Religious pluralism in contemporary Mexico differs greatly from that of its colonial past. When we observe IslÄm1 in this predominantly Catholic Latin American country today, we realize that it is an indivisible part of its rich sociocultural and religious mosaic. Its presence in the modern Mexican public sphere is intertwined in a web of transnationalism and also locally, and it is in the local that the most tangible and recent realities of Mexican IslÄm may be seen. But, was this the case also in Nueva España? Two main lines of reasoning emerge from the publications that have to do with the arrival and development of IslÄm in the Americas. The first locates it before the advent of Spain to the American continent, while the second positions it right after this event, namely, at the commencement of the Colonial era. However, I will argue that exploring the relations and attitudes between any of the three Abrahamic religions, both historical and theological, including confrontations and peaceful encounters, calls for detailed descriptions and renewed assessments of historical evidence written in the original languages of the protagonists, as well as an examination of the relations between the factors and the actors involved in the cases of study. Since such an effort provides an important tool for future research on the subject, it should be included in the methodological repertoire of the researcher. With this in mind, we see that Mexican literature on the theme, although thin, has undoubtedly certain strengths, yet it also presents important limitations on the question of IslÄm in Colonial and Early Independent Mexico, which makes it altogether arguable. Consequently, I argue that there is a need to challenge the present academic position, and present other points of view.
It is in this context that this book, which is a work of research, revision, and reflection, aims to reassess the genesis of IslÄm in Mexico. This is a challenging task, because evidence in the archives only illustrates the presence in Colonial Mexico of few and scattered individuals of suspected Islamic affiliation or of Arab and Muslim origin. While their arrival might date back to the earliest appearance of Spaniards in Mesoamerica in these archives, the existence of IslÄm as an organic religious system present across the historical spectrum of Colonial and Early Independent Mexico is a questionable matter and a historical postulation somehow difficult to sustain. Therefore, inferring that these disseminated-in-time-and-space personages of Moorish and, or of Islamic origin in Nueva España equals IslÄm, as a Novohispanic religious tradition per se, seems rather perplexing. Nor do the primary sources that I have examined demonstrate that their presence in the Viceroyalty of New Spain played a part in the construction of Colonial Mexican society. Historical records show that indeed the opposite occurs, namely, that those few individuals did not bring, guard, and transmit a religious tradition from the Iberian Peninsula to Mesoamerican lands which endured throughout Mexicoâs Colonial period; but rather, those who reached Mexico, seem to have been absorbed into the modus vivendi of Novohispanic society. In this regard, Kambiz Ghaneabassiri, of Reed College, states, âMuslims neither came to America in large numbers at that time nor did they play a primary role in colonising the Americas.â2 This applies to New Spain as well, partly because their quantitative and qualitative input lacked the magnitude necessary to be the cause of such an effect. Consequently, the first challenge we encounter is the lack of substantial evidence. Despite this, in the historiography composed in Mexico, but not exclusive to it, there exists the idea of an IslÄm from the distant past that is deeply rooted in Mexican history. This IslÄm, which transcends time through historical occurrences, and is fed and revived by neocolonial European efforts during the second half of the nineteenth century until it finally reaches present day, prevails. But, does the evidence really point in this direction, or may we ultimately be permitted to perform a historical reconstruction to address this question?
Muslims are a minority in Mexico today, and their belief system is still, sadly, largely misunderstood. In part, the Muslim population of Mexico is the result of Islamic proselytism, and although it includes individuals of diverse backgrounds and occupations, it consists mostly of Muslim converts of Mexican origin. Camila Pastor de MarÃa y Campos of the Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas (CIDE) expresses Islamic proselytism in Mexican society as âthe political economy of conversion in Mexico,â3 and explains, âin the Mexican case, converts are in fact populations subject to various marginalisations.â4 Additionally, proselytism in Mexico is often based on social platforms that tackle social marginalisations, but which also underline national traumas derived from the Spanish Conquest of México-Tenochtitlán (1519â1521). I will argue then, that as heirs to a country where the social ladder was built as racial and classists rungs, mainly due to the Estatutos de Pureza de Sangre5 (purity of blood statutes), Mexico still guards in its collective psyche the outcome of those crude social realities of its colonial past. Pastor de MarÃa y Campos makes a relevant point with regard to this:
La conversión permite a los musulmanes nuevos dar un paso fuera de estas ideologÃas locales; ofrece la posibilidad de circunnavegar discursos que los definen como subalternos al establecer un acceso directo a regiones lejanas y a los privilegios de la extranjerÃa y lo cosmopolita por vÃa de la fe.6
As a result, IslÄm has gained ground in todayâs Mexico, particularly in the most socio-economically neglected areas of the country as the State of Chiapas clearly shows. In this context, we see that IslÄm is well incorporated in Mexicoâs present, despite the acute incomprehension that still exists in Mexican society about this religion and culture.
