%images;]> gcesp-0013 Hans P. Kraus Collection of Hispanic American manuscripts; a guide, by J. Benedict Warren: a machine-readable transcription. Historias Paralelas, Kraus Collection. Selected and converted. Global Gateway, Library of Congress.

Washington, DC, 2003.

Preceding element provides place and date of transcription only.

For more information about this text and this Global Gateway collection, refer to accompanying matter.

74001097 General Collections, Library of Congress. Copyright status not determined; refer to accompanying matter.

The National Digital Library Program at the Library of Congress makes digitized historical materials available for education and scholarship.

This transcription is intended to have an accuracy of 99.95 percent or greater and is not intended to reproduce the appearance of the original work.

2003/02/11 0001 0002 0003 0004 0005 0006
0007

Kraus Collection of Hispanic American Manuscripts

0008 0009

Hans P. Kraus Collection of Hispanic American Manuscripts

A Guide by J. Benedict Warren

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS WASHINGTON 1974

0010

Frontispiece: Title page from Demostracion historiografica by Antonio de Arredondo. Item 156.

Endpapers: Pages 10 and 11 from the rules and constitutions of the Fraternity of St. Peter Martyr, to which the members of the Inquisition belonged. See item 151A.

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data

United States. Library of Congress. Manuscript Division. Hans P. Kraus Collection of Hispanic American manuscripts.

1. Manuscripts, Spanish American—Catalogs. 2. Manuscripts—United States—Catalogs. 3. Latin America—History—Sources. 4. United States. Library of Congress. Manuscript Division. I. Warren, J. Benedict. II. Title. Z66621.U58K7 016.091 74-1097 ISBN 0-8444-0118-8

The printing of this catalog was supported by the Hans P. Kraus Publication Fund.

0011 v
Foreword

Presented to the Library of Congress in 1969 by Hans P. Kraus, bookman, collector, and bibliophile, the manuscripts described in this catalog represent the most important acquisition of Hispanic materials since the gift in 1929 by the late Edward S. Harkness of his collection of Spanish manuscripts from the early years of the colonial history of Mexico and Peru. The Kraus Collection is significant not only for the wide range of information it contains about Spanish colonial history but for the light it sheds on the early history of territories now included in the United States.

Among the manuscripts are contemporary colonial writings that document exploration of the New World, the government of New Spain, the workings of the Inquisition, taxation, economic conditions in the colonies, Spanish relationships with the Indians and the French, and the loss of parts of the Spanish Empire to American encroachment.

The majority of the first 116 letters and documents originated in the archives of Bishop Juan de Zumárraga and of his successors in the See of Mexico. The signatures of King Charles I, his wife Isabel, and their son and daughter, King Philip II and Juana, and Cardinal García de Loaysa appear in these manuscripts relating to the ecclesiastical affairs of New Spain. Another invaluable group of contemporary documents reflects the development and impact of the New Laws of 1542 and touches upon the career of Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas. In one long autograph letter, the text of which has never appeared in print, Las Casas petitions the Spanish Crown for the privileges that he considered necessary for the good of his diocese in Chiapas.

A most important volume contains orders of Viceroy Luis de Velasco the Elder, along with items concerned with the enlightened Indian policy of his predecessor, Viceroy Antonio de Mendoza. Other notable manuscripts illuminate the careers of Amerigo Vespucci, Giovanni da Verrazzano, Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca, Pedro de Ursúa, Lope de Aguirre, Dominique de Gourgues, and less well-known figures of the Spanish colonial period.

0012 vi

The gift of these manuscripts greatly enriches the Library's resources for the study of colonial Spanish-American history. The late Howard F. Cline, director of the Hispanic Foundation from 1952 until 1971, prized the collection highly and anticipated the completion of this catalog as a significant contribution to scholarship in this field.

L. Quincy Mumford Librarian of Congress

0013 vii
Preface

THE HANS P. KRAUS COLLECTION is made up of a select group of manuscripts relating directly or indirectly to colonial Spanish America. It is varied in nature and in origin, with materials concerning many different aspects of colonial life and administration. The majority of the items pertain to the history of colonial Mexico, although there are important items concerning other regions.

The items fall into several related groups. Items 1–116 are a collection of royal decrees and other related papers concerned primarily, though not exclusively, with the Church in Mexico. They fall within the 16th century, except for items 105–116, which date from 1607–09 and 1648&60. Six items pertain to the Inquisition in New Spain (items 145, 149, 151, 155, 159, and 160). Other items concerning the Church in New Spain are item 153, on the Cruzada; item 154, on an election scandal in the Dominican Order; and item 157, on the proposal to construct a new church in Otatitlan.

Several items deal with explorers of America and/or their families: Amerigo Vespucci (items 118–119), Giovanni da Verrazzano (item 121), Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca (item 122), and Pedro de Ursúa and Lope de Aguirre (items 141–143).

The history of the pre-Spanish period in Mexico is represented by the Crónica mexicana of Fernando Alvarado Tezozomoc, written toward the beginning of the 17th century (item 117).

Seventeen important documents concerning the general civil administration of the Spanish Indies during the 16th century are contained in a bound volume (items 123–139). These are especially important because of the light they throw on the preparation of the New Laws of 1542 and the reaction of the colonists to them. Various aspects of viceregal administration are covered in item 140, an order book of Viceroy Luis de Velasco the Elder; item 150, royal instructions to Diego Benavides y de la Cueva as Viceroy of Peru; item 161, the instruction of the Viceroy of New Granada, Pedro de Medinueta y Múzquiz, to his successor in office; and item 162, six monthly reports of Juan Ruíz de Apodaca, Viceroy 0014 viii of Mexico, to the Spanish secretary of state and war. Items 146 and 147 pertain to local civil administration in Tepeaca and Yucatán respectively.

There are four items relating to the history of Spanish Florida: item 144, a collection of manuscript materials regarding Dominique de Gourgues and his family; item 148, a volume of 27 documents pertaining to Pedro de Céspedes y Vallejo, a soldier who served in Florida; item 152, a letter of Diego Quiroga y Losada, governor of Florida; and item 156, a treatise by Antonio de Arredondo on Spanish claims to Georgia.

Two appeals for royal favor are included. Item 120, by a descendant of Bernardino Vázquez de Tapia, incorporates the latter's relation of his services to the crown in the conquest of Mexico. The background of the Iturrates, a Basque family of Ica, Peru, is given in item 158, together with their royal patent of Basque hidalguía.

In preparing the following descriptive catalog of the collection, an effort has been made to locate and cite published versions of the documents, but there has been no attempt to give cross-references to related material in print or in manuscript, which is often quite extensive. This task is left to those scholars who undertake to publish individual items. Editorial comment on the value and importance of the documents within the literature has been avoided.

I wish to acknowledge the work of Richard Boulind, who prepared the preliminary descriptions of the manuscripts for Mr. Kraus. In the case of the manuscripts written in 16th-century Italian and French, I have depended entirely upon his notes for the description of their contents. In all cases his work has been of great help. I wish also to express my gratitude to the members of the Latin American, Portuguese, and Spanish Division, the Manuscript Division, and the General Reference and Bibliography Division, Library of Congress, for their assistance. Particular thanks are due to the late Howard F. Cline for general direction of the project and to my wife Patricia S. Warren for the indexing.

J. Benedict Warren

0015 ix
Contents

Foreword v

Preface vii

Manuscripts 3

Bibliography 165

Chronological Index 173

Name and Place Index 177

0016 x
Abbreviations

AGI Archivo General de Indias, Sevilla.

DHM Documentos para la historia de Méjico. 21 vols. in 19. México, 1853–1857.

DII Colección de documentos inéditos relativos al descubrimiento, conquista y organización de las antiguas posesiones españolas de América y Oceanía. 42 vols. Madrid, 1864–1884.

DIU Colección de documentos inéditos relativos al descubrimiento, conquista y organización de las antiguas posesiones de Ultramar. 21 vols. Madrid, 1885–1928.

HAHR Hispanic American Historical Review.

Recop. Recopilación de leyes de los reynos de las Indias. 4 vols. Madrid, 1681.

0017
Kraus Collection of Hispanic American Manuscripts 0018 0019 3
Manuscripts
1

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of the Island of Española. Valladolid, February 15, 1527. 1 leaf.

The judges are commanded to permit Francisco de Carrión, free-holder of Burgos, to bring away from the island Francisco, the nine-year-old son of his dead brother Hernando de Carrión and of an Indian woman, so that the petitioner may rear the boy as his own son and give him a Christian education in Spain.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de los Cobos.

The cedula is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. Also on the verso, entirely unrelated, is a short notation in a different hand, bewailing some results of the anonymous writer's sins. The document is numbered 2 on the recto, 82 on the verso.

2

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to the [Royal Treasury] officials of New Spain. Valladolid, August 2, 1527. 1 leaf.

In regard to a group of up to 40 Franciscan friars whom Fr. Antonio de Ciudad Rodrigo is taking to New Spain, the King has commanded that their passage expenses and port charges be paid. He here commands the treasury officials of New Spain to pay the transit expenses of the books, vestments, and other items which the friars are taking for personal use or for their order. If the ship lands at the island of Española, the officials there are to pay the expenses up to that point.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de los Cobos.

It is endorsed on the back with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies. An annotation on the back indicates that it was entered in the books of the Casa de Contratación on May 23, 1528. It is numbered 1 on the recto, 81 on the verso.

0020 4
3

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Duplicate of a royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain issued in Toledo, August 24, 1529. Duplicate issued in Madrid, February 4, 1530. 1 leaf.

The Crown had been requested to relieve the Indians of La Rinconada and Cempoala from tribute for two years, because they were being overburdened, and to allow them to work only on the house of the Franciscan friars in that province. The Queen commands the audiencia to make an inquiry, issue a decision, and send her a report of what was done.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

Endorsed on the back with the rubrics of three councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 4 on the recto, 1529–1 and 100 on the verso.

4

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to Juan de Zumárraga, confirmed bishop-elect of Mexico. Ocaña, January 25, 1531. 1 leaf.

The Queen acknowledges Zumárraga's letters regarding his differences with the first audiencia of New Spain, the work of converting the natives, and other matters. She commands him to come to the court in Spain on the first ship which leaves after receipt of her letter to report on conditions, so that the necessary decisions can be made.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

Endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of two councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 5 on the recto, 1531–3 and 125 on the verso.

Printed in Carreño, p. 78, from a notarized copy.

5

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain. Madrid, February 4, 1530. 1 leaf.

The Queen informs the audiencia that two pious, religious women (religiosas beatas emparedadas) of Salamanca are going to New Spain to instruct native women in the Catholic faith, and one of them is taking her two nieces. The Queen commands the audiencia, together with the bishop-elect and the Franciscan superior, to select a site for a house and monastery for the women and to have the Indians of the area construct it. For this purpose 200 pesos of 450 maravedis each are to be used from the royal funds to pay the Spanish foreman and artisans.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

0021 5

It is endorsed on the verso with rubrics of three councilors of the Indies. There are two annotations on the verso. The first indicates that it was entered into the books of the Casa de Contratación, Seville, June 27, 1530; the second, that it was entered in the books of the accountant's office of New Spain, December 20, 1530, signed by Rodrigo de Albornoz. It is numbered 7 on the recto, 2 on the verso.

6

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to Juan de Zumárraga, bishop-elect of Mexico. Ocaña, February 13, 1531. 1 leaf.

The Queen informs the bishop-elect that the Pope has granted a bull of Cruzada for the Spanish dominions. By virtue of it, the bishop of Zamora has appointed Cristóbal de Haro, Juan López de Calatayud, and Gonzalo de Burgos as treasurers and receivers of payments. The Queen commands that the bull be received with reverence and that the treasurers be given favor and assistance.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Burgos.

It is endorsed with one rubric on the verso. It is numbered 6 on the recto, 12 on the verso.

7

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to Juan de Zumárraga, confirmed bishop-elect of Mexico. Ocaña, [September] 17, 1531. 1 leaf.

The Queen refers to her previous command to Zumárraga to come to the court and also to the fact that he should present himself for his episcopal consecration, since his bulls had arrived (although they had been sent back to Rome for some corrections). She again commands him to come immediately and to select someone as his vicar-general to take his place during his absence.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

Endorsed on the verso with the rubric of two councilors of the Indies. A number on the recto has been marked out; it is marked Dupp[lica]da 105 on the verso, also 2 quaderno-imbentario.

8

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Juan de Zumárraga], bishop of Mexico. Medina del Campo, January 10, 1532. 1 leaf.

The Queen informs the bishop that the Pope has granted the bull of the Cruzada with the indulgences and favors contained in it, and the bishop of Zamora, commissary general of the Cruzada, has commanded that it be preached like previous bulls, and he has 0022 6 appointed Cristóbal de Haro and Juan López de Calatayud, freeholders of Burgos, as treasurers for the Spanish Indies. She commands that the bull be received with reverence and that the treasurers or their representatives be given every assistance, since the income is to be used to support the army which is in Africa.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Burgos.

On the verso are two notations made in Mexico on December 7, 1534. The first records the presentation of the cedula before the vicar general of the diocese, Bachiller Alonso López, who sent it to the bishop. The second records its presentation before the bishop, who received it but deferred its execution to a later date because he was sick in bed. It is numbered 8 on the recto, 115 on the verso.

9

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain. Madrid, November 27, 1532. 1 leaf.

The Queen informs the audiencia that Juana Velázquez, a beata, had written to the Queen, in her name and in that of the other beatas in Mexico City, about their good work of teaching the daughters of caciques and about the good order of their house; she had asked that, since they were not nuns but only a group of pious women, they should not be subject to inspection by the Franciscan friars nor forced to conform to a strict rule but should be inspected by the audiencia. The Queen commands that if the beatas have not given obedience to any order, the audiencia should decree that they should not be subject to inspection by the Franciscan friars and that the audiencia should make the most suitable provision for the future.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the back with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 22 on the recto, 113 on the verso.

10

The King [Charles I of Spain] and the Queen [Juana of Spain]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain. Monzón, August 2, 1533. 1 leaf.

In a decree of January 13, 1528, the Crown had ordered tithes to be collected in New Spain as of December 12, 1527, the date of Juan de Zumárraga's nomination as bishop. Zumárraga had bought a house as episcopal residence and two smaller houses—one of which was being used as a prison, the other for casting bells—for which 0023 7 he had paid with funds from the tithes. The bishop has asked the Crown to cede all rights that pertain to it in regard to the tithes which were to be for the use of the diocese. The monarchs grant the request and command the audiencia to protect the bishop in his right.

Signed by the King only; countersigned by Comendador Mayor Francisco de los Cobos.

It is endorsed on the verso with one rubric and the signatures of four councilors of the Indies. On the verso an annotation records the fact that in Mexico City on September 3, 1587, Francisco de Paz, mayordomo of the archdiocese, presented the cedula before the audiencia in the presence of Notary Sancho López de Agurto, and the audiencia obeyed it and commanded that it be carried out. It is numbered 16 on the verso.

Printed in DHM, 2d ser., v. 3 (1855), p. 343–346, and in García Icazbalceta (1881), v. 2, p. 80–81.

11

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain. Monzón, August 2, 1533. 1 leaf.

The King reminds the audiencia of a paragraph of the instructions which had been given to them by his wife. The paragraph, which is repeated here in full, commanded them to have churches built in the Indian towns, using for this purpose up to one-fourth of the towns' tribute, whether the tribute was paid to the Crown or to an encomendero. Since the Indians were not obligated to pay tithes, and the secular clergy (clérigos) would need a means of support for themselves and their churches, a temporary increase in the tribute was to be instituted to pay for these expenses until such a time as the Indians should start paying tithes. In places where there were Spaniards, their tithes were to be used to support the clergy, and only what was needed over and above this was to be exacted from the Indians. The King had not received any report on the execution of this order. He commands that it be put into effect and that a report of the action be sent to him immediately.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de los Cobos.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 15 on the recto.

Printed in Puga (1563), leaves 88–88v, in Encinas (1596), p. 138–140, and in DIU, v. 10 (1897), p. 171–174.

0024 8
12

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to the audiencia and treasury officials of New Spain. Toledo, May 21, 1534. 1 leaf.

Bishop Juan de Zumárraga was taking seven women with him to New Spain to teach the Indian girls. The King commands that bread be given to them for two years from the royal supplies in New Spain, provided that they are doing their work. The royal treasury officials are to keep a record of this.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de los Cobos.

It is endorsed on the back with rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 19 on the recto, 96 on the verso.

13

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain. Toledo, May 21, 1534. 1 leaf.

Bishop Juan de Zumárraga was taking with him to New Spain 30 tradesmen, most of them with their wives and children. The King recommends them to the audiencia to be helped, favored, and given everything which is customary for men of their class, including lands and building sites.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de los Cobos.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 20 on the recto, 98 on the verso.

14

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Royal letter to Juan de Zumárraga, bishop of Mexico. Valladolid, September 3, 1536. 2 leaves.

The queen acknowledges Bishop Zumárraga's letters and the good work which he is doing among the natives. She encourages him to continue his work with even greater effort if possible and to exhort the friars to do likewise. He is to report any grievances of the Indians to the Viceroy or to the Crown.

She was pleased by the processions and prayers which had been offered when word reached Mexico of the fall of Tunis, and she asks that prayers be continued for victory and the happy return of His Majesty.

She commends him for having handed over to the Viceroy his decrees relative to the protection of the Indians, but she insists that he must continue to advise both the Viceroy and Crown regarding the good treatment and instruction of the Indians.

The Queen was delighted to hear that he had examined the abilities 0025 9 of the Indian boys who were being educated in the monasteries and had found them intellectually capable and that, in agreement with the Viceroy and audiencia, about 70 of the boys had been organized into a college in the parish of Santiago on the previous January 6. She recommends that they be assisted out of royal funds.

She was also pleased about the success in the education of the girls who were gathered into eight or 10 communities with 300 or 400 girls in each. She has sent an order to the Viceroy that some assistance be given to the pious women who teach the girls.

She was pleased at the good report regarding Diego Ramírez and family, whom Zumárraga had taken to Mexico, and asks that he be thanked and encouraged in her name.

Zumárraga's installation of the vicar-general and decisions regarding clerical discipline are good; she is sending a command to the Viceroy to support his decisions regarding correction of the clergy. The treasury officials are also being commanded to give him the income from the tithes collected during his absence. She is also sending a cedula commanding that the income from Zumárraga's encomienda shall be supplemented from royal funds to a total of 2,000 ducats per year.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso of the second leaf with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 24 on the recto of the first leaf, 106 on the verso of the second leaf.

Printed in Carreño, p. 104-106.

15

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Valladolid, September 3, 1536. 1 leaf.

Bishop Zumárraga has informed the Queen of the capabilities of the Indian boys trained in the monasteries and of the formation of a college for 70 of them. The Queen commands the Viceroy to determine if they can be aided from the royal resources in New Spain.

The bishop has also informed her of the communities of Indian girls who are being trained in the Christian life. She commands the Viceroy to give material support to the pious women who are teaching them.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 25 on the recto, 107 on the verso.

0026 10
16

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal letter to Juan de Zumárraga, bishop of Mexico. Valladolid, December 7, 1537. 1 leaf.

In reply to Zumárraga's letters of November 24 and 25, 1536, the King acknowledges the bishop's advice regarding the instruction of the Indian children and the improvement of the land; the King is sending cedulas regarding these matters and asks Zumárraga to continue advising him.

The bishop had also asked for an improvement in his encomienda grant of Ocuytuco. The King has instructed the Viceroy to report on the matter and commands that in the meantime Zumárraga should take special care regarding the good treatment and instruction of the Indians of the town.

Signed; countersigned by Juan Vázquez.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 26 on the recto, 126 on the verso.

17

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Duplicate of a royal cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain, issued in Valladolid, December 7, 1537. Duplicate issued in Valladolid, December 30, 1537. 1 leaf.

The bishops of Mexico and Oaxaca have reported that some of the Spanish women who went to teach the Indian girls are leaving their houses because of lack of support; the bishops requested that each woman be given several varas of cloth every two or three years. The Queen commands that if, in the Viceroy's view, the women's work is worthwhile, they should be given for a period of two years the amount of cloth that seems good to him.

Signed; countersigned by Juan Vázquez.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 27 on the recto, 117 on the verso.

18

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Notarized copy of a royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain, issued in Valladolid, February 26, 1538. 1 leaf.

The Queen refers to a letter of Bishop Juan de Zumárraga and quotes a long section of it expressing the missionary friars' discontent with the fact that they were to depend upon the secular authorities to punish the Indians who did not attend religious services and who continued idolatrous and superstitious practices. The lay authorities 0027 11 had not been willing to act, either because of their small numbers, or laziness, or self-interest. Fr. Francisco de Soto, a Franciscan, had preached in the presence of the bishop about the fact that the friars had grown lukewarm, and the bishop was afraid that the same thing was happening among the other orders. Zumárraga asked that he be granted authority to punish delinquent converts and to appoint alguaciles. The Queen commands that the audiencia determine the extent and limitation of the punitive power of the bishop and his representatives and give them full support. They are to send her a report of their decision and a copy of the instruction which they give to the bishop.

The copy (dated Seville, March 23, 1538) is preceded and followed by the official annotation of the notary, Pedro de Arellano, and is signed by the notary and two witnesses. It is numbered 28 on the recto.

19

The Queen [Isabel, wife of Charles I of Spain]. Notarized copy of a royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain and the bishop of Mexico, issued in Valladolid, February 26, 1538. 1 leaf.

The Queen had been informed that, although the sons of the Indian nobility and the Indian girls were being educated well in the monasteries and by the pious women, respectively, their parents gave them over unwillingly or hid them, and it had been suggested that they be taken away and put in the schools. The Queen orders the audiencia and bishop to consider the matter, decree what can be done with the least scandal, and send her a report.

The copy (dated Seville, March 22, 1538) is preceded and followed by the official annotations of the notary, Pedro de Arellano, and is signed by Arellano and two witnesses. It is numbered 29 on the recto, 68 on the verso.

19A

Juan de Zumárraga, bishop of Mexico, Joannes [Juan] de Zárate, bishop of Antequera [Oaxaca], and Francisco Marroquín, bishop of Santiago, Guatemala. Letter to His Imperial Catholic Majesty [Charles I of Spain]. Mexico, December 4, 1537. 8 leaves.

Provenance: Phillipps Ms. 13,316.

In response to a command of the King included in a letter to the Viceroy, the bishops had been discussing matters pertaining to the good of the Indians and their instruction in the faith and other 0028 12 pastoral obligations. They are writing about their decisions. The letter contains many requests and reports including the following:

1) That instructions be sent as to whether any or all of the bishops should go to the Council of Trent.

2) That the King command the Indians to be gathered into towns so that they can be better instructed in the faith.

3) That more friars be sent; if the King will not pay for their passage, the bishops will pay for as many as they can.

4) That great care be shown in allowing secular clergy to come, that the principal prebends in each diocese be given to a theologian and canonist, that Bachiller Barreda be appointed archdeacon of Mexico and canonist, and that the secular priests be prohibited from returning to Castile.

5) That they be allowed to make appointments to vacant benefices in their dioceses; that they all be allowed to appoint pastors for the cathedral churches, as has been permitted in Mexico; and that they support the bishop of Mexico in his punishment of certain clerics.

6) That some method be worked out requiring the Indians to pay a partial tithe which would not overburden them and that they be made conscious of their general obligation of paying full tithe.

7) That, because of continuing idolatry, the Christian churches be given the lands which had supported the priests and temples and that they be allowed to use the stone of the temples to build churches.

8) That, since the Indians continue to violate the Christian rule of monogamy, the bishops be given authority, for themselves and their inspectors, to inflict punishments in this matter.

9) That the King command fulfillment of the cedula which allowed the collection of tithes from Indian towns which pay tribute to the Crown or to an encomendero.

10) That the King enforce the rule that no benefice be given to any secular clergyman who is exempt from the jurisdiction of the bishop. They cite the bad example of Francisco Alegrías, official of the Santa Cruzada.

11) That, because of the good results which are evident from the college for Indian boys, the King should favor and enlarge it and command the Franciscan provincial to leave two of his friars there.

12) That a monastery of professed nuns be founded and land set aside for its construction and that an Indian town be assigned to build and support it; there, the Indian girls will be instructed and cared for better than they are by the pious Spanish women who are not bound by vows.

13) That plenary power be requested from the Pope such as was 0029 13 given to the friars, or that at least a legate be established in Mexico with such powers. Some of the friars have been boasting that they have more power than the bishops. They also ask that the friars be forbidden to found friaries too close together because many areas are left without ministers.

14) That, because of the great disagreement which has arisen regarding the ceremonies of baptism, the Royal Council give a decision which can be observed uniformly by all. The confirmed bishop-elect of Michoacán [Vasco de Quiroga] has written a tract regarding the matter.

15) That permission be requested from the Pope for the bishops to consecrate holy oils without the usually required number of assistants and to use locally produced balsam.

16) That, because of the scarcity of Spanish foodstuffs and Spanish tradesmen and the resultant high prices, the King impose price controls, and open a school to teach trades to the Indians or, at least, encourage the Spanish tradesmen to teach the Indians. The Viceroy has written about this at more length.

17) That unmarried encomenderos be given a time limit within which they must marry, that those who were married in Castile be required to bring their wives and children within a certain time, that it be made more difficult for married men in the colony to return to Castile, and that provision be made for married Spaniards in the colony who have no means of support.

18) That towns be assigned to them, as they are to the bishops of Castile, where they can retreat from their cares. The towns will support their needs, especially in regard to establishing schools for Indian girls such as the bishop of Mexico has founded.

19) That the Viceroy be given authority to review the whole question of diocesan boundaries and to settle them more clearly.

20) They insist upon three things as most important: that a) the adobe buildings of the college for Indian boys be replaced by a two-story masonry building; b) there be a two-story monastery for girls, with the mestizas above and the Indians below and that it be conducted preferably by cloistered nuns; and c) 20 friars be sent every year.

21) That a small village be assigned for the support of the college for Indian boys and another for the monastery for Indian girls. For each institution an encomendero has been found who would give up a village for its support.

22) That the two villages which have been offered for support of the college for boys and monastery for girls be confirmed to them for as long as the institutions shall last. They also ask that for the construction of the buildings, the King grant the service of the 0030 14 corregimiento of Texcoco for six years; during these six years the bishop of Mexico offers to pay the Viceroy 300 ducats a year for the passage of 15 or 20 friars. The bishop of Mexico will bring nuns and pious women at his own cost to teach the girls.

23) The two villages for support of the schools are small and adjoin Zumárraga's town of Ocuytuco. They are Tetela, encomienda of María de Estrada, and Ximultepeque, encomienda of Alonso de Escobar. If Ocuytuco is not to become a holding of the bishops of Mexico, Zumárraga would like to let it go for the support of the college or monastery, and the tributes of Ximultepeque would pay for the passage of friars. Further information can be obtained from Fr. Luis de Fuensalida, Franciscan superior of Mexico City, who is their messenger.

24) That a great cathedral should be built in Mexico.

25) That the Pope be asked to allow the archdeacon in each diocese to be consecrated coadjutor bishop to bear some of the burden of episcopal activity.

26) The friars are doing excellent work but they are lacking leaders. The superior of the Augustinians has died; the Franciscans are lacking Fr. Martín de Valencia; the Dominicans have Fr. Domingo de Betanzos and Domingo de la Cruz, both very capable. They recommend Domingo de la Cruz for a bishopric, and they ask the King to give special attention to the problem of leadership among the friars.

27) The bishops praise Antón Gómez, secular clergyman, bearer of the letter.

Signed by the three bishops. On the verso of the last page there is a wax episcopal seal.

A copy dated “fin de noviembre” 1537 was printed in García Icazbalceta (1881), v. 2: 87–102, citing as his source an appendix to Concilios primero y segundo celebrados en la muy noble y muy leal ciudad de México, presidiendo el illmo. y rmo. señor d. fr. Alonso de Montúfar en los años de 1555 y 1565 , edited by Francisco Antonio Lorenzana y Butrón (Mexico, 1769). A check of the three copies of Concilios . . . in the Rare Book Division of the Library of Congress has not revealed this appendix.

20

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal letter to the bishops of Mexico, Guatemala, and Antequera [Oaxaca]. Valladolid, August 23, 1538. 3 leaves.

This is a reply to the petitions presented by the bishops in item 19A. This reply, however, was apparently made on the basis of a 0031 15 slightly later copy of the bishops' letter. The King refers to their letter of December 10, 1537, while item 19A was dated December 4, 1537. The replies are as follows:

1) None of the bishops should go to the Council of Trent.

2) The King has written to the Viceroy to work out the best arrangement possible regarding gathering Indians into towns.

3) Regarding friars, some have already left.

4) Since the archdeaconship is not vacant, Bachiller Miguel de Barreda cannot be appointed to it. Care will be taken regarding the secular clergymen who are sent.

5) Regarding vacant benefices, they are allowed to make interim appointments in their cathedrals, to a total of four, and in other places.

6) All of the bishops are allowed to appoint pastors for their cathedral churches.

7) He is instructing the Viceroy that the temples should be torn down prudently and the stone used for churches and monasteries; that a report should be made of the revenue sources of the pagan religion and that, in the meantime, the revenues should be used to support the Christian church; and that idols should be sought out and burned.

8) Regarding punishment of Indian violators of monogamy, they are to reach a decision with the Viceroy and audiencia, provided there are no pecuniary fines.

9) Concerning Indian payment of tithes, for two years after January 1, 1539, the Indians are to pay tithes on cereal grains at the place where they deliver their tribute to the encomendero; after two years they are to pay at the place where it is harvested.

10) The King has commanded the Viceroy to force exempt secular clergymen to leave and not to allow the commissaries of the Cruzada to give exemption to their officials.

11) Regarding the college for Indian boys, he is writing to the provincial of the friars and to the Viceroy to encourage the friars in the work.

12) For the present no nunneries are to be founded in the Indies.

13) Troublesome friars are to be forced to leave, and friaries are not to be built too near one another. If they are being built too closely together, they are to be torn down.

14) Regarding baptisms, a recent decision of Pope Paul III is to be followed.

15) The Pope has been asked to allow the use of the local balsam in the holy oils. A copy of his answer will be sent as soon as it is received.

0032 16

16) Regarding Spanish foodstuffs and Spanish tradesmen, he is writing to the Viceroy to make a decision on the matter; more tradesmen will be sent from Spain.

17) The King is also instructing the Viceroy to encourage unmarried encomenderos to marry but not to put undue pressure on them; the Viceroy is to let them know that in the allotment of Indians, married men will be preferred.

18) The Viceroy should review the question of diocesan boundaries.

19) Regarding the college building for Indian boys, the Viceroy is being instructed to inspect it and to make arrangements for the nearest Indians to help with the construction of the new building, which is not to be overly sumptuous. The house for Indian girls is to be moderate but well constructed.

20) Concerning the villages which have been offered for support of the college and of the house for girls, approval is granted. Regarding [Ocuytuco] and Texcoco, the decision will come through the Council of the Indies.

21) Because of their recommendation of Fr. Domingo de la Cruz, Franciscan provincial, he is to be given the protectorate of the Province of Galicia in New Spain. [The wording of the bishops in item 19A rightly indicates that Fr. Domingo de la Cruz was a Dominican, but here he is referred to as Provincial of the Franciscans.]

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

The letter is endorsed at the foot of the last written page with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 30 on the recto of the first leaf.

An extract of this letter was printed by García Icazbalceta (1881), v. 2, p. 102–103, citing as his source an appendix to Lorenzana's Concilios provinciales primero y segundo . . . . The letter is published in its entirety in Carreño, p. 120–125.

21

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Valladolid, August 23, 1538. 1 leaf.

This is a cedula issued in response to one of the requests of the bishops in item 19A. The King has been informed that certain secular clergymen are claiming exemption from the authority of the bishops. He commands the Viceroy to allow them to be expelled from the land and orders that the commissaries and preachers of the Cruzada not be allowed to give exemptions to their officials.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the back with the rubrics of five councilors of 0033 17 the Indies. It is numbered 32 on the recto, 10 [or 1] on the verso.

Printed in Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 126, in DIU, 10: 439, and in Carreño, p. 125–126.

22

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Valladolid, August 23, 1538. 1 leaf.

A response to the bishops' complaint in item 19A that many of the encomenderos were unmarried or were not supporting their wives and children in Castile. The King commands the Viceroy to persuade and exhort the unmarried encomenderos to marry, and he is to make clear to them that married men will be preferred in the distribution of Indians.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 35 on the recto, 73 on the verso. Printed in Konetzke, v. 1, p. 187.

23

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Valladolid, August 23, 1538. 1 leaf.

This cedula is a response to the request of the bishops, item 19A, regarding the college for Indian boys. The King commands the Viceroy to inspect the college and, considering its utility, to see to the construction of a new and lasting, but not sumptuous building, using Indian laborers from the nearest towns, no matter whether they are in corregimientos or encomiendas.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 39 on the recto, 60 on the verso.

Printed in Carreño, p. 126.

24

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Valladolid, August 23, 1538. 1 leaf.

This cedula is a response to the petition of the bishops in item 19A, regarding the need to raise more Spanish foodstuffs and to bring in more Spanish artisans to teach the natives. The King commands the Viceroy to look into the matter and to decree whatever he deems best.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

0034 18

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 40 on the recto, 72 on the verso.

Printed in Puga (1563), leaves 117–117v, in DIU, v. 10, p. 438, and in Konetzke, v. 1, p. 186.

25

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Valladolid, August 23, 1538. 1 leaf.

This cedula is a response to the request of the bishops in item 19A that the Indians be gathered into towns and introduced to Spanish social civilization (policía humana) so they may be instructed in Christianity more easily. The King orders the Viceroy to try by all means to induce the Indians into this settled manner of life, without oppression, but by showing them the advantages of it.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 41 on the recto.

Printed in Konetzke, v. 1, p. 186–187.

26

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to the provincial of the Franciscan Order in New Spain. Valladolid, August 23, 1538. 1 leaf.

This is in response to the bishops' request to the King in item 19A that he command the Franciscans to continue their good work in the college for Indian boys. The King charges the Franciscan provincial to see that the good work continues and to encourage the priests in their work, expressing to them the King's thanks.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. On the recto it is marked dupp[lica]da; on the verso it is marked D[u]pp[lica]da 1538–No. 11.

27

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to the royal [treasury] officials of New Spain. Toledo, October 25, 1538. 1 leaf.

Antón Gómez, a secular clergyman, was asked by the bishop of Mexico to take vestments, books of chants, and other items to Mexico for the service of the cathedral. He has requested permission to take them in without paying import duty. The King commands that the privilege be granted in New Spain and in any intervening ports, 0035 19 but if he should sell or trade the goods, the officials are to collect the complete duty.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the back with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 43 on the recto, C 70 [?] on the verso.

28

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain and to [Juan de Zumárraga], bishop of Mexico. Toledo, February 21, 1539. 1 leaf.

The King repeats the Queen's cedula of February 26, 1538, regarding instruction of Indian boys and girls (see the notarized copy in item 19) and orders that it be fulfilled.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 44 on the recto, 130 and 1539–No. 14 [?] on the verso.

29

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Royal cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Madrid, November 8, 1559. 1 leaf.

The King had been informed that Viceroy Mendoza, as a knight of the Order of Santiago, was claiming exemption from the obligation of paying tithes on his incomes. Because of the newness of the colony, the King commands him to pay the tithes in any diocese in which he is earning income.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 46 on the recto, 1539–No. 13 on the verso.

Printed in Puga (1563), leaf 167v, contained in another cedula of December 14, 1539.

30

García [de Loaysa], cardinal archbishop of Seville, governor of the Indies, Regent of Spain. Copy of a royal cedula to Juan de Zumárraga, bishop of Mexico. Madrid, January 24, 1540. 2 leaves.

Alvaro Temiño, schoolmaster of the cathedral of Mexico, in the name of the cathedral chapter had complained about the permission given to Zumárraga to make appointments of up to four benefices in the cathedral chapter when vacancies occurred through death or 0036 20 absence. According to the letter founding the chapter, the present beneficiaries were to gain the income of those who were absent. The cardinal and the Council of the Indies here give their decision that the bishop can make appointments only to benefices vacant through death or through an eight months' absence of the beneficiary.

This is a simple copy, not notarized or dated. The handwriting appears to be of the 16th century. It is numbered 47 on the recto of the first leaf, 62 on the verso of the second leaf.

31

García [de Loaysa], cardinal archbishop of Seville, governor of the Indies, Regent of Spain. Royal cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Madrid, June 10, 1540. 1 leaf.

The Crown has been informed that the Indians are keeping idols in their houses, that the bishop of Mexico has found idols during the destruction of the temples and in secret places, and that they do other things dishonorable to God. The Regent commands the Viceroy to look into the matter and to determine the punishment he deems best.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of three councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 48 on the recto, 137 and 16 on the verso.

32

García [de Loaysa], cardinal archbishop of Seville, governor of the Indies, Regent of Spain. Cedula to Juan de Zumárraga, bishop of Mexico. Madrid, November 29, 1540. 1 leaf.

Bishop Zumárraga advises the Crown that he has founded a hospital for the indigent sick and for those suffering from venereal disease. He has asked that the hospital be taken under the royal patronage so that it will be favored and better supported. The Crown accepts the patronage for the present and the future, promising to promote the good of the hospital and its poor people.

Signed; countersigned by Pedro de los Cobos.

It is endorsed on the back with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 49 on the recto, 6 on the verso.

A more formal and somewhat more extensive decree of the same date regarding the same matter is published in DHM, 2a ser., v. 3 (Mexico, 1853), p. 353–356, in García Icazbalceta (1881), v. 2, p. 138–139, and in DII, v. 41, p. 185–187.

0037 21
33

García [de Loaysa], cardinal archbishop of Seville, president of the Council of the Indies, Regent of Spain. Notarized copy of a cedula to the governors of Guatemala, Higueras, and Honduras and other justices in the Spanish Indies. Talavera, January 11, 1541. 1 leaf.

It had been reported that some of the Spanish colonists were treating the Indians as slaves, causing a great disservice to God and harm to the Indians. Therefore, the royal justices are commanded to allow the free Indians to live with whomever they please and not to allow the Spaniards to enslave them. No one shall be allowed to keep such Indians in his house against their wills, to take them to their mines or farms or anywhere else, or to transfer their ownership. The person who sells them shall be fined half of his goods. So that everyone will know of it, the cedula is to be proclaimed by the public crier in the public gathering places. Any Indian who was not justly enslaved is allowed to live as a free man, and anyone who hinders him is subject to a fine of 100 pesos, half for his accuser and half for the Crown.

The copy of the cedula, dated Madrid, May 18, 1541, is preceded and followed by the usual notarial annotations certifying its authenticity and is signed by Alonso Díaz, notary public resident in the royal court. It is numbered 50 on the recto.

Printed in Konetzke, v. 1, p. 198–199, from a copy in the AGI.

34

García [de Loaysa], cardinal archbishop Seville, governor of the Indies, Regent of Spain. Royal cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Talavera, March 14, 1541. 1 leaf.

The Crown had been informed by Bishop Zumárraga that the Augustinian friars were building a very sumptuous church in the town of Ocuytuco, which had been granted to the bishop, and that the audiencia had taken from him a third of the tribute of the town to support the construction project. Before the church was completed, the friars had started construction of a friary, even though he had told them that they should not start the friary until after the completion of the church but rather should live in the house which had formerly belonged to the encomenderos and corregidor. After agreeing to the cut in his tribute, he had also given 100 pesos a year for the construction. But the friars, insisting on building their friary against his will, had overworked the Indians, harassing, whipping, and imprisoning them. When the Indians complained to him, he had 0038 22 their two prisons torn down and sent a secular pastor to the town. At this the friars deserted the church, taking the bell, vestments, locks, and even the orange trees and other plants to the town of Totolapa, two leagues away, where they had a friary. Then the bishop diverted nearly all of the tribute of the town to completing the church, with Indian and Spanish artisans.

Now that it was completed and fully equipped the Augustinians were coming back, telling the pastor that they were going to return, even if the bishop did not wish it, and that if he put Franciscans there they would drive them out with lances. They had also done other things not becoming to friars. Zumárraga asked that they not be allowed to return. The cardinal commands the Viceroy to inquire into the matter and if the bishop's report is correct, the Augustinians are not to be allowed to return to the town. Also, if there are any malcontents among the Augustinians, he is to have the provincial expel them from the land.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed at the foot of the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 52 on the recto.

35

García [de Loaysa], cardinal archbishop of Seville, governor of the Indies, Regent of Spain. Copy of a cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Talavera, August 16, 1541. 2 leaves.

This cedula repeats in full an earlier one issued by the cardinal in Madrid on January 9, 1540, to Viceroy Mendoza, the audiencia, and Bishop Zumárraga. In that cedula the cardinal ordered that, in view of the increase in population, the City of Mexico was to be divided into parishes, leaving one third of it to the cathedral and distributing the rest into parishes in a way that would seem best. Also specified in detail was the manner in which the tithes should be divided in both the cathedral parish and the other parishes.

Bishop Zumárraga, however, had complained that it was too early to divide the city into parishes, because the tithes were not adequate to support such a change and the population was adequately served by the cathedral and the three churches of friars. The bishop asked that the previous cedula be suspended. The cardinal now commands the Viceroy to examine the matter and, after consultation with the audiencia and the bishop, to decree what seems best to him.

The original of the cedula was signed by the cardinal and counter-signed by Juan de Sámano. This is a simple copy, apparently contemporary 0039 23 but without notarization or date. It is numbered 53 on the recto of the first leaf, 66 on the verso of the second leaf.

Printed in Carreño, p. 178–180.

36

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Notarized copy of a royal cedula to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Barcelona, May 1, 1543. 1 leaf.

The King has been informed that some clergymen who had been friars in Spain had gone to New Spain and had left their religious orders there and that they were giving a bad example in the new land, where greater than usual attention to a good life was necessary. The Viceroy is commanded to inquire into the matter, and if he finds such clergymen, he is to compel them to return to Spain.

The copy of the cedula, dated Mexico, October 8, 1555, the original of which was signed by the King and countersigned by Juan de Sámano, is preceded and followed by the usual notarial certifications and is signed by Juan de Ybarreta, royal notary in Mexico. The copy was witnessed by clérigo Juan Cabello and Juan de la Puebla. It is numbered 55 on the recto, 134 on the verso.

The cedula is printed in Puga (1563), leaf 96v, and in Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 126–127, and is cited in Recop., ley lxxxiv, tit. 14, lib. I.

37

The Prince [later Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to Juan de Zumárraga, bishop of Mexico. Valladolid, June 16, 1543. 1 leaf.

To be better informed about the state of the bishop's diocese, the Prince commands Zumárraga to send him a report via the first ships leaving for Spain. The report is to discuss affairs of the diocese: the administration of justice there, the regulation of spiritual matters, the instruction and good treatment of the natives, the clergy and religious orders and whether more friars or clergy are needed, how the natives are treated, the care of royal finances and how they are being improved, and anything else that seems appropriate. This is to be done so that the Crown will be better able to legislate. The bishop is exhorted to give advice regularly on these matters.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies on the verso. It is numbered 56 on the recto, 131 and 17 on the verso.

0040 24
38

The Prince [later Philip II of Spain]. Notarized copy of a royal cedula to Vasco de Quiroga, bishop of Michoacán. Valladolid, August 23, 1543. 2 leaves.

The Prince reminds the bishop that the Emperor, in fulfillment of his obligation of good government for the Indies and good treatment for the Indians and after much deliberation and consultation, has issued certain ordinances and declarations, many of which are related to the welfare of the Indians “so that in everything they may be treated well as free people and vassals of His Majesty, as they are.” Printed copies are being sent with the cedula. He has commanded authorities in the New World to put them into effect; he has also ordered the religious to make them known to the Indians and to notify the audiencia about offenders. But he had thought it seemly to notify the bishop personally so that he should be watchful concerning the fulfillment of the ordinances and notify the local royal authorities concerning violations. If the local authorities are remiss, he is to inform the audiencia; if the audiencia does not take action, he is to notify the Crown. This would not only fulfill his obligation to God and to his conscience but would also be a service to the Emperor. The date of the cedula as originally written on this copy was August 23, 1544, but was changed to August 23, 1543.

The notarized copy, dated Mexico, October 16, 1555, is preceded and followed by the usual notarial annotations and is signed by Juan de Ybarreta, notary of His Majesty in the City of Mexico. It is numbered 57 on the recto of the first leaf, 44 on the verso of the second leaf.

39

The Prince [later Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to Juan de Zumárraga, bishop of Mexico. Valladolid, August 23, 1543. 2 leaves.

This cedula has the same text as that of the cedula in item 38, with a simple change of the name of the recipient.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed at the foot of the verso of the first leaf with three rubrics of councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 58 on the recto of the first leaf, 132 (or 152) and 18 on the verso of the second leaf.

40

The Prince [later Philip II of Spain]. Royal letter to Juan de Zumárraga, bishop of Mexico. Madrid, November 8, 1546. 2 leaves.

The Prince is answering Bishop Zumárraga's letter of February 0041 25 24, 1548, in which the bishop had made some suggestions for the good of the colony and the natives.

The Prince approves a donation (unspecified) which the bishop has made to the hospital for those suffering from venereal disease as well as the donation of three houses to help support it with their rents.

Next to the hospital there is a house which was used for the instruction of the daughters of Indian nobles, but now it is empty. The bishop has asked that it also be appropriated to the hospital, and the Prince approves.

Because the bishop complained about the excessive fees for lawyers, the Prince is writing to the audiencia to command them to establish rates for lawyers. Zumárraga had also suggested that an approved physician should examine the apothecaries, inspect their shops, and fix the prices for medicine. The Prince is also commanding the audiencia to attend to this matter.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed at the foot of the verso of the first leaf with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 54 on the recto of the first leaf, 16 on the verso of the second leaf.

41

The Prince [later Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain. Madrid, November 8, 1546. 1 leaf.

The Prince notifies the audiencia of Bishop Zumárraga's request that the house which had formerly housed the daughters of the native nobles should be appropriated to the hospital for venereal disease (see item 40), and he commands this transfer to be carried out, provided it does not harm the interests of a third party.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

There is a rubric at the foot of the recto and five rubrics at the top of the verso, one of which is the same as that on the recto. It is numbered 60 on the recto. Part of a summary on the verso has been torn off.

42

The Prince [later Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to Juan de Zumárraga, archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, June 12, 1548. 1 leaf.

