WHY MEXICO CHAPTER 1

Was the Spanish civilization superior to that of the Indians?

   In a conference I attended many years ago, was said that culture is the conjunction of the way of living and traditions of a specific social group. And that all cultures are integrated by subcultures.

   I kept such knowledge in my memory of useless things, until almost four years ago when I got to know that in a Congress in northern México, they were considering granting an Indian a nomination in spite of commanding only his people’s native language. I was astonish, I didn’t know that so backward Indian communities existed in México.

   I consulted the Internet and was embarrassed because of my ignorance, then trying to compensate I commented that it was right to give a seat in congress to anyone representing rightfully his voters in spite of the language used. I also said, that it was good such issue was being reviewed no matter it was done with two hundred years of delay.

   This experience I could not file in my memory to rest and not because of my social consciousness or because of my sympathy for the Indians who have been not understood nor respected after being set free so many times by the Independence War, the Revolution, government’s plans and so many votes seekers, but because I felt really uneasy when realizing my lack of knowledge of what was going on.

   Impelled by such staggering feeling I decided to gather all the available information to better understand México. That task gave birth to this work.

   What I present here is not intended to convince, nor to worship or condemn persons or ideologies, it is just a personal research that I willingly share.

   All you are about to read have been said and repeated many times from long ago, yet never has been consider as a part of the official history of which it differs greatly.

   I think that this essay will create discomfort in some society sectors and for that I apologize, I consider that among them there will be academy professors specialized in history and political studies, who have stated in their papers that the conquest of the New World gave the Indians better insights in moral, religion and culture, and that in México, the Independence War finished slavery, the Revolution freed the people from dictatorships, and that the 1917     Constitution cancelled for good the exploitation of peasants and factory workers. To them I recommend not to take me into account, since I wrote all this just to please me.

   On the other hand if someone finds here a reasonable way of understanding México, I can’t but to express my sincere gratitude for making this work worth of being done.

LIVING SUBCULTURES OF MÉXICO

   In 1521 at the falling of México-Tenochtitlan four subcultures began to emerge, each involving a peculiar social behavior.

   Native Post Conquest

   Conquerors

   Defeated

   Politicians

   At the beginning every subculture was represented for communities that could be differentiated by their clothing, the accent and intonation when speaking, where they lived, and for their skin color.

   Five centuries later those differences faded, and social behaviors mixed and remain present in all Mexicans in the form of a multipolar personality that conflicts in itself.

  Yet, now a days there are two subcultures that in addition to being present in most Mexican’s behavior, are still represented by differentiated communities, those of Native Post-Conquest and Politicians.         

   The remainings of Native Post-Conquest subcultures can be found in many Indian villages scattered in the Country, and on the other hand, the Politicians subculture is typified by the group that rules and leads Mexico under the designation of “The Political Class”.

NATIVE POST CONQUEST SUBCULTURES

(Background/ Involvement in Mexican Culture/ Future)

BACKGROUND OF NATIVE POST-CONQUEST SUBCULTURES.

   It is needed to keep in mind that we are going to talk about the subcultures that emerged as a consequence of the annihilation of the ancient pre Hispanic cultures.

   To gather data for this first part of my quest was easy, not to digest it. What I found differs a great deal from what is taught at schools.

   Out of the sayings of malicious chroniclers, most of us have been taught that before the conquest the Indians had not proper education and good manners and even that the Aztecs were cannibals.

   Those ideas, made new Mexicans to dislike Indians, in spite of the fact that most of them have Indian blood and their collective memory includes memories of the Ancient Native Cultures, and therefore most Mexicans are Indians, whether they accept it or not.

   Among Mexicans it is a generalized practice to label other Mexicans as Indians based in their skin or wealth. I found this criteria inadequate and went on advancing in my research to identify the existence of two major Indian groups.      

   Mexicans Indians who do not refer to themselves as Indians. Those are the inhabitants of big cities, dark skinned or blond, who in spite of their best wishes have relatives peasants or artisans living in their grand parent’s home village.

   The common profile of this Indians negates and shows contempt to all that is Indian, along with a sincere taste and admiration for everything coming from abroad, mainly from the U.S.A.

   Mexicans who are proudly Indians. Their ancestors were subjects to the Aztec Empire who after the Spanish conquest were left by themselves because of their poverty, although in some instances were deprived from their land and pushed to the mountains.

   This people who have manage to keep their language, culture and religion together, are the ones keeping alive the Native Post-Conquest subcultures.

   The saying that they have kept their religions may well shake more than one Christian priest, since these Indians are supposed to be catholic; what happened is that the first catholic missioners working in converting them to Christianity, when finding that the moral values in place were so valid and elevated, settled with teaching them how to make the sign of the holy cross and chose among the catholic saints those to replace their deities.

   To accept that the worshipers of the Gods of Sun, Moon or Stars had high moral values is not easy when for centuries it has been spread the idea that before the conquest all natives lived in sin, because of the absence of Jesus in their hearts.

   That was not the opinion of the catholic missioners in the sixteenth century. They priced so highly the Indian’s culture that the Church and the Crown felt the need of silencing them and condemn their written accounts.