It is difficult to deny the fact that this Abrahamic faith is part of contemporary Mexicoâs sociocultural and religious reality. There are those who choose for IslÄm, but also those who misuse and abuse the actuality on the ground. Likewise, it should be remembered that, unfortunately, this has also been instrumentalised by opportunist political actors and parties, mainly across countries in Europe and the Americas. This book has no intention whatsoever to align itself with any position or stand. Its nature and raison dââ¯Ãªtre is purely historical and educational, and belongs solely to the academic realm. It aims to show and discuss, from diverse angles, the genesis and development of this monotheistic religion in Colonial and Early Independent Mexico, in a strict sense. Hence, any use of the content in it that does not comply with this aim in both essence and purpose cannot be attributed to my research. Ultimately, my work stands for the right and freedom of consciousness of any individual, regardless of race, color, creed, gender, or cosmovision which the protagonists in the pages of this bookâthe prohibidos, were, sadly, not fully able to enjoy.
With this in mind, let us first state that IslÄm belongs to the family of Abrahamic religions along with Judaism and Christianity. While we may find that the three share many ideas which are historically and theologically linked, âsimply comparing them as similar-and-different religions misses something crucial,â7 as Steven G. Smith stated. I argue that this is the acknowledgement that IslÄm is not only, in the words of Smith, âa phenomenological type, but also a real history, lived forward from a particular time and place of origin, with a knowable development and a discussible future.â8 This fact was not foreign to the Muslims who lived on the Iberian Peninsula during the Late Medieval and Early Modern period of history. In Hispania, IslÄm, historically speaking, had a point of beginning, an arrival, a development, a summit, and a decline. In these periods, it echoed not only in the deepest part of the hearts of its parishioners, their faith, and consciousness, but also in the public sphere, where it was tangible, visible, and influential in most aspects of life in Iberian society. Consequently, it set and shaped the modus vivendi and cosmovision of both its followers and of its non-Muslim neighbors, particularly from the end of the Spanish Reconquista to the expulsion of the Moriscos in the early seventeenth century. Using this prism and from this historical vantage point, we might rightly speak then about IslÄm as a vivid reality that was present and echoed in the lives of a given regionâin this case of Spain. It did so to such an extent that we may as well ask not only if IslÄm belonged to Spain, but rather if Spain belonged to IslÄm. By this I mean to the Abode of IslÄmâan Islamic principle utilised with reference to the major divisions of the world in IslÄm.
From a parallel perspective, this book poses a similar question with regard to Colonial and Early Independent Mexico. The answer to this may help us understand the extent of IslÄm as a Novohispanic religious tradition stricto sensu. I also ask what role Muslims might have played in bringing, guarding, transmitting and developing this religion within the space-time continum we are looking at, and this lies at the core of my research. If the answer fails to provide for a set point on the temporal plane with regard to the Colonial or Early Independent era of Mexicoâs life, then this should mean that its emergence may be found in a different time, namely, closer to our present day. However, often without questioning, a large part of contemporary academic work on the subject places the genesis of IslÄm in Mexico at the very beginning of the Spanish Conquest. According to this vision, IslÄm in Mexico dates as far as the first meetings between Spaniards and Mesoamericans, and in fact, arrived in Aztec lands by the very hands of Mexicoâs first Christian colonizers. IslÄm then developed as a Novohispanic Muslim tradition present across the colonial lifespan of Mexico (1521â1821), becoming thus, part of the religious mosaic of the Viceroyalty of Nueva España. It also endorses that IslÄm eventually went into hiding due to the Inquisition, but persevered through an active performance of taqiyyah,9 entering hence into a phase of caution and dissimulation that extends from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century. In spite of this, these scholars further argue that IslÄm resurfaces and reappears again in those Latin American latitudes during the second French occupation of Mexico (1862â1867) as a direct consequence of the Muslim troops (Algerian and Egyptian Battalions) within the Expeditionary Forces of Napoleon III (1808â1873). This military intervention is believed to have produced a new phase of taqiyyah in Early Independent Mexico. The entire premise is framed by the general historiographical vision mentioned above in four different interludes: a) Arrival of IslÄm in Mexico (1519â1521) b) Obliged dissimulation (1519â1833) c) Pertinent dissimulation (1833â1980) d) Reappearance (1862â1867). However, this proposition is highly debatable and seemingly unconvincing in light of critical scrutiny.
