Foreign Immigrants in Early Bourbon Mexico, 1700–1760 (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 31))

CAMBRIDGE LATIN AMERICAN STUDIES GENERAL EDITOR MALCOLM DEAS ADVISORY COMMITTEE WERNER BAER MARVIN BERNSTEIN RAFAEL SE...

Author: Charles F. Nunn

95 downloads 1374 Views 3MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

CAMBRIDGE LATIN AMERICAN STUDIES

GENERAL EDITOR MALCOLM DEAS ADVISORY COMMITTEE WERNER BAER MARVIN BERNSTEIN RAFAEL SEGOVIA

31 FOREIGN IMMIGRANTS IN EARLY BOURBON MEXICO, 1700-1760

FOREIGN IMMIGRANTS IN EARLY BOURBON MEXICO 1700-1760 CHARLES F. NUNN

CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS CAMBRIDGE LONDON

NEW YORK

MELBOURNE

Published by the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge GB2 IRP Bentley House, 200 Euston Road, London NWI 2DB 32 East 57th Street, New York, NY 10022, USA 296 Beasonsfield Parade, Middle Park, Melbourne 3206, Australia © Cambridge University Press 1979 First published 1979 Printed in Great Britain by Western Printing Services Ltd, Bristol Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Nunn, Charles F. Foreign immigrants in early Bourbon Mexico, 1700—1760. (Cambridge Latin American studies; 31) Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. Mexico - Foreign population. 2. Mexico Emigration and immigration. 3. Mexico — History — Spanish colony, 1540-1810. I Title. II. Series. F1392.AIN86 3Oi.32'972 78-1159 ISBN o 521 22051 3

To JOHN TATE LANNING gentleman, scholar, and mentor extraordinary

Contents

List of tables and figures Acknowledgements

page vin ix

Introduction i Spies, interlopers, and the famous foreign merchant 2 Entering the viceroyalty: immigrants by accident and by design 3 Religion: the essential requirement 4 Other hurdles to acceptance 5 The burden of wealth Conclusion Appendices A note on names i A partial list of foreigners in New Spain, 17001760 Gross reference to surnames in Appendix I 11 Jesuit foreigners in New Spain, 1700-1760 Gross reference to surnames in Appendix II List of abbreviations and conventions Notes Bibliography Index

Vll

1 11

30

47 70

86 no "9 121

148 152 164 167 169 225 235

Tables and figures

Viceroys of New Spain, 1688-1766 Map of the viceroyalty of New Spain in 1740 The flow of power for early Bourbon Mexico Jesuits in New Spain, 1744-1761

vm

page x xii 7 44

Acknowledgements

It is impossible to list all of the individuals who in one way or another contributed to this study. My father, W. C. Nunn, pointed me toward historical work, and Donald E. Worcester stimulated an interest in Latin America. The late John Tate Lanning, to whom this volume is dedicated, introduced me to the demands of scholarship and gave direction at critical points in the preparation of the original manuscript. John Richard Alden, John Jay TePaske, Harold T. Parker, Joseph Spengler, Peter J. Bakewell, Thomas Brown, Mark A. Burkholder, D. S. Chandler, Lawrence A. Clayton, and the late Robert S. Smith all offered helpful comments. Gene L. Adrian and several other colleagues helped with restructuring some Hispanized names. Archivists, Sr Lie. D. J. Ignacio Rubio Mane former director of the National Archive of Mexico and Sra Da. Rosario Parra Cala director of the Archive of the Indies (Seville), and their able staffs offered invaluable assistance as did librarians at Duke University, the University of Richmond, and the University of Virginia. Carlos M. Ordonez, though going blind, went beyond the call of duty and obtained for me photocopies of letters of naturalization housed at the archive in Simancas. Funds awarded by Duke University and the University of Richmond made the project possible. My wife Barbara provided steady encouragement. Without her support this study might not have been. To all of these and to those who remain unnamed, I owe a sincere debt and a disclaimer that whatever failings survive are entirely my own. Richmond, ig?6

CFN

IX

Viceroys of New Spain, 1688—1766

The names or titles in italics are those by which these viceroys are known in the literature. This custom is followed in the text. Name

Tenure

Gaspar de la Gerda Sandoval Silva y Mendoza, Count of Galve

20 November 1688 to 21 January 1696

Audiencia as executive

21 January 1696 to 27 February 1696

Juan de Ortega Montafiez, Bishop of Michoacan

27 February 1696 to 18 December 1697

Jose Sarmiento Valladares, Count of Moctezuma y de Tula

18 December 1697 to 4 November 1701

Juan de Ortega Montafiez, Archbishop of Mexico

4 November 1701 to 28 December 1702

Francisco Fernandez de la Gueva Enriquez, Duke of Alburquerque

28 December 1702 to 15 January 1711

Fernando de Alencastre Norefia y Silva, Duke of Linares, Marques de Valdefuentes

15 January 1711 to 15 August 1716

Baltasar de Zufiiga y Guzman, Marques de Valero, Duke of Arion

15 August 1716 to 15 October 1722

Juan de Acufia y Manrique, Marques de Casafuerte

15 October 1722 to 17 March 1734

Viceroys of New Spain, 1688-1J66

xi

to l

l August 1740

Juan Antonio de Vizarron y Eguiarreta, Archbishop of Mexico

19 March 1734

Pedro de Castro y Figueroa, Duke of Conquista, Marques de Gracia Real

17 August 1740 to 22 August 1741

Audiencia as executive

22 August 1741 to 3 November 1742

Pedro Cebrian y Agustin, Count of Fuenclara

3 November 1742 to 9 July 1746

Francisco de Giiemes y Horcasitas, Count of Revillagigedo*

9 July 1746 to 9 November 1755

Agustin de Ahumada y Villalon, Marques de Amarillas Audiencia as executive Francisco Cajigal de la Vega, Governor of Cuba Joaquin de Monserrat, Marques de Cruillas

10 November 1755 to 5 February 1760 5 February 1760 to 28 April 1760 28 April 1760 to 6 October 1760 6 October 1760 to 25 August 1766

* This viceroy is usually labeled the first Count of Revillagigedo or simply Revillagigedo I. Revillagigedo II, Juan Vicente de Guemes Pacheco de Padilla y Horcasitas, served as viceroy of New Spain from 17 October 1789 to 12 July 1794.