In a letter of April 30, 1547, Zumárraga had reported the misdeeds of Juan Negrete, archdeacon of the cathedral, and that he had the records of judicial inquiries into the matter. The Prince tells him 0042 26 that corrective action is the bishop's responsibility. The Prince is sending a letter to the audiencia of New Spain commanding them to give the bishop whatever support he needs.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso with four rubrics of councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 61 on the recto, 20 on the verso.

When this cedula was issued, Bishop Zumárraga was already dead. He died in Mexico on June 2, 1548.

43

The Prince [later Philip II of Spain]. Notarized copy of a royal cedula to the audiencias of New Spain, Guatemala, and New Galicia. Madrid, March 11, 1553. 2 leaves.

The Prince reminds the audiencias that he has appointed bishops with good qualifications for the dioceses in their jurisdictions and that the bishops and their vicars should be given due honor and their cathedrals favored. He commands, therefore, that they be given such honor and that the cathedrals be assisted and given the preeminence which is their due.

The annotation preceding the copy of the cedula records that in Mexico City on July 12, 1554, Pero Ramírez Cabezudo, fiscal of the city and of the archdiocese and its court, appeared in the presence of Juan Cano, alcalde ordinario of the city, and of Pedro de Salazar, notary public, and asked in the name of Archbishop Alonso de Montúfar that notarized copies of the cedula be made. The alcalde ordered it to be done. Witnesses, Cristóbal de Heredia and Alonso de Trujillo, notaries public.

The annotation following the cedula states that the copy was made on July 12, 1554. Witnesses, Alonso de Mansilla, Juan de Ybarreta, and Melchor de Miranda. It is signed by Alcalde Ordinario Juan Cano and the notary, Pedro de Salazar.

It is numbered 64 on the recto of the first leaf, 9 on the verso of the second leaf.

Puga (1563), leaf 168–168v, published this cedula but dated it March 11, 1543.

Royal cedula from Prince Philip of Spain to the archbishop of Mexico, May 10, 1554. Item 44.

0043 0044 28
44

The Prince [later Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to Alonso de Montúfar, archbishop of Mexico. Valladolid, May 10, 1554. 1 leaf.

The Prince notifies the archbishop that after the death of Edward [VI], King of England, the Emperor arranged for him (Philip) to marry his aunt [ sic ] Mary [Tudor] who had succeeded to the throne. The Emperor thought that this union would be good for his realms and for the universal peace of Christendom. The Prince, upon leaving for his marriage, is informing the archbishop of the marriage and of the fact that during his absence and that of the Emperor, his sister, the Princess [Juana] of Portugal, will be in charge of the government. He commands that she be obeyed like the monarchs themselves and asks the archbishop to pray to God to guide him and take him by the hand so that he might better serve him.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the back with six rubrics of councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 65 on the recto, 18 on the verso.

A cedula of the same date and content, addressed to the president and audiencia of New Spain, is printed in Puga (1563), leaves 149v–150, and another to the cathedral chapter appears in Carreño, p. 229–230.

45

The Princess [Juana, Princess of Spain and Portugal]. Royal letter to Alonso de Montúfar, archbishop of Mexico. Valladolid, July 17, 1555. 1 leaf.

The Princess is replying to the archbishop's letter of November 30, 1554, in which he had informed the Crown of his arrival in Mexico. She expresses her pleasure at this and hopes for good results from his presence. She tells him to send advice for legislation.

She is pleased by his desire for peace between the royal and ecclesiastical jurisdictions. She charges him to do everything that he can toward that end; she is writing to the audiencia regarding these matters.

She is writing to the Viceroy regarding the construction of the first part of the cathedral, which the archbishop thought could be completed in 12 or 15 years; the archbishop will know of her decision through the Viceroy.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Ledesma.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 66 on the recto.

0045 29
46

The Princess [Juana, Princess of Spain and Portugal]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of Mexico. Valladolid, December 27, 1555. 1 leaf.

Juan Ruiz Rubio, in the name of the archbishop of Mexico and his cabildo, had reported that the Viceroy and the regidores of the city were threatening to take away a large part of the land that had been set aside for the cathedral, even though it had been blessed by the first bishop of Tlaxcala. They would have only enough space for the body of the church, without room for the offices which would be necessary. The archbishop's representatives asked that the area be reserved for the church and that in the meantime the Crown should command that the area not be used as a dung heap, dumping ground, or a place for keeping and killing bulls, since it had been consecrated. The Princess commands the audiencia to look into the matter promptly and to reach a decision which would not give any of the parties grounds for complaint.

Signed; countersigned by Ochoa de Luyando.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of three councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 69 on the recto.

47

The Princess [Juana, Princess of Spain and Portugal]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of Mexico. Valladolid, March 16, 1556. 1 leaf.

Juan Ruiz Rubio, representing the archbishop of Mexico, has reported that many friars in New Spain have built sumptuous friaries in out-of-the-way places where there are only two friars, and that what one superior built another would tear down, all at the expense of the Crown and Indians. He accused them of using groups of 200 to 300 Indians in rotation without giving them food or anything else. As a result, many Indians were fleeing and were asking for secular priests rather than friars. The friars reportedly were also making excessive expenses ornamenting their churches, e.g., for retables, monstrances, and cruets. Ruiz Rubio requested the Crown to command that the friars show moderation in their buildings, that the plans of the friaries should be approved by the Viceroy and the prelate of the diocese, that the plans should be proportionate to the place and the number of friars, that friars should not be allowed to tear down what had been built, except with the approval of the Viceroy and prelate after consulting with artisans, that moderation be observed in the ornamentation, such as vestments of gold, silk, silver, and brocade and crosses, chalices, and monstrances, so 0046 30 that the caciques would not lay the burden of it on the common people. The Council of the Indies having considered this, a decision was reached to command the audiencia to look into the matter and to decree what would be best for the service of God and the Crown and the good of the natives.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of seven councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 70 on the recto, 24 and 27 on the verso.

48

The Princess [Juana, Princess of Spain and Portugal]. Royal cedula to [Alonso de Montúfar], archbishop of Mexico. Valladolid, September 15, 1556. 1 leaf.

It had been reported that the archbishop had interfered with the secular judges in the execution of justice by imposing censures on them, especially in the case of a certain Quijada, a former soldier of Gonzalo Pizarro in Peru, who had been condemned forever to the galleys and who later had committed crimes in New Spain. The Princess charges him to restrain himself in imposing censures in the future, since it is not right for such malefactors to find asylum in the church; she further commands him to punish the clergy for any excesses which they may commit.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Sámano.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. It does not have any old enumeration but is marked duplicada at the top of the recto.

49

Luis Pérez, beneficed vicar of the Mines of Taxco, Hernando de Encina, curate of the same place, Gaspar de Roças and Martín Rodríguez, secular priests resident in the same place. Notarized copy of a power of attorney to Bachiller Juan de la Riba, vicar general of the archdiocese of Mexico, or to his successor, to Juan de Salazar and Francisco Ramírez, attorneys for cases in the audiencia of New Spain, and to Juan Ruiz Rubio, canon of the cathedral of Mexico, and Juan Ortiz de Oribe, the last two of whom were at the royal court. The Mines of Taxco, February 5, 1558. 4 leaves.

The four priests state that at the request of the Dominican, Franciscan, and Augustinian Orders in New Spain, the Crown had issued four cedulas which the secular clergy found offensive. The first forbade the archbishop and bishops of New Spain to put secular clergy in towns where there were friars; the second allowed the friars 0047 31 to found friaries wherever they wished in New Spain, without obtaining permission from the archbishop or bishops; the third suspended the chapter of the synodal regulations which required the general payment of tithes; and the fourth commanded the archbishop and bishops of New Spain to allow the friars of the three orders to administer the sacraments freely. The secular priests maintained that these decrees were harmful to the secular clergy and to the Christianity of the natives and that the Crown would not have issued them if it had been better informed. They claimed that if the cedulas were carried out, the secular clergy would have to leave. The friars had monopolized such an area that they could not take care of a 10th or a 20th of it. Under the cover of false piety, the friars had informed the Crown that it would not be good for the Indians to pay tithes, because they foresaw that once the Indians started paying tithes, secular clergy would be sent among them, and the friars would lose the control over both spiritual and temporal matters, which they had maintained up to this time. The Crown had ordered certain inquiries made and had asked for certain opinions, all of which were now being sent to His Majesty.

In view of this, the four priests are giving their power of attorney for the pursuit of their interests before the Pope, the King, the Council of the Indies, the audiencia of New Spain and any other secular or ecclesiastical justices who might be involved.

The original of the power of attorney was signed by the four priests in the register of the notary and was witnessed by Diego López de Aragón, Francisco Rodríguez, and Juan Nardón. The copy is signed by Pedro Garcés, notary public.

It is numbered 73 on the recto of the first leaf. The last leaf is blank except for a very brief summary notation.

50

The Princess [Juana, Princess of Spain and Portugal]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain. Valladolid, May 7, 1558. 1 leaf.

Juan Ruiz Rubio, canon of the cathedral of Mexico and representative of the archbishop of that city, reported that in many Indian towns there were chests in which large amounts of gold pesos were placed each year at the expense of the common people and that headmen of the towns spent the money on eating and drunkenness rather than for the good of the community. He has requested that the Crown command that a triple lock be placed on each chest and that one key be given to the cacique of the town, the second to one of the Indian alcaldes, and the third to the corregidor, who 0048 32 at the time of his residencia would have to give an account of the income and expenditures, keeping a record book for this purpose. The Council of the Indies agreed to send this royal cedula to the audiencia, commanding it to look into the question and to decree what it considered best.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Ledesma.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 75 on the recto, 25 on the verso. Part of a summary annotation on the verso is torn off.

51

The Princess [Juana, Princess of Spain and Portugal]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain. Valladolid, May 27, 1558. 1 leaf.

Juan Ruiz Rubio, canon of the cathedral of Mexico and representative of its archbishop, reported that even though the Indian commoners had been relieved of the obligation of personal service to the Spaniards, the Indian leaders keep them under heavy servitude, worse than under Moctezuma, making them work for the common funds which the leaders then consume, or having them plant fields, build houses, and carry burdens without pay. The Indian commoners are so subject to them that they do not resist. There is such a great number of headmen that unless a stop is put to this practice almost all will be headmen. This happens in two ways. First, one becomes a merchant and, having built up some capital, he becomes a headman; if he makes any contribution to the tribute, it is not in money or personal service. Secondly, those who serve in the friaries, as well as their parents and brothers, are free from tribute and personal service. As a result the burden falls on the commoners, who serve not only their traditional headmen but also those who have become headmen, because the latter are not willing to cultivate the fields or do any kind of personal service. The canon, in the archbishop's name, petitioned that the situation be remedied. The question having been considered by the Council of the Indies, the audiencia is hereby commanded to look into the matter and decree what is best.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Ledesma.

It is endorsed on the back with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 76 on the recto, 23 [marked through] and 26 on the verso.

0049 33
52

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Luis de Velasco], Viceroy of New Spain. El Pardo, October 16, 1559. 1 leaf.

The cathedral chapter of Antequera [Oaxaca], during the vacancy of the office of bishop, reported that one Cristóbal de Chaves had died intestate and that, even though his funeral rites pertained to the cathedral church, the Dominican friars, giving great scandal and bad example, had gone to his house with raised cross and taken his body to their friary—an offense against the cathedral and its immunity. When the diocesan authority excommunicated some people who accompanied the body of the deceased, the Dominicans admitted them to the hours of the office and preached publicly that the excommunications had no validity and that the friars would absolve them. Other scandalous words were also used, all of which was evident from an investigation which had been presented to the King. The King, having been requested to remedy the situation, expresses the opinion that such matters should be punished rigorously so that the friars will cease such actions and give a good example. He then commands that the Dominican provincial be shown the copy of the investigation signed by Gómez de Paz and that he punish the guilty friars in proportion to the seriousness of the case, so that it will be a punishment for the guilty and an example for others.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 79 on the recto, 35 and 34 [marked out] on the verso.

53

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Luis de Velasco], Viceroy of New Spain. Aranjuez, October 21, 1559. 1 leaf.

The archbishop of Mexico had reported to the Crown that after he had appointed a secular priest, Juan de Ayllón, as vicar of the towns of Tlaquiltenango and Caçatepeque, certain Franciscan friars had entered Ayllón's house, mistreated him, and ousted him, because they claimed that the region was under their charge and that the bishop must not appoint a vicar there. This caused scandal among the Indians and placed an additional burden on them because they had to go a great distance to the friaries for services. Ayllón, seeing that he could not exercise his office, returned to Mexico City. All this was contained in a written investigation which had been sent to the King with a request for solution. In response, the King commands 0050 34 the Viceroy to summon the Franciscan provincial and tell him to punish the friars who are found guilty; if the provincial is away the Viceroy is to notify him. If the friars are not punished, the Viceroy is authorized to expel them from the land if he thinks this best.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Erasso.

The third to last line of the text is badly damaged, but the sense can be understood from the summary at the foot of the page. It is endorsed on the verso with rubrics of six councilors of the Indies.

There are two annotations on the verso, besides a brief summary. The first, signed by Viceroy Luis de Velasco and authenticated by Antonio de Turcios, records that in Mexico City on May 9, 1560, the cedula was presented before Viceroy Velasco by Alonso de Montúfar, the archbishop of Mexico, in the presence of Antonio de Turcios, the major royal notary. The Viceroy gave due reverence to the cedula and expressed his readiness to obey it.

The second annotation records that, because the Franciscan provincial was away from the city, the Viceroy sent him a letter and a copy of the cedula and asked him to report on the punishment so that the King could be notified. It is signed by Antonio de Turcios.

On the recto the cedula is marked dup[lica]da, without any old enumeration. On the verso it is numbered 34.

54

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to [Alonso de Montúfar], archbishop of Mexico. Toledo, June 24, 1560. 2 leaves.

The King had been informed that the archbishop of Mexico was unwilling to ordain any friars because of the antipathy that he held toward them over the question of tithes. It had also been reported that he was ordaining many mestizos and other people born in the land. The King charges him that, in consideration of the great amount of good work that the friars have done and are doing among the natives, he should ordain any friars who need ordination, without any excuse or delay.

An annotation is also included in the copy, which records that in Mexico City on January 15, 1561, Antonio de Turcios, at the command of the audiencia, read the cedula to Archbishop Montúfar. The archbishop gave the cedula the usual signs of respect and obedience, but he said that a false report had been given to the King. He maintained that he had a paternal love for all of the friars in New Spain and that he had ordained all of those whom he found fit. In regard to ordaining mestizos, he claimed he had not done so.

0051 35

This is a simple copy, without notarization or date, but it appears to be from the 16th century. It is numbered 80 on the recto of the first sheet, 57 on the verso of the second sheet. The two summary notes on the verso of the second sheet erroneously state that the archbishop is commanded not to ordain mestizos.

Printed in Puga (1563), leaf 211, in Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 172, and in Konetzke, v. 1, p. 377–378.

55

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to the archbishops and bishops and other archdiocesan and diocesan officials of the islands and mainland of the Ocean Sea. Toledo, August 27, 1560. Also, copy of the response of the archdiocesan authorities of Mexico to the cedula. Mexico, January 15–23, 1561. 2 leaves.

It had been reported to the King that the ecclesiastical authorities were imposing excommunications for trivial reasons and imposing pecuniary fines on laymen. Because the King felt that greater temperance should be shown in a new land and greater emphasis placed upon good example and avoidance of scandal, he charges them not to excommunicate for slight reasons and not to impose pecuniary fines on laymen.

In Mexico City on January 15, 1561, the Notary Major Antonio de Turcios, at the command of the audiencia, read the cedula to Archbishop Alonso de Montúfar. The archbishop gave the cedula the usual signs of reverence and answered that, far from excommunicating for minor matters, the Church's jurisdiction was not even obeyed in grave matters and, in regard to pecuniary fines, they were imposed only in very serious cases. He stated that his understanding of the cedula was that it referred to fines imposed for slight causes and that if any other meaning were given to the cedula, he appealed from it with all due respect.

On January 22, 1561, the Notary Agustín Pinto presented the cedula to Doctor Anguís, vicar-general of the archdiocese, who reverenced it but supported the appeal of the archbishop. Witnesses, Juan Baptista de Avendaño and Francisco de Basivara.

On January 23, 1561, Agustín Pinto presented the cedula to Francisco Sánchez Moreno, vicar-general for Indians, who also reverenced it but supported the archbishop's response. Witness, Lázaro del Alamo.

On January 25, Doctor Anguís presented a more extended legal argumentation in support of the archbishop's position.

Antonio de Turcios notarized a copy of all of the preceding 0052 36 documents at the request of the archbishop and by command of the audiencia on February 4, 1561. Witnesses, Juan de Salazar and Diego de Quadros.

The present manuscript is an unnotarized and undated copy of all of the aforementioned documents. It appears to be a 16th-century copy. It is numbered 59 on the verso of the second leaf.

The cedula is printed in Puga (1563), leaf 210v, in Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 168, and in Medina (1914), v. 1, p. 488–489.

56

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to the archbishop and bishops of the Spanish Indies. Toledo, August 31, 1560. 1 leaf.

In some of the synods which had been held in the Indies, some decrees had been issued which were harmful to the royal jurisdiction and others which had produced bad results. Because the land was new and the faith newly planted, great care should be taken that scandal and other harmful results not arise. The King therefore charges the bishops that before they publish or print synodal acts they should send them to the Council of the Indies for approval and, if they have already held synods, they should send the results to Spain on the first ships.

An annotation records that on January 15, 1561, Antonio de Turcios, at the command of the audiencia, read the cedula to Archbishop Montúfar. The archbishop gave the usual signs of reverence to the cedula and said that since his arrival in New Spain he had held only one provincial synod (1555), the results of which had been sent to the King and Council as soon as it was completed. He had been informed of their receipt, but he would send another copy. If any synod were held in the future he would obey the King's command.

This is a simple copy of both the cedula and the annotation, without date or notarization, but apparently from the 16th century. It is numbered 88 on the recto.

The cedula is printed in Puga (1563), leaf 210v, and in Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 136–137, and is cited in Recop., ley vi, tit. 8, lib. I.

57

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain. Toledo, February 19, 1561. 1 leaf.

It had been reported to the Crown that there were serious excesses in regard to the number, kind, and expense of musicians and singers. 0053 37 There were players for trumpets, trombones, hautbois, shawms, sackbuts, drums, flutes, cornets, flageolets, fifes, bowed and plucked viols, and other sorts of instruments. They were commonly found in the friaries and their number was constantly increasing, in both large and small towns. The report made the accusation that the musicians and singers, who had been reared in the friaries learning their art, were great idlers who from childhood knew all of the women in the towns, ruined married women and girls, and showed all the other vices related to the idleness in which they were reared. In many towns the musicians and singers did not pay tribute, so that the burden fell upon the poor. Many towns were trying to free themselves of the service of the superior towns because of the problems caused by the musicians and singers. The report suggested that the audiencia should confer with the prelates and provincials to seek a solution to the problem. The King commands that the audiencia investigate the situation and prevent future excesses, sending a report of their actions.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 86 on the recto.

58

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Luis de Velasco], Viceroy of New Spain. Aranjuez, March 4, 1561. 1 leaf.

The King first reminds the Viceroy that royal orders have been issued previously regarding the construction of friaries. He has now received a report that friaries are being built close together because the friars want to be in good areas and close to Mexico City. In other more difficult areas Indians may be left without instruction for a distance of 20 or 30 leagues. Following suggestions in the report, the King commands the Viceroy to see that future friaries are not built closer than six leagues apart, and that the friaries in one province of the country should all belong to the same order.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 85 on the recto, 30 on the verso.

Printed in Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 145.

59

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Alonso de Montúfar], archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, August 26, 1561. 1 leaf.

It had been reported to the King that when the archbishop went 0054 38 through the city or to nearby places he desired a large number of people to accompany him. And it had happened that on solemn feast days there would be no one in the choir of the cathedral except two chaplains, and he had scolded one canon who had returned to the choir. Further, those who accompanied him received their fees as though they had been in the choir, while he took off for those who missed choir to prepare sermons, even with the chapter's permission. The King reminds him that he had been ordered not to take a large cortege with him when he left the city because of the harm to the Indians; he charges him to avoid a large accompaniment both inside and outside of the city, not to interfere with those who should serve in choir, and to favor and encourage those who are preparing sermons.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with four rubrics of councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 82 on the recto, 75 [marked out] and 32 on the verso.

60

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal letter to [Alonso de Montúfar], archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, August 26, 1561. 1 leaf.

The King is responding to three letters of the archbishop dated February 4, 1561, in which the latter complained about four royal cedulas: 1) regarding ordination of friars, 2) regarding royal approval for synodal acts, 3) prohibiting him from putting his attorneys in towns other than Mexico City, and 4) prohibiting him from excommunicating for slight causes and from imposing pecuniary fines. The King tells the archbishop that his arguments have been considered, but that, since the cedulas were well considered beforehand and were issued for all the prelates of the Indies, he is ordering them to be reissued. Regarding the ordination of friars, he is to ordain those who present certification of having been examined by their superiors; otherwise he can examine them or have them examined and ordain those whom he finds able.

The King approves the archbishop's having ordained those who were born in the New World of Spanish parents on both sides. Such ordinations may continue, provided the candidates are fit.

The King has read the archbishop's complaints about the friars and is displeased that there is so much lack of conformity between the bishops and the friars of New Spain because of the problems which result from this in relation to the instruction of the Indians. He trusts that the archbishop will employ all of his good graces to 0055 39 bring about peace and unity. The King has written to the friars also. He further promises that a decision will soon be given in regard to the tithes.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Erasso.

It is endorsed at the foot of the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 87 on the recto.

61

Luis de Velasco, Viceroy of New Spain, and the audiencia of New Spain. Order to Antiwarés de Cabrera, notary and receptor of the audiencia. Mexico, May 14, 1563. 1 leaf.

Antonio de la Cadena, vecino of Mexico, had reported that in 1560, by commission of the audiencia, Dr. Ceynos had sent Andrés de Cabrera to establish the boundaries of a caballería of land which was in dispute between the Indians of Tacuba and Pero Ortiz, Cadena's tenant. Cabrera, in the presence of Melchor Vázquez, alcalde of Tacuba, and Gerónimo del Aguila, and three regidores and other headmen, had established the boundaries without any contradiction from the Indians. Now the Indians of Tacuba are bothering Cadena about the possession of the land, and Cadena has asked that Cabrera be sent back to review the boundaries and establish him as the owner. Accordingly, the audiencia commands him to check the boundary and to report back to the audiencia so they can make a decision.

It is signed by the Viceroy Luis de Velasco and by the oidores Doctor [Francisco de] Ceynos, Doctor [Pedro de] Villalobos, Doctor Vasco de Puga, and Doctor [Luis de] Villanueva.

On the verso is the undated autograph report of Andrés de Cabrera, who found that the Indians had planted two small pieces of land within the boundaries of the caballería.

The leaf, which appears to have been taken from a legal dossier, is numbered 234 on the recto.

62

Luis de Velasco, Viceroy of New Spain. Viceregal grant of land to Diego Sánchez. Mexico, June 5, 1564. 2 leaves.

The Viceroy grants to Diego Sánchez, vecino of the town of San Felipe, a site for an estancia for small livestock along the road from San Felipe to Zacatecas at the foot of the hill of El Fuerte by a lake which has water during the rainy season. Juan Sánchez de Alanis had inspected the site and informed the Viceroy that it would not interfere with the rights of anyone else. During the first six years 0056 40 he could not sell or alienate it to anyone except to vecinos of the town; afterward he could sell it to whomever he wished, provided it was not to a church or an ecclesiastical person. (There are some irregularities in this grant which justify a suspicion that it may be fraudulent.)

Signed; countersigned by Antonio Estris[?]. Appended are two later documents regarding the land grant.

On the verso of the first leaf there is an annotation recording that in San Felipe on December 8, 1572, Diego Sánchez, in the presence of Alonso Díaz, alcalde ordinario, ceded the land to Cristóbal Hurtado, a vecino of the town, in view of the many kindnesses he had received from him. It is signed by Diego Sánchez, Alonso Díaz, and the notary Juan Lopes.

On the recto of the second leaf is recorded the fact that in San Felipe on June 21, 1632, in the presence of Juan de Tafalla, deputy of the alguacil mayor, Francisco de Quintana appeared as representative of Agustín Rincón and asked to be given possession of the land which had been granted to Diego Sánchez. This formality of pulling up grass, throwing stones, and other acts of possession, was carried out in the presence of the notary. The location of the estancia was indicated as being about one and a half leagues from San Felipe. This affidavit is signed by Juan de Tafalla, Francisco de Quintana, and the notary, Clemente Azcanda.

63

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula for the archbishop and cathedral chapter of Mexico. Madrid, September 3, 1564. 1 leaf.

Doctor Bravo de Lagunas, canon of the cathedral of Mexico, as representative of the archbishop and cathedral chapter, had informed the Crown that the Emperor had granted to the cathedral the two-ninths [of one-half] of the tithe which belonged to the Crown. This first grant had been given for three years, but it had been extended by various other grants for another 24 years. The funds were to be used for various expenses in the construction of the cathedral. The most recent extension of the grant had expired on January 9, 1563. Therefore, archdiocesan authorities requested that the grant be extended for another four years because of the needs of the archdiocese. The King here grants the requested extension, retroactive to the date of the expiration of the previous grant. He also commands the treasury officials to carry it out, turning over to the archdiocese any of the tithes which they might have collected for the King since the expiration of the last grant. They are also 0057 41 to see that the funds are spent for the purpose for which they were granted.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 92 on the recto.

64

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to the audiencia and treasury officials of New Spain. Madrid, November 23, 1566. 1 leaf.

Hierónimo de Ulloa, fiscal (attorney) of the Council of the Indies, reported that the parochial clergy (curas) were not being given the share which was due them from the tithes. As a result their full salaries were being paid from the funds of the royal treasury, whereas the Crown should have been responsible only for what was necessary for their support over and above what they received from the tithes. After this had been discussed in the Council of the Indies, it was agreed, and the King concurred, that the present cedula should be issued commanding that the parochial clergy be given that part of the tithe which they were entitled to and that the royal officials should pay the clergy only the part of their salary which was not paid by the tithe, without unjustly burdening the treasury or the encomenderos.

This is a simple copy, not notarized or dated, although it appears to be from the 16th century. It is numbered 95 on the recto, 120 on the verso.

Printed in Carreño, p. 291–292.

65

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to Alonso de Montúfar, archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, July 1, 1567. 1 leaf.

Juan de la Peña, representing the cathedral chapter of Mexico, had called the Crown's attention to the fact that the archbishop was still exercising the special privilege of appointing up to four clergymen to vacant benefices, even though there was now a much larger group (17 or 18) of beneficed clergy adequate to carry out the offices. The members of the chapter asked that this practice be stopped, provided there were four or six beneficed clergy to perform the services, and that the remaining tithes for the benefices be distributed among those who were resident. The matter was considered in the Council of the Indies, and, with the concurrence of the King, they charged the archbishop not to appoint any clergy to benefices as long as 0058 42 there were four or more residing there who had been appointed by the King. As soon as a benefice becomes vacant, the archbishop is to notify the Crown so that an appointment can be made, and he is not to make any interim appointments.

Signed; countersigned by Martín de Gaztelu.

It is endorsed with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies on the verso. It is numbered 96 on the recto.

Printed in Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 90–91, and in Carreño, p. 293–294, and cited in Recop., ley xii, tit. 6, lib. I.

66

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to the archbishops and bishops of the Indies. The Escorial, November 3, 1567. 2 leaves.

The King had been advised that in some places encomenderos and royal justices had presumed to appoint beneficed clergy in the towns over which they had authority and that prelates had attempted to install beneficed clergy in the towns without royal approval, both of which were contrary to the rights and preeminence of the Crown. He therefore charges all the prelates of the Indies that in the future they should not make appointments to any dignity or benefice. In places where there are to be parish priests, the prelate can give them power to administer the sacraments and do other services pertaining to his office. In towns where a beneficed clergyman is needed, in order to avoid suspension of clerical services, the prelates can give permission for the clergy to serve in the benefices without installing them canonically, but within two years they are to present the permission and a letter of approval from the prelate before the Council of the Indies so that the Crown may formally present them, or whomever it pleases, for the office. By virtue of this royal presentation to the benefice, the prelates may install the beneficed clergy. If the clergy do not get the presentation within two years, the prelates are to remove them and give the interim appointment to others, who shall have the same obligation of petitioning the Crown for formal presentation.

The bishops had been given the privilege of appointing clergy to no more than four vacant benefices in their churches, but because many of these appointees had neglected to get royal approval, they are also to be required to obtain formal royal presentation within two years, and if they do not, they are to be replaced by others, with the same obligation. The prelates are to report on the qualifications of the applicant so that the King will know whether to appoint him or someone else. The obligation of the cedula is retroactive, and 0059 43 those who had previously been installed in benefices without formal presentation are to obtain it within two years or be replaced.

Signed; countersigned by Martín de Gaztelu.

It is endorsed on the verso of the first leaf with the rubrics of three councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 97 on the recto of the first leaf, 97 and 96 [marked out] on the verso of the second leaf.

Printed in Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 91–92, contained in a cedula of September 11, 1569.

67

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal letter to [Alonso de Montúfar], archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, December 19, 1568. 1 leaf.

The King is answering the archbishop's letter of March 7, 1568, in which the archbishop reported on the procession which had been held for the safe delivery of Queen Isabel [Elisabeth of Valois] and a resultant disagreement with the cathedral chapter. He commands them to find out what had been done in the past and, in the meantime, to do what was customary and to carry out the instructions in an accompanying cedula.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of seven councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 98 on the recto.

68

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to the archbishop and cathedral chapter of Mexico. Madrid, December 19, 1568. 1 leaf.

This is the cedula referred to in the previous letter (item 67). The archbishop had established a certain order of procession with various ranks of the friars interspersed among the various ranks of the beneficed clergy, but the cathedral chapter had commanded all of the friars to follow the prebendaries. This had resulted in some discontent, and when the procession was ready to leave the church, the archbishop ordered them to follow the custom of their predecessors. An open verbal dispute of such intensity broke out between the archbishop and the chapter that the royal judges, Licenciado Muñoz of the Council of the Indies and Dr. Carrillo, magistrate of the royal household, had to command that the archbishop's decision be carried out. To avoid recurrence of such a scandal, the King commands that they make an inquiry and report to him on what had been done previously in the city and that until he makes a decision, 0060 44 they should continue to follow their established custom without innovation.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of seven councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 99 on the recto and 49 [marked out], 50 [marked out], and 39 on the verso.

Printed in Carreño p. 296–297.

69

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to the archbishop and bishops of the Indies. Madrid, February 5, 1569. 1 leaf.

The King had been advised that in the Indies there were some secular priests who were doing well for the service of God by instructing and converting the natives; it would be a loss if they were permitted to return to Spain. He therefore charges the bishops not to give permission easily for such priests to return but to urge them to stay, giving them help and encouragement.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of eight councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 100 on the recto; a number on the verso has been largely torn off.

70

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain. Constantina [near Seville], February 15, 1570. 1 leaf.

Dr. Sancho Sánchez de Muñón, schoolmaster of the cathedral of Mexico, representing the archbishop and cathedral chapter of Mexico City, reported that when the dioceses of Guadalajara, Michoaćan, Jalisco, and Tlaxcala were separated from the archdiocese of Mexico, it was closed in and left with a very reduced area, less than that of any of the suffragan dioceses. In some places its boundaries were within 11 or 12 leagues of the city, while some of the other sees extended out for 40 or 50 leagues. They asked that some of the excess area of the dioceses be taken away and given to the archdiocese. The King, therefore, asks for a report on the extent of the dioceses and the distance between the see cities and on the possible directions in which the archdiocese might be extended with the least injury to a third party. The members of the audiencia are to present their opinions together with the report.

This is a simple copy, without notarization or date, but apparently of the 16th century. It is numbered 103 on the recto, 8 on the verso.

0061 45

Someone used the bottom half of the verso to practice making his rubric.

The cedula is printed in Carreño, p. 300–301.

71

[Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a section of a royal document. [Spain, ca. 1574]. 1 leaf.

This is a copy of a paragraph of a general royal instruction regarding the presentation to beneficed positions in the church. The King requests the diocesan prelates and the religious provincials, and he commands the Viceroys, presidents of audiencias, and governors to prepare a list of the beneficed positions within their respective jurisdictions as well as a list of clergy, religious, and ecclesiastical students, with their qualifications and defects, specifying the benefice for which they would be competent. These lists are to be sent with every flota and are to be kept up to date.

Another later hand has added a title and a second paragraph. The title indicates that this is a paragraph of the instruction and order which His Majesty sent regarding the secular and regular ecclesiastical state. The second paragraph states that, in the reports on those proposed for benefices, their age, place of origin, length of residence in the Indies, place and kind of work, means of support, and reputation are to be included.

It is numbered 23 on the recto, 53 on the verso.

The first paragraph is taken from a royal cedula regarding the patronage over the Church, issued in the Escorial on June 1, 1574. See Carreño, p. 320–321.

72

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to the archbishop of Mexico. Aranjuez, March 1, 1571. 1 leaf.

The King wants to know how many parochial benefices there are in the archdiocese, how much each one pays per year, where they are and what is the nature of the terrain, whether they minister to Spaniards or Indians, how many people there are in them, and what worthy ecclesiastical persons there are available for appointment to the benefices. He charges the archbishop to send a report on this to the Council of the Indies so that presentations can be made which will be good for the service of God and the King.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of seven councilors of the Indies. It has no old numbering.

0062 46
73

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to the archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, May 26, 1573. 1 leaf.

The King had decreed that the Franciscan friars should take under their supervision the nuns of the Convent of the Conception in Mexico City, but the friars had declined because they said that it would interfere with their religious work among the Indians. The King, therefore, instructs the archbishop to take the nuns under his care following the same instructions given to the Franciscan friars. The archbishop is to send a report upon his fulfillment of the decree.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 112 on the recto, 73 on the verso.

74

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, July 20, 1574. 1 leaf.

The King informs the archbishop that in some parts of Dauphiné and the lands of the Duke of Savoy, some Protestant preachers (predicadores luteranos) had appeared and that one of them was a prisoner in Mondovi. He had confessed to having gone about discussing his errors secretly in Alessandria, Pavia, Venice, and other parts of Italy and was determined to go to the Indies. Other members of his sect had already set out for the Indies. He was very obstinate in this and said that if he died, his only disappointment would be that he had not been able to spread the knowledge of his religion to those lands. The King reminds the archbishop of the importance of this matter and charges him to be especially vigilant, to make careful secret inquiries about whether any of these “false and damned ministers” has arrived, and to remedy the situation by every means possible, punishing them according to their crimes and reporting back to the Crown.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of eight councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 115 on the recto.

0063 47
75

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to Martín Enríquez, Viceroy of New Spain, or to his substitute in the governorship. Madrid, November 3, 1574. 1 leaf.

The cathedral chapter of the diocese of Michoaćan had asked that the grant of the King's share of the tithe [two-ninths of one half] which had been given to the cathedral previously, be extended; the King now wants to know how the funds were spent. He commands the Viceroy to determine how much money this amounted to each year, to make a detailed account of who was to pay it and how it was spent. Each year should be accounted for separately, specifying what was spent for the adornment and repair of the churches as well as how it was spent, whether for the purchase of materials or the salaries of artisans. The account should likewise list what was bought, especially crosses, vestments, and other things of this nature, indicating from whom they were bought, how much they cost, what resources were available for payment, what salaries were paid and by whose order, and what were the occupations of those who were paid. After the account is complete it is to be given to the representative of the cathedral, who is to present it before the Council of the Indies so that a decision can be reached.

This is a simple, unnotarized and undated copy, but it appears to be from the late 16th century. It is numbered 118 on the recto, 109 [corrected from 108] on the verso.

Printed in Carreño, p. 329–330.

76

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to Martín Enríquez, Viceroy of New Spain, or to his substitute in his absence. Madrid, December 23, 1574. 1 leaf.

The provincial of the Augustinian Order had informed the King that in their friary in Mexico City there were generally about 100 friars, with novices and students of the arts and theology. He suggests that it would be very helpful if another friary could be founded in the city where students could study better and practice the Indian language, administering the sacraments and preaching to the natives. For this purpose the church of San Pablo would be very good because in that section of the city there was no other church, and it was served by only one paid clergyman who was changed at the will of the archbishop and cathedral chapter. After the matter had been considered by the Council of the Indies, in consultation with the 0064 48 King, the present cedula was issued, commanding the Viceroy to meet with the archbishop and provincial to decide what should be done and to put it into effect, sending a report to the King.

On the verso is the record of the Viceroy's action regarding the cedula on July 27, 1575. He summoned the archbishop and the provincial of the Augustinians, Alonso de la Vera Cruz, and in their conference the archbishop opposed the transfer of the church to the Augustinians, while the provincial argued in favor of it, asserting that the natives would be given better care. The Viceroy sided with the provincial and commanded the archbishop to remove the secular priests from the church and turn it over to the Augustinians, instructing the friars at the same time to carry out what they had promised. Juan de la Cueva signed as official witness.

This is a simple copy of both the cedula and the record of the viceregal act. It is numbered 119 on the recto, 80 on the verso.

77

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, January 24, 1575. 1 leaf.

The King informs the archbishop that the Viceroy had reported that the cedula regarding the construction of the cathedral had specified that the assessment for construction should be made only for the amount which exceeded the share of the tithes which was set aside for construction. But reportedly this part of the tithes was being used for singers, choirboys, musicians, vestments, and other expenses. The King is writing separately to the Viceroy instructing him to see that construction is continued and only that which is necessary for divine worship be taken from the income of the cathedral, taking into account necessary moderation. The rest is to be spent on the construction, and an accounting of expenditures to date is to be sent immediately, followed by an annual report of expenditures. The King charges the archbishop to importune the Viceroy to fulfill the cedula. He is also instructed to see that the accounts are made each year and sent to the King.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of eight councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears after the summary annotation at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 123 on the recto.

0065 49
78

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. Villaseca [Segovia], April 27, 1575. 1 leaf.

The King had been informed that the archbishop, on the occasion of his consecration, had allowed a comedy to be performed on the platform on which his consecration was celebrated, and when he received the pallium another farce had been acted out about a tax collector, which provoked some criticism among the audience. The King indicates his displeasure upon hearing this and does not accept the archbishop's excuse that he had delegated the examination of these plays to someone else. He charges the archbishop to set good examples in the future and instructs all ecclesiastics to do the same, so that the Spaniards and Indians will imitate them and live in proper obedience and subjection.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 124 on the recto, 107 [corrected from 106] on the verso.

79

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to Martín Enríquez, Viceroy of New Spain. Toledo, May 3, 1575. 1 leaf.

The archbishop of Mexico, Pedro Moya de Contreras, had reported to the King that the Franciscan, Dominican, and Augustinian Orders in Mexico, not content with the number of towns to which they ministered in the archdiocese, were daily entering the towns of secular priests and persuading the Indians to obey the friars rather than the secular priests, which the Indians did easily because of the great influence of the friars. This was causing disagreements between the friars and the secular clergy and setting a bad example for the natives. The archbishop maintained that the friars were unable to give adequate care to the towns they already had; many of the small towns were visited only occasionally, and the sick had to be brought to the friaries for confession, even though the distance was three or four leagues, and some had died on the road; the same thing occurred with children to be baptized. The archbishop asked that the friars be forbidden from taking over towns or areas subject to secular clergy and that he be allowed to place secular clergy in towns which the friars had taken over but which did not have friaries; the Viceroy should also be prohibited from giving such towns to the friars. The archbishop's 0066 50 report was considered by the Council of the Indies and, after consultation with the King, this cedula was issued, commanding the Viceroy to investigate the legislation that had previously been issued in this regard and to see that it was carried out.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of seven councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears on the recto above the summary annotation at the foot. It is numbered 122 on the recto, 49 [48 crossed out] on the verso.

80

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. San Lorenzo el Real [the Escorial], May 15, 1575. 1 leaf.

Juan Velázquez de Salazar, representing Fr. Cristóbal de Birviesca, provincial of the [Franciscan] province of Michoaćan and New Galicia, and Frs. Juan de Ayora and Juan Baptista de Lagunas, definitors (councilors) of the province, had reported that Fr. Maturino Gilberti, “a man of good life, example and teaching, and a great speaker of the Tarascan language,” who had lived in the province for many years, had written a dialog of Christian doctrine in Tarascan. It had been presented to Viceroy Luis de Velasco and the archbishop [Montúfar] and, after its approval by theologians and friars who were expert in the language, many copies were printed. But the bishop and some friars of Michoaćan opposed the publication. The Crown ordered the copies to be corrected before being sold, but a second inspection revealed nothing to be corrected. Because of the good results that could be achieved, the friars asked that the work be circulated. The Council of the Indies considered the petition and issued the present cedula, which instructs the archbishop to examine the work and have it translated and sent to the Council of Indies with his opinion.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears after the summary annotation at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 125 on the recto, 100 [99 crossed out] on the verso.

Printed in García Icazbalceta (1886), p. 92–93, and in Medina (1907–1912), v. 1, p. 121.

0067 51
81

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal letter to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. San Lorenzo el Real [the Escorial], June 17, 1576. 1 leaf.

The King is responding to letters of the archbishop dated March 24 and September 25, 1575, and February 11, 1576. The King commends his efforts to maintain peaceful relations with the civil authorities and encourages him to continue to do so and also to keep on good terms with the friars and the members of the cathedral chapter.

In regard to the lawsuit which the archbishop is having with the Augustinians over the church of San Pablo, the King is writing separately to the audiencia, commanding them to make a prompt decision and to determine how it is to be administered, sending a report upon completion to the Crown. [Cf. item 76.]

The King commends the archbishop's actions in regard to presentations for benefices and encourages him to continue to act judiciously in this matter.

Other matters which the archbishop mentioned are still under consideration.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 126 on the recto.

82

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to the audiencia of New Spain. San Lorenzo el Real [the Escorial], June 17, 1576. 1 leaf.

This is the cedula mentioned in the second paragraph of item 81, regarding the lawsuit between the archbishop of Mexico City and the Augustinians over the parish of San Pablo. The King commands the audiencia to decide the case immediately, if they have not already done so, and to send him a report on their decision so that he can give an order for the proper administration of the parish.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears above the summary statement at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 127 on the recto, 120 on the verso.

0068 52
83

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. Calera, December 16, 1576. 1 leaf.

The King informs the archbishop that Pope Gregory XIII had proclaimed a Jubilee, calling on all Christians to do penance and good works, so that God in His mercy would prevent the spread of and put an end to the pestilence which had struck many cities of Italy, especially Milan and Venice, but from which Rome and many other parts of Italy had been spared. The King orders the archbishop to have the Jubilee proclaimed in his archdiocese and in the suffragan dioceses of his province. This was to be done at a time when there would be no obstacles, after the preaching of the bull of the Cruzada which was being sent for its third publication. A report was to be sent to the Crown regarding what had been done.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the end of the summary statement at the foot of the recto. It has no old numbering, but is marked dupp[lica]do at the top of the recto.

84

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal letter to [Diego Romano], bishop of Tlaxcala. Madrid, March 22, 1577. 1 leaf.

In answer to the bishop's letter of March 20, 1576, the King approves of his having filled the benefices of the diocese in accord with the royal right of patronage and encourages the bishop to continue showing such care.

The bishop had complained that the secular clergy of the diocese were being molested unnecessarily by being summoned to Mexico for every Indian complaint, and he had asked the King to let him judge such matters. Accompanying this letter the King is sending a cedula to the audiencia, ordering a detailed report on the matter.

Signed; countersigned by Diego de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the back with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears, partially cut off, at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 135 on the recto, 115 on the verso.

0069 53
85

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. Aranjuez, April 22, 1577. 1 leaf.

The King had been advised of irregularities in the ceremonies in the cathedral of Mexico. The canons were refusing to dress as deacons but were sending in their place prebendaries to say the Gospel, and for the Epistle they were sending half-prebendaries. The half-prebendaries had formerly accompanied the celebrant when he went to the sacristy to get the cope for the prayer at Vespers, but now they want chaplains to do so; at times the celebrant is accompanied only by altar boys. The King charges the archbishop to keep in mind the proper observance and to see that the services are carried out with propriety.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears above the summary note at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 134 on the recto, 53 [originally 112] on the verso.

86

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to the cathedral chapter of Mexico. Aranjuez, May 13, 1577. 1 leaf.

The King had been informed that members of the chapter were taking for themselves certain laical chaplaincies of which they were the patrons, and that for the better service of the church, the chaplaincies should be given to the chaplains of the choir and to members of the chapel staff. In this way the chapter members would better fulfill their duty as patrons. The King asks for a detailed report on the foundation and obligations of the chaplaincies, the conditions that were placed on them, the persons whom the founders put in charge, and the persons who were holding them.

This is a simple, unnotarized and undated copy, apparently contemporary. It is numbered 129 on the recto, 90 on the verso.

87

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to the royal treasury officials of New Spain. Mentrico [Toledo], May 21, 1577. 1 leaf.

The King had received a complaint from Archbishop Pedro Moya de Contreras that he had not been paid for the period during which he served as inquisitor of Mexico (May 1–October 17, 1574). The matter had been appealed to the Council of the Indies which had 0070 54 decided to issue the present cedula, commanding the archbishop to be paid for the time that he served as inquisitor up until he began to receive the income of the archbishopric. Treasury officials are ordered to pay him from funds set aside for the salaries of the inquisitors.

A marginal notation to the left of the text says “This is what the Viceroy has claimed against me in order not to pay me what is owed to me and to collect what has been paid to me . . ..” It is apparently an annotation of the archbishop.

This is a simple, unnotarized and undated copy. It is numbered 136 on the recto, 84 on the verso.

88

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to Martín Enríquez, Viceroy of New Spain. San Lorenzo [The Escorial], May 20, 1578. 1 leaf.

The King reminds the Viceroy of his interest in the welfare and conversion of the Indians and the various meetings that have been held at his insistence, especially that of the prelates of New Spain in 1546, at which various decisions were made for the good of the Indians. They had placed particular stress on the idea that the Indians should be gathered into towns where they could be more easily instructed in Christianity and trained in Spanish customs. The King quotes the paragraph in which the bishops asked that this be done and that during the period while it was being carried out, the Indians should be exempted from tribute. The King commands the Viceroy to put the congregation of the Indians into effect with tact and understanding, not by forcing the Indians into the larger congregations, but by attracting them with good treatment and protection. The Viceroy is to get the cooperation of the archbishop so that the two of them may use the power of their offices to achieve this good end.

