Re: Indian Population in Latin America (As of 1982) fwd
paul manansala (polmansl@ix.netcom.com)
Thu, 8 Jun 1995 10:13:23 -0700
I am a new subscriber to this list and would just like to comment on
some of the population statistics that were given. In many cases, the
Indian population of the Latin countries may be understated by the
official statistics. In Mexico, for example, the 29% spoken of means
those people who speak the Indian language, or still maintain the Indian
culture to a degree that it distinguishes them not only from those of
European descent, but also from Mestizos. The last Mexican census based
more on racial background was, I believe, in 1793, when 61.1 % were
Indians, 38.6% mestizos and mulattos, 0.2% Spanish and Criollos, and
0.1% 'Negroes.' Shortly after this period, the criteria was changed so
that those who assimilitated into Mexican culture by adopting the
Spanish language, and the like, were considered Mestizos even if they
had no Spanish blood. Indeed, even today many Mestizos may be
full-blooded Indians, and many people considered as Indians may be
Mestizos, or even completely without Indian blood.
However, as far as descent goes, undoubtedly a very large
proportion, much larger than 29%, of the Mexican population is of
Indian or part-Indian blood. And many of these, even though they have
assimilated to some degree or another, still retain links to their
Indian culture. This situation applies to practically all the Middle
American countries with the exception of Argentina, Chile and Ecuador.
Of course, in North America, language cannot be considered as a
criteria at all since many Natives have lost their original tongues.
But still, there is probably a number of assimilated Natives here
that also do not get counted.
Paul Kekai Manansala