As Elliot points
out in his work, Empires of the Atlantic, Spanish and English colonization of
the America’s conveyed astounding differences. It was the differences of timing, Church, private and crown
involvement, treatment of indigenous and African slaves, and the construction
of race that shaped the organization of these two colonial societies in North
and South America.
Although only
separated by eighty-seven years, the difference in timing between the Spanish
and English arrival and colonization efforts in the Americas proved to dictate
the shape of their colonial societies in very distinct ways. Hernan Cortes
successfully landed on the Caribbean coast of what is modern day Mexico in 1519
and as Elliot points out laid the foundation of Spanish Empire in South
America. It was not until 1607
when the Englishman Christopher Newport put ashore on what would be the Jamestown
colony, marking Britain’s foothold in North America. While the English held the advantage of being able to take
Spain first as a model, and then as a warning[i],
the Spanish conquistadores did not bear the luxury. As the first Europeans to come to the Americas, the
Spaniards enjoyed more room and freedom to acquire lands, than their successors
who were forced to content themselves with territory not already occupied by
subjects of the Spanish crown.[ii] As well, with the Spaniards also came
their 16th Century assumptions about the promotion of the civil and
religious values of Christendom and their ideas of the nature of non-European
peoples, both of which were products of the Reconquista and expulsion of the
Moors from Spain. During the
Reconquista, the Spanish state unified under the monarchy of Ferdinand and
Isabella successfully exterminated the Moors from the Iberian Peninsula. In doing so, it fostered a mentality of
radical Catholicism and religious fervor within Spanish society. Upon the arrival of Columbus to
Hispanola in 1492 and later Cortes to Mexico in 1519, the feverous ideals of
the Reconquista were very much engrained in Spanish colonization. Pursuing an
imperial strategy aimed at exploiting indigenous labor, the Spanish persisted
to colonize South America by vigorously attempting to convert large populations
found within its regions, and save indigenous peoples from damnation. On the other hand, the English
experienced a much different development.
The English using its colonization of the British Isles as a stepping
off point, attempted to colonize in a different manner than the Spanish. While the Spanish were interested in
conquering new territories, the English primarily planted new settlers in new
lands. By the time the English
reached North America, the Protestant Reformation had already swept through
Europe, leaving behind in England transformations in both society and
politics. Among the most important
was the result of individual and local decision-making. So rather than a centrally directed
imperial strategy like Spain, the English enjoyed the creation of a number of
differing colonial societies, sharing the fundamental features of
representative assemblies and a plurality of faiths.[iii] As the English would bring to light,
political consent and religious toleration proved to be a successful
strategy. So while Spanish
colonization persisted on the path of dictates from the crown, English
colonization took a much more independent approach.
The role of the
Crown versus private companies is another key difference in the two colonization
projects that shaped the organization of societies in each respected
territory. While ideologies of the
time influenced colonization efforts, so to did funding. Spanish exploration and colonization
was dictated and funded solely by the state. The crown in search of mineral resources in the form of
precious metals, aspired to gain wealth from the new world. The Spanish crown’s determination to
create an institutional framework designed to ensure compliance by its
officials and the obedience of its overseas subjects encouraged the creation of
bureaucracy’s in accordance to crown priority to the exploitation of wealth.[iv] In essence, the Spanish crown
controlled every aspect of colonization from exploration through
settlement.
In contrast, primarily
private companies initiated British colonization. Although the British crown did sponsor the voyage of John
Cabot, who founded the fisheries around Newfoundland, royal interest waned when
mineral resources were not found.
In the crown’s absence, private merchant based companies moved in to
fund colonization efforts. Unlike
the Spanish, English colonizers were granted funds to settle in North
America. Instead of revenue from
America returning to the state, it went to the investors and stockholders of
the private companies. While the
Virginia Company sponsored the voyage of Captain Christopher Newport in return
for the revenue that would be created from the new colony of Jamestown,
charters were granted to those fleeing religious persecution as well. Building on the ideals of religious
toleration sparked by the Enlightenment, the Massachusetts Bay Company,
Puritans, was granted a charter in 1629.