This is a simple copy, undated and unnotarized. It is numbered 137 on the recto.

Cited in Recop. , ley i; tit. 3, lib. VI.

89

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal letter to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. San Lorenzo el Real [the Escorial], June 1, 1578. 1 leaf.

The King is replying to two letters of the archbishop, dated March 15 and October 28, 1577. He expresses his pleasure at the archbishop's good work and encourages him to continue it, especially in regard 0071 55 to the Cruzada. Other matters mentioned are still under consideration.

The King has commanded that a letter be written to the general of the Jesuits requesting him to send more of his religious to New Spain because of the need expressed by the archbishop.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears in the lower right corner of the recto. It has no old numbering but is marked duplicada in the upper right corner of the recto.

90

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal letter to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. San Lorenzo [the Escorial], July 5, 1578. 1 leaf.

The King approves the archbishop's moderation in his efforts to get the secular clergy to wear surplices in choir on solemn feasts and in general processions. A letter will be written to the Viceroy and audiencia, commanding them to help the archbishop in this matter.

The King asks that if the canons have not yet sent a report on the lay chaplaincies, the archbishop should have it sent immediately.

If the “Universal history of the Indies” by Fr. Bernardino de Sahagún has not been sent, the archbishop is to urge the Viceroy to do so at the first opportunity.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 145 on the recto.

Printed in Carreño, p. 337–338.

91

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to Martín Enríquez, Viceroy of New Spain. Madrid, July 29, 1578. 1 leaf.

According to a report sent to the King, the College of San Juan de Letrán in Mexico was producing little fruit, and if it were entrusted to the Jesuits, they would produce the same good results as in other colleges; this would be good for the natives of the province. The King, therefore, has ordered the archbishop, in cooperation with the Viceroy, to decide what would be best. He commands the Viceroy, after discussion with the archbishop, to be sure that the financial resources of the college are distributed for the benefit, common good, and good teaching of the sons of the Spanish vecinos and of the natives. The Viceroy is to report on what is decided.

0072 56

This is a simple, undated, and unnotarized copy, apparently dating from the period. It is numbered 147 on the recto, 85 on the verso.

92

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, November 25, 1578. 1 leaf.

The King had been informed that when priests in the Indian towns lead a bad life, the archbishop normally makes an investigation. If the report is verified, the archbishop merely imposes a monetary fine and leaves the priest in the town or moves him to a better position. Because of this, the priests are not afraid and give bad examples to the Indians. If they were expelled from the towns and not given another, they would show greater care in living in an exemplary manner. The King charges the archbishop, as a matter pertaining to his office, that in future cases of this kind, he should do what is best for the service of God and the good of souls, punishing the offending priests in such a way that it shall be an example to others.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of eight councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 142 on the recto.

93

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, November 25, 1578. 1 leaf.

The King has been advised that, although some of the Indians are good Christians and have the capacity to receive the Sacrament of Communion, it is not given to them. After consideration, the Council of the Indies has decided that for the spiritual good of the Indians, they should charge the archbishop to do what seems best for the service of God and the salvation of his flock and to report on what he has done.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of eight councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 148 on the recto.

Printed in Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 164, and cited in Recop. , ley xix, tit. 1, lib. I.

0073 57
94

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. El Pardo [Madrid], December 2, 1578. 1 leaf.

The King had been informed that, even though the archbishop was ordered not to assign priests to Indian towns for which they did not know the language, he had assigned to these towns many secular clergy who were unfamiliar with the native language. Because there were fines established for those priests who did not know the language, they learned a few words from the confessionaries, enough to enable them to hear confessions but insufficient to teach, preach to, or correct the Indians. If this is so, the archbishop can neither fulfill the duties of his office nor hope for an improvement among the Indians. He is charged, therefore, not to appoint priests who do not know well the language of the Indians over whom they have charge. Doing this, he will serve God, fulfill his duty, and give satisfaction to the King.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of eight councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 139 on the recto.

95

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. El Pardo [Madrid], December 2, 1578. 1 leaf.

The King has been informed that the archbishop had ordained mestizos and other unqualified persons; the King reminds him that for many reasons this practice is unbecoming, especially because these persons may not be recollected, virtuous, adequate, and qualified for the priestly state. The King charges him to be careful to ordain only those who have the requisite qualifications and by no means to ordain mestizos until the matter has been studied further and a decision announced.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of eight councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 140 on the recto, 59 on the verso.

A cedula of the same text and date, but addressed to the archbishop of Lima, is printed in Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 173 and v. 4, p. 344, and in Konetzke, v. 1, p. 514. A similar decree with some differences in the wording, had been sent to the bishop of Cuzco on December 13, 1577. See Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 172.

0074 58
96

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. El Pardo [Madrid], December 21, 1578. 1 leaf.

The King informs the archbishop that Pope Gregory XIII, in consideration of the dangers to the faith and the labors of the Spaniards in the wars against the heretics in Flanders, and recognizing the need for repentance to regain God's merciful regard, had granted the most ample of Jubilees to all the Christian faithful who would fulfill the conditions expressed in his brief. A copy of the brief was being sent with the cedula. For the good of the natives and Spaniards and to appease God with fastings, prayers, and alms-giving, the King requests and charges the archbishop to proclaim the Jubilee so that the faithful can participate. The archbishop is also to distribute throughout the archdiocese the copies being sent to him. But he is to show special care that the Jubilee is not proclaimed within the period two months before or after the preaching of the Cruzada, so that it will not interfere with the preaching.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of seven councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It has no old numbering on the recto; it is numbered 34 [changed from 33] on the verso.

97

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal letter to Pedro Moya de Contreras, archbishop of Mexico. Aranjuez, May 22, 1579. 1 leaf.

This is a response to a letter from the archbishop dated December 16, 1578. The King is pleased that the archbishop is fulfilling his duty well and is particularly gratified to hear of his recently completed personal visitation of his entire archdiocese. He thanks the archbishop for this good service and charges him to continue to show zeal and care in encouraging the preaching of the bull of the Cruzada.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of four councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. On the verso it is numbered 38, 39 [both marked out] and 56.

98

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal letter to Pedro Moya de Contreras, archbishop of Mexico. Badajoz, June 17, 1580. 2 leaves.

In answer to several letters of the archbishop written in 1579, 0075 59 especially one of April 24, the King expresses his pleasure that the prelate is fulfilling the duties of his office well and encourages him to continue to inform the Crown of the colony's needs.

He notes the archbishop's report that the Indian populations of the Huasteca and Pánuco have been greatly reduced. He has commanded Captain Luis de Carvajal, who is leaving with the present fleet for the conquest of Nuevo León, to take the remaining Indians under his care and to make the roads safe with his new conquest.

The archbishop had questioned whether it was better to give the college of San Juan Letrán to the Jesuits or to choose an alternative. The King replies that this matter will be studied soon and the archbishop will be informed when a decision is reached.

For the building of the cathedral, the archbishop requested an alms of the two-ninths [of one-half] of the tithe which pertained to the Crown. Before making a decision, the King demands an accounting of how this money had been spent previously even though, as the archbishop had reported, the accounts were not very clear.

The congregation of the Indians was a matter the King considered to be of great importance, and he had commanded Viceroy Enríquez to confer with the archbishop previously. The King urges the archbishop to confer with the new Viceroy, the Conde de Coruña, and to report on what is accomplished.

This is a simple undated and unnotarized copy but apparently contemporary with the original. It is numbered 149 on the recto of the first leaf.

99

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Copy of a royal cedula to the audiencia of La Plata de los Charcas, Upper Peru. Badajoz, September 23, 1580. 2 leaves.

The Crown had ordered the founding of a university in Lima for the education of the colonists, and the King is pleased that it is showing good results. One of the King's principal aims was to improve the welfare of the Indians; therefore, a chair had been established for the training of priests in the Indian language, which was necessary for fulfilling their office. The King commands that such a chair be established in every city where there is an audiencia, and he issues the appropriate ordinances for their establishment.

First, a suitable place is to be chosen, and the person who is most knowledgeable in the Indian language is to be appointed, with an adequate salary.

The bishops, cathedral chapters, and religious superiors are not 0076 60 to allow their subjects to be ordained unless they know the Indian language, having taken at least one course from the professor.

The audiencia is to make known to the priests that, in appointments for doctrinas, benefices, and advancement, those priests will be given preference who have a knowledge of the Indian language; the bishops and prelates are to give the same notice.

The audiencia is also to make known to priests coming from Spain that they will not be given doctrinas or benefices unless they know the language and can produce a certification from the professor indicating that they have taken at least one course or spent enough time to learn the language adequately. A record of this certification is to appear in their presentations for doctrinas and benefices; without this record, presentations given after the effective date of these ordinances will be null and void.

Within a year after the publication of the ordinances, the priests who are ministering in the doctrinas are to appear before the professor to be examined; if they do not do so, their positions are to be considered vacant. The bishops and other ecclesiastical authorities are to urge their priests to take the examination; they are also to be examined on how they have administered their offices, and those who are not doing well are to be replaced.

The ordinances are to be promulgated before the audiencia and in the presence of its scribe and the ecclesiastical authorities. Copies are to be sent to bishops and prelates throughout the districts of the audiencia.

This is a simple copy, without date or notarization. It is numbered 150 on the recto of the first leaf. “No. 6” on the verso of the second leaf has been marked out with what appears to be a rubric.

Printed in Encinas (1596), v. 1, p. 205–206.

100

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. Portalegre, March 5, 1581. 1 leaf.

The King reminds the archbishop that under the Royal Patronage, the prelate was to open vacant benefices to public competition and was to indicate to the Viceroy, president of the audiencia, or governor the ones who are most worthy so that the official may choose one of them and notify the prelate as to the one chosen to receive the office. To avoid possible delays that this would entail, the King authorizes the archbishop to hold the required competition and to make appointments to benefices, doctrinas, or other offices, until such time as the Crown decrees otherwise. In each fleet he is to 0077 61 send a report on the vacant benefices and his presentations and another report on the clergy of his district and their qualifications. He is to tell the priests that offices are to be filled according to the report which he sends to the King and by no means are the priests to come seeking the office. Those who come to court will not receive an office, even though they bear the archbishop's recommendation, and they will not be allowed to return. The priests are to be aware of the fact that the best means of advancement is by way of the archbishop's report. The King is writing separately to the Viceroy to refuse permission for priests to come to Spain unless they also have the permission of the archbishop.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears after the summary note at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 151 on the recto, 41 on the verso.

101

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. Lisbon, May 27, 1582. 1 leaf.

The King has been informed of the decline in the Indian population through mistreatment by their encomenderos. In some places they have decreased by a third, but they still have to bear the full burden of taxation. The encomenderos treat them worse than slaves; some are bought and sold as slaves, some killed by beatings; women have died or been injured from heavy burdens; other women and their children are made to work and have to sleep in the field, some women giving birth and rearing children there, where they are subjected to poisonous insects. Many hang themselves or starve themselves to death, or take poisonous herbs. There are some women who kill their children at birth to save them from the burdens of work. As a result the Indians hate the name of Christians, consider the Spaniards deceivers, and do not believe what they are taught, so that everything has to be done by force. The situation is reportedly worse among Indians who are under royal corregidores. The King, having made many attempts to bring about good treatment of the Indians, believed his ministers were carrying out his desires; he was saddened to hear otherwise. He chides the archbishop for not having kept him informed that matters were reaching such a bad state. He is writing to the Viceroys, audiencias, and governors to warn them that if they are at fault they will be punished. He charges the archbishop to have the decrees already issued carried out so that the Indians may enjoy 0078 62 rest and quiet and be saved by divine grace and the preaching of the Gospel. He obligates the archbishop in conscience to inform him of any shortcomings in this regard so that they can be corrected.

Signed [with a stamp]; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears on the recto above the summary notation. It is numbered 154 on the recto.

102

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico. San Lorenzo [the Escorial], April 6, 1583. 1 leaf.

The King had been informed that even though two-thirds of the Indians had died during the pestilence, the same number of friars and secular priests as before were working in the doctrinas. This had resulted in much unnecessary cost to the Crown and burden to the encomenderos. The King charges the archbishop to look into the matter and to impose the best remedy so there will be adequate, but not excessive, provision for the spiritual care of the Indians. The archbishop is to send a report.

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 155 on the recto, 94 on the verso.

103

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Pedro Moya de Contreras], archbishop of Mexico and to the vicar-general and the oldest canon or dignitary. El Pardo [Madrid], September 3, 1583. 1 leaf.

The King reminds the ecclesiastics that the Popes had granted the bull of the Cruzada to be preached in all of his realms so that the income would help with the expenses which he incurred in the public and common defense of Christianity against the infidels and heretics, enemies of the holy faith. Now the bull was being sent again so that when the fifth biennial term was completed, it could be preached for the sixth time. Rev. Thomas de Salazar, commissary general of the holy Cruzada, had subdelegated to the dignitaries to whom the cedula was addressed the authority to have the preaching of the Cruzada in the archdiocese carried out. The King charges them to accept the subdelegation and to see that everything related to the bull is properly carried out and that the officials of the Cruzada are treated well.

0079 63

Signed; countersigned by Antonio de Erasso.

It is endorsed with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 157 on the recto, 118 on the verso.

104

Luis de Velasco [the Younger, Viceroy of New Spain]. Viceregal order. Mexico, September 3, 1591. 1 leaf.

The citizens of Los Valles had informed the Viceroy that the area was being depopulated because the beneficed secular priest who had been appointed for the town would not remain, and frequently the Spaniards were left without the sacraments. The Indians had departed altogether. The citizens had asked for Franciscan friars in place of the secular clergy to remedy the problem. The Viceroy sent an order to Captain Pero Martínez de Loaysa, alcalde mayor who resided in the town, to report on the various points of the petition. On the basis of the alcalde's report and the fact that no secular priest had accepted the position, the Viceroy decided it would be better to put the friars in charge of the church for the good of both Spaniards and Indians. The town, being the only Spanish settlement in the region, was necessary for its defense; it was thought the Franciscans would attract the vecinos back and would help to pacify and settle the Indians. The presence of other Franciscans in the region would be a help to the new friars. Therefore, the Viceroy requests the Franciscan superior (custodio) of Tampico to assign to the town enough religious to instruct the people and to administer the sacraments. They will be responsible for the spiritual needs of the people just as the last beneficed clergyman was, and the people are to give their support. This arrangement is to be in effect until changed by the King or Viceroy. A report is to be sent regarding the fulfillment of the order.

Signed; countersigned by Pedro de Campos.

It is numbered 159 on the recto.

105

The King [Philip III of Spain]. Royal cedula to the archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, February 6, 1607. 1 leaf.

The provincial and definitors of the province of San Diego of Discalced Franciscans in New Spain had written to the King on May 1, 1605, that their newly founded province had only six friaries and needed more in order to survive. In view of requests from Spanish 0080 64 towns to establish additional friaries, they asked the King to allow them to found six more friaries. After consideration by the Council of the Indies, the King asks the archbishop of Mexico for a report on the advantages and disadvantages of granting the request.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Ciriça.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 4 on the recto.

106

The King [Philip III of Spain]. Royal license. Madrid, March 4, 1607. 1 leaf.

Permission to beg for alms in Peru and New Spain is granted by the King to aid the monastery of Nuestra Señnora de la Concepción de San Luis of Burgos for expenses incurred in purchasing a house and building a church. Abiding by a decision of the Council of Trent, the monastery had moved to the city of Burgos, but this had cost them their economic resources. The request is granted for six years.

Signed; countersigned by Gabriel de Hoa.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of nine councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 5 on the recto.

107

The King [Philip III of Spain]. Royal cedula to [García Guerra], archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, March 24, 1609. 1 leaf.

A reorganization of church districts in Mexico had been suggested to the Crown by Diego Vázquez de Mercado, bishop of Yucatán. The bishop recommended transferring the province of Tabasco to the jurisdiction of the bishop of Chiapas, who had previously been responsible for it, and further suggested a separate diocese be established for Tabasco, Chontalpa, and Guaçaqualco [Coatzacoalcos], which was under the jurisdiction of the bishop of Oaxaca, and the Costa de Alvarado and Nueva Veracruz, which were subject to Puebla. The King here informs the archbishop of Mexico of the bishop's proposal and asks him to consider the matter and give his opinion.

Signed; countersigned by Juan de Ciriça.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of eight councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 11 on the recto.

0081 65
108

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Juan de Mañosca], archbishop of Mexico or, if the see is vacant, to the cathedral chapter. Aranjuez, April 26, 1648. 1 leaf.

The Council of the Indies, attempting to settle problems concerning the archdiocese and cathedral chapter of Mexico, needed a copy of the record of the establishment of the archdiocese. The Crown requests the authorities of the archdiocese to send a copy of the record, together with copies of the pertinent papal bull and royal cedulas, and a clear description of the archdiocesan boundaries, the number of parishes and settlements, and a census of the faithful. It is to be sent to the Council as soon as possible, properly authenticated.

Signed; countersigned by Juan Baptista Sáenz Navarrete.

It is endorsed on the foot of the verso with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 33 on the recto.

109

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal cedula to the Count of Alva de Aliste y Villaflor, Viceroy of New Spain (or to the person or persons who might be in charge of the government). San Lorenzo [the Escorial], November 2, 1649. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Mathías de Peralta, oldest oidor of the audiencia of Mexico, had written to the Crown on May 20, 1649, about a decree issued by the audiencia, excluding from government buildings the storage room and slaughterhouse for sheep and cattle, as well as games of bowls (juegos de bolas y bolillos). It had also stopped the allotment of fish, fowl, and eggs which were given to the governors and Viceroys in increasing amounts, often being brought ten or twelve leagues by the Indians, who were then detained in the city unduly. The Crown approves the audiencia's ruling and instructs the Viceroy not to go against it.

Signed; countersigned by Juan Baptista Sáenz Navarrete.

It is endorsed on the verso of the first leaf with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 63 on the recto of the first leaf, 64 on the recto of the second. It is written on stamped paper, dated 1649.

0082 66
110

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal letter to the Count of Alva de Aliste de Villaflor, Viceroy of New Spain. Madrid, February 11, 1651. 2 leaves [1 blank].

The fleet under the command of General Pablo Fernández de Contreras had arrived safely at San Lúcar and Cádiz on January 18, 1651, carrying two duplicate packets of letters from the Viceroy, in which he announced his arrival in New Spain and spoke of other problems. The King was especially pleased by his prompt dispatch of the fleet and by the shipment of silver which he had accumulated in such a short time. The other matters in his letters are being discussed in the Council of the Indies.

Reference is made to a dispatch of October 21, 1650, ordering the Viceroy to send immediately the silver and other precious merchandise on two ships leaving Veracruz for Havana where they would await the galleons. The needs of the royal treasury being more severe than ever, the King exhorts the Viceroy to make every effort to collect all of the royal income.

Signed; countersigned by Juan Baptista Sáenz Navarrete.

It is endorsed on the verso of the first leaf with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 101 on the recto of the first leaf, 102 on the recto of the second.

111

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal cedula to the Count of Alva de Aliste Viceroy of New Spain. Madrid, March 11, 1652. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Juan Manjarrés, oidor of the audiencia of Guatemala, had been conducting a residencia of the Viceroy of New Spain, the Duke of Escalona. But he had been accused of bias so the King orders him, in a cedula of June 29, 1651, to turn over all the records of the case to his replacement, and to go immediately to Guatemala. According to a report of the audiencia of Guatemala, Manjarrés has not yet arrived. The King transmits another copy of the previous cedula and commands the Viceroy to see that Manjarrés leaves immediately for Guatemala, if he has not already left. Pedro de Gálvez, visitador of the audiencia, has already been appointed (June 29, 1651) to continue the residencia, or in his absence, Luis de Mendoza, fiscal of the audiencia.

Signed; countersigned by Gregorio de Leguía.

It is endorsed on the verso of the first leaf with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears beneath the 0083 67 King's signature on the recto. It is numbered 173 on the recto of the first leaf, 174 on the recto of the second. It is written on stamped paper, dated for 1652.

112

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal letter to the Count of Alva de Aliste, Viceroy of New Spain. Madrid, August 15, 1652. 3 leaves [1 blank].

Thirty-nine letters from the Viceroy arrived on July 5, 1652, aboard the fleet commanded by Luis Fernández de Córdoba and escorted by Francisco Rodríguez de Ledesma. The fleet included a galleon of the governor of Florida together with the silver galleons. One of the 39 letters, dated March 23, 1652, reported that the fleet carried 578,336 pesos plus 100,000 pesos from the treasury at Veracruz, as well as 720,000 pesos in Rodríguez de Ledesma's galleon and other funds for specific purposes. The King thanks the Viceroy but expresses dissatisfaction with the small quantity of silver registered by private individuals. To encourage private shipments, the Viceroy is authorized to reduce to 12 percent the cost of the avería (compulsory cooperative insurance).

The Viceroy had sent ships to Peru and Guatemala to request help for the Philippines. The ship from the Philippines had arrived in Acapulco on March 11 but was in such bad condition it could not return. The newly appointed governor of the Philippines, Sabiniano Manrique, was unable to leave Mexico because of illness. The Viceroy had set January as the projected time of departure. The King orders the Viceroy to send help to the islands as soon as possible because of their defense needs.

The Viceroy had informed the King that the royal cedulas regarding friars in doctrinas had already been put into effect. Henceforth, insofar as they were working as parish clergy, the friars should be under the jurisdiction of the bishops. The King again commands the Viceroy to show special interest in this matter and to send reports of the various dioceses in the province.

The King congratulates him for his supervision of the Mexican mint and asks him to thank its alcaldes, Juan Manuel de Sotomayor and Francisco Calderón, for having reminted some Peruvian pesos found to be short of weight and which were returned to their owners. The King gives his approval to the Viceroy's appointment of Juan Manuel de Sotomayor to inspect some irregularities in regard to silver from the tithes, as well as to the Viceroy's confiscation of 104,000 pesos, which were being smuggled out of the realm under the guise of tithes, without payment of taxes. Other matters about which the 0084 68 Viceroy wrote are still under consideration.

Signed; countersigned by Gregorio de Leguía.

It is endorsed on the recto with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. The leaves are numbered respectively 201, 202, and 203 on the recto.

113

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal cedula to the Count Alva de Aliste, Viceroy of New Spain (or to the person or persons who have charge of the government of New Spain). Madrid, August 22, 1652. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Luis de Berrio, alcalde de crimen of the audiencia, with a special commission from the Viceroy, went to Veracruz and confiscated 12,971 pesos and 7 tomines because of irregularities which came to light during the unloading of the fleet of Luis Fernández de Córdoba. The King acknowledges the Viceroy's report of November 15, 1651, and the accompanying depositions.

Signed; countersigned by Gregorio de Leguía.

It is endorsed on the verso of the first leaf with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto. It is numbered 25 and 205 on the recto of the first leaf, 206 on the recto of the second leaf.

114

The King [Philip IV]. Royal cedula to the Count of Alva de Aliste, Viceroy of New Spain. Madrid, August 30, 1652. 2 leaves.

This is a further reply to the Viceroy's letter of March 23, 1652, concerning confiscated silver (see item 112). On the death of Gerónimo Bañuelos, corregidor of the city of Mexico, who had authority over the silver collected from tithes and church taxes, the Viceroy had given this authority to Juan Manuel de Sotomayor. In trying to find out how Peruvian coins were entering New Spain illegally, he arrested a muleteer who was thought to have brought some loads from Veracruz to Mexico City. When they opened a number of boxes, all supposedly containing chocolate, addressed to various ministers and other persons in Spain, they found the silver from the tithes and Church taxes. The King praises the Viceroy for having confiscated the whole amount rather than letting the offending parties have the silver after paying the taxes, as had been done in a similar case in Peru by Viceroy Conde de Salvatierra. The amount of bullion being submitted for registration and taxation had increased significantly since this confiscation. 0085 69 The King promises royal favors to Sotomayor and a reward for his assistants.

Signed; countersigned by Gregorio de Leguía.

It is endorsed on the verso of the second leaf with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies, one of which also appears at the foot of the recto of the second leaf. It is numbered 215 and 216 on the recto of the first and second leaf respectively. It is written on stamped paper, dated for the year 1652.

115

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal cedula to [Mateo Saga de Bugueira], archbishop of Mexico. Madrid, March 9, 1660. 1 leaf.

The Bishop of Guadalajara had written to the Crown on August 29, 1658, recommending that all prelates of New Spain meet in a provincial council to determine effective means to control the excesses and disorders of which he accused the friars in the administration of the doctrinas. The Council of the Indies has discussed it, and to get a better idea of the good and bad results which might come from such a provincial council, the King requests the archbishop of Mexico to give his opinion on the matter.

Signed [with a stencil]; countersigned by Juan de Subiça.

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of five councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 50 on the recto, 103 on the verso. It is written on stamped paper, dated for the year 1660.

116

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal order for the archbishops and bishops of the Spanish New World. Madrid, September 9, 1660. 1 leaf.

The Council of the Indies had received letters and papers which reported that comedies and other dramatic presentations had been enacted in friaries in the Indies, contrary to the reverence due these places, resulting in scandal and setting a bad example. The Council of the Indies had considered the matter quite serious because of the need to set good examples, especially for those recently converted. The present royal order was therefore issued, charging the archbishops and bishops as far as it was in their power, to see that no such dramatic performances were enacted in the houses of male or female religious. Similar orders were being sent to the Viceroys, presidents of audiencias, and governors and to the provincials of the religious orders.

Signed [with a stencil]; countersigned by Juan de Subiça.

0086 70

It is endorsed on the verso with the rubrics of six councilors of the Indies. It is numbered 51 on the recto, 104 on the verso. It is written on stamped paper, dated for the year 1660.

117

[Fernando Alvarado Tezozomoc]. . . . La corónica Mexicana. [Mexico, ca 1600 (i.e. between 1598 and 1609)]. 158 leaves.

Tezozomoc's chronicle has come to be recognized as one of the principal sources for our knowledge of the narrative history of the Aztecs. It begins with their legendary origins but enters into a more truly historical narrative with the reign of Acamapichtli I in the late 14th century. The author then traces the development of the Aztec Empire down to the reign of Montezuma II and the arrival of the Spaniards under Cortés in 1519.

The text originally consisted of 112 chapters but it is lacking two leaves (4–5), which contained the end of chapter 3, all of chapter 4, and the beginning of chapter 5. D. W. McPheeters, who described this manuscript (see McPheeters), discounted the idea that any of the text was missing, but it is obvious that where there are two leaf numbers missing with a corresponding skip of two chapter numbers, some text must be missing. The printed editions of the work disguised the break in the text by renumbering the chapters, beginning with chapter 6 (chapter 4 in the printed versions). In this they probably relied upon the manuscript copies made in the late 18th century. The break in the text occurs as follows: (leaf 3v at the bottom) “y asi conçertado para dividirse les hablo el propio ydolo huitzilopochtli a todas,” (leaf 6r) “y ansi amanescido otro dia todo lo tenia puesto por orden el teomama . . ..”

The author, who lived from ca. 1520 to 1609, was a descendant on both sides from the Aztec emperors. On his father's side he was a great grandson of Axayácatl, the sixth emperor, and his maternal grandfather was Montezuma II, emperor at the time of the Spanish invasion. We know that he was writing his chronicle about the year 1598 because when he writes of a great flood in Tenochtitlan which he dates as 1470, he says it occurred “about 128 years ago” (chapter 83 in this manuscript, chapter 81 in the printed texts). In his writing he was able to draw upon the oral traditions of his people to give a fuller interpretation of the hieroglyphic histories which had been preserved.

This is the earliest known manuscript of the chronicle, dating from the late 16th or early 17th century. An undated note at the foot of the recto of leaf 1 records that Francisco Peres de Peñalosa bought 0087 71 it from Padre Francisco Besera for 1 peso and 4 tomines. The manuscript is known to have been in the collection of the 18th-century Italian Mexicanist Lorenzo Boturini Benaducci (see Boturini, p. 17). Mariano Veytia used the manuscript after he returned to Mexico in 1750, and some of the marginal notations in the manuscript are attributed to him. Veytia had a copy made, which he used in preparing his Historia antigua de México. In 1792 two other copies were made from Veytia's copy for the Viceroy Revilla Gigedo. It is from these copies that the various printed editions are derived. The present manuscript found its way into the library of the Counts of Revilla Gigedo, where it remained until the 20th century.

The chronicle was published in 1848 by Lord Kingsborough in his famous collection, from one of the copies derived from Veytia; Manuel Orozco y Berra republished it in 1878. Two abridged editions have appeared during the present century. Tezozomoc prepared, or intended to prepare, another volume on the conquest, but it has not come to light.

The present manuscript varies in many small particulars from the printed versions, pointing to efforts on the part of the various editors to improve the style. Any new edition of the work must take these variations into account.

The end papers of the volume were written on before they were used in this binding. The front end paper contains a prayer to the Virgin Mary, repeated over and over, written by Pedro Díaz de Aguilera in Mexico on the 13th and 14th of October, year unknown (but in an 18th-century hand). The back end paper contains large alphabets. In both front and back, the pages which are glued to the binding were written upon before being glued in the book. The leaves were originally numbered 1–160. Leaves 4–5 are missing. The numbers were trimmed off some of the other leaves in binding.

118

Amerigo Vespucci et al. Anthology of miscellaneous materials in the Italian language. [Florence, third quarter of the 16th century] 29 leaves [leaves 12–13 blank].

Provenance: Found in 1937 in the family archive of Prince Ginori Conti, member of an old Florentine family. Manuscript ex libris of Giovanni Strozzi on front end leaf.

This small volume (23 cm. x about 17 cm.) was first used to copy a letter of Amerigo Vespucci to Lorenzo de' Medici of July 18, 1500, and a fragment of another letter from Vespucci, written after 1502, known in the literature as the “fragmentary letter.” Other unrelated 0088 72 items were later added both preceding and following the Vespucci letters. The items seem to have been written into the book over the course of several years, judging from the evolution of the compiler's handwriting. They are described below in the order in which they appear.

118/1

Anotazione de certi particolari tratti dalle stori[e] del guicardine. Leaves 1, 28v, 29r.

These notes mention important events in Italian history from 1494 to 1574. They were written on the front fly leaf, the verso of the back fly leaf, and the back end leaf. The last event recorded is the death of Grand Duke Cosimo in 1574. Since Francesco Guicciardini died in 1540 and his La historia d'Italia was published in 1561, obviously the notes at the end of this series are not from his book. Judging from the position of these notes in the volume and the unsteadiness of the handwriting, they were probably the last items entered in the manuscript and give an indication as to when the manuscript was completed.

118/2

Amerigo Vespucci. Lettere di Amerigo Vespucci. [Copy of a letter to Lorenzo di Pier Francesco de' Medici. Seville, July 27 (erroneous, for July 18), 1500]. Leaves 2r–8v.

This letter has previously been known in two manuscript copies of the early 16th century, made by or for Piero Vagliente (Bibl. Riccardiana 2112 and 2112 bis) and was first published in 1745 by Angelo Maria Bandini in his Vita e lettere di Amerigo Vespucci. The text of this letter, when compared to the Vagliente text as printed in Bandini, shows many variants and is clearly very corrupt. Nevertheless, since it represents a separate manuscript tradition, it deserves careful study and collation with the Vagliente text, as it may preserve more correct readings in some instances. The compiler notes on leaf 2v that he found this letter and the fragment which follows among “our old papers,” apparently in the family archive. It is likely this was the archive of the Strozzi family. The volume bears a manuscript ex libris of Giovanni Strozzi. It is known that the Strozzi papers contained another Vespucci letter as well as several other manuscripts about the Vespucci family. (See Bandini, p. xiv, xx, xxiii, xxv, and xxvi.)

In this letter Vespucci reports his safe return to Seville one month 0089 73 previously, after a voyage to the Indies for which the Spanish monarchs had placed at his disposal two ships. He left from Spain on May 10, 1499, later reaching a new land about 1,300 leagues from Cadiz. Then they turned south along the coast, noting a great river (the Amazon) and the change of direction of the shadow as they went farther south. They lost sight of the North Star at 6° south, and although Vespucci tried to find a south polar star, he was unable to do so. He discusses other problems of navigation. Turning north, they encountered cannibalistic natives and other more hospitable groups. They had several battles with heavily armed natives and later put in at the island of Hispaniola to repair their ships. On their way back to Spain they passed among a great number of islands north of Hispaniola and took 232 Indian slaves. The voyage lasted 13 months. He speaks of the profits of the voyage, of plans to make another expedition soon with three ships, and of his intention to send Medici two maps. Finally, he notes the success of the first Portuguese voyage to Asia around Africa.

118/3

Amerigo Vespucci. Copia d una parte d una lettera d amerigo vespucci. Without place or date [probably ca. 1502–1503]. Leaves 9r–11v.

Known in the literature as the “fragmentary letter,” this piece starts abruptly, the beginning having been lost, with remarks on the fact that Vespucci reached far southern latitudes on the coast of the new continent after having been forced south by a storm. Vespucci then comments on a variety of subjects: the lack of clothing of the South American Indians, his qualifications as a navigator, the color of the American tropical natives, the reversal of the seasons in the southern hemisphere, a passage in his letter of 1502 to Lorenzo de' Medici, the “epicurean” nature of American Indian society, the action of the magnetic compass in the southern hemisphere, and his astronomical measurements of the length of day and night in the southern hemisphere. The text breaks off, leaving the last passage unclear. This fragment was first published by Roberto Ridolfi in 1937. The letter answers certain questions raised by Vespucci's letter of 1502 to Lorenzo de' Medici, and for this reason Ridolfi thought that this letter was also addressed to Medici. But Roberto Levillier maintains that the brusque tone of the letter is quite different from the respectful tone with which Vespucci addressed Lorenzo de' Medici. Therefore, he thinks that the letter was probably addressed to a friend or relative who had seen the Medici letter. (See Vespucci, 1951, p. 71–72.)

The publication of this letter aroused some dispute between experts 0090 74 on the Vespucci question. Alberto Magnaghi, who supported the thesis that Vespucci made only two voyages (1499–1500 and 1501–1502), rejected the authenticity of this evidence of a third voyage. (See Magnaghi, 1937, 1938.) Roberto Levillier, who has strongly supported Vespucci's various claims to fame, expressed confidence that the letter was authentic, even though corrupted through a series of copyings. (See Levillier, 1948, v. 2, p. 282–285, 338–342, 352–355.)

118/4

Lucius Annaeus Seneca. Tratto da Lucio Anneo senacha: sopra lira. Leaves 14r–19r.

Extracts from an Italian version of Seneca's De ira , translated by Francesco Serdonati and published in 1569.

118/5

Eusebius Pamphili, bishop of Caesarea. Tratto dalla storia Ecresiastica [sic] Di Euxibio cexariense. Leaf 19v.

Notes from the early ecclesiastical historian Eusebius, possibly from an Italian translation published in 1547.

118/6

Ludovico Ariosto. Dechiarazione di molti bedetti et uocaboli sopra lopera del furioso di L[udovi]co ariosto. Leaves 20r–22r.

Selections from Ariosto's Orlando furioso.

118/7

Appianus of Alexandria. Somario Di Guerre civile de romani Tratti da Appiano Alex[andri]no. Leaves 22v–24v.

A summary of Appianus' history of the Roman civil wars, extracted undoubtedly from one of the many Italian translations published during the 16th century.

118/8

Francesco Guicciardini. Notes on Florentine history taken from Guicciardini's La Historia di Italia. 24v–28v.

Among these notes the compiler inserts a small bit of biographical information, remarking on the very small print of his copy of Guicciardini, his poor eyesight, and the fact that he was 86 years old at the time he was making the copy.

0091 75
119/1

Amerigo Vespucci. Letter[a] de Americo. Vespucci. pro viagio a chalicut. [Copy of letter to Piero Soderini, Gonfaloniere of the Republic of Florence.] Lisbon, September 10, 1504. 17 pages [one leaf is missing between 12 and 13].

Provenance: From the Library of Padre Antonio Amoretti of the Congregazione della Madre di Dio, in the late 18th century.

This is a copy of the well-known letter of Vespucci to Piero Soderini in which he narrates the much disputed history of his four voyages. He states that this work was his own abridgement of a longer work which he had composed in geographical style from the notes that he had kept on each of his voyages. Such a longer work was never published and is unknown.

The text of this letter as previously known has been derived from two manuscript copies and from the printed edition made in Florence, ca. 1505. The present copy gives a great number of interesting variant readings which should serve to clarify some of the problems which have arisen in regard to the letter. Many of these variants are of a substantial nature and are not simply errors of copyists. For instance, in Vespucci's description of the battle with the Indians of the island of Uti (“Iti” in the printed edition), the text of the present manuscript is about 175 words longer than that of the printed edition. Further, he does not mention the name of Columbus in relation to his visit to Hispaniola in 1500.

The copy is undated; it was made in Florence, probably later in 1504.

This copy reflects the interest of the great Florentine mercantile houses in learning more about the new regions and possible new routes to the Orient. It shows evidence of having been copied hurriedly for a utilitarian purpose. Obviously at one time it was bound into a larger volume of materials, since the leaves were numbered 122–131 (with 128 missing). In the early 19th century it was owned by Padre Antonio Amoretti in Rome, and since that time it has been known as the Codex Amoretti. It disappeared for over a century and a half before being rediscovered in recent years. It has never been used as the basis of a published scholarly study.

119/2

[Carlo Amoretti]. Varianti tratte da un Codice posseduto dal P. Antonio Amoretti d'Oneglia della Congreg[azion]e della Madre di Dio. Rome, January 22, 1802. 2 cols., 36 leaves [leaf 12 blank].

This is a collation of the Amoretti Codex (item 119/1) with the 0092 76 printed edition of Vespucci's letter to Soderini as reprinted in Angelo Maria Bandini's Vita e lettere di Amerigo Vespucci (Florence, 1745).

According to Giovanni Francesco Galleani Napione (see Galleani Napione, p. 24), this collation was made by Abate Carlo Amoretti, a relative of Antonio Amoretti and librarian of the Biblioteca Ambrosiana in Milan. It was through Carlo Amoretti that Napione knew of the existence of the Amoretti Codex, which he never saw and of which he did not know the whereabouts when he wrote his Esame critico in 1811. Although Carlo Amoretti's collation was made with great care, it does not include all of the variant readings of the Amoretti Codex.

120

Bernardino Vázquez de Tapia. Copy of a narrative of merits and services [to Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroy of New Spain. Mexico, ca. 1544]. [Mexico, ca. 1630]. 14 leaves, plus an inserted leaf with a coat of arms.

Provenance: Formerly in the library of Federico Gómez de Orozco, from the papers of the Rivadeneyra family.

This relation of merits and services is one of the more extensive pieces of this kind and gives many interesting details of the conquest of Mexico. The author came to the New World with Pedrarias Dávila in 1513 but went to Cuba after two and a half years. He sailed with Juan de Grijalva and then joined the expedition of Hernán Cortés. After the conquest of Mexico he helped to found the Spanish city of Mexico and became one of its first regidores. Later he became one of the leading opponents of Cortés in the disputes of the late 1520's. He apparently wrote this narrative about 1544, since he speaks of having been regidor for 22 years.

The relation is addressed simply to “Yll[ustrisi]mo S[eñ]or,” a form of address used for high officials of church and state, which here undoubtedly indicates the Viceroy, Antonio de Mendoza.

The hand in which the narrative is written is of the style of the late 16th or early 17th century. Following the text there is a lengthy note in an entirely different hand, summarizing the life of Pedro Vázquez de Tapia, uncle of Bernardino Vázquez de Tapia. As his source for this information the writer cites a chronicle of Cardinal Pedro González de Mendoza, written by Pedro de Salazar y de Mendoza and published in Toledo in 1625. On the verso of the last page is a note in the same hand indicating that this memorial was copied

Coat of arms inserted in the narrative of merits and services by Bernardino Vázquez de Tapia. Item 120.

0093 0094 78

from another note in the possession of the writer's cousin, Juan Casaus de Cervantes. He also speaks of Bernardino Vázquez de Tapia as his uncle. Since he entitles him “Conquistador que fue deste Reino,” the copy was obviously made in Mexico. Both notes are followed by the same rubric.

Inserted after leaf 13 is a colored and intricate coat of arms, including the devices of Ovando, López, Carrillos de Peralta, Castilla, Rivadeneyra, Vázquez de Tapia, and Cervantes.

The text of this manuscript was published by Manuel Romero de Terreros in his Relación del conquistador Bernardino Vázquez de Tapia (Mexico, 1939). In his introduction he identifies the person who had this copy made as a son of Leonel de Cervantes and María de Carvajal and as a grandnephew of Bernardino Vázquez de Tapia.

121

Giovanni da Verrazzano and the Verrazzano family. Collection of letters, documents, and transcripts relating to Giovanni da Verrazzano and the Verrazzano family. Florence, 15th–18th centuries. 49 manuscript items; 100 leaves, bound in two volumes.

Giovanni da Verrazzano (1470–1528) was a Florentine who entered the service of the kings of France about 1495 and made several voyages to America for them. In 1523, sailing out from Dieppe, he explored and charted the east coast of North America from Florida to Newfoundland (30° to 50° north latitude). During the course of this voyage he discovered New York Harbor. His final voyage was in 1528, during the course of which he lost his life.

This collection is a miscellaneous group of Verrazzano materials, ranging from autograph letters to copies of passages from printed works. They appear in the following order.

In the first volume (bound in 16th-century vellum):

1) The coat of arms of the Verrazzano family. n.p., n.d. 1 leaf. This slip of paper has four pen drawings of the Verrazzano coat of arms.

2) Antonio de Nicholo da Verrazzano. A legal document. 1433. 2 leaves (the second leaf follows no. 3).

3) Amerigo da Verrazzano. Financial accounts. 1548. 2 leaves.

4) Piero da Verrazzano. Copia d'una scrittura antica. 17th century.10 leaves (1 leaf blank), preceded by a small printed reproduction of a statue of St. Augustine in a niche. This is a genealogy of the Verrazzano family, from 1237 to 1529, with three genealogical tables.

0095 79

5) Guiseppe Pelli Benciolini, Primo Originale dell'Elogio Istorico di Giovanni da Verrazzano Discopritore della Nuova Francia . . . (Florence, 1768). 6 leaves (1 blank). This is a manuscript of an item printed in Giuseppe Allegrini's Serie de ritratti d'uomini illustri toscani. 4 v. (Firenze, 1766–1773), II, no. xxx.

6) Antonio da Verrazzano. Accounts and records, 1504–1511 (18th-century copies). 2 leaves.

7) Biographical sketch of Giovanni da Verrazzano, ca. 1750. 8 leaves (1 blank).

8) Financial accounts 1512–1513 (copies). 1 leaf. Apparently these are a continuation of those in no. 6 above.

9) Bartolomeo da Verrazzano. Autograph letter, signed. December 9, 1566. 2 leaves. The letter consists of a brief note on the recto of the first leaf.

10) Antonio da Verrazzano. Autograph receipt, signed. November 29, 1619. 2 leaves.

11) Francesco da Verrazzano. Autograph letter, signed. May 26, 1628. 1 leaf.

12) Camillo da Verrazzano. Autograph receipt, signed. September 23, 1668. 2 leaves.

The second volume of Verrazzano materials is entitled Notizie di Giovanni di Pierantonio da Verrazzano, Scopritore di Capo Breton Nell America Occidentale. Items 13–49, which make up this volume, are for the most part references and extracts from printed works referring to Giovanni da Verrazzano, apparently copied in the 17th century. It includes passages from such authors as Blaeu, Plancius, Laet, and Ramusio, as well as two biographical sketches and two poems. No. 30 is an extract from the narrative of Verrazzano's voyage of 1523 as preserved in the Strozzi-Magliabecchi codex in Florence. The text of the Strozzi-Magliabecchi manuscript was published by Alessandro Bacchiani in 1910. These items are mounted in a binding of 19th-century tan morocco, richly gilded, with green morocco inlays.

122

Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca. Documents relating to properties of the family of Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca. Jerez de la Frontera, 1512–1557. 9 leaves.

This is a collection of three documents, one on vellum and two on paper. We can judge from these papers that the name Alvar 0096 80 Núñez Cabeza de Vaca was one that was passed on through several generations of the family at Jerez. The first document mentions lands of the heirs of Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca in 1512 at a time when the future explorer was about 22 years old and was serving in the Spanish army in Italy. The third document is the work of a much younger Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca who was not yet 25 years old in 1557.

122/1

Pero Riquel. Deed of sale of land to Bartolomé Dávila. Jerez de la Frontera, June 28, 1512. 3 leaves [1 blank].

In this document written on vellum, Pero Riquel, vecino of the city of Jerez de la Frontera, records the sale of two and a half caballerías of land to Bartolomé Dávila, son of the deceased jurado Martín Dávila and also a vecino of Jerez. The piece of land, which lay between the lands of the heirs of Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca and of Diego de Roca, had been sold to Dávila by Riquel during September 1511, with the understanding that upon Dávila's request Riquel would have a deed drawn up. The price of the land was 200,000 maravedis, and the owner had the added obligation of paying an annual tribute or tax of 915 maravedis, one mutton, and two cheeses to the canons of the Church of San Salvador of Jerez. The deed was drawn up in the house of Doctor Francisco Rodríguez Lucero, who witnessed it together with Luis Ortiz de Gatica, teniente de almirante, and Pedro de Molina, royal notary. It was notarized by Antón de Alarcón, notary public of Jerez.

This deed is followed by a fragment of the record of the act of taking possession of the property by Bartolomé Dávila in the presence of Antón de Alarcón on July 6, 1512. From this fragment it appears that the piece of land was also bordered by lands of the Carthusian monastery and of the Church of San Dionys.

122/2

Pedro de Estopiñán y de Vera. Receipt to the jurado Juan de Cabra for moneys paid. Jerez de la Frontera, June 14, 1530. 2 leaves.

By this document Pedro de Estopinan y de Vera legally acknowledges that he is fully satisfied with the payment of 90,000 maravedis which the jurado Juan de Cabra paid him for a piece of pastureland along the Guadalete River within the jurisdiction of Jerez. He obligates himself not to take any future action for the sum. The document was drawn up in the plaza of San Dionys, Jerez, by the notary public 0097 81 Baltasar de Luena, in the presence of Juan de Fuentes, Francisco de Cuenca, and Hernando de Cuenca, vecinos of Jerez. The date July 14, 1530, which has been written at the bottom of the document in a later hand, is an erroneous reading.

