fertility: the regulator of demographic dynamics in the ancient americas1 blame colombus? new...

Fertility: the regulator of demographic dynamics in the Ancient Americas

1

Blame Colombus? New Blame Colombus? New

skeletal evidence and the skeletal evidence and the

paleodemography of the paleodemography of the

Americas over the millennia.Americas over the millennia.FertilityFertility: :

regulator of demographic dynamics regulator of demographic dynamics in the Ancient Americasin the Ancient Americas

paper posted at: paper posted at: www.hist.umn.edu/www.hist.umn.edu/

~rmccaa/paleodem.doc ~rmccaa/paleodem.doc


2

Richard Steckel and Jerome Rose Richard Steckel and Jerome Rose (eds.), (eds.), The Backbone of History: The Backbone of History: Health and Nutrition in the Health and Nutrition in the Western HemisphereWestern Hemisphere (7000 BP – (7000 BP – 1900 AD), Cambridge University 1900 AD), Cambridge University Press, 2002Press, 2002• Largest collection of skeletal Largest collection of skeletal

microdata ever assembled: microdata ever assembled: 12,500 skeletons, 65 sites, 7 12,500 skeletons, 65 sites, 7 millennia millennia

• Uniform methodology: 24 bio-Uniform methodology: 24 bio-archaeologists, 6 historiansarchaeologists, 6 historians


3

Subject:Subject:The human The human skeleton.skeleton.

Microdata:souMicrodata:source for rce for studying studying health, health, nutrition and nutrition and demographic demographic dynamicsdynamics


4

Outline, 45 slides:Outline, 45 slides:• 1. (10) Bioarcheological evidence 1. (10) Bioarcheological evidence

on paleopathologies and height: on paleopathologies and height: Ancient America was no paradiseAncient America was no paradise

• 2. (15) Paleodemography: new 2. (15) Paleodemography: new methodmethod

• 3. (20) New findings: 3. (20) New findings: demographic dynamics for 3 demographic dynamics for 3 periods:periods:Ancient (7000 – 1500 BP)Ancient (7000 – 1500 BP)Classic (1500 – 500 BP)Classic (1500 – 500 BP)Historical (500 – 100 BP)Historical (500 – 100 BP)


5

Blame Columbus? Blame Columbus? (Title of a (Title of a New York TimesNew York Times review of review of book, but not a concern of the book book, but not a concern of the book

itself)itself)• 1. Bioarcheological evidence on 1. Bioarcheological evidence on

paleopathologies and height: paleopathologies and height: Ancient America was no paradiseAncient America was no paradise

• 2. Paleodemography: new 2. Paleodemography: new methodmethod

• 3. Demographic dynamics for 3 3. Demographic dynamics for 3 periods:periods:Ancient (7000 – 1500 BP)Ancient (7000 – 1500 BP)Classic (1500 – 500 BP)Classic (1500 – 500 BP)Historical (500 – 100 BP)Historical (500 – 100 BP)


6

4 measures of health and 4 measures of health and nutritionnutrition

1.1. Porotic hyperostosisPorotic hyperostosis

2.2. Degenerative joint disease Degenerative joint disease (limbs, spine)(limbs, spine)

3.3. Dental diseaseDental disease

4.4. Stature Stature


7

Hard Times in Ancient Hard Times in Ancient AmericasAmericas

»Skeletal Skeletal archaeology archaeology shows shows porotic porotic hyperostosis hyperostosis as nearly as nearly universal —universal —perhaps due perhaps due to extreme to extreme dependence dependence on corn. on corn.


8

Porotic Hyperostosis: Porotic Hyperostosis: a physiological adaptation to a physiological adaptation to

inadequate absorption of inadequate absorption of oxygenoxygen

• High frequency: 1/3 – 1/12 of adults in High frequency: 1/3 – 1/12 of adults in these communities show signs of these communities show signs of extraordinary bone remodeling. extraordinary bone remodeling.

• Worsened over time: as the transition Worsened over time: as the transition to sedentary agriculture proceeded (1-to sedentary agriculture proceeded (1-3,000 BP), physiological conditions 3,000 BP), physiological conditions deteriorated. deteriorated.