The viceroyalty of New Spam in 1740 Limits of Audiencias Major provincial limits Frontier Scale 1:5,000,000 Scale of miles

Introduction

A handful of scholars have written about foreigners in other periods or in other parts of the Spanish American empire. A few authorities in dealing with their own topics have also touched on foreigners. Synthesizing these various views and applying them to colonial Mexico in the first half of the eighteenth century would suggest several things. The most important of these inferences are that Spanish law was reasonably effective in excluding foreigners, that there were a few exceptions such as prisoners of war, illicit traders, and Jesuits, but that even then their numbers were small. Since the kings of Spain and their advisers saw aliens as potential threats to imperial, religious, and mercantile security and since the crown legislated accordingly, it might also be assumed that the Spaniards were both xenophobic and intolerant. Reinforcing this view still further, surviving sixteenth-century Protestant and eighteenth-century Enlightenment prejudices about the Inquisition might exaggerate both the zeal of the Holy Office and the bigotry of Spaniards toward outsiders. The laws were strict, but the documents, primarily from the Archive of the Indies (AGI) in Seville and the National Archive of Mexico (AGN) in Mexico City, suggest that the preceding assumptions misconstrue the situation in New Spain between 1700 and 1760. Prisoners of war often stayed to settle after their release, most foreign merchants had nothing to do with smuggling, and Jesuits were not the only foreign churchmen. In addition to all of these, however, still other foreigners entered the viceroyalty as soldiers, sailors, drifters, and fugitives. Most settled and adapted to life as they found it. Protestants accepted Catholicism, single men married, and successful ones sought naturalization. Through it all, Spanish officialdom, including the Holy Office of the Inquisition, followed policies that offered toleration to those who conformed. Most adapted, and the result was that, although the authorities had often ignored or bypassed statutes in order to let

2

Foreign immigrants in early Bourbon Mexico

the newcomers stay, the underlying aims of those same laws became reality as foreign immigrants faded into the society of the viceroyalty. Foreigners did represent a small number of the total population of New Spain, but they comprised some 3 percent of the European born. Though unobtrusive, these foreigners had experiences that provide a significant collective example of how Spanish colonial justice worked. Legal practice stressed precedent rather than code; tolerance was more general than exceptional; and administration was more humane than inefficient. Corruption there was, but the overall picture fails to confirm the Black Legend of a Spanish empire awash in bigotry, sloth, and injustice. Yet fencing with a retreating straw man has its limits; tracing the interplay of law and practice that faced foreigners in early Bourbon Mexico has descriptive value in its own right. Who, after all, were these outsiders? The generally accepted definition of 'foreigner' implies either those born outside the area under discussion (which would make European Spaniards, Filipinos, and Spanish South Americans 'foreigners') or those born outside the empire (which would make Flemings and a number of Italians 'citizens'). Neither of these interpretations will quite suffice to translate extranjero as used with reference to Spanish America in the eighteenth century. The only workable definition is that used by the Spaniards at the time; namely, that a foreigner was anyone (excluding slaves) born outside Spain or the Indies.1 Yet in practice, non-Spanish subjects of the crown, including, among others, Flemings, Sardinians, Neapolitans, and Milanese, found readier acceptance than did foreigners from other nations. Most foreigners were Europeans, a minority were colonial subjects of other powers, and a few came from such places as Persia, Armenia, and India. Still, no one on the following pages has been identified as an alien simply because of a name. To have done so would have risked the inclusion of Spanish- or Indies-born descendants of foreigners and, perhaps, a few Basques and Catalans as well. Names cut the other way too. The scribes wrote what they heard or spelled as their mood dictated. They did a particularly bad job with French surnames. In addition, foreigners Hispanized their names by translating meaning, by adopting similar sounding Spanish names, or occasionally by pulling an alias out of the air. The documents, for example, describe 'Isidro Bebeagua' (Isidor Drinkwater) as being from 'Verdini' (Virginia) in the Kingdom of

Introduction

3

England and a native of the city of 'Guillermo Vergui' (Williamsburg).2 In order to spare the reader such anomalies, an attempt is made on the following pages to put the names of foreigners back into the 'original'. 3 Although other regions of Spanish America, particularly those bordering on the Caribbean, also had foreign visitors and immigrants, this study is concerned with those aliens who had contact with the Viceroyalty of New Spain. Large and complex, with well-developed institutions, diverse peoples, a mature colonial economy, and several large cities, eighteenth-century New Spain was of great significance to the empire. The nature of the country was such that many who came as transients stayed on to settle. The viceroy with his capital at Mexico City was the crown's chief executive officer for a vast domain, including not only colonial Mexico, but also the Philippines, Central America, Spanish islands in the Caribbean, the northern frontier from California to Florida, and at times Venezuela as well.4 Yet because his 'subordinates' in these peripheral areas often corresponded directly with the Royal and Supreme Council of the Indies at the apex of Spain's non-European empire, the viceroy's main responsibility was for the two jurisdictions that almost equally divided the 700,000 or so square miles of colonial Mexico. These two areas, the Audiencias of Mexico and Guadalajara, taken together comprised the region most often referred to as New Spain. Of the approximate total of 3,500,000 persons who lived in New Spain between 1700 and 1760, the Audiencia of Mexico had almost six out of seven.5 In fact, the Kingdom of New Spain, that part of the Audiencia which had given its name to the whole viceroyalty, had the bulk of the people. This spacious and well-populated kingdom covered the extent of the empire of Montezuma but also included Tlaxcala, Michoacan, and certain other regions which were never tributary to the Aztecs. The Audiencia of Mexico also included tiny Tabasco, virtually independent Yucatan, frontier Texas, and the largely pastoral provinces of Coahuila and Nuevo Leon. All but the central-Mexican Kingdom of New Spain had small populations. To the north and west lay the Audiencia of Guadalajara, a jurisdiction as large as its sister but unable to compete in population, wealth, or prestige. Here the Audiencia also included New Vizcaya, California, Sinaloa, New Mexico, and, for judicial matters, Nayarit, Nombre de Dios, and a tiny part of the Kingdom of New Spain.