In some journalistic and political circles, both Mexican and international, a similar idea goes further back chronologically, and asserts an Islamic presence in the Americas as far back as the twelfth century. This assumption has served to feed popular understanding. Yet, it is not based on tangible historical evidence. These positions appear, prima facie, to demonstrate an Islamic historical depth in the Americas and to create a new socio-historical consciousness and sense of belonging in contemporary society. I refer to a social cohesion through historical reconstruction, or Ê¿Asabiyya10 in more Khaldunian terms. However, when searching for historical proof to base and justify such pronouncements, the task becomes difficult, especially so since no mosque is found in Mexico before the decade of 1980. I suggest that when speaking of social cohesion it is not only Khaldunian ideas that are relevant, but also the analysis of the prominent French Philosopher Jean Paul Gustave RicÅur (1913â2005). For RicÅur, who considered memory as one of the objects of historical knowledge,11 the role of remembrance and of its historical inscription as a source of social cohesion is pivotal. For him, âmemoryâ and âhistoryâ function as prerequisites of social cohesion. In our theme of study, the significance and scope of chronological discontinuity to which this supposed cohesion is subject, is a prevailing issue for the postulators of the theory of a Novohispanic Islamic tradition. For such a theory, the possibility of the past being made present again is proportionally inverse; in other words, from a present Islamic mosaic embedded in todayâs Mexican society it strives to construct a similar past in which IslÄm finds a historical depth rooted in the Mexican Colonial Era. This book aims to place this idea in a critical light in order to provide a relief to the aporia in this vision of IslÄm in Mexico.
But what purpose does memory actually serve? Jeffrey Andrew Barash, of the Université de Picardie, explains that as human beings, we call upon memory of the past and its historical inscription âto redress the effects of laceration, discontinuity, and rupture [which over time] aim to lend cohesion to human collectivities.â12 We must recall that memory is related to the past, and this to historia. On the latter, Gerald A. Press, from City University of New York, reminds us of Ciceroâs uses of both historia and historicus, where the latter refers to the historian;13 while the former indicates a factual account, and it is understood as âthe facts or information about the particular subject, and it might be translated as the facts or account of the facts [â¦] in which it refers to a written account about social and political events;â14 in other words, it is an inquiry into the events of previous times. For the researcher of the past, inquiring about these occurrences is mainly from within the corpus of historical evidence. Archives play a role, in this case, as the depositories of the documented memory of a nation. Thus, the name Archivo General de la Nación (General Archive of the Nation), for instance, evokes exactly this purpose. When historians inquire into the archives in search for factual accounts related to Novohispanic Islamic tradition, the absence of substantial inscribed memories is evident. Therefore, I refer to RicÅurâs idea again, where he addresses the question of how a memory in the present can be of something absent, the past. From this perspective, imagination seems to have played a big part in the construction of the theories I question, where its function consists in placing the object before the eyes to make something intangible, visible.15 RicÅur also underlines the importance of discerning historical discourse and its capacity for representing the past. Accordingly, how the past is represented and how it is narrated is not only linked to the ability of the historian to render the historical account, but to the referential impulse of the narrator.16 The writing of history should then be performed away from prejudice or appropriation, and as a matter of recognition of registered former events. In addition, its purpose must be âthat of representing the past faithfullyâ17 as RicÅur stressed. He also emphasises the relation between memory and narrative identity. The former is often falsified, he argued, through the detour of narration,18 resulting in problems with regard to history. Keeping this in mind, I argue that liberating the past should be done not as an untested reclamation of history, but rather constructed on solid corroborated historical evidence, as Professors George C. Bond (1936â2014) and Angela Gilliam (1936â2018) stated:
The reclamation of the past has its own complexities and social penalties, especially for scholars focusing on subjugated populations. The formulations of scholars are rarely tested within situations of actual social turmoil. Rarely do they have to pay for their misinterpretations.19
