Sunday, September 10, 2017

Malintzin, Or, Who is that chick with Cortés?

The year is 1521. After a three-year long siege, the Aztec island metropolis, Tenochtitlan – larger than Paris, the biggest European city at the time – has fallen. Hernán Cortés leads the Spanish into the vanquished city and re-names it Mexico City, the capital of New Spain. This is an opening chapter in the centuries long European domination of the Americas – but Cortés couldn’t have done it without the help of a virus and a teenage girl.
            In the sixteenth century, when Europeans arrived uninvited on American shores, the Yucatan peninsula was ruled by the Aztec Empire. The Aztec Empire was ruled by an ethnic group called the Mexica who dominated a population that was ethnically Mayan – with Mayan being a broad term akin to saying someone from Eastern Europe is Slavic.
            The Mexica had once been a nomadic people who filled the power vacuum left by the fallen Toltec Empire. To solidify their rule, they formed an alliance with two other regional powers: some historians prefer to call this empire the Triple Alliance rather than the Aztec Empire. The Mexica built for themselves a tribute empire: the city-states that came under their dominion were forced to send tribute, surrender lands, and provide military service for the empire.
            History tells us that people don’t usually like to be governed by foreign invaders and the Mexica’s relationship with the population of the Yucatan was no different. Some groups collaborated and benefitted from Mexica rule while others suffered under occupation. Some saw in the arrival of Europeans the opportunity to overthrow their odious overlords. Many still independent kingdoms were at war with the Triple Alliance: they saw the Spanish as allies in the preservation of their independence. The Aztec Empire itself was rife with social and political turmoil.
            Meanwhile, the Spanish had been gobbling up territories in the Caribbean ever since their crash-landing on Hispaniola (Modern Haiti/Dominican Republic) in 1492. During their island-hopping expeditions, the Spanish began to hear rumors of a fabulously wealthy empire on the mainland. So, Cortés kissed his wife goodbye in Cuba and set off in search of it. By the time he first encountered the Aztec Empire in 1519, he’d spent 15 years actively searching for it, along the way encountering indigenous peoples, converting them to Christianity, and gaining allies in his quest – as well as transmitting smallpox to a population that did not have the built up immunity to the virus that Africans and Europeans did. The Spanish did not yet know that this virus would be their most important ally in toppling the empires of the Americas and went about the business of making human alliances.
            One such ally was the confederation of four kingdoms called Tlaxcala who had been fighting off the Aztec Empire for years. The Spanish cemented their alliance with the Tlaxcala through the exchange of gifts and the marriage of one of the kings’ daughters to Cortés’ second in command. During an earlier occasion of making friends with the locals, Cortés’ expedition were gifted twenty enslaved women, among them a young woman (probably about 16 at the time) named Malintzin. The Spanish baptized her as Doña Marina and sometimes called her La Malinche. They learned very quickly that she could speak Nuahautl (the language of the Mexica) as well as several Mayan dialects – and, in only a matter of months, she became proficient in Spanish too.
            Several decades after the conquest, conquistador Bernal Díaz del Castillo put his memories to paper, giving us one of the most extensive records of the conquest. Here is how he remembers Malintzin:  
 “…the twenty women that were given us, among them one very excellent woman called Doña Marina, for so she was named when she became a Christian…. Cortés allotted one of the women to each of his captains and Doña Marina, as she was good looking and intelligent and without embarrassment, he gave to Alonzo Hernández Puertocarrero. When Puertocarrero went to Spain, Doña Marina lived with Cortés, and bore him a son named Don Martin Cortés…
Before telling about the great Montezuma [sic] and his famous City of Mexico and the Mexicans, I wish to give some account of Doña Marina, who from her childhood had been the mistress and Cacica of towns and vassals. It happened in this way:
Her father and mother were chiefs and Caciques of a town called Paynala, which had other towns subject to it, and stood about eight leagues from the town of Coatzacoalcos. Her father died while she was still a little child, and her mother married another Cacique, a young man, and bore him a son. It seems that the father and mother had a great affection for this son and it was agreed between them that he should succeed to their honours when their days were done. So that there should be no impediment to this, they gave the little girl, Doña Marina, to some Indians from Xicalango, and this they did by night so as to escape observation, and they then spread the report that she had died, and as it happened at this time that a child of one of their Indian slaves died they gave out that it was their daughter and the heiress who was dead.
The Indians of Xicalango gave the child to the people of Tabasco and the Tabasco people gave her to Cortés. I myself knew her mother, and the old woman’s son and her half-brother, when he was already grown up and ruled the town jointly with his mother, for the second husband of the old lady was dead. When they became Christians, the old lady was called Marta and the son Lázaro. I knew all this very well because in the year 1523 after the conquest of Mexico and the other provinces, when Crist’obal de Olid revolted in Honduras, and Cortés was on his way there, he passed through Coatzacoalcos and I and the greater number of the settlers of that town accompanied him on that expedition as I shall relate in the proper time and place. As Doña Marina proved herself such an excellent woman and good interpreter throughout the wars in New Spain, Tlaxcala and Mexico (as I shall show later on) Cortés always took her with him, and during that expedition she was married to a gentleman named Juan Jaramillo at the town of Orizaba.
Doña Marina was a person of the greatest importance and was obeyed without question by the Indians throughout New Spain.
When Cortés was in the town of Coatzacoalcos he sent to summon to his presence all the Caciques of that province in order to make them a speech about our holy religion, and about their good treatment, and among the Caciques who assembled was the mother of Doña Marina and her half-brother, Lázaro.
Some time before this Doña Marina had told me that she belonged to that province and that she was the mistress of vassals, and Cortés also knew it well, as did Aguilar, the interpreter. In such a manner it was that mother, daughter and son came together, and it was easy enough to see that she was the daughter from the strong likeness she bore to her mother.
These relations were in great fear of Doña Marina, for they thought that she had sent for them to put them to death, and they were weeping.
When Doña Marina saw them in tears, she consoled them and told them to have no fear, that when they had given her over to the men from Xicalango, they knew not what they were doing, and she forgave them for doing it, and she gave them many jewels of gold and raiment, and told them to return to their town, and said that God had been very gracious to her in freeing her from the worship of idols and making her a Christian, and letting her bear a son to her lord and master Cortés and in marrying her to such a gentleman as Juan Jaramillo, who was now her husband. That she would rather serve her husband and Cortés than anything else in the world, and would not exchange her place to be Cacica of all the provinces in New Spain.
Doña Marina knew the language of Coatzacoalcos, which is that common to Mexico, and she knew the language of Tabasco, as did also Jerónimo de Aguilar, who spoke the language of Yucatan and Tabasco, which is one and the same. So that these two could understand one another clearly, and Aguilar translated into Castilian for Cortés.
This was the great beginning of our conquests and thus, thanks be to God, things prospered with us. I have made a point of explaining this matter, because without the help of Doña Marina we could not have understood the language of New Spain and Mexico.” [Emphasis added.]

