The ships that crossed the Atlantic after the arrival of Columbus to America, transported human beings, but also plants and animals. Thus began a process called “Colombino Exchange”, which led the corn to Africa, the sweet potato to Asia, the horses to America and the eucalyptus to Europe; He moved organisms such as insects, rats, bacteria and viruses, generating what for the writer Charles C. Mann It was “the most important biological revolution since the extinction of dinosaurs.” Because the Spaniard’s trip “discovered a new world, created it.” That is the thesis of his latest book, 1493. How the discovery of America transformed the rest of the world (Captain Swing), the journalist shows how the continents ceased to be autonomous, sitting the precedent of the current globalized planet.
What implied the arrival of Columbus to America in ecological terms?
For millions of years before 1492, the eastern and western hemispheres were completely separated; Its ecosystems had been developed independently. (I say “almost” because a few creatures managed to cross between the hemispheres, but they were exceptions). Columbus and those who followed them ended with that separation from a stroke. Thousands of species of Eurasia and Africa passed to America and vice versa. The result was the second largest ecological seizure in history. That “Colombian exchange” is the reason why there are tomatoes in Italy, oranges in Florida, chocolate in Switzerland or chiles in Thailand.
Was that exchange an ecological disaster or an inevitable biological revolution?
It seems unlikely that the separation of the hemispheres could have been maintained, so, in that sense, the Colombian exchange seems inevitable. However, it could have occurred in different ways and, in that sense, it had nothing inevitable. It is possible to imagine a slower process – one that, for example, will not begin with Columbus but with Pedro Álvares Cabral, who landed in Brazil in 1500 -, and that he developed with less negative consequences for indigenous peoples … or even one as the imagined by the French writer Laurent Binet in his novel Civilizations.
But is it fair to judge the ecological impact of the conquest with the current criteria?
A complicated question. Columbus and Cortés had no idea that diseases were caused by microorganisms. But, when evaluating the impact of the conquest, it would be absurd that we intend to know the germs today. At the same time, it would be equally foolish to blindly impose the current ethical standards to evaluate its impact. It seems fairer to consider those people from the past depending on their own ideas. But in saying this we should be careful what those ideas really were. It is true that many Spaniards of the time sincerely believed that carrying Christianity and other European ideas to the inhabitants of America was so valuable and good that it was worth the human cost. But it is also true that many others firmly opposed, and I would especially highlight the Salamanca de los Dominicos School, whose best -known members are Domingo de Soto, Francisco Suárez and, above all, Francisco de Vitoria. Thus, if you want to judge the past for its own criteria, we must ask if we refer to those of Cortés or those of Francisco de Vitoria. Spain has an incredible human rights tradition, perhaps the oldest in the world.
To what extent do we underestimate the civilizing role of the Spanish empire in the Americas in front of the narrative of mere exploitation?
“Civilize” is one of those words, as “reality”, which should never be written without quotes. I have met many natives who think that my English ancestors were incivilized barbarians and theirs, illustrated people. I would say, however, that the exchange between American and Native American inaugurated by Spain had huge positive consequences and enormous negative consequences. The tragedy lies in its unequal distribution.
Should Legazpi claim more as the true beginning of global trade?
Yes. Legazpi and the Hispanic-Filipino link are, in many ways, the true beginning of our modern globalized world. You could say that our current president (Trump) is trying to disrupt the globalized world launched by Legazpi and the Spanish empire. I would add that it arrives about 400 years late (it refers to the crisis of the seventeenth century).
What role did indigenous agricultural knowledge play in this biological exchange, and was recognized by the Spaniards?
Indigenous agriculture played a huge role in biological exchange. Bring corn, potatoes, tomatoes, cassava, sweet potatoes, peanuts, pumpkins, chiles, avocados, etc., transformed European agriculture, which not only transformed European economies, but also European culture. As for what I know, this was better understood then than now, because the success of current agriculture – partially mounted by the Colombian exchange – has made it possible for modern people not to understand their deep role in our societies and cultures.
Has the European negative impact been exaggerated, when technical, legal, religious and social advances were also introduced?
“Advances” is another term with which you have to be careful. If you are a Christian, the dissemination of Christianity – the “religious advance” you mentioned – is obviously something positive. But if you are Hindu or Buddhist, maybe not so much. I would say it like this: 1492 durable impacts were more biological than technical, and were both good and bad.
Would you say that the ecological legacy of Hispanicity in America was more balanced than that of other later colonial powers?
It’s hard to say. Spain was the first, and the first always has more impact. Spain, France, England, Portugal and the Netherlands introduced horses in America. But Spain did it first, and it was the Spanish horses that deeply affected the indigenous cultures of the North American west. Thus, Spanish equestrian culture had a disproportionate impact, but not so much because of its unique characteristics (although it certainly had them) as Spain was the first.
Can the present learn from the miscegenation and cultural exchange model of the Hispanic world as a way to follow before the current clash of civilizations?
This is fundamentally a matter of opinion, more than facts. So I will give my opinion: yes. In the United States and Canada, saying that indigenous cultures affected the main US and Canadian cultures is controversial. In Latin America, the impact is accepted as something natural. And this means that, in a way, the importance of indigenous societies is better understood in Latin America than in the north. Nothing is perfect (there is no permanent victory condition to be human, as the writer Bruce Sterling has pointed out), but cultural exchange is good.