Pedro de Estopiñán may be Cabeza de Vaca's nephew of the same name who accompanied him to the Rio de la Plata in 1540.

122/3

Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca. Settlement of a lien on property of Hernando Morales. Jerez de la Frontera, September 30, 1557. 4 leaves.

Pedro de Morales, deceased, and his wife, Elvira de Caravajal, had sold to Ana de Espindola, wife of Pedro González de Mendoza, the right to an annual tax and tribute of 10 ducados on eight caballerías of land in the grant of Montegil for the price of 100 ducados. The tribute was to be paid semiannually, half on May 29 and half on November 29. The obligation could be terminated at any time by paying the 100 ducados and the percentage of the tribute due at the time. Hernando de Morales, brother of Pedro, bought the land from Ana de Espindola and her children and wanted to pay off the lien. By this document Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca, son of Hernán Ruys Cabeza de Vaca, in his own name and that of this wife Catalina de Torres, daughter of Diego González, notary of the council of the city of Cádiz, accepts payment of the 100 ducados and current tribute from Hernando de Morales, vecino and regidor of the town of Alcalá de los Gazules. We are not told how Alvar Núñez acquired the right to the lien. This is obviously not the Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca of New World fame, since he states that he is less than 25 years old and more than 22 at this late date; the explorer of the same name had sailed to Florida 30 years previously. The document was drawn up in the presence of Francisco de Morales, Gonzalo Hernández, notary, and Antón Benítez, carpenter, vecinos of Jerez.

123–139

Varios pareceres manuscritos originales sobre legislación de Indias, siglo XVI.

Provenance: Bound together in the early 19th century for William Henry Crawford, bibliophile of County Cork, Ireland. The volume also has the ex libris of Florencio Gavito, vizconde de la Alborada y de Villarubio. The 17 documents are bound in one volume.

Items 123–139 are a collection of important letters, written opinions, and other documents dealing with questions of legislation for Spain's 0098 82 New World colonies during the 16th century. They have particular bearing on the relationship between the Spaniards and the Indians.

They are listed here in the order in which they are mounted in the volume rather than in chronological order. They are numbered 1–17 in the volume.

123

The King [Charles I of Spain]. Letter to the president and oidores of the Council of the Indies. Cologne, August 16, 1545. 4 leaves.

In this letter the King is answering letters from the Council which had been sent to him on June 6, 7, and 30, 1545. He excuses himself for having delayed his answer because of the pressure of affairs in Europe.

He accepts the Council's report that Blasco Núñez Vela had been too severe in his governing and in the death of Yllán Suárez. The members of the audiencia were excused for having recognized Gonzalo Pizarro as governor because they were under pressure from Pizarro, who is recognized as the one notably at fault. Although the King would like to impose punishment which would serve as an example for others because of the disturbances of the past four or five years, he decides it would be better to avoid force and to try to re-establish calm. Recognizing the new regulation regarding encomiendas as the heart of the problem, he commands that it be revoked and that the Indian question remain as it was until further decision can be reached. Because he wants Spanish colonists to establish themselves permanently in the land, he commands the Council to review the ordinances, suspending any that seem to be a source for disturbances until further information can be gathered.

Regarding the person who should go to settle affairs in Peru, the King chooses Licenciado Pedro de la Gasca, member of the Council of the Inquisition, who is to be given full powers for this purpose. Two oidores are to accompany him, whom the King will choose from a list which he asks the Council to send. In case of a tie vote in the audiencia, La Gasca's vote is to prevail. La Gasca is not to be given secret instructions to seize the oidores in Peru and send them to Spain; any such action is to be deferred until the land is pacified.

Regarding the matter of Blasco Núñez Vela, if La Gasca finds the land at peace, the Viceroy can be allowed to keep his position, except that La Gasca would oversee the administration of justice and would gather information regarding the Viceroy's administration. If La Gasca finds that Gonzalo Pizarro and his supporters are willing to lay down their arms, but that the passions against Núñez Vela 0099 83 are so strong that the land cannot be pacified with him in power, the Viceroy is to be relieved of his governing power and to exercise military power only within limits determined by the audiencia. If, in spite of the concessions, the rebellion continues, the audiencia is to concern itself only with matters of justice, and Núñez Vela is to have a free hand in government. The audiencia, however, is to determine when the rebellion is ended. On this basis instructions are to be formulated for La Gasca, and replies are to be composed to the letters of Núñez Vela. Letters are to be written to Gonzalo Pizarro, to the prelates, and to the cities; ships are to be prepared for the departure of La Gasca, who is to leave the matters to which he is attending in Valencia and prepare for his immediate departure.

In case Pizarro and his followers are not willing to lay down their arms, an armada is to be prepared to carry loyal soldiers to the war. Special care is to be taken to hold the ports of Panama and Nombre de Dios, and Viceroy Mendoza of New Spain is to be asked to see to it that ships are available.

[Diego de] Maldonado, [one of the conquerors of Peru who had compromised himself with Gonzalo Pizarro] and [Diego Alvarez] Cueto, [Núñez Vela's brother-in-law] had brought their cases before the King, who commanded them to accompany La Gasca until the land is pacified, and then to bring a report to him. The Council is to take care, however, that his decisions are not communicated by private correspondence before the official letters are received.

In regard to Vaca de Castro, the King approves the legal action against him, which is to be carried out quickly without excessive delays. La Gasca or one of the oidores is to be commissioned to gather evidence. Castro is not to be allowed to enter the Council, and he is to be placed under detention in some fortress rather than in his house.

Licenciado Salmerón is to be given a grant of 500 ducats, and his son is to be remembered for a benefice in the Church.

Regarding goods of some Englishmen sequestered by Prince Philip, the King has written to him twice, and the Council will carry out his commands.

Regarding the proposal that a fiscal be appointed for the Casa de Contratación, the King, realizing it is not part of the office of Francisco Duarte, commands the Council to select a candidate in consultation with the Prince and to appoint him by a letter signed by the Prince, his annual salary to be 50,000–60,000 maravedis.

The Council has proposed the establishment of an audiencia of three oidores for the province of Popayán with authority over the additional provinces of Santa Marta, Nuevo Reino de Granada, 0100 84 Cartagena, Venezuela, and Río de San Juan. Licenciado Miguel Díaz de Armendaris, who had been sent there as visitador, is recommended to be president of the audiencia. The King approves the proposal and orders the necessary papers drawn up.

The King has signed the blank forms for presentations of bishops for the new dioceses of New Galicia and Popayán and commands the Council to select qualified persons.

Francisco de Mesa, vecino of the Canary Islands, has requested permission to establish the settlement of Puerto de Monte Christi on Hispaniola, with himself as governor. The King approves but reminds the Council to consider whether it is a good idea to take so many citizens with all their households from the Canary Islands, with liberty for others to go later. They are to draw up the agreement accordingly.

The King has written to the comendador mayor of Leon [Francisco de los Cobos] by way of Don Juan de Figueroa, that he should inform the Council of what he had heard from the English ambassadors concerning the gold which an English captain had taken from a ship coming from the Indies, so that the truth might be determined and justice done. The King is insisting that the King of England return the vessel and its contents as well as others which had been taken since publication of the peace.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Erasso.

124

The King [Philip II of Spain]. Royal letter to the president and members of the Council of the Indies. Brussels, February 15, 1557. 2 leaves.

The King is replying to the Council's letter of December 14, 1556, concerning a number of matters.

Regarding the appointment of a governor for Chile, it is to be deferred until more information is available. In the meantime, the decisions of the audiencia or Viceroy of Peru are to be observed regarding administration of justice.

Despite the difficulty of appointing bishops from among the clergy in the New World because of refusals by the clergy, the resultant delays, and long vacancies, they are to continue to observe what his father the Emperor had commanded.

The Viceroy of New Spain had requested the appointment of three alcaldes to take care of special business of the audiencia, but the King concurs with the Council's decision to refuse the appointments; the oidores of the audiencia are ordered to make inspections of the land.

0101 85

The King is expecting a list of those recommended for the audiencia of Charcas; if it has not been sent, they are to send it immediately.

He approves of their decision regarding what had happened between Francisco de Duarte, the officials of the Casa de Contratación, the corregidor of Cádiz, and the alcaldes mayores of Cádiz. Regarding a more recent incident between the alcaldes mayores and the officials, which resulted in the imprisonment of the contador Pero Vaca, the King is very displeased and will take appropriate action upon his return. Meanwhile, he approves of the action of the Princess [his sister Juana] in appointing Licenciado Muñatones, Doctor Velasco, and Licenciados Birviesca and Juan Sarmientos to look into the problem.

The King approves the Council's decision giving letters of agreement to the Admiral of the Indies [Luis Colón, grandson of Christopher Columbus], and he is also pleased by a report from the bishop of Tierra Firma reporting gold in Veragua. Special care should be taken regarding colonization of the area. If a governor is to be appointed, the Council should send a list of candidates to the King.

Ochoa de Luyando, because of his services to the Council, is to be given 600 ducats at once and 50,000 maravedis in aid annually for six years.

The widow and children of Doctor Quesada, deceased president of the audiencia of Los Confines, are to be granted 1,000 ducats.

He approves of the Council's having sent Licenciado Salgado to look into the question of some Frenchmen whom Alvaro de Bazán had taken prisoner. He requests a report.

The King thanks them for their report on the question of granting the encomiendas in Peru in perpetuity [i.e., as a perpetual hereditary right]. He has determined to send a commission to Peru to study with the Viceroy the whole question of encomiendas. He has chosen Licenciado Birviesca of the Council of the Indies, Licenciado Pedrosa from the Royal Council, with Doctor Vázquez as alternate, Diego de Vargas Caravajal, Francisco de Córdoba, and [Martín] Ramoyn as secretary. The Council is to reach an agreement with them regarding salaries and other matters. It is ordered to have ships ready for their departure and to send their instructions and letters of commission as soon as possible for his signature.

Signed; countersigned by Francisco de Erasso.

Following the date is a postscript in which the King thanks the Council for the memorial they sent him for obtaining more money from Peru. He has been forced to break the truce with France and is rallying an army. He suggests that the commission take the memorial to Peru and discuss its implementation with the Viceroy.

0102 86
125

Doctor Hernán Pérez. Opinion addressed to His Imperial Majesty. [Spain, 1545]. 2 leaves.

In this signed holograph, Pérez declares that the discussions [concerning the New Laws] were already well advanced before he arrived and that he is giving an opinion on short notice and without adequate knowledge, only because commanded to do so.

Seeing that the intent is to assure that the Spaniards stay in the new land, a means must be found which will attract them and will at the same time be good for the Indians.

Three alternative opinions have been presented: 1) suspension of the laws until more information is gathered, but the uncertainty of this situation would cause the Spaniards to abuse the Indians; 2) giving the Spaniards perpetual tributes, but this would necessitate appointment of corregidores whose salaries the town would have to pay besides the tribute; 3) granting the conquerors perpetual vassalage of certain places without civil or criminal jurisdiction, with the Crown retaining authority over all of the more important places and many of the smaller ones. With this assurance of perpetuity the Spaniards would be satisfied with less than otherwise. This arrangement would also set aside a reserve from which the Crown could make later rewards. The Indians, if overburdened by their encomenderos, could always move to a town held by the Crown.

If the encomenderos live up to the obligations of their grants, which is hardly to be expected from past experience, this arrangement will give the Indians a defender and someone to instruct them in the faith. If they do not fulfill the obligations, their Indians should be taken from them.

To make the proposal effective, certain things should be done: a moderate taxation should be established for the towns; at intervals the audiencia should review the taxation and increase or decrease it according to fluctuations in population; personal services should not be included except for moderate salaried work in cultivating the land; the Crown should receive a 10th or a 20th of the amount of the taxation; the encomenderos should be subject to inspections by the oidores of the audiencia and, if they are found wanting, their towns should revert to the Crown.

He again apologizes for his lack of experience in this matter.

0103 87
126

Juan de Zúñiga, comendador mayor of Castile. Statement of opinion. [Valladolid, summer 1545]. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Zúñiga professes his inexperience in matters of the Indies, having been called to discuss them only five or six times besides two meetings in the house of Cardinal [Loaysa] of Seville, and he acknowledges the great difficulty of the problem.

Regarding the question of perpetuity of the encomiendas, on the one hand, four out of five of the councilors of the Indies are opposed to it; two of them have spent considerable time in official positions in the Indies. On the other hand, experience has shown the violent results of suppressing the encomiendas, leading even to war. The situation is so confused that even if he could see everything in the Indies, he would not dare suggest what the King should decree. But, speaking generally, he suggests that his Majesty quickly send grants which would satisfy the conquerors and colonists, according to their merits. Further, he should handle the matter in such a way that he does not have to conquer the area from the conquerors, for neither is his Majesty so unoccupied nor his treasury so unburdened that he can settle all the affairs of the Indies by force. Signed.

127

García de Loaysa, cardinal archbishop of Seville, president of the Council of the Indies. Opinion addressed to His Imperial Majesty. [Valladolid, summer 1545]. 2 leaves.

Loaysa states that after serving for 21 years as president of the Council of the Indies, he is more qualified than anyone to give as opinion on good government and royal service in the Indies.

He reminds the King of his opposition to the law of 1542 which would have terminated the encomienda and of the turmoil which resulted when the law was announced. He is especially upset that more than 200,000 pesos have been lost to the treasury in Peru and thinks that 500,000 pesos will be lost before the area is pacified. Considering the slight credit that has been given to his previous opinions, he might excuse himself from giving another were it not that his whole purpose is to serve the King.

Three things must be kept in mind: the conversion of the Indians and the conservation of their lives, the royal income, and the contentment of the Spanish colonists, upon whom the whole structure of royal authority in the Indies rests. With this in mind, not only should the law be suspended, but the King should distribute the towns to 0104 88 the conquerors and to good colonists, with the power of civil jurisdiction like feudal lords and with feudal obligations. The King should send loyal subjects from Spain to whom additional towns could be allotted, so that the only towns retained by the Crown would be the major cabeceras and the seaports. Experience has shown that from a million Indians held by the Crown, it does not receive more than 4,000 ducats because the corregidors are more interested in enriching themselves and they make no effort to Christianize the Indians. But if the Indians were given in perpetuity to the Spaniards, the latter would have a personal interest in their Christianization, and the land would be enriched by the introduction of Spanish agriculture and industry.

Loaysa supported this opinion at two meetings in Valladolid in 1527 and had the support of the Grand Chancellor, García de Padilla, Doctor Carvajal, Polanco, and Acuña. In Madrid at the beginning of 1535, with the agreement of nearly all of the Council of the Indies, the Count of Osorno, and the comendador mayor of León [Francisco de los Cobos], the King had decided to send Antonio de Mendoza to New Spain as Viceroy with instructions to examine the whole situation there regarding encomiendas and to send a report later so that a distribution could be made. The colonists were waiting patiently for this to be done.

He thinks that those who maintain that the Indians would be destroyed by this distribution are deceiving themselves. Rather, if the Indians were given out in this way, the Spanish would treat them as their own children, providing instruction in the faith and in the civilized life. The case of Santo Domingo and the islands should not be cited against this because there “the allotment was made as though they were slaves granted for a certain time, and they were made to work in the mines, to dig under the earth, the same as the Negroes do today, and since the work was so excessive and imposed upon persons who never knew how to occupy themselves in anything besides growing a little maize, enough for their support, they began to die and decrease in number, and they killed themselves by drinking poison in order to flee and to be free from a life so full of work.” He reminds the King that for an area at least 20 leagues around Mexico City, those who mistreat Indians are punished more severely than thieves in Castile. Signed.

0105 89
128

Doctor Hernán Pérez. Opinion addressed to His Imperial Majesty. n.p. [ca. 1550]. 2 leaves.

This is Pérez's opinion written for a meeting summoned by His Majesty to discuss the question of further exploration and conquest.

In view of the fact that no previous regulation concerning exploration has been observed, there is little hope for change in the future. Christianization of the Indians was the principal purpose of the expeditions, but this has not been done except in a very small area around Mexico City and in Vera Paz. He understands that in Peru, New Granada, Santa Marta, Cartagena, Popayán, Cabo de Vela, Río de la Plata, and Yucatán, there is not a town of Christian Indians. He is of the opinion that not one step more should be explored until they have fulfilled the conditions under which they justified their previous expeditions. Such a fulfillment is not to be expected soon because of the scarcity of religious ministers.

The King must also provide audiencias and courts for the newly conquered lands. The audiencia in Peru is still responsible for 700 leagues. Only after this is accomplished should the area of domination be expanded.

Regarding the articles which were issued concerning the licitness of making war against the Indians, he thinks that an offensive war can rarely be justified. But if the occasion does occur, the audiencia of the district should gather information and send it together with their opinions, to the King, who will make the decision. Regarding defensive warfare, the audiencias can do everything necessary for their defense and then notify His Majesty.

A note on the verso of the second leaf indicates this was written about 1541 before the New Laws. This, however, seems erroneous. It seems more correctly associated with the discussions of further conquests in 1550. The audiencia of Lima did not take office until 1544. Signed holograph.

129

[Sebastián Ramírez de Fuenleal], bishop of León, previously of Santo Domingo. Opinion presented to [Cardinal Loaysa, president of the Junta of Valladolid]. [Valladolid, July 1542]. 8 leaves.

The first leaf, recto and verso, contains a summary list of provisions which seem to have been those distributed for consideration. Bishop Ramírez de Fuenleal, who had been bishop of Santo Domingo and president of the audiencia there and later president of the second 0106 90 audiencia of Mexico, was now bishop of León and president of the audiencia of Valladolid. Here he gives his lengthy and detailed opinion concerning the written articles which had been distributed.

First he asserts that encomiendas of Indians should not be given to Spaniards. Experience has demonstrated that where Indians were entrusted to the Spaniards, the population decreased much more rapidly than otherwise, and the Spaniards who populated the areas were not the encomenderos but those who had ranches and other interests. In New Spain the encomiendas are of value for only 300 or 400 out of some 6,000 colonists. If corregimientos and alguacilazgos were established they would support more Spanish colonists than the encomiendas. The encomenderos spend much of their income on lawsuits over encomiendas and do not instruct their Indians well, even causing difficulties for the friars. He attributes much of the attack on Indian rationality to the desire to gain dominion over them. He does not think the Spaniards would treat the Indians with greater moderation if the Indians were granted in encomiendas. If the tribute is specified, the Spaniards always require more, or they force the Indians to give personal service or to bear excessive burdens. For these excessive impositions the Spaniards sometimes give the Indians something of little value and claim this as justification before the courts.

There are many enterprises which can be developed in New Spain—mines of gold, silver, copper, tin and iron, cotton and cotton cloth, wood, alum, wool, silk, leather, dried meat, fisheries, horses, and other livestock. But those who have an assured income from Indians are not interested in these enterprises.

Regarding the question of granting Indians to the Spaniards in perpetuity, the bishop thinks that this will cause great dissatisfaction among the Spaniards over inequalities and will upset the Indians.

For the future he proposes that the Indians who are under direct royal authority should continue as such and that certain specified towns and provinces should be taken for His Majesty. When an encomendero dies without heirs his encomienda should revert to the Crown. If he leaves children or a wife, the town should revert to the Crown, with the heirs receiving part of the tributes. If the King wishes to create “ricos hombres,” he could do so by giving them a share of the tributes rather than by giving them vassals.

Regarding the argument that the encomenderos would take better care of their Indians if the encomiendas were perpetual, experience with grants for one or two generations has not supported this. The comparison with perpetual vassals in Spain is not valid, since the Spaniards pay taxes only from their goods, while the Indians must 0107 91 pay with personal services, and this is destroying them. In answer to objections against corregidores, the bishop believes they should be there merely to colonize, not to govern, except insofar as the local governor commands.

Concerning the enslavement of Indians, he thinks too many contradictory regulations have been issued. There should be no justification for enslaving Indians except in case of an uprising. If the one in charge of the government is at fault in regard to an uprising, he should be punished. In New Spain there should be no enslavement, since the Indians cannot revolt except in some areas which only Indians can inhabit.

Regarding new explorations and conquests, agreements should not be made to organize expeditions in Spain, because they are consistently lost. Nor should they be made with those in the colonies, because the persons needed for the expeditions are taken away from underpopulated areas. Explorations should be carried out in such a way as to maintain peace with the Indians. He does not think the requerimiento justifies war.

On instructing the Indians in the faith, he is of the opinion that it should be the responsibility of the friars and that funds should be set aside so that 30 or 40 of the friars could go to the New World each year. Friaries should be built any place upon which the religious superior and the governor agree. His Majesty should send letters to the friars, telling of the good report that he has received regarding their work. It is a mistake to put secular priests in the towns, because they do not learn the language nor teach doctrine to the Indians; they are greedy and attempt to ruin the reputation of the friars among the Indians. If the bishops would visit their dioceses they would see how much the friars are doing.

He gives a number of brief suggestions regarding civil government: the entire colony should be governed through audiencias; an audiencia should be established in Peru with authority also over Panama and Castilla de Oro and another in San Salvador for the area of Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Honduras; governors should not be allowed to lead expeditions of conquest; bishops and royal officials should not have Indians in encomienda; lawsuits over Indians should not be heard in the Council of the Indies; no one should be allowed to take Indians to Spain or to the islands except for one personal servant; the profits of the land should go to those who bring their wives and children; and only the most qualified should be appointed to office.

In regard to punishing those who harm the Indians and punishing judges who have not done justice, he suggests the appointment of two judges of residencia, who first would go to Santo Domingo for 0108 92 three or four months to take the residencia of the members of that audiencia and inspect the treatment of the Indians; then, they should go to Mexico to do the same; and finally, with Licenciado Maldonado as their president, they should form the new audiencia for Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Honduras. Three other judges should go to Panama to take the residencia there and then proceed to Peru to establish another audiencia, with Vaca de Castro as president. The records of their inspections of the treatment of Indians should be sent to the Council of the Indies, which would determine the punishments.

The sources of royal income from the Indies are the import duties of 7–1/2 percent, the fifth of gold, silver, pearls, and gems, and about 40,000 pesos in tribute from towns pertaining to the Crown, from which the corregidores and alguaciles must be paid. This income will be increased by taking the towns allocated to bishops and royal officials but will be increased significantly only by following his suggestion regarding Indian towns. Signed.

Many of the suggestions made by Bishop Ramírez de Fuenleal had a direct influence on the composition of the New Laws of the Indies of 1542.

130

J[uan de Pardo de Tavera], cardinal archbishop of Toledo. Opinion addressed to His Imperial Majesty. Valladolid, June 18, 1545. 1 leaf.

Cardinal Tavera, aged royal advisor who would die six weeks later, writes that presupposing that the royal dominion in the Indies is to be preserved for the conversion and good government of the natives, Spaniards are to be encouraged to settle in the land to keep it in subjection. The King should, therefore, grant perpetual favors to the Spaniards according to their merits. It would be better if this could be achieved without perpetual repartimientos and encomiendas of Indians. He does not think the articles in the New Laws concerning encomiendas should be revoked or changed, but, considering the upheaval which had resulted in the colonies, the King should listen to their complaints and suspend the execution of the ordinances, leaving hope to the conquerors and colonists that they would be rewarded for their services. He should have the Viceroy of New Spain and other trustworthy persons investigate matters concerning lands, Indians, and tributes and judge whether or not the encomiendas could be suppressed. On the basis of their reports the King could make his decision. These commissioners should also look into reports of maltreatment of the Indians by corregidores, royal officials, and their own native lords and give the appropriate orders.

0109 93

Regarding the friars, everyone reports that they are doing excellent work in the colonies; the King should command that more of them be sent to the Indies. Signed.

131

The Cabildo [City Council] of Mexico City. Capitulos tractados entre la ciudad de Mex[i]co y El marq[ue]s de Falces Virrey sobre el assiento de las Cortes y perpetuydad de la tierra. Mexico, [February 10, 1567]. 4 leaves [1 blank].

The first section of the letter summarizes negotiations between the cabildo of Mexico City and the recently arrived Viceroy, Gastón de Peralta, Marqués de Falces, concerning the questions of summoning the cortes (legislative assemblies) and the distribution of the Indians. The cabildo summarizes its position under 10 headings:

1. They ask, in the name of the cities of New Spain and New Galicia, that they be formed into a separate kingdom and that a cortes be held with deputies from the kingdom every three years. In consultation with the Viceroy, the cortes will determine the service to be rendered to the King, this service to be paid by all non-exempt citizens of the kingdom.

2. In regard to encomiendas, grants should be made in perpetuity, inheritable even to the extent that they can be set up as entailed estates. Encomenderos should also be given limited civil and criminal jurisdication over their encomiendas.

3. Because there are some conquerors and early colonists and many descendants of others who do not receive any reward for their service or that of their ancestors and some who have only a poor encomienda, the cabildo asks that the Crown distribute all of its towns to them, except the major ones.

4. For grants made in perpetuity, the King should allow the joining of houses and entailed estates through intermarriage or other means so that some major houses would arise that could be granted titles of nobility.

5. The city of Mexico should be the capital of the kingdom, and its representatives should have preeminence in the cortes; during the period when the cortes is not in session, the city should represent the whole kingdom before the Viceroy.

6. By reason of the grant of perpetuity, all recipients who are not conquerors or their descendants should pay to the King one-tenth of what they receive from their Indians after paying the salaries of the royal justice officials, the support of the religious minister, and the tithe. The conquerors and their descendants should pay 0110 94 one-twelfth. Those belonging to the first group may free themselves from obligation by paying 14 times the annual payment at one time; the conquerors and their descendants may do so by paying eight times the annual payment.

7. Before general allotment is made, some towns should be set aside for the support of Mexico City because it was built in the water and does not have its own means of support. Otherwise, the Crown should give the city 10,000 pesos de minas annually from the service detailed in article 6.

8. In view of their services, the King should exempt from the taxes all those who are in New Spain before the date of the general allotment of Indians. Those who arrive later should pay taxes if they had to do so in their homeland; others shall be obliged to prove their exemptions.

9. The provinces of Guatemala, Yucatán, and Cozumel should send deputies to the cortes and be subject to the service for the King.

10. The Viceroy should bring all of these matters to the attention of His Majesty.

The letter is signed by the members of the cabildo: Leonel de Cervantes, Angel de Villafañe, Luis de Castilla, Bernardino de Albornoz, Juan Velázquez de Salazar, Juan de Sámano, Pedro Lorenzo de Castilla, Bernardino Pacheco de Bocanegra, Francisco Mérida de Molina, Jerónimo López, Jorge de Mérida, Luis de Velasco, and as notary, Pedro de Salazar.

132

Juan de Salmerón. Opinion addressed to His Majesty. [Valladolid?, 1545]. 4 leaves [1 blank].

Licenciado Juan de Salmerón had spent about 10 years as oidor in New Spain, and when the New Laws were first being composed, he had been called upon for advice. Here he comments on changes which he thinks should be made in the New Laws in view of the reactions of the colonists.

He begins his discussion with a distinction as to whether the laws are just and whether they are expedient. That the laws are just is accepted by all and does not require further discussion. Their expediency is then the question at issue. It is pointed out that some laws might be expedient in a settled area such as Mexico but not so in such newly conquered areas as Peru and New Granada.

He sets up certain general principles: that Spaniards and everything 0111 95 needed for their support and contentment are necessary for the new lands and that some of the New Laws should be modified, even deferring justice to the natives if no other way can be found, unless this would do notable harm to the natives.

He then lists the means which he thinks would aid the permanent establishment of the colony: reduction of port duties and the taxes on precious metals, continuance of certain grants made previously, and encouragement to the friars to go to the New World.

Salmerón suggests a number of remedial measures. Since the corregimientos have not justified themselves, the Crown should pay annuities of from 50,000 to 150,000 maravedis to conquerors and colonists, instead of paying salaries to corregidores and alguaciles. Not all of the annuities should be given in perpetuity, but some for only two generations as a reward for service. At some future time the need for such annuities may cease. He lists a lengthy series of conditions under which the annuities are to be given, among which are the duty of keeping arms, appearing at musters, serving against uprisings, and making inspections of the Indian towns. The tributes should be moderate so that the Indians are able to pay them. As the Crown takes over more and more towns, the annuities should be increased.

Arrangements should be made for the establishment of more Spanish towns. Land grants in the Spanish towns should not be given to those who have land elsewhere. The Indians should be encouraged to work for the Spaniards for pay according to a price established by the Viceroy or an oidor. Each Indian town should supply a certain number of individuals regularly for this work. The materials necessary for work should be taken to the place of work by cart. Colonists who have newly taken up residence in a town with their families should be given assistance from the tributes to pay for such work.

Finally, he asserts that the ordinance should be maintained which required that existing encomiendas be taken over by the Crown as they become vacant and that no further encomiendas be established. The ordinance regarding liberty of Indian slaves should be enforced gradually because of the importance of the mining industry. The suggested annuities will be adequate support for the colonists. It would make a bad impression on the natives if, at the insistence of the Spaniards, the King changed a law which was favorable to them.

In conclusion, Salmerón insists that the King must make a determined resolution of these matters because the uncertainty is very harmful.

This is a holograph document signed by Salmerón.

0112 96
133

Hortuño de Ibarra, accountant of New Spain. Letter to His Royal Majesty. [Spain, 1561?]. 4 leaves.

Ibarra reminds the King that by command of Viceroy Luis de Velasco he had come to Spain in August of the previous year as general of the fleet and had reported on the condition of the new land and its needs. This letter makes some further specific suggestions.

There are 347 towns assigned in encomienda to conquerors and colonists, from which the total taxation of tribute annually is 377,735 pesos (each peso being valued at 272 maravedis). He suggests that a third or a half of this income be taken from all except the smallest towns in exchange for making the grants perpetual. The income that is taken from them could be used to support other conquerors and settlers.

This distribution would save the Crown the 17,000 pesos which it now pays to conquerors and their children who do not have encomiendas. It would also save another 18,000–20,000 ducats in salaries for unnecessary offices of corregidores and alguaciles which have been set up to reward conquerors and colonists. Also, the Crown should distribute the small towns which it holds, retaining only the more important ones.

Each of the recipients of these favors should give to His Majesty half of the income for the first four years and should keep arms and be prepared to defend the land when summoned by the Viceroy.

He objects to the fact that when the oidores inspect towns to reevaluate the amount of tribute to be paid, they frequently reduce it, but they say that a royal decree prevents them from revising it upward even if the population has increased. He asks that the revision of tribute be solely in the hands of the Viceroy and treasury officials.

He requests the appointment of a contador de cuentas to keep the records up to date and to make sure that required payments are made. The oidores who had responsibility for this were too busy to carry it out, and he himself also had too many other obligations.

Since the quality of silver in New Spain varied a great deal, he asks that all of it be assayed before paying the royal fifth and that it be stamped to indicate the assayed quality.

He lists towns and provinces which he thinks could pay much more tribute, naming Mexico and Santiago (Tlaltelolco), Tlaxcala, Cholula, Huejotzingo, Tepeaca, Izucar, Texcoco, Chalco, Tula, the City of Michoacán, Xochimilco, Otumba, and Tepeapulco. He suggests that the towns which have more resources be taxed accordingly, rather than pay tribute merely according to population. Signed.

0113 97
134

[Francisco de los] Cobos, comendador mayor of León. Statement of opinion. [Valladolid, summer 1545]. 3 leaves.

Cobos notes his lack of knowledge in matters of the Indies but out of obedience he gives his opinion. He first recalls previous consultations in which it had been decided to make the encomiendas perpetual by one form or another. Later, when Antonio de Mendoza was sent out to New Spain as Viceroy, he was instructed to send a detailed report so that the allotment of Indians could be made. Meanwhile, wives and children were permitted to inherit the encomienda. He mentions the deliberations held preparatory to issuing the New Laws and his view that in regard to the distribution of Indians, they would cause trouble. Such trouble had arisen, endangering the colonies and costing the Crown much money.

Except for the prudence of Viceroy Mendoza, Cobos believes that the same thing would have happened in New Spain as happened in Peru.

Considering the need for a large group of Spanish colonists, the bad results of the system of corregidores, and the various petitions and recommendations from the colonies, including one from Blasco Núñez Vela, he feels the Indians should be allotted as perpetual vassals to the Spaniards, except in the principal cities and ports. Regarding these latter towns, orders must be given to instruct the Indians in the faith and have the Indians pay a moderate tribute so that the Crown might earn some revenue. Since the present encomenderos have no right to their towns except by the will of the King, he should make a completely new distribution of Indians according to the merits of the individual conquerors and colonists, in moderate quantity but granted in perpetuity as a fief, or with any condition which he deems necessary. Less fortunate caballeros and hidalgos in Spain should also be encouraged to go to the Indies with their families to take these grants. A 12th or a 15th of the tribute should be paid to the Crown. When the succession to the fief dies out, the grant should revert to the Crown for reassignment.

The Viceroy of New Spain should be entrusted with this distribution, in consultation with the oidores and the provincials of the religious orders, and the record of the distribution should be sent to the King for confirmation. In the meantime, it should be announced to the friars and attorneys who are at court that the ordinances are to be suspended and that the grants are to be perpetual. Moreover it must be determined that the tribute is not excessive. Personal services should not be allowed, and His Majesty should reserve for himself civil and 0114 98 criminal jurisdiction. Cobos declines to go into the question of the quantity of the tribute. Signed.

135

[Garci Fernández] Manrique, Conde de Osorno, governor of the Council of the Indies. Opinion addressed to His Imperial Majesty. Valladolid, June 18, 1545. 2 leaves.

The Count of Osorno, aware of what happened in Peru, recommends to the King that above all he should revoke the decree which so irritated the Spaniards there. He has always insisted to the King that the land cannot be held without a force of Spaniards and that rewards are necessary if they are to stay in the Indies. They would prefer to have a few Indians at their command rather than receive much tribute without Indians. Every Spaniard should be given a place to settle which he can hope to leave perpetually as an inheritance for his family, with established tributes from the Indians and civil jurisdiction over them. None of these places should be a principal town or a seaport. The grantee shall be given only one-third of the present income from the encomienda. The execution of the ordinance should be the responsibility of the Viceroy of New Spain in consultation with the oidores. He should determine whether individuals are being rewarded too much or too little and make appropriate recommendations to the Crown. The Viceroy should also notify the Crown of Spaniards who do not have Indians.

The Indians and incomes should be regarded as fiefs with all the customary conditions most favorable to His Majesty; if the grantee should leave the land where his fief is located, he shall lose his right to it. Signed.

136

Alonso de Estrada, royal treasurer, and Rodrigo de Albornoz, royal accountant. El Pareçer que los ofiçiales de su mag[es]t[ad] desta nueva españa dan a lo que su mag[es]t[ad] sezaria manda çerca de la perpetuydad de los yndios y pueblos desta nueva españa. [Tenuxtitan-Mexico, 1526]. 2 leaves.

This piece must date from 1526. It cannot have originated before that time, since the writers refer to the parecer of the Dominican friars, who arrived in 1526. It cannot have been later than that year since Hernando Cortés is referred to as the governor, from which position he was relieved in July 1526. A probable dating would be between early June 1526, when Cortés returned from Honduras, and early July of the same year, when Luis Ponce de León arrived 0115 99 to take Cortés' residencia.

They note that the present system of encomienda is not good because the Indians are not instructed in the faith and are maltreated, all due to the fact that the grants are not perpetual. They agree with the written opinions of the governor Hernando Cortés, the Franciscan and Dominican friars, and many conquerors and colonists that His Majesty should grant the Indians as vassals, following the same practice as in Castile. Other jurisdictional authority should remain in the hands of the King. The grants should be made freely to the conquerors as a fief, with the obligation to pay the royal fifth on gold, slaves, precious stones, and pearls which are given to them by their subjects. The colonists who arrive later should be given Indians according to their noble rank, with the feudal obligations to be paid to the King, provided that no sales tax is imposed.

His Majesty should keep the principal cities for himself and order friaries built in them for training the Indians in the faith. Some Spaniards should settle in the cities and if they are of noble rank, they might be granted lands in the area. The service required of the Indians should be moderate and any agreement reached with the native lords regarding their tribute should be registered with the treasurer. The King could give small landholdings to those conquerors and colonists who do not have the qualifications for receiving vassals.

The King had asked about the gold and silver mines and whether his slaves should be put to work in them. They comment that the Spaniards were starting to work the mines with slaves whom they had bought or who had been given by their caciques. The income from the mines was hardly worth the expense, and the treasury officials had done little to encourage mining. Signed.

137

J[uan Bernal Díaz de Lugo], bishop of Calahorra, Lic. G[uti]erre Velázquez and Lic. G[regori]o López. Opinion addressed to His Imperial Majesty. [Valladolid, summer 1545]. 4 leaves [1 blank].

Doctor Bernal was at this time a member of the Royal Council, having previously been a member of the Council of the Indies; Licenciados Velázquez and López were members of the Council of the Indies. They had studied the reports from New Spain regarding the reaction to the New Laws and had listened to those who had come to offer objections to the laws.

They are of the opinion that the Spaniards in the new lands must be given a permanent means of support, especially the conquerors 0116 100 and their descendants, but also the colonists, as an encouragement for permanent settlement. Because the councilors in Spain have inadequate knowledge of persons and conditions in the colonies, they recommend that the King send someone in whom he has confidence so that with the Viceroy he can make a study of the situation and issue proper ordinances. This individual should also set the boundaries of Spanish towns and establish new towns for the Spaniards, as was done in Puebla de los Angeles. To the conquerors and to the children of the dead conquerors should be given a proprietary annuity to be passed to their descendants as though it were an entailed estate. They should not be given towns as encomiendas nor should they hold any jurisdiction over towns, but they should rather receive a pension from the royal officials. This would prevent them from having anything to do directly with the Indians.

The royal commissioner should make a new assessment of tribute to make sure that it is not excessive. He should determine the amount necessary from the tribute to support friaries and monasteries in every province and from the rest he should take the annuities for the conquerors. He should send a list of these annuitants to the King so that letters of provision could be issued. The annuities should be given with the following conditions: if the line of heredity dies out, the annuity reverts to the Crown; the recipient of the annuity cannot have or buy immovable property in Castile. The annuities should not be stingy but generous.

To deserving colonists, income should be given from the tributes, inheritable for two or three generations. Both the conquerors and the colonists should be given lands on which to establish themselves.

They call upon the King for a quick decision. The Spaniards in the Indies should be discouraged from enriching themselves quickly and then returning to Spain, since this is the source of much harm to the Indians.

They note that they all agree in these opinions, with the exception that Bernal and Velázquez think that the annuities should be paid from the general royal income rather than from the income from particular towns, and López thinks that the Spaniards might be better satisfied if the annuities were based on the assignment of income from particular towns. Signed.

138

El parecer de los q[ue] se han juntado por mandado de v[uestra] m[ages]t[ad] a entender en las cosas de las Yndias despues de haver oydo al padre fray b[a]r[tolo]me de las casas y fray Jacobo de tastera 0117 101 y el licenciado Salmeron asy de palabra como por escripto. [Valladolid, June or July 1542]. 14 leaves [1 blank].

This is a summary statement of the various opinions presented in the Junta of Valladolid, which began to meet in the late spring of 1542 and continued until June or July of that year, with the purpose of establishing basic legislation for Spain's holdings in the New World. On October 16, 1542, representatives of the Junta met with the King in Barcelona to discuss these matters. The result of the discussions were the New Laws of the Indies, issued in Barcelona on November 20, 1542. A facsimile of the manuscript of the New Laws from the Archivo General de Indias was published in 1945 by Antonio Muro Orejón. For comparison it is cited in the following paragraphs.

Apparently the regulations for the Council of the Indies, which formed the first nine items of the New Laws, were discussed elsewhere, since there is nothing regarding these matters in the body of the present document.

This document begins with recommendations for the establishment of audiencias in Lima and Guatemala, recommendations which formed the basis for the respective articles of the New Laws (cf. Muro Orejón, p. 816). A residencia for the audiencia of Santo Domingo is suggested.

Governors and private persons who mistreat the Indians should be punished (cf. Muro Orejón, p. 819). Regulations for explorations and discoveries are suggested which correspond, with some changes, to the respective articles of the New Laws (cf. Muro Orejón, p. 824–825). Further opinions on the question of exploration and conquest are given, notably those of Sebastián Ramírez de Fuenleal, Licenciado Mercado, Doctor Bernal, and Gutierre Velázquez, which were not included in the New Laws. The expeditions of Sebastián de Benalcázar and Hernando de Soto are mentioned.

Bishops and friars should be sent to the provinces which need them.

Indians should not be enslaved in the future, and those who have been enslaved illegally should be set free by the audiencias after a summary inquiry. No Indians should be forced to work as servants (cf. Muro Orejón, p. 820). Supplementary opinions are given by Bishop Ramírez de Fuenleal and Doctor Arteaga, by Doctor Bernal and Gutierre Velázquez.

Regulations are suggested for the pearl fisheries of Venezuela with an amendment by Doctor Bernal and Gutierre de Velázquez. Both the recommendation and the amendment were incorporated into the New Laws (cf. Muro Orejón, p. 821).

The members of the junta apparently were unable to reach any 0118 102 basic agreement on what to do about the encomienda. No general statement is given but only a series of divergent opinions by Doctor Arteaga, Doctor Bernal, Licenciado Gutierre Velázquez, the bishop of Lugo [Suárez de Caravajal], Doctor Beltrán, the president of the audiencia of Valladolid [Sebastian Ramírez de Fuenleal], Licenciado Mercado de Peñalosa, Doctor Guevara, the Count of Osorno, the comendador mayor of León [Francisco de los Cobos], and the Cardinal [García de Loaysa]. Some support the continuance of the encomienda, others are for its suppression, and others propose some form of compromise.

The original body of this report was written on nine leaves. Leaves 10, 11, and 13 contain hastily written notes, which are possibly the outcome of a conference with the King, concerning decrees to be issued on specific matters. The principal matters mentioned are the following: royal officials should not have encomiendas; the audiencia of New Spain should carry out an inspection to find those who had Indians without title; a report should be made regarding those who had excessive numbers of Indians, as well as how they treated their Indians; the audiencias should not give out any encomiendas; and the encomiendas in Peru and other areas outside of New Spain should be taken away (cf. Muro Orejón, p. 821–823). There follow lists of names of those who are considered apt candidates for certain offices, namely, visitador of Mexico, judge of residencia for Santo Domingo, and Viceroy of Peru. It is interesting to note that the Marqués del Valle [Hernando Cortés] is among those listed for Viceroy of Peru. There are five vacant dioceses. Four Franciscans of New Spain are listed as good candidates, including Fray Toribio [de Benavente, or Motolinia], followed by five other friars and one canon. Support for the diocese of Honduras is also discussed.

Leaf 13r contains certain recommendations regarding the Council of the Indies, which were incorporated into the New Laws (cf. Muro Orejón, p. 814–815).

On the verso of leaf 14 are noted the names of those who are to meet with His Majesty.

139

Bartolomé de las Casas, bishop-elect of Chiapas. Petitions to His Imperial Majesty. [Spain, after May 1543 and probably before January 1544]. 4 leaves.

Bartolomé de las Casas was nominated as bishop of Chiapas in May 1543 and was approved by the Roman curia on December 19 and 20 of the same year. (See Wagner, p. 121–122.) Since he refers to himself here as bishop-elect, he must have written the letter between 0119 103 the two dates or shortly after the second. In the letter he makes a number of specific requests regarding matters which he considers necessary for the proper government of his diocese. He had been asked to leave for his diocese on the first fleet that sailed; he apparently thought that he might have to leave before being consecrated, and he wanted to strengthen his legal position. Beside each paragraph is given the decision of the Council in the briefest of terms. If a decision was reached to issue a provision, the execution of the decision is indicated by the letters “fha” (fecha, meaning done). These are noted in parentheses in the following digest after the items to which they pertain. The bishop makes the following requests:

1. That his diocese be clearly delimited from those of Guatemala, Honduras, Tlaxcala, and Oaxaca. (“To the audiencia.” “Done.”)

2. That the “provincias de guerra” named Teculutla, Lacandón, etc., where he and his companions had worked, be included in his diocese, “since this was the principal reason why he accepted it,” and that it should extend to the gulf, including the land of Yucatán. (“Idem. That if it appoints a person concerning the boundaries, let it be entrusted to him.” “Done.”)

3. That the audiencia and royal officers of justice be commanded to support the ecclesiastical jurisdiction. (“In the executorials.”)

4. That the audiencia and royal officers of justice observe the ecclesiastical immunities. There follows a petition which Las Casas crossed out.

5. That the audiencia be commanded to clarify doubtful questions regarding the tithing of the Spaniards. (“That he be given the letters which are given to other dioceses.”)

6. That the bishop be allowed to take for the needs of the Church the goods of those who die intestate and without heirs. (“It is not granted.”)

7. That even before his consecration he be allowed to take accounts of the executors of wills. (“He does not need it.”)

8. That, at least for this first time, he be allowed to indicate those who are to be appointed to ecclesiastical dignities and, if possible, that he be given some blank letters of appointment. (“Thus it will be done.”)

9. That, because Soconusco is so far from the audiencia, he be allowed to inspect, personally or through a representative, the corregidor and other officials of the area “because they are accustomed to rob the Indians and cause them other injuries.” (“He does not need it.” “That Soconusco be entrusted to the bishop of Chiapas in the meanwhile until a diocese is erected.” “Done.”)

0120 104

10. That he be empowered to send secular clergy, friars, or good laymen as visitors to inspect the treatment of the Indians throughout the diocese. (“What was agreed upon.” “Done.”)

11. That either personally or through another person he may inquire into the treatment of the Indians, especially in Chiapas, Tabasco, and Coatzacoalcos, because of their distance from the audiencia. (“Idem.”)

12. That he be given a cedula commanding the royal officials to give him immediately upon disembarking at Puerto de Caballos that part of his annual income of 500,000 maravedis which is due to him by that time. (“Cedula for the officials of Honduras that on the account of his salary they should give him 300 [?] ducats and pay it from the time of his appointment [provisión].” “Done.”)

13. [in the left margin] That he be given a grant covering the cost of the bulls of his consecration because he intends to use everything that he has for colonizing the land and serving God and King. (“For this the income of the vacant see is given to him.” “Done.”)

14. That the people who are going with him be exempt from paying customs duties either in the Indies or Seville. (“For the secular clergy, what was agreed upon; for the laymen, let him name them.”)

15. That His Majesty command the examination of a memorial which he will present and show whatever favor is possible to the farmers and other people whom he is taking with him or who will come later to colonize. (“Let him give the memorial.”)