            We can’t fully trust everything Bernal Díaz del Castillo wrote, but we know that her contributions were important to the Spanish, because they told us so themselves. Her presence was even significant enough to be depicted in the codices drawn by the conquered indigenous peoples to reflect the events. She is practically Cortes’ shadow:





After the early conquest, we lose track of her. She gave birth to Cortes’ son, but Cortes’ wife came from Cuba to join him and Malintzin was shunted to the side, married off to another conquistador, and had another child. Historians believe she died not long after that, no older than twenty-five, before the consequences of her efforts could be fully realized.
La Malinche’s legacy is complicated. On the one hand, she can be seen as a collaborator in the Spanish conquest of the Americas. Her name is a derivative of an insult in Mexico that refers to people who love foreign culture more than their own. One of the problems with viewing her as a traitor to “her people” is that it applies a present day lens in grouping all indigenous peoples together and suggesting they should have necessarily opposed all Europeans. It ignores the fact that La Malinche did not consider the Mexica to be “her people” and that she was a teenage girl who had been sold into slavery by her own family. She was clearly quite intelligent and had probably learned a sort of opportunism at a young age. In being Cortés’ mistress, she may have had little choice. In being his translator, she may have seen the opportunity for her own survival and advancement. If she had any sense of national or ethnic identity that she was acting on, she had no way of knowing how catastrophically worse the Spanish would be for the Mayans than the Mexica had been.
She played a key role in one of the biggest military conquests in history. On the other hand, her children may have been among the first mestizos – people of mixed American Indian and European heritage, making her symbolically the mother of the blended culture of modern Mexico: a fact that made her a symbol in the Mexican Revolution of the 1910s – but, more on that next week.

