Resignification as Fourth Narrative: Power and the Colonial Religious Experience in Tula, Hidalgo

S. Iverson
{"title":"Resignification as Fourth Narrative: Power and the Colonial Religious Experience in Tula, Hidalgo","authors":"S. Iverson","doi":"10.1163/9789004273689_013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholars have typically described colonial religious change in Mesoamerica in one of three major narrative frames: (1) the “spiritual warfare narrative”: a top-down imposition of Christianity; (2) the “core-veneer narrative”: a largely failed colonial project in which indigenous subjects retained many of their essential religious traits; or (3) the syncretism narrative: a passive, relatively equal blending of two originally coherent belief systems. These debates are, at their core, ideas about the way that power operates in early colonial situations, and each constitutes a narrative of power that is enabled, strengthened, challenged, and refined by empirical data. However, as I worked through the data I collected from two early Franciscan sites in Tula, Hidalgo in central Mexico (Figure 12.1), I found that existing narratives of religious change were inadequate to interpret the full extent of the transformations and continuities that I was observing. These data pointed toward a complex but unequal exchange: indigenous subjects clearly did not have full autonomy in early colonial Christian contexts, yet their diverse preexisting religious ontologies shaped the New World Church to a remarkable degree. This finding, though shared with many other researchers with similar topics (Graham 2011; Tavárez 2011; Wernke 2007), did not fit well with established narratives of colonial religious power. This was not an “ideal-type” problem: that is, the inherent mismatch between real-world data and inherently inadequate “ideal-type” models. Rather, there seemed to be a gap where a fourth narrative should be. Even so, the old “commonsense” narratives of religious change seemed to stubbornly persist despite ample data and careful refutations of existing models. Finding an interpretation of colonial power that articulated honestly with my data became my most challenging task. To contextualize the Tula case, I explain existing narratives of religious change in the region. I then contrast two forms of material culture from Tula – buildings and ceramics – that, at least superficially, appear to tell opposite","PeriodicalId":293206,"journal":{"name":"Material Encounters and Indigenous Transformations in the Early Colonial Americas","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Material Encounters and Indigenous Transformations in the Early Colonial Americas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004273689_013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Scholars have typically described colonial religious change in Mesoamerica in one of three major narrative frames: (1) the “spiritual warfare narrative”: a top-down imposition of Christianity; (2) the “core-veneer narrative”: a largely failed colonial project in which indigenous subjects retained many of their essential religious traits; or (3) the syncretism narrative: a passive, relatively equal blending of two originally coherent belief systems. These debates are, at their core, ideas about the way that power operates in early colonial situations, and each constitutes a narrative of power that is enabled, strengthened, challenged, and refined by empirical data. However, as I worked through the data I collected from two early Franciscan sites in Tula, Hidalgo in central Mexico (Figure 12.1), I found that existing narratives of religious change were inadequate to interpret the full extent of the transformations and continuities that I was observing. These data pointed toward a complex but unequal exchange: indigenous subjects clearly did not have full autonomy in early colonial Christian contexts, yet their diverse preexisting religious ontologies shaped the New World Church to a remarkable degree. This finding, though shared with many other researchers with similar topics (Graham 2011; Tavárez 2011; Wernke 2007), did not fit well with established narratives of colonial religious power. This was not an “ideal-type” problem: that is, the inherent mismatch between real-world data and inherently inadequate “ideal-type” models. Rather, there seemed to be a gap where a fourth narrative should be. Even so, the old “commonsense” narratives of religious change seemed to stubbornly persist despite ample data and careful refutations of existing models. Finding an interpretation of colonial power that articulated honestly with my data became my most challenging task. To contextualize the Tula case, I explain existing narratives of religious change in the region. I then contrast two forms of material culture from Tula – buildings and ceramics – that, at least superficially, appear to tell opposite
辞职作为第四叙事:权力与伊达尔戈州图拉的殖民宗教经验
学者们通常用三种主要的叙事框架之一来描述中美洲殖民地的宗教变化:(1)“精神战争叙事”:自上而下的基督教强加;(2)“核心-表面叙事”:一个基本上失败的殖民项目,其中土著主体保留了许多基本的宗教特征;或者(3)融合叙事:将两种原本连贯的信仰体系被动地、相对平等地混合在一起。这些争论的核心是关于权力在早期殖民局势中的运作方式的观点,每一个都构成了一种权力的叙述,这种叙述是由经验数据实现的、加强的、挑战的和完善的。然而,当我从墨西哥中部伊达尔戈州图拉的两个早期方济会遗址收集数据(图12.1)时,我发现现有的宗教变化叙述不足以解释我所观察到的转变和连续性的全部程度。这些数据表明了一种复杂而不平等的交流:在早期的殖民基督教背景下,土著居民显然没有完全的自主权,然而他们多样化的预先存在的宗教本体论在很大程度上塑造了新世界教会。这一发现虽然与许多其他研究类似主题的研究人员分享(Graham 2011;Tavarez 2011;Wernke 2007),并不符合殖民宗教权力的既定叙述。这不是一个“理想型”问题:也就是说,现实世界的数据与本质上不充分的“理想型”模型之间存在固有的不匹配。相反,在第四种叙述应该出现的地方似乎有一个缺口。即便如此,尽管有充足的数据和对现有模型的仔细反驳,关于宗教变化的旧的“常识性”叙述似乎仍然顽固地坚持着。找到一种对殖民权力的解释,并用我的数据诚实地表达出来,成为我最具挑战性的任务。为了将图拉案例置于背景中,我解释了该地区宗教变化的现有叙述。然后,我对比了图拉的两种物质文化形式——建筑和陶瓷——至少从表面上看,它们似乎是相反的
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信