Abstracts of papers:
The Chimalpahin Conference 2008:
Colonial and Post-Colonial Remembering and Forgetfulness
October 15 - 18, 2008
The
Dramatic Symbol of Christ’s Passion and Christian Crusade:The Cross in
the Reenactments of Colonial Mexico
Zachary
Wingerd
Department
of History
Lon
Morris College
Jacksonville,
Estados Unidos
In comparatively more peaceful demonstrations of
hegemony, although often violent in content, didactic reenactments of
Christian victories over pagans complemented the crusades and inquisitions
in colonial Mexico. The cross
provided an obvious instrument in dramatic propaganda as the symbol of
Christian salvation and the power of Spain.
The effect of these productions reverberated in Spain as well as
Mexico. In these productions, the cross played a crucial role as the
symbol of the conqueror as Muslims are transformed into crusaders and
Natives converted by angels. The
cross features as both the instrument and representation of conquest.
In addition to marshal and political reenactments,
Spanish missionaries had the Natives reenact the crucifixion during Holy
Week. The political intrusion
of the Spanish did not disrupt indigenous society to the extent that the
missionaries of the Roman Catholic Church threatened to do.
However, the Aztec practice of ixiptla, which the Maya also practiced, included the belief that
a god became incarnate in a man who wore his regalia and eventually was
sacrificed. Mircea Eliade
claims that, “For archaic man, reality is a function of the imitation of
a celestial archetype.”[1]
The reactualization
discussed in Eliade can also be seen in Serge Gruzinski’s
definition of man-gods in
colonial Mexico. According to
Gruzinski, the man-god was the
one who embodied the deity worshipped.
In Nahua thought, which perceives as whole the concept of the ixiptla,
the man is the very god adored.[2]
Eliade argues that where the sacred intersects our world, it
appears in the form of ideal models such as the actions of gods or
mythical heroes. All things become truly “real” by imitating these
models, which helps explain the connection Natives made with the
reenactments of Christ’s crucifixion.
Europeans forced the cross symbol into the center of
controversy throughout the regions they encountered, making it an
extension of their dominance. One
of the most powerful “sensuous symbols” in colonial Mexico was the
cross. Natives saw the cross,
an ancient sacred image among Mexican peoples, incorporated in the plays
of the conquerors and accepted certain teachings and roles within the
Christian churches. This is
especially true of the passion plays which allowed indigenous
participation in deification as they understood the continuation of the
role of the ixiptla in their
religious rituals. The theory
of the “eternal return” put forth by Eliade, which was enacted in the
colonial passion plays, does not suggest that traditional societies are
stagnant and unimaginative, nor does it lead them to “a total cultural
immobility.”[3]
Instead, established religion allows a foundation to build on and
concrete symbols, like the cross, act as a means of keeping humans rooted
in the historic/mythic past so that they can move forward into an unknown
future. The ability of
Natives to utilize the cross in a process of religious stabilization and
continuity within the colonial context led to the development of a unique
Mexican Catholicism.
[1] Mircea Eliade, Cosmos and History: The Myth of the Eternal Return, (New York: Harper & Row, 1959), 5.
[2] Serge Gruzinski, Man-gods in the Mexican Highlands: Indian Power and Colonial Society, 1520-1800, Translated by Eileen Corrigan, (Stanford: University Press, 1989), chapter 1.
[3] Mircea Eliade, Myth and Reality, Translated by Willard R. Trask, (New York: Harper & Row, 1963) 140.