Examines explanations of how & why Europe successfully conquered New World civilizations.

1. WAR
of
the
WORLDS
Why
&
How
Europe
Conquered
The
Americas
by
Craig
Collins,
Ph.D.
Most
scholarly
efforts
to
explain
Spain's
conquest
of
Latin
America
focus
almost
entirely
upon
the
exploits
of
renowned
Spanish
conquistadors
like
Hernando
Cortez
and
Francisco
Pizarro.
However,
whether
these
histories
extol
their
bravery
or
deplore
their
brutality,
this
traditional
approach
to
the
conquest
of
the
New
World
is
inaccurate
in
the
extreme
and
flawed
at
its
core.
The
Spanish
(and
European)
conquest
of
the
Americas
must
be
explained
within
the
context
of
a
much
deeper
process
whose
motive
forces
lie
far
beneath
either
the
ruthless
charismatic
courage
of
Cortez
or
the
fatalistic
religious
prophecies
of
Montezuma
and
his
people.
The
most
comprehensive
effort
to
understand
the
Spanish
conquest
necessarily
entails
confronting
questions
that
reduce
even
the
epoch’s
greatest
personalities
to
little
more
than
brilliant
reflections
off
the
surface
of
the
great
river
of
history.
What
motivated
Spain
and
its
European
rivals
to
explore,
conquer
and
colonize?
What
vulnerabilities
in
the
ecology
of
the
New
World
and
in
the
structure
of
pre-­‐
Colombian
societies
explain
why
Spaniards
(and
Europeans)
were
so
successful
in
this
endeavor?
What
accounts
for
the
extreme
variability
in
Europe’s
penetration
and
domination
of
Asia,
Africa
and
the
New
World?
Spain's
conquest
of
the
Americas
was
part
of
the
wider
process
of
European
global
expansion.
Its
mechanisms
and
motives
must
be
sought
well
beneath
the
convictions
of
any
man,
kingdom
or
empire.
World
system
theorist,
Immanuel
Wallerstein,
contends
that
the
explanation
lies
within
the
developmental
logic
of
an
emerging
capitalist,
European-­‐centered
“world-­‐system”,
economically
committed
to
production
for
profit
on
a
global
scale
and
politically
fragmented
by
intensely
rivalrous
states.
For
world-­‐system
theorists,
Spain's
motives
for
conquest
necessarily
arose
from
its
involvement
in
the
acutely
competitive
and
war-­‐prone
interaction
between
the
dominant
European
states
that
formed
the
core
of
this
world-­‐system.
The
unique
aspects
of
Spain's
motives
(for
example,
the
Crown's
crusade
to
“Christianize”
the
native
population)
were
secondary
derivatives
of
an
expansionist
drive
which,
in
the
main,
was
identical
with
the
imperialist
motives
of
other
colonizing
European
powers:
the
need
to
seek
maximum
advantage
in
a
high
stakes
game
of
economic
and
military
“king
of
the
mountain."
Thus,
in
the
Americas,
Spain
sought
to
plunder
the
tremendous
wealth
to
be
found
in
exploiting
Indian
labor
to
mine
the
precious
metals
of
Mexico
and
the
Andes
and
use
this
wealth
to
finance
their
bid
for
European
hegemony.
It
was
indeed
a
fortunate
coincidence
for
Spain
that
the
major
population
concentrations
of
the
Americas
were
so
close
to
the
richest
known
deposits
of
gold
and
silver.
William
H.
McNeill's
THE
PURSUIT
OF
POWER
gives
implicit
recognition
to
Wallerstein's
expansionist
world-­‐system
and
notes
that
this
hot
house
of
military

2. and
market
rivalry
produced
an
unusual
cooperation
between
royal
monarchs
and
merchant
capitalists,
each
eager
to
reap
the
benefits
from
conquest
and
colonization.
This
environment
also
encouraged
the
rapid
development
of
technological
and
social
innovations
designed
to
improve
the
efficiency
of
overseas
trade
and
both
naval
and
land
warfare.
Thus,
although
Europe
lagged
well
behind
many
other
civilizations
by
some
measures,
its
ability
to
combine
overseas
transport
with
military
prowess
was
unmatched.