16. That, because in Yucatán there are some Spanish outlaws and others who do injury to the Indians and make the pacification of the neighboring areas difficult, he be given a decree commanding all Spaniards to leave that area except those whom he authorizes to stay; because some of them are under penalty of death or other penalties, he requests His Majesty to pardon them so that they will leave. (“Cedula to the audiencia that they decree what seems best to them for the colonization and good of the land and its pacification, not allowing that there should be men who are injurious to the land.”)

17. That, because the Adelantado Montejo has committed many injustices to the Indians in Yucatán and has achieved nothing except making the Indians despise the Christian faith, Montejo should be excluded from that land so that the bishop-elect can better look to the pacification, conversion, and colonization of the land. (“See if a reply has been issued for Montejo and his officials.”)

18. That if there is any other way in which he can be of service, the King should command it, because he is ready to serve the King with all his strength to the end of his life.

19. That he be allowed to participate in the determination of the 0121 105 tributes of the Indians of his diocese with the oidor or other person who may be appointed. (“That he should be given a copy of the taxations.”)

20. That he be allowed to participate in the limiting of excessive repartimientos in Chiapas.

21. That he participate in the examination of titles of ownership of slaves. (“That he should urge it.”)

22. That when any of the repartimientos of his diocese becomes vacant, he be authorized to place it under the Crown.

23. That, if he gives a vecino a share in the tributes which are to be imposed upon the Indians of the “tierra de guerra,” as he is empowered to do, and the individual forsakes his purpose, the bishop be authorized to incorporate it into the royal Crown.

24. That he be given a decree authorizing him to promise to the Indians in the wilderness that if they come to settle among peaceful Indians they will not be subject to tribute and other taxes for ten years. (“What was agreed upon, in blank form, for two years more.” “Done.”)

25. That he be allowed to do the same for those whom he may ask to leave populated areas and settle in underpopulated areas. (“That the law of the realm be observed . . .” “Done.”)

26. That, in order to encourage the settlement of Spaniards in the “provincia de guerra,” he be allowed to distribute all the tributes to the Spaniards, just as he had previously been authorized to distribute half of them. (In the left margin, marked out, “Let the decree be seen.” In the right margin, “Incorporating the other decree, let everything be given to the vecinos anew.” “Done.”)

27. That, in regard to the “provincias de guerra,” which he and his companions had begun to pacify, the audiencia and other justices be commanded not to interfere except at the request of the bishop until a Spanish town is founded. (“Cedula to the audiencia that they should favor this and not consent that any Spaniard, etc.”)

28. That Fray Pedro de Angulo be instructed to do nothing in the “provincias de guerra” without permission of the bishop-elect.

29. That he be permitted to take over two dozen Negro slaves, tax free, to cultivate cassava for the support of the colonists and friars. (“Consult,” i.e., with the King.)

30. That because of immediate expenses of friars and colonists he be assisted with a loan of 500 ducats from the Casa de Contratación, which he would repay in two or three years. (“There is no disposition.”) Signed holograph.

0122 106
140

Luis de Velasco, the elder, and Antonio de Mendoza, Viceroys of New Spain. Viceregal orderbook. Mexico City and other places in New Spain, 1548–1552. 522 leaves variously numbered.

Provenance: G. R. G. Conway collection.

This volume was put together from three earlier manuscripts. The first part, with leaves numbered 1 through 455, with some irregularities, contains the viceregal orders of Don Luis de Velasco from November 8, 1550, to March 30, 1552. The second part, which has two numbers on each leaf, 3–21 and 412–431, continues the viceregal orders from April 8, 1552, to May 5, 1552. The last part, numbered 1–46 in pencil, is from the years 1548–1550, under the viceregency of Antonio de Mendoza.

The Velasco ordinances cover every aspect of the day-to-day government of Mexico: decisions regarding Indian lands and labor, licenses for Indians to ride horses, commissions to various inspectors and judges, decisions regarding affairs of the church, licenses for business enterprises, grants of land, ordinances for mines, patents for mining equipment, licenses for emigration, etc. It is of primary importance for the history of the first 18 months of Velasco's administration.

The papers from the viceregency of Mendoza are concerned entirely with questions involving Indian towns and tributes. It is interesting to note that in a number of instances, those who were sent out to settle difficulties in or between Indian towns were Indians themselves. The principal Indian towns involved were Tlatlaquntepeque, Teçistlan, Xalatzingo, Tecuitlan, Ixcatlan, Xiquipilco, Xochimilco (a long tribute taxation), Amatepeque, Chicoloapa, Chimaloacan, Guatepeque, Acatlán, Cuilutla, the region of Ocuytuco, Tenango, Teuxteupam, Guautepulco, Guazquatepeque, Molango, Coatepeque, Atotonilco, Gauquechula, Oquila, Çinacantepeque, Tepetitlan, Cuyotepeque, Tecamachalco, Quechula, Zinguiluca, and Tilantongo.

141

[Gerónimo de Ipori (?)] Del Río Marañon y de su descubrimi[ent]o y sus nazimi[ent] os y de otras muchas particularidades del, y de la Jornada q[ue] hizo P[edr]o de orsua. [ca. 1580–1600]. 62 leaves.

Provenance: Sir Thomas Phillipps and R. L. Harmsworth collections.

This manuscript traces the history of the exploratory expedition which was organized under Pedro de Ursúa, down the Amazon (Marañon) River from Peru. Ursúa arrived in Peru in 1558 after 0123 107 a career of several years in New Granada and Panama. He gained the support of Viceroy Cañete for his plan to search for the fabled wealth of the kingdom of El Dorado.

The present manuscript begins with an introductory chapter regarding the Amazon Basin and the background of Ursúa's expedition. It then follows the course of the expedition, showing Ursúa's misadventures and misdeeds until his arrival in the province of Machifaro, where his followers rose up under the leadership of Lope de Aguirre and killed him. Aguirre had Hernando de Guzmán chosen as captain and later sworn to as prince. As the expedition moved on Aguirre killed several other members, including his “prince.” Eventually they reached the island of Margarita and then the north coast of South America, leaving behind a bloodstained path. From Venezuela, Aguirre wrote an insulting letter to Philip II, a version of which is included here. The author details the slow process of organizing the royal forces in Venezuela and the gradual destruction of Aguirre's following. Finally, Aguirre was captured near Barquisimeto on October 27, 1561, and was killed by two of his former followers. His body was quartered, and various parts were exhibited in towns of Venezuela. The author of the present work assigns his soul to hell: “se puede inferir que su anima fue donde con pena y castigo etherno pagará sus culpas en el infierno.”

The authorship of this narrative is not entirely certain. The only indication of the authorship is a statement in the left margin at the head of the first sheet: “Este descubrimiento es de un nieto de geronimo de ypori el cual se llama geronimo de ypori.” But this could indicate simple possession as well as authorship. González de Barcia, in his additions to León Pinelo's Epítome , referred to what may have been another manuscript copy of this text although the title is somewhat different. It had 122 leaves, and the reference to Ipori was at the end of the work rather than at the beginning. Barcia was also unable to determine whether Ipori was the owner or the author (León Pinelo, 2: 690).

Emiliano Jos, who has written the most careful study of the Ursúa-Aguirre expedition, has identified a Jerónimo de Ipori, a dealer in precious metals and jewels, who was in Peru in 1561 and had previously been in New Granada, Popayán, and on the Spanish Main (Jos, p. 29–30).

The work was written after 1580, as is indicated by the fact that on the first page the author refers to the Crown of Portugal being at this time subject to the Crown of Castile. But, since the author seems to have gathered his material from first-hand sources, the work must have been written before the end of the century.

0124 108

The author is anything but dispassionate in his treatment of Aguirre, to whom he applies the title “el Tirano” and of whom he speaks in the most uncomplimentary terms. Yet, he seems to have attempted to garner the facts of the case as well as his limitations would allow.

142

Relazion De todo lo suçedido En la Jornada de omagua que por otro nombre es el dorado desde que fue encargada a Pedro de Orsua Por el marques de canete . . . y de como el cruel Tirano Lope de Aguirre llegó a las isla [sic] de la margarita y de las crueldades q[ue] Hizo hasta salir de la d [ic] ha ysla. Tambien trata de algu [n] as Cossas que suçedieron antes que la Jornada se proveyesse y del desbarato y muerte del Tirano Para mejor dar a entender el principio y fin que Tubo . . . [16th century, after 1561]. 34 leaves.

Provenance: Sir Thomas Phillipps and R. L. Harmsworth collections.

This is an anonymous narrative of the same historical episode as recounted in the previous item. It seems to be an independent account, although both narratives contain versions of Lope de Aguirre's letters to the provincial Montesinos and to Philip II of Spain. Even though the two accounts agree in many details, it is difficult to find a verbal dependence.

This account is written in two distinct hands. Leaves 1–2 and 25–34 are in an even, cultivated script which seems to date from a period considerably later than the original. Leaves 3 through 24 are in a secretarial hand which is more in the style of the late 16th century. It seems probable that the initial and final pages of the work were recopied at some time, possibly because they were deteriorating.

The author of the present account was a contemporary of the incidents but apparently not a member of the expedition, as he speaks of having gathered information from participants. (For example, on leaf 5, “Asi me lo dixeron algunos de los pocos quescaparon de la jornada que fueron gonçalo de çuniga que murio preso en el carcel de corte de madrid y balladares y otros.”)

The existence of this account was noted by González de Barcia in his revision of León Pinelo's Epítome , 2: 690, although he was dealing with a different manuscript copy. Emiliano Jos (p. 243–250) summarized the account from a copy in the collection of “Papeles de Jesuitas” in the Real Academia de Historia, Madrid (Vol. 115, leaves 493–518). It is basically the same text as the present one, although it includes a few sentences beyond the end of this text and concludes with a list of the 61 persons known to have been killed by Aguirre during the course of his tyranny.

0125 109
143

The King [Philip II]. Copy of a royal cedula to the audiencia of Los Reyes [Lima], Peru. Madrid, October 3, 1562. With an appended list of those involved in the Lope de Aguirre revolt and a paragraph of a royal letter to Pedro de la Gasca. [Valladolid, July 6, 1550]. 5 leaves [1 blank].

Provenance: Sir Thomas Phillipps and R. L. Harmsworth collections.

The King reminds the audiencia of the basic facts of the rebellion of Lope de Aguirre and states that he has been informed that many of those who escaped when the revolt was suppressed had made their way to Peru and other provinces and had escaped punishment. He commands the audiencia to seek out these men and take judicial action against them. He is having a list of their names appended to the cedula. The audiencia is to see to it that none of the guilty parties remain in those lands and to report on the action taken.

The appended list contains the names of 184 men and was signed in the original by the royal secretary, Ochoa de Luyando.

The final paragraph in the manuscript is a passage from a royal letter to Pedro de la Gasca concerning the fact that 155 Indian warriors and their dependents from the Brazilian coastal area and the Paraná River had come via the Paraguay River to the region of the Chachapoyas. There the corregidor Capt. Gómez de Alvarado, with Juan Pérez de Guevara and other vecinos, captured them and distributed them among themselves. The King commands that the article of the New Laws forbidding enslavement of Indians be applied to them and that La Gasca make sure that they are well treated and instructed in the faith, putting them in a town where this can be better accomplished.

The anonymous author of item 142 refers to a report, brought by such a group of Indian wanderers from the Brazilian coast, as having sparked the interest which led to the Urúa-Aguirre expedition.

144

Letters, documents, and a narrative manuscript relating to Dominique de Gourgues, his expedition to Florida in 1567–1568 and his family. 1558–1593. 55 leaves, 40 pages. With an interspersed collection of letters, documental transcripts, historical notes, and printed items related to the same subject. Early and middle 19th century. Ca. 33 items (6 printed).

Provenance: Collection of the Vicomte de Gourgues and that of the Baron E. de Bony, Château de Vayres (Gironde).

This is a mixed collection of materials related to Domingue de Gourgue (or Dominique de Gourgues) and his family. Interspersed 0126 110 with a number of original documents from the 16th century are 19th-century transcripts of other documents of that period; the volume concludes with a group of letters and printed items from the early and middle 19th century. All of these items are mounted in a bound volume, which has the spine title “Dominique de Gourgues—Autographes.” The collection was assembled by Vicomte Alexis de Gourgues in the early 19th century. The items from the earlier period are numbered separately in the volume, and only they will be listed in the following description. The researcher, however, will find some of the transcripts to be of value.

Dominique de Gourgues (ca. 1530–1582) was born at Mont-de-Marsan in the Landes, near Bordeaux. His family was distinguished, although minor, nobility of Guienne. He fought against the Spaniards in Italy, was captured, and was condemned to serve in the galleys as an oarsman. After escaping he undertook a career as a naval officer. In 1567 he took a cargo of African slaves to the Spanish Antilles where he sold them as contraband. Then he sailed to Florida where, with the help of Indian allies, he captured the Spanish fort of San Mateo and murdered 60 Spanish prisoners as an act of revenge for the murder of French prisoners by Pedro Menéndez de Avilés in 1565. Gourgues then returned to France and sold the booty from the captured Spanish fort, but he was soon forced to go into hiding for two or three years because of a pro-Spanish turn in French policy. He emerged to participate in the siege of the Huguenot stronghold of La Rochelle with his ship, Le Grand Charles , and another vessel, La Desesperada. His later years were spent in naval service. His final assignment was related to the French attempt to prevent Philip II of Spain from gaining complete control of the Portuguese empire. He was to have been commander of French vessels in the fleet under Filippo Strozzi which was sent against the Azores in support of the Portuguese claimant Dom Antonio and was disastrously defeated by the Spaniards. De Gourgues was unable to participate in the expedition, as he died early in 1582.

Perhaps the most important item in the collection is the 32-page manuscript copy of the Reprise de la floride faite par le Capitaine Gourgue which recounts de Gourgues' expedition against the Spanish in Florida. It is one of seven known manuscript copies of this account of the most famous episode of de Gourgues' life.

The collection contains 27 items from the 16th and early 17th centuries, listed below with brief descriptions:

0127 111
144/1

Domingue de Gourgue. Power of attorney. August 31, 1558. 2 leaves.

Here de Gourgues gives his power of attorney for a person to substitute at the marriage of a relative of his at Dax. De Gourgues is stated to be on duty in the French navy. Signed.

144/2

Domingue de Gourgue. Power of attorney. Bordeaux, January 6, 1569. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Power of attorney is given for the collection of 7,500£ Tournois owed to de Gourgues by the city of Bordeaux for nine guns which he had seized from the Spanish at Fort San Mateo in Florida. Signed.

144/3

Domingue de Gourgue. Document. January 1569. 2 leaves.

This document gives details of the distribution of the Florida booty, with the names of some of the men of the expedition. Signed.

144/4

Robert de Barnac and Arnaud Gerburi. July 25, 1567. 2 leaves.

This is a contract between the surgeon and assistant surgeon of the Florida expedition, signed a few days before the sailing. The final page has been glued down, and some of the text is therefore lost. Signed.

144/5

Domingue de Gourgue. Power of attorney to Raymond Blizeau. 2 leaves [1 blank].

The document is signed, but the date is missing because of damage.

144/6

Jean Mandran (agent for de Gourgues) and Louis de la Forcade. Settlement of accounts. [1569?] 2 leaves.

The settlement involves the sale of the cannon from San Mateo and the payment for provisions for the Florida voyage. It was published in part by Tamizey de Larroque (1867, p. 74–76). Signed.

0128 112
144/7

[Jeanne de Eyquem]. Receipt. [After 1568]. 2 leaves.

This receipt is for pay due to F. de la Lagune, captain of a ship on the Florida expedition and the husband, perhaps deceased, of Jeanne Eyquem. It was partially published by Tamizey de Larroque (1867, p. 72–73).

144/8

Chevalier [Blaise] de Monluc and others. Document of appraisal. [Bordeaux], August 27, 1568. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Here is an appraisal of the cannons which were captured by de Gourgues at San Mateo. Blaise de Monluc, who signs himself as “chevalier,” or “knight,” was one of the outstanding French captains of the 16th century. The item was published by Tamizey de Larroque (1867, p. 72). Signed.

144/9

Domingue de Gourgue. Loan contract. October 1568. 3 leaves.

In this contract a ship name Le Brigantyn is mortgaged to de Gourgues. It is signed by de Gourgues in five places.

144/10

Domingue de Gourgue. Power of attorney to Augier (Ogier) de Gourgue. January 5, 1569. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Dominique de Gourgues gives his power of attorney to his cousin to receive merchandise from a voyage which a Captain Cazenave is to make. Signed.

144/11

Domingue de Gourgue. Document. July 9, 1568. 2 leaves [1 blank].

This is another document regarding the ship Le Brigantyn (see item 144 / 9). Signed.

144/12

Sergent, Castaigne, and others. Order to draft sailors. [1572?]. 2 leaves.

This is an order for the seizure of 30 to 40 sailors for service on de Gourgues' ship Le Grand Charles. Signed.

0129 113
144/13

Jehan de Bordenave (agent for Domingue de Gourgue). Contract with Jonyn de Villars. Bordeaux, February 27, 1576.

The contract is with Villars, a carpenter, for repairs to the ship Le Grand Charles. 1 leaf.

144/14

Maurice Garat and others. Receipt for pay. Bayonne, May 7, 1572. 1 leaf [strips pasted together].

The receipt is for payment for having found sailors for de Gourgues' ship Le Grand Charles. Signed.

144/15

Estienne de Bang and de Labat. Work contract. Bayonne, [1570's].

By this contract de Bang and de Labat agree to serve as carpenters on Le Grand Charles. 1 leaf.

144/16

Verrier. Letter to Domingue de Gourgue. April 14, 1579. 1 leaf.

Verrier replies to a request from de Gourgues for payment of 7,000 écus for his service at La Rochelle with his ships Le Grand Charles and La Desesperada. Signed.

144/17

Domingue de Gourgue. Power of attorney to Romarine de Mesmes. January 15, 1580. 1 leaf [two pieces pasted together].

He gives power of attorney to his aunt for the administration of his lands. Signed.

144/18

The King [Antonio, Prior of Crato, pretender of Portugal]. Letter to Queen Catherine de Medici of France. Rochester, June 26, 1582. 2 leaves.

He expresses his desire to see the Queen personally, but mentions the necessity which had forced him to move to Rochester, as will be explained to the Queen more at length by Pedro de Oro. Signed.

0130 114
144/19

Henry [Duke of Anjou, later Henry III, King of France]. Letter to the Duc de Longueville, Paris, November 4, 1572. 1 leaf.

A letter concerning the projected siege of La Rochelle. Signed.

144/20

Louis de Lur and others. Letter to Domingue de Gourgue. Bordeaux, October 31, 1568. 2 leaves.

The letter treats of the defenses of the Garonne River. Signed.

144/21

Louis de Lur and others. Letter to Domingue de Gourgue. Bordeaux, October 22, 1568. 2 leaves.

This is another letter regarding the Garonne defenses. Signed.

144/22

Louis de Lur and others. Letter to Domingue de Gourgue. Bordeaux, November 6, 1568. 2 leaves.

The letter concerns de Gourgues' ship Le Grand Charles. Signed.

144/23

Louis de Lur and others. Receipt for expenditures. n.p., February 1575. 1 leaf.

The receipt is for expenditures made in the siege of La Rochelle. Signed.

144/24

Gombault de la Gombaudière and others. Document regarding the ship Loursin. n.p., n.d. 8 leaves [1 blank].

Gombaudière was commander of the squadron which guarded the Garonne in 1582 when de Gourgues served there with his ships. Signed.

144/25

[Antoine de Gourgues]. Order for a levy of foot soldiers. n.p., January 15, 1589. 1 leaf.

The sheet has been glued to the backing, obscuring the conclusion of the letter and the signatures. The order is for the levy of two squadrons of foot soldiers.

0131 115
144/26

[Pierre Locgrate]. Summary of funeral expenses for Domingue de Gourgue. n.p. [1582]. 6 leaves.

This summary gives many interesting details.

144/27

[Pierre de Vaquieux]. Reprise de la Floride faite par le Capitaine Gourgue. [Early 17th century]. 32 pages.

Vaquieux wrote his narrative of de Gourgues' Florida expedition during the late 16th century. It became rather widely distributed in manuscript and was used by various authors in writing their narratives of the French experience in Florida.

Six other manuscript versions are known to exist, all of which are now in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris. There they are listed as: 1) Manuscrit français 2,145; 2) Manuscrit français 3,884, leaves 318–344; 3) Manuscrit français 6,124; 4) Manuscrit français 19,899 (formerly Manuscrit Ancien Saint-Germain français 1,886); 5) Manuscrit français 20,794, leaves 728–738; 6) Manuscrit nouvelles acquisitions françaises 14,755. The oldest is Manuscrit français 20,794, which dates from the late 16th century. The last one, Nouvelles acquisitions 14,755, is a 19th-century copy of one of the others and can be left out of the discussion. Manuscrits français 2,145, 6,124, and 19,899 all appear to be copies made in the late 16th or early 17th century by the well-known and popular scribe, Robert Leprévost. Manuscrit français 3,884 is a copy from later in the 17th century and contains some notable variants from the earlier readings. Various printed editions of the Reprise have been made, utilizing one or the other of the manuscripts from the Bibliothèque Nationale or the present manuscript, but no fully comparative scholarly edition has been made.

Tamizey de Larroque used Manuscrit français 2,145 as the basis of his 1867 version, and although he consulted other versions, he did not print variant readings. Ternaux-Compans (v. 20, p. 301–366) published an incomplete version of 19,899; Paul Gaffarel (p. 483–515) published a better edition of the same manuscript, noting variants from 2,145, 3,884, and 6,124. Taschereau (1835), the first to publish an edition of the Reprise, used the least adequate text, Manuscrit français 3,884, leaves 318–344. The oldest of the manuscripts, Manuscrit français 20,794, leaves 728–738, has not been published in a French edition although it formed the basis for an English translation by Mrs. J. T. Connor which was published by Charles E. Bennett (p. 202–226).

0132 116

The present manuscript was apparently in the family archive of the de Gourgues until the 19th century when it was placed in the present collection by the Vicomte Alexis de Gourgues. Later it was passed on to Baron E. de Bony, who married a lady of the Vicomte's family and who preserved the papers at the Chateau de Vayres near Bordeaux. It was used by Pierre F. X. de Charlevoix, S. J. (1774, v.1, p. 147–165), who paraphrased it in his history of New France. In 1851 it was published in an inadequate edition by a local historian at Mont-de-Marsan (see Tamizey de Larroque). It has never been published in an adequate edition. The last three leaves of the manuscript are in inverse order.

145

Holy Office of the Inquisition, Mexico. Proceso de oficio contra Simón Perenis por ciertas palabras que dixo contra la fe. Mexico, September 10*ndash;December 4, 1568. 102 pages [p. 24, 26, 31, 56–58, 60, 84–88, 92, 99–100 are blank.] Two additional ms. slips are inserted after p. 90.

Provenance: from the collections of Luis González Obregón and G. R. G. Conway.

Simón Pereyns is a commonly accepted spelling of the name of the Flemish painter who was defendent in this Inquisition case, although the name is spelled any number of ways in this document, and his signature appears to be Simon Perijns. He was born in Antwerp and lived for a while in Lisbon and Toledo before coming to Mexico with the Viceroy Marqués de Falces in 1566. He spent the rest of his life in Mexico, being active there as late as 1603. The present trial record gives us a considerable amount of information about Pereyns and other artists who were active in Mexico at the end of the 1560's. It also shows the workings of the episcopal Inquisition in Mexico during the last years before the establishment of the Tribunal of the Inquisition there as a separate judicial body, independent of the authority of the bishops.

The case was opened in Mexico City on September 10, 1568, with a self-denunciation by Pereyns for having said to Francisco de Morales and his wife in the town of Tepeaca that it was a less serious sin for an unmarried man and woman to have intercourse than if one of them were married. He had also told them of a letter in which his father had congratulated him for painting portraits rather than saints' pictures because there was more money in portraits. The statement is signed by Pereyns, Fray Bartolomé de Ledesma, and Gutierre de Paz, the notary (p. 1–2).

On September 14 Licenciado Portillo, vicar general of the archdiocese, 0133 117 called in Francisco de Morales to take his testimony concerning the incident. Morales accused Pereyns of more serious crimes than he had admitted. The testimony is signed by Morales and Juan de Avendaño. Portillo then commanded Pereyns to be imprisoned (p. 2–4).

On the same day Pereyns was called upon to confess and repeated substantially the same confession as in his self-denunciation of September 10. He also asserted that Morales and his wife misunderstood him because of his difficulties with the language. He was called upon to confess again on September 16 and September 18. On the latter occasion he admitted some confusing statements about sacramental confession but again claimed that the confusion was due to his problems with the language (p. 5–9).

Licenciado Portillo made out the charge against Pereyns on September 18, concerning his statements regarding sexual intercourse, sacramental confession, and a preference for painting portraits rather than religious paintings. Pereyns was to present his defense within 10 days. Immediately, however, he was required to answer the charges. Interestingly, he testified that Morales had threatened to have him expelled from the land, and for this reason he had denounced himself (p. 10–12).

On the same day Pereyns gave his power of attorney to Juan Vellerino. The body of this document is a printed form, apparently a unique printed piece which is unrecorded. In a note on the front wrapper of the case, G. R. G. Conway, former owner of the manuscript, attributes it to the press of Pedro de Ocharte. The first and last parts of the document are written in by hand by the scribe Pero Gómez Nájera (p. 13–14).

On September 22 Licenciado Portillo extended for 20 days the term for Pereyns to present his defense (p. 15).

Defense petitions were presented for Pereyns by Juan Vellerino on September 23 and 25. On October 2 Portillo commissioned Juan de Vergara, a secular priest, to take depositions for Pereyns, outside the city of Mexico. He was to be paid 2 pesos a day (p. 17–22). On September 30 Juan de Avendaño, the notary, notified Juan de Vellerino that he should go or send someone to take depositions for Pereyns in the diocese of Tlaxcala and the town of Tepeaca (p. 23).

Francisco Morales ratified his previous testimony on October 13 (p. 25).

On September 20 Licenciado Portillo, vicar general for Archbishop Alonso de Montúfar, wrote to Bishop Hernando de Villagómez, bishop of Tlaxcala, to his vicar general, and to the Franciscan superior of 0134 118 the friary of Tepeaca, asking them to take a deposition from Francisca Ortiz, wife of Francisco de Morales, in Tepeaca. Her deposition was taken down on October 5, written on the back of Portillo's letter by the scribe Antonio de Luzán and signed by him. It was also signed by Fr. Juan de Escalante, Franciscan superior of Tepeaca, and by the Franciscan priests Alonso de Molina (a noted linguist) and Juan de Beleña. A deposition was also taken from Diego Mallorquín, signed by him, by Luzán, and by the three friars. Fr. Juan de Escalante then commanded that the two depositions be sent to Portillo under seal. The seal is intact (p. 27–32).

Blas de Morales, as attorney for Pereyns, asked for publication of the testimony, and this request was granted by Portillo on October 19 (p. 33).

Pereyns' interrogatory for his defense was presented by Juan Vellerino before Portillo on September 24. It stressed the enmity and envy which Morales held toward Pereyns (p. 35–37). Witnesses presented were Martín Telmo, September 24 (p. 39–41); Martín de Carranza, September 25 (p. 41–42); Francisco de Zumaya, painter, October 1 (p. 43–44); Juan Rodríguez, sculptor, October 2 (p. 44–47); Claudio de Arziniega, October 6 (p. 47–49); Fr. Francisco de Ortega, an Augustinian priest, October 6 (p. 50–51); Bartolomé de Argumedo, October 7 (p. 51–53); Juan Ortiz, October 11 (p. 54–55). All the depositions were made in Mexico City and signed by the respective witnesses and by the notary Juan Ortiz de Arri.

Portillo commissioned Juan de Vergara on October 2 to go to Malinalco and other places to gather testimony for Pereyns (p. 59). Another copy of Pereyns' questionnaire is given (p. 61–62) and further depositions: Fr. Alondo de Alvarado, prior of the monastery of Oquila, in Oquila, October 7 (p. 63–67); Fr. Juan Cruzate, prior of the monastery of Malinalco, October 7, apparently in Oquila (p. 67–70); Fr. Luis de Mingolla, Augustinian priest, October 7, in Malinalco (p. 70–75); García de Salamanca, sculptor, October 11, in Malinalco (p. 75–79); Juan Hernández, enxamblador, October 11, apparently in Malinalco (p. 80–83). Each witness signed his deposition except Juan Hernández, who did not know how to write. Each deposition is signed by Juan de Vergara.

On October 20 Pereyns presented a petition to the effect that his defense had been adequately presented and that the case should be decided. Licenciado Portillo ordered the petition entered in the record (p. 89–90).

Following p. 90 two slips are inserted. The first, written and signed by Fr. Christóbal de Agurto, stated that Pereyns had gone to confession to gain the Jubilee indulgence in 1563. The second, written and 0135 119 signed by Fr. Juan de Santo Domingo, sacristan of the Dominican friary in Mexico City, asserted that Pereyns had gone to confession and had received communion there twice in 1568.

On November 15 Pereyns, complaining of his sufferings in the prison of the archdiocese, again asked that his case be decided. Estevan de Portillo, the vicar general, replied that it would be done soon (p. 91). Apparently Portillo had gained a doctorate during the intervening days. From here to the end of the case he is referred to and signs himself as “Doctor Estevan de Portillo.”

Portillo condemned Pereyns to torture on December 1, and the order was carried out the same day. He was placed on the rack with a hood drawn down over his mouth and was subjected to three turns of the rack, alternated with three jars of water poured in his mouth over the hood. Pereyns maintained at each stage of the torture that he had told the truth previously. The record of each stage of the torture is signed with the signatures of Pereyns and Juan de Avendaño, the notary, and with the rubric of Portillo (p. 93–98).

On December 4, 1568, Portillo passed sentence in the case, requiring that, all supplies being given to him, Pereyns should paint the retable of Our Lady for the cathedral church very devoutly and to the satisfaction of Portillo and that he should not leave the city before its completion. Further, Pereyns was not to say words such as those for which he had been imprisoned and was not to enter into discussions regarding the faith. He was also required to pay the costs of the case. On the same day Pereyns was informed of the sentence and accepted it.

This Inquisition case was published in full by Manuel Toussaint (1938).

146

Tepeaca (town) con Luis Hernández. Autos hechos sobre las tres cauallerías de t[ie]rra que esta cibdad vendio a Luis H[e]r[nande]z. Mexico City, Puebla de los Angeles, Tepeaca, August 1–September 20, 1583 (with appended documents dated as early as November 22, 1581). 26 leaves.

For the title page of this lawsuit the scribe used the back of a letter from Martín Seguera to Juan de la Cueva in Tepeaca. The letter was dated in Los Angeles [Puebla], July 29 (no year). It seems to have no relationship with the lawsuit itself.

In Tepeaca on August 1, 1583, the governor, alcaldes, and regidores of the town appeared before the alcalde mayor, Juan Vázquez de Cearreta, and presented a petition and some documents regarding three caballerías of land. The petition stated that, after having bought 0136 120 the land from Diego Maldonado, the town had ignorantly allowed themselves to be led into issuing a written statement declaring that the lands were not within the boundaries described, which encompassed fertile land, but in a barren area. They ask that their letter be declared void. The petition is signed with 17 names. Juan Vázquez declared that the documents should be assembled so that a decision could be reached. His decision bears his signature and that of Juan de la Cueva, notary public. A transcript of documents is inserted. In Tepeaca on July 31, 1583, the town government requested a copy of the statement which they had made regarding the lands which Diego Maldonado had sold to them. The alcalde mayor commanded Juan de la Cueva, notary of the city, to search in the registers of his predecessor Francisco de Molina and make a copy of the document. La Cueva copied out the statement, which was dated December 19, 1582. La Cueva's transcript of these documents is dated August 1, 1583, and is authenticated with his sign and signature (leaves 3–8).

An original viceregal cedula, issued by Viceroy Lorenzo Suárez de Mendoza, Conde de Coruña, in Mexico City on July 13, 1582, is attached. It gave to Diego Maldonado the three caballerías of land which had belonged to Licenciado de la Parra in recompense for two caballerías which had been granted to Maldonado; the possession of the two caballerías had been contested by the minor children and heirs of Don Tomás de Tapia, an Indian. The cedula is signed by the Conde de Coruña and countersigned by his secretary Juan de Cueba. On the verso of the cedula is an agreement between the government of Tepeaca and Diego Maldonado written in Tepeaca on December 19, 1582. The Indians agreed that the boundaries were different from those stated in the viceregal grant, and with this understanding, Maldonado transferred the grant to them. It is signed by Maldonado, by five members of the town council, by Bachiller Thomas Ruiz de Zuñiga as witness, Hernando de Argueta as interpreter, and Francisco de Molina as notary public (leaf 9).

Another transcript follows. In Tepeaca on July 31, 1583, the government of Tepeaca asked the alcalde mayor to instruct the notary to search the registers of Francisco de Molina for the deed of sale made out to them by Diego Maldonado. The alcalde mayor so commanded, and the notary copied the deed of sale, dated in Tepeaca, November 22, 1581. The transcript was made by Juan de la Cueva in Tepeaca on August 2, 1583, and was authenticated with his sign and signature (leaves 10–14).

In Tepeaca on August 3, 1583, Alcalde Mayor Juan Vázquez de Cearreta granted the petition of the town of Tepeaca and declared 0137 121 that their written statements regarding the location of the land were null and void. Immediately following this, starting on the same sheet, is a request by the town of Tepeaca for permission to sell the land. They had taken the 1,500 pesos to buy the land from a fund intended for the payment of tribute to His Majesty. Now they had received permission from the Viceroy to sell the land to make up the deficit. They ask that the sale be announced publicly by the crier. The request was dated in Tepeaca, August 2 [sic], 1583, and is signed (leaves 15–16).

An original cedula of the Viceroy, Lorenzo Suárez de Mendoza, Conde de Coruña, to the alcalde mayor of Tepeaca is appended. It was issued in Mexico City on June 8, 1583, signed by the Viceroy, and countersigned by Juan de Cueba. The Indians of Tepeaca had asked him for permission to sell the land for the 1,600 pesos which had been offered for it by private parties, especially one Luis Hernández, a Spaniard. They wanted to use the money to pay overdue tribute. The alcalde mayor is commanded to see to it that the land is sold for the highest price possible, that all the royal laws for the protection of Indian rights are observed, and that the money be given to the royal treasury officials to pay the overdue tribute (leaf 17r).

The alcalde mayor commanded that the crier publicize the sale for 30 days as required by law. Each publication was recorded as it was made by the crier Juan Negro, and the record was signed each time by the notary Juan de la Cueva. The publications were made in Tepeaca on August 2, 3, 12, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31; September 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 12; in San Salvador on August 7, 8, 9; in Acatzingo on August 13, 20, September 10; in Tecamachalco on August 14, 16, 17, September 7; in San Pablo, where the repartimiento of field workers was made, on Monday, August 19; and in Quecholac on September 9. On the occasion of the last publication, in Tepeaca on September 12, Luis Hernández, vecino of that city, offered 1,500 pesos for the land (leaves 17v–21r).

In Tepeaca on September 13 the crier Juan Negro announced the sale to see if anyone would offer more than 1,500 pesos; no one appeared, and the sale was postponed by the alcalde mayor until Monday, September 16. On that day again no one appeared to offer more, and the sale was postponed until Thursday, September 19. Again on the 19th no one offered more, and the alcalde mayor called for the conclusion of the auction: “y dijo el dicho pregonero tres veces y más ‘Mil y quinientos pesos de oro común dan por las dichas tierras. ¿Hay quién diga más? ¿Hay quién puje? Pues que no hay quién diga más, buena, buena, buena pro le haga.’” The sale was 0138 122 then awarded to Luis Hernández (leaves 21v–22v).

The bill of sale follows, made that same day, September 19, 1583, in the presence of the alcalde mayor Juan Vázquez de Cearreta, the notary Juan de la Cueva, and the members of the town council of Tepeaca. It is signed by the alcalde mayor, those of the town council who knew how to write, Francisco de Torres as witness, and the notary (leaves 23r–26r).

The manuscript concludes with the first page of the official act of taking possession of the lands, made by Luis Hernández on his newly purchased property on September 20, 1583 (leaf 26v).

147

Juan Bueno de Rojas. La Provincia de Iucatan, i los Decendientes de sus Cõquistadores, Pacificadores, i antiguas pobladores, en el pleito con el senor Fiscal . . . [Madrid?, ca. 1631]. 15 leaves.

This is a signed, printed document in which the lawyer for the Province of Yucatán presents his clients' case against the royal attorney. The question at issue was that on June 28, 1630, the Council of the Indies had issued a decree affecting the encomiendas of the province. A cedula of September 22, 1565, renewed in 1573 and 1619, had permitted that as the encomiendas became vacant, their income should be put into the royal treasury of the province up to a total of 25,000 pesos annually to pay the salaries of the bishops and the officials of the government and other expenses. Now the Crown wanted to place new taxes on the revenues of the encomiendas. In arguing against this, the lawyer summarized the services of the encomenderos in protecting the province against French and English corsairs and Indian rebellions. It is signed by Licenciado Juan Bueno de Rojas at the end.

Unfortunately the woodcut vignette at the top of the first page has been cut out, leaving a lacuna on the verso in the middle of the summary of the Crown's proposed innovations.

148

Papeles de los Servicios del capitan Don Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo Díaz. Various places, 1627–1641.

This is a collection of 27 papers and documents pertaining, according to the cover, to the military career of Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo Díaz. Oddly, the earliest of them (nos. 2, 14, 27, 6) refer to Pedro de la Peña y Céspedes or Pedro de Céspedes y de la Peña. Perhaps this merely indicates a change of his usage in regard to his name, 0139 123 since there seems to be a continuity in the military career of Pedro de la Peña y Céspedes and Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo.

The five earliest documents in chronological order (nos. 2, 14, 27, 6, 13) refer to service in Spain and the Canary Islands. The middle group, chronologically, pertain to his activities in Cuba and Florida between 1630 and 1639 (nos. 3, 15, 20, 8, 9, 21, 22, 10, 23, 25, 26, 24, 17, 16, 4). The final group was issued after his return to Spain in 1640 and ends with him taking leave in Valencia because of injuries suffered during the suppression of the Catalan revolt in 1641 (nos. 11, 7, 18, 12, 5, 19, 1).

The person who organized the present volume arranged the documents topically, with titles on pages inserted between the documents. There is no title before the first one. The rest are as follows (in modern orthography): Nos. 2–5, “Licencias de los generales y cabos que le dieron al Capitán Don Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo en diferentes partes que ha servido”; Nos. 6–10, “Ventajas, nombramientos y patentes del Capitán Don Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo”; Nos. 11–19, “Certificaciones de diferentes oficiales de las ocasiones en que se ha hallado el Capitán Don Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo”; and Nos. 20–27, “Ordenes que han dado al Capitán Don Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo generales y cabos diferentes debajo la mano de quien servía y adonde consta que ha ido a cabo governando diferentes navíos y gente de mar y guerra muchas veces.”

148/1

Martín de Velasco Briz[ue]la, principal accountant of the army of Cantabria. Certification of Céspedes' military service. Tarragona, April 17, 1641. 2 leaves [1 blank].

He certifies that Céspedes had taken up duty with the army of Cantabria on January 3, 1641, by virtue of a royal cedula of May 15, 1640 (see item 148/7). He served until March 22, 1641, when he took advantage of a permission of the Captain General Marqués de los Vélez to go to Valencia (see item 148/5). Signed.

148/2

Gabriel Frías de Lara, governor of the Canary Islands. Permit for passage to Don Pedro de la Peña y Céspedes. Canaria, January 25, 1627. 1 leaf.

Pedro de la Peña y Céspedes, a soldier in the company of Captain Cristóbal de Salazar and one of 44 soliders assigned to the island, has asked permission to go to Spain for some necessary business. The permission is granted, with a command to Francisco García y Arce, accountant of the soldiers, to note it in his books. Signed.

0140 124

A note by García y Arce, in the lower left corner, indicates that he did as commanded on January 28, 1627.

148/3

Fadrique de Toledo Osorio, Marqués de Villanueva de Valdueza, captain general of the armada. Permit to Céspedes to travel. Havana, May 7, 1630. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Andrés Rodríguez de Villegas, who was going as governor of Florida, has asked permission for Pedro de Céspedes, a soldier in the company of Captain Pedro de Arbieto, to go with him. Permission is here granted.

Signed, with seal partially intact.

Noted in the veeduría general on May 8, 1630, by Martín de Velasco; noted in the contaduría by Francisco de Arestau[?]ja; countersigned by Antonio Rodríguez de Fresnilla.

148/4

Damián de Vega Castro y Pardo, governor of Florida. Permit for Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo to travel. San Agustín de la Florida, March 21, 1639. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo, captain of one of the companies of infantry of San Agustin, Florida, had requested permission to go to other parts to continue in the service of the King. Permission is here granted. Signed.

On the verso of the first leaf there is a certification from the royal treasury officials of Florida to the effect that Céspedes did not owe any debts to the treasury. It is signed by Francisco Menéndez Márquez and Nicolás Ponce de León.

148/5

Marqués de los Vélez, Viceroy of Catalonia. Permit for Céspedes to travel. Tarragona, March 19, 1641. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Captain Pedro de Céspedes, soldier of the company of the maestre de campo Bernabé de Salazar, having served his Majesty for 22 years, requested permission to go to Valencia to regain his health, because he was confined to his bed as the result of a fall from a horse, suffered in the pursuit of the enemy. Leave is granted for two months. Signed with seal intact.

Noted in the veeduría on March 22.

0141 125
148/6

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal cedula to the Marqués de Villanueva de Valdueza, captain general of the armada of the Ocean Sea. Madrid, July 18, 1628. 2 leaves [1 blank].

The King commands that the Marqués give Pedro de Céspedes de la Peña a position as a soldier in one of the companies of infantry of armada [marines], with a salary of four escudos per month more than his ordinary wage as a soldier.

Signed; countersigned by Pedro de Arce.

On the verso of the first leaf there is an order that the cedula be fulfilled, dated in Madrid, August 3, 1628, and signed with the name of the Marqués Fadrique de Toledo Osorio. It was entered into the books of the veeduría general of the armada as of August 12, 1628, signed by Juan de Castro y Castilla; it was also noted by the contador of the armada, Francisco Beltrán de Manusga.

148/7

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal cedula to the captain general of the army of Cantabria [the Marqués de los Vélez]. Madrid, May 15, 1640. 2 leaves [1 blank].

The King commands that Captain Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo be given a position in the army, with pay of 25 escudos per month.

Signed with a stamp; countersigned (signature illegible).

On the verso of the first leaf there is an order dated January 3, 1641, signed by the Marqués de los Vélez, commanding that the cedula be put into effect. It was noted in the veeduría and contaduría of the army, with a statement that Céspedes was placed in the company of the lieutenant colonel of the Count of Oropesa.

It is written on stamped paper dated for the year 1640.

148/8

Andrés Rodríguez de Villegas, governor of Florida. Promotion for Céspedes. San Agustín de la Florida, October 24, 1630. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Melchor de Orantes recommends that Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo be given the position of alférez in his company, a position formerly held by Miguel Marroquín. Signed, in San Agustín de la Florida, October 24, 1630.

The governor, Andrés Rodríguez de Villegas, orders the request put into effect. Signed, same place and date.

On the verso of the first leaf, Juan de Cueva, the accountant, 0142 126 indicates he has registered the promotion in his books. Signed, same place, on October 25, 1630.

148/9

Eugenio de Espinosa, sergeant major of the fortification of the province of Florida, in charge of the government of the army of Florida by special cedula of His Majesty. Promotion for Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo. San Agustín de la Florida. December 11, 1631. 1 leaf.

Pedro de San Martín was giving up his position of adjutant of the presidio of San Agustín. Espinosa appoints Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo, alférez of Captain Melchor de Orantes, to take San Martín's place. Signed, with seal intact.

On the verso [Nicolás] Ponce de León indicates that he noted the promotion in the books of the contaduria.

148/10

Luis Horruytiner, governor of Florida. Confirmation of promotion of Pedro Céspedes Vallejo. San Agustín de la Florida, September 17, 1633. 2 leaves [1 blank].

The governor notes that he had been informed that the alférez Pedro de Céspedes y Vallejo had been named to the position of adjutant of the sergeant major of the presidio by Captain Eugenio de Espinosa, sergeant major, who had been governor in regard to matters of war since February 1, 1633. Horruytiner here confirms the promotion.

Signed; countersigned by Miguel Ramírez de Guevara.

On the verso [Nicolás] Ponce de León notes that the appointment has been recorded in the books of the contaduría of the province.

148/11

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal cedula to the captain general of the army of Cantabria. Madrid, April 18, 1640. 2 leaves [1 blank].

The King commends Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo to the captain general, so that he may be given command of a company.

Signed with a stamp; countersigned by Fernando Ruiz de León [?].

0143 127
148/12

Andrés de Roças. Letter of recommendation for Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo. Madrid, July 17, 1640. 1 leaf.

The letter is directed to an unnamed individual who is presumed to have some influence “con esos señores del consejo como con el señor Don Martín de Rhedin.” The writer refers to Céspedes as one of the “most principal persons of the mountainous region where I was born” and mentions that he has obligations toward Céspedes. Signed holograph.

148/13

Alonso de Muxica, alcaide of the Almadén quicksilver mines. Certification of Céspedes' military service. [Almadén], October 24, 1628. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Muxica certifies that Pedro de Céspedes had served His Majesty faithfully as a soldier from 1619 to 1623 and recommends him for the favors of His Majesty.

Signed, with seal intact; countersigned by Agustín [?] de Jaureguí.

148/14

Cristóbal de Salazar y Frías, captain of an infantry company in the Canary Islands. Certification of the services of Pedro de la Peña y Céspedes. Canaria, [Grand Canary?], February 26, 1627. 1 leaf.

Salazar certifies that Pedro de la Peña y Céspedes served well under him for two years in the Canary Islands. Salazar titles himself “capitán de infantería de una de las compañías que trujo de socoro a estas islas de Canaria el governador Don Francisco de Andia por su majestad.” Signed, with seal intact.

148/15

Pedro de Arbieto y Angulo, infantry captain. Certification of military service of Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo. Havana, May 9, 1630. 1 leaf.

Arbieto certifies that Céspedes served well under him for one year, both on the sea and on the land, and that he had shown valor, especially in the expulsion of the enemy from the Island of San Cristóbal [St. Kitts, West Indies]. Signed, with seal partially intact.

