THE GENOCIDE OF NATIVE

                             THE GENOCIDE OF NATIVE


The sixteenth century, following the first voyage of Christopher Columbus, and the region of the Caribbean and Mexico are the setting for one of the most shocking events in the history of mankind. In that century, the Europeans they encountered in the '"other."
The discovery of America, Todorov writes, "or better than the Americans, is the most extraordinary meeting of our history [...] even if every date by which you try to separate two periods is arbitrary, none is more fitting to mark the 'beginning of the modern era of the year 1492, the very year in which Columbus crosses the Atlantic Ocean. "
The sixteenth century was also the century in which you will make the greatest genocide in human history: the elimination of entire populations. Todorov, in step anthologized, covers the main phases of the destruction of the Indians in the light of contemporary reports and research that were later made ​​by historians, archaeologists, ethnologists. What emerges is a picture of bleak tragedy and of incredible savagery.



The destruction of the Indians in the sixteenth century must be considered from two different points of view, quantitative and qualitative. At that time, in the absence of statistics, the problem of the number of Indians killed could be the subject of mere conjecture, which gave rise to the most contradictory answers. The ancient authors provide the figures, it is true; but, in general, when a Bernal Diaz or Las Casas say "one hundred thousand" or "million", it is doubtful that they ever had a chance to count, and if those numbers mean anything, it is something very imprecise: they want to say simply "many". To this were not taken very seriously "millions" of Las Casas, when - in Brief relacion de la destruycion de las Indias - he tries to express in a figure the number of Indians disappeared. Things are, however, completely changed since some historians today have succeeded, with ingenious methods to estimate with considerable likelihood the population of the American continent on the eve of the conquest, to compare it to the one that was there fifty or a hundred years later, according to the Census Spaniards. No serious objection could be urged against these figures, and those who still continue to refuse, they do it simply because, if it were true, it would be very shocking. In fact, these figures give reason to Las Casas, not because its estimates are reliable, but because the figures indicated by him are of the same order of magnitude as those laid down today.
Entrar without too much detail, and only to give an overall picture of the phenomenon (even if you do not have the right to round up some numbers, when it comes to human lives), it can be assumed that in 1500 the population of the globe was of 'order of 400 million people, 80 of whom live in America. Towards the middle of the sixteenth century, of these 80 million will remain 10 By limiting the discussion to Mexico, on the eve of the conquest of the city population was about 25 million inhabitants; in 1600 it was reduced to 1 million.
If there is a case where we can talk without fear of contradiction, genocide, this is it. It is a record, it seems to me; and not only in relative terms (the destruction of the order of 90 percent or more), but also in absolute terms, because the population of the globe was decreased by 70 million human beings.
None of the great massacres of the twentieth century, can be compared to this carnage.
It 'easy to understand, then, how vain the efforts of some authors who try to debunk what was called the "black legend", which focuses on the responsibility of Spain in the genocide and obscures, in this way, reputation.
The black exists, even if there is nothing legendary. Not that the Spanish colonizers are worse than others; it gives only the case that America, at that time occupied by them, and that no one else has had the opportunity colonizer, sooner or later, to destroy so many people at once. The British and French, in that same era, they do not behave differently; but their expansion does not occur to the same scale, and faults caused by them do not have, therefore, the same proportions.
It could be argued that there is no sense of responsibility to look, or even talk of genocide instead of a natural disaster. The Spaniards did not proceed directly to an extermination of those millions of Indians, nor would they be able to do so. If you look at the forms taken by the decrease of the population, it becomes apparent that they were three, and that the responsibility of the Spaniards was inversely proportional to the number of deaths attributed to each of them:

1) To direct killing during wars or outside of them (high number, but relatively small) direct responsibility.
2) As a result of maltreatment (higher number): liability (a little ') less direct.
3) For diseases, to "shock the microbial" (most of the population): diffused and indirect liability.

