Steve, you're mixing two different periods in your statement, "As more Europeans arrived, things got worse of course and In the early 1600's the natives pulled together and managed a widespread rebellion large enough to push the Spanish back south of what is modern day El Paso, the entire occupied Rio Grande River Valley for nearly 400 miles was expunged of these foreign devils. A few years later, Juan de Oñate returned with a much more significant force and overwhelmed the natives with their "modern weaponry", horses, and brutality. A relatively small but significant group held out against this force on top of a mesa within view of my house... these native warriors were able to use their knowledge of the terrain and some help from their people now subjugated in the region to remain at large for months. Once they finally fell, Onate and Spain "owned" the region again, and his first act to make the point that rebellion would not be tolerated was to cut one foot off of every able-bodied male of age to be a warrior as a preventative and a reminder of his power (and intolerance)."
The Pueblo Revolt was in the late 1600’s, 1680 to be exact, and the reconquest in 1692 was led by De Vargas, not Oñate. The reconquest is nowadays characterized as “peaceful”, which is basically not true, as can be seen at http://www.newmexicohistory.org/filedetails.php?fileID=482. Juan de Oñate was the original colonizer of New Mexico, in 1598. From http://www.newmexicohistory.org/filedetails.php?fileID=312: “In December 1598, on their way to Zuni, Capt. Juan de Zaldívar and his soldiers stopped at Acoma for provisions. While there the Acomas accused one of Zaldívar’s soldiers of stealing, and violating an Acoma woman. The Acomas proceeded to kill Zaldívar and nearly a dozen of his men, later claiming that the soldiers had demanded excessive amounts of provisions. A Spanish punitive expedition ascended on Acoma resulting in a three-day battle. When the fighting ended, several hundred Indians were dead, and hundreds of surviving Acomas were held prisoner and taken to Santa Domingo Pueblo to stand trial. Oñate severely punished the people of Acoma. Men over twenty-five had one foot cut off and were sentenced to twenty years of personal servitude to the Spanish colonists; young men between the ages of twelve and twenty-five received twenty years of personal servitude; young women over twelve years of age were given twenty years of servitude; sixty young girls were sent to Mexico City to serve in the convents there, never to see their homeland again; and two Hopi men caught at the Acoma battle had their right hand cut off and were set free to spread the news of Spanish retribution.” I think that it’s misleading to say about the early 1600’s, “The Natives in the area submitted somewhat willingly, being a relatively peace-loving people and the Spanish were not brutal unless there was resistance to their presence whereupon their horses and steel weapons and armor allowed them to be crushingly brutal.” When the Oñate colonization expedition came to Okehowingeh (called San Juan Pueblo by the Spaniards) near Española, they stole essential food supplies from the Pueblo. The Pueblo Revolt of 1680 was triggered by the large-scale Spanish execution of native priests. This doesn’t sound like “the Spanish were not brutal unless there was resistance to their presence”. There’s an interesting twist to Oñate’s brutality to the Acoma prisoners. A few years ago a memorial to Oñate was established north of Española, on the way to Abiquiu. In front is an equestrian status of Oñate. One morning it was discovered that in the night someone had sawed off one of Oñate’s feet... The Pueblo Revolt was fundamentally a success. Before 1680 Spanish oppression was intolerable, hence the revolt, the first time a large number of pueblos had collaborated on something. Immediately after the revolt the leader, Popé, tried to eradicate all Spanish influences, but his people were unwilling to follow his lead. For one thing, wool is better than cotton for many uses. Also, during the period 1680-1692, in the absence of Spanish soldiers, the pueblos again faced serious damage by Apaches and other marauders, and they came to appreciate the protection that those Spanish soldiers had provided. When the Spaniards returned, a new and better accommodation was worked out. The Spanish eased off on their oppression, especially with a “don’t ask, don’t tell” attitude toward native religion, which is part of the reason for the secrecy even today about native rituals. And the Pueblo peoples appreciated the greater security provided by the Spanish presence. The anthropologist Ruth Underhill wrote a book, “Red Man’s America”, that I found very helpful in thinking about the conquest of the Americas in a larger context. Although (because?) Underhill was both knowledgeable about and sympathetic to Amerindian problems, part of her book is a kind of “tough love”. She (like you, Steve, in your references to Genghis Khan and other conquerors) points out that human conquest was common in all places and all times, but that there have been diverse responses by the conquered to being conquered. Some conquered peoples learn from and even assimilate the conquerors (think of the Norman conquest). Others give up (alas, the most common reaction in the Americas, perhaps because of the unusually large disparity between conqueror and conquered). Different groups in the Americas responded in different ways. The Navajo, who came to the Southwest only shortly before the Spaniards, are famous for successful import of culture from their neighbors, first from the Pueblos and later from the Spaniards, and later still from the Anglos. Underhill makes an interesting observation about the possibilities for one group to learn from the other. You’ve surely seen admiring lists of the wonderful gifts of the New World to the Old World, including such things as potatos. She points out that the comparable lists of the wonderful gifts of the Old World to the New World are far far longer (including sheep in New Mexico). She argued for a more realistic, less simplistic, less overly romantic view of our shared history, without in any way denying the blood and terror of the conquest of the New World. Bruce ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