• No gendered difference: “A near No gendered difference: “A near complete absence of sex differentials in complete absence of sex differentials in pathologies is surprising.”pathologies is surprising.”


9

Degenerative joint disease Degenerative joint disease (DJD)(DJD)

• DJD: 10-20% of adults of both sexes.DJD: 10-20% of adults of both sexes.• From age 20, hard, repetitive work From age 20, hard, repetitive work

exacted severe wear on both sexes, exacted severe wear on both sexes, particularly of joints required for mobility, particularly of joints required for mobility, manipulation of objects, and manipulation of objects, and carrying carrying loads.loads.

• GenderGenderdifferences:differences:statisticallystatisticallysignificantsignificantin DJD andin DJD andcranialcranialfractures. fractures.


10

Degenerative joint disease, Degenerative joint disease, spinespine::

picture worsenspicture worsens • Generally high levels ranging from Generally high levels ranging from

25 to 83% for adults from the 25 to 83% for adults from the Mesoamerican sites—a ubiquitous Mesoamerican sites—a ubiquitous affliction, principally due to hard affliction, principally due to hard labor. labor.

• ““Where the means of carrying heavy Where the means of carrying heavy burdens is almost solely the human burdens is almost solely the human body, an enormous biological cost is body, an enormous biological cost is exacted from the organism.”exacted from the organism.”


11

Shovel Shovel shaped shaped incisors:incisors:geneticgenetictrait of trait of Native Native

AmericaAmericansns


12

Severe Severe dental dental disease disease

was was common common

in in societies societies based on based on

corncorn


13

Stature, 3 features stand Stature, 3 features stand out:out:

• 1. Males decline over time in mean 1. Males decline over time in mean height: 1 cm. per thousand years--height: 1 cm. per thousand years--due to worsening nutrition?due to worsening nutrition?

• 2. Female stature constant over 2. Female stature constant over time even from pre-historic time even from pre-historic period. period.

• 3. Males show decreasing stature 3. Males show decreasing stature from north (164 cm) to south (161 from north (164 cm) to south (161 cm). cm).


14

Male stature declines over Male stature declines over time: confirmed in Center and time: confirmed in Center and