The
Aztec
and
Incan
armies
were
at
a
distinct
disadvantage
when
their
more
primitive
weapons
faced
the
steel
armor
and
swords;
the
war
horses
and
muskets;
and
the
battle-­‐tested
military
strategies
of
the
Spanish
invaders.
But
this
advantage
only
partially
explains
how
Pizarro's
band
of
168
soldiers
could
defeat
thousands
of
Incan
soldiers
and
subdue
an
entire
civilization.
McNeill
acknowledges
in
another
work,
PLAGUES
AND
PEOPLES,
that
Spanish
military
and
technical
superiority
over
Amerindian
civilizations,
“do
not
seem
enough
to
explain
wholesale
apostasy
from
older
Indian
patterns
of
life
and
belief.”(p.1)
McNeill's
book
documents
the
ghastly
impact
of
a
“weapon”
so
devastating
that
it
completely
exterminated
many
New
World
peoples
and
so
secret
that
it
was
wielded
unknowingly
by
the
invading
armies
of
the
Old
World.
This
“secret
weapon”
was
infectious
disease.
Behind
the
astounding
military
victories
of
the
conquistadors
and
the
miraculous
religious
conversions
of
native
peoples
by
Spain’s
Catholic
missionaries
lie
the
profound
demographic
and
psychological
implications
of
pathogens
that
killed
only
Indians
while
leaving
Spaniards
unharmed.
Neither
Europeans
nor
Native
Americans
realized
that
these
Old
World
diseases
had
become
endemic
to
European
society
through
their
age-­‐old
contact
with
farm
animals
not
found
in
the
New
World.
Thus,
diseases
that
killed
only
native
people
"could
only
be
explained
supernaturally,
and
there
could
be
no
doubt
about
which
side
of
the
struggle
enjoyed
divine
favor.”
Thus,
the
conquest
of
the
Americas
must
also
be
studied
as
a
tragic
episode
in
humanity’s
historic
encounters
with
dangerous
micro-­‐parasites
and
the
far-­‐reaching
consequences
that
have
ensued
whenever
contacts
across
disease
boundaries
allowed
foreign
pathogens
(smallpox,
measles,
influenza,
etc.)
to
invade
a
population
that
lacked
any
acquired
immunity
to
their
ravages.
The
reasons
behind
the
one-­‐sided
susceptibility
of
New
World
peoples
to
European
diseases
leads
directly
toward
a
far
more
pervasive
vulnerability.
According
to
Alfred
Crosby,
The
New
World
was,
by
comparison
with
the
enormous
size
and
ecological
complexity
of
the
Afro-­‐Eurasian
land
mass,
no
more
than
an
enormous
island.
Forms
of
life
were,
in
general,
more
highly
evolved
in
Eurasia
and
Africa,
having
responded
to
a
wider
range
of
variability
arising
from
a
larger
land
mass
and
greater
biodiversity.
This
gave
Old
World
civilizations
access
to
a
wide
range
of
animals
(horses,
pigs,
goats,
sheep,
oxen,
cows)
that
could
be
domesticated
for
farm
labor,
food,
transportation
and
warfare.
Consequently
plants
and
animals
introduced
by
Europeans
to
the
Americas
often
displaced
native
species
and
disturbed
pre-­‐existing
ecological
balances
in
explosive,
and
at
least
initially,
highly
unstable
ways.
For
example,
the
Amerindian
peoples
of
Central
America,
Mexico
and

3. California
found
their
crops
invaded
by
unknown
European
weeds,
insects,
and
vermin
and
trampled
and
eaten
by
both
feral
and
domestic
herds
of
sheep,
cattle,
pigs
and
horses.
This
ecological
conquest
was
largely
unconscious,
but
nevertheless
it
had
the
objective
effect
of
starving
village
after
village
of
native
peoples
into
submission
to
the
missionary
system
and
dependency
upon
European
forms
of
agriculture.
(Crobsy,
ECOLOGICAL
IMPERIALISM:
THE
BIOLOGICAL
EXPANSION
OF
EUROPE
900-­‐1900).
Thus
the
conquest
of
the
indigenous
populations
of
the
Americas
was
only
partially
conscious
and
partially
military
in
nature.
In
reality,
it
was
a
pervasive
assault
upon
every
aspect
of
the
Native
American
way
of
life.
Those
who
survived
the
military
conquest
lived
to
have
their
habitats
destroyed
by
invading
European
flora
and
fauna
and
their
lives
threatened
by
Old
World
diseases.
Eric
Wolf
and
Charles
Gibson
point
out
that
the
biological
and
ecological
vulnerability
of
New
World
civilizations
was
compounded
by
the
structural
susceptibility
of
its
major
agricultural
empires
to
Spanish
conquest,
domination,
and
control.
Gibson
stresses
that,
in
the
region
of
Veracruz,
where
Cortez
first
landed,
the
natives
had
only
recently
come
under
the
domination
of
the
Aztec
empire
which
had
been
gradually
conquering
and
subjugating
its
neighbors.
“This
fact
goes
far
to
explain
the
ease
with
which
Cortez
and
his
followers
established
their
main
foothold.
As
deliverers
or
apparent
deliverers,
here
and
at
many
other
points,
the
Spaniards
were
repeatedly
able
to
turn
native
political
conditions
to
their
own
advantage
(Gibson,
26).”
Wolf
concludes
that,
“None
of
Cortez’s
military
successes
would
have
been
possible
without
the
Indian
allies
Cortes
won
in
Middle
America.
Spanish
military
equipment
and
tactics
carried
the
day,
but
Indian
assistance
determined
the
outcome
of
the
war
(Wolf,
154-­‐5).”
Even
the
“one
powerful
cement
for
social
unity”
possessed
by
the
Aztec
civilization,
its
doomsday
cosmology,
became
a
potent
force
for
destruction
at
the
hands
of
the
invading
Spaniards
(Wolf,
144).
Because
the
Aztecs
believed
that
their
civilization
must
eventually
fall
victim
to
violent
cataclysmic
forces,
Montezuma’s
people
must
have
been
struck
with
a
profound
sense
of
apocalyptic
fatalism
as
they
saw
village
after
village
either
put
to
the
sword
by
armored
horsemen,
die
of
mysterious
ailments,
or
side
with
invaders
in
open
rebellion.
Once
the
Aztec
empire
had
been
beheaded,
the
sedentary
socio-­‐economic
structure
of
this
densely
populated
agricultural
society
made
it
relatively
easy
to
impose
Spanish
control
over
the
defeated
peoples
of
the
empire.
Even
the
religious
beliefs
of
the
Mexical
peoples
were
highly
compatible
in
their
resemblance
to
Catholicism.
Both
religions
believed
in
a
structured,
ordered
and
hierarchical
supernatural
world.
The
Catholic
Church
was
careful
to
offer
the
Indians
a
way
to
re-­‐cast
their
traditional
spiritual
attachments
into
new
forms.
The
transition
from
old
to
new
gods
was
eased
by
an
astonishing
similarity
in
belief,
ritual
and
symbol.
Both
religions
had
a
rite
of
baptism,
a
kind
of
confession,
and
a
communion
ritual.
Both
religions
used
incense,
fasted
and
did
penance,
went
on
holy
pilgrimages,
kept
houses
of
celibate
virgins
and
believed
in
the
existence
of
a
supernatural
mother

4. and
virgin
birth.
Both
religions
even
made
use
of
a
holy
cross.
While
Aztec
religion
had
no
notion
of
original
sin,
its
stress
on
predestination
meshed
with
Catholic
fatalism.
The
Aztecs
even
divided
their
afterworlds
into
the
realms
of
a
blissful
heaven
(Tlalocan)
and
a
murky
underworld
(Mictlan).
The
Aztec
regime
applied
the
death
penalty
against
adultery,
homosexuality,
and
upon
women
who
induced
abortions.
Divorce,
while
possible,
was
very
difficult
to
obtain.
Thus,
even
on
these
questions
of
sexual
policy,
the
Spanish
Catholic
regime
brought
no
new
changes
(Wolf,
167-­‐72).
Most
important
of
all,
both
Aztec
and
Incan
religions,
like
Catholicism,
believed
that
their
rulers
commanded
authority
because
they
were
closer
to
their
gods
than
everyone
else.
