Guaman Poman De Ayala’s intent
Upon first reading Guaman Poman De Ayala’s “The First New Chronicle and Good Government”, I was originally inclined to read it as text that was inherently based firmly within colonial idealogy, though, with slightly more progressive (for lack of a better word) tone than I am used to in these Spanish colonial texts. The text is clearly built on colonial frameworks, with Guaman Poman De Ayala, writing the entire thing in Spanish and basing his text, including his critiques, in core principles of Christian morality. While he is, in fact, criticizing the abuses committed by the Spanish in Peru, he still oftentimes presents the view that the spread of Christianity is a positive outcome, or rather, a positive byproduct of colonialism. Throughout the text, he maintains the notion of the Spanish conquest as part of a divine plan, through which he bases many of his critiques on the idea that the suffering inflicted by the Spanish is a test or a punishment that requires some correction. This view implies a level of acceptance of the colonial order as divinely ordained, even as he critiques its current implementation. It is also important to consider Guaman Poman De Ayala’s identity when trying to determine his true position. Perhaps the best way to describe De Ayala’s identity is liminal; his dual identity as both an insider and outsider so to speak molded his belief in the possibility of coexistence and at least some kind of mutual respect between Spaniards and the indigenous people of Peru. When reading this text with the idea of it being inherently colonial, the tone of the text is distinctly reformist, not revolutionary, with him seeking a more humane and just Spanish colonial administration. However, the longer I have sat with these reading, the more it reads to me like a somewhat Tongue-in-Cheek Anti-Colonial Piece. I think this is especially apparent when he draws up the parallel timelines between inca history and the new testament. He uses the biblical narrative to effectively turn the colonial argument on its head. By presenting the Andean people as Noah’s descendants, there is an implication that the suffering and subjugation they face under Spanish rule are not part of a divine mandate for conversion and salvation, but rather an unjust deviation from Christian teachings. The irony here is that the colonizers, who see themselves as God’s chosen instruments, are, in fact, failing to live up to their own religious standards. Moreover, While seeking royal intervention to improve governance from the Spanish king and invoking the king’s name constantly, De Ayala is explicit in his advocacy for the rights and dignity of the Inca. He documents the abuses they suffer, by connecting these abuses directly to the praise of the Spanish king, he holds the monarchy accountable for the actions of its representatives in a bit of a cheeky way.
“He documents the abuses they suffer, by connecting these abuses directly to the praise of the Spanish king, he holds the monarchy accountable for the actions of its representatives in a bit of a cheeky way.” In the political thought of the time, the King was the instance before which justice was appealed, whether it was indigenous people, conquerors or Afro-descendants who requested it. It is true that the type of justice that corresponded to each person was different in an Ancien Regime society. You are right: Guamán Poma makes strategic use of speech to give his own unique message. You have found the keys to this conflictive text.
Hi Ben, I agree that the Guaman Poma text requires a second look to take into account both his identity and his intent with publishing a 1000+ page essay/lettter to a King who probably didn’t really give a fuck about it. I agree with you that he uses literary tools such as irony and humor to critique the Spanish mission in Latin America. I think context is so important when reading a text like this. Although we may not consider it revolutionary, being reformist in and of itself may have been revolutionary bahviour for a man caught between 2 worlds.
Nice reflections. I also really like what Morgan added about how reformist messages could be considered revolutionary at the time. I guess revolution has many faces and some of those are slow, through speech, shifting ideologies perhaps.
The way you describe Guaman Poma’s identity as liminal is really catching: it’s as if a positionally that is in-between is not really a positionally at all. Its adding up now also to what you commented in the park in our conversation about adapting, picking, and choosing from ideologies … that then forms a new ideology. Same can be assumed of identity, perhaps. This idea of two-eyed seeing, double consciousness, black face white mask, is really interesting to take an entire view of the authors we are reading, existing in a time when worlds were colliding. They play a role of dampening the classing of that collision. But Guaman Poma was definitely leaning on into the cross… in a cheeky way, albeit, to mentions some major issues of the violence experienced by the divine plan.