Sources:
Women in World History – includes primary sources and lesson plans! This is a great resource for my teacher friends.
Born in Blood and Fire, by John Charles Chasteen
1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus, by Charles C. Mann (Here is an article from The Atlantic that summarizes some of the findings of the book.)
World Civilizations: The Global Experience, 7th ed., Stearns et al



Saturday, September 2, 2017

Cleopatra: The Last Pharaoh


You are probably familiar with this version of Cleopatra:
Elizabeth Taylor is not the first or the last person to portray this version of Ancient Egypt’s last independent ruler – although, her depiction may have been the most expensive. Even in her own time, Roman propaganda painted Cleopatra as a vamp, creating a myth so powerful that it reverberated through the ages, creating an obsession and an icon shared by peoples on every continent for the last two thousand years.
But it’s just that: a myth.
Indulge me in quoting a long passage. I think that Chip Brown of National Geographic said it better than I could:
“Yet if she is everywhere, Cleopatra is also nowhere, obscured in what biographer Michael Grant called the ‘fog of fiction and vituperation which has surrounded her personality from her own lifetime onwards.’ Despite her reputed powers of seduction, there is no reliable depiction of her face. What images do exist are based on unflattering silhouettes on coins. There is an unrevealing 20-foot-tall relief on a temple at Dendera, and museums display a few marble busts, most of which may not even be of Cleopatra.
“Ancient historians praised her allure, not her looks. Certainly she possessed the ability to roil passions in two powerful Roman men: Julius Caesar, with whom she had one son; and Mark Antony, who would be her lover for more than a decade and the father of three more children. But her beauty, said Greek historian Plutarch, was not ‘the sort that would astound those who saw her; interaction with her was captivating, and her appearance, along with her persuasiveness in discussion and her character that accompanied every interchange, was stimulating. Pleasure also came with the tone of her voice, and her tongue was like a many-stringed instrument.’”
This is a bust that historians think more closely represents Cleopatra’s actual appearance:
 

And a coin depicting her profile:

If you are like me, then the first thing you might have thought when comparing these versions to Elizabeth Taylor, is that she looks shockingly Greek.
            There’s a good reason for that. It’s because Cleopatra was Greek.
            She was the last ruler in the Ptolemaic dynasty, a Greek family that ruled Egypt from 305 BCE until around 30 BCE, when Egypt became a province of the Roman Empire. They were a foreign occupier, much like the Romans who came after them. They spoke and kept their records in Greek. The woman we call Cleopatra was actually Cleopatra VII, and is believed to be the only Ptolemy who ever learned Egyptian language. Their names were Greek. We hear Cleopatra and think Egypt: her name is Greek for “glory of the father.” They ruled from the Hellenized Egyptian city of Alexandria – named for the Greek military leader who enabled the Ptolemies to rule Egypt: Alexander the Great.
 Here’s the skinny: Alexander conquered A LOT of territory before dying at the ripe-old-age of 32, leaving no clear heir or plan for governing. His empire was divided into three Hellenistic kingdoms ruled by his generals and their successors: The Atigonids in Greece, the Selucids in Persia, and of course, the Ptolemies in Egypt.
            The Ptolemaic dynasty was known not only for their incest, but also for their fratricide. (They would give the Lannisters and Targaryens a run for their money.) Cleopatra VII was no exception. By the time Cleopatra ascended to the throne in 51 BCE at the age of 18 (co-ruler and wife of her 10-year-old brother – YUCK!), the once glorious Ptolemaic kingdom was crumbling, and their northern neighbor, Rome, was experiencing some troubled times of its own. Cleopatra wanted to Make Alexandria Great Again, so, she shunted her younger brother/husband Ptolemy XIII to the side, and started doing things her way.
It was not unheard of for husband and wife to reign as co-regents, but it was unusual for a female ruler to dump her male co-regent and rule independently. The tables were soon turned on Cleopatra and Egypt became embroiled in a civil war between Cleopatra and the sibs. Ptolemy XIII, seemingly with the support of his remaining brother (also Ptolemy) and sister, Arsinoe, returned to rule Alexandria, while Cleopatra amassed a rebel army in Syria.
This is how Cleopatra came to be so intimately involved with Egypt’s big, bad northern neighbor: Rome.
            At the time of the Ptolemaic family feud, Rome was experiencing a fraught moment of its own. A certain gentleman by the name of Julius Caesar was busy dismantling the Roman Republic and naming himself as dictator-for-life while fighting off his competitors. In 48 BCE, Caesar came to Egypt in pursuit of one of his competitors, Pompey the Great, and decided to try to negotiate a settlement in the fratricidal civil war as long as he was in the neighborhood.
Ptolemy, hoping to win Caesar’s favor, had Pompey killed, and presented Caesar with his rival’s head. Caesar was not amused by this stunt and ordered Pompey’s body to be recovered so that he could receive a proper Roman funeral. Despite his displeasure with Ptolemy’s stunt, Caesar invited the warring siblings to the royal palace for a peace conference, however, Ptolemy XIII (who was only thirteen) ordered his guards not to let Cleopatra in.
Cleopatra saw in Caesar an opportunity to regain her throne. Famously, she had herself smuggled to Caesar either in a sack, or rolled up in a rug. Nine months later, Cleopatra had a son named Caesarian or Little Caesar.