Also in 1632, Lord Baltimore was granted a charter to colonize Maryland
as a Catholic colony.[v] The granting of charters through
private companies reflects directly on the absence of mineral deposits in North
America. The English crown feeling
no urgency to make its claim in North America made little imperial strong
holding in the colonies. In
reality, the lack of imperial presence by the English also goes to display the
effect of Reformation ideals and the changing balance of political forces it
entailed.
At the same time
when the Spanish crown was dominating the colonization of South America, the
English in North America were colonizing under a loose set of imperial
restrictions. Because the English
crown largely stayed out of colonial affairs, the colonies were left to their
own mechanisms for survival. They
developed a rich diversity, which in turn fostered a shared political culture
centered at the right of political representation and Locke’s idea of a common
law.[vi] Thus, the colonies shared a common
interest and enabled them to unite for independence, which occurred much
later. It is important to note
that the crowns lack of administration planted the seeds of independence.
The role of
religion and the Church in colonial North and South America played key roles in
the development of colonial society.
While both the English and the Spanish saw their mission in the Americas
to “reduce the savage people to Christianity and civility[vii]”,
the English were not as aggressive as the Spanish for the cause. Riding high off the ideals of the
Reconquista, the Spanish saw it as their duty to convert and save indigenous
populations from eternal damnation.
The conversion of indigenous peoples into Catholics served as the
justification for Spanish claims to the new world. Under the Alexandrine Bulls, issued by the pope, of 1493
gave the monarchs of Castile dominion over any land discovered, on condition
that they assumed responsibility for protecting and evangelizing the indigenous
inhabitants.[viii] By violence and example they managed to
catholicize large sections of the indigenous populations and force them to be subjects
of the crown. Through the forced
conversion and labor of indigenous peoples, the Spanish successfully organized
colonial society under the pretext of inequality. The Church recognized that indigenous peoples were inferior
to Spaniards and thus exploited the idea.
Thus, in Spanish and Crown worked side by side in colonization. While both disagreed on many issues,
the Church served to justify the actions of the state.
As for the
English, religion and the Church played a much smaller role. Influenced by the Reformation, English
colonization exercised a fair degree of religious toleration, as evidenced by
Catholic, Puritan, Protestant and Quaker groups in the colonies. Their policy towards the indigenous
peoples was lenient as well.
Failing to find large populations of indigenous peoples, like the
Spanish in South America, the English viewed indigenous conversion as a futile
effort. Lacking a large labor
force to tap into, English colonizers saw conversion as an unnecessary
risk.
So while religion
was at the core of Spanish colonization, justifying the conquest of indigenous
peoples and forcing them into labor, extracting revenue for the crown in return
for salvation, it served as a tool to include indigenous populations into
colonial society. In opposition,
the lack of conversion efforts by a Church authority and central religion in
the English colonies served to marginalize indigenous peoples from colonial
society.
The relationship
between the English and Spanish towards the indigenous populations of the
Americas was vastly different and shaped colonial society in two distinct
ways. Upon arrival to the
Americas, the Spanish encountered large groups of indigenous peoples. Realizing there benefits, the Spanish
forced labor upon the indigenous peoples, in return that the indigenous peoples
would be catholicized. This system
was known as the encomienda system.
Under this system, indigenous peoples learned the atrocities of forced
labor and many died from overwork and malnutrition. The encomienda system fostered attitudes of resentment
towards the Spanish and colonial control.
While the Spanish treated the indigenous populations brutally, they also
included them in colonial society, albeit as fundamentally unequal.