4


The peoples who inhabited the viceroyalty were a varied lot.6 Their numbers increased from fewer than 3,000,000 in 1700 to almost 3,750,000 in 1760. The increase would doubtless have been more rapid but for the periodic levelings caused by famine, disease, and occasional natural disaster. Hard hit by these calamities, the Indians continued their decline as a percentage of the population, a trend which had started with the coming of the Spaniards. Though they had begun a slow absolute recovery by the midseventeenth century, Indians continued to lose relative ground to the new mixed groups or cast as.7 Of these, the mestizos were the most numerous. Interracial unions also served to dilute the blood of pure blacks. Negroes and their identifiable descendants, the pardos, remained numerically important in some of the humid coastal and lowland regions of New Spain, but they were almost insignificant in the central highlands where Indians and mestizos predominated. In the 1740s the population of southern Mexico was still roughly 90 percent indigenous, but for the viceroyalty as a whole, Indians accounted for about 60 percent of the total. The other 40 percent was divided rather unevenly among castas, whites, and blacks. A few Filipinos concentrated in Acapulco and Mexico City.8 Whites, rapidly increasing in the eighteenth century, also preferred cities. In 1742 there were about 450,000 of these persons in New Spain. Most were native born, but some 29,000 were Europeans. Probably no more than 15 percent of these newcomers were women who had accompanied their husbands, fathers, or employers to the New World. About 3 percent of the immigrants were foreigners. Since Indians and castas provided the peasant agricultural base of society, aliens, like whites generally, tried to find slots in the small middle and upper groups. Some succeeded; others failed. Stratified by class, color, and even culture, New Spain was in some ways a rich country. Silver mines, mostly in the north and west, provided the most valuable export, but chocolate, sugar, vanilla, cochineal, and other exotic products also earned income for the viceroyalty. Ranches in the north helped feed the miners and sent hides, wool, and other products to markets both within and outside the country. The textile workshops (obrajes) of New Spain sent cotton and woolen fabrics as far away as Peru. The sleepy Pacific port of Acapulco tied colonial Mexico to Manila and thus to Asian sources of luxury goods for re-export to Europe and South America. Though twice as large as Acapulco, Vera-

Introduction

5

cruz, the main port of the viceroyalty, had only 8,000 persons in 1740. Yet the interior supported a number of true urban centers, the grandest of which was Mexico City. Originally built by the Aztecs on an island in the west of the once huge Lake Texcoco, the city still faced water on the east and south.9 The government had undertaken several projects to control the waters of the lakes, but the immensity of the task and the huge and rising costs militated against an easy solution.10 The city itself spread out in the form of a square on soft mucky ground and circumscribed an area of about eighteen square miles.11 The central district, called La Traza, contained the government offices and finest buildings. Most of the white residents lived in this threesquare-mile zone that centered on the Plaza Mayor, the great square. Well-built structures and beautiful churches dotted the city with opulence. There were eighty-four chapels and almost fifty rich conventos. These convents were not mere monasteries, for the Spanish kings had forbidden contemplative orders of monks to go to the New World. Only working orders like the Jesuits, Augustinians, Franciscans, Dominicans, and others, supplemented by nuns, might function in the Indies. Some of the orders provided direct services to the populace by operating hospitals, schools, and public baths. The convents shared the city with a major university, with government offices, with the quarters of the Inquisition and the guilds, with fine homes, and with meaner structures filled with every variety of humanity. The great unfinished cathedral stood next to the viceregal palace on the Plaza Mayor.12 Other plazas and public promenades set with fountains added freshness to the city. The north-south and east-west streets were broad by the standards of the day, some as wide as 'ten lances'.13 At night lanterns lit the streets until 10.00 p.m. The law required each place of business to light such a device, and the city government maintained its own in areas where there were few shops. Giovanni Francesco Gemelli Careri, a Neapolitan who visited Mexico City in 1697, found it to be physically impressive, saying that it competed with the 'finest' in his native Italy.14 Striking to see, Mexico City was by far the largest city in North America.15 In 1700, nearly 100,000 persons lived there. In the immediate vicinity, there were perhaps that many again, and Gemelli Careri noted that everywhere the number was increasing.16 Slightly over 50 percent were Spaniards, 8 to 9 percent Indians, and the rest mestizos, blacks, and mulattoes.17 By the end

6


of the century, whites outnumbered Indians in the valley by two to one. Incomplete data, surviving from the censuses of 1689 and 1753, indicate that the bulk of the whites were native born. Of those who were not, the vast majority were peninsular Spaniards, but, significantly, almost 4 percent of the Europeans were foreigners in 1689. The figure was just under 3 percent in 1753. Since they were not supposed to be there at all, it seems reasonable to assume that the percentage of aliens in each case was actually higher and that some of the foreigners found ways to avoid the census takers just as did 20 to 30 percent of the rest of the population of Mexico City. The climate of the Valley of Mexico was much like that of Spain itself.18 An altitude of some 7,400 feet that produced cool nights, warm days, clear air, and blue skies mitigated some otherwise unhealthy conditions. Packs of stray, ownerless dogs abounded in the city, so many that when the government ordered the guardia to deplete the numbers of these pests in 1748, the constables killed almost 6,ooo.19 The canals that entered the city from several directions, and over which Indians ferried agricultural products, also served as disposal points for the wastes of the populace and resident animals. During the rainy season, these canals sometimes flooded and deposited their disease-laden contents throughout the city, while in the dry season, they added their dust to that which blew in from a rocky volcanic wasteland, the Pedrigal, located a few miles to the south.20 In spite of these drawbacks, one of the canals doubled as a recreation spot. This was the canal of Jamaica that cut south from the city and east of the Pedrigal to the village of Ixtacalco. Dressing themselves after the most current fashion, some of the more prosperous members of the community boarded small flower-covered barges and spent leisurely Sunday afternoons floating down the canal and listening to the musicians who accompanied them. On a normal day, the government began work at eight o'clock in the summer and nine o'clock in the winter, but with the rising of the sun the streets had already begun to bustle with priests and religious, with vendors of bread, milk, chocolate, meat, and other necessities, with servants, merchants, and soldiers going about their tasks or heading for some destination, and with beggars and minstrels wandering about with little or no purpose except, perhaps, survival.21 All colors, classes, and professions went to the markets. There were several of these in the city, offering thou-