My research shows that speaking about IslÄm in Colonial and Early Independent Mexico is a thematic that is better studied through the lenses of History and Islamic Studies. With this in mind, we may grasp that some of the Mexican academic porosity on the subject might derive from the fact that in todayâs Mexico, the study of IslÄm has been performed mainly through the frame of Sociology, Anthropology, Ethnology, Literature and Lettersâboth Classics and Hispanics. This is so because as a discipline, Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies is still underdeveloped in Mexico. Consequently, the results of intellectual efforts based on the disciplines I have just mentioned, while produced bona fide, often present a number of insufficiencies. I must clarify however, that animus of my observation is de bene esse and flows from the necessity to improve the scholarly approach to the question. Mexican academic literature on the theme is still at a permeable stage, although it acts at times as if the subject was cadit quaestio. The shortfall of Mexican Anthropology to address the topic of IslÄm in Colonial and Early Independent Mexico lies, paraphrasing Bond and Gilliam, âin the limitation of anthropological paradigms to explain historical constructions.â20 Such limitations are also found in the disciplines mentioned above, whose core focus of study is neither the past nor IslÄm. Let us recall that History, as field of study, does not attempt to revive the past as its main objective, but to interpret it and to make it comprehensible. Historiography in this case, as an analysis of the past per se, is a subject of constant revision, and sometimes it may even be refutable, whereas History, as human experience, is the happening itself. To historicise is then to constantly question how âsomethingâ came to be and the effect it has had through time. To quote the North American Philosopher Leon J. Goldstein (1927â2002), âthe whole point of history is the past, when those events described in history books were really present [â¦] the starting point of historical inquiry is a body of evidence [â¦] the problem of the historian is to explain the evidence.â21
When speaking of IslÄm in Colonial Mexico, this monotheistic faith is regularly presented by Mexican and foreign historiography as a Novohispanic religious tradition. With regard to history and traditions, it is once again worth referring to Bond and Gilliam, who suggested that power of history lies in several domains: âone is the relations of text to subject, and another is the construction of individual and collective identities. These social constructions are part of the process of inventing traditions.â22 As far as the latter is concerned, we should clarify the role of historical interpretations in the creation of a common past in Latin America, where the phenomena of historical reengineering is not uncommon. Natividad Gutiérrez Chong of the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, speaks about the fabricating of new traditions and histories, and illustrates this point through the Yamor Festival in Ecuador. She suggests that âit may be characterized as recently invented tradition which seeks to refashion and recombine pre-Hispanic female symbols for purposes of social cohesion.â23
The postulated Novohispanic Islamic tradition and Mexicoâs present religious pluralism are often acclaimed as if they occupy a continuous space in time. As a consequence, the historical discourse around the historiographies that present a Novohispanic Islamic tradition gain authority. Some Mexican compositions illustrate this alleged tradition by pointing at figures from the Mexican archives which supposedly and ultimately should demonstrate the case, and argue:
Los documentos que se presentan son muestra de la presencia del Islam en la Nueva España [â¦] es por ello que esta base busca mostrar expedientes tanto impresos como manuscritos de esta época y con el tema de la presencia del Islam en Nueva España.24
However, this claim presents certain astonishing contradictions. For instance, the case of José Bernardino López and MarÃa Felipa de la Cruz, both categorized as âMoriscosâ in the original document, are, ipso facto, subsequently referred to as individuals of clear Islamic origin in the academic work mentioned above, which demonstrates, for these researchers, an Islamic presence in New Spain. In 1789, López and De la Cruz obtained a âdispensa del parentesco de consanguinidad,â25 a necessity for the purpose of marriage. This is the main premise of the original record. However, the authors failed to clarify that 1789 is a date in Mexican colonial history in which the term âMoriscoâ already had a completely different connotation to the one apparently alluded to by the scholarly composition they present, namely, a term with no reference to religion whatsoever, but rather related to a social class (casta).