SouthSouth

Fig. 1. Change in Stature by Region: Mexican MalesYears Before Present

cent

imet

ers

NorthR**2= .04 b=-.0006 P>.59 mean=164.7

-5000 -2000 -1500 -750 -100

150

160

170

Yaqui

TarahumaCora

CuliacanPericuTecualil

RVerdetc

CandelarCandelar

V Reyes

cm

SouthR**2= .63 b=-.0036 P<.01 mean=160.7

-5000 -2000 -1500 -750 -100

150

160

170

MChiapasMYucatan

Tsotzil

Zapotec

Tzeltal

Zaculeu

PlayaCar

Altar

Can Cun

Coixtlah

Altar

M Alban

ZaculeuTikal

ChiapaCo

Jaina

Tikal

Altar

Dzibietc

ChiapaCo

Monte Ne

cent

imet

ers

CenterR**2= .53 b=-.0014 P<.01 mean=162.3

-5000 -2000 -1500 -750 -100

150

160

170

OtomiTotonac

TarascanNahuaTeotihuaBasin

Tehuacan

Teotihua

Tlatilco

Tehuacan

CuicuilcChupicuaTicoman

Tecolote

Tehuacan

cm

All RegionsR**2= .23 b=-.0014 P<.01 mean=162.1

-5000 -2000 -1500 -750 -100

150

160

170

OtomiTotonac

MChiapas

Yaqui

Tarahuma

MYucatan

Cora

Tsotzil

TarascanZapotecNahua

Tzeltal

Teotihua

CuliacanPericu

Zaculeu

PlayaCar

Altar

Tecualil

Basin

RVerdetcTehuacanCandelarCan Cun

Candelar

Coixtlah

Altar

M Alban

ZaculeuTeotihuaTikal

ChiapaCo

V Reyes

Jaina

Tlatilco

Tehuacan

CuicuilcTikal

Altar

ChupicuaDzibietc

ChiapaCo

Monte Ne

TicomanTecolote

Tehuacan

North North =165 cm =165 cm “no” “no” declinedecline

South South =161 cm =161 cm much much declinedecline

CenterCenter=162 cm =162 cm some some declinedecline

All All =162 cm =162 cm acceleratiaccelerating declineng decline


15

Fig. 1. Stature of Mexican Males in Time and SpaceDegrees North

cm

Pre-Classic (3200-1800 BP)R**2=.12 b=-.25 P>.32 mean=163.9

15 20 25 30

150

170

DzibietcChupicua

Ticoman

CuicuilcTlatilco

Tehuacan

Monte Ne

ChiapaCo

Altar

Tikal

cm

Classic (1800-1200 BP)R**2=.36 b=.5 P>.11 mean=161.8

15 20 25 30

150

170

TikalAltarZaculeu

ChiapaCo

M Alban

Jaina Teotihua

V Reyes

cm

Post-Classic (1200-500 BP)R**2=.47 b=.36 P<.01 mean=162.8

15 20 25 30

150

170

ZaculeuAltar

Coixtlah

PlayaCarTehuacan

Can Cun

TeotihuaBasin

RVerdetc

Tecualil

CuliacanPericuCandelar

Candelar

cm

Modern (100-40 BP)R**2=.74 b=.78 P<.01 mean=159.2

15 20 25 30

150

170

TzeltalMChiapas

Tsotzil

Zapotec Nahua Tarascan

TotonacOtomi

MYucatan

Cora

Yaqui

Tarahuma

Male stature gradient S. (15°) to N. Male stature gradient S. (15°) to N. (30°): (30°):

greatest in modern times (1900-1960)greatest in modern times (1900-1960)

3200-1800 BP 3200-1800 BP

=164 cm =164 cm b=-.25, b=-.25, rr22=.12=.12

1800-1200 1800-1200 BP BP =162 cm =162 cm b=.50, b=.50, rr22=.36=.36

1200-500 BP1200-500 BP=163 cm =163 cm b=.36, b=.36, rr22=.47=.47

100-40 BP 100-40 BP =159 cm =159 cm b=.78, b=.78, rr22=.74=.74

Females (<150 cm) little variation in space Females (<150 cm) little variation in space or time.or time.


16

Blame…?Blame…?

• 1. Bioarcheological evidence on 1. Bioarcheological evidence on paleopathologies and height: Ancient paleopathologies and height: Ancient America was no paradiseAmerica was no paradise

• 2. Paleodemography: new method2. Paleodemography: new method

• 3. Demographic dynamics for 3 periods:3. Demographic dynamics for 3 periods:Ancient (7000 – 1500 BP)Ancient (7000 – 1500 BP)Classic (1500 – 500 BP)Classic (1500 – 500 BP)Historical (500 – 100 BP)Historical (500 – 100 BP)


17

PaleodemograPaleodemographyphyMaterials:Materials:skeletons by skeletons by estimated age estimated age at deathat deathMethods:Methods:fit estimated fit estimated age age distributiondistributionto stable to stable modelsmodels


18

A quick lesson in model life A quick lesson in model life tables (of stable populations)tables (of stable populations)

• Stable populations: Stable populations: – regardless of initial conditions regardless of initial conditions – populations subjected to constant populations subjected to constant

birth and death rates birth and death rates – will evolve to stable age and death will evolve to stable age and death

structures, that is:structures, that is:•% population aged 0, 1, 2, … will be % population aged 0, 1, 2, … will be the same year-after-year as long as the same year-after-year as long as birth & death rates are stablebirth & death rates are stable

•% of deaths aged 0, 1, 2, … will be the % of deaths aged 0, 1, 2, … will be the same year-after-year …same year-after-year …


19

So, for the So, for the paleodemographer…paleodemographer…

• If ancient populations were stableIf ancient populations were stable• If the recovered skeletons are If the recovered skeletons are

representative of the dying representative of the dying populationpopulation

• And if the age at death of the And if the age at death of the skeletons can be estimated…skeletons can be estimated…• Then, we match observed skeletal age Then, we match observed skeletal age distribution with those of stable distribution with those of stable populations to derive: populations to derive: – Birth and death ratesBirth and death rates– Life expectancy, …even age structureLife expectancy, …even age structure


20

How exactly do we do this?How exactly do we do this?2 steps: 2 steps:

