Native Americans in South America

Feb 2017
201
Canada
#1
Was thinking recently that I know the history of Native Americans in North America well, but not as much in South America, so wondering if anyone can field a few questions..

- Is colonial history in South America more or less the same as in North America? As in South America is now predominantly populated by people of European descent after undermining native populations?

- How well are native populations now integrated into various South American communities, and what proportion of these populations do they make up?

- Are there any reserve systems in South America, as there are in the North?
 

Chlodio

Ad Honorem
Aug 2016
3,475
Dispargum
#2
In South America, there was a lot more intermarriage between Natives and Europeans. IIRC most South Americans today have mixed ancestry but are more proud of their European heritage than of their Native heritage. For instance, almost all South Americans speak a European language and practice Christianity, not native religions.

There are differences from country to country. People in northwestern countries like Peru and Ecuador have a much higher percentage of Native DNA, and Native American culture is stronger/more prevalent.

In South America there was more assimilation and absorbtion rather than the mass displacement that occurred in North America.
 
Jun 2012
2,955
Brazil
#3
Was thinking recently that I know the history of Native Americans in North America well, but not as much in South America, so wondering if anyone can field a few questions..

- Is colonial history in South America more or less the same as in North America? As in South America is now predominantly populated by people of European descent after undermining native populations?

- How well are native populations now integrated into various South American communities, and what proportion of these populations do they make up?

- Are there any reserve systems in South America, as there are in the North?
it is difficult to respond for the whole continent, because the "colonization pattern" was not the same in different places.
But like Chlodio said intermarriage was much more widespread in south america than in north america, but a characteristic o colonial rule, was the division of population, for example a mixed individual was positioned below a white european citzen but better classed than a full blooded native american, this caste sistem helped the colonial rule, but created the myth that they are superior than native americans and they didn't have no relation with the natives,
for example even today in some parts of south america calling someone "Indian", is a great offence.
Now reserve in Brazil there were reserves, but worked in a different way, normally reserves here were in ancestral lands, and its creation is seen as something good in the eyes of natives, most reserves were new, but there are old ones, like the Kadweu with one I'm half breed, it began when a combined Portuguese native army conquered the region of Apa river in 1808, and later it was given by brazilian Emperor for Kadwéu job in protecting the borders.
The most famous and one of the biggest is the Xingu were 15 different tribes live.
here a map of indian reserves in Brazil.
 
Likes: unclefred
Jan 2010
4,262
Atlanta, Georgia USA
#4
I believe there's a big difference: in South and Central America , the indigenous were regarded as fellow humans (and as fellow Christians after conversion) but as laborers for a European population composed of young single men whose goal was generally do get rich with as little work as possible. So while title to land was taken, in general the native populations were allowed to remain on the land and work it, and because most of the Europeans were single men, intermarriage was very common. In the US ( the history of Canada and Mexico are different), the Europeans wanted to take the land and work it themselves so the natives were in the way and were therefore expelled or killed. And because most of the Europeans in the US brought spouses with them, there was little intermarriage.

Argentina, Uruguay and Chile are much more like the US, in that the lands (at least the plains) were taken and the natives killed or died of disease.
The South Americans I know from northern South America (Peru, Ecuador and Venezuela) all have some native ancestry while those from Chile and Argentina are entirely European.

You also have to distinguish the populations in the mountains from that on the plain. The mountains--even in Argentina--are inhabited to a large extent by full-blooded native Americans (Quechua in Peru, for example) and the native cultures are fairly intact, at least among the women. The mountains are not "reserves", as far as I know, but they are difficult places to live and relatively poor, and the natives are much better adapted to living there than Europeans.
 

Jake10

Ad Honoris
Oct 2010
11,960
Canada
#5
A lot of good points have been made, but I will add another point to the intermixing, which is that it also took place between blacks, Indigenous and Spanish settlers. In countries like El Salvador, for instance, it is common to find people with blood from all three backgrounds.
 
Mar 2017
855
Colorado
#6
There are some excellent documentaries on YouTube produced in South/Central America in Spanish, with either subtitles or dubbing. I couldn't find the one I was looking for as an example.

The one I wanted covered the conquistadors in a very interesting manner. It was absolutely scathing about the treatment of indigenous peoples, and covered the economics of men scraping together boat fare to make their fortunes in the New World ... any damn way they could: digging up old graves, taking bits of jewelry from villagers, killing any hapless peoples that got in the way. It was made in Columbia or Brazil (I think) and they made their opinions of the Spanish pretty clear.

It seemed like it was history from "their" point of view, as opposed to what North Americans think.

------

Back in the day, I went SCUBA diving on the 9 Mile Reef a day's boat ride off the coast of Belize (2nd largest coral reef in the world). The boat captain was named Demetrio Mahio and looked EXACTLY like the faces carved in Palenque.
 
Last edited:
Oct 2017
110
United States
#8








Iberians were already dividing people up into castes based on their race since at least the Reconquista in the 15th century, where the term ‘raza’ (race) first appears in official documents. Royal legislation carefully distinguished between ‘old christians’, those of ‘pure white Christian ancestry’, & ‘new christians’, those with identifiable Jewish & Muslim heritage. New christians were denied to right to various occupations, were banned from many civil & ecclesiastical offices, & in many respects were treated as second-class citizens.
In the New World, The complexity of phenotypes that were produced as a result of miscegenation created a complex caste system. It was a lot less binary that British North America, & race wasn’t as empasized as much as merit. Nevertheless, race was too a major concern for Latin America, & non-whites were generally denied access to various occupations, Government & ecclesiastical offices.
 
Last edited: