Ironically Church action led to much of our knowledge of pre-Conquest cultures, as well as to much of our ignorance of them. Shortly after the Conquest, churchmen systematically gathered and burned pre-Columbian codices. As the Bishop of Yucatan Diego de Landa stated:
We found a large number of books in these characters [Mayan hieroglyphs], and, as they contained nothing in which there were not to be seen superstition and lies of the devil, we burned them all, which they regretted to an amazing degree, and which caused them much affliction.
Subsequently, possession of such books was equated with idolatry, which was punished by hanging and burning at the stake.216
The attitude of the Church soon changed, and the clergy assumed the leading role in the study of pre-Conquest cultures. Fray Bernardino de Sahagun compared the study of indigenous beliefs to the study by a doctor of the cause of disease. He claimed that just as doctors needed to know the cause of disease, a priest, as a doctor of souls, needed to know the cause of idolatrous superstitions before he could cure the idolater.217
Sahagun’s Historic general de las cosas de la Nueva Espana (General History of the Things of New Spain), also known as the Florentine Codex, is the outstanding example of such studies. In compiling his work between 1558 and 1569, Sahagun used methods that foreshadowed those of the modern ethnographer, including posing the same question in Nahuatl to different informants to corroborate the responses he received. His twelve-volume encyclopedia of pre-Columbian Aztec life included information on flora, fauna, history, and religious views and ceremonies. He included a long list of dishes with the ingredients, indicating the Aztecs’ wide culinary variety. Included were dozens of ways to prepare tamales. Informants’ replies in Nahuatl, transcribed for the book using the Latin alphabet, were included along with a translation. Accompanying the text were 1,852 illustrations drawn by indigenous informants. (One of these illustrations appears as Figure 2.3.)
While he felt the religious practices he documented indicated that Satan had possessed the Aztecs, Sahagun described with admiration Aztec architecture, medical knowledge, educational practices, and political organization. He did not, as far as is known, either suppress or censor any responses. Mexican historian Enrique Florescano described his work as “one of the most original books human ingenuity has ever produced.”218
Many influential individuals in New Spain felt that Sahagun’s work, served to perpetuate indigenous beliefs and rites, rather than eliminating them. In 1577, as a result of these individuals’ denunciations, King Felipe II forbade research on Indian history and religion, thus halting Sahagun’s work. This royal disfavor delayed the publication of his study in its full form until the twentieth century.219
The early church assumed the responsibility for educating the indigenous elite. Bishop Zumarraga and Viceroy Mendoza founded the Colegio de Santa Cruz in Tlatelolco to instruct the sons of Indian leaders in religion, reading, writing, rhetoric, philosophy, music, medicine, good manners, and Latin grammar. The Spanish hoped the school would become a seminary for training a native priesthood. The students, who numbered seventy in 1536, created a scholarly, written record of Aztec culture. They translated works directly from Nahuatl into Latin, a language they mastered so well that their compositions were compared to Cicero’s. Some of the school’s graduates remained to teach the next generation of students, and, in 1550, a native Mexican became rector. Other graduates became magistrates in Indian villages, skilled musicians and artisans, and teachers of indigenous languages.220
Later in the sixteenth century, the school fell into disfavor. Spaniards and Creoles, whose numbers continued to rise, became increasingly unwilling to share positions of influence with Indians. In 1585, the archbishop condemned teaching Indians Latin, rhetoric, and philosophy. By the end of the century, Creoles, but not Indians, received higher education in the University of Mexico.221
Missionaries assumed responsibility for the early primary education of Indian children. They not only imparted a basic education but also their class and gender values. Girls’ schools sought to protect Indian girls and train them to be wives and mothers. They stressed sewing, catechism, and household tasks. Girls generally remained inside. When outside, someone accompanied them. The Franciscans separated the children of plebeian and aristocratic Indians. The latter attended boarding schools, stayed in school longer, and received more religious training. Many Indian leaders, unwilling to see their sons confined by the priests of the new religion, substituted the sons of their subjects or slaves for their own children, whom they kept at home.
World History