1. Materials: Age distribution of 1. Materials: Age distribution of skeletonsskeletons

• Example, Example, Belleville, Belleville, Ontario. Ontario. 1919thth century century white white populationpopulation—well —well preservedpreserved

AgeAge0055101015152020252530303535404045+45+

Deaths Deaths (n)(n)

239 239 31 31 12 12 4 4 22 22 11 11 21 21 36 36 31 31 116 116

%%45.7 45.7 5.9 5.9 2.3 2.3 0.8 0.8 4.2 4.2 2.1 2.1 4.0 4.0 6.9 6.9 5.9 5.9 22.122.1

Cum Cum %%

45.745.7 51.651.6 53.953.9 54.754.7 58.958.9 61.061.0 65.065.0 71.971.9 77.877.8100.0100.0


21

How exactly do we do this?How exactly do we do this?2 steps: 2. Models: life tables2 steps: 2. Models: life tables

• Coale & Demeny Coale & Demeny 19831983

• 25 e25 e00s: 20-80 years, s: 20-80 years, at 2.5 year intervalsat 2.5 year intervals

• 13 GRRs: 1 – 6 girls, 13 GRRs: 1 – 6 girls, at various intervalsat various intervals

• 4 Regions: North, 4 Regions: North, South, East, WestSouth, East, West

• Total: Total: 25x13x4=130025x13x4=1300


22

Model West Model West Females level Females level

2,GRRs 0.8 – 62,GRRs 0.8 – 6 ee00 = 22.5 years = 22.5 years

• Statistics:Statistics:– Population Population

at/to ageat/to age

Cummulative %Cummulative %

Cummulative %Cummulative %

% Population at age% Population at age

% deaths at age% deaths at age

Other statsOther stats

– Deaths at/to Deaths at/to ageage– 18 stats for 18 stats for each GRR (see each GRR (see separate pages separate pages for other efor other e00s s and regions)and regions)


23

ee00=52.5=52.5

ee00=22.5=22.5

Question: Are age structures of dying determined by Question: Are age structures of dying determined by fertility (within a sheet) fertility (within a sheet) or mortality (between sheets)?

Between (mortality)?Between (mortality)?

Answer: contrary to common sense, fertility!!!Answer: contrary to common sense, fertility!!!

or mortality (between sheets)?or mortality (between sheets)?


24

GRR =2 , 3, 4, 5, 6; e0 = 20

Fertility effects are bigFertility effects are big


25

Fig. 2. Mortality offers a small target

GRR = 3; e0 = 20, 30, 40, 50

Mortality effects are smallMortality effects are smallexcept at young (< 15) and old ages except at young (< 15) and old ages (60+)(60+)


26

GRR = 3e0=20, 30, 40, 50

GRR = 4e0=20, 30, 40, 50

GRR = 2, 3, 4, 5, 6e0=20

GRR = 2, 3, 4, 5, 6e0=50


27

Three recent Three recent advances in advances in

paleodemography:paleodemography:1.1. Fertility has stronger effects on age Fertility has stronger effects on age

distributions than mortality.distributions than mortality.

2.2. Proportional hazard models are more Proportional hazard models are more robust than simple percentages.robust than simple percentages.

3.3. Fitting observed skeletal Fitting observed skeletal distributions to stable populations distributions to stable populations yield valuable demographic insights.yield valuable demographic insights.


28

Four innovations hereFour innovations here

1.1. Use only “best” age data: ages 5-45Use only “best” age data: ages 5-45

2.2. Fit all possible models:Fit all possible models:

GRR GRR (gross reproduction ratio)(gross reproduction ratio) = 2-6 = 2-6

daughtersdaughters

ee00 (life expectancy at birth)(life expectancy at birth) = 20-50 years = 20-50 years

3.3. Consider range of good fits, instead of Consider range of good fits, instead of

only “best fit”—all “pretty good” fits only “best fit”—all “pretty good” fits

4.4. Calibrate paleodemographic results Calibrate paleodemographic results

against historical demography—against historical demography—

see next figuresee next figure


29

Calibrating method: skeletal data Calibrating method: skeletal data for 19for 19thth century Belleville, Ontario century Belleville, Ontario


30

Better fertility models fit a small spread: GRR=2.9-3.5Better mortality models range too widely: e0=20-50

good

ness

of f

it (p

>)