Further illustrations emphasized in the same composition as tangible evidence of Islamic presence in Colonial Mexico are presented through cases of individuals whose last names happened to be either Mezquita (mosque) or Coran, such as Fray Juan de Mesquita of the Ordo Praedicatorum (The Dominican Order) or José MarÃa Mezquita; Luis Mezquita; Nicolas de Mezquita; Florencia Mezquita; Juan Manuel Coran; and Catalina de San Joseph Coran. All these are surnames with no relation to IslÄm. This research, apparently facile in nature, points to an oversimplified methodology, diaphanous in form, and flimsy in depth:
La metodologÃa que pusimos en funcionamiento para buscar y localizar referencias sobre musulmanes tuvo un conocimiento sobre la religión y su vida cotidiana. Por lo cual, como en el ámbito peninsular los musulmanes no se nombraban como tal en el mundo cristiano, los rastreamos por medio de las prácticas y palabras propias del Islam. Es asà como creamos una lista de términos que al integrarlos a la búsqueda de documentación en los archivos los encontramos de manera indirecta. El propósito de esta investigación es el visibilizar a un segmento de la sociedad novohispana que ha sido totalmente invisible e ignorado.26
Using the same methodology, the formerly alluded to scholarly reference provides additional illustrations of the Novohispanic Islamic presence through a denouncement in 1754 against certain Moors who carried âuna imagen de Mahomaâ (an image of Muḥammad); as well as the case of a Moorish man who in 1756 asked, of his own will, to be baptised.27 As Goldstein emphasised, if the historianâs duty is to explain evidence, how does this explain the supposedly Islamic nature of the examples mentioned above? How can such a body of evidence serve to point at a Novohispanic Muslim tradition? How would a family name signify IslÄm? And, is it not forbidden in this monotheistic religion, to create portraits or images of the Prophet? Moreover, how could having an individual, wholeheartedly asking to be baptised, be seen as proof of a Novohispanic Islamic tradition? This particular instance would unquestionably demonstrate the contrary, namely, an apostasyâin case he was indeed a Muslimâdue to his voluntary leaving of IslÄm and his unstinting adoption of Catholicism. Interpretation of textual record will always vary. However, we cannot ignore that the exegesis of archival documentation might also be fed by imaginations and affections, which is what RicÅurâs means when he says, âwhen the affection is present but the thing is absent, what is not present is ever remembered.â28
Cross-cultural and socio-historical comparisons are necessary to probe key presumptions about ideas that are taken as common wisdom. Thus, a comparative effort on the variables that inform this research is also necessary to foster a better appreciation of the ways these conform to its main question. Accordingly, it is imperative to place the protagonists of this study in perspective vis-à -vis each other. This would mean including inquisitorial authorities, from a transatlantic viewpoint, that encompass both sides of the Iberian worlds, and those considered as heretics.29 They would then need to be situated chronologically tête-à -tête on the distinct operational theaters where they historically acted, interacted, and crossed, namely Spain and Mexico of sixteenth to nineteenth centuries. Such an exercise gives rise to a historical discussion of the interlacing encounters that have taken placed between those protagonists, and ultimately, it may permit us to question the standard images of the varied aspects that are presented. As a result, it may allow for the formulation of additional and contrasting historical perspectives of a seemingly old matter that in reality, is new in Mexico. The comparative exercise relies on History as a scholarly discipline and also on Islamic Studies, simply because they provide us with a serviceable and essential blueprint, as well as tools and a methodology that may aid us in clarifying and arriving at conclusions. It is History that must be the bedrock and raison dââ¯Ãªtre of any scholarly effort that aims to research the past, and Islamic Studies will undoubtedly come to the aid of this particular intellectual enterprise. Therefore, if we desire to explore the historical roots of IslÄm in Mexico, and of this as a religious tradition per se, I dare to argue that it is not sufficient to profile the current Islamic cultural impact upon its contemporary society. This is so, because field and ethnographic work is in this case, a tool at the service of, and not the spine and core of a historical work. Field work does not allow us to travel in and through time, but a thoroughly archivist research may. Ultimately, âthere is no unequivocal evocation of the past by the evidence,â30 as Goldstein rightly argued.
Another shortcoming in studies focusing on the history of IslÄm in Mexico is the lack of a comparative approach to the socio-religious realities that those considered hereticsâProtestants, Muslims and Jewsâlived during the time of Colonia. If we are to take Spain and Colonial Mexico as the operational platform from where our historical plot emerges and develops, and the actors are to be the prohibidos (considered as heretics or the forbidden peoples by the Inquisition) and the inquisidores, then we should study them by taking a comparative perspective. The results permit us to realise that although heretics were confronted with the same barriers and obstacles, a well defined ethnoreligious group within the forbidden cluster succeeded in introducing a religious tradition that was protected, practised, and transmitted through diverse historical periods in Nueva España, while other prohibidos had a less favorable outcome. This situation gives rise to questions that we are obliged to address.
