Also was thinking. Is the pronounciation more like "CAR-Low-line-ah" as opposed to "CARE-Oh-line-ah"?
It comes from the Latin like the English word, so I would imagine that its the same. Not that that is necissarily right.
Agree, same etymological origin but seems me, that it's more where both language stressed the vowel or not do for pronounced the same word.
I have seen the argument that this escape clause for moving up in Spanish society especially the ones in Mexico actually lead to the more thorough depletion of full blooded native groups and faster assimilation. There is likely to be no reservation policy for Carolina.
But, the thing about Spanish colonies in Mexico vs Spanish colonies in the Chesapeake is that the Chesapeake is so much less populated and less dense. Its a lot easier to avoid contact with natives, especially seeing as many weren't sedentary. That's always why I've thought that intermixing didn't happen in the British colonies like it did in Mexico, not that there was necissarily a cultural difference (though I guess there could have been). My OTL example for this would be Argentina, which is more similarly populated to North America than Mexico is, but is still Spanish. Argentina is much "whiter" than Mexico or really anywhere else in the Spanish colonies, and I would think that this would be more like what Carolina would look like.
Although obviously the colonization process itself and the Spaniard in specific was very far from being a social Utopia (in reality was more an dystopia)...
The main difference was that apart from the density of European or indigenous population or therefore whether it was 'easy' or 'hard' 'avoid contact' with the Indians, the key factor it the people's will to intermarry/had relations that it's a natural human trend/characteristic.
Also the reaction of their respective societies and / or political / religious leaders to this human tendency/characteristic.
Therefore, we must analyzing if the intermarry it's encouraging,allowed / officially ignored or how historically and generally happened in the first settled English colonies in America, that was religiously proscribed or sociality repressed the 'racial mixing' because was perceived as a challenge to the social order.
Either by the state/colonial authorities or by the same community that socially sanctions those who are perceived as 'transgressors' of their 'social' norms and also from the juridical ones that generally were written later but at same time if these leader felt that they must did this kind of laws.
Besides the racist arguments, the key factor, it's, in my opinion, because existed and were more or less habitual the interracial relations and for that reason, these leaders had to make laws to prohibit / penalize them.
Because in these colonies (English ones) were social and legal pressure (that were/had being theological legitimized or selves-justify their policies and laws) against anyone who crossed the 'racial line' and intermarry or that took a 'bedmate' Native or African.
In contrast to the above situation the Spaniards colonial authorities must help and support the church's efforts to preach and all 'activities' amongst them that help for their conversion.
For the natives (at least for which that will assimilate) the main difference was that they will be Spain's subjects, protected by the
Indians Laws, at least juridically, but it's far 'better' than they would get under the English colonizers rule for which were foreigners not only in the political sense but also were aliens in the sociological.
For the natives (at least for which that will assimilate) the main difference was that they will be Spain's subjects, protected by the
Indians Laws, at least juridically, but it's far better than they would get under the English colonizers rule for which were foreigners not only in the political sense but also were aliens in the sociological.
Another key difference within the respect colonization systems was the Spanish crown had the '
patronato real' (royal patronage) over ecclesiastical affairs (granted to the Spanish crown by the Pope) and the will for use it for protect their native subjects and for converts them.
''...As patrons the State authorities made the final determination as to where and when missions would be founded or closed, what administrative policies would be observed, who could be missionaries, how many missionaries could be assigned to each mission, and how many soldiers if any would be stationed at a mission. In turn, the state paid for the missionaries' overseas travel, the founding costs of a mission, and the missionaries' annual salary. The State also usually provided military protection and enforcement...''
Notwithstanding in this TL situation where for long time the Spaniard will be relatively few and were settled at the border of a continent and semi isolated from other spaniards colonies and with their only contact/communication way it's through the ocean therefore the
reduction system, in this colony, only could be applied voluntarily but it's more probably that will be a mix within the
missional system of 'religious outpost' and the
Jesuit variant.
''...The ideal of the missionaries themselves, supported by royal decrees, was to establish autonomous Christian towns with communal property, labor, worship, political life, and social relations all supervised by the missionaries and insulated from the possible negative influences of other Indian groups and Spaniards themselves... the Indians were expected to 'mature' in Christianity and Spanish political and economic practices until they would no longer require special mission status. Then their communities could be incorporated as such into ordinary colonial society, albeit with all its racial and class distinctions. This transition from official mission status to ordinary Spanish society, when it occurred in an official manner, was called 'secularization'..."
Apologies for the next off topic but I must strongly disagree with the Argentinian example... first because there isn't adequate to took the Río de la Plata (in general or in the Argentine specifically) colonial historical time period (ethnographic situation) how a valid base for extrapolating to present day and/or for compare with other country.
Because there were some region with no european presence, the lack of interest from colonial authorities or with a nominal control about the local tribes: how almost of the Pampean region, the Patagonia or the Chaco, that were for their distance, geography or climate very hard.
Second because the 'Indian wars' that generally was fought by the new Nation government against the native's communities inside the former colonial settle borders or the independent tribes beyond the european settle lands.
Mainly for the european immigration waves but also from Middle Orient and in the s. XX from East Asia and from in great numbers from the Argentina's neighbouring countries and was registered almost one hundred thousand from cabo verde.
Finally there is a Myth about that the Río de la Plata countries and in specific Argentina was a ''White ('only') country'' that was 'built and lifted to the category of Argentine national identity 'mytho' because the political leader winners from the civil wars and the intellectuals that came later to legitimate their politics.
Identified and believed that mixed origin from the 'gauchos' and the leaders/supporters ideology and costumes with the 'social anarchy' beside that they were or felt 'ashamed' (not only the argentines but also some South American, nineteenth and twentieth leaders/intellectuals, in more or lesser measure) from their historical and social past and begin for elaborate the myth about the argentina 'whiteness'.
Because mostly of non white or with 'mixed' ancestry were habitant from the central and in specific from the northern argentine provinces and those that were in the rest of the country or were 'expelled' and forced to move to the north for political or socio economics reasons.
The remnants fraction was submerged /assimilated within the newcomers (european mainly) immigrants.
Notwithstanding it's true that a great percentage from the Argentine population it's from european ascendancy but this fact not invalid or must be make us to forget that there was/are millions of argentines that are from Indian, African origin and others with mixed origin, from Middle Orient or from East Asia (mostly Koreans and Japanese) origin.
Finally, in spite of appearances for all the above factors the 'white only' o 'majority' it's a myth.
For further readings: two Classics
Manifest Destiny by
Albert K. Weinberg and
A Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America by
Ronald Takaki.
Argentina immigration useful links:
Immigration in Argentina and
The Afro-Argentines.