Introduction

7

sands of items from blankets and shoes to flowers and songbirds, but the central market took place in the Plaza Mayor. Gemelli Careri noted that the city's almost 4,000 vagabonds spent their days here, sleeping where they could at night. The market place shone with contrasting colors and reeked of foul smells. Excrement and garbage littered the ground, for men and women alike relieved themselves when and where the need arose. No matter what they were selling, the Indians decorated their little stalls with flowers and spread their wares on large leaves. In addition to the markets, the city had a number of specialty shops, each type tending to cluster together and giving their product names to many of the streets. With all its markets and merchandise, the city made it possible, said Gemelli, for a man * to live like a gentleman for no more than half a peso a day'.22

The flow of power for early Bourbon Mexico (Solid lines denote a downward flow of power and an upward movement of appeals. Dotted lines symbolize shared authority, with relative height indicating greater or lesser power and importance.)

Although a center for commerce and population, Mexico City was first and foremost the capital of a great colony. The viceroy headed the government and served many functions. He was chief executive, vice-patron of the Church, first tax collector, chief justice, and as captain general, commander of all of the military forces in the country. He shared his civil powers with the audiencia, his patronage with the archbishop, his investigative and tax

8


collecting responsibilities with numerous agencies and courts, but his military command was his own.23 The Audiencia of Mexico, a supreme court and viceregal council of one criminal and two civil chambers, advised the viceroy on policy matters and decided important cases. Besides his own archdiocese, the archbishop had nine suffragan bishoprics. Four of these, Guatemala, Honduras, Chiapas, and Nicaragua, were beyond the effective jurisdiction of the viceroy. The others, Puebla, Michoacan, Oaxaca, Guadalajara, Yucatan, and New Vizcaya, lay within the confines of the viceroyalty. The Protomedicato, made up of three prominent doctors, regulated the practice of medicine in the colony. The largely independent Holy Office of the Inquisition met in the 'sumptuous' Imperial Convento de Santo Domingo and stood ready to protect the faith. Two judges and the fiscal or crown attorney, all called inquisitors, made up the tribunal of this important social court. Other government tribunals dealt with matters of the treasury and the royal monopolies of mercury, playing cards, alcoholic drinks, sealed paper, tanning agents, gunpowder, copper, alum, cock fights, and mountain snow used in the preparation of a kind of ice cream. Subject to the viceroy and the audiencia, the city had its own government.24 Called the Ayuntamiento and headed by a council, in the same way as analogous municipal governments throughout the Spanish world, it looked after the general welfare of the city and occasionally provided bullfights for the citizens. Under the Ayuntamiento were the alcaldes ordinarios or magistrates. These men each had their own jurisdictions where they judged and sentenced in minor civil and criminal cases. More important cases might go directly to the audiencia. The guilds policed their own members and sometimes provided a kind of social security for them. They often sponsored charitable acts, fiestas, and bullfights. They also maintained a militia, in case the city should need one. The most important guild in Mexico City was the consulado, made up of the more powerful merchants. Their tribunal met in the viceregal palace and aided the government in collecting customs duties and protecting the monopolistic trading system. Until late in the century, this was the only consulado in New Spain. Not even Guadalajara had such a body. As the second capital of the viceroyalty, however, it did have its own audiencia, of which none of the other major cities in the country could boast.25 This court was smaller than the one in Mexico City, and even

Introduction

9

though it had its own president, or presiding officer, it was still subject to the viceroy. Located some 200 miles west and a little to the north of Mexico City, Guadalajara had a temperate climate, sturdy buildings and regular streets. In 1742 Guadalajara had a population of some 76,000 persons. Of the other bishoprics, Valladolid (Morelia), about 160 miles southeast of Guadalajara, had a population of fewer than 25,000 persons. Merida, with some 7,000 inhabitants, was stuck away in the interior of Yucatan. Antequera de Oaxaca, 240 miles southeast of Mexico City with 34,000 Spaniards and mestizos, was one of the more important cities of the viceroyalty. Durango, 480 miles northwest from the capital, had a population of 20,000, but the city remained little more than a focus for the scattered mines, ranches, and missions of the northern frontier. Queretaro, San Luis Potosi, and Zacatecas had no bishops, but they were still important cities in eighteenthcentury New Spain. The great city of Puebla lay between Mexico City and Veracruz. On his way back to Europe, Gemelli Careri passed through Puebla and described it as a city almost as large as the capital, but cleaner and quieter. Unlike most other travelers, Gemelli Careri had arrived in New Spain via Acapulco. It was January 1697 when he stepped off the boat in Mexico.26 Leaving home some five years earlier and financing his travels through buying and selling as he went, Gemelli had crossed the Mediterranean, and traveled through North Africa, Asia Minor, India, and the Philippines where he took passage for Acapulco. There obtaining a 'passport' from the cooperative governor, Gemelli made friends rapidly. He was a non-Spanish subject of the crown and thus found readier acceptance than would a foreigner from another nation. But he was also an educated man and a world traveler whose entertaining company must have been appreciated by those whom he encountered in New Spain. In Mexico City he even met Viceroy Sarmiento, the Count of Moctezuma. On arriving in Veracruz, his point of departure, Gemelli Careri went the next morning to pay his respects to the local governor.27 The traveler had to wait some time to find a ship to take him to Europe, and he amused himself by hunting in coastal river valleys. Always the diplomat, Gemelli several times treated the governor to venison and fowl. When the ships finally arrived, this friendship proved valuable, for the governor helped Gemelli to obtain passage and, at the same time, to avoid the royal customs.