0144 128
148/16

Luis Horruytiner, governor of Florida. Certification of Céspedes' services. San Agustín de la Florida, November 20, 1638. 2 leaves [1 blank].

The governor certifies that he found Céspedes as adjutant and raised him to the rank of captain of an infantry company to fill the place vacated by Bartolomé López Gavira, but Céspedes had to relinquish the position when Martín de Cueba arrived with a royal appointment. Horruytiner relates episodes in which Céspedes showed his valor, particularly one in which he saved the allotment for the city of Puerto Rico from a badly damaged ship and another in which he led a battle with a Dutch ship.

Signed, with seal intact; countersigned by Francisco Fernández de Zendiera.

148/17

Nicolás Ponce de León, royal accountant of Florida. Statement of royal funds deposited with him by Céspedes. San Agustín de la Florida, March 7, 1636. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Ponce certifies that when Céspedes went out in a launch to help a ship which was carrying the allotment for Puerto Rico, he brought in eight chests of coins (reales) and five bars of silver belonging to His Majesty and deposited them with the royal accountant. Later the funds were taken to Puerto Rico on a royal ship. Signed.

148/18

Luis Horruytiner, former governor of Florida. Certification of Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo's service. Madrid, July 15, 1640. 1 leaf.

The former governor recommends Céspedes for royal favor for his good service in Florida, particularly because of his knowledge of the Bahama Channel, the Florida coast, and the Cuban coast around Havana. Signed, with a seal.

148/19

Bernabé de Antoñano Salazar, maestre del campo. Certification of Céspedes' good military conduct. Ruidoms, April 16, 1641. 1 leaf.

Antoñano enumerates the engagements in which Céspedes had participated against the Catalonians and their French allies. Signed.

0145 129
148/20

Andrés Rodríguez de Villegas, governor of Florida. Orders to Pedro de Céspedes. San Agustín de la Florida, September 12, 1630. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Rodríguez appoints Pedro de Céspedes, a soldier of the presidio, as the commander of the soldiers and sailors on the frigate Nuestra Señora de los Remedios , one of the ships which was being sent to provision the missions of Guale.

Signed, with seal partially intact; countersigned by Bartolomé Antonio [?] Alvarez Pineda and by Juan Ximénez.

148/21

Eugenio de Espinosa, sergeant major of the presidio of San Augustín, in charge of the government of the province. Order to Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo. July 15, 1632. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Céspedes, adjutant of the sergeant major, is appointed to go as commander of the soldiers and sailors on the frigate Nuestra Señora de los Remedios to take communications to Havana and to bring back provisions and communications for the presidio. He is warned that an enemy fleet is reported off the coast of Havana. He is to gather information about it from the Indians and is to take the safest route according to the information obtained. He is to return as soon as possible because of the need of the presidio. He is to try to establish friendship with the Indians to the south.

Signed; countersigned by Juan Ximénez, notary.

148/22

Eugenio de Espinosa, sergeant major of the presidio, in charge of the government of the province. Order to Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo. San Agustín de la Florida, October 20, 1632. 1 leaf.

Céspedes is appointed to go as commander of the soldiers and sailors of the frigate Nuestra Señora de los Remedios to deliver dispatches to Havana and to bring back dispatches and necessary provisions for the presidio. He is to try to make friends with the Indians along the coast to the south.

Signed; countersigned by Juan Ximéenez, notary.

148/23

Luis Horruytiner, governor of Florida. Order to Pedro de Céspedes. San Agustín de la Florida, May 19, 1634. 1 leaf.

Céspedes, adjutant of the sergeant, is appointed commander of 0146 130 the soldiers and sailors of the frigate Nuestra Señora de los Remedios to take provisions to the friars who are working in the missions of the province of Guale.

Signed; countersigned by Miguel Ramírez de Guevara.

Juan Ximénez, notary, records at the bottom that he made a copy of the order by command of the governor.

148/24

Luis Horruytiner, governor of Florida. Order to Pedro de Céspedes. San Agustín de la Florida, February 24, 1636. 1 leaf.

Captain Pedro de Céspedes is commanded to come quickly to the presidio of San Agustín because the ship El Rosario is lost, and it is necessary to send help to the people who were aboard. Signed.

148/25

Luis Horruytiner, governor of Florida. Order to Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo. San Agustín de la Florida, January 9, 1635. 2 leaves [1 blank].

Céspedes, adjutant of the sergeant major, is appointed as commander of the soldiers and sailors of the ship Nuestra Señora de los Remedios to take supplies, which were sent every four months, for the missionaries in Guale. He is also to pick up the provisions for the presidio which were being gathered in that region by the alférez, Patricio de Florencia, and a group of infantry.

Signed; countersigned by Miguel Ramírez de Guevara.

Juan Ximénez, notary, recorded beneath the countersignature that he had made a copy of the order for the governor.

148/26

Luis Horruytiner, governor of Florida. Order to Pedro de Céspedes Vallejo. San Agustín de la Florida, September 27, 1635. 2 leaves.

Céspedes, captain of a company of infantry, is given command of the soldiers and sailors of the ship Nuestra Señora de los Remedios. The supply ship had not arrived, and the presidio was in need, not having enough flour for hosts to celebrate Mass. The sentinel of Matanzas had reported a ship which seemed to be trying to reach San Agustín. The governor had sent out the alférez Juan de la Vera with soldiers to see if the ship could be found along the coast. Céspedes is to proceed along the coast to see if he can find the supply ship, in case it needs help; if he cannot find it, he is to go on to Havana by the safest route and try to get the necessary supplies.

Signed; countersigned by Miguel Ramírez de Guevara.

0147 131

Pedro de Aspioleal, notary, recorded beneath the countersignature that he had made a copy.

148/27

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Royal cedula to Pedro de Céspedes de la Peña. Madrid, September 12, 1627. 1 leaf.

Pedro de Céspedes y de la Peña had informed the Crown of his service in the armada and the Canary Islands for nearly five years and had asked to be excused from the additional years required before he could be appointed alférez. The Council of War, in consultation with the King, decided to grant his request. When a vacancy for an alférez arises in the jurisdiction where Céspedes is serving, the Crown commands that he be given the promotion.

Signed with a stamp; countersigned by Pedro de Arce.

149

Holy Office of the Inquisition, Mexico. Peti[ci]ón y Genealojía del Br. Antonio Calderón y Br. Diego Calderón su hermano. Mexico, 1649—1682. 132 leaves [23 leaves blank; 2 leaves printed but completed in manuscript].

The Calderón press, founded by Bernardo Calderón in 1631, was one of the most prolific printing establishments of Mexico during the 17th century. It continued in the hands of various members of the family until 1718. (See Medina, v. 1, p. cxxviii–clxviii, passim.)

The present volume of documents was put together by the authorities of the Inquisition in Mexico in relation to the appointment successively of two sons of the founder of the press as officials of that body. The title page bears the cuaderno number 132. The documents are divided into four major groupings, each with its own title page.

The first title page originally read “1652 años. Petición y genealogía de Antonio Calderón.” On March 21, 1652, Antonio Calderón, “vecino de esta ciudad, mercader de libros y impresor del secreto de este Santo Oficio,” petitioned that he be allowed to become a familiar of the Inquisition and presented a genealogy. That same day the judges of the Inquisition decided that there was no reason to prevent Calderón from being admitted as a familiar, and on Saturday, March 23, 1652, they admitted him to the position, subject to a review of his genealogy in Spain. (Leaf 2).

His genealogy (leaf 3) includes his grandparents on both sides. His parents were Bernardo Calderón, native of Alcalá de Henares, who died in Mexico City and Paula de Benavides, born in Mexico. His paternal grandparents were Diego Guillén of Alcalá de Henares, deceased, and Agustina Calderón, who had later married a bookseller 0148 132 of Seville, Joseph Montero. His maternal grandparents were Gabriel López de Benavides and María de los Reyes, natives of Torriga in the archdiocese of Toledo, both of whom had died in Mexico. Agustina Calderón's brother was Fr. Pablo Calderón, a Franciscan priest. The genealogy is signed by Antonio Calderón. (Leaf 4, an unnumbered leaf, and leaf 5 are blank.)

There follow two transcripts of documents which appear in the original at leaves 21–24r (see below). The first transcript was made by Juan de la Serna de Haro y Vega on May 23, 1659 (leaves 6–7). The second transcript of the same documents was made by Eugenio Saravia on October 26, 1658 (leaves 8–9).

The names of Inquisitors which appear are Dr. Francisco de Estrada y Escobedo, Dr. Juan Sáenz de Mañozca, Licenciado Bernabé de la Higuera y Amarilla, and, in 1658 as visitador, Dr. Pedro de Medina Rico. The fiscal in 1652 was Antonio de Gaviola, who was ill.

The second group of documents has the title “1649 años. Nombramiento de impresor de este tribunal en Antonio Calderón” (leaf 10). On January 28, 1649, Antonio Calderón presented a petition (signed) in which he asked to be appointed printer for the Inquisition, in view of the fact that their previous printer, Francisco Robledo, was going to Spain and had sold all of his equipment. The Inquisitors agreed to this request on that same day with the conditions that he take an oath of secrecy and fidelity and that the appointment be approved by the archbishop, who was visitor general of the Tribunal. The approval of the archbishop was obtained on February 2, 1649, and Calderón took the oath on February 4, 1649. On February 6 Calderón asked to be given an affidavit of his appointment and the Inquisitors ordered it done. (Leaves 11–13; leaf 14 is blank.) Eugenio de Saravia, secretary of the Inquisition, issued the affidavit on March 10, 1649 (leaf 15). On June 31 [sic], 1656 Antonio Calderón y Benavides, now a bachiller and a secular priest, asked for an affidavit of his appointment as printer for the Inquisition and of his having fulfilled the office punctually and satisfactorily. A note at the foot of the page indicates that the affidavit was issued on July 1, 1656 (leaf 16; leaves 17–19 are blank). The names of the Inquisitors in these documents are the same as those in the first group.

The third group of documents is entitled “1658 años. Petición y genealogía del Br. Antonio Calderón, presbitero” (leaf 20). On August 19, 1658, Bachiller Antonio Calderón de Benavides reminded the tribunal that his first request to become a minister of the Inquisition had been returned from the Supreme Council of the Inquisition in Spain with an inquiry as to whether he were in holy orders. Calderón was now an ordained priest and renewed his request for a position. 0149 133 He presented another genealogy in which he gave his age as 29. On August 26 Andrés de Çabacea [?], apparently the fiscal, noted that the genealogy had already been presented on March 21, 1652, and that there were no objections.

On August 26 the tribunal decreed that the investigation of the genealogy could proceed and commanded Calderón to make a deposit of 180 pesos for the expenses. This he did on August 27, 1658. It was not until July 29, 1660, that the Inquisitors issued a decree commanding that inquiries be made in Spain and in Mexico. Entries of March 15 and April 2, 1663, indicated that Calderón's questionnaire and money did not reach the proper authorities in Spain, in spite of their having been sent out in 1661. (Leaves 21–25; leaf 26 is blank.)

On July 24, 1664, Juan de la Vega y Dávila, secretary of the Inquisition in Toledo, wrote a statement to the effect that his inquiries regarding Calderón's ancestors had shown nothing objectionable. This was sent from the Supreme Council of the Inquisition in Madrid on July 31, 1664, and was registered in the Tribunal in Mexico on September 14, 1665. On October 2 the fiscal of the Tribunal, Nicolás de las Infantas y Venegas, asked that the local examinations be made, and the next day the Tribunal commanded that this be done. On December 5, 1665, Calderón was assessed 326 pesos and 2 reales to pay for the expenses, and he was notified of this on December 7. On December 12 Calderón indicated his readiness to pay the fee, but because the depositary of proofs, Dr. Rodrigo Ruiz de Cepeda Martínez y Portilla, was out of the city, he asked that someone be named to receive the money. The Tribunal indicated that the money should be given to the contador Florián Rey y Alarcón. The necessary document was issued that day, and on December 13, 1665, Calderón deposited the additional money. A transcript of the report by Juan de la Vega y Dávila, transcribed in Madrid on August 2, 1664, and certified by the Supreme Council on July 31, 1664, was registered in the Tribunal in Mexico on May 16, 1666. (Leaves 27–34; leaves 31 and 35 are blank.)

Calderón presented his questionnaire in printed form with names written by hand and with three questions added in manuscript (leaf 36; leaf 37 is blank). The questionnaire is not dated but the first witness was called on May 19, 1666. He was Fr. Diego de Carmona Tamariz, a Discalced Franciscan priest, minister of the Inquisition, and procurator general of his order (leaves 38–39v). The other witnesses were Luis de Guinea, a merchant, on May 20, 1666 (leaves 40–42v); Juan Rodríguez de Abrill (signed Juan Rs Abril), a merchant, on May 20, 1666 (leaves 42v–45); Captain Diego Millán, a merchant, 0150 134 on May 20, 1666 (leaves 45–47v); Captain Prudencio de Armentia, familiar of the Holy Office, on May 21, 1666 (leaves 48–50); Diego del Castillo, third master carpenter, on May 22, 1666 (leaves 50–52v); Diego de Ribera, master wax-chandler, on May 22, 1666 (leaves 52–54v); Licenciado Francisco López Sanz, “receptor” of the Inquisition, on May 24, 1666 (leaves 55–57); Licenciado Roque de Gomera y Quirós, priest, notary of the Inquisition, on January [sic] 25, 1666 (leaves 57–59v); Licenciado Alonso García de Ledesma, priest, on May 25, 1666 (leaves 59v–63); Licenciado Diego Martín del Guijo, priest, on May 28, 1666 (leaves 63–65v); Licenciado Nicolás Leal, priest, on May 28, 1666 (leaves 65v–68).

On May 28, 1666, the Inquisitor Juan de Ortega Montañés ordered that a copy of the testimonies be given to the fiscal. On the same day the fiscal, Nicolás de las Infantas y Venegas, recommended that Calderón be given the title of commissary for the town of Coyoacán, and the Inquisitor commanded that it be done. A marginal note records that Calderón took his oath on May 29, 1666, and that his title was dated May 31. Various fees were totaled up on May 29, amounting to 100 pesos and two tomines. The Inquisitor decreed on May 29 that the fees should be paid from the money which Calderón had deposited with Florián Rey y Alarcón. Various receipts indicate that the fees were paid on June 1, 1666 (leaves 68–70; leaf 71 is blank). On June 23, 1666, Calderón asked to be given an official copy of his title. The fiscal approved his request on June 26, and a certificate of the title was given to him the same day. (Leaf 72; leaf 73 is blank.)

In this group of documents (leaves 20–73) the names of the Inquisitors are the same as in the previous documents up to 1658. Beginning with 1658 Dr. Pedro de Medina Rico appears as Inquisitor Visitor. After 1663 Licenciado Juan de Ortega Montañés appears as sole Inquisitor with Medina Rico, who was frequently absent because of indisposition. Diego Martínez Hidalgo, signed most frequently as secretary after 1663.

The fourth and final group of documents is entitled “Mexico, año de 1668. Papeles de la pretensión del Br. Diego Calderón, presbitero, natural de esta ciudad y domiciliario de este arzobispado” (leaf 74). Diego Calderón Benavides was a brother of Antonio Calderón Benavides to whom the previous documents pertained.

On July 28, 1668, Bachiller Diego Calderón Benavides, a secular priest, chaplain and confessor of the Hospital de Nuestra Señora in Mexico City, presented a petition asking that, in consideration of the fact that his brother had died, he should be appointed commissary for Coyoacán or some other place. He offered to make 0151 135 all the necessary deposits for having the examinations made. In his genealogy he stated that he was 31 years old and that his brother had died on July 12, 1668. On July 28, the Inquisitor Visitor Pedro de Medina Rico commanded that a copy be given to the fiscal, and on August 3, 1668, the fiscal, Nicolás de las Infantas y Venegas, reported that he had no objection to the petition. The Inquisitor Visitor on the same day admitted the petition to the stage of proof and commanded that a copy of the proceedings be sent to Spain and that Diego Calderón make the necessary deposits in Madrid through his agent. (Leaves 76–78; leaf 79 is blank.)

Jerónimo Ruiz Samaniego, secretary of the Inquisition of Toledo, issued a certification of the purity of the family background of Diego Calderón on July 19, 1670. It was endorsed by the Supreme Council in Madrid on August 12, 1670, and registered in the Tribunal in Mexico City on May 23, 1671. A duplicate copy, made in Madrid on August 12, 1670, and endorsed by the Supreme Council the same day, was registered in Mexico City on September 5, 1671. (Leaves 80–84; leaf 85 is blank.)

On May 30, 1671, in the Tribunal of the Inquisition in Mexico City, Martin de Soto Guzmán, the fiscal, recommended they proceed with the local investigations regarding Diego Calderón and his mother, and the Inquisitors decreed that it should be done (leaf 86; leaf 87 is blank).

Diego Calderón presented a printed form of questionnaire with names and other additions written in by hand (leaf 88; leaf 89 is blank). The printed form is identical with that previously presented by his brother (cf. leaf 36). The following witnesses were interrogated: Licenciado Antonio de Fuentes, priest, on July 23, 1671 (leaves 90–92v); Licenciado Nicolás Leal, priest, on July 24, 1671 (leaves 93–95v); Juan Lorenzo Bezón de Mur, master bookseller, on July 29, 1671 (leaves 95v–98); Manuel Becerra Tanco, master apothecary and familiar of the Inquisition, on July 30, 1671 (leaves 98–100v); Diego Millán, on August 5, 1671 (leaves 101–103v); Licenciado Gregorio Martín del Guijo, priest, secretary of the cathedral chapter of Mexico City, on August 14, 1671 (leaves 103v–106v); Pedro Sánchez Quijada, royal notary, on August 17, 1671 (leaves 107–109v); Alonso de Rueda Torres, royal notary, on August 17, 1671 (leaves 109v–112v); Francisco de Haro, familiar of the Inquisition, on August 18, 1671 (leaves 112v–115v); Cristóbal Bernardo de la Plaza, secretary of the Royal University of Mexico City, on August 22, 1671 (leaves 116–118v); Luis de Guinea, on August 22, 1671 (leaves 118v–121v); Diego del Castillo, master carpenter, on August 27, 1671 (leaves 121v–124).

On August 31, 1671, the Inquisitors commanded that the depositions 0152 136 be given to the fiscal for his report. On September 15, 1671, the fiscal indicated he had no objection to the appointment. That same day the Inquisitors commanded that Diego Calderón Benavides be given the title of commissary, after paying his fees and taking his oath. The bill for fees of 107 pesos was issued the same day by the secretary of the Inquisition, Martín Ibáñez de Ochandiano, and a receipt for the deposit was issued that day by the depositary, Bonifacio de Argiles (leaves 124–126; 127 is blank). An itemized list of the fees was also given, and on September 19, 1671, a number of receipts for individual payments made from the deposit were signed (leaf 128; leaf 129 is blank).

Pedro de Medina Rico, Inquisitor Visitor, signed the documents in this group which were issued in 1668. The documents issued in 1671 indicate that the Inquisitors were Juan de Ortega Montañés and Nicolás de las Infantas y Venegas; the latter had previously been fiscal.

The final item in the volume is a signed petition of Paula de Benavides, mother of the bachilleres, presented before the Inquisitors Juan Gómez de Mier and Joseph de Santa María Lando on December 19, 1682. She had been informed by the tribunal in Mexico City that 1,323 reales were left over from the deposit which her son Antonio had made with the Supreme Council in Spain, but when her agent had tried to collect it, he had been told that there was no such account. She asks for a letter to the Supreme Council regarding the matter. The Inquisitors certify that her information is correct and that she may appeal to the Council. (Leaf 130; leaf 131 is blank.)

150

The King [Philip IV of Spain]. Ynstruccion que se da a los Virreyes del Peru. Madrid, August 16, 1660. 24 leaves [3 blank].

This is a copy of the royal instruction to the Viceroy of Peru, Diego de Benavides y de la Cueba, Conde de Santisteban, Marqués de Solera, who arrived in Lima on July 31, 1660, having previously been Viceroy of Navarre. He remained in Peru until his death, which occurred in Lima on March 17, 1666.

This copy of the Viceroy's instructions, dated in Lima, September 16, 1661, and signed by Alonso de Herrera, was made from the original in the Viceroy's possession. It is bound in limp vellum, tied with green silk ribbons, with the title on the cover.

By this date the instructions to the Viceroys were rather generalized, with some changes from one Viceroy to the next when specific problems would arise. The present instruction consists of 75 numbered paragraphs.

0153 137

The first two paragraphs are general in nature. Paragraphs 3–13 are related to the religious government, specifically such questions as the instructions of the Indians, the concentration of friars in the cities, the internal government of the church, and the relations between the church and the civil authorities. The rest of the document is concerned with the civil government: the archive and register of cedulas (par. 14, 15, 63), viceregal pardons (par. 16), encomiendas and repartimientos (par. 17–22, 35), government of the Spanish colonies (par. 23–30, 40), governmental officials (par. 31–34, 36), rewards (par. 37), exploration (par. 38), prohibition of clothmaking and winegrowing (par. 39), safety of the roads (par. 41), safety of navigation along the Pacific coast (par. 42), war against the Indians in Chile (par. 43), arms and munitions (par. 44), government and protection of the Indians (par. 45–58, 74), financial matters (par. 59–62, 65–70), trade via Panama (par. 64), and the viceregal office (par. 71–75).

151A

Fraternity of St. Peter Martyr (Cofradía de Señor San Pedro Martir), Mexico City. [Reglas y Constituciones que han de gu] ardar los Señores Inquisidores, Fiscales, Secretarios, Officiales, Calificadores, Consultores, Abogados, Comissarios, Notarios, Honestas personas, Capellanes, Familiares y otros qualesquier Ministros del Tribunal del Santo Officio de la Inquisicion de esta Ciudad de Mexico de la Nueva España, como Cofrades de la Nobilissima y Santa Cofradia de Señor San Pedro Martyr, principal Patrono, y Fundador de el Santo Officio de la Inquisicion. Mexico, 1657–1820. Leaves numbered: 2, 6r–360v, 364r–372v, 384r–385v, i.e., 364 leaves [183 blank].

The Cofradía de Señor San Pedro Martir was the brotherhood which was made up of all the members of the Inquisition, from the Inquisitors down to the least of the lay ministers. In 1657 the fraternity in Mexico City apparently was reorganized by order of the visitor of the Inquisition, Pedro de Medina Rico. The present volume begins with an order by Medina Rico and the three Inquisitors, issued in Mexico City on October 23, 1657, to the effect that the members should meet regularly to become acquainted with their rights, privileges, and obligations and to elect the head of the fraternity. The order is signed by Medina Rico and by the Inquisitors Francisco de Estrada y Escobedo, Juan Sáenz de Mañozca, and Bernabé de la Higuera y Amarilla and is countersigned by the secretary Eugenio de Saravia.

Immediately after this appeared the rules and constitutions of the brotherhood. Originally the title was apparently written on four very 0154 138 ornamental title pages, of which only the last one remains. The title can be reconstructed from the printed version of the rules and constitution which accompanies this manuscript volume (item 151B). The extent of the ornamentation of the original title pages can be judged from the fact that only six words and part of a seventh were lost when the three leaves were torn out. The text of the rules and constitution is written on leaves 6r–22v. (It is interesting to note that in the numeration of the leaves of this volume the facing pages were given the same number.)

Immediately following the rules and constitution is an order by Medina Rico and the Inquisitors, dated December 23, 1657, that a meeting should be held on January 7 of the following year. The meetings thereafter were held annually, generally on January 7, the day after the feast of the Kings. The principal activity at these meetings was the election of the head of the fraternity (hermano mayor). The records of the annual meetings from 1658 to 1820 appear on leaves 23r–177v. There is no record of the meetings for 1742, 1743, 1745, and 1784, and the record for 1746 is incomplete. For the year 1814, when the Inquisition was temporarily suppressed, and for 1819 there are no entries. There are also interspersed records of occasional meetings at which business was discussed. Each entry is signed by the secretary who entered it in the book. These records give also the names of the Inquisitors and other personnel of the Tribunal who attended the meetings. (Leaves 177r–301v are blank.)

On July 13, 1663, Visitor Pedro de Medina Rico and the Inquisitor Juan de Ortega Montañés issued an order regarding the care of the goods of the fraternity and commanded that an inventory be made, with the intention that the inventory be kept up to date in the future. An inventory of 12 items follows the order, with a 13th entry made on August 14, 1664. (Leaves 301r–303r; 304v–306v are blank.)

Leaves 306r–307r contain records of various amounts of money which were placed in the chest of the fraternity on July 18, 1663, April 22, 1665, and December 2, 1665. (Leaves 308–354v are blank.) On leaves 354r–356v are entered expenditures made from the chest of the fraternity on August 14, 1664, April 22, 1665, and December 2, 1665. (Leaves 356r–385v are blank.)

It seems evident that Visitor Medina Rico intended that a complete record of income and expenditures of the fraternity be kept but that his intention was not carried out.

The volume is bound in leather, with ornamentation of gold leaf and braid.

0155 139
151B

Fraternity of St. Peter Martyr [Cofradía de Señor San Pedro Martir], Mexico City. Reglas y constitvciones, qve han de gvardar los señores Inqvisidores, fiscales, secretarios, officiales, calificadores, consvltores, abogados, commissarios, notarios, honestas personas, capellanes, familiares, y otros qvalesqvier ministros del tribvnal del Santo Officio de la Inquisicion de esta Civdad de Mexico, como cofrades de la nobilissima, y santa cofradia de señor San Pedro Martyr: principal patrono, y fvndador del Santo Officio de la Inquisicion. Mexico, En la Emprenta del Secreto del Santo Officio, Por la Viuda de Bernardo Calderón. . ., 1659. 20 leaves [4 unnumbered].

Provenance: The volume bears the bookplate of Florencio Gavito, Vizconde de la Alborada y de Villarrubio.

From the preceding item (151A, leaf 25v) we learn that in 1659 the annual meeting of the Fraternity of St. Peter Martyr was held several days late, on January 13, because the rules and constitutions were being printed for distribution to the membership. On the day of the meeting the copies were distributed.

The present item is one of the copies printed in 1659. Except for the usual variations in orthography, it is the same as the official manuscript version which appears in item 151A. It was printed at the press of the Viuda de Calderón, which had been chosen as the press for the Inquisition in 1649 (see item 149, leaves 10–16). Three full-page engravings appear between the title page and the text.

152

Diego Quiroga y Losada, governor of Florida. Letter to the Marqués de Montealegre. San Agustín de la Florida, April 20, 1688. 1 leaf.

Quiroga reports that he had arrived in Florida and taken possession of the governorship on August 21, 1687. He had visited the province, settling the natives' problems which had arisen during the 32 years since the last visitation. He expresses discontent with his assignment and asks the Marqués to intercede to have him taken out of such a difficult position. The poverty of the area is such that the Spaniards must depend on the annual allotment for their clothing and support, and the allotment had been delayed now for three years because of losses at sea. Signed.

153

Joseph Adame y Arriaga. Manifiesto Chronologico de las Cruzadas, y sus concessiones Pontifiçias, que en la nueba España, sus Obispados sufraganeos y el de Campeche, y los de las Yslas Philipinas, se han practicado desde 0156 140 su Origen. Con varias notiçias concernientes â su curso legal de Bullas Pontifiçias, R[eale]s çedulas, y despachos de los Yll[ustrisi]mos Señores Comisarios generales, y Consejo Apostolico y R[ea]l de Cruzada y de las facultades de los Comisarios subdelegados generales de Mexico. Dedicado Al Yll[ustrisi]mo s[eño]r Don Gonzalo Fernandez de Cordova Cauallero de el orden de Alcantara, de el Consejo de su Magestad Cathedratico que fue de prima de canones en la insigne Vniuerssidad de Salamanca, Presidente de la cassa de la contratacion y de el R[ea]l Consejo de Castilla, Sumiller de cortina de su Magestad Catholica, Comisario Apostolico general, de la santa Cruzada, y demas gracias, â ella anexas en todos sus Reynos, y señorios, Yndias, y Tierra Firme de el mar occeano Et[ceter]a. Por El Doctor Don Joseph Adame y Arriaga, su Comissario subdeleg[a]do general de esta nueba España, Arçediano de la santa Yglessia Metropolitana de Mexico, Cathedratico proprietario de prima de Leyes en su R[ea]l vniuerssidad, y Capellan de honor de el Rey n[uest]ro señor. Año de 1692. 109 leaves [4 blank].

This is a lengthy historico-legal argument regarding the rights and privileges of the Cruzada and its officials in New Spain. The Cruzada was originally instituted as a means of collecting offerings from the faithful to finance the compaigns against the Moslems. In return for their offerings they were given certain privileges in the religious sphere, such as indulgences and dispensations from abstinence from meat on Fridays and other obligations. The privilege of collecting these offerings continued to be extended to the kings of Spain long after the period of the Moslem threat because of Spain's activities against Protestantism and in support of the evangelization of the New World. The privilege was always granted by the Popes for a definite time period. But with the passage of time the Spanish monarchy came to consider it as a dependable regular source of revenue. (See Haring, p. 286–287.)

The author of the present work was at the time of writing commissary and subdelegate general for the Cruzada in New Spain. He had previously gained doctorates in both canon and civil law at the University of Mexico and had become a professor of law there. His previous ecclesiastical preferments had been as canon of the Cathedral of Puebla (1677) and archdeacon of the Cathedral of Mexico City. In the year in which he wrote the present work (1692) he was nominated as archbishop of Manila, but was never consecrated. In 1698, the year of his death, his history of the University of Mexico, Imperialis mexicana universitas Illustrata . . ., was published in Seville (Medina, v. 3, no. 1981).

Adame gives the motive for the present work in the first few pages, under the title “Hecho que da ocasión a este manifiesto.” The 0157 141 summaries of the bull, which were given to the people when they made their offerings, were all printed in Spain. When the time was approaching for the biennial publication of the bull to be made in 1691, the summaries had not arrived. Adame as commissary subdelegate of the Cruzada, following precedents and having consulted with the proper authorities, restamped, i.e., redated, the surplus summaries that had been left over from the previous publication and sent them out to the dioceses under his jurisdiction. There had been some official objection at the time on the part of the bishops of Michoacán and Puebla, but he had satisfied their objections. More recently some person, who is unnamed, had written a lengthy argument (“de treinta y ocho pliegos”), disputing Adame's authority to act as he had done. It was in response to this attack that Adame wrote the present work. In composing it he utilized the Cruzada archive in Mexico City, quoting from many documents which have since disappeared. The 653 notes with which he supports his work are evidence of his care and erudition.

The body of the work is divided into nine “distinctions.” The first is a chronological synopsis of the various concessions of the Cruzada which had been given for the Spanish Indies and the history of their publication. Here he shows that papal grants had been given in 1573, 1576, 1585, 1591, 1592, 1600, 1603, 1605, 1611, 1615, 1619, and 1624. Each one was for 12 years, and the collection of offerings and distribution of the summaries were to be made biennially. Even though new bulls were granted before the expiration of the old ones, they were put into force consecutively. As a result, the papal concession which was in force at the time of Adame's writing in 1692 was the bull of 1615, and two bulls were still in reserve.

In the second distinction Adame sets out to prove that there is no confusion in regard to the series of concessions, as his opponent had maintained. He goes about this by distinguishing carefully between the concessions which were given for Spain and those which were given for the Spanish Indies. In the third distinction he further emphasizes the differentiation between the concessions for Spain and those for the Indies and cites many documents to justify the numeration of the concessions being used in New Spain. He gives enlightening information regarding the establishment and development of the Cruzada in the New World and on the process of preparing the summaries in Spain and distributing them in the New World.

In the fourth distinction he argues in defense of the summaries which he had restamped in 1691, especially regarding the position which he had designated for them in the series, as the fifth preaching of the 10th concession. He continues this argumentation in the fifth distinction, showing why it is justifiable that in the metropolitan center 0158 142 of the New World the bulls should be allowed to be restamped when necessary. Going further into this argument in the sixth distinction he cites the specific faculties and titles which give the subdelegates general of the Cruzada the right to restamp old summaries when the current ones have not arrived from Spain.

The seventh distinction goes into a theoretical discussion of the origin, necessity, and difference of seals, discussing imperial, royal, papal, and episcopal seals. In the eighth distinction the author returns more closely to the matter at hand, with an effort to prove that the subdelegates general of the Cruzada are not obliged to show their commissions before the ordinaries of the dioceses, and even less their faculty to restamp the summaries of the bulls. His antagonist had maintained that the bishops should assert their authority in this regard. In his ninth and final distinction he further defends his authority against that of the bishops by asserting that the subdelegates of the Cruzada and their notaries do not need to be approved by the ordinaries. At the end of the work he submits the whole matter to the censorship of the Church and signs it with his name.

154

[Juan de Villa Sánchez]. Muerde Quedito. Mexico, 1714. 150 leaves [1 blank].

Provenance: Library of Joseph Martini.

The author of this small manuscript book was much disturbed by the outcome of the provincial chapter of the Dominican province of Puebla which had taken place on May 5, 1714. The chapter had elected as provincial Fr. Bartolomé Mansano who was in Europe, and his place was taken by Fr. Antonio de Vera, prior of the friary of Puebla. A group of about 40 Dominicans were very upset by this, maintaining that a gachupín (peninsular Spaniard) should have been elected, and they took refuge in the Franciscan friary. The book is a discussion of this situation, written in a satirical vein and generously seasoned with classical allusions. The author explains his title, “A Gentle Bite,” by saying that he intended only to discuss things that were known and not to bite into the bone or draw blood.

An annotation on the second leaf attributes the work to Juan de Villa Sánchez. Villa Sánchez, who lived from 1683 to 1760, was a prominent Dominican preacher in Mexico. An annotation on the title page of the work indicates that it was published by Carlos Maria de Bustamante as a supplement to La Marimba (1832).

0159 143
155

Holy Office of the Inquisition, Mexico. El S[eñ]or fiscal de este s[ant]o ofiz[i]o c[ontr]a El B[achille]r D[o]n Eustachio Perez de Aviles, Presbitero Confesor y Capellan menor del Santuario de n[uest]ra s[eño]ra de la soledad de d[ic]ha ciu[da]d por Solizitante Expontaneo. Puebla de los Angeles and Mexico, 1725–1727. 83 leaves [1 title page, 2 blank].

The volume opens with a letter from the commissary of the Inquisition in Puebla, Onofre Miguel de el Castillo Villegas, to the Inquisition in Mexico City, advising them that he was sending them a confession by Eustachio Pérez de Avilés, as well as other related depositions. The letter was dated in Puebla, November 17, 1725, and was received by the Inquisition in Mexico on November 22, 1725 (leaf 1). The self-accusation of Bachiller Eustachio Pérez de Avilés, a secular priest of the diocese of Puebla and minor chaplain of the Shrine of Nuestra Señora de la Soledad, was made in Puebla on October 18, 1725. He gave his age as 27. He admitted that in a case of emergency he had heard the confession of a castiza, Francisca Antonia, with whom he had carried on an affair two years previously. Because he felt that she was not being open with him, he later brought another confessor to hear her confession, but he had a mulatto woman, Jacinta de San Diego, hide under her bed to listen to the confession and report back to him. Then, becoming scrupulous about having abused the confessional, he decided to report himself to the Inquisition and admonished Jacinta to do the same. (Leaves 2–3.)

Jacinta de San Diego was summoned before the commissary in Puebla on October 22 and interrogated about the matter. She verified her testimony, with an addition, on October 29. From her testimony it appears that Pérez suspected Francisca Antonia of having relations with another man. (Leaves 4–5.) On October 28 Licenciado Bernabé Díaz, secular priest of the diocese and assistant pastor of the cathedral, appeared before the commissary in Puebla to make a statement in the name of Miguel Cayetano de Estrada to the effect that Eustachio Pérez de Avilés had tried to force him in the confessional to admit that he had had intercourse with a certain woman who was Pérez' friend. Estrada had denied any such act. On October 29 Estrada himself was summoned and interrogated. He identified the woman in question as Francisca, a mestiza. He indicated that Pérez was his cousin. Estrada verified his testimony and added more on November 2. (Leaves 6–9.) Bernabé González, pastor of Ayutla, the priest whom Péerez had summoned to hear Francisca's confession the second time, was called upon for testimony on November 7, and he ratified his 0160 144 testimony on November 16 (leaves 10–12; one blank unnumbered leaf).

On November 8 Eustachio Pérez de Avilés again appeared before the commissary of his own accord and made a statement regarding the accusation which his cousin had made against him. According to this statement the conflict had arisen over the fact that Miguel was playing around with Francisca's younger sister against the will of her mother, and Pérez had commanded him to stay out of the house. (Leaves 13–14.)

Previously, on November 5, the commissary had gone to the house of the woman friend of Pérez, who gave her name as Francisca Antonia Jaén and her age as 19 years. She was the daughter of Joseph Jaén, a mestizo cobbler, and of Agustina Hurtado de Mendoza, a Spanish woman. She was still sick in bed. It appears from her testimony that she had borne a child to Pérez early in October, but she makes it clear that she and Pérez had broken off their affair sometime previously. On November 10 she was called before the commissary to ratify her previous testimony, to answer questions regarding other testimony, and to respond to a charge that she had broken the secrecy of the Inquisition by discussing her previous testimony with Pérez. (Leaves 15–18.)

Her mother, Agustina Hurtado de Mendoza, was summoned before the commissary on November 9. She was 36 years old and the mother of nine children, of whom Francisca Antonia was apparently the oldest. She verified that she had asked Pérez to correct his cousin Miguel regarding his relationship with her daughter, Ana de los Santos, and that her daughter Francisca had asked her second confessor, Bernabé González, to satisfy her mother that she had not confessed to having relations with anyone besides Pérez. She verified her testimony, with some additions, on November 15. (Leaves 19–20.)

These documents having been sent to the Tribunal of the Inquisition in Mexico City, the fiscal (prosecuting attorney) finally presented his opinion on May 25, 1726, and recommended that Pérez be commanded to appear before the Tribunal. Such a command was sent to the commissary in Puebla on May 27. (Leaves 21–22.)

Pérez appeared in Mexico City on June 18 and was commanded by the Inquisitors, Licenciado Francisco de Garzarón and Doctor Francisco Antonio de Palazio y del Hoyo, to stay in the city and to keep them informed of his address, to which he agreed (leaves 23–24). He was given his first audience on June 21, at which time he gave his genealogy and confessed what he had admitted before, as well as the jealousy which had motivated him. He also admitted having blasphemed at finding himself so undeceived regarding his 0161 145 former mistress and her mother. His second audience was on June 25 and the third on June 28. In them he again admitted his abuses of the sacrament of confession with great regret and gave as an excuse only the fact that he had been blinded by jealousy. On July 9 he was asked to add anything else he might remember, and when he added nothing, he was presented with the accusations of the fiscal. (Leaves 25–33.)

The fiscal, Licenciado Pedro Navarro de Isla, presented the accusations against Pérez under 18 headings (leaves 34–45). Pérez admitted having been a bad Christian and a bad priest but denied any implication of heresy. On July 17 he replied to the fiscal's charges one by one. He chose as his defense attorney Doctor Antonio Pardo, one of the two attorneys who defended accused parties before the Inquisition. (Leaves 45v–51.) On July 24 he had an audience before the Inquisition with his attorney. At another audience on August 3 he was called upon to confess further; when he declared that he knew of nothing more to add, the Inquisitor commanded that he be shown the testimony against him, without revealing the names of the deponents. (Leaves 51–53.) The publication of the witnesses, as it was called, was then made, including Pérez' two self-accusations (leaves 54–66). Pérez immediately made a statement regarding each deposition (leaves 66–68v). On August 7 Pérez made another defense statement after conferring with his attorney (leaves 68v–71.)

On September 19, 1726, the two Inquisitors and the representative of the diocese of Puebla, Dr. Mathías Navarro, vicar general of the archdiocese of Mexico City, decided that Pérez should make an abjuration de levi, should be deprived of the faculty of hearing confessions for 10 years, and during the first year he should say the Office of Our Lady on Saturdays (leaf 72). The sentence was formulated, signed, and read to Pérez on September 26 (leaves 73–75), and Pérez made his abjuration (leaves 76–78).

On March 31, 1727, Onofre Miguel de el Castillo Villegas wrote from Puebla to the Inquisitors in Mexico City that he had informed the officials of the Shrine of Nuestra Señora de la Soledad about Pérez' sentence and that Pérez was no longer serving there. The letter was registered in Mexico City on April 5. An annotation on the verso records that a summary of the case was sent to the Council with a letter of September 15, 1728. (Unnumbered leaf.)

156

[Antonio de Arredondo] . Demostracion historiografica del derecho que tiene el Rey Catholico âl territorio que oy posee el Rey Britanico con el nombre de nueva Georgia en las Provincias y continente de la Florida en la que

0162 146

From Demostracion historiografica by Antonio de Arredondo. Item 156.

se prueba el dominio positivo que tiene el Rey de España hasta la latitud septentrional de 32.grados 30.minutos inclusibe, en que se halla la barra de la Isla de Sta. Elena, termino por el qual se deben arreglar los limites de las respectivas poseciones en esta parte de mundo entre la Florida, y la Carolina. Havana, April 22, 1742. Title page (vellum), 36 leaves, folding map (vellum).

Arredondo's work is a defense of Spain's rights to the region which the English were occupying under the name of Georgia. The work has been well known since 1925 when it was published in English and Spanish by Herbert E. Bolton in Arredondo's Historical Proof of Spain's Title to Georgia. For his edition Bolton depended upon a manuscript copy in the Archivo General de Indias, which in the old numbering system was shelved at Est. 86, caj. 5, leg. 24. He indicated the existence of another copy at Est. 87, caj. 1, leg. 3. The present copy is, then, a third manuscript version. It varies in some particulars from the copy published by Bolton. One notable difference is that Bolton's copy was dated March 20, 1742, and the present is dated April 22, 1742. Further, the present text lacks the letter of transmittal at the end, dated in Havana, April 4, 1742, in which Juan Francisco 0163 147 de Gúemes y Horcasitas, captain general of Havana, indicates that the work had been written by the Engineer Don Antonio de Arredondo at his request. It is obvious, then, that the present copy was made from the original draft after the copy published by Bolton had been sent off to Spain. The ornamental title page and the inclusion of the route of Hernando de Soto on the map show the additional care which was devoted to the preparation of this copy.

Arredondo's work was closely plagiarized in 1785 by Iñigo Abad y Lasierra under the title “Relación de el descubrimiento, conquista y población de las provincias y costas de la Florida, etc.” This was edited by Justo Zarogoza and published in 1912 by Manuel Serrano y Sanz in Documentos históricos de la Florida y la Luisiana , one volume in the series Biblioteca de los Americanistas.

The work itself discusses the history of Florida from discovery to 1737, with emphasis on the period after 1670 and the struggle over the region occupied by the Georgia colony. Arredondo depended for sources upon a number of earlier published works and the archival materials available in Havana, as well as upon personal experience which he gained when he was sent by Gúemes to treat with the English about their expanding colony. For further introductory information, see Bolton, p. v–xi.

157

Buenaventura Blanco y Helguera, Bishop of Oaxaca, Mexico. Auto f[ec]hos â consulta del Yll[ustrisi]mo señor obispo de la Ciudad de Oaxaca en horden a que se le conceda lizencia para fabricar nueba Yglecia, la q[ue] le [h]avía avisado el cura de Chacaltianguis era necesario hacer en nuebo paraje del q[ue] al presente tenía la Mitra, y devotissima Ymagen de n[uest]ro señor Crucificado q[ue] se venera en el Pueblo del de Otatitlan de aquella Doctrina. Antequera and Chacaltianguiz , 1756. 15 leaves [1 title page].

This formal investigation opens with a decree of Bishop Blanco y Helguera, dated in Antequera [Oaxaca] on May 7, 1756. The bishop states that he had been informed by Ignacio Antonio de Pereyra y Castro, pastor of Chacaltianguiz, that the shrine of Otatitlan, where a miraculous image of Christ Crucified was venerated, was in a dilapidated condition, especially as a result of a recent hurricane. Pereyra had requested permission to rebuild the shrine there or in another place. The bishop commands Joseph Joachím Cañete, pastor of Jalapa, to take two master builders to assess the condition of the church. Cañete is also to examine witnesses regarding the question of changing the location of the church. (Leaf 1.)

0164 148

In Jalapa on June 1, 1756, Cañete accepted the commission in spite of bad health. On June 5 in Otatitlan, he appointed Joseph Joachím de Quebedo as notary; Quebedo was a vecino of Cosamaloapan residing in Otatitlan. That same day Cañete also inspected the shrine, and finding it to be of wood and thatch, he decided that the judgment of master builders or alarifes would not be necessary; in addition he noted that there were no master builders within a radius of 30 leagues. Therefore he sent to Cosamaloapan and Tlacotalpan to summon three or four master carpenters. On June 9 he named as master carpenters for this investigation Joseph Botín from Tlacotalpan, Pedro Muñoz and Juan Joseph de Nieves from Cosamaloapan, and Bernardino Joseph from Chacaltianguiz. They were sworn in immediately and on June 10 gave their opinions individually. They all agreed on the fact that the present church was about to fall down from rot and that the proposed new location, about a league and a half away, would be a better place to build a new church. One estimated the cost of a new church with a masonry foundation at 16,000 pesos; two others, at 17,000. Two signed their statements; the other two did not know how to write. On the same day a master builder, Manuel Joseph de Montoya, a native of Cazaltenango, happened to be in town. Cañete called upon him to give his opinion regarding the cost of masonry walls for the new church. He estimated the cost of the walls at about 5,000 pesos. (Leaves 2–7.)

Cañete began summoning witnesses to testify regarding the question. On June 11 in Otatitlan he took testimony from Simón Vicente, Gregorio Hernández, Juan de la Cruz, and Juan Gaspar, all alcaldes ordinarios and natives of the town. All but the first were identified as Indians. None could sign their names. It appears that for four years they had wanted to move their town of 18 families to a place called Amachcalapan, within the lands of their town, where they now proposed to build their church. The proposed new site was the highest in their lands, and it would get them out of the dampness of their present site where, as one witness stated, none of them lived to be more than 40. (Leaves 7–10.)

