The Cuban historian Rolando Gallardo argues that Cuban identity has predominantly Iberian roots and that historiography has distorted this origin by discussing colonization as if today's Cubans were unrelated to that process. His statements are part of an interview with Tania Costa, published in CiberCuba.
«The mistake lies in historiography, in speaking from the third person. No, no, no, you have to speak from the first person plural,» stated Gallardo, who advocates for a radical reformation of the historical narrative. «We killed the Taínos, we mixed with the Taínos, we arrived in Cuba when Columbus arrived or when we arrived with Columbus, because that’s what genetics say, we are 78% Iberian.»
Gallardo's central argument is based on genetic data to challenge what he calls an excess of "Africanization" of Cuban identity. "We are constantly seeking ways to over-Africanize," he noted, adding that the Africans arrived on the island brought by the Iberian colonizers who were already living there. "The Africans we brought, we brought them ourselves, our ancestors."
For Gallardo, the Cuban as a cultural phenomenon is a construction of the 19th century shaped by the confluence of Asturians, Galicians, and especially Canarians. "The motherland of the Cuban is the Canarian, because the constant waves of families coming to Cuba are from the Canary Islands, and that's why we speak like the Canarian and that's why the Cuban punto is the same as traditional Canarian music," he explained. He even went so far as to declare that "mojo is not Cuban, it is Canarian."
The thesis also extends to gastronomy. Gallardo questioned whether enslaved Africans could have introduced crops to the island. "Who is going to come on a ship loaded with seeds to plant in a country they are being taken to as a slave?" According to him, "the banana came from the Canary Islands, we already had cassava in the territory, and what we did was adapt to what we had there and tailor it to Spanish cuisine."
The historian went further by dismantling one of the most deeply rooted culinary symbols of Cuban identity. After consulting the first cookbook of Cuban food written on the island during the 19th century, he concluded that "ajiaco is a close relative of cocido madrileño and contains chickpeas. We often repeat that we are an ajiaco. Listen, ajiaco is a European broth, not a Taíno broth." With this assertion, he directly subverts the metaphor of "ajiaco" that the anthropologist Fernando Ortiz popularized in the 20th century to describe the cultural mix that defines what it means to be Cuban.
Regarding casabe—an indigenous Taíno food—Gallardo acknowledged its native origins but pointed out that it was the Spaniards who preserved it, and that Bayamo is the place where it is still produced.
The most rigorous genetic studies on the Cuban population, such as the one published in PLOS Genetics in 2014 involving over 1,000 Cubans, estimate an average ancestry of 72% European, 20% African, and 8% Native American based on autosomal analyses, a figure somewhat lower than the 78% cited by Gallardo, although they point in the same direction. Mitochondrial DNA analyses, which trace only the maternal line, show different proportions with a greater presence of Native American and African ancestry.
Gallardo's statements come alongside the publication of an article of his on slavery and the role of Cuban creole elites in its preservation, in which he develops the thesis that these elites were active participants in perpetuating the slave system, rather than passive victims of Spanish colonial imposition.
Filed under: