Pueblo-Catholic Syncretism unto Revolution: A Cursory Look
The arrival of Spanish colonists in New Mexico in the sixteenth century set the stage for a complex dynamic of repression, revolution, and trauma. The native Puebloans and the Spanish colonizers would enter into a tumultuous relationship throughout the seventeenth century, conflagrated by religious oppression and political struggle which dramatically culminated in the Pueblo Revolt of 1680. While many narratives exist on this episode of North American history, there are still many gaps in the historical record which pique my curiosity. The colonization of New Spain involved the collision of two nearly diametrically opposed epistemological systems and this dynamic was destined to influence each people in profound ways. Of great interest to me is the concept of syncretism, which is defined by The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church as “the attempt to combine opposing doctrines and practices, especially in reference to philosophical and religious systems.” While “attempt” implies a concerted effort on the part of the practitioners of either faith in question to synthesize, the species of syncretism seen in New Mexico can be understood to be as a mutual synthesis borne of political and spiritual conflict, all initiated by fundamental and universal analogs between Puebloan and European life ways.
The “opposing doctrines and practices” between Puebloans and Spaniards are obvious to many and are well-documented in history, yet my curiosity is spurred by the question of analog: what were the parallels and the intuitive familiarities which cultivated (and cultivates) the evolution of Pueblo-Catholic syncretism? Syncretism is often seen in a one-directional manner, that is, Pueblo “religion” (which is a term I use here for ease of illustrating parallels) is often considered to have incorporated Catholic influences. But what about the other direction? I hope my analysis will modestly illuminate how syncretism is truly a relational dynamic.
To understand that relational dynamic, we must first state the actors at play. Although there are many actors, we can focus our investigation on Pueblo peoples (and though I would prefer not to generalize my analysis in a “pan-Pueblo” manner, my scope here to a certain extent requires it, and I will specify via capitalization: particular communities will be implied by the lower case while generalized or broad concepts and premises will be implied by the upper) and the Franciscan order of the Catholic church.
From the very beginning of Spanish colonization, the act of settling at established pueblo sites shows how early settlers gravitated toward models of community planning that appeared familiar. These perceived similarities between Spanish conceptions of community organization and Pueblo society set the foundations for syncretic development. Those first Spaniards, for example, noticed how pueblos, like Spanish villages, centered around a plaza which was a communal space of spiritual significance, as noted by Phillip O. Leckman in his essay “Meeting in Places: Seventeenth-Century Puebloan and Spanish Landscapes”: “Within both Puebloan and Iberian settlements of the seventeenth century, space and place were conceptually and physically centered on open public plazas constituting important communal, extramural spaces, and venues for activities both economic and sacred” (New Mexico and the Pimería Alta: The Colonial Period in the American Southwest, p. 85). The power of congregational spaces provided a fertile ground for the transmission of culture and, eventually, a revival of Pueblo religion which ignited in revolution in 1680. Again, Leckman: “If the gaps in understanding between ostensibly similar aspects of Spanish and Pueblo worlds aggravated the painful, often violent imposition of colonial values and practices on seventeenth-century New Mexico, they also sometimes opened routes for synthesis and experimentation, enabling the creation of spaces within which Puebloan culture could survive and revitalize” (New Mexico and the Pimería Alta: The Colonial Period in the American Southwest, p. 106). Because the inauguration of the revolution is so intimately tied and affected by the geographical situation of the various pueblos, this dimension of translatable community orientation provided the backdrop of the syncretism which was a powerful force behind Puebloan resistance.
