Schwaller’s monograph explores the organization of difference in New Spain before the seventeenth-century emergence of a more systematic racial hierarchy. In one sense, the author provides a prehistory of the sistema de castas. He traces the creation of what would become the colony’s standard identity categories—español, indio, negro, mestizo, and mulato—and finds evidence of precocious stereotyping; the authorities tended to view the last three groups as suspect and threatening nearly from the start. Yet this is not primarily a story about origins, but a study that—eschewing anachronism and anticipation—stands on its own as an examination of the specific social milieu of early colonialism. Notably, Schwaller vigorously and persuasively argues that one cannot speak of “races” during this period. Contemporaries recognized variations among humans—the géneros de gente of the title—but these depended more on social and cultural characteristics than on phenotype; in any case, the lived experience of people in a given category could and did sharply diverge.One of the book’s strengths is that it disaggregates the process of identity formation. Thus, the terms español, negro, and indio (Schwaller is careful to use the original language rather than less precise English translations) developed at different rates and for different reasons. Moreover, géneros were relational, linked to the socioeconomic evolution of the colony and further filtered through the crown’s agenda. The mestizo label, for example, developed haltingly. Many persons of Spanish/indigenous descent became “tacit españoles” and found useful roles within the Hispanic realm: males in the economy and government office, mestizas as marriage partners for footloose conquerors. Mestizo, then, functioned as a liminal category, describing those who did not fit into either the Spanish or Indian “republic.” Mulato, by contrast, had a more solid and stable meaning, denoting partial (as opposed to complete) Africanness. In a major contribution, Schwaller makes the case that most mulatos in this era were actually Afro-indigenous, moving and mediating between Hispanic and native worlds, representing connection rather than isolation. Here and elsewhere, Géneros de Gente presents a rich social history, focused on the lives of “mixed” groups. The author skillfully mines Inquisition records (particularly bigamy trials), to capture the range of individual experience. He demonstrates the flexibility of ascriptive practices, pointing out how family associations and residence shaped public perceptions of identity and status. To deepen this analysis, he brings in evidence on marriage patterns from parishes in Mexico City and Guanajuato. Although generally high rates of endogamy persisted, mestizos and mulatos were the most exogamous; however, mestizos gravitated toward indio and español partners, while mulatos married negros. These results support Schwaller’s broader argument: “Marriage trends grew out of familial ties, occupations, and social networks” (163). He produces quantitative data for occupations as well, again based on Inquisition prisoners, which suggest that mestizo and mulato men operated in a relatively open economic landscape, where personal choice, connections, and luck combined to offer opportunities for modest success—most often as artisans, muleteers, and ranch hands. Women’s options, on the other hand, proved far narrower. These conclusions are certainly reasonable, though Schwaller is pressing against the admitted limits of his source base, especially its small sample size. His discussion of property holding is based on just eleven people over a three-decade period, making any ability to generalize (even between typical male and female possessions) somewhat questionable.Schwaller renders an original, detailed, and nuanced portrait of interethnic relations in sixteenth-century Mexico. Non-Spaniards did not face rigid, inescapable restrictions on their employment and marriage choices. Categories of difference remained fluid and responsive to a rapidly changing social environment. Indeed, the author emphasizes that géneros formed through a complex “recursive process” (50). Colonial subjects produced popular stereotypes, such as the mestizo or mulato vagabond; the crown responded with legislation designed to identify and keep these groups under control; and locals applied or ignored these mandates as they saw fit, usually on a case-by-case basis. Still, género labels were not random; by the century’s end, Mexico’s residents “shared a set of understanding of how to categorize one another” (226). Unfortunately, this logic also tainted particular groups with negative images, an ominous legacy for the future.
Read full abstract
Jan 1, 2020
Beatriz Caroline Dias + 6
Open Access