In the case for
the British colonizers, indigenous populations were shunned to the margins of
colonial society. Faced with
sparser indigenous populations that could not be mobilized as a labor force,
the English adopted an exclusionary approach to the natives. While Cortes
encountered an indigenous population of roughly ten million in Mexico, the
English found a native empire consisting only of fourteen thousand.[ix]The
English could not rely on the native population for labor and supplies, thus
barred them from their communities. Unlike the Spaniards who made the
indigenous a facet of colonial society, the English expelled the natives beyond
the borders of their colonial societies.
The inclusion of
indigenous peoples into Spanish colonial empire as subjects to the crown shaped
colonial society into a rigid system of social and racial hierarchies. Levels of inequality, within a greater
society all under Spanish law, led to many unhappy citizens who saw there place
in society unrepresented and undermined. In effect, the workings of Spanish
colonial government had to be performed with respect to indigenous peoples as
well towards Spaniards. However, the English did not face the same problems as
the Spanish. Because the
indigenous populations were left out of English colonial society, it gave them
more freedom to make reality conform to their imagination. Without the need to integrate
indigenous populations into society, the English hath not needed to accept
compromises with indigenous inhabitants like the Spanish.[x]
In both Spanish
and English America, African slaves constituted the bottom wrung of
society. As indigenous populations
started dying off because of disease and over work, the Spanish turned to the
importation of black African to meet their labor demands as slaves. African slaves in Spanish America most
often worked in sugar plantations, agricultural production or as household
servants. Socially, slaves were at
the bottom of society, but as laborers in Spanish society, they were included
in the colonial system. Slaves
were granted some certain space in colonial society, such as the ability to buy
their freedom. Slaves had the
right to earn a wage, doing small menial tasks, as long as it did not interfere
with their work for their owner.
As for the
British, slaves were acquired to work on the vast plantations in the
colonies. Like the indigenous
peoples, slaves were granted very little space in English colonial
society. Slaves in the English
colonies had virtually no freedom and did not have the opportunity to buy their
own freedom.
By making black
Africans a part of their society, the Spanish affectively limited their
maneuverability to construct Spanish America as they saw fit. Legislation and law had to account for
Africans, indigenous, and Spanish persons and led to increased complexity in
the workings of government. While
the English colonists were awarded with more maneuverability in law and
practice, their refusal to include Africans within their boundaries eventually maintained
slavery as an institution longer than in South America.
Although in both
colonial projects inequality played a major role, Spanish construction of race
varied greatly from English construction of race in its colonies. Because indigenous peoples, black
Africans and Spaniards were all subjects included in colonial society, this led
to a rise in racially and culturally mixed populations through the mingling of
blood. The outcome was societies
composed of a variety of castes, or castas, and shades. In Spanish America, there were many
categories of classification to distinguish race. There were creole Spaniards, peninsular Spaniards, blacks,
Indians, mestizos, mullatos. Cholos, castizos and mambos. Society was organized based off race,
in that Spaniards constituted the elite, and the more black someone was, the
lower in society they were.
Spanish construction of race is very complicated and is an ideal
illustration of the inequality colonial society was based on.
In contrast, the
English colonies remained much more Caucasian. By shunning black Africans and Indians from society, the
English colonies did not encounter the same racial mixing as was developed in
Spanish America. They saw Africans
and indigenous peoples as an other group, did not mix with them. Because of this, white racism became
much more widespread in the English colonies.
So while Spanish
and British colonization enjoyed similarities, it was their differences that
shaped the colonial societies of the two in very different ways. The Spanish colonized on the precept of
conquest incorporating and integrating the newly discovered lands into the King
of Spain’s dominion, There inclusion and Catholic conversion of indigenous
peoples and black Africans shaped colonial society into a rigid hierarchical
framework wrought with inequality and fissures. On the other hand, the more independent, private
entrepreneurship of the English colonized on the basis of planting and
sustaining a new life. Their
exclusion of Indians and blacks from society and the lack of crown interest
paved the way for diverse communities who shared a same common goal and idea
about their place in colonial society.