This
belief
predisposed
them
to
believe
that,
if
their
own
priest-­‐kings
could
be
defeated
by
these
invaders,
then
their
gods
must
be
even
more
powerful
and
worthy
of
fearful
obedience.
The
amazing
socioeconomic
and
cosmological
similarities
between
Spaniards
and
Aztecs
may
explain
why
the
conquistadors
found
ruling
the
indigenous
populations
of
central
Mexico
relatively
easy
compared
to
the
rebellious
Toltec
peoples
of
the
Yucatan,
the
Andean
empire
of
the
Incas,
or
the
fierce
hunter-­‐gatherers
of
the
Argentine
pampas
and
Mexico's
northern
badlands.
Like
Cortez,
Pizarro's
conquest
of
the
Incas
benefited
from
the
demographic,
economic,
and
psychological
devastation
of
deadly
European
pathogens
which
may
have
cut
the
population
of
the
Incan
empire
in
half
before
he
arrived
in
1530
(Gibson,
64).
And
like
Cortez,
Pizarro
was
able
to
cleverly
exploit
a
political
schism
between
rival
Incan
rulers
to
divide
and
conquer
Andean
civilization
(Gibson,
30).
Yet
the
Spaniards
and
their
religion
were
not
readily
accepted
among
the
Incan
peoples.
The
Incan
empire
had
been
relatively
benevolent
and
egalitarian
compared
to
the
Aztecs,
and
Incan
cosmology
was
less
similar
to
Catholicism.
Thus
the
Andean
peoples
maintained
a
sullen
hostility
toward
the
Spaniards
and
awaited
the
day
when
a
new
Inca
warrior
king
would
lead
them
against
the
invaders
and
reorder
a
world
turned
upside
down.
The
Spanish
conquest
faced
even
greater
resistance
from
the
more
mobile
and
warlike
hunter-­‐gatherers
of
the
Southern
cone
and
northern
Mexico.
The
lifestyles
of
these
peoples
were
completely
incompatible
with
colonial
systems
of
coerced
labor
in
plantations
or
mines;
and,
with
the
introduction
of
the
horse,
these
nomadic
tribesmen
sharpened
their
ability
to
wage
mobile
guerilla
warfare
against
the
encroaching
Europeans.
The
conquest
of
these
fierce
nomads
was
further
retarded
by
the
fact
that
their
homelands
were
less
valuable
to
the
Spaniards
since
they
contained
neither
fertile
land
and
dense
populations
of
exploitable
labor
nor
known
deposits
of
gold,
silver
or
other
precious
minerals.
Therefore,
unless
the
Spaniards
found
some
political
or
economic
reason
for
putting
added
resources
into
the
conquest
of
these
“savage”
territories,
they
usually
held
out
against
the
European
invaders
much
longer
than
their
more
“civilized”
neighbors.

5. In
sum,
the
Spanish
conquest
of
the
Americas
was
far
more
than
a
dramatic
confrontation
between
conquistadors
and
Indians.
It
was
a
protracted
and
titanic
war
of
the
worlds
whose
outcome
completely
transformed
the
future
of
both
continents.
It
was
an
ecological
and
biological
battle
between
New
and
Old
World
species,
pathogens,
and
peoples;
a
technological
war
pitting
spears
and
arrows
against
rifles,
cannons,
and
armored
horsemen;
a
socioeconomic
confrontation
between
a
concentrated
and
rivalrous
system
of
warlike
seafaring
traders
and
a
dispersed
and
disparate
array
of
sedentary
agrarian
societies
and
nomadic
hunter-­‐
gatherers.
It
was
a
political
war
pitting
imperialist
monarchies
against
large
agrarian
empires
and
small
tribes
of
foragers.
And
finally,
it
was
a
cosmological
conflict
between
those
who
believed
in
man’s
superiority
over
nature,
and
his
unlimited
ability
to
"pillage
&
progress"
at
her
expense,
and
those
who
believed
in
nature’s
supreme
power
to
either
favor
or
destroy
man’s
flimsy,
short-­‐lived
efforts
at
civilization.