io


Finally, after a voyage that took him to Spain with a stop first in Havana, Gemelli Careri arrived home in Naples. He wasted no time in publishing an account of his travels. The Italian devoted a lengthy part of his Giro intorno al Mondo to New Spain.28 The book first appeared in 1700 and went through several printings. Gemelli had added another volume to the already considerable body of literature about New Spain. Tales about the wealth and wonder of this land had been floating around Europe since French corsairs had captured the first treasure ship that Cortes sent to Charles V in 1519. Accounts told by sailors, priests, merchants, and travelers (including Gemelli Careri) may have inspired some Europeans to go and see for themselves. These aliens and those who arrived by chance faced several obstacles to entry and, if they decided to stay, to settlement. But before tracing foreigners over the hurdles to acceptance, it will be necessary to examine the official attitudes of the government and the threats that foreigners, as a group, represented to the interests of the crown. The interpretation of the resulting laws, in turn, was the opening through which foreigners entered New Spain and settled.

CHAPTER I

Spies, interlopers, and the famous foreign merchant 4

That no foreigner or excluded person be allowed to trade in the Indies, or go to them.'

So said the Laws of the Indies in 1681.1 Yet the Catholic Kings had said it much earlier. The instructions of Ferdinand and Isabella to their governor in Hispaniola in 1501, less than a decade after the discovery, forbade him to permit foreigners, Moors, Jews, or non-reconciled heretics to remain in America.2 Even after the publication of the Laws, the kings of Spain frequently and regularly repeated the dictum of their ancestors against foreigners being in the Indies. A cedula of Ferdinand VI issued in 1750 recognized the antiquity and importance of this position.3 In this decree the king said, 'Since the conquest of the Indies it has always been one of the primary principles of their governance and protection that foreigners be forbidden to go there or reside there.' Ferdinand threatened his colonial officials with disciplinary action should they be remiss in rounding up and sending to Spain any foreigners within their jurisdictions. The constant repetition of this theme by all the Spanish monarchs until after their American colonies achieved independence suggests at the very least that foreigners were constantly trying to enter the forbidden Spanish American empire, and that the kings wanted all of their officials to remain vigilant. Yet the kings and their advisers for colonial affairs, the minister and Council of the Indies, were not irrational xenophobes.4 These top officials and their subordinates in the field all realized that exceptions would be made. But they demanded through repeated cedulas that whatever dispensations might be called for in individual cases, they should be made by the king and the Council of the Indies. It was a matter of royal authority, centralization of power, and imperial finance. The various cedulas aimed at foreigners emphasize different 11

12


things, yet a pattern of central concerns soon emerges. Kings and royal councilors, from the time of Ferdinand and Isabella onward, considered foreigners in the Indies a threat to religious purity, imperial defense, and mercantile exclusion. Religion was indeed a prerequisite for acceptance in the Hispanic world from the time of the Reconquest, and was the bond on which the Catholic Kings had tried to build a common Spanish nationality among the distinct Christian peoples of the Iberian peninsula.5 But while heretics might undermine the social fabric of the empire, royal fears of foreign conquest led to concern with imperial security and monopoly mercantilism. The territorial dangers seemed most threatening in time of war, and between 1700 and 1760 Spain had few long respites of peace. Even these were times of caution and preparation for the next struggle. The year 1700 was an ominous one for the whole Spanish empire. The last of the Hapsburgs was preparing to die. At stake was a domain stretching from Italy to the Philippines and from Texas to Tierra del Fuego. Charles II had no heir, and the French and Austrian dynasties maneuvered to inherit the power of Castile. After the death of the Bavarian candidate, Charles named Philip of Anjou, grandson of Louis XIV, as his successor and promptly expired. Catalonia pronounced for the Austrian claimant; England, Holland, and Austria also refused to accept the decision of the dead king, and Portugal, lured by promises of territory, soon joined the alliance against Spain. Even with the help of a powerful France, it was far from certain whether Philip could hold his vast, newly acquired empire together. Concerned with all his possessions, the new king replaced the viceroy in New Spain, the Count of Moctezuma, for not making sufficiently diligent defense preparations and ordered the immediate improvement of defenses at Veracruz.6 The Spaniards knew that two enemy fleets were in American waters, and consequently the new viceroy, Juan de Ortega, Archbishop of Mexico, got carte blanche to take whatever measures he felt might be necessary.7 Royal fear of foreign designs on the American domain persisted throughout the War of Spanish Succession and resurfaced with every subsequent conflict or threatened conflict during the century.8 For example, Philip V in 1718 warned Viceroy Valero that a state of war existed with England, and ordered him to prepare for possible action by that power.9 The following year a cedula told the viceroy to beware of a French fleet active in the New


