What I really enjoyed about these readings was the fact that one was through the perspective of a Quechua noble man and the other through a European explorer and colonizer—two sides of the conquest. I found this to be very helpful in understanding the historic moment that transformed the entire continent of America. Both readings agree on the fact that the European invaders had a strong fascination with gold, and this was strongly emphasized throughout both Poma de Ayala and Colombus’ outlooks. Why is it that Europeans so badly wanted to seek gold—something materialistic and impermanent in their lives that would feel them with more greed and hunger for more?
What struck me the most in both readings was the strong motivation of the Europeans to impose and enforce the Catholic/Christian religion on the “Indians” and Incas. Respect for others’ beliefs is forgotten on both sides: Atahualpa throws the holy bible to the floor and Colombus states that the Indians as he calls them are “people who would be more easily converted to our Holy Faith.” They don’t even give each other a chance to converse and share their different perspectives on religion and talk about the morals behind them or even about its origin or the reason of belief.
Religion is a huge part of peoples’ lives, something they spiritually connect with and can relate to on a daily basis. When that is taken away from someone, the meaning of life to that person becomes difficult to grasp. To me, imposing religion on other people simply defeats the point of even having that spiritual connection to anything. Most religions are based on moral theories that come about in how people act or even think about others and the world. So how is it that religious people such as Fray Vicente and Christopher Columbus can think its okay for one to remove that spiritual aspect of a person and replace it with what they think is spiritually correct?
What I also noticed in Cummins’ article was Colombus’ reaction to the new “green, fertile, great woods” land he was stepping on. It almost seemed like places like these were rare or even lucky to see in Europe—a civilized society. Is it because civilized societies loose their connection with nature as they focus more on the needs of humans and less on the rest of the entities on Earth?
hi cody!
Hi Cody, I am intrigued by the last two questions you proposed. Not growing up with a religion myself, I had a hard time conceptualizing what the purpose of religion was, and why it existed. In regards to what you said about religions being based on moral theories, to me religion seems like it has been a useful tool for social control. Thinking of Columbus, perhaps his quest was an attempt to create a unified system of social control? I find it difficult to imagine the time back then, or even with today’s religious fundamentalists, where religion has so much meaning about people’s lives, that they have formed their identities around it, and that any threat to the religion is a threat to the people themselves, and like you said, “the meaning of life to that person is difficult to grasp”. I think that when the Spaniards meaning of life and identity was rejected, this is what caused such immediate violence without any harmonious discussion about each perspective in Guaman Poma. I do not want to justify the Spaniards or Columbus but I want to try and look a things from both perspectives. I think your last question is quite interesting, and i would agree that perhaps when a society becomes more ‘civilized’, or industrialized, they become less connected to nature. I also find it interesting how the Spanish (coming form a more ‘civilized’ society) worshiped a human figure Jesus and the Inca’s, according to Atagualpa worshiped the sun (being more surrounded and in-touch with nature).