   That was the case of Juan de Tecto, who described pre Hispanic religious believes as “the theology that Saint Augustine fully ignored”

   Such statement is particularly interesting because Juan de Tecto before coming to the New Spain was a theology professor in Paris for fourteen years, so you can imagine the effect his words had in Rome.

   In total amazement, those scholars also found that the social rules and the moral values of the prehispanic societies were of a superior refinement than those prevailing in Europe at the time.

   Fray Bernardino de Sahagún in his “General History of the Things of the New Spain” disclosed that the monarch and senators were elected not imposed, and that they should satisfy a precise profile: He should (the nominee), “keep in place; not to be arrogant, presumptuous, or noisy; never was elected as ruler someone impolite, inconsiderate, or foul-mouthed; no one bold when speaking, was put in podium or throne; and when a senator happened to tell dirty words or make mockery of others, was named tecucuecuechtli which means deceiving person; never was given a important position in the republic to a dared or dissolute person when speaking or to one who used to mock”.

   As to the expected behavior of a true lord, Fray Bernardino de Sahagún mentioned “Really humble, obedient, no lifted or presumptuous, very rational and prudent, very peaceful and collected”, Sahagún said also that all those precepts used to be told to children along with the following advice “You must be of good heart in the face of our God. Make it sure you do not just pretend to be humble, because otherwise they are going to name you titoloxochton (hypocritical) or titlanixiquipile (feigned). You got to understand that our God sees our hearts and all concealed affairs”

   Find next more pre Hispanic behavior rules reported by Fray Bernardino de Sahagún.

   “Do not launch yourself at women like a dog launches itself at meat”

   “It is convenient for you to speak peacefully, not with haste or uneasiness, do not speak aloud, your tone must be moderate, nor to low nor to high, make you words soft and tender”

   “Pretend you did not listen or see what is not for you to know, especially if it is mean”

   “Do not wait to be called twice, answer at first call, and stand up at once”

   “Do not dress odd or weird garments… nor dress torn or despicable robes.

   “Walk the street gently, not in haste nor with much space…; the ones doing so are named ixtotomac cuecuetz meaning a person wandering around crazy, walking without dignity and without seriousness; neither will you walk crestfallen or leaning the head sideways; do not meddle so people don’t label you dumb or uneducated and without discipline”

   “Do not eat in a hurry, do not eat showing contempt, do not take big bread bites, neither put food in excess into your mouth so you don’t risk choking, do not swallow like a dog, do not scatter the bread, do not snatch what is on the table; eat peacefully so nobody laughs at you. Before any meal wash your hands and mouth and do the same when you finish eating”

   One important contribution to have nowadays written evidence of all this aspects of pre-Hispanic Mexican culture, was made by the Franciscan missioner Andrés de Olmos, who learned to speak Nahoa, Huasteco and Totonaco, and gathered many original documents, among them the ones known as huehuetlahtolli where are described the conduct rules and moral vision of the Nahoa people.

   Initially the title of this writings was translated as “The ancient’s sayings” yet I find more adequate the translation “Forefather’s Precepts” made by Ángel María Garibay in his History of Nahoa Literature.

   Discussing this text, Garibay mentions “the work written in Nahua language by father Olmos describes with detail all behavior rules for a distinguish person to follow; how to behave when with superiors, equals or lowers; to respect elders, be compassionate to the hopeless, avoid speaking meaningless, under all circumstances conform his acts and words to the most exquisite courtesy”.

   “When attending a feast. Pay attention to the way you walk in, there will be people observing you. Approach respectfully, bow your head and salute (to the host); when eating, do not do foolish things, do not mess around, do not be careless; do not show yourself gluttonous, avid or devourer; have your meal slowly and peacefully; when sipping soup or water do not be noisy and do not pant, do you happen to be a puppy?; do not use all fingers when eating, just three of your right hand; do not cough or spit, do not take any chances of staining somebody else”.

   Returning to Fray Bernardino de Sahagún, we can find in the prehispanic documents he recovered a recurrent emphasis on the roll of a king.

   The very same day of his crowning, every king was told as follows.

   “You must not say or do anything in haste, listen in peace all complains or information brought to your consideration; do not accept persons but deeds, do not punish without reason. My lord, make it sure that in podiums or thrones of principals and judges be no place for haste in doing or talking, nor for anger. Do not speak in rage to anybody, nor scare anyone with ferocity. It is rather convenient milord that you avoid using words of mockery or conceit, because doing so shall bring shame on you. Now your heart must be that of an earnest and calm man. Do not concede yourself to women. Milord, do not think that royalty, throne or dignity are meant to give happiness or pleasure, but a lot of work, big affliction and enormous penance”.

   At this point my curiosity has already turned into indignation.

   Why was it said that before the conquest everything in the “New World” was ignorance and sin? Why everybody but some scholars ignore that when the conquest, values, courtesy, and civility of prehispanic cultures were equal and even superior in many instances to that of the most refined Europeans?

   Why is it denied that when the conquest, the moral values of Indians were better than those of the inhabitants of the “Old World”?

   The answer that I ripped out of my shame is simple, because the history we have learned and repeated, is the one that better serve us to go on taking advantage, without remorse, of the crimes done by the generations that inherited us the privileges of conquerors.

   Finally I began to understand how little I knew of the colossal magnitude and transcendence of the Clash of the Two Worlds.