Cleopatra, in her early twenties, had a sexual relationship with Julius Caesar, by then in his early fifties. Cleopatra gets most of the “blame” for this relationship, and is looked down on for it, even though Caesar was a known womanizer, having an extramarital affair with a woman half his age. Cleopatra was just a young woman who was married to her underage brother because it was family tradition and was in the middle of fighting a civil war with him. Can you blame a girl?
            Cleopatra’s gamble paid off. Caesar awarded Cleopatra control of the throne, something that Ptolemy XIII continued to rebel against. With the help of his other sister, Arsinoe, Ptolemy besieged Cleopatra and Caesar in Alexandria, during which time the famed Library of Alexandria was burned. However, in 47 BCE, Roman forces arrived to help Cleopatra and Ptolemy fled, drowning in the Nile en route.
            During all this time, Caesar was still married to Calpurnia in Rome, and Cleopatra was still married to Ptolemy XIII. After his death, tradition dictated for her to marry her other brother, Ptolemy XIV, but after Caesar’s assassination in 44 BCE to prevent future threats to her or her son’s claim to the throne, Cleopatra had her remaining siblings quietly murdered.
            You know, for safety.
            Egypt and Rome’s alliance was mutually beneficial with Egypt providing grain and ships for the growing empire, and in exchange, Rome left Egypt alone as the last independent state in the Mediterranean – all others having been already subsumed by the Roman war machine. Initially an unpopular ruler among the Macedonian-Greek elite, Cleopatra had to not only ingratiate herself with these elites, but also appeal to the ethnically Egyptian majority. Thanks to her linguistic skills (she may have known as many as nine languages), political savvy, and charm she was able to do just that and steady the sinking ship of state during the decade and a half of her reign.
            Caesar’s relationship with Cleopatra was well known in Rome and was highly unpopular. Much of our perception of Cleopatra dates back to unfavorable Roman propaganda that started with those who disliked her relationship with Caesar and was amplified by the later Emperor Octavian when Cleopatra entered a relationship with his rival, Mark Antony. (You may remember him from Shakespeare.
You may also remember from Shakespeare that Julius Caesar was stabbed to death on the senate floor.
 Cleopatra and her son Caesarian were in Rome when Caesar was murdered but swiftly returned to Alexandria to cement their rule over Egypt and observe the events in Rome from a safe distance.
After Caesar’s death, Rome descended into a period of civil war as the strong men of the empire competed for control. The main contenders were Mark Antony and Caesar’s nephew and designated heir, Augustus/Octavian. Cleopatra saw an opening for her own claim: she was the mother of Caesar’s son, after all.
If you at least know the title of a certain Shakespearian tragedy, then you probably know who Cleopatra allied with. Hint: It was Mark Antony – who abandoned his wife (Octavian’s sister) and children for a several years long Bacchanalia with Cleopatra in Alexandria, during which time they had three children. First, a pair of twins poetically named Alexander Helios (sun) and Cleopatra Selene (moon), and later another son. At first, Mark Antony supported Octavian’s claim, but eventually the Greco-Egyptian power couple decided (much to Octavian’s ire) to pursue their own claim to Rome.
First, Mark Antony declared support for Cleopatra’s son as Caesar’s heir, rather than Octavian. He then awarded land to each of his children by Cleopatra, making very clear that he never intended to return to his wife, Octavia – not a great way to please his imperial brother-in-law. Octavian convinced the Roman senate to revoke Antony’s title by claiming that he would shift the seat of Rome’s power to Egypt. Then, he declared war on Cleopatra.
Egypt put up a good fight: Cleopatra herself led troops in a naval battle against Rome, but as you probably already know, it was in vain.
