‘Surviving Conquest: The Maya of Guatemala in Historical Perspective W. George Lovell Latin American Research Review, Vol. 23, No. 2 (1988), 25-57, Stable URL: Ittpflinksjstor.orgsici?sici=023-879 | %281988%2928%3 A2%9C25%3 ASCTMOGIE2.0.COWSB2-7 Latin American Research Review is currently published by The Latin American Studies Association, Your use of the ISTOR archive indicates your acceptance of ISTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at flip: feworwjtor org/aboutterms.htmal. ISTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in par, that unless you fave obtained pcior permission, you may not dowaload an cnt isus of @ journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content inthe ISTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial uss. Please contact the publisher cegarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at bhupsferwer.jstor.org/jowmals/lamertel. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transtnission. ISTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to creating and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. For more information regarding ISTOR, please contact support @jstor.org- hup:thrwwjstor.orgy Sat Jul 9 19:43:39 2005,SURVIVING CONQUEST ‘The Maya of Guatemala in Historical Perspective” W. George Lovell Queen's University, Kingston, Canada Little by litle heavy shadows and black night enveloped our fathers and grand- fathers and us also, oh, my sons. | Allofus were thus. We were born (9 die! "The Annals of the Cakchiguels (a, 1550-1600) ‘The Maya of Guatemala are today, as they have been in the past, a dominated and beleaguered group. Few have expressed this enduring reality more poignantly than the late Oliver La Farge. Commenting forty years ago on why Kanjobal Indians take to drink, La Farge ob- served that “while these people undoubtedly suffer from drunkenness, ‘one would hesitate to remove the bottle from them until the entire pattern of their lives is changed. They are an introverted people, con- sumed by intemal fires which they cannot ar dare aot express, eternally chafing under the yoke of conquest, and never for a moment forgetting that they are a conquered people.” La Farge's observation is important because, among other things, it views conquest not as a remote, historical experience but as a visible, Cresent condition. Sol Tax and others concur with La Farge, portraying The research for ths article was cade possible by grants and fellowships awarded over the pest several years by the Killam Program of the Canada Ceunei the Plumsock Fur for Mesoamerican Stas, the Socal Sciences and Humanities Retearch Counell of Canada, anc Queen's University Advisory Research Comittee. for their wards of en couragement, and caution, in the course a} earkee drat, hank jefcey Belinger, Wayne Bernhareson, Woodsew Borah, Robert M. Carmack, jeffrey A. Cole, Sasha and Dovid Cook, Shelton H. Davis, Susan E. Davi, James Durkes(ey, Steve Ellitt, Mireya Foe Piero Glejeses, Paul Goadwin, Linds Gres, Ruth Grob, fim lend, Sally sea Chest ppher Lutz, Elizabeth Mahan. Laura Massolo, Kent Mathewson, Rosemarie MeN: fox Devers, Jak H. Rowe, jane ard Wiliam Swezey, Joh M Watanabe, and Fain Lee ‘Woodward, The response of Carel A. Smith was especially helpful, a8 were the comments and suggestions of Bernard Q. Nielschmann and James J. Parsons. The Department of ‘Geogrepiy atthe University af Calfernia, Berkeley, where I was a visting scholat inthe fall 01985, prouded 2 stizulating eewiroemect in whieh to zeformulate my ideas about ow this racle ould be writen 2Latin Americar Research Review TABLE 1 The Mayo Population of Guatemala, 1950-1980 Percentage of Year Maya Poputauion National Popudation. 1950 1,611,928 56.2 1964 2,188,679 50.3 1973 21680,178, 48.0 1980 3,230,393, 473, Source. join D. Early, "A Demographic Survey of Contemporary Guatersalan Maya," 1 Hortege of Conquest: Thirty Years Later, edie by Carl Kendall, John Hasekina, and Lael Boceen (Albuquerque: University af New Mesica Press, 1983), 75 native life in Mesoamerica as 2 “heritage of conquest” that connects modem-day survivors with their aS ST CENTS ago? The forms cof this heritage, to be sure, have varied considerably over the years, but conquest as a wy of life remains very much a fact of life for more than twenty different Maya lifferent Maya-speaking peoples who, to this day, comprise roughly half the population of Guatemala (lables 1 and 2) In coming to terms with Indian survival in Guatemala, a great danger lies in romanticizing ot aversimpliying what happened in his- ‘The recent work of Nancy Farniss in this regard helps enor mously. Farris asserts that Mesoamerican Indians must be viewed properly as independent subjects rather than as anachronistic vestiges ofa pre-Columbian past ar as passive objects of calonial or neocolonial tule.’ This perspective, she maintains, allows indigenous peoples to be seer not se much as zelicts or victims-—which they are or can be—but as actors who have responded to events in ways that help determine no Small part of their cultural reality. The capacity to respand creatively to invasion and domination is one Farriss likens to “strategic aocultura: ‘tion," by which she means that concessions are made and certain ‘Changes are undertaken “in_order_to preserve essentials.” Over the past two decades, revisionist depictions by Farriss and others have cre- ated a distinctive genre of Latin Americanist research that embraces diverse disciplines, ideologies, and interests.® This article seeks to delineate some of the ways the Maya of Guatemala have responded culturally in order to survive almost five centuries of conquest. In piecing together a synthesis, evidence is laid. down in the form of a pyramid. The base of time past tapers towards the peak of time present, a structure chosen to emphasize the historical antecedents that propel, and the cultural context that frames, current social unrest. Most scholars wishing to situate the contemporary crisis in historical perspective devate considerably more atlention to post- Independence times (1821 on) than to the colonial period.’ Such an approach is here reversed in an attempt to establish more concretely 26(MAYAN SURVIVAL IN GUATEMALA TABLE 2 Language Groups of the Guatemalan Maye Maye Language Group Number of Speakers fea. 3973) Ach{ of Cubuleo 38,¢00 ‘Aguacateco 16,000 Cakchiquel 405,000 Chott 52,000 Chay 25,00 Bil 7,000 Jacalteco 32,000 Kanjobal 12,000 Kekchi 361,600 Mam 644,000 Maya. Mopar 5,000 Focoman 33,400 Pokomcht 50,000 Quiche 967000 Rabinal Achi 40,000 Sacapulteco 21,000 Sipacapense 3,000 Tacanece 2,000 Tectiteco 2.300 Tatu) 0,000 Uspanteco! 2,000 Source: Siingafa det Institut Livgution de Verano de Cenncondrir, edited by Pamela Sheets de Eeherd (Guatemala Cty. Institute de Verano, 1983), 47 the colonial experience upon which the events and circumstances of post lndopandiines Mia la naeaaceduaitoundad While the spe