I will return on the first point when I will examine the destruction of the Indians in terms of quality; check here matter in what and how the Spanish can be held jointly responsible for the first and second form of death.
To "abuse" mean above the working conditions imposed by the Spanish, particularly in mines, but not only in them. The conquistadors colonizers have no time to lose, must get rich quickly; therefore they impose unbearable pace of work, without even bothering to protect the health and the lives of their workers. The average life expectancy of a miner is the age of twenty-five years. But there are not only the mines; taxes are so unreasonable that produce the same result. The first settlers did not pay attention to the phenomenon, because the gains are continuing at such a rate that the death of an entire population does not raise concerns vain: you can always insediarne another, transferring it from the lands of most recent employment.
Motolina observes: "The taxes for which the Indians were burdened were so high, that many cities, not being able to pay them, they sold the land to the moneylender and the children of the poor; but since the collections were very frequent, and the Indians could not get rid of even by selling everything they had, some cities were depopulated and completely lost the other part of the population. "
Even enslaving causes, directly or indirectly, massive population declines. The first bishop of Mexico, Juan de Zamarraga, describes the exploits of Nino de Guzman, conquistador and tyrant: "When he began to govern this province, 25,000 Indians lived in it subdued and peaceful. He has sold 10,000 as slaves, and otherwise fearing tessa sorte- have abandoned their villages. "
In addition to increased mortality, new living conditions also cause a decrease in the birth rate, "Do not approach more to their women, not to generate the slaves," wrote King Bishop Zumarraga. And Las Casas explains: "In this way, the husband and wife were not together nor were seen for eight or ten months, or for an entire year; when it finally came together, they were so tired and exhausted by hunger and fatigue, so exhausted and weakened one and the other, who cared little to have marital relations. So they ceased to procreate. The infants died immediately, because mothers - affamate- tired and did not have milk to feed them. When I was in Cuba, 7000 children died in three months for this reason: Some mothers drowning their children to despair; other, realizing they are pregnant, abortions with the help of certain herbs that they give birth to children born-dead "(Historia, II, 13). Las Casas also tells, in his Historia de las Indias, that his conversion to the cause of the Indians was produced by reading these words of Ecclesiastes (34.12): "The bread of the poor is his life: he that deprives him of the bread is a murderess. "
In all these cases it is just an economic murder, and settlers who bear the whole responsibility.
Less clearly things are with regard to the diseases.
Epidemics, at that time, not only raged in America, but decimated the same European cities, although on a different scale.
The Spaniards not only knowingly inocularono this or that microbe to the Indians, but (especially certain religious) would have wanted to fight against epidemics; But they did not know to do it effectively.
Today, however, we know that, at that time, the Mexican population also decreased regardless of the outcome of major epidemics, malnutrition, or other diseases as a result of current or effect the destruction of the traditional social fabric. On the other hand, those deadly epidemics can not even be considered as a purely natural. The mestizo Juan Bautista Pomar, in his relacion de Tezcoco, ended at 1582, reflecting on the causes of depopulation. The reduction of the population (which, with pretty accurate assessment, believed to be of the order of ten to one) is due to certain diseases; but the Indians were particularly vulnerable to the disease because they were exhausted from work and did not love life more. The fault was "of tiredness and despair of their spirit, because they had lost the freedom that God had given them and they were treated by the Spanish as slaves or worse."
Whether or not this is acceptable explanation from the medical point of view, one thing is certain (and it is much more important for the analysis of ideological representations that I'm trying here): the conquistadors definitely consider epidemics as one of their weapons. They do not know the secrets of warfare, but, if they could do it, they would not hesitate to knowingly diseases; you may think that, in general, have not done anything to prevent the spread of the infection.
The fact that Indians die like flies is proof that God is on the side of the conquerors. The Spaniards assumed perhaps a bit 'too much regarding their assessment of this divine benevolence; but, for them, it was an indisputable fact.
Motolina, a member of the first group of Franciscans landed in Mexico in 1523, he began his Historia enumerating the ten plagues sent by God as punishment, on the ground; their description occupies the first chapter of the first book. The reference is clear: as the biblical Egypt, Mexico was guilty before the true God, and is justly punished. We see then succession, in this list, a series of events whose integration in a unique sequence is not without interest.
"The first was the scourge of smallpox" brought by a soldier of Narvaez. "The Indians did not know the remedies for this disease. And since, sick or healthy, they have a habit of making the bathroom very frequently, they continued to do so even after taking smallpox, for which they died in droves as bedbugs. Many others died of starvation, because, being all sick, they could not heal each other and there was no one to give them bread or other things to eat. "
Even for Motolina, therefore, the disease is not solely responsible: they are of equal ignorance, lack of care, lack of food. The Spaniards could materially eliminate these other causes of mortality, but nothing was farther from their intention, why fight a disease, if it is sent by God to punish the unbelievers?
Eleven years later, continues Motolina, he began a second epidemic (measles), but this time the bathrooms were banned and you took care of the sick; there were the dead, but in far fewer.
"The second plague was the large number of those who died during the conquest of New Spain, especially around Mexico City."
In this way, who was killed at gunpoint going to reach the victims of smallpox.
"The third plague was a great famine that struck the country immediately after the capture of Mexico City."
During the war, you could not sow; and if anyone could do it, the Spaniards destroyed the harvest. The Spaniards found it hard to find the corn: and that says it all.
"The fourth plague was that of calpixques or overseers, and the Negroes."
The one and the other served as intermediaries between the colonizers and the bulk of the population; were Spanish peasants or old African slaves.
"Because I do not want to highlight their flaws, I will not say what I think; I will only say that they do serve and fear as if they were absolute lords and natural: they do is ask, you have a nice give them all: they are never happy. Wherever they are, they infect and corrupt everything, stinking like rotting flesh. (...) During the early years, these overseers mistreated the Indians so absolute, overloading them with work, moving them away from their land and imposing their other demanding tasks, which many Indians died because of them and in their hands. "
"The fifth plague were high taxes and the services that the Indians had to pay."
When the Indians had no more gold, they sold their children; when they had no more children, they could not offer that's life. "Many of them died as a result of this, some under torture, other cruel in prisons, because the Spaniards treated them brutally and considered them beneath the beasts." But was it really an enrichment for the Spanish?
"The sixth plague were the gold mines."
"It would be impossible to calculate the number of Indian slaves who, until now, have died in these mines."
"The seventh plague was the construction of the great City of Mexico."
"In the course of construction work, some were crushed from the rafters, others fell from the scaffolding, and others were buried under the buildings that were demolished in a place to be rebuilt in another; This was especially so when they were shot down the main temples of the devil. Many Indians died under them. "How can we not see divine intervention in the death inflicted by the stones of the Great Temple? Motolina adds that, for this work, the Indians were not only not paid, but they paid from their own pockets or the materials had to take them with him, while, on the other hand, no one gave them to eat. And since they could not at the same time destroy the temples and work the fields, going to work hungry (hence, perhaps, a certain increase in "work accidents").
"The eighth plague were thrown slaves in the mines."
Were taken before those who were already slaves of the Aztecs; then those who were guilty of insubordination; Finally, all those on which it was possible to get your hands. In the first years after the conquest, the slave trade is flourishing and slaves often change master "were etched on their faces so many signs, which were added to the royal stigmata, that their faces were all written down, because he wore the brand of all those who had bought and sold. "Vasco de Quiroga, in a letter to the Council of the Indies, he has also provided a description of their faces transformed into illegible books, like the bodies of executed Kafka's In the Penal Colony "are marked in focus in the face and they are imprinted in meat the initials of the names of those who gradually became their owners; pass it from hand to hand, and some even have three or four names, so that the face of those men who were created in God's image is transformed, for our sins, in paper. "
"The ninth plague was the procurement service of the mines, for which the Indians, loaded with weights, ran distances of sixty miles and more. The food that was brought to feed upon themselves sometimes finished before they arrived at the mines, and other times it ended up on the way back, before they came home. Sometimes the miners were holding them back for a few days, to get help to extract the mineral or to build their own homes or to be served; and when those Indians had no more food, died in the mines or on the street, because they had no money to buy food and no one gave him anything. Some returned home in such a manner that l ^ a little, they died. The bodies of these Indians and slaves died in the mines produced such fetid fumes give birth to a plague, especially in the mines of Guaxaca. Up to half a league away all around, and along much of the road, you did nothing but walk on the corpses or on piles of bones, and the flocks of birds and crows that came to devour them were so numerous as to obscure the sun. In this way, many villages were depopulated, along the road and in the surrounding area. "
"The tenth plague were the factions that divided the Spaniards in Mexico."
One may wonder what damage this could cause to the Indians. It 's simple: seeing discuss the Spaniards, the Indians think they enjoy being able to get rid of them. That the thing is true or not, the Spaniards will find a good excuse to execute many other Indians, including Cuauhtemoc, their prisoner. "

Tzvetan TODOROV