Fig. 3. Bellville: Many good fitting modelsgross reproduction ratio

2 2.5 3 3.5 4

.05

.5

.95

30 30 50405040 2020 40302020 5030 5040 304020505020 30

30 4020

40 50

3050

4020


31

Calibration of life Calibration of life expectancy, eexpectancy, e00

(Belleville)*(Belleville)*• Conventional paleodemography: Conventional paleodemography:

20.8 years (MAD, “mean age at death”)20.8 years (MAD, “mean age at death”)

• PH models, using best age data, pretty PH models, using best age data, pretty good fits, GRR = 3.16, growth rate = 2%:good fits, GRR = 3.16, growth rate = 2%:36 years (see table 4.1)36 years (see table 4.1)

• Historical data (parish books, census)Historical data (parish books, census)36.5 years36.5 years

*thanks to an anonymous reviewer for the idea of calibrating *thanks to an anonymous reviewer for the idea of calibrating the method using Belleville.the method using Belleville.


32

Blame…?Blame…?

• 1. Bioarcheological evidence on 1. Bioarcheological evidence on paleopathologies and height: paleopathologies and height: Ancient America was no paradiseAncient America was no paradise

• 2. Paleodemography: new 2. Paleodemography: new methodmethod

• 3. Demographic dynamics for3. Demographic dynamics for 3 periods: 3 periods:Ancient (7000 – 1500 BP)Ancient (7000 – 1500 BP)Classic (1500 – 500 BP)Classic (1500 – 500 BP)Historical (1500 AD – 1900)Historical (1500 AD – 1900)


33

Paleodemography: new Paleodemography: new methods, surprising results: methods, surprising results:

Fertility, the keyFertility, the keyFertility: an important regulator of Fertility: an important regulator of

American demographic dynamics American demographic dynamics

• Lowest fertility: ancient times (1500+ BP), Lowest fertility: ancient times (1500+ BP),

GRR=~2.2GRR=~2.2

• Higher fertility: middle period (1500BP –Higher fertility: middle period (1500BP –

1500AD), GRR=~2.91500AD), GRR=~2.9

• Highest fertility: domesticated animals (horse, Highest fertility: domesticated animals (horse,

Plains Indians, 1500 AD-1900), GRR=3.2Plains Indians, 1500 AD-1900), GRR=3.2• Last five hundred years: large ethnic differentials, GRRLast five hundred years: large ethnic differentials, GRR

Native Americans: 2.8-2.9Native Americans: 2.8-2.9

African Americans: 3.1-3.3African Americans: 3.1-3.3

European Americans: 2.4-2.6European Americans: 2.4-2.6


34

Time: Ancient, Classic, and post-Columbian Americas

Fig. 4. Fertility increased between ancient and classic erasLittle change between classic and post-Columbian eras

Early, GRR=2.1-2.3;sites: rea osg cot lat lib LNP teo KIT CUI TL2 MR1

p

grr

2 2.5 3 3.5 4

.05

.5

.9530

20

40

50

5020 40

30 3020

405050 40302040

Classic, GRR=2.8-2.9; sites: LNC QUI co9 cop 101 111 201PEA SUN MON dol J73 CO1 XCA AZ1 3AM CHB SGB Y1B ESB

p

grr

2 2.5 3 3.5 4

.05

.5

.95

40

5030

5020

20

3040 5050403020

Post-Columbian, GRR= 2.8-2.9;sites: snt 301 303 BUF haw dk2 KX1 CRW DW2 BU2 CHY BFT

p

grr

2 2.5 3 3.5 4

.05

.5

.95

50

4020

3030 5020

40 50

502040 403020 5030


35

Settlement types: foragers, villagers, and townsfolk

Fig. 5. Village fertility is highest; urban, lowest

Foragers and Fishers, GRR=2.3-2.6;sites: osg LNP 101 111 KIT

p

grr

2 2.5 3 3.5 4

.05

.5

.952030

40 50

20 40302030 5040

50

2030 2030 4040 50502030 2040 30 5020 4050

Ancient Villagers, GRR=~2.7; sites: rea cot lat lib LNCQUI co9 201 PEA SUN MON dol TL2 AZ1 MR1 3AM CHB SGB Y1B ESB