It is possible that such a comparative analysis could produce a different result from the one often recognised as common wisdom by certain academic works dealing with the subject of IslÄm in the Viceroyalty of New Spain. This simple method delivers significantly better results than seeing only one side of the coin. The act of comparing alludes to juxtaposing, and this is where the compared elements ultimately offer information about the manner in which a contrasting subject intersects with a given object and causes it to be attracted to it, or to be repelled by it. Consequently, the curtain of the Mexican scenario opens in a wider way, permitting us to identify if Nueva España was, as a matter of fact, a fertile ground for the implementation, practice, and transmission of a Novohispanic Islamic tradition. Ultimately, such an evaluation may also help us to discern if IslÄm indeed enjoys historical depth in Mexico as a religious Novohispanic custom stricto sensu.
The case concerning the resurfacing of IslÄm in Mexico as a direct product of the second French occupation of the Aztec Country presents similar patterns of interpretation as those previously described. However it has different protagonists. The prohibidos are no longer a part of this scenario, but instead, a Sudanese-Egyptian Battalion and some Algerian troops in the French Expeditionary Corps that Napoleon III sent to Mexico occupy the stage. We should perhaps ask how Muslim soldiers, at the service of France, contributed to the development of a new phase of taqiyyah in the just born Mexican Republic, and to the resurfacing of IslÄm31 in a vastly illiterate, precarious, battle-devastated Catholic country, which is what nineteenth century Mexico was. With respect to this, I suggest that relying on the term âtaqiyyah,â while searching for evidence of IslÄm in Early Independent Mexico, should be done with utmost caution and distanced from simplified generalisations, because its definition is wide and cannot be essentialised. This book invites the reader to rethink, along with the central question of its analysis, the terminology and categories of the thematic as well. For this reason, this work urges self-reflection, and defies the facile categorisation of current academic literature of its subjects and objects of study. This often appears crafted by a well intended and spirited Sociology, Anthropology and Literature, which claim to represent History and IslÄm.
âThe construction of historical and social configurations gains significance only through a stirring of social and historical imaginationsâ32 as Bond and Gilliam explained. The social configurations of contemporary Mexico, including those derived from its religious pluralism, should not be taken to create historical reconfigurations. This would constitute a misuse of history and of particularised symbolisms in the interpretation of the past. Neither should the writing of history be one in which cultural appropriation occurs as has been the case with colonialism. Bond and Gilliam provide us with valuable insights on the matter:
In the act of creating a written text subjects are transformed into transportable objects. We create them and in so doing, we pretend that we are creating ourselves [â¦] But in the process we appropriate them, we fix and frame the other through a zealous essentialism, thereby falling prey to the dilemma of dual fabrication.33
Furthermore, I must underline that this book does not intend to create a definitive research of IslÄm in Mexico, but only aims to be a modest contribution towards that end. It avoids appropriating a culture and religion and shows in the light of archival sources that these are apparently missing in a particular time and space of the Mexican past. Therefore, this work questions and counters the vision mentioned above through an in-depth examination of Mexican and French archives as well as other documentation treasured in the depositories of the Bibliothèque nationale de France (BnF) and the Biblioteca Nacional de España (BNE). In utilising primary sources in diverse languages other than English for the writing of this book, translations were needed for the sake of the reader who is not acquainted with Arabic, French and Spanish. I opted to provide the general public with the extracts in the original language, and then proceeded to translate these in the corresponding footnote. Translations are in this manner of my authorship, and I bear full responsibility for any lack of accuracy. In this way, the book is a merely qualitative study with its methodology in archival research. It allows collective access to a significant corpus of data in order to reflect on its scientific postulations and precise interrogations. As a historian, I work within the limits of the evidence found and strive to protect historical plausibility. Within those limits, I believe, and I intend to endeavour, to stay as close as possible to what Leon J. Goldstein righteously declared:
The historian [â¦] must persuade his colleagues that the evidence is to be ordered in the way he proposes as relevant to the problem he seeks to deal with, and that, in consequence, what he presents in his book or essay is precisely what it is reasonable to believe took place once upon a time.34
With this in view, the purpose of the intellectual effort behind this work is to bring new insights and fresh perspectives of study on the theme. I seek to contribute to an improved understanding of IslÄm in Mexicoâs history and of Mexico in the history of IslÄm, as well as to recognise Mexicoâs contemporary society and this Abrahamic religion. It is directed not only to the academic community, but also to the wider public. Through this research, I have found that the genesis of IslÄm in Mexico, as a religious tradition per se, is located at a different chronological time than the one proposed by contemporary academic works. Ergo, I claim that this religion, as a belief system, is rather new to Mexico, where it forms an indivisible part of its colorful religious pluralism today. In this manner, I encourage the reader, in the words of professors Bond and Gilliam, to âbecome the final arbiter, measuring history against history, and interpretation against interpretation.â35 My aim is to provide a scholarly work that reassesses the genesis of IslÄm in a region of the world where long-term European settlement and Christian theological and socio-political attitudes determined the modus vivendi of its society: Colonial and Early Independent Mexico. I suggest that New Spain and IslÄm might have known about the existence of each other, but within the chronological framework in which Nueva España developed there were social hindrances, geopolitical imperatives, and theological impediments on both sides of the Atlantic, that gave rise to the quasi-perfect circumstances for IslÄm not to exist as a religious tradition in this period of Mexican history. But beyond that, this book intends to promote freedom of thought and liberty of academic consciousness. And while historiographical divergence should indeed exist, this work challenges superficial conclusions on the theme it addresses. It asks questions and strives for creating dialogue, instead of simply providing answers. Yet, at heart, it aims to satisfy the historiographical necessity that exists today on the subject, while keeping in mind the ideas of Goldstein:
The past that the historian evokes is not a real past as it was when it was present, but rather a construction of his own [â¦] devised as the best explanation of the evidence he has. The historical eventâthe only historical event that figures in the work of historiansâis a hypothetical construct [â¦] And while one might want to say that the historical construction which most nearly describes the real past is the best or the truest account, how can we ever know? How can we ever test the event except in terms of our evidence?36
Fundamentally, the objective of revising history that is regarded as common wisdom should make us more aware of the dynamics of representing the past. However, if the findings of the research I present do not convince all readers, let them serve then to enrich the historiographical space with fresh perspectives. But before further reading, I believe that it is essential to invoke the thought of the illustrious Mexican historian, Mariano Cuevas (1879â1949), who wisely advised: âTaparnos los ojos ante la luz que irresistiblemente se nos echa encima de las puertas abiertas de los archivos no es sistema posible ni necesario de defensa.â37 With this in mind, it is my vehement hope that this book will be serviceable to anyone wishing to gain a clearer understanding about the history of Colonial and Early Independent Mexico and its religious minorities. Yet, its ultimate objective is to invite readers to question and rethink anew the genesis of IslÄm in Mexico. If attained, I hope my research is a humble contribution to the field.
Unless quoted from secondary literature, I use the term IslÄm in its transliterated form instead of Islam. This for two reasons: to signify its essence as DÄ«n, as explained in the following chapters; and to guard the linguistic essence from the Arabic language. I use Islamic however, as an adjective in the English language.
Kambiz Ghaneabassiri, A History of Islam in America, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010, p. 1.
Camila Pastor de MarÃa y Campos, âGuests of Islam: Conversion and the Institutionalization of Islam in Mexico,â in: MarÃa del Mar Logroño Narbona, Paulo Pinto, and John Tofik Karam (Eds.), Crescent over Another Horizon: Islam in Latin America, the Caribbean and Latino USA, Austin: University of Texas Press, 2015, pp. 144â189.
Ibid., p. 155.
For an illustration see: Albert A. Sicroff, Les Controverses des statuts de pureté de sange en Espagne, du XVe au XVIIe siècle, Paris: Didier, 1960.
(Conversion allows new Muslims to step outside of these local ideologies; it offers the possibility of circumnavigating discourses that define them as subordinates by establishing direct access to distant regions and to the privileges of foreigners and what is cosmopolitan through faith), Camila Pastor de MarÃa y Campos, âSer un Musulmán nuevo en México: la EconomÃa PolÃtica de la Fé,â Istor Revista de Historia Internacional, Año XII, Núm. 45, (2011), pp. 54â75.
Steven G. Smith, âAbrahamâs Family in Children of Gebelaawi,â Literature and Theology, Vol. 11, No. 2 (June 1997), pp. 168â184.
Ibid., p. 168.
Literally, âcaution or dissimulation.â It is referred in IslÄm to the concealment of oneâs faith when to reveal it may incur a direct threat to its personal integrity. The concept will be further developed in third chapter of this book.
Ibn ḤaldÅ«n (1332â1406) was the author of the monumental history work entitled KitÄb al-Ê¿Ibar, whose first volume contains a long preface called Al-Muqaddimah. In it, he elaborated on a special idea coined as Ê¿Asabiyya (group feeling, social cohesion). This term emphasizes unity, group consciousness and sense of collective shared purpose. Ibn ḤaldÅ«n describes it as the fundamental bond of human society, which may be strengthened by social aspects and religion. Arab lexicographers connect the term with the Arabic word âAsabah which literally signifies agnates; to make common cause with oneâs agnates.