13

World because it had already seized Pensacola. That struggle ended in 1720. A year before renewed fighting with Britain and France broke out in 1727, Philip warned Viceroy Casafuerte to be on guard against potential English attacks in the Indies.11 The threat lasted until peace came in 1729. The War of Polish Succession (1733-1738) in which Spain allied with France presented no overt danger to the American empire because Austria, the enemy, had no bases or fleets in the New World. Yet before it ended, tensions were brewing with the British over Georgia and over trading rights in Spanish America. In April 1738, Spanish strategists suspected that the sailing of an English squadron from Plymouth meant that an attack on the Indies could be expected. Philip V warned the viceroy, Archbishop Vizarron, to be prepared.12 In August of the following year, the king's minister, Don Joseph de la Quintana, informed the archbishop that negotiations with the British had broken down and that Admiral Edward Vernon had sailed for American waters.13 Subsequently Vernon sacked Portobello (1739) and later returned with a British expedition to invest Cartagena (1741). With declared war under way, these actions raised royal fears to a fever pitch. Philip and his minister sent repeated demands for the defense of the American dominions with special attention to Veracruz, which spies indicated might be the next British objective.14 With Vernon checked at Cartagena and Santiago de Cuba and with his forces much reduced by disease and Spanish bullets, the threat passed. Yet Philip and his son Ferdinand VI (1746-1759) remained worried until peace came in 1748. Thereafter Spain avoided international hostilities until Charles III (1759-1788) entered the Seven Years War in 1762. He lost Florida and gained Louisiana. In each of these wars, Spanish officials wrestled with a problem quite similar to overt attack and invasion. This matter involved foreign enclaves on the unsettled fringes of New Spain and northern South America. Attempts by other powers to establish or to enlarge such enclaves were as likely to occur in peace as during war. And since Madrid considered the territories in question 'Spanish', no formal declaration of hostilities was necessary to deal directly with such encroachments. One area contested from the seventeenth century to the American Revolution was the Laguna de Terminos region of present-day Campeche. The tropical forests near the Laguna contained significant stands of dyewoods valued by Europeans for use in textile manufacture. And it

14


was to obtain these trees that Englishmen, mainly from Jamaica, went to the otherwise unsettled bay area. Although the Spaniards made futile attempts to expel these interlopers permanently in the seventeenth century, the English presence still rankled at the outbreak of the War of Spanish Succession. The governor of Yucatan, Martin de Ursua, had fought several engagements with the dyewood cutters but lacked the power to drive them out. A royal cedula ordered the Duke of Alburquerque, who had replaced Archbishop Ortega as viceroy in New Spain, to support Ursua with everything he might need 'to totally exterminate the English from the Laguna and Campeche5, including use of the Caribbean fleet, the Armada de Barlovento.15 English attempts in 1703 to expand their beachhead met with countermoves and attacks by subordinates of Governor Ursua in Tabasco. The Spaniards took a few prisoners, but the English remained strong in the Laguna area.16 A major attack by the acting governor of Yucatan, Alvaro de Ruiaguda, in 1704 netted 130 English prisoners, some black slaves, and several enemy vessels.17 The king authorized the sale of captured English property, including the slaves, to help pay the costs of the expedition and ordered the prisoners to be taken to Veracruz. Subsequently the Spaniards considered fortifying the Laguna but decided that was impractical.18 They had to repeat their action of 1704 several times during the century before the War of the American Revolution when Viceroy Martin de Mayorga's expedition finally ended the British threat to Campeche.19 Worrisome as foreign designs on Campeche were to the kings of Spain, other areas even further from the viceregal capital also caused great concern. Such was the case with Belice on the southeast of the Yucatan peninsula and also with the whole northern frontier along the Gulf shore and in Texas. Although the Spaniards mounted numerous attacks on the English in Belice in the eighteenth century and succeeded several times in almost eliminating foreign presence there, Britain held on and ultimately succeeded in carving out what came to be called British Honduras.20 To the north, the English threat to Florida from the late seventeenth century increased markedly after the official establishment of Georgia in 1732. Florida passed to Britain as a result of the Seven Years War and remained a possession of that country until Spain recovered it in the War of the American Revolution. The French in Louisiana posed threats to West Florida and

Spies, interlopers, and the famous foreign merchant

15

Texas until their eviction from North America in 1763. Even during the War of Spanish Succession when Spain and France were allies, both countries engaged in covert activities against each other on the Gulf coast.21 Spanish officials at first dealt cautiously with their French allies while the reverse was not the case. The French took advantage of the uncertainty of the period shortly before the war to establish Biloxi (1699), their first Gulf coast settlement, and in 1710 they moved settlers to the more healthful Mobile. Even before the establishment of New Orleans in 1718, French traders and voyageurs had established contacts with tribes in Texas. The activities of these adventurers and those who came after them stimulated Spanish efforts to strengthen their own position in the area. The new presidios and missions established sovereignty for Spain, but the settlers continued to trade clandestinely with the French from Louisiana. By 1750 Frenchmen regularly traded as far west as Santa Fe and Taos.22 The most important and celebrated of the early incursions was sparked off in 1711 by a Spanish Franciscan, Francisco Hidalgo, who wrote to the French in Louisiana offering to sell livestock from his Texas mission.23 Responding in September 1713, Antoine de la Mothe-Cadillac, French governor at Fort St Louis, authorized Louis de Jusseraud, Seigneur de St Denis, an experienced voyageur, to take an expedition of twenty-four other Canadians and assorted Indians into Texas 'to find the mission and obtain livestock'. St Denis and his party left Mobile in the fall of 1713.24 They proceeded to Natchitoches and then overland into Texas. Moving into the Nacogdoches area, St Denis found Father Hidalgo living among the Tejas. Since there was no hostile Spanish reaction and since the Tejas were friendly, St Denis sent the bulk of his followers home, exceeded his written instructions, and pushed on with three other Frenchmen and an escort of Tejas. After the party had bested a group of hostile nomads near the San Marcos River, St Denis felt that the worst part of his journey was over. He sent the Tejas home and continued on to the Spanish presidio of San Juan Bautista on the Rio Grande, where, in August 1714, St Denis and his companions were taken into £ custody5 by Captain Diego Ramon. They were guests of Ramon until the spring of 1715. The detention was rather casual since St Denis married one of Ramon's nieces.25 Sent to explain his incursion to suspicious officials in Mexico City in June 1715, St Denis offered his services as a frontiersman and interpreter of

