History is Written by the Victors*

Tania Chen
Ilustración: @MuseoMural
La Jornada Maya

Thursday, April 25, 2019

Author Benjamin Walter said history is written by the victors. That is to say, the vanquished are forced to adopt the narrative of the conquerors, and that erases significant parts of history. How can history be understood through one narrow lens and what are the repercussions that come with refusing to accept the perspective of the vanquished?

Recently, Mexican president Andrés Manuel López Obrador wrote to King Felipe VI of Spain and Pope Francis, a letter asking for acknowledgement of the abuses committed by the Spanish during the conquest of Mexico, which was, without doubt one of the most important events of humanity’s history. Spain’s answer to Mexico on this issue were less than promising, with a statement from the government ‘completely rejecting’ the letter’s contents. It added that the ‘arrival of the Spanish on Mexican soil 500 years ago cannot be judged in the light of contemporary considerations. Our closely related peoples have always known how to view our shared history without anger and from a shared perspective’.

[b]But is this truly the case?[/b]

Arguably, the conquest of the Aztec empire by Hernan Cortés represents an unsurmountable cultural loss for Mexican history. Superior war weapons and disease were some of the main factors that served to exterminate a significant portion of the population and with it lost irreplaceable knowledge of customs, culture, and technology. The systematic destruction of temples, texts, language – all, which formed part of a rich culture, were followed by the imposition of Spanish culture, religion and language. These lost parts of history are of immeasurable value and importance if there is to be a readdress of the past, as long as they are missing there is a gap in Mexican history that is filled by the Spanish narrative.

Certainly, centuries later, we are still witnessing the impact of Colonialism on the conquered, with one of the most notable examples being the slave trade from Africa to the Americas, and the struggle of Black Americans to define themselves, and reconcile the past. The conquest of Mexico is no different; the loss the indigenous population suffered at the hands of the Spanish left a deep socio-cultural wound that requires discussion. There is a need for Mexicans to define their identity by reconciling their past. However, this discussion should take place alongside the indigenous populations to incorporate them with the respect and understanding they deserve. This would be a crucial first step towards encouraging greater understanding and respect towards the different indigenous populations.

The first step is to acknowledge the wrongdoings of the past rather than gloss over them.

To dismiss the past as being unimportant presents two risks. The first is that of repeating mistakes, a willingness to overlook the suffering of others for the sake of ‘progress’. The second is to give voice to just one side of the story, the victors, while erasing from the narrative of history the merits of those who lost the conflict. This is no small loss and has given rise to widespread misconceptions of the past, for example, the myth that the conquest brought “a far more humanitarian system” to the Aztec empire is to view the situation purely through the eyes and values of colonialism. To argue that Hernán Cortés brought order and values to the Aztec is to erase the merits and values that were already in place there. However, this point of view has been prevalent in painting the conquest of the Americas as ‘progressive’ and the atrocities as ‘acceptable losses’ in the name of morality.

The argument of the immorality of human sacrifice has been repeatedly used as justification, falling in line with the enduring myth that states colonialism brought with it ‘civilisation to backwards and/or barbaric people’. Nevertheless, to denounce human sacrifice as barbaric means to dismiss the nuances within indigenous culture. The Aztecs were ruled by a non-Catholic system of morality, where death/rebirth/renewal were interlinked concepts that went beyond black and white, the beliefs that their gods locked in constant conflict to prevent the end of the world. They were keenly attuned to their environment, and their relationship with nature. Simply put, death and sacrifice did not carry the same connotations to them as they did to their Spanish counterparts. To simply dismiss human sacrifice as unacceptable and reason enough for the subjugation of an entire race, is to erase and misinterpret said culture.

This is why reinterpretation of history is not just important but necessary. Indeed, when studying the past one must be aware of the lens with which it is viewed. History is not a static discipline, it is an ever-evolving narrative that aims to bridge the gap between past and present. Through this, historians aim to apply the lessons of the past to the present in order to improve the future. More importantly, the way people history can be instrumental in understanding social trends and ideological shifts. Its malleability is crucial as a tool for building a nation, indeed many of the rising nationalist trends take root in a narrow version of history that advocates the supremacy of a country, religion, race above others, and therefore legitimizes their right to rule.

Furthermore, history is full of examples of countries who have revisited history with various intensions, one of which is to frame their identity in the present. In Spain, the Hispanic Civilisation Foundation is a current attempt at dispelling what they consider to be Spain’s tainted historical image and restore a sense of pride in Spanish culture. Unfortunately, in their attempt to do this they are systematically dismissing the evidence from Bartolomé de las Casas, and heavily leaning on racist rhetoric to justify the Conquest by saying Cortés brought “a far more humanitarian system” to the Aztec. Again, such assertions are dangerously dismissive and ignorant in the face of growing understanding of prehispanic cultures.

It is also important to remember that Spain’s own history is filled with atrocious acts aside from the conquest of the America. Royal decrees demanding Muslim and Jews to convert to Catholicism or face expulsion from Spain were put in place by the 16th Century, signalling the beginning of a long period of intolerance within Spain. By the time of the establishment of the Spanish Inquisition and trials, the values and beliefs that fuelled them were rooted in religious intolerance and politics. The Inquisition remains a barbaric act of religious intolerance despite arguments claiming it was less violent than history asserts. Given these trends, was Spain in a position to judge what was morality right for an indigenous population they knew nothing of at the time? No.

Much like how Spain intends to rehabilitate its history and address la Leyenda Negra, Mexico too has a right to revisit the Conquista, from a different perspective, dispelling the prevalent racism imposed by historical narrative so far.

If society is to move forward, there must be a deeper understanding of the influence the past exerts on the present and how to readdress the wounds inflicted by colonialism. This, however, cannot be done until the victors of the past are willing to accept responsibility for the atrocities committed.

*Tania Chen is a third culture child, having grown in a diplomatic environment all her life. She has a Masters in Historical Studies from University of Bristol, specialising on the Holocaust, and is deeply committed to exploring how the past affects the present and highlights the future.

[b][email protected][/b]