The colonial efforts of the Spanish crown had the Franciscan order of the Catholic church as its engine. Franciscans were especially vociferous in their proselytization, as their representative saint, Francis of Assisi, endeavored to Christ-like martyrdom and valued poverty, discipline, and Christ imitation above all. Ramón A. Gutiérrez’s When Jesus Came, The Corn Mothers Went Away: Marriage, Sexuality, and Power in New Mexico, 1500–1846 provides a useful snapshot of the Franciscan conversion program which occurred in three stages: purgation of native practices, illumination via God’s true light and gospel, and union with God in, among other connotations, a matrimonial sense (Gutiérrez, p. 71–74). Especially important to the Franciscan mode of conversion was, along with an internal (soul-centered) salvation, an emphasis on the external, objective world as a way of demonstrating virtue, and thus, the natural world was considered an important way to be in communion with God. The sacredness of land and nature is well-known as an Indigenous universal and this parallel “greatly facilitated the incorporation of the Pueblo pantheon of animal deities into Christian ritual” (Gutiérrez, pg. 69). This and many other parallels were not lost on the Franciscans and while they were certainly used to fuel conversion efforts, they also by that very act (in that they did not negate them totally) contributed to both the preservation of Pueblo religion and the evolution of the syncretic mixture.
The final parallel I will highlight for this project are the respective misperceptions (and fear thereof) of the other consciousness which colored the various interactions between the Christians and the Puebloans, who practiced a diverse and complex kind of pantheism which is called “the Kachina cult” by Western academia. The very diversity of the Kachina cult was itself a convenient parallel with the Christian cult of saints, utilized as a semiotic means of indoctrination in lieu of verbal instruction, since the friars did not take special interest in learning Puebloan languages (Gutiérrez, pg. 82, Knaut, pg. 78). This example evinces how the misinterpretation of behaviors and epistemologies, in an almost ironic sense, led to the continued cultivation of mutual syncretism.
That very self-imposed language barrier is another compelling manner by which parallels affected both Catholic and Pueblo ways of life. The Franciscans, out of fear that their teachings might be misinterpreted if they were taught in a native tongue, opted instead for “paraliturgies” that relied on drama, thespianism, and example (as was the Franciscan way) (Gutiérrez, pg. 80). This dependence of visualizing Christian doctrine through drama naturally pitted these productions in competition with the Puebloan traditional dances and ceremony, which the friars endeavored to overshadow via “magnificent ceremonies rivaling native rituals…” (Gutiérrez. pg 79). Here we see a concrete example of how the course of historical synthesis affected both practices.
The enduring symbol of two perpendicular lines — the Cross — was also an object of misperception on the parts of both Puebloans and Spaniards. The weight of the crucifix in the Christian belief need not be described here, but it is worth noting the Puebloan significance of symbols which, to Western eyes, were suggestive of Jesus’s sacrifice. Prayer sticks constructed of wood, feathers, and other spiritual filigree were offered to Kachinas to secure their eventual arrival to the pueblos. Upon first arrival to pueblos in the mid-sixteenth century, the soldiers immediately perceived prayer sticks as Christian crosses. On the other hand the Puebloans, according to Gutiérrez, perceived approaching cross-wielding Spanish soldiers as visiting Kachinas (Gutiérrez, pg. 82). Both symbols represented, in some way, an offering; for Europeans, the cross symbolized the ultimate offering — the sacrifice of Christ — and for the Puebloans, the prayer sticks represented an offering to the Kachinas. The ensuing violence between these two peoples was borne of these types of misinterpretations; parallel misperceptions in opposing directions based on foundational symbols for either.
The foregoing examples of Pueblo-Catholic parallelism paradoxically laid the groundwork for traumatic repression of Indigenous belief systems while simultaneously facilitating the inevitable synthesis of the traditions and values of both oppressor and oppressed. Furthermore, the conditions of oppression ironically laid the groundwork for revolution, as is seen in many theaters of history, for the measures and practices of Catholic, state, and revolutionary authorities agitated the dialectical historical process into various instances of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis which ultimately led to the Pueblo Revolt of 1680. What I have described here in short order constitutes the origins of the Pueblo Revolution which I look forward to analyzing deeper as I continue to learn more about the resistance of my forebears.
