Restall, Matthew. Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest, New York: Oxford
University Press, 2003.
Matthew Restall puts to reset what he considers the most widely misinterpreted versions of the Conquest by contrasting false and accurate accounts of the Spanish invasion. Restall explains how contemporaneous sources and later interpretations contributed to the myth of the Spanish Conquest and how the myths were propagated. Through a revisionist approach and consideration of sources of African participants and indigenes, the author challenges interpretations of other historians.
In the first chapter, Restall focuses on the myth of exceptional men that supposedly explains how few conquistadors could accomplish something as great as the conquest of the Americas. According to Restall the development of conquistador legends can be attributed to Columbus, Cortes, Pizzaro, and their contemporaneous chroniclers who played a role in inserting the myth into literature. In Restall’s words the “great men” were simply following a standard procedure of conquest established by the Spaniards. Thus Renstall argues that proof-of-merit reports naturally exaggerated conquistadors’ accomplishments, minimized the extend of indigenous resistance, and made it seem as a few men were responsible for pacifying scores of uncivilized tribes. According to the author, “great men approach ignores the roles played by larger processes of social change.”
Renstall asserts that the conquistadors were not Spanish soldiers but artisans and professionals, simply armed entrepreneurs. In their reports and narratives, Cortes and others refrain from describing themselves as king’s soldiers. Only toward the end of the sixteenth century the word soldier began to appear in literature concerning the Conquest. The author attributes our views of the conquistadors as being part of a militarized unit to the military revolution in Spain in the sixteenth and seventeenth century and its accompanied terminology. Thus this early perception of the conquerors subsequently propagated throughout history morphing into a myth.
Restall attributes the myth of the white conquistador to Spaniards’ reluctance to acknowledge the importance of Africans in combat roles, although contemporaneous sources reveal the presents of Africans in the many campaigns. The Spaniards regarded black conquistadors as good fighters. This attribute is plausible since many blacks became enslaved through military conquest, therefore had combat experience. A common reward for an enslaved black conquistador was his freedom. Some who survived the Conquest rose to high social levels and even received the coveted encomiendas. Also absent from the Spanish narrative is the vital role the alliance between the invaders and the indigenes played in the Conquest. Some native empires aligned themselves with the Spaniards in order to conquer their traditional enemies thus thousands of native warriors participated in the bloody campaigns.
To disprove the myth of completion Restall argues that since conquistadors had obligations to fulfill they exaggerated their accomplishments deeming the conquest complete yet the “conquest was incomplete for centuries after the initial Spanish invasion.” The system of patronage further “encouraged rapid claim of success in exploration and conquest.” As in his previous assertions, Restall blames the sources and historians’ interpretations for the creation of the myth. Since politically motivated conquistadors were eager to perpetuate their supposed successes, modern historians were mislead by the narratives. Restall was able to paint a different picture of the conquest. An example of a critical account that was discounted is one Juan de Villagutierre Soto-Mayor when he admitted in 1701 “that Spanish expansion had left ‘great portions’ of the Americas partially or entirely unconquered.” Renstall is able to further support his interpretation by pointing out that several expeditions to Florida failed between 1513 and 1560’s. Buenos Aires was not permanently founded until the 1580’s. New Mexico although conquered at the beginning of the seventeenth century, was lost in 1680 and had to be reconquered in the 1690’s. Although Catholicism was successfully introduced to native America, it did not retain its form.
Although vital to communication between the various groups of indigenes and the Spaniards, the interpreters such as Cortes’ Malinche, were not given much credit for their efforts. In the chapter titled, the Myth of (Mis) Communication, Restall examines the myth of communication and countermyth of miscommunication. The author relies on quotes that reveal Spaniards’ difficulty with communication. He also criticizes other historians’ arguments that the indigenes lost wars because they could not communicate with the Spaniards and further states “Spanish actions conveyed their purposes more clearly than the text did anyway.” He also disagrees with Jared Diamond’s assertion that literacy helped Spaniards acquire pertinent information that helped the conquistadors win battles. The author points out that there is no evidence either group had better information regarding one another and doubts that writing would have been a better means of communication in such circumstances.
The myth of native desolation is somewhat related to the myth of completion and superiority since the indigenes were able to retained many aspects of their culture, language, adapted to new circumstances and survived. In this chapter Restall condemns academic emphasis on destruction of native culture. He argues against a myth that the natives benefited from the conquest because it introduced them to superior civilization. The author also points out that there is no evidence of Spaniards being taken for gods. As in previous myths, the clash of two alien cultures compounded with difficulty in communication provided inadequate understanding of one another. In author’s words, “native cultures were neither barbarous nor idyllic, but as civilized and imperfect as European cultures of the time.”
Although not all aspects of the myths addressed by Restall are adequately argued, most of author’s opinions are well articulated. He clearly points out how historians erroneously interpreted sources that were infested with bias. The most valuable aspect presented by Restall is that he underscores the importance of interpreting sources carefully. Historians must attempt to understand the circumstances and motives surrounding historical narratives, reports, letters, and such. We must be aware of falling into a trap of misconception.
Restall by no means presents a full story of the Conquest. Although he was able to debunk most of the myths, some arguments were not as strong as others. As he admitted himself, the interactions between the natives and Europeans are complex thus it takes more than simply choosing seven aspects of the Conquest to present a better picture of the native cultures. Some of the seven myths relate to each other thus author’s arguments are redundant.
In the transatlantic concept, Restall, as opposed to other historians, gives life to the Africans and Native Americans. He portrays the indigenous peoples not as victims of an inevitable conquest but as active participants. In Restall’s book the natives have a voice and are able to manipulate the circumstances to their advantage and sometimes successfully exploit the Spanish to reaffirm their local authority. The Africans were not just slaves in the service of the conquistadors but they were conquistadors themselves. They had at least some control over their situation and were able to acquire their freedom and even rose to prominent positions within the community.
In Europe, the Spaniards were busy building their empire competing with other European powers. Armed with their experiences from the re-conquest of the Iberian Peninsula from the Moors and the conquest of the Canaries, they had developed a standard procedure that they applied in the New World. The wealth that they sought in the Americas was needed to finance their activities in Europe.