In the head town of San Juan Bautista Chacaltianguiz, on June 12, 1756, Cañete summoned three more witnesses: Bachiller Miguel de Acevedo, native and vecino of the town of Cosamaloapan, a diocesan priest; Nicolás Hernández, governor of Chacaltianguiz; and Toribio Rodríguez, a mestizo native and vecino of Chacaltianguiz. Only Acevedo could sign his name. Acevedo in particular stressed the danger to the people who made the annual pilgrimage on May 3 to venerate the image of Christ Crucified in Otatitlan. From all of the testimony it appears that the town, because it was a league from the Rio Grande, 0165 149 was cut off from the main artery of commerce but because it was situated so low, suffered annual floods. (Leaves 10–12v.)

On June 14 in Chacaltianguiz Cañete asked to see the record book of the alms for the Crucifix of Otatitlan. Pedro de Andrada, depositary of alms for the Crucifix, produced the register, consisting of 47 leaves. From the register Cañete found that the liquid funds as of May 9, 1756, were 24,183 pesos and 6 reales. Cañete went to the house of Andrada to inspect the chest and make sure that the funds were there. He then concluded the investigation and sealed the record for dispatch to the bishop. (Leaves 12v–14.)

Filing marks appear on the title page: “Superior govierno 1756,” “Patronato 1757, no. 208.”

158

Iturrate family. Papers regarding the Vizcayan nobility of the Iturrate brothers of Ica, Peru. 1777–1782.

This is a bound volume containing two documents—the first a royal decree, the second a judicial decree issued in the King's name. It is bound in red velvet, with worn green silk ribbons as ties.

158/1

The King [Charles III of Spain]. Royal cedula to the Viceroys, governors, captains general, and other royal authorities of the kingdoms and provinces of New Spain and Peru, especially of the city of Ica. Aranjuez, May 16, 1782. 4 leaves [1 blank].

By this decree the Crown gives royal recognition to the following judicial decree and requires that Maximiliano and Joseph Antonio de Iturrate be accorded all their exemptions and preeminences as “hijosdalgo vizcaynos originarios.”

Signed with a stamp; countersigned by Miguel de San Martín Cueto.

The first leaf is written on sealed paper for the year 1782. On the verso of leaf 3 are the signatures of Phelipe de Arco, Juan González Burtillo, and El Conde de Tepa. On both sides of the remains of a royal seal are signatures of Juan Angel de Cerain, deputy of the Grand Chancillor.

158/2

Joseph Colón de Larriategui, major judge for Vizcaya in the audiencia of Valladolid. Decree in the name of King Charles to the corregidores, assistant governors, alcaldes mayores, alcaldes ordinarios, and other judges and justices 0166 150 of the city of Ica and of all the cities, towns, and places of the realms of the King. Valladolid, May 9, 1777. 318 leaves.

On May 9, 1777, Joseph Colón de Larriategui issued this lengthy judicial decree which certified that Francisco de Iturrate and his brothers, Doctor Maximiliano de Iturrate, pastor of the city of Jauja, and ecclesiastical judge and vicar of the province of Jauja in Peru, and Joseph Antonio de Iturrate, colonel of dragoons of the regiment of Palpa and privative judge of the royal tax of the alcabala, were hidalgos of Vizcayan origin and were to be given all the rights pertaining to that position. The decree incorporated all of the investigations, judicial decrees, and other documents which the Iturrates had presented as proof of their case. They had begun the efforts to prove their nobility in Ica in 1771 and had presented records of marriages and baptisms, clauses from wills, and titles of honor and preferment which pertained to their ancestors. Some of these documents dated back to the early 17th century. In 1775 Francisco de Iturrate, now resident in Madrid, continued the process of collecting evidences of the family's nobility, again gathering depositions of witnesses, records of baptisms and marriages, and other similar documents, which are also incorporated into the decree. The documents give the background of an influential Basque family in colonial Peru.

Signed; countersigned by Joseph de Zarandona y Balboa.

159

Holy Office of the Inquisition, Mexico. Facultad, que el Confessor Fr. Mariano Cassas Religioso Francisco Conventual en Puebla, solicitó del Tribunal para absolver â un Penitente que incurrió en el Crimen de Heregía, y no quiso expontanearse, la que se le concedió, y fué absuelta ad cautelam. Puebla and Mexico City, 1785. 12 leaves [title page, 3 blank].

On January 8, 1785, a letter from Fr. Mariano Cassas, a Franciscan friar of Puebla, was received by the Inquisition in Mexico. He asked for the faculty to absolve a penitent who had committed heresy in secret and who, even though he had repented, was unwilling to accuse himself before the Inquisition. The reply of the Inquisitor was that the penitent should be encouraged to accuse himself and that the special faculty would be given to the confessor only as a last resort. (Leaf 1.) On January 12 Santiago Martínez Rincón, secretary of the Inquisition, sent the Tribunal's reply to Cassas by way of Joseph Suárez, commissary of the Inquisition in Puebla. Suárez signed a receipt for the communication on January 15, and the Tribunal in 0167 151 Mexico City received this receipt on January 18. (Leaf 2.) On the cover of the letter from the Tribunal, Cassas also wrote a receipt for the letter (leaf 3).

Cassas wrote to the Tribunal again on January 22, 1785, indicating that his penitent was entirely unwilling to accuse himself before the Inquisition and again asking special faculties for absolution. He explained that the penitent in his heart had denied that Christ was present in the Eucharist, that Mary was the Mother of God, and that God was merciful, but he had repented for this. The letter was received in Mexico City on January 25. The Inquisitors Mier, Carasa, and Bergosa, decided that Cassas should be given the faculty which he requested, and a letter to this effect was dispatched on January 26. (Leaves 4–5.)

Cassas wrote to the Tribunal on February 5 to indicate that he had carried out their wishes, and he returned their two letters. His letter was registered in the Tribunal on February 10, 1785. (Leaf 6.) The two letters of the Tribunal follow, both signed by the Inquisitors Juan de Mier y Villa and Antonio Bergosa y Jordán and countersigned by the secretary Santiago Martínez Rincón. On the back of the letter of January 26 Fr. Cassas noted on February 5, 1785, that he had absolved the penitent by virtue of the special faculty granted him. (Leaves 7–8.)

160

Holy Office of the Inquisition, Mexico. El S[eñ]or Inq[uisid]or Fiscal del Santo oficio contra El P. Fr. Mariano Oliva, del orden de San Francisco, y cura de Gueiteupam por Conculcante de Ymagines, y obscenidades. Chiapas and other towns of its province, Guatemala, and Mexico City, 1796–1803. 72 leaves [title page, 2 blank].

On September 4, 1798, Francisco Vicente del Corro, dean of the cathedral chapter of Chiapas and commissary of the Inquisition, wrote to the Tribunal of the Inquisition in Mexico, sending certain denunciations against Fr. Mariano de Jesús Oliva, a Franciscan priest. He considered the denunciations to be motivated by passion. His letter was discussed in the Tribunal on September 25, 1798, and the Inquisitors Mier and Bergosa decided that the denouncers should be reexamined together with other witnesses. Letters to this effect were sent out on December 1 and 3. (Leaf 1.)

The documents which Corro had submitted follow. An undated letter from Fr. Josef María Poggio accused Oliva of having used his maid Sebastiana and his sister Rosalia for purposes of masturbation and of having abused a crucifix (leaves 2–3). In another letter dated 0168 152 in Gueiteupam on November 30, 1796, Poggio notified Corro that, obeying the latter's command, he had gone to summon Sebastiana Ruiz but had found her sick in bed, unable to come (leaf 4).

In a letter to Josef Mariano Cuello, dated in Simojovel, July 25, 1798, Carlos Antonio Solórzano reported he had inquired in Gueiteupam and had found no Sebastiana Ruiz other than the one whom he had sent to Cuello (leaf 5).

A lengthy letter from Fr. Santiago Pérez, a Franciscan priest, dated in Gueiteupam on December 3, 1796, informed Corro that the Indians had not allowed Pérez to leave town after he had turned the friary over to Fr. Poggio in the presence of Diego Betancurt. The Indians said that no one else would hear their confessions in their language. Pérez accused Oliva of being lazy, of practicing homosexuality and masturbation, and of teaching homosexuality to the Indians.

In Chiapas on February 10, 1798, Corro, who was ill, appointed Joseph Mariano Cuello, priest and major sacristan of the cathedral, to take a denunciation from the lay brother Diego Betancurt regarding Oliva. On February 13, 1798, Cuello commanded that Sebastiana Ruiz, Antonia de Ara, and Diego Betancurt be summoned to give depositions. Betancurt began his deposition on February 16, 1798, and completed it on February 19. He ratified his statement on February 24. Other witnesses who appeared were Juana María Cansino, who testified on March 8, 1798, and ratified on March 10, 1798; Antonia de Ara Vásquez, who testified on March 12 and ratified on March 14; and Sebastiana Bicochea, sister-in-law of Sebastiana Ruiz, who testified on March 20. (Leaves 6–13.)

A letter from Carlos Antonio Solórzano referring to the matter was sent from San Andrés on February 23, 1799, and received in the Tribunal in Mexico City on March 27, 1799 (leaf 14).

The Tribunal wrote to the provincial of the Franciscan Province of Dulce Nombre de Jesús of Guatemala on December 1, 1798, asking him for information regarding the religious life of Oliva. On the same paper the Provincial Miguel de Jesús Lanuza wrote a reply which gave a generally unfavorable picture of Oliva. It was dated in Nueva Guatemala on February 3, 1799, and was received in Mexico City on March 27, 1799. (Leaves 15–16.)

In a letter to the Tribunal dated in Chiapas on October 6, 1799, Joseph Mariano Coello informed them that, in fulfillment of their command, he was proceeding with the investigation regarding Oliva, which had been held up by the death of commissary Corro (leaf 17). He forwarded a letter from the Tribunal to Carlos Solórzano, dated December 3, 1798, at which time Solórzano had been pastor of Simojovel, the nearest town to Gueiteupam. The Tribunal asked 0169 153 that he inform them regarding Oliva's way of life. (Leaf 18.) On April 10, 1799, another letter to the same intent was sent by the Tribunal to Solórzano. On the same sheet Solórzano wrote his reply, dated in San Andrés on October 3, 1799. He acknowledged that Pérez, Poggio, and Betancurt had accused Oliva of unspecified crimes, but from his own observation he judged that Oliva was a good priest and pastor. (Leaves 19–20.)

On December 10, 1799, Joseph Mariano Coello sent in the depositions which he had gathered, with a covering letter in which he admitted that the testimony had not amounted to much (leaf 21). A copy of Poggio's letter to Corro (see leaves 2–3) was included, the copy having been authenticated in Mexico City on April 10, 1799, by Bernardo Ruiz de Molina, secretary of the Inquisition (leaves numbered 24–25). A lengthy order from the Tribunal to the commissary Corro, dated April 10, 1799, summarized the testimony which had been given up to that time, pointed out irregularities in it, and gave instructions for reexamination of the witnesses. It was signed by the Inquisitors Juan de Mier y Villar and Antonio Bergosa y Jordán and by the secretary Bernardo Ruiz de Molina. (Leaves number 22–23, 26–30.)

On October 10, 1799, Coello recorded that, because of the death of Corro on March 16, the Tribunal had instructed him in a letter which he received in early September to proceed with the examination of the witnesses. The witnesses appeared in the following order: Sebastiana Goicoechea, alias Ruiz, a mulata, widow of Rafael Gómez, citizen of Gueiteupam, in the service of Doña Josefa Goicoechea, about 20 years old, on October 11, 1799 (leaves 31–33v); Sebastiana de Ara del Barco, alias Sebastiana la vieja, a mulata, widow of Lucas Gómez, native of Chiapas City, resident in Gueiteupam, about 45 years old, on October 15, 1799 (leaves 33v–35); Juana Maria Canzino (previously spelled Cansino—leaf 11), a Spanish woman, wife of Juan Manselino de Ocampo, also a native of Chiapas City and citizen of Gueiteupam, on October 15, 1799 (leaves 35–36); María Antonia Vázquez de Ara, india ladina, wife of José Ruiz, citizen of Chiapas City, about 25 years old, on October 16, 1799 (leaves 36v–37). The ratifications of their respective testimonies were made by Sebastiana del Barco y de Ara (previously, de Ara del Barco) and by Juana Canzina, on October 18, 1799, by Sebastiana Goicoechea, alias Ruiz, and by María Antonia Vázquez on October 21, 1799 (leaves 37v–40). Josefa Sánchez, india ladina, unmarried daughter of Diego Sánchez, about 25 years old and a citizen of Chiapas City, testified on November 4, 1799, and ratified her testimony on November 9 (leaves 40–41v).

On November 10, 1799, Coello declared his inquiry concluded and 0170 154 sent the depositions to the Tribunal in Mexico City. No further action was taken in the case until April 9, 1801, when Inquisitor Bergosa commanded that letters be sent to other places for collection of testimony (leaves 41v–42).

Mathías Josef de Nájera, secretary of the Inquisition, wrote Josef Angel Dorrego, provincial of the Franciscan Province of the Holy Gospel of Mexico, on April 13, 1801, inquiring about friars who had come from the Province of Guatemala in 1799 and 1800. Dorrego answered on the same sheet on April 14, and his reply was registered in the tribunal on April 15. (Leaf 43.)

On April 18 Nájera wrote to the ex-provincial of Guatemala, Miguel de Jesús Lanuza, asking for further elaboration of his previous communication. Lanuza replied on the same sheet, from Nueva Guatemala on June 3, 1801. (Leaf 44.)

In another letter of April 18, Nájera asked Ramón Ordóñez y Aguiar to inquire extrajudicially about Oliva's way of life since 1781. On the same sheet Ordóñez replied from Chiapas City on July 6, 1801, giving a favorable report. His reply was registered in the Tribunal on July 28, 1801. (Leaf 45.)

Also on April 18, in a letter signed by the Inquisitors Antonio Bergosa y Jordán and Bernardo de Prado y Obejero and countersigned by the secretary Nájera, the pastor of Gueiteupam was commanded to take depositions from certain individuals. Marcos Montes de Oca received the commission in Simojovel on June 13, 1801, and appointed Manuel de Zepeda, assistant pastor of Simojovel, as his notary. In Gueiteupam on June 17 they recorded that there were two or more people who responded to every name in the commission and therefore they could not carry it out. The papers were sent back from Gueiteupam on June 18, 1801, and were received in the Tribunal on July 28. (Leaves 46–48.)

From Nueva Guatemala on July 3, 1801, Manuel Antonio Bousas wrote to the Tribunal explaining his procedure in obtaining a deposition from Santiago Pérez in Quetzaltenango. This, with the accompanying papers, was received in the Tribunal on July 28, 1801. The commission, addressed to Antonio García Redondo, commissary for Guatemala, was issued in Mexico on April 18, 1801, and signed by the Inquisitors Bergosa and Prado and the Secretary Nájera. On May 25 García Redondo gave the commission to the other commissary Manuel Antonio Bousas, who subdelegated Félix González, Franciscan pastor of Quetzaltenango, to take the deposition. González accepted the commission on June 6, and he appointed Fr. Joseph Mariano Aguilera, the commissary of Tertiaries, as his notary. Pérez gave his 0171 155 deposition in Quetzaltenango on June 8, 1801, and ratified it on June 10. (Leaves 49–53v.)

In Mexico on September 11, 1801, the supernumerary promotor fiscal of the Inquisition, Dr. Flores, gave his opinion of the case, rejecting the value of most of the testimony against Oliva. It is interesting that he rejected the most damaging testimony of two of the women because they were mulatas. He suggested, however, that before concluding the case, they wait for more testimony. His recommendation was accepted by the Inquisitors on September 24. (Leaves 53v–55.)

On December 1, 1801, Joseph de Zavalegui, commissary for Yucatán, wrote to Nájera from Mérida that he had not received a commission to take a deposition from Fr. Poggio, about which Nájera had inquired. Zavalegui's letter was registered in the Tribunal on February 3, 1802. (Leaf 56.) Nájera's letter of inquiry was dated in Mexico on September 23, 1801 (leaf 57).

On February 26, 1802, the pastor of Tlacotalpan, Juan Garrido y Bolaños, remitted to the Tribunal a commission which he had been given, together with a deposition which he had taken. His letter and the accompanying papers were received by the Tribunal on March 30, 1802. The commission, issued in Mexico on September 30, 1801, and signed by Inquisitors Mier, Bergosa, and Prado and Secretary Nájera, required the pastor to take a deposition from a María Leocadia, native of Guieteupam who was married in his parish. Garrido accepted the commission on November 27, 1801, and appointed his assistant pastor Manuel Antonio Tello as his notary. On December 2 in Tlacotalpan, capital of the province of Tabasco, Garrido summoned María Leocadia Aguilar to appear. She gave her deposition on that same day. She is described as about 30 years old, parda, married to Josef Gómez who was also pardo; both were servants of Josef Merino Muñoz and lived on a hacienda of livestock on the Rivera de Buluji. (Leaves 58–62; leaves 63–64 blank.)

A second commission to Joseph Zavalegui was sent from Mexico on April 23, 1802, signed by the Inquisitors Mier and Prado and the secretary Nájera. Zavalegui accepted the commission in Mérida on July 20, 1802, and sent notification to the Franciscan provincial to have Poggio appear before him, but the provincial replied that Poggio was stationed in one of the other towns of the province. On January 12, 1803, Poggio appeared in Mérida and made his deposition. He was a native of Cádiz, was living at this time in the friary of Calkim, and was 31 years old. He ratified his statement on January 14. On January 15 Zavalegui commanded that the deposition be sent 0172 156 to Mexico City, where it was received by the Tribunal on March 15. (Leaves 65–70v.)

In the Tribunal on March 18, 1803, the supernumerary Inquisitor fiscal, Dr. Flores, stated that the testimony was not adequate to justify inquisitorial action and recommended that the case be filed away until further evidence appeared. On March 23 the Inquisitors Mier and Prado decreed that it should be so done, and thus the case ended. (Leaves 70v–71.)

161

Pedro Medinueta y Múzquiz, Viceroy of New Granada. Instruction to his successor, Antonio Amar y Borgón. Guaduas (in New Granada, now Colombia), December 1803. 272 leaves.

Pedro Medinueta y Múzquiz served as Viceroy of New Granada from 1797 to 1803. At the end of his term of office he followed a custom of over 250 years duration and wrote a lengthy instruction for his successor in office. The purpose of such instructions was to summarize the state of the viceroyalty at the time of the transition from one Viceroy to the next. Some of them, such as the present one, are quite lengthy and give a valuable administrative view of the viceroyalties.

The following are the headings under which Medinueta organized his material:

Introduction (leaf 1)

Part I: Ecclesiastical State

Chapter 1. The Royal Patronage (leaf 3v)

Chapter 2. The Dioceses (leaf 7)

Chapter 3. The Religious Orders (leaf 22)

Chapter 4. The Active Missions (leaf 38)

Part II: The Government and Administration of Justice

Chapter 1. The Tribunals of Justice (leaf 57)

Chapter 2. The Governorships and Corregimientos (leaf 63v)

Chapter 3. Population and Civil Government (Policía)(leaf 71)

Chapter 4. Literary Instruction (i.e., secondary and higher education) (leaf 120v)

Chapter 5. Mines (leaf 132v)

Chapter 6. Commerce (leaf 142)

Part III. The Royal Hacienda

Chapter 1. Its Tribunals and Offices (leaf 161v)

Chapter 2. The Products, Increase, and Debts of the Royal Hacienda (leaf 174v)

Chapter 3. The Coast Guard (leaf 184v)

0173 157 Part IV. The Military State

Chapter 1. The Veteran Troops (leaf 185v)

Chapter 2. The Corps of Militia (leaf 201v)

Chapter 3. Fortification and Artillery (leaf 217)

Chapter 4. The Naval Forces (leaf 256) Other miscellaneous matters are considered briefly, beginning at leaf 260.

Signed.

162

Juan Ruiz de Apodaca, Count of Venadito, Viceroy of New Spain. Six official reports to the Secretary of State and of the Department of War of Spain. Mexico, July 31—December 31, 1819.

The six letters which make up this collection were reports sent in to the Spanish government by the Viceroy of New Spain at the end of each of the last six months of 1819. They treat of the situation in Mexico (including provinces now forming part of the United States) toward the very end of the period of Spanish domination, which would come to a close in 1821. They indicate a confidence in the Spanish repression of the Mexican insurgents but a cautious suspicion regarding the expansionism of the Anglo-Americans. Ruiz de Apodaca numbered this series of viceregal dispatches 95, 99, 101, 102, 104, and 106.

162/1

[Juan Ruiz de Apodaca], El Conde del Venadito. Report to the Secretary of State and of the Department of War. Mexico, July 31, 1819. 12 leaves [1 blank].

No. 95 of Apodaca's series. Subjects treated: the appearance of three supposed enemy vessels off the coast of San Blas (leaf 1); the departure of warships and troops to Monterey in California and reports from California (leaves 1–2); treaty of peace with Apaches at Tucson (leaf 2); the organization of a piratical force in Galveston to make raids in Tampico and Campeche (leaves 2–3); a description of the Yellowstone or Roche Jaune River made by Engineer Bartolomé Lafón (leaf 3); a flood in San Antonio, Tex., and assistance given to the town (leaves 3v–4); the arrival of silver from Chihuahua, Durango, El Rosario, Zacatecas, and Guadalajara (leaf 4); continued action by Colonel Matías Martín y Aguirre against the rebels in the Province of Valladolid (leaves 4–4v); surrender of Marshal Anaya (leaf 4v); action against Huerta, Cervantes, Guerrero, Bedolfa, Montesdoca, 0174 158 and other insurgents (leaves 4v–5); construction of fortifications at Puruándiro (leaf 5); actions of the division of Acapulco, especially against Guerrero's men (leaves 5–6v); efforts to bring to submission the priest Izquierdo and his followers who had fortified themselves in the Peñas de San Pedro, Serranía de Goleta (leaves 6v–7v); a battle at Sultepec (leaf 7v); state of peace in localities along the road from Mexico City to Valladolid (leaves 7v–8); actions of the troops of the Province of Guanajuato, notably the killing of Andrés Delgado, alias El Giro (leaves 8–8v); resultant surrender of a number of insurgents (leaf 8v); expectation that the other rebels in the Bajío will request amnesty (leaf 9); actions of the division of Querétaro (leaf 9–9v), state of peace along the road to Querétaro, in the military sector of Apan and in the Provinces of Puebla, Oaxaca, and most of Veracruz (leaves 9v–10); the daily service of pack trains from Veracruz to other parts of the realm (leaves 10–10v); income to the royal treasury (leaves 10v–11), memorial ceremonies for the deceased wife of King Ferdinand VII, Queen María Isabel Francisca de Braganza y de Borbón (leaf 11); and the issuance of 188 letters of amnesty during the present month (leaves 11–11v). Signed.

162/2

[Juan Ruiz de Apodaca], El Conde del Venadito. Report to the Secretary of State and of the Department of War. Mexico, August 31, 1819. 18 leaves.

No. 99 of Apodaca's series. Subjects treated: anchoring in San Blas harbor of three foreign ships, the Anglo-American ship The Two Catharines (“Las dos Catalinas”) on July 9, the English whaler Wander on July 13, and the United States warship Macedonia with 300 men on July 19 and the resultant concern of José de la Cruz, commandant general of New Galicia (leaves 1–2v); previous appearance of the Macedonia in Acapulco and anticipation that it would return (leaves 2v–3); refusal of the request of a German passenger of the Macedonia , the “Varon de Kavanagk,” to travel across Mexico (leaf 3); sighting of a boat off San Blas on July 8, 16, 17, and 19, suspected of being the insurgent boat La Chilena (leaf 3); departure of the brigantine Kosak from San Blas for Upper California on July 15 with 100 soldiers (leaves 3–3v); agreement of peace among Apache groups at Tucson (leaf 4); state of peace in the Interior Provinces (leaves 4–4v); threat of an invasion of Texas by adventurers from the United States under Lallemand and preparation for defense by the Viceroy (leaves 4v–8); the policy of the United States in assisting the insurgents (leaves 8–8v); request for more troops (leaves 8v–9); peace in Zacatecas and San Luis Potosí and arrival of silver shipments 0175 159 and livestock from there (leaf 9); actions in Guanajuato and the “tierra fría” around Valladolid and grants of amnesty to many, including Licenciado Mariano and José María Huerta (leaves 9–10); actions in the south against Guerrero and his supporters (leaves 10–10v); continued resistance of rebels at La Goleta (leaves 10v–11); continued peace along the highway from Mexico City to Valladolid (leaf 11); further actions in Guanajuato (leaves 11–12); amnesty accepted by José Antonio Magos and Cristóbal Mejía with their followers in the Sierra Gorda (leaves 12–13); description of the Sierra Gorda (leaf 13); recommendations and promotions for those involved in the campaign of the Sierra Gorda (leaves 13–14v); proposed action against the Sierra de Jalpa (leaf 14v); peace along the road from Mexico City to Querétaro, in the region of Apan and in Puebla, Oaxaca, and Veracruz (leaves 14v–15v); resumption of commerce along the highways (leaves 15v–16); change of command at Veracruz (leaves 16–16v); departure of a convoy of silver and goods for Veracruz on August 6 (leaf 16v); reconstruction of the bridge at San Martin Texmelucan and of the inn at Córdoba (leaves 16v–17); improved military training at Monterrey, capital of the Interior Provinces (leaves 17–17v); income to the royal treasury (leaves 17v–18); and issuance of 742 letters of amnesty during the present month (leaf 18). Signed.

162/3

[Juan Ruiz de Apodaca], El Conde del Venadito. Report to the Secretary of State and of the Department of War. Mexico, September 30, 1819. 17 leaves [1 blank].

No. 101 of Apodaca's series. Subjects treated: visit of the United States ship Macedonia at Acapulco (leaves 1–1v); sighting of another ship off Punto de Tabo (leaf 1v); his insistence on maintaining a force at the Punto de Maquili to prevent the Chileans from supplying the insurgents with arms (leaves 1v–2); treaty of peace with the Navajo Indians (leaves 2–2v); reports of expeditions organized in St. Louis under Benjamin Offallen and Talbot Chambers, possibly threatening New Mexico (leaves 2v–4); reported invasion of Texas by Anglo-American adventurers under General James Long in collusion with the pirates in Galveston and preparations for defense (leaves 4–7); request for replacement of soldiers (leaf 7); general peace in Western and Eastern Interior Provinces (leaves 7–7v); peace in Zacatecas and San Luis Potosí and shipments of silver (leaf 7v); actions of the Division of Guadalajara in Guanajuato and Michoacán (leaves 7v–8); actions of the force from Valladolid in the tierra caliente (leaves 8–8v); 154 amnesties granted in the tierra fría of Michoacán (leaves 8v–9); 0176 160 defensive fortification in the district of Acapulco (leaves 9–9v); the insurgents in La Goleta in the jurisdiction of Temascaltepec under Vicente Guerrero and actions against them (leaves 9v–13); peace along the highway from Mexico City to Valladolid (leaf 13); actions in the Province of Guanajuato, especially against the Ortizes and their followers in the Sierra de Guanajuato (leaves 13–14); shipment of silver from Guanajuato (leaf 14); 123 more amnesties in the Sierra Gorda (leaf 14); skirmishes in the district of Querétaro (leaf 14v); action against insurgents in the Sierra de Jalpa (leaf 14v); quiet along the road to Querétaro, in the district of Apan, and in Puebla and Oaxaca (leaves 14v–15); safe arrival of the convoy of silver from Mexico City and Puebla in Veracruz on September 6 (leaves 15–15v); security of the roads leading out from Veracruz (leaf 15v); action against rebels in the Cerro de Coyuxquihin (leaves 15v–16); income to the royal treasury (leaf 16); memorial services for King Charles IV and his wife (leaf 16); and 433 letters of amnesty granted during the month (leaf 16). Signed.

162/4

[Juan Ruiz de Apodaca], El Conde del Venadito. Report to the Secretary of State and of the Department of War. Mexico, October 31, 1819. 15 leaves.

No. 102 in Apodaca's series. Subjects treated: sighting of two unidentified ships from the Ensenada de Aticla on October 15 (leaf 1); survivors of a shipwrecked English whaler in Lower California (leaves 1–1v); defense of California (leaves 1v–3); peace with the Navajos (leaf 3); no further information on the Anglo-American threat to New Mexico from St. Louis but continued vigilance (leaves 3v–4); contribution of 28,343 pesos by the citizens of New Mexico for support of the war (leaf 4); defense of Texas against adventurers from Louisiana (leaves 4–6); general peace in the Interior Provinces (leaf 6); silver shipments from Durango, Chihuahua, El Rosario, and Cosala (leaves 6–6v); continued peace in Zacatecas and San Luis Potosí, with the exception of an incursion from Guanajuato (leaf 6v); silver shipments from Zacatecas and Potosí (leaf 6v); actions of the troops of Guadalajara and silver shipments from there (leaf 6v); actions of the troops from Valladolid in the tierra caliente, apparently cut off by insurgents from La Goleta (leaves 6v–7); actions in the highlands of Michoacán (leaves 7–7v); actions of the Division of Acapulco in the coastal region of Zacatula (leaves 7v–8); unsuccessful attack on Zacualpan by insurgents from La Goleta (leaves 8–8v); two weekly convoys of produce and merchandise from the district of Acapulco (leaves 8v–9); dispersal of the insurgents Guerrero, Izquierdo, Asencio, Campos, et al., who 0177 161 had been occupying the mountain of La Goleta (leaves 9–10v); capture and execution of Vicente Vargas, who had violated his amnesty (leaves 10v–11v); an action by the division of Ixtlahuaca in the otherwise peaceful region of the road from Mexico City to Valladolid (leaf 11v); actions in Guanajuato, especially against the Ortizes and their followers (leaves 11v–12v); shipment of silver from Guanajuato (leaf 12v); pacification of the region of Jalpa (leaf 12v); an action in the district of Querétaro (leaf 12v); peace in the Sierra Gorda (leaves 12v–13); a single action along the road from Mexico City to Querétaro (leaf 13); a silver shipment from Zimapan (leaf 13); continued peace in the military district of Apan (leaf 13–13v); silver shipment from Pachuca (leaf 13v); continued peace in the provinces of Puebla, Oaxaca, and Veracruz, with regular commerce from Veracruz (leaves 13v–14); income to the royal treasury (leaves 14–14v); and 255 letters of amnesty granted during the present month (leaf 14v). Signed.

162/5

[Juan Ruiz de Apodaca], El Conde del Venadito. Report to the Secretary of State and of the Department of War. Mexico. November 30, 1819. 14 leaves [1 blank].

No. 104 in Apodaca's series. Subjects treated: sighting of an unidentified ship off the Punto de Tabo (leaf 1); anchoring of two foreign ships in San Blas harbor on November 16, the one an English vessel Hydra , the other an Anglo-American vessel Triton —both on whaling expeditions (leaves 1–1v); defensive preparations against the possibility of an attack on New Mexico by the previously mentioned Anglo-American expedition from St. Louis to the Yellowstone River (leaves 1v–4v); request for more troops (leaf 4v); preparations for an attack against the Anglo-American adventurers in Nacogdoches and report of an agreement between their leader James Long and the pirates in Galveston, also a report of an agreement between Luis de Onís, Spanish minister to the United States, and Swiss businessmen, allowing them to colonize 20 square leagues in Texas with Swiss and German colonists (leaves 4v–6); negotiations with Mariano Renovales (leaves 6–6v); shipment of silver from Chihuahua, Durango, and El Rosario (leaf 6v); peace in Zacatecas and San Luis Potosí and a silver shipment from the former (leaf 6v); actions of the Division of Guadalajara in the Province of Guanajuato, driving some of the Ortiz faction out of the area (leaves 6ví7); actions in highland Michoacán (leaves 7–8); and in lowland Michoacán, resulting in many requests for amnesty (leaf 8); defense of the Pacific coast in the region of Zacatula (leaves 8–8v); two weekly convoys from the area of Acapulco 0178 162 (leaf 8v); an encounter with Guerrero near the Hacienda of Canario in the province of Michoacán in which a number of the insurgent officers were captured or killed (leaves 8v–9); continued peace along the road to Valladolid (leaf 9); action against the remnants of the insurgent force from La Goleta (leaves 9–9v); actions in the Bajío of Guanajuato and Sierra de Jalpa (leaves 9v–10v); actions against the Ortizes in the Sierra de Guanajuato (leaf 10v); shipment of silver from Guanajuato (leaf 10v); destruction of resistance in the Sierra de Jalpa (leaves 10v–11); amnesties in Querétaro (leaf 11); peace along the highway to Querétaro, in the military district of Apan and in the Provinces of Puebla, Oaxaca, and Veracruz (leaves 11–12); income to the royal treasury (leaf 12); 1,172 letters of amnesty granted during the present month (leaves 12–12v); the extent of his line of military operations and the exposure of the realm to external attack (leaf 12v). Signed.

162/6

[Juan Ruiz de Apodaca], El Conde del Venadito. Report to the Secretary of State and of the Department of War. Mexico, December 31, 1819. 12 leaves.

No. 106 in Apodaca's series. Subjects treated: the departure of the whalers Hydra and Triton from San Blas (leaf 1); sighting of two suspicious frigates from the Ensenada de Maruata thought to be heading for Acalpica and Maquili (leaves 1–1v); arrival in San Blas of the Santa Ana from Lower California and the San Carlos and Nuestra Señora del Carmen from Upper California (leaves 1v–2v); landing of the Cosak at San Luis in Lower California and the overland march of the troops for Upper California (leaf 2v); financial assistance to California (leaves 2v–3v); decreasing sense of danger in New Mexico regarding the Anglo-American expedition at the confluence of the Missouri and Yellowstone but continued preparations for defense (leaves 3v–5); no report yet received from the expedition against the Anglo-Americans at Nacogdoches (leaves 5–5v); no report on the negotiations with Renovales (leaf 5v); shipments of silver and gold from Durango, Chihuahua, and El Rosario (leaves 5v–6); incursion into Zacatecas by the Ortizes (leaves 6–6v); surrender of and amnesty to Santiago González and his followers (leaf 6v); silver shipments from Zacatecas and San Luis Potosí (leaf 6v); actions of the Division of Guadalajara (leaves 6v–7); silver shipment from Guadalajara (leaf 7); actions in the highlands of Michoacán (leaf 7); revival of the economy in Michoacán (leaves 7–7v); nothing new to report regarding the southwest coast or the activities of Guerrero (leaves 7v–8); quiet along the highway to Valladolid (leaf 8); continued action in the 0179 163 district of Temascaltepec against the remnants from La Goleta (leaves 8–8v); actions in the Bajío of Guanajuato (leaf 8v); capture of Ignacio Ayala near Guanajuato (leaves 8v–9v); capture of Miguel Borja in Sierra Gorda (leaves 9v–10); actions in the Sierra de Guanajuato, especially against the Ortizes (leaf 10–10v); silver shipment from Guanajuato (leaf 10v); some action against bandits in Querétaro (leaf 10v); congregation of the small farmers into fortified points in Querétaro, Guanajuato, and Michoacán (leaf 10v); quiet along the highway to Querétaro, in the military district of Apan, and in the provinces of Puebla, Oaxaca, and Veracruz (leaves 10v–11v); income to the royal treasury and total amount of 12,030,515 pesos minted during the year (leaf 11v); and 443 letters of amnesty granted during the month (leaf 11v). Signed.

0180
0181 165
Bibliography

Abbad y Lasierra, Iñigo.

1912 Relación de el descubrimiento, conquista y población de las provincias y costas de la Florida. In Serrano y Sanz, Manuel, ed. Documentos históricos de la Florida y la Luisiana, siglos XVI al XVIII. Madrid, V. Suárez, 1912. (Biblioteca de los Americanistas) p. 1–133. F314.S48, v. 16

Allegrini, Giuseppe, ed.

1766–1773 Serie di ritratti d'uomini illustri toscani, con gli elogj istorici dei medesimi. Firenze, G. Allegrini, 1766–73. 4 v. N7606.A4

Alvarado Tezozomoc, Fernando.

1848 Crónica mexicana. In Kingsborough, Edward King, Viscount. Antiquities of Mexico. v. 9. London, H. G. Bohn, 1848. p. 1–196. F1219.K52, v. 9

1878 Crónica mexicana. Anotada por el Sr. Lic. D. Manuel Orozco y Berra. México, Impr. y litog. de I. Paz, 1878. 712 p. (Biblioteca mexicana) F1219.A47

Arredondo, Antonio de.

1925 Arredondo's historical proof of Spain's title to Georgia; a contribution to the history of one of the Spanish borderlands. Edited by Herbert E. Bolton. Berkeley, University of California Press, 1925. xvii, 382 p. F289.A75

Bandini, Angelo Maria.

1745 See Vespucci, Amerigo, 1745.

Bennett, Charles E., comp.

1968 Settlement of Florida. [Gainesville] University of Florida Press, 1968. xvi, 253 p. F314.B42 Rare Bk. Coll.

0182 166

Bolton, Herbert E.

1925 See Arredondo, Antonio de, 1925.

Boturini Benaducci, Lorenzo.

1746 Idea de una nueva historia general de la América Septentrional. En Madrid, En a impr. de Juan de Zúñiga, 1746. 20, 167, 96 p. F1219.B75 Rare Bk. Coll.

Bustamante, Carlos María de.

1832 See Villa Sánchez, Juan de, 1832.

Carreño, Alberto María, ed.

1944 Un desconocido cedulario del siglo XVI perteneciente a la Catedral metropolitana de México. Mexico, Ediciones Victoria, 1944. 488 p. BX1430.M45C3

Charlevoix, Pierre François Xavier de.

1744 Histoire et description generale de la Nouvelle France, avec le Journal historique d'un voyage fait par ordre du roi dans l'Amérique Septentrionnale. Paris, Chez Rollin fils, 1744. 6 v. F1030.C46

Colección de documentos . . . de América y Oceanía.

1864–1884 Colección de documentos inéditos relativos al descubrimiento, conquista y organización de las antiguas posesiones españolas de América y Oceanía, sacados de los archivos del reino, y muy especialmente del de Indias. Madrid, 1864–84. 42 v. E123.C69

Colección de documentos . . . de ultramar.

1885–1932 Colección de documentos inéditos relativos al descubrimiento, conquista y organización de las antiguas posesiones españolas de ultramar. 2. ser. publicada por la Real academia de la historia. Madrid, Est. tip. “Sucesores de Rivadeneyra,” 1885–1932. 25 v. E123.C70

Documentos . . . Méjico.

1853–1857 Documentos para la historia de Méjico. Méjico, Impr. de J. R. Navarro, 1853–57. 21 v. in 19. F1203.D63

Encinas, Diego de.

1596 See Mexico (Viceroyalty). Laws, statutes, etc., 1596 (1945–1946)

0183 167

Gaffarel, Paul L. J.

1875 Histoire de la Floride française. Paris, Firmin-Didot, 1875. 522 p. F314.G13 Rare Bk. Coll.

Galleani Napione, Giovanni F., conte di Cocconato Passerano.

1811 Esame critico del primo viaggio di Amerigo Vespucci al Nuovo mondo. Firenze, Presso Molini, Landi, 1811. xxviii, 146 p. E125.V5G3

García Icazbalceta, Joaquín.

1881 Don fray Juan de Zumárraga, primer obispo y arzobispo de México; estudio biográfico y bibliográfico. Mexico, Andrade y Morales, 1881. 371, 270 p. BX4705.Z8G3

1886 Bibliografía mexicana del siglo XVI. México, Andrade y Morales, 1886. xxix, 419 p. Z1412.G2

Gourgues, Dominique de, supposed author.

1835 La reprise de la Floride, par le capitaine de Gourgues, 1567–68. In Revue rétrospective; ou, Bibliothèque historique, contenant des mémoires et documens authentiques inédits et originaux, pour servir â l'histoire. 2. sér., t. 2. Paris, Impr. de H. Fournier aîné, 1835. p. 321–358. DC1.R38, 2 s., v. 2 Jules Antoine Taschereau, editor.

1867 La reprise de la Floride, publiée, avec les variantes, sur les manuscrits de la Bibliothèque impériale, et précédée d'une préface par M. Ph. Tamizey de Larroque. Bordeaux, Impr. G. Gounouilhou, 1867. 80 p. F314.G71

Guicciardini, Francesco.

1561 La historia d'Italia. Fiorenza, Appresso L. Torrentino, impressor ducale, 1561. 665 p. DG539.G8 1561

Haring, Clarence H.

1947 The Spanish empire in America. New York, Oxford University Press, 1947. 388 p. F1410.H25

Jos, Emiliano.

1927 La expedición de Ursúa al Dorado, la rebelión de Lope de Aguirre, y el itinerario de los “Marañones,” según los documentos del Archivo de Indias y varios manuscritos inéditos. Huesca, Impr. V. Campo, 1927. xv, 296 p. E125.U8J6

0184 168

Kingsborough, Edward King, Viscount.

1830–1848 Antiquities of Mexico. London, A. Aglio, 1830–48. 9 v. F1219.K52

Konetzke, Richard, ed.

1953- Colección de documentos para la historia de la formación social de Hispanoamérica, 1493–1810. Madrid, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1953- F1410.K6

León Pinelo, Antonio R. de

1737–1738 Epítome de la bibliotheca oriental y occidental, náutica, y geográfica, añadido y enmendado nuevamente en que se contienen los escritores de las Indias orientales y occidentales, y reinos convecinos, China, Tartaria, Japon, Persia, Armenia, Etiopia, y otros partes. Madrid, F. Martínez Abad, 1737–38. 3 v. in 1. Z1610.L56

Levillier, Roberto.

1948 América la bien llamada. Buenos Aires, Editorial G. Kraft [1948] 2 v. E101.L49

1951 See Vespucci, Amerigo, 1951.

Lorenzana y Butrón, Francisco A.

1769 See Mexico (Ecclesiastical province). Council, 1555 , 1769.

McPheeters, Dean W.

1954 An unknown early seventeenth-century codex of the Crónica Mexicana of Hernando Alvarado Tezozomoc. Hispanic American historical review, v. 34, Nov. 1954: 506–512. F1401.H66, v. 34

Magnaghi, Alberto.

1937 Una supposta lettera inedita di Amerigo Vespucci sopra il suo terzo viaggio. In Società geografica italiana. Bollettino, v. 74, ag./sett. 1937: 589–632. G17.S67, v. 74

1938 Ancora a proposito di una nuova supposta lettera di Amerigo Vespucci sopra un suo terzo viaggio. In Società geografica italiana. Bollettino, v. 75, ag./sett. 1938: 685–703. G17.S67, v. 75

Medina, José T.

1898–1907 Biblioteca hispano-americana (1493–1810). Santiago de Chile, 1898–1907. 7 v. Z1601.M49

0185 169

1907–1912 La imprenta en México (1539–1821). Santiago de Chile, Impreso en casa del autor, 1907–12. 8 v. Z1411.M49

1914 La primitiva inquisición americana (1493–1569); estudio histórico. Santiago de Chile, Impr. elzeviriana, 1914. 2 v. BX1737.M4

Mexico ( Ecclesiastical province ). Council, 1555.

1769 Concilios provinciales primero, y segundo, celebrados en la muy noble, y muy leal ciudad de México, presidiendo el illmo. y rmo. señor d. fr. Alonso de Montúfar, en los años de 1555, y 1565. Dalos a luz el illmo. sr. d. Francisco Antonio Lorenzana. México, En la impr. de el superior gobierno, de el br. d. J. A. de Hogal, 1769. 396 p. BX1430.M4A3 1555

Mexico ( Viceroyalty ). Laws, statutes, etc.

1596 (1945–1946) Cedulario indiano, recopilado por Diego de Encinas. Reproducción facsímil de la ed. única de 1596. Estudio e índices por Alfonso García Gallo. Madrid, Ediciones Cultura Hispánica, 1945–46. 4 v. DLC-LL

Mexico ( Viceroyalty ). Laws, statutes, etc.

1563 Prouisiões, cedulas, instruciones de Su Magestad: ordenãças de difútos y audi?cia, pa la buena expediciõ de los negocios, y administraciõ de justicia: y gouernaciõ dessta Nueua España: y pa el bue tratamieto y preseruaciõ de los yndios, dende el año 1525 hasta este presente de 63. Mexico, En casa de P. Ocharte, 1563. 2131. DLC-LL

Compiled by Vasco de Puga.

Muro Orejón, Antonio, ed.

1945 Las Leyes Nuevas, 1542–1543. Reproducción de los ejemplares existentes en la sección de Patronato del Archivo General de Indias. In Anuario de estudios americanos. t. 2; 1945. Sevilla. p. 811–835. F1401.A587, v. 2

Pereyns, Simón, defendant.

1938 Proceso y denuncias contra Simón Pereyns en la Inquisición de México, con una introducción por Manuel Toussaint. México [Impr. universitaria] 1938. xxi, 38 p. (Documentos para la historia del arte en México) N6553.P4

Puga, Vasco de.

1563 See Mexico ( Viceroyalty ). Laws, statutes, etc. , 1563.

0186 170

Recopilación.

1681 See Spain. Laws, statutes, etc. , 1681.

Ridolfi, Roberto.

1937 Una lettera inedita di Amerigo Vespucci sopra il suo terzo viaggio. Archivio storico italiano, anno 95, 1937: 3–20. DG401.A7, v. 95

Spain. Laws, statutes, etc.

1681 Recopilación de leyes de los reynos de las Indias. Madrid, I. de Paredes, 1681. 4 v. DLC-LL

Tamizey de Larroque, Philippe.

1867 See Gourgues, Dominique de, supposed author , 1867.

Taschereau, Jules Antoine, ed.

1835 See Gourgues, Dominique de, supposed author , 1835.

Ternaux-Compans, Henri.

1837–1841 Voyages, relations et mémoires originaux pour servir à l'histoire de la découverte de l'Amérique. Paris, A. Bertrand, 1837–41. 20 v. E121.T32

Toussaint, Manuel, ed.

1938 See Pereyns, Simón, defendant.

Vespucci, Amerigo.

1745 Vita e lettere di Amerigo Vespvcci, gentilvomo fiorentino; raccolte e illvstrate dall'abate Angelo Maria Bandini. Firenze, Stamperia all'insegna di Apollo, 1745. lxxvi, 128 p. E125.V5V49 Rare Bk. Coll.

1951 El nuevo mundo; cartas relativas a sus viajes descubrimientos. Estudio preliminar de Roberto Levillier. Buenos Aires, Editorial Nova [1951] 342 p. (Biblioteca americanista) E125.V5A417

Veytia, Mariano.

