Reading Silvio A. Zavala’s (1935) monumental work on
Spanish Encomienda, La encomienda Indiana,
I found a passage that captured particularly my attention. It dealt with
the problem Spanish Crown officials faced when taxing the natives entrusted to Spanish grantees in the
Philippines, the so called encomenderos at
the beginning of the 17th century. The
questions the Spanish monarchy and its officials were asking at that time were:
How do we tax Philippine natives? Do we tax them by collecting the fees in
goods or by collecting actual money, that is, gold and silver?
This is the passage that intrigued me, as it reflected
the many contradictions of early forms of capitalism:
The
royal decree of 16 February of 1602 commanded the governor of the Philippines,
Don Pedro de Acuña,
to oversee if, as the prosecutor of the Audience informs, the tax of eight
reales that the Indians pay now in goods by their own choice is inconvenient.
The prosecutor held the view that before, by demanding to pay their taxes in
goods, they produced them; now they buy the cloaks from the
Chinese and do not weave them, and they do not mine gold. The King mandates
that the most appropriate order be given to charge the fees. (Zavala, 1935, pp.
773-774)
These contradictions could be expressed nowadays by
competing forms of economic development. On the one hand, we have economies
that encourage the making of a fast buck, such as those of developing countries
that encourage free trade, open up their domestic markets and engage in the
retailing of products manufactured abroad, including China. The way to finance
the consumption of foreign goods is by selling no manufacture-intensive
commodities, that is, raw material. Because the economy is not labour intensive
and the production processes are simple, the entrepreneurs and the workforce
remain unsophisticated. On the other hand, we have economies that are not that
radical in the defence of open markets, at least they are not keen on opening
up their domestic markets, and prefer to manufacture goods locally. This kind
of system requires massive amounts of capital and may create the true capitalist
entrepreneur, the industrialist and the proletariat.
Salazar (2003) traces back this contradiction to the
discovery and colonial periods, to the collision of different modes of
production represented by the higher ideals set by traders, merchants and
military captains that engaged in exploration and pillaging as a way to acquire
gold, what he calls ‘the first conquest enterprise’ or ‘societas maris’, and the deviant and lower ideals set by the
conquerors as they became settlers and sought autonomy from European powers,
what he calls the ‘popular enterprise of production and exporting’ that created
a proto colonial bourgeoisie (pp. 36-37). Eventually, the deviant idea was the
seed of independence. The former mode of production is the one of the adelantados, explorers such as Cortés in Mexico and Pizarro
in Peru. The latter mode of production is the one of Valdivia in Chile, an adelantado that did not find any
treasures to pillage and therefore had no other choice than putting his
soldiers to work in the settlements.
Yet there is still another contradiction in the
aforementioned case of the Philippine Encomienda. If the Spaniards let the
Indians engage in trading and retailing of commodities, taking advantage of the
Philippines geographic position as a trading hub, as it stands near continental
China and the Pacific islands that produced spices and manufactured goods, the
master-serf relation that characterised the Encomienda would de facto come to an end. Ultimately,
this meant that the natives would become entrepreneurs, businessmen and gain extraordinary
levels of autonomy. They would move upward the social ladder severing the ties
that locked them to their colonial masters. Thus, the Spaniards had many
reasons to control Chinese trade in Manila and the Philippines in general and
tax the Philippine natives in goods instead of cash. In that way they could have
them working in the fields and mines, keeping them as serfs. However, these
reasons betrayed the Spanish mercantilist fixation with rapidly acquiring gold and
silver. The introduction of the market, ruled by the abstraction of exchange
value and currency, was a way to end up the old feudal order.
Referencias
Zavala, Silvio (1935).
La encomienda Indiana. Madrid: Editorial Porrúa.
Salazar, Gabriel (2003). Historia de la acumulación
capitalista en Chile. Santiago: LOM Ediciones.