In the last half of the book, Stern
brings to light how the natives worked the system under the Toleden
reforms. It was interesting to see how they used the Spanish laws to
their advantage, or at least tried to, in order to continue
self-sufficiency, to settle disputes between allyus, and to limit
mita quota.
Stern's relationship to the Black
Legend earlier in the book detailed how the Spaniards exploited the
natives for labor and discussed the violence and dominance shown in
order to gain these benefits. Although it supports the Black Legend,
I don't think Stern actually believes the Spaniards to be these evil
people victimizing the natives. The last half of the book dispels the
myth that the natives were these victims of conquest. They were smart
and tried to gain benefits for themselves and make life easier under
the Spanish colonialism. The natives even incorporated Spanish
culture into their lives to get ahead. Many natives were able to to
raise enough funds to purchase or rent property (p.159).
Stern highlights the dependency between
the Spaniards and the natives as well. The colonials needed the labor
of the natives, who despised the mita system. This created other ways
of exploiting labor from
them. The mita system never
deteriorated but as there were shortages of laborers, others methods
were the yanaconaje, wage labor agreements, asiento contracts, and
the rise of slavery (p. 189).
While Stern depicts the Spaniards as
dominating and exploitative, he also shows the natives as people who
understood how this colonial society in Huamanga worked. Although
they were unable to break free from this socioeconomic society, they
did have some small success.
I agree with you. It is very easy to read about the mita and the colonial system in Stern and think that it supports the Black Legend, but it actually doesn't. Stern even states that the early capitalist system that the Spanish and natives are a part of is the true evil. This is true in both the first and second halves of the book. The first half, like I said, focuses more on the mita and laborers while a large chunk of the second half focuses more on Hispanization. Like you said, the natives were not victims here, at least not of the Spanish. The natives understood that the only way to survive in this world was to hispanize themselves, but, as Stern points out, that did not meaning giving up their native culture all together. Stern goes into a great amount of detail in how natives who appeared to be completely hispanized and Christianized would occasionally perform in native religious ceremonies or incorporate elements of their native religion into Catholicism, much like what we saw in the Yucatan. Hispanization also brought about a lot of conflict, particularly in young men and women. Young men, frightened of impending family and tributary responsibilities that could leave them poor for the rest of their life, often fled and became part of the growing forestero population. Young women were faced with the decision of either staying with the ayllu or marrying an outsider, meaning a forestero Indian, a free black, a mixed race person, or a Spaniard, to escape it. Overall, Stern clarifies that it is not the Spanish who are brutal, but the systems they put into place.
ReplyDelete