1944 Historia antigua de México. [México] Editorial Leyenda [1944] 2 v. F1219.V59 1944

[Villa Sánchez, Juan de]

1832 El muerde-quedito. Papel joco-serio, satírico y moral en que ambos estilos se alaban algunas virtudes y se condenan algunos defectos, sin denigrar la fama de los sujetos que en él se mencionan. 0187 171 La Marimba, suplemento, v. 1, 25 de feb. de 1832: 1–39. CtY; NN

Carlos María de Bustamante, editor.

Wagner, Henry Raup.

1967 The life and writings of Bartolomé de las Casas. With the collaboration of Helen Rand Parish. Albuquerque, University of New Mexico Press [1967] xxv, 310 p. E125.C4W3

0188
0189 173
Chronological Index

Date Item

1433–1768 121

1433 12/2

1500 July 27 118/2

ca. 1502–1503 118/3

1504 September 10 119/1

1504–1511 121/6

1512–1557 122

1512–1513 121/8

1512 June 28–July 6 121/1

1526 136

1527 February 15 1

August 2 2

1528 May 23 2

1529 August 24 3

1530 February 4 3, 5

June 14 122/2

June 27 5

December 20 5

1531 January 25 4

February 13 6

September 17 7

1532 January 10 8

November 27 9

1533 August 2 10, 11

1534 May 21 12, 13

December 7 8

1536 September 3 14

1537 December 4 19A

December 7 16, 17

December 30 17

1538 February 26 18, 19

March 22 19

March 23 18

August 23 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26

October 25 27

1539 February 21 28

November 8 29

1540 January 9 35

January 24 30

June 10 31

November 29 32

1541 January 11 33

March 14 34

May 18 33

August 16 35

1542 June or July 138

July 129

1543–1544 139

1543 May 1 36

June 16 37

August 23 38, 39

ca. 1544 120

1545 summer 125, 126, 127, 132, 134, 137

1545 June 18 130, 135

August 16 123

1546 November 8 40, 41

1548 121/3

1548–1552 May 5 140

1548 June 12 42

ca. 1550–1574 118

ca. 1550 128

1553 March 11 43

1544 May 10 44

July 12 43

1555 July 17 45

October 8 36

October 16 38

December 27 46

1556 March 16 47

September 15 48

1557 February 15 124

September 30 122/3

1558–1593 144

1558 February 5 49

May 7 50

May 27 51

August 31 144/1

1559 October 16 52

October 21 53

1560 May 9 53

June 24 54

August 27 55

August 31 56

Between 1561 and 1600 142

0190 174

1561 133

1561 January 15–23 55

January 15 54, 56

February 19 57

March 4 58

August 26 59, 60

1562 October 3 143

1563 May 14 61

1564 June 5 62

September 3 63

1566 November 23 64

December 9 121/9

1567 February 10 131

July 1 65

July 25 144/4

November 3 66

ca. 1568 144/7

1568 July 9 144/11

August 27 144/8

September 10–December 4 145

October 144/9

October 22 144/21

October 31 144/20

November 6 144/22

December 19 67, 68

ca. 1569 144/6

1569 January 144/3

January 5 144/10

January 6 144/2

February 5 69

1570's 144/15

1570 February 15 70

1571 March 1 72

1572? 144/12

1572 May 7 144/14

November 4 144/19

December 8 62

1573 February 144/23

May 26 73

ca. 1574 71, 118/1

1574 July 20 74

November 3 75

December 23 76

1575 January 24 77

April 27 78

May 3 79

May 15 80

July 27 76

1576 February 27 144/13

June 17 81, 82

December 16 83

1577 March 22 84

April 22 85

May 13 86

May 21 87

1578 May 20 88

June 1 89

July 5 90

July 29 91

November 25 92, 93

December 2 94, 95

December 21 96

1579 April 14 144/16

May 22 97

ca. 1580–1600 141

1580 January 15 144/17

June 17 98

September 23 99

1581 March 5 100

November 22–1583 September 20 146

ca. 1582 144/24

1582 144/26

1582 May 27 101

June 26 144/18

1583 April 6 102

September 3 103

1587 September 3 10

1589 January 15 144/25

1591 September 3 104

ca. 1600 (i.e. between 1598 and 1609) 117

Early 17th century 144/27

17th century 121/4

1607 February 6 105

March 4 106

1609 March 24 107

1619 November 29 121/10

1627–1641 148

1627 January 25–28 148/2

February 26 148/14

September 12 148/27

1628 May 26 121/11

July 18 148/6

August 3 148/6

October 24 148/13

ca. 1630 120

1630 May 7–8 148/3

May 9 148/15

September 12 148/20

October 24–25 148/8

ca. 1631 147

1631 December 11 148/9

1632 June 21 62

July 15 148/21

October 20 148/22

1633 September 17 148/10

1634 May 19 148/23

1635 January 9 148/25

0191 175

September 27 148/26

1636 February 24 148/24

March 7 148/17

1638 November 20 148/16

1639 March 21 148/4

1640 April 18 148/1

May 15 148/7

July 15 148/18

July 17 148/12

1641 January 3 148/7

March 19–22 148/5

April 16 148/19

April 17 148/1

1648 April 26 108

1649 January 28—1682 December 19 149

1649 November 2 109

1651 February 11 110

1652 March 11 111

August 15 112

August 22 113

August 30 114

1657–1820 151A

1659 151B

1660 March 9 115

August 16 150

September 9 116

1668 September 23 121/12

1688 April 20 152

1692 153

1714 154

1725 October 18–1727 March 31 155

1742 April 22 156

ca. 1750 121/7

1756 May 7–June 14 157

1768 121/5

1777–1782 158

1777 May 9 158/2

1782 May 16 158/1

1785 January 8–February 5 159

1796 November(?)—1803 March 18 160

1802 January 22 119/2

1803 December 161

1819 July 24–December 31 162

July 24 162/1

August 31 162/2

September 30 162/3

October 31 162/4

November 30 162/5

December 31 162/6

0192
0193 177
Name and Place Index

Abbad y Lasierra, Iñigo, 147

Acalpica, 162

Acamapichtli, 70

Acapulco, 67, 158–161

Acatlán, 106

Acevedo, Miguel de, 148

Acuña, 88

Adame y Arriaga, Joseph, 139–141

Africa, 6

Aguila, Gerónimo del, 39

Aguilar, María Leocadia, 155

Aguilera, Joseph Mariano, 154

Aguirre, Lope de, vii, 107–109

Agurto, Christóbal de, 118

Alarcón, Antón de, 80

Alamo, Lázaro del, 35

Alborada y de Villarubio, Viscount de la; see Gavito, Florencio

Albornoz, Bernardino de, 94

Albornoz, Rodrigo de, 5, 98

Alcalá de los Gazules, 81

Alcalá de Henares, 131

Alessandria, 46

Alegrías, Francisco, 12

Allegrini, Giuseppe, 79

Almadeu, 127

Alva de Aliste y Villaflor, Count of; see Guzmán, Luis Enríquez de Alvarado, Alonso de, 118

Alvarado Tezozomoc, Fernando; see Tezozomoc Alvarez Cueto, Diego, 83

Alvarez Pineda, Bartolomé Antonio, 129

Amachcalapan, 148

Amar y Borgón, Antonio, 156

Amatepeque, 106

Amazon, river, 73, 106

Amoretti d'Oneglia, Antonio, 75–76

Amoretti d'Oneglia, Carlo, 75–76

Anaya, Marshal, 157

Andia, Francisco de, 127

Andrada, Pedro, 149

Anguís, Doctor, 35

Angulo, Pedro de, 105

Antequera; see Oaxaca

Antilles (Spanish), 110

Antoñano Salazar, Bernabé de, 128

Antonio, Don, Prior of Crato, Portugal, 110, 113

Antwerp, 116

Apan, 158–162

Appianus, of Alexandria, 74

Ara Vázquez, Antonia de, 152

Aranjuez, 37, 45, 52, 58, 65, 149

Arbieto, Pedro de, 124, 127

Arce, Pedro de, 125, 131

Arco, Phelipe de, 149

Arellano, Pedro de, 11

Arestauja, Francisco de, 124

Argiles, Bonifacio de, 136

Argueta, Hernando de, 120

Argumedo, Bartolomé de, 118

Ariosto, Ludovico, 74

Armentia, Prudencio de, 134

Arteaga, 101–102

Arredondo, Antonio de, viii, 145–147

Arziniega, Claudio de, 118

Asencio, 160

Asia, 73

Aspioleal, Pedro de, 131

Atotonilco, 106

Audiencia; see geographic area desired

Augustinian Order, 21–22, 30, 47–49, 51, 118

Avendaño, Juan Baptista de, 35

Avendaño, Juan de, 117, 119

Axayácatl, 70

Ayala, Ignacio, 163

Ayllón, Juan de, 33

Ayora, Juan de, 50

Ayutla, 143

Azcanda, Clemente, 40

Azores, 110

Aztecs, 70

0194 178

Bacchiani, Alessandro, 79

Badajoz, 58

Bahama, 128

Bañuelos, Gerónimo, 68

Bandini, Angelo Maria, 72, 76

Bang, Estienne de, 113

Barcelona, 101

Barco y de Ara, Sebastiana del, 153

Barnac, Robert de, 111

Barquisimeto, 107

Barreda, Miguel de, 12, 15

Basivara, Francisco de, 35

Bayonne, 113

Bazán, Alvaro de, 85

Becerra Tanco, Manuel, 135

Bedolfa, 157

Beleña, Juan de, 118

Beltrán (President of Audiencia of Valladolid), 102

Beltrán de Manusga, Francisco, 125

Benalcázar, Sebastián de, 101

Benavente, Toribio de, 102

Benavides, Paula de, 131, 136

Benavides y de la Cueva, Diego de, Conde de Santisteban, Marqués de Solera, Viceroy of Peru, vii, 136

Benciolini, Guiseppe Pelli, 79

Benítez, Antón, 81

Bennett, Charles E., 115

Bergosa y Jordan, Antonio, 151, 153–155

Bernal Díaz de Lugo, Juan, 99–101

Bernardino, Joseph, 148

Berrio, Luis de, 68

Besera, Francisco, 71

Betancurt, Diego, 152–153

Betanzas, Domingo de, 14

Bezón de Mur, Juan Lorenzo, 135

Bicochea, Sebastiana, 152

Birviesca, Cristóbal de, 50

Birviesca, Licenciado, 85

Blaeu, 79

Blanco y Helguera, Buenaventura, 147

Blanes, Tomás de, Bishop of Chiapas, 64

Blizeau, Raymond, 111

Bolton, Herbert E., 146

Bony, Baron E. de, 109, 116

Bordeaux, 110–113, 116

Bordenave, Jehan de, 113

Borja, Miguel, 163

Botin, Joseph, 148

Boturini Benaducci, Lorenzo, 71

Boulind, Richard, viii

Bousas, Manuel Antonio, 154

Brussels, 84

Burgos, 3, 6, 64

Burgos, Gonzalo de, 5

Burgos, Juan de, 5–6

Bustamante, Carlos María de, 142

Cabacea, Andrés de, 133

Cabello, Juan, 23

Cabeza de Vaca, Alvar Núñez; see Núñez Cabeza de Vaca, Alvar

Cabo de Vela, 89

Cabra, Juan de, 80

Cabrera, Andrés de, 39

Caçatepeque, 33

Cádiz, 66, 73, 85, 155

Calahorra, 99

Calderón, Agustina, 131–132

Calderón, Antonio, 131–134

Calderón, Bernardo, 131

Calderón, Diego, 131–136

Calderón, Francisco, 67

Calderón, Pablo, 132

Calera, 52

California, 157, 160, 162

Calkim, 155

Campeche, 139, 157

Campos (insurgent), 160

Campos, Pedro de, 63

Canary Islands, 84, 127, 131–132

Cañete, Joseph Joachím, 147–149

Cañete, Viceroy of Peru; see Hurtado de Mendoza, Andrés

Cano, Juan, 26

Cansino, Juana María, 152–153

Cantabria, 123, 125–126

Carasa (Inquisitor), 151

Caravajal, Elvira de, 81

Carmona Tamirez, Diego de, 133

Carolina, 146

Carranza, Martín de, 118

Carreño, Alberto María, 4, 9, 16–17, 23, 28, 41–42, 44–45, 47, 55

Carrillo, Doctor, 43

Carrillos de Peralta family, 78

Carrion, Francisco de, 3

Carrión, Francisco de (nephew), 3

Carrión, Hernando de, 3

Cartagena, 84, 89

Carthusian Order, 80

Carvajal, Doctor, 88

Carvajal, Luis de, 59

Carvajal, Maria, 78

Casa de Contrataciaón, 3, 5, 83, 85, 105, 140

Casas, Bartolomé de las; see Las Casas, Bartolomé de

Cassas, Mariano, 150–151

Castaigne, 112

Castile, 12–13, 17, 87–88, 99–100, 107

Castilla, family, 78

Castilla, Luis de, 94

0195 179

Castilla, Pedro Lorenzo de, 94

Castilla de Oro, 91

Castillo, Diego del, 134–135

Castillo Villegas, Onofre Miguel de el, 145

Castro y Castilla, Juan de, 125

Cayetano de Estrada, Miguel, 143–144

Cazaltenango, 148

Cazenave, Captain, 112

Cempoala, 4

Ceraín, Juan Angel, 149

Cerro de Coyuxquihin, 160

Cervantes, Juan de, Bishop of Oaxaca, 64

Cervantes, Juan Casaus de, 78

Cervantes, Leonel de, 78, 94, 157

Céspedes y de la Peña, Pedro de; see Céspedes Vallejo Diaz, Pedro de

Céspedes Vallejo Díaz, Pedro de, viii, 122–131

Ceynos, Francisco de, 39

Chacaltianguiz, 147–149

Chachapoias, 109

Chalco, 96

Chambers, Talbot, 159

Charcas, Audiencia of, 59, 85

Charles I of Spain, V of the Holy Roman Empire, 3–4, 6–8, 10–19, 23–24, 28, 40, 82–83, 86–89, 92, 95, 97–102, 104

Charles III of Spain, 149

Charles IV of Spain, 160

Charlevois, Pierre F. X. de, 116

Chávez, Cristóbal de, 33

Chiapas, 64, 102–104, 151–154

Chicoloapa, 106

Chihuahua, 157, 160–162

Chile, 84

Chimaloacan, 106

Cholula, 96

Chontalpa, 64

Çinacantepeque, 106

Ciriça, Juan de, 64

Ciudad Rodrigo, Antonio de, 3

Clement VII, Pope, 5

Cline, Howard F., viii

Coatepeque, 106

Coatzacoalcos, 64, 104

Cobos, Francisco de los; see Los Cobos, Francisco de

Cobos, Pedro de los; see Los Cobos, Pedro de

Coello, Joseph Mariano; see Cuello, Josef Mariano

Cofradía de Señor San Pedro Martir, 137, 139

Colmenero, Juan Ruiz, Bishop of Guadalajara, 69

Cologne, 82

Colombia, 156

Colón, Luis, 85

Colón de Larriategui, Joseph, 149–150

Columbus, Christopher, 75, 85

Confines, Audiencia de los; see Guatemala, Audiencia of

Connor, Mrs. J. T., 115

Constantina, 44

Contreras, Pablo Fernández de, 66

Conway, G. R. G., 106, 116–117

Córdoba, Francisco de, 85

Córdoba, Luis Fernández de, 67–68

Corro, Francisco Vicente del, 151, 153

Cortés, Hernán, 70, 76, 98–99, 102

Cosala, 160

Cosamaloapan, 148

Cosimo, Grand Duke, 72

Costa de Alvarado, 64

Council of the Indies, 16, 20–21, 30–32, 36, 41–42, 47, 50, 53, 56, 65, 69, 82–85, 87–88, 91–92, 98–99, 101–103, 122

Council of Trent, 12, 15, 64

County Cork (Ireland), 81

Coyoacán, 134

Cozumel, 94

Crawford, William Henry, 81

Córdoba (Mexico), 159

Cruz, Domingo de la, 14–16

Cruzada, vii, 5, 12, 15–16, 52, 55, 58, 62, 139–142

Cruzate, Juan, 118

Cuba, 76, 123, 128

Cueba, Juan de, 120–121

Cueba, Martin de, 128

Cuello, Josef Mariano, 152–153

Cuenca, Francisco de, 81

Cuenca, Hernando de, 81

Cuilutla, 106

Cuyotepeque, 106

Dávila, Bartolomé, 80

Dávila, Martín, 80

Dávila, Pedrarias, 76

Delgado, Andrés, 158

Díaz, Alonso, 21, 40

Díaz, Bernabé, 143

Díaz de Aguilera, Pedro, 71

Díaz de Armendaris, Miguel, 84

Dieppe, 78

Dominican Order, vii, 14, 16, 30, 33, 49, 98–99, 142

Dorrego, Josef Angel, 154

Duarte, Francisco, 83, 85

Durango, 157, 160–162

Edward VI of England, 28

El Dorado, 107

Elisabeth of Valois; see Isabel (Queen, Elisabeth of Valois)

0196 180

El Pardo, 33, 57

El Rosario, 157, 160–162

Encina, Hernando de, 30

Encinas, Diego, 7, 17, 23, 35–37, 42–43, 56–57

Enríquez, Martin, 47–49, 54–55, 59

Ensenada de Aticla, 160

Ensenada de Maruata, 162

Erasso, Antonio de, 44–45, 48–53, 55–58, 61–63

Erasso, Diego de, 52

Erasso, Francisco de, 33–34, 37–39, 41, 43–44, 84–85

Escalante, Juan de, 118

Escobar, Alonso de, 14

Escorial, The, 42, 45, 50–51, 54–55, 62, 65

Española; see Hispaniola

Espindola, Ana de, 81

Espinosa, Eugenio de, 126, 129

Estopiñán y de Vera, Pedro de, 80–81

Estrada, Alonso de, 98

Estrada, María de, 14

Estrada y Escobedo, Francisco de, 132, 137

Estris, Antonio, 40

Eyquem, Jeanne de, 112

Ferdinand VII of Spain, 158

Fernández de Zendiera, Francisco, 128

Fernández de Córdova, Gonzalo, 140

Fernández Manrique, García, Count of Osorno, 88, 102

Figueroa, Juan de, 84

Flanders, 58

Florence, 71, 75, 79

Florencia, Patricio de, 130

Flores (Inquisitor), 155–156

Florida, viii, 67, 78, 81, 109–112, 115,124–126, 128–130, 139, 145–147 Forcade, Louis de la, 111

France, 78, 110

Franciscan Order, 4, 6, 11–12, 14, 16, 18, 22, 30, 33–34, 46, 49–50, 63, 99, 102, 117–118, 132–133, 142, 147, 150–152, 154–155

Franciscan Order, Discalced, 63

Fraternity of St. Peter Martyr; see Cofradía de Señor San Pedro Martir

Frías de Lara, Gabriel, 123

Fuensalida, Luis de, 14

Fuentes, Antonio de, 135

Fuentes, Juan de, 81

Gaffarel, Paul L. J., 115

Galicia (New Spain), 16

Galleani Napione, Giovanni Francesco, 76

Galveston, 157, 159, 161

Gálvez, Pedro de, 66

Garat, Maurice, 113

Garcés, Pedro, 31

García de Ledesma, Alonso, 134

Garcia Icazbalceta, Joaquín, 7, 14, 16, 20, 50

García Redondo, Antonio, 154

García y Arce, Francisco, 123–124

Garrido y Bolaños, Juan, 155

Garonne, 114

Garzarón, Francisco de, 144

Gasca, Pedro de la; see La Gasca, Pedro de

Gaspar, Juan, 148

Gaviola, Antonio de, 132

Gavito, Florencio, Vizconde de La Alborada y de Villarrubio, 81, 139 Gaztelu, Martín, 42–43

Georgia, viii, 145–147

Gerburi, Arnaud, 111

Gilberti, Maturino, 50

Ginori Conti, Prince, 71

Gironde, 109

Goicoechea, Josefa, 153

Gomera y Quirós, Roque de, 134

Gómez, Antón, 14, 18

Gómez, Josef, 155

Gómez, Lucas, 153

Gómez, Rafael, 153

Gómez de Mier, Juan, 136

Gómez de Orozco, Federico, 76

Gómez Nájera, Pero, 117

Gonzales, Diego, 81

González, Bernabé, 143–144

González, Félix, 154

González, Santiago, 162

González Burtillo, Juan, 149

González de Barcia, Andrés, 107–108

González de Mendoza, Pedro, 76, 81

González Obregón, Luis, 116

Gourgue, Augier de, 112

Gourgue, Domingue de; see Gourgues, Dominique de

Gourgues, Alexis de, Vicomte, 109–110, 115

Gourgues, Antoine de, 114

Gourgues, Dominique de, viii, 109–116

Granada, Nuevo Reino de; see New Granada

Gregory XIII, Pope, 52, 58

Grijalva, Juan de, 76

Guaçaqualco; see Coatzacoalcos

Guadalajara, 44, 69, 157, 159–162

Guadalete River, 80

Guaduas, 156

Guale, 129–130

Guanajuato, 158–163

Guaquechula, 106

0197 181

Guatemala, 14, 21, 66–67, 91–92, 94, 103, 151–152, 154

Guatemala, Audiencia of, 26, 66, 85, 101

Guatepeque, 106

Guautepulco, 106

Guazquatepeque, 106

Gueiteupam, 152–155

Güemes y Horcasitas, Juan Francisco de, 146–147

Güemes Pacheco y Padilla, Juan Vicente de, Count of Revilla Gigedo, Viceroy of New Spain, 71

Guerra, García, Archbishop of Mexico, 64

Guerrero, Vicente, 157–160, 162.

Guevara, Doctor, 102

Guicciardini, Francesco, 72, 74

Guienne, 110

Guillen, Diego, 131

Guinea, Luis de, 133, 135

Guzmán, Hernando de, 107

Guzmán, Luis Enríquez de, Count of Alva de Aliste y Villaflor, 65–68

Haring, Clarence, 140

Harmsworth, R. L., 106, 108–109

Haro, Cristóbal de, 5–6

Haro, Francisco de, 135

Havana, 66, 124, 127–130, 146–147

Henry VIII of England, 84

Henry III of France, 85, 114

Hernández, Gonzalo, 81

Hernández, Gregorio, 148

Hernández, Juan, 118

Hernández, Luis, 119, 121–122

Hernández, Nicolás, 148

Herrera, Alonso de, 136

Heredia, Cristóbal de, 26

Higueras, 21

Hispaniola, 3, 73, 75, 84

Hoa, Gabriel de, 64

Hojacastro, Martín de, Bishop of Tlaxcala, 29

Holmes, Lanna, viii

Honduras, 21, 91–92, 98, 102–104

Horruytiner, Luis, 126, 128–130

Huasteca, 59

Huejotzingo, 96

Huerta, José María, 157, 159

Hurtado, Cristóbal, 40

Hurtado de Mendoza, Agustina, 144

Hurtado de Mendoza, Andrés, Marqués de Cañete, Viceroy of Peru, 107

Ibáñez de Ochandiano, Martín, 136

Ibarra, Hortuño de, 96

Ica, viii, 149–150

Inquisition, Holy Office of the, vii, 116, 131–137, 143–145, 150–156

Ipori, Gerónimo de, 106–107

Ireland, 81

Isabel (Queen, Elisabeth of Valois), 43

Isabel (Queen, wife of Charles I of Spain), 4–6, 8–11, 19

Italy, 46, 52, 80

Iturrate family, viii, 149

Iturrate, Francisco de, 150

Iturrate, Joseph Antonio de, 149–150

Iturrate, Maximiliano de, 149–150

Izquierdo, Father, 158

Izucar, 96

Ixcatlan, 106

Ixtlahuaca, 161

Jaén, Francisca Antonia, 143–144

Jaén, Joseph, 144

Jalapa, 147–148

Jalisco, 44

Jalpa, 161

Jauja, 150

Jauregui, Agustín de, 127

Jerez de la Frontera, 79–81

Jesuit Order, 55, 59

Jos, Emiliano, 107–108

Juana (Princess of Spain and Portugal), 28–32, 85

Juana (Queen of Spain), 6

Kingsborough, Edward King, 71

Konetzke, Richard, 17–18, 21, 35, 57

Kraus, Hans P., vii–viii

Labat, de, 113

La Cadena, Antonio de, 39

Lacondón, 103

La Cruz, José de, 158

La Cruz, Juan de, 148

La Cueva, Juan de, 48, 119–122, 125

Laet, Johannes, 79

Lafón, Bartolomé, 157

La Gasca, Pedro de, 82–83, 109

La Goleta, 159–163

La Gombaudiere, Gombault de, 114

Lagunas, Bravo de, 40

Lagunas, Juan Baptista, 50

La Higuera y Amarilla, Bernabé de, 132, 137

La Lagune, F. de, 112

Lallemand, 158

La Madrid, Diego de, Archbishop of Lima, 57

Landes, 100

Lando, Joseph de Santa María, 136

Lanuza, Miguel de Jesús, 152, 154

La Parra, Licenciado de, 120

La Pena, Juan de, 41

0198 182

La Peña y Céspedes, Pedro de; see Céspedes Vallejo Díaz, Pedro de

La Plata de los Charcas, Peru, Audiencia of; see Charcas, Audiencia of

La Plaza, Cristóbal Bernardo de, 135

La Puebla, Juan de, 23

La Riba, Juan de, 30

La Rinconada, 4

La Rochelle, 114

Lartaun, Sebastián de, Bishop of Cuzco, 57

Las Casas, Bartolomé de, 102–105

Los Confines, Audiencia of, 85

La Serna de Haro y Vega, Juan de, 132

Las Infantas y Venegas, Nicolás de, 133–136

La Vega y Dávila, Juan de, 133

La Vera, Juan de, 130

La Vera Cruz, Alonso de, 48

Leal, Nicolás, 134–135

Ledesma, Bartholomé de, 116

Ledesma, Francisco de, 28, 32

Ledesma, Francisco Rodríguez de, 67

Leguía, Gregorio de, 66, 68–69

León, 84, 88–89, 97, 102

León Pinelo, Antonio R. de, 107–108

Leprevost, Robert, 115

Levillier, Roberto, 73–74

Lima, 59, 136

Lima, Audiencia of, 83, 89, 101, 109, 116

Lisbon, 61

Loaysa, García de, 19–22, 87–89, 102

Locgrate, Pierre, 115

Long, James, 159, 161

Lopes, Juan, 40

López family, 78

López, Alonso, 6

López, Gregorio, 99–100

López, Jerónimo, 94

López de Agurto, Sancho, 7

López de Aragón, Diego, 31

López de Benavides, Gabriel, 132

López de Calatayud, Juan, 5–6

López Gavria, Bartolomé, 128

López Sanz, Francisco, 134

Lorenzana y Butrón, Francisco Antonio, 14, 16

Los Cobos, Francisco de, 3, 7–8, 84, 88, 97–98, 102

Los Cobos, Pedro de, 20

Los Reyes; see Lima

Los Reyes, María de, 132

Los Santos, Ana de, 144

Los Valles, 63

Los Vélez, Marqués de (Viceroy of Catalonia), 123–125

Louisiana, 160

Luena, Baltasar de, 81

Lur, Louis de, 114

Luyando, Ochoa de, 29, 85, 109

Luzán, Antonio de, 118

Machifaro, 107

McPheeters, Dean W., 70 Madrid, 4, 6, 19–21, 25, 37–38, 40–41, 43–44, 46–48, 55–58, 62–64, 66–69, 88, 122, 125, 133, 135–136, 150

Magnaghi, Alberto, 74

Magos, José Antonio, 159

Maldonado, Diego de, 83, 92, 120

Malinalco, 118

Mallorquín, Diego, 118

Mandran, Jean, 111

Manila, 140

Manjarres, Juan, 66

Mañosca, Juan de, Archbishop of Mexico, 65

Manrique, Garcí Fernández, Conde de Osorno, 98

Manrrique, Sabiniano, 57

Mansano, Bartolomé, 142

Mansilla, Alonso de, 26

Maquili, 162

Marañón; see Amazon River

Margarita, Island of, 107

María Isabel Francisca de Braganza y de Borbón, Queen of Spain, 158

Mariano, Licenciado, 159

Marroquín, Francisco, 11, 14

Marroquín, Miguel, 125

Martín del Guijo, Diego, 134

Martín del Guijo, Gregorio, 135

Martín y Aguirre, Matías, 157

Martínez Hidalgo, Diego, 134

Martínez de Loaysa, Pero, 63

Martínez Rincón, Santiago, 150–151

Martini, Joseph, 142

Mary Tudor of England, 28

Matanzas, 130

Medici, Catherine de, of France, 113

Medici, Lorenzo di Pier Francesco de', 71–73

Medina, José T., 36, 50, 131, 140

Medina del Campo, 5

Medina Rico, Pedro de, 132, 134–138

Medinueta y Múzquiz, Pedro de, vii, 156

Mejía, Cristóbal, 159

Mendoza, Antonio de, 8–11, 13–23, 76, 83, 88, 95, 97–98, 100, 106

Mendoza, Luis de, 66

Menéndez de Avilés, Pedro, 110

Menéndez Márquez, Francisco, 124

Mentrico (Toledo), 53

Mercado, 101

Mercado de Peñalosa, 102

0199 183

Mérida, 155

Mérida, Jorge de, 94

Mérida de Molina, Francisco, 94

Merino Muñoz, Josef, 155

Mesa, Francisco de, 84

Mesmes, Romarine de, 113

Mexico, vii–viii, 142

Mexico (City) 4–14, 18–20, 22–26, 28–41, 43–49, 52–53, 55–58, 60–65, 67, 69, 71, 76, 89–90, 92–94, 96, 98–102, 106, 116–117, 119–121, 131, 133–137, 140–145, 147, 150–163

Mexico, Audiencia of; see New Spain, Audiencia of

Mexico, Cabildo of, 93

Mexico, University of, 140

Michoacán, 13, 24, 44, 47, 50, 96, 159–163

Mier y Villa, Juan de, 151, 153, 155–156

Milan, 52, 76

Millán, Diego, 133, 135

Mingolla, Luis de, 118

Miranda, Melchor, 26

Missouri River, 162

Moctezuma, 32, 70

Molango, 106

Molina, Alonso de, 118

Molina, Francisco de, 120

Molina, Pedro de, 80

Mondovi, 46

Monluc, Blaise de, 112

Mont-de-Marsan, 110, 116

Montealegre, Marqués de, 139

Montejo, Francisco de, 104

Montes de Oca, Marcos, 154

Montesdoca, 157

Montesinos, 108

Monterey (California), 157

Montero, Joseph, 132

Montoya, Manuel Joseph de, 148

Montúfar, Alonso de, 26–30, 32–38, 41, 43, 50, 117

Monzón, 6–7

Morales, Blas de, 118

Morales, Francisco de, 81, 116–119

Morales, Hernando, 81

Morales, Pedro de, 81

Motolinía; see Benavente, Toribio de,

Moya de Contreras, Pedro, 46, 48–58, 60–62

Muñatones, Licenciado, 85

Muñoz, Licenciado, 43

Muñoz, Pedro, 148

Muro Orejón, Antonio, 101–102

Muxica, Alonso de, 127

Nacogdoches, 161–162

Nájera, Mathías Josef de, 154–155

Nardón, Juan, 31

Navajos, 160

Navarro, Mathías, 145

Navarro de Isla, Pedro, 145

Negrete, Juan, 25

Negro, Juan, 121

Newfoundland, 78

New France, 79

New Galicia, 16, 50, 84, 93, 158

New Galicia, Audiencia of, 26

New Granada, vii, 83, 89, 94, 107, 156

New Mexico, 159–162

New Spain, 3–5, 8–10, 16–18, 20–23, 25, 29–34, 36–37, 41, 47, 49, 53–55, 63–64, 66–68, 76, 83–84, 88, 90–91, 93–94, 96–97, 99, 102, 105–106, 139–142, 149, 157 New Spain, Audiencia of, 4, 6–11, 19, 21–22, 25–26, 29–32, 34, 36, 39, 41, 44, 51, 55, 65, 90, 103, 105

New York, 78

Nicaragua, 91–92

Nieves, Juan Joseph de, 148

Nombre de Dios, 83

Nuevo León, 59

Nuevo Reino de Granada; see New Granada

Núñez Cabeza de Vaca, Alvar, vii, 79–81

Núñez Vela, Blasco, 82–83, 97

Oaxaca, 10–11, 14, 33, 64, 103, 147, 158–163

Ocampo, Juan Manselino de, 153

Ocaña, 4–5

Ocharte, Pedro de, 117

Ocuytuco, 10, 14, 16, 21, 106

Offallen, Benjamin, 159

Oliva, Mariano de Jesús, 151–155

Oliva, Rosalia, 151

Onís, Luis de, 161

Oquila, 106, 118

Orantes, Melchor de, 125–126

Oro, Pedro de, 113

Oropesa, Count of, 125

Orozco y Berra, Manuel, 71

Orsua, Pedro de; see Ursua, Pedro de

Ortega Montañes, Juan de, 134, 136, 138

Ortiz (Mexican insurgents), 160–163

Ortiz, Francisca, 118

Ortiz, Juan, 118

Ortiz, Pero, 39

Ortiz de Arri, Juan, 118

Ortiz de Gatica, Luis, 80

Ortiz de Oribe, Juan, 30

Ordóñez y Aguiar, Ramón, 154

Ortega, Francisco de, 118

Otatitlan, vii, 147–149

Otumba, 96

Ovando family, 78

0200 184

Pacheco de Bocanegra, Bernardino, 94

Pachuca, 161

Padilla, García de, 88

Palazio y del Hoyo, Francisco Antonio, 144

Palpa, 150

Pamphili, Eusebius, 74

Panama, 83, 91–92, 107

Pánuco, 59

Paraguay River, 109

Pardo, el, 33, 57

Pardo, Antonio, 145

Pardo de Tavera, Juan de, 92

Paul III, Pope, 12–15

Paul IV, Pope, 31

Pavia, 46

Paz, Francisco de, 7

Paz, Gómez de, 33

Paz, Guiterre de, 116

Pedrosa, Licenciado, 85

Peñas de San Pedro, 158

Peralta, Gastón de, Marqués de Falces, 93–94, 116

Peralta, Mathías de, 65

Perenis, Simón; see Pereyns, Simón

Pereyns, Simón, 116–119

Pereyre y Castro, Ignacio Antonio de, 147

Peres de Peñalosa, Francisco, 70

Pérez, 153–154

Pérez, Hernán, 86, 89

Pérez, Luis, 30

Pérez, Santiago, 152

Pérez de Avilés, Eustachio, 143–145

Perijns, Simon; see Pereyns, Simón

Peru, vii–viii, 59, 64, 67–68, 82–85, 89, 91–92, 94, 102, 106–107, 109, 136, 149

Philip II of Spain, 23–26, 28, 31, 33–38, 40–42, 44–59, 61–62, 83–85, 93–94, 96, 107–110, 121

Philip III of Spain, 63–64

Philip IV of Spain, 65–69, 125–126, 131, 136

Philippine Islands, 67, 139

Phillipps, Sir Thomas, 106, 108–109

Pinto, Agustín, 35

Pizarro, Gonzalo, 30, 82–83

Plancius, 79

Polanco, 88

Portalegre, 60

Portillo, Estevan de, 116–119

Portugal, 107

Popayán, 83–84, 89, 107

Ponce de León, Nicolás, 124, 126, 128

Ponce de León, Luis, 98

Poggio, Josef María, 151–153, 155

Prado y Obejero, Bernardo de, 154–156

Puebla, 64, 100, 119, 140–145, 150, 158–163

Puebla de los Angeles; see Puebla

Puerto de Caballos, 104

Puerto de Monte Christi, 84

Puerto Rico, 128

Puga, Vasco de, 7, 18–19, 26, 28, 35–36, 39

Punto de Tabo, 159, 161

Puruándiro, 158

Quadros, Diego de, 36

Quebedo, Joseph Joachím de, 148

Quecholac, 121

Quechula, 106

Quesada, Antonio Rodríguez, President of the Audiencia of Los Confines, 85

Querétaro, 158–163

Quetzaltenango, 154–155

Quijada, a soldier, 30

Quintana, Francisco de, 40

Quiroga, Vasco de, 13, 24

Quiroga y Losada, Diego, viii, 139

Ramírez, Diego, 9

Ramírez, Francisco, 30

Ramírez Cabezudo, Pero, 26

Ramírez de Fuenleal, Sebastián, 89–90, 92, 101–102

Ramírez de Guevara, Miguel, 126, 130

Ramoyn, Martín, 85

Renovales, Mariano, 161–162

Ramusio, 79

Rey y Alarcón, Florian, 133–134

Rhedin, Martin de, 127

Ribera, Diego de, 134

Ridolfi, Roberto, 73

Riquel, Pero, 80

Rincón, Agustín, 40

Rio de la Plata, 81–89

Rio de San Juan, 84

Rio Grande, 148

Rivadeneyra family, 78

Rivera de Buluji, 155

Robledo, Francisco, 132

Roca, Diego de, 80

Roças, Andrés de, 127

Roças, Gaspar, 30

Roche Jaune; see Yellowstone River

Rochester, 113

Rodríguez, Francisco, 31

Rodríguez, Juan, 118

Rodríguez, Martín, 30

Rodríguez, Toribio, 148

Rodríguez de Abrill, Juan, 133

Rodríguez de Fresnilla, Antonio, 124

Rodríguez de Villegas, Andrés, 124–125, 129

0201 185

Rodríguez Lucero, Francisco, 80

Rojas, Juan Bueno de, 122

Romano, Diego, 52

Rome, 52, 75

Romero de Terreros, Manuel, 78

Rueda Torres, Alonso de, 135

Ruiz, José, 153

Ruiz Samaniego, Jerónimo, 135

Ruiz, Sebastiana, 151–153

Ruiz de Apodaca, Juan, vii, 157–163

Ruiz de Cepeda Martínez y Portilla, Rodrigo, 133

Ruiz de León, Fernando, 126

Ruiz de Molina, 153

Ruiz Rubio, Juan, 29–32

Ruiz de Zúñiga, Thomas, 120

Ruys Cabeza de Vaca, Hernán, 81

Sáenz de Mañozca, Juan, 132, 137

Sáenz Navarrete, Juan Baptista, 65–66

Saga de Bugueira, Mateo, Archbishop of Mexico, 69

Sahagún, Bernardino de, 55

Saint Augustine (Florida), 124–130

Saint Kitts, West Indies, 127

Saint Louis, 159–161

Saint Peter Martyr, Fraternity of; see Cofradía de Señor San Pedro Martir

Salamanca, 4

Salamanca, University of, 140

Salamanca, García de, 118

Salazar, Bernabé de, 124

Salazar, Cristóbal de, 123

Salazar, Juan de, 30, 36

Salazar, Pedro de, 26, 94

Salazar, Thomas, 62

Salazar y de Mendoza, Pedro de, 76

Salazar y Frías, Cristóbal de, 127

Salgado, Licenciado, 85

Salmerón, Juan de, 83, 94–95, 100

Sámano, Juan de, 4–6, 9, 16–20, 22–26, 28, 30, 94

Sánchez, Diego (16th century), 39–40

Sánchez, Diego (18th century), 153

Sánchez, Josefa, 153

Sánchez de Alanis, Juan, 39

Sánchez de Muñón, Sancho, 44

Sánchez Moreno, Francisco, 35

Sánchez Quijada, Pedro, 135

San Andrés, 152–153

San Antonio (Texas), 157

San Blas, 157–158, 161–162

San Diego, Jacinta de, 143

San Felipe, 39–40

San Juan de Letrán, College of, 55, 59

San Lorenzo de Real; see Escorial, The

San Luis Potosí, 158–162

San Lúcar, 66

San Martín, Pedro de, 126

San Martín Cueto, Miguel, 149

San Martín Texmelucan, 159

San Mateo, 110–112

San Pablo, 121

San Salvador, 91, 121

Santa Marta, 83, 89

Santiago (Guatemala), 11

Santiago (Tlaltelolco), 9, 96

Santiago, Order of, 19

Santo Domingo (city), 88–89, 91

Santo Domingo, Audiencia of, 3, 101

Santo Domingo, Juan de, 119

Saravia, Eugenio, 132, 137

Sarmientos, Juan, 85

Savoy, Duke of (1574), 46

Segovia, 49

Seguera, Martín, 119

Seneca, Lucius Annaeus, 74

Serdonati, Francesco, 74

Sergent, 112

Serranía de Goleta, 158

Serrano, Manuel, 147

Seville, 5, 11, 20–22, 44, 72, 87, 104, 132, 140

Sierra Gorda, 159–161, 163

Sierra de Jalpa, 159–160, 162

Simojovel, 152, 154

Society of Jesus; see Jesuit Order

Soconusco, 103

Soderini, Piero, 75–76

Solórzano, Carlos Antonio, 152–153

Soto, Francisco de, 11

Soto, Hernando de, 101, 147

Soto Guzmán, Martín de, 135

Sotomayor, García Sarmiento de, Conde de Salvatierra, Viceroy of Peru, 68

Sotomayor, Juan Manuel de, 67–69

Spain, 3, 19, 21, 23, 44–45, 61, 73, 81–82, 84, 88, 90, 96, 102, 108, 123, 126, 131, 135–136, 140–142, 147, 157

Strozzi, Filippo, 110

Strozzi, Giovanni, 71–72

Suárez, Joseph, 150

Suárez, Yllán, 82

Suárez de Caravajal, 102

Suárez de Mendoza, Lorenzo, Conde de Coruña, 59–60, 120–121

Subiça, Juan de, 69

Sultepeque, 158

Tabasco, 64, 104, 155

Tacuba, 39

Tafalla, Juan de, 40

Talavera, 21–22

Tamizey de Larroque, Philippe, 111–112, 115–116

0202 186

Tampico, 63, 157

Tapia, Tomás de, 120

Tarragona, 123–124

Taschereau, Jules Antoine, 115

Tastera, Jacobo de, 100

Taxco, 30

Tecamachalco, 106, 121

Teçistlan, 106

Tecuitlan, 106

Teculutla, 103

Tello, Manuel Antonio, 155

Telmo, Martín, 118

Temascaltepec, 160, 163

Temiño, Alvaro, 19

Tenango, 106

Tenochtitlan, 70

Tenuxtitan; see Mexico

Tepeaca, viii, 96, 117–122

Tepeapulco, 96

Tepetitlan, 106

Ternaux-Compans, Henri, 115

Tetela, 14

Teuxteupam, 106

Texas, 158–161

Texcoco, 14, 16, 96

Tezozomoc, Fernando Alvarado, vii, 70–71

Tilantongo, 106

Tlacotalpan, 148, 155

Tlaltelolco, 96

Tlaquiltenango, 33

Tlatlaquntepeque, 106

Tlaxcala, 29, 44, 52, 96, 103, 117

Toledo, 4, 8, 18–19, 34–36, 49, 53, 76, 116, 132, 135

Toledo Osorio, Fadrique de, Marqués de Villanueva de Valdueza, 124–125

Torres, Catalina de, 81

Torres, Francisco de, 122

Torriga, 132

Totolapa, 22

Toussaint, Manuel, 119

Trujillo, Alonso de, 26

Tucson, 157–158

Tula, 96

Tunez, 8

Turcios, Antonio de, 34–36

Ulloa, Hierónimo de, 41

United States, 161

Ursúa, Pedro de, vii, 106–109

Vaca, Pero, 85

Vaca de Castro, 83, 92

Vagliente, Piero, 72

Valencia, 83, 123–124

Valencia, Martín de, 14

Valladolid, Spain, 3, 9–11, 14, 16–18, 23–24, 28–32, 87–89, 92, 94, 97–99, 102, 109, 149–150

Valladolid (Spain), Audiencia of, 90, 149

Valladolid (Spain), Junta of, 101

Valladolid, Province of, Mexico, 157–162

Valle, Marqués del; see Cortés, Hernán

Vaquieux, Pierre de, 115

Vargas, Vicente, 161

Vargas Caravajal, Diego de, 85

Vayres, Chateau de, 109

Vázquez, Juan, 10

Vázquez, Juan, 120

Vázquez, Melchor, 39

Vázquez de Cearreta, Juan, 119–122

Vázquez de Mercado, Diego, 64

Vázquez de Tapia, Bernardino, viii, 76–78

Vázquez de Tapia, Pedro, 76

Vega Castro Pardo, Damián de, 124

Velasco, Licenciado, 85

Velasco, Luis de (the elder), vii, 28–29, 33–34, 37, 39, 50, 96, 106

Velasco, Luis de (the younger), 63, 94

Velasco, Martín de, 124

Velasco Brizuela, Martín de, 123

Valázquez, 100

Velázquez, Gutierre, 99, 101–102

Velázquez, Juana, 6

Velázquez de Salazar, Juan, 50, 94

Vellerino, Juan, 117–118

Venezuela, 84, 101, 107

Venice, 46, 52

Vera, Antonio de, 142

Veracruz, 64, 66–68, 158–163

Veragua, 85

Vera Paz, 89

Vergara, Juan de, 117–118

Verrazzano, Amerigo da, 78

Verrazzano, Antonio da, 79

Verrazzano, Antonio de Nicholo da, 78

Verrazzano, Bartolomeo da, 79

Verrazzano, Camillo da, 79

Verrazzano, Francesco da, 79

Verrazzano, Giovanni da, vii, 78–79

Verrazzano, Piero da, 78

Verrier, 113

Vespucci, Amerigo, vii, 71–76

Veytia, Mariano, 71

Vicente, Simón, 148

Villafañe, Angel de, 94

Villagómez, Hernando de, 117

Villalobos, Pedro de, 39

Villanueva, Luis de, 39

Villars, Jonyn de, 113

Villa Sánchez, Juan de, 142

Villaseca (Segovia), 49

0203 187

Wagner, Henry Raup, 102

Xalatzingo, 106

Ximénez, Juan, 129–130

Ximultepeque, 14

Xiquipilco, 106

Xochimilco, 96, 106

Ybarreta, Juan de, 23–24, 26

Yellowstone River, 157, 161–162

Yucatán, viii, 64, 89, 94, 104, 118, 122, 155

Zacutula, 160–161

Zacatecas, 39, 157–162

Zacualpan, 160

Zamora (Spain), Bishop of, 5

Zarandona y Balboa, Joseph, 150

Zárate, Juan de, 10–11, 14

Zaragoza, Justo, 147

Zavalegui, Joseph, 155

Zepeda, Manuel de, 154

Zimapan, 161

Zinguiluca, 106

Zumárraga, Juan de, 4–11, 13–14, 18–26

Zúñiga, Juan de, 87

0203 187 0204 0205 0206 0207 0208 0209 0210