; Indigenous property could not.Furthermore, whenthe Crown decided that lands in Indigenous towns or cities were baldíosmeaning abandoned or not worked, it rescinded the Indigenous rightsand granted the lands to new owners, generally Spaniards. 28And all too often law or principles were not conformed to and so themanners in which the Indians lands were usurped were multifold.At first the land question was of only minor importance in colonialMexico because of the great decrease in population numbers, due mainlyto diseases, overwork, and malnutrition, which vacated large stretches ofland.Originally, the Spanish colonists were attracted primarily to CentralMexico with its zones of dense settlement and thus readily available laborforces.29 Nonetheless, the land question existed, as Frans Schryer has shownby determining that much though not all of Indian resistance against thecolonizers focused on retaining or repossessing land, as well as on opposingforced labor or taxes.30 Resistance thus specifically opposed these measuresthat can tentatively be identified as a central element of colonial Spain sIndian policy.In quelling such resulting unrest, officials usually resorted tobrute force only if negotiations failed as the destruction of the indigenouscommunities would have meant the annihilation of a valuable labor forceand that was far from desirable to the colonial power, even though it wouldhave contributed to the clearing of lands.Policies changed towards the end of the colonial period, whenHabsburg rule, which, as Weber has concluded, had forced its paternal-istic rules unevenly, was replaced by that of the Bourbon s. After 1700, Weber argues, Bourbon Spain narrowed, but never closed, the still sizablegap between policy and practice. 31 However, event his new regime nevermanaged to stick to one uniform Indian policy, and labor, trade, diplomacy,war and others continued to coexist, often called upon through primarily Indian Policy in Mexico 91practical calculations to the benefit of the conquerors.32 Colonial Indianpolicy was to a large extent motivated through reasons other than merehumanitarian ones, as Horst Pietschmann has shown convincingly.33 Eco-nomic and political issues were at the heart of colonial policy, accountingfor its central importance.During the colonial era, Spanish policy towardsthe Indians was ostentatiously aimed at integrating the indigenous peoplesinto a Spanish-dominated society the colonial power was keen to construct.However, while some Spaniards may genuinely have believed this to be anachievable and beneficial goal, in general these were not genuine attemptsto assimilate the Indians as the Spanish idea of the new society rather envis-aged two repúblicas, with the Spanish one outranking that of the Indians.34In practice, it seems to have been more important to integrate the Nativesinto the colonizers economic system than to incorporate them into Spanishsociety or even the Catholic belief system.Throughout the colonial period, land and labor were important issuesshaping the interactions between colonizers and colonized, with labor ini-tially taking precedence.However, with the increasing scarcity of availablelands towards the end of the colonial period the focus shifted and this trendcontinued after Mexican Independence.INDEPENDENT MEXICOIndependence saw an instrumentalization of the indigenous populationfor the purpose of justifying the attempts to shake off Spain s control [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]