16


Indian languages to the Spaniards. Released from custody, he returned to Mobile, gathered his possessions, and brought them back to New Spain. Viceroy Valero, citing his fear of illicit commerce, had the Frenchman arrested. But an investigation showed no wrongdoing, and again because of his possible usefulness, he was freed.26 Valero should have kept St Denis in Mexico City because the Frenchman had had enough of the Spaniards. Feigning loyalty, St Denis was allowed to go to Texas with the expedition of Captain Domingo Ramon in 1716-1717.27 Already worried by the implications of the French incursion of 1714, Philip V appointed a governor for Texas, provided a small complement of soldiers for him, ordered construction of a mission at San Antonio, and directed the viceroy to establish a string of military outposts.28 After these presidios began functioning, Spanish forces, the king's advisers believed, would be sufficient to capture any small bands of Frenchmen who slipped in either by land or by sea. Such persons would be interned in New Spain.29 But it was almost too late. St Denis had made his way back to Louisiana by 1719 and become the French commander at Natchitoches. Later that year when hostilities broke out on the northern frontier, he succeeded in occupying East Texas.80 A Spanish expedition that regained the region with a superior show of force in 1721-1722 carried out the order of 1718 to establish new missions, presidios, and settlements.31 Antagonisms flared into war again (1727-1729) with indecisive results in the Gulf region, but after 1733 Spain and France were allies under the terms of the Family Compact. That the Bourbons and the Borbones were allies, however, does not mean that all was sweetness and light between them. St Denis remained the French commander on the frontier into the 1740s. He kept up the pressure by establishing settlements nearer and nearer to the Texas missions and presidios. The Spaniards remembered the lesson he had taught them about small 'harmless' incursions. In 1747 Ferdinand VI ordered the first Count of Revillagigedo, the viceroy of New Spain, to attack and destroy new French settlements on the north Gulf coast. Persons captured in the raids were to receive treatment 'as pirates'.82 Yet Ferdinand favored diplomacy and endeavored to win his goals through craft rather than arms. In 1752 he told Revillagigedo to continue resisting the request of the governor of Louisiana, Pierre Francois de Rigaud, for a mutual exchange of


17

deserters. The Spaniards had already decided to consider all Frenchmen apprehended in Texas to be 'deserters' and to prevent their return to French territory.34 Royal councilors had news that the French were building up their forces in Louisiana and promised the viceroy that arms were on their way to him in order to maintain a balance. Ferdinand believed that the 'deserters' whom Rigaud was so anxious to get back were in reality spies sent out to reconnoiter Spanish defenses in Texas, and that to return them to Louisiana would play into the hands of the French. The king was stalling for time when he ordered Revillagigedo to tell Rigaud that there could be no exchange of prisoners yet because authorization for it had still not arrived from Spain. Ferdinand could thus hide his true intentions behind the mythical inefficiency of the Spanish bureaucracy. The prisoners in the meantime would remain safely in workshops (obrajes) and castle prisons in New Spain where, unlike St Denis, their knowledge of Texas could do no harm to the security of the territory. For the time being, Ferdinand instructed Viceroy Revillagigedo to continue negotiations to recover outposts on the Louisiana border without resort to force. The king desired no European war and approved the prudence exhibited by his able viceroy in the past. Revillagigedo left New Spain in 1755, ^ u t before departing he dictated some advice to his successor, the Marques de las Amarillas.33 In a general discussion of the problems of foreign commerce, Revillagigedo said illegal trade along the interior frontiers was the most dangerous and difficult to control. The French from Louisiana were the culprits and the danger was imperial security as it had been with the 'deserters' in 1752. In 1756 Amarillas reported to his sovereign that in 1754 the governor of Texas, Jacinto de Barrios y Jauregui, had captured three Frenchmen along with two of their blacks at the mouth of the Trinity River.86 These interlopers were the advance party for fifty families of settlers waiting in New Orleans. Barrios had sent the five to jails in Mexico City from whence the viceroy was now sending the survivors to Spain. The one deceased, a man named Blanpain, had died in Mexico City. Viceroy Amarillas saw an obvious threat in continued French attempts to settle near Galveston Bay and requested royal approval for the expenditure necessary to establish a Spanish settlement of fifty families along with thirty soldiers in the area. It went without question that the Spaniards should politely deny the recent French request to hunt buffalo in East Texas.

18


Hunting, trading, exploring - the French tried every avenue to penetrate Texas. At the end of 1757, Viceroy Amarillas sent a French cleric, Jacques Didier, to Spain under guard.37 Governor Barrios of Texas had apprehended the priest who apparently was trying to evangelize the Indians of the region. The Spaniards always encouraged conversion of Indians to Catholicism, but the loyalty of the missionaries to the crown was of great importance. In May 1758, Amarillas received a royal order to cease sending to Spain Frenchmen captured on the frontiers.38 In this order the minister of the Indies, Friar Julian de Arriaga, explained that because of the activities of the French ambassador in Spain it was most difficult to keep these interlopers from returning to France. Arriaga instructed Amarillas to ship future prisoners of this sort to Peru. The viceroy in that kingdom would then have the option of sending them to the Juan Fernandez Islands, of Robinson Crusoe fame, or to the uncomfortable presidio of Valdivia in southern Chile. In this way the interlopers would remain out of sight of the French ambassador in Madrid. In September 1758, Amarillas replied that he agreed with exiling captured Frenchmen within the Indies rather than returning them to Europe where their knowledge of Spanish defenses might aid the enemies of the king, but he questioned sending these persons to Peru.39 He pointed out that commerce with Peru was irregular and that captives might learn too much about the defenses of Acapulco if they spent time there waiting for passage to South America. He further cautioned that Peru was a very valuable kingdom and that foreigners sent there would certainly learn something of its weaknesses. Should they ever manage to get home, their knowledge of the region would be invaluable to potential invaders. Amarillas offered an acceptable solution: send future captives to the Philippines. No French ambassador could get them released from there or even find out that there were Frenchmen in that far-away province. Furthermore, the chances of such persons getting home on their own were very remote. The viceroy might have added that the voyage from Acapulco to Manila was probably the most arduous then traveled by mariners from any country and that the mortality of a certain number of men who made each trip could be expected as a matter of course. Ferdinand and his minister were delighted with the viceroy's suggestion and ordered that it be put into effect from then onward.40 All the kings of Spain from the sixteenth century to the early