p

grr

2 2.5 3 3.5 4

.05

.5

.952030

40

50

502030 40 20 5030 40

Ancient Urban, GRR=2.2-2.5;sites: cop teo CUI J73 CO1 XCA

p

grr

2 2.5 3 3.5 4

.05

.5

.95 2030

4050

40 5020 30

203040

5020 4030 3020 504020 5030 203040 40


36

Ethnicity: Native-, European-, and African-Americans

Fig. 6. Fertility of African-Americans was highest; Euros-, lowest

Post-Columbian Native-Americans, GRR= 2.8-2.9;sites: snt 301 303 BUF haw dk2 KX1 CRW DW2 BU2 CHY BFT

p

grr

2 2.5 3 3.5 4

.05

.5

.95

50

4020

3030 5020

40 50

502040 403020 5030

Free African-Americans, GRR=3.1-3.3: FAB 3C9 3La C41DNote: Data for slave populations were too few to analyze

p

grr

2 2.5 3 3.5 4

.05

.5

.95 4030

20

50

2050

30

4040 3020

20 5030 504020 4030 2040 50 50

European-Americans, GRR=2.4-2.6;sites: cry ftl GPS stt HPK sfc sfa SF1

p

grr

2 2.5 3 3.5 4

.05

.5

.95

20

30

40 504030 5020

2030

40 40302050 502030


37

Paleodemography: new Paleodemography: new methods, surprising results: methods, surprising results:

Mortality (pooled)Mortality (pooled)Life expectancy estimates, eLife expectancy estimates, e00: :

contingent upon a good estimate of growth ratecontingent upon a good estimate of growth rate

• Highest eHighest e00: ancient times (1500+ BP), ~34 years: ancient times (1500+ BP), ~34 years

• Lowest eLowest e00: middle period (1500-500), ~23 years: middle period (1500-500), ~23 years

• Modern: large ethnic differentials in eModern: large ethnic differentials in e00

Native Americans: eNative Americans: e00=~ 22-23 years=~ 22-23 years

African Americans: eAfrican Americans: e00=~ 21-29 years=~ 21-29 years

European Americans: eEuropean Americans: e00=~ 30-36 years=~ 30-36 years


38

Three conclusionsThree conclusions

1.1. Great variations in fertilityGreat variations in fertility• Ancient timesAncient times,,

• low pressure demographic regime: low pressure demographic regime: • fertility was a brake on population fertility was a brake on population

growthgrowth

• Classic timesClassic times,,• high pressure demographic system: high pressure demographic system:

• higher fertility, low life expectancyhigher fertility, low life expectancy• mortality was the brake on pop. mortality was the brake on pop.

growthgrowth


39


2. Agriculture was the “caboose” 2. Agriculture was the “caboose” of demographic change, not of demographic change, not the “engine” the “engine” • Agriculture seems to have evolved Agriculture seems to have evolved

as a response to demographic as a response to demographic pressurepressure

• Rather than propelling Rather than propelling demographic transformations.demographic transformations.

• Why? Because in classic times Why? Because in classic times demographic transformations demographic transformations occurred in all settlement types. occurred in all settlement types.


40


3. 3. Modern periodModern period: fundamental : fundamental demography of native peoples demography of native peoples did not change with the clash did not change with the clash of biospheresof biospheres• Paleodemographic method is Paleodemographic method is

insensitive to demographic insensitive to demographic catastrophe—unless a mass grave catastrophe—unless a mass grave is foundis found

• Underlying fundamentals Underlying fundamentals persisted for almost a thousand persisted for almost a thousand years (til 1800)years (til 1800)


41

Postscript: Blame Postscript: Blame Colombus? Colombus?

1.1. Demographic catastrophe was real—the Demographic catastrophe was real—the

debate is about magnitude and cause(s)debate is about magnitude and cause(s)

2.2. Magnitude: extinction for many smaller Magnitude: extinction for many smaller

populations (e.g, Tainos); 1/3-3/4 loss for populations (e.g, Tainos); 1/3-3/4 loss for

larger populations (Aztecs). larger populations (Aztecs).

3.3. Cause(s): the great debate—disease? Cause(s): the great debate—disease?

War/pacification/exploitation? Both?War/pacification/exploitation? Both?