            One of the most often replicated and portrayed aspects of Cleopatra’s life is her death: Cleopatra and Mark Antony committed suicide in early August, 30 BCE when it became clear that their bid for Rome would fail. The most popular version of the story is that Cleopatra induced an asp (Egyptian Cobra) to bite her, but some historians question if this is true, not least because asp bite is an excruciatingly painful way to die, and Cleopatra would have known this.
(FYI: the video is pretty gross – but fascinating!)
If she did kill herself, some argue that it’s more likely she simply drank poison. As Cleopatra’s body has not yet been found, it’s impossible to know for sure. To again quote Chip Brown:
“The wealth of attention paid to Cleopatra by artists seems inversely proportional to the poverty of material generated about her by archaeologists.”
We all know Cleopatra, but how much do we know her? She is a prime example of the PR problems that have plagued female leaders throughout history. Within patriarchal societies, there tends to be a phobia of powerful women, which helps to explain why powerful women in history – Catherine the Great, Empress Wu Zetian, Empress Dowager Cixi, Empress Theodora, to name a few – have so often been sexualized in a way that discredits them by making them seem repulsive, immoral, or weak. Often, their offenses, if true, are no different from the exploits that kings get away with all the time. But it gives the impression that women can’t be moral rulers and that their path to power lies purely in their sexual prowess.
 For example, Cleopatra is best known for her sexual conquests: something that would have been unremarkable if she were male. Because she managed to sleep with not one, but two of the most powerful men in Rome, she has been mythologized as being exceptionally beautiful. Her name is synonymous with sexiness. But what if she wasn’t? Plutarch, the person who recorded her closest to her lifetime, describes her intelligence, wit, and linguistic gifts as being a large part of her appeal, and her appearance as unremarkable. In recent years, archaeologists have found coins with Cleopatra’s rather homely profile, which has disrupted most of our perceptions of her. But why do we care if she was beautiful? No one gets their knickers in a knot over whether Mark Antony was a hunk.
 Why do we know so little about a woman who is so universally recognized? Partly, because of the smear campaign launched by Octavian. After Cleopatra’s death, Egypt was annexed as a Roman province. Unlike earlier Ptolemies, Cleopatra had bothered to learn Egyptian language. She made a concerted effort to project the image of herself as Egyptian (in statues) by equating herself with the Egyptian mother goddess, Isis. The Romans didn’t have a problem incorporating other cults into their Empire, but allegiance to the Emperor was non-negotiable.
            Another reason why so little is known about Cleopatra is that much of what was Alexandria during Cleopatra’s time is now under water. Although there are underwater archaeologists, it is understandable that excavating a submerged site presents some challenges.


A final, recent challenge in Egyptian archaeology is the current political climate in Egypt. As I’ve been researching Ancient Egyptian babes these past few weeks, it has become increasingly apparent that many leaps in our understanding of Ancient Egypt have occurred since the year 2000. Advances in DNA technology in particular has helped answer a lot of questions about the mummies the Ancient Egyptians left lying around. However, since the 2011 revolution and subsequent instability, it has not only been more difficult for research teams to work in Egypt, but many archaeological sites have become the targets of looting. Egyptian antiquities sell for a boatload of money on the grey market but for historians, the most valuable resource any dig site has to offer is its context: where objects are in relation to each other, their depth in the soil, etc. In order to extract antiquities for illicit sale, looters destroy the context that would answer so many of our questions about ancient mysteries.
Once that context is gone, it is gone forever.

Sources:
Wikipedia
            Cleopatra
            Ptolemy XIII
National Geographic
            The Search for Cleopatra
            Cleopatra on Coins
Smithsonian
            Rehabilitating Cleopatra
            Who Was Cleopatra?
History Channel
            Cleopatra