Paul RicÅur, Memory, History, Forgetting, (Translated by Kathleen Blamey and David Pellauer), Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2004, p. 96.
Jeffrey Andrew Barash, âThe Time of Collective Memory: Social Cohesion and Historical Discontinuity in Paul RicÅurâs Memory, History, Forgetting,â Ãtudes RicÅuriennes/RicÅur Studies, Vol. 10, No. 1 (2019), pp. 102â111.
Gerald A. Press, The Development of the Idea of History in Antiquity, Montreal, Kingston, London and Ithaca: McGill-Queenâs University Press, 1982, p. 64.
Ibid., pp. 46â47.
RicÅur (2004), op. cit., p. 54.
Ibid., p. 237.
Ibid., p. 229.
Ibid., p. 505.
George Clement Bond and Angela Gilliam, Social Construction of the Past: Representation as Power, New York and Abingdon: Routledge, 1994, pp. 10â11.
Bond and Gilliam (1994), op. cit., p. 13.
Leon J. Goldstein, The What and the Why of History: Philosophical Essays, Leiden, New York, Köln: Brill, 1996, pp. 3â4.
Bond and Gilliam (1994), op. cit., p. 13.
Natividad Gutiérrez Chong, âEthnic Origins and Indigenous Peoples: An Approach from Latin America,â in: Athena S. Leoussi and Steven Grosby, Nationalism and Ethnosymbolism: History, Culture and Ethnicity in the Formation of Nations, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2007, pp. 312â324.
(The documents presented are proof of the presence of IslÄm in New Spain [â¦] That is why this data base seeks to show both printed and manuscript records of this time and with the theme of the presence of IslÄm in New Spain), Mariam Saada and Anette Yohalli SantamarÃa Pozos (Eds.), Huellas islámicas y árabes en el México Colonial 1570â1820, resguardadas en el Archivo General de la Nación (AGN), México: LNPP, Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas, 2018, available at:
AGN, Instituciones Coloniales, Regio Patronato Indiano, Bienes Nacionales (014), Vol. 93, Exp. 180, âDispensa del parentesco de consanguinidad concedida a José Bernardino López, Sabino, y MarÃa Felipa de la Cruz, ambos Moriscos, solteros, y originarios del Rancho de Temacaque, pertenecientes al partido de S. Antonio Singuilica,â México, 1789.
(The methodology that we put into operation to search and locate references about Muslims had a base in the religion practised and their daily life. Therefore, as in the peninsular sphere where Muslims were not named as such in the Christian world, we trace them through the practises and words of Islam. This is how we created a list of terms. When integrating them into the documentation search in the archives, we found them indirectly. The purpose of this research is to make visible a segment of the Novohispanic society that has been totally invisible and ignored), Saada and SantamarÃa Pozos (2018), op. cit, âMetodologÃa,â available at:
Saada and SantamarÃa Pozos (2018) op. cit. The original file of the case is located at: AGN, Instituciones Coloniales, Indiferente Virreinal, Caja 5119, Exp. 028, âInforme de Don Leonardo Terrallas, sobre que en la feligresia, un hombre que ha afirmado ser moro, pide el bautismo y cumplimiento con el ritual, no deja de parecer sospechoso,â Ciudad de México, 1756, 3 fojas.
RicÅur (2004), op. cit., p. 16.
Within the context of this study the term âhereticsâ is used to define Jews, Muslims and Protestants alike, who due to their beliefs systems were considered as such by the Inquisition.
Goldstein (1996), op. cit., p. 5.
See: Pastor de MarÃa y Campos (2011), op. cit., pp. 54â75; and Arely Medina, Islam en Guadalajara, Identidad y Relocalización, Zapopan: El Colegio de Jalisco, 2014, pp. 36â38.
Bond and Gilliam (1994), op. cit., p. 13.
Ibid.
Goldstein (1996), op. cit., p. 206.
Bond and Gilliam (1994), op. cit., p. 11.
Goldstein (1996), op. cit., pp. 5â6.
(Covering our eyes before the light that irresistibly is thrown at us from the open doors of the archives, is not a possible or necessary defense system), Genaro GarcÃa, Documentos Inéditos del Siglo XVI para la Historia de México, Corregidos y Anotados por el Padre Mariano Cuevas S.J., México: Talleres del Museo Nacional de ArqueologÃa, Historia y EtnologÃa, 1914, p. xi.