4.4. Varied place-to-place: Varied place-to-place:

Hispaniola: exploitation, not disease…Hispaniola: exploitation, not disease…


42

Blame Colombus? Blame Colombus? Hispaniola, certainly!! Hispaniola, certainly!!

Case of Hispaniola, see:Case of Hispaniola, see:

Bartolome de Las Casas, Bartolome de Las Casas, Brief Brief

Account of the Destruction of the Account of the Destruction of the

Indies (1596)Indies (1596), or , or

Massimo Livi-Bacci, “Return to Massimo Livi-Bacci, “Return to

Hispaniola”, February 2003, Hispaniola”, February 2003,

Hispanic American Historical Hispanic American Historical

ReviewReview


43

Disease?: Disease?:

• First smallpox epidemic, 1518 (25 First smallpox epidemic, 1518 (25

years after contact, colonization). years after contact, colonization).

• Evidence of other introduced Evidence of other introduced

diseases in first decades is scant diseases in first decades is scant

(non-existent?). (non-existent?).

• Malaria and Yellow fever (cited by Malaria and Yellow fever (cited by

Wilford, NYT): 17Wilford, NYT): 17th-th- 18 18thth centuries centuries



44

Exploitation?: Exploitation?:

ML-B: “tribute imposed by Colon at ML-B: “tribute imposed by Colon at

the end of 1495 to the caciques of the end of 1495 to the caciques of

the ‘pacified’ Tainos: every native the ‘pacified’ Tainos: every native

of 14 years or more was required of 14 years or more was required

to pay every three months one to pay every three months one

Flanders hawk’s bell full of gold…”Flanders hawk’s bell full of gold…”



45

Exploitation?: Exploitation?:

• Fragile communities—”congregated”Fragile communities—”congregated”

• Little agricultural surplusLittle agricultural surplus

• All “work” devoted to food All “work” devoted to food

production production

• Unaccustomed to forced labor for Unaccustomed to forced labor for

building, gold mining. building, gold mining.

• Insatiable demand by Christians for Insatiable demand by Christians for

gold, slaves, servants, … sexgold, slaves, servants, … sex



46

Demographic catastrophe and its Demographic catastrophe and its causes: viruses, Black Legend causes: viruses, Black Legend

and the social context of and the social context of epidemics (Mexico)epidemics (Mexico)

Alonso de Zorita (~1565): “...and it is certain that Alonso de Zorita (~1565): “...and it is certain that

from the day that D. Hernando Cortes, the Marquis from the day that D. Hernando Cortes, the Marquis

del Valle, entered this land...del Valle, entered this land...the natives suffered the natives suffered

many deaths, and many terrible dealings, many deaths, and many terrible dealings,

robberies and oppressions were inflicted on themrobberies and oppressions were inflicted on them, ,

taking advantage of their persons and their lands, taking advantage of their persons and their lands,

without order, weight nor measure; ...the people without order, weight nor measure; ...the people

diminished in great number, diminished in great number, as much due to as much due to

excessive taxes and mistreatment, as to illness excessive taxes and mistreatment, as to illness

and smallpoxand smallpox, such that now a very great and , such that now a very great and

notable fraction of the people are gone, and notable fraction of the people are gone, and

especially in the hot countryespecially in the hot country.”


47

Blame Colombus…??Blame Colombus…??The debate continues… The debate continues…

see next issues of see next issues of Revista de IndiasRevista de Indias and and

Hispanic American Hispanic American Historical ReviewHistorical Review


48

Thank youThank you * * * * * ** * * * * *

paper posted:paper posted:www.hist.umn.edu/~rmccaawww.hist.umn.edu/~rmccaa

/paleodem.doc/paleodem.docothers:others:Health & nutrition: /mxbioarc.docHealth & nutrition: /mxbioarc.doc

Aztec household & family: Aztec household & family: /nacolhist.htm/nacolhist.htm

Smallpox & catastrophe: Smallpox & catastrophe: /vircatas/vir6.htm /vircatas/vir6.htm

fertility: the regulator of demographic dynamics in the ancient americas1 blame colombus? new...

Documents

bp slide

ancient americas6

bp classic

bp historical

ancient americas paper

ancient americas3 subject

ancient americas4 outline

new skeletal evidence