19

nineteenth century worried about the economic security of their empire almost as much as they did about its territorial integrity. Again the problem came from foreigners, in this instance from their attempts to penetrate the Spanish trade monopoly with the Indies. Ferdinand and Isabella had originally intended the forerunner of the Gasa de Contratacion, or House of Trade, to function as a royal trading company with all profits from commerce with the new domains flowing directly to the crown.41 It soon became manifest, however, that the volume of trade would be too great for the state to operate by itself. Thus it was that the Casa became a licensing and regulatory agency overseeing a monopoly that benefited mainly the crown and its mercantile supporters in Andalusia, the Consulado (Merchant's Guild) of Seville. With the growth of Spanish settlement in the New World, the volume of trade with Europe, funneled through Seville and later Cadiz, increased substantially. With fluctuations in the sixteenth century, this trade continued its upward climb until the seventeenth century. About 1620 the volume weakened considerably and was accompanied by severe depression in Spain and a somewhat less drastic slowing of economic activity in New Spain. The reasons for the decline are controversial. With direct contacts between Spain and her colonies threatened or interrupted by a continuous state of war (16211659), foreign-based merchants moved to supply a portion of the remaining Mexican market and to buy Mexican exports.42 The main threats came from the new maritime powers of the seventeenth century, Holland and England, as well as from the traditional rival, France. These three and Denmark all established themselves on Caribbean islands in the course of the century. From these bases, their commercial vessels, not to mention their corsairs, privateers, and naval squadrons, threatened to disrupt the old mercantile system which had been so meticulously developed by the Spaniards. Illicit commerce between the interlopers and Spanish America grew apace, especially after the economic recovery which dates, at least for New Spain, from about 1670. The artificial restriction of trade to a few favored hands encouraged evasion, and by 1700 smuggling had reached a high point. It remained a problem in both war and peace throughout the eighteenth century. The kings, as had their predecessors in previous generations, continued to believe that maintaining the monopoly was related

20


directly to the defense of their realm, the continuance of their revenues, the protection of their sources of credit in Spain, and the preservation, even, of traditional Hispanic virtues. Foreign spies threatened security; smugglers paid no taxes; interlopers would lend none of their profits to the crown; heretics could spread unfortunate doubts in an innocent population; and undesirables might even undermine social stability. All of these were genuine worries in Madrid. The severity of penalties reflected this grave degree of concern. The Laws of the Indies, true to its sixteenth-century origins, often equated foreigners with pirates.43 Accordingly, commanders of armadas and fleets44 were to capture any foreign or pirate vessel encountered on the way to the Indies. The culprits would meet summary execution, and the members of the fleet would divide the spoils. Similarly, port governors were to seize foreign vessels that wandered into their jurisdictions, sequestering all goods on board.45 The profit went to the royal treasury, unless there was an informer, who received one-fourth of the proceeds as a reward and as an incentive for others to follow his example. The Laws imposed the seizure of goods and, possibly, the death sentence on anyone caught dealing with foreigners in the Indies.46 This double-edged prohibition supposedly included all trade with aliens, even down to the ransoming of prisoners of war. The law decreed the customary treatment for the convicted man's property. One-third was to go to the treasury, one-third to the sentencing judge, and one-third to the informer. Failure to enforce this statute could cost an official his job. It probably never did. All of these were old regulations which the maritime officials probably never vigorously enforced against foreigners in the eighteenth century, even in time of war. Although Spanish statutes almost always contained the words 'without exception', in practice enforcement was selective. The same was true of the choice of which statute or precedent to apply in a given case. The Spaniards preserved often contradictory laws and dispositions in order to be able to cloak even arbitrary governmental decisions in the mantle of legality. There was no formal police force,47 and it is possible that the small or nonexistent salaries of many of the functionaries charged with the day-to-day enforcement of the law meant that the king expected his retainers occasionally to ignore his regulations so that they could feed their families.48


21

The officials could not be everywhere at once, and even when violations came to their attention, there might be extenuating circumstances. Even the Laws of the Indies recognized exceptions.49 Foreigners licensed by officials in Spain to trade in the New World caused enforcement problems, as did privateers, whose 'prizes' might be nothing more than illicit goods.50 Smugglers routinely took advantage of the chaotic conditions of wartime to trade with enemy territory. Colonials, as well as Europeans, engaged in these practices, much to the chagrin of their home governments. In addition, Spanish ships carried large quantities of foreign goods. There was a sizeable foreign community in Andalusia, and Spanish merchants themselves regularly shipped foreign-made merchandise from Seville and Cadiz. Yet Spanish home-officials seemed to believe, and Andalusian guild merchants consistently charged, that foreign residents of the Indies were at the root of most illicit commerce in the New World. The vulnerability of these people may also have had something to do with the attention they received. For example, in 1700 Charles II ordered Viceroy Moctezuma in New Spain to proceed quietly against English, Dutch, and German merchants operating in the viceroyalty.51 The alcaldes del crimen were to conduct their investigations secretly and had orders to seize the goods and effects of these merchants and of other citizens of the three enemy nations. The authorities in New Spain, however, waited four years before they moved against the enemy aliens, and then they did so without hysteria. Perhaps they chose this course of action in the hope that the war would soon end and that they could avoid lengthy litigation. The War of the Spanish Succession, however, lasted until 1713 and provided ample opportunity and necessity for the enforcement of restrictions on trade with foreigners. In 1703, Philip V expressed his pleasure with a Spanish fleet that had captured forty-two Englishmen who were on the way to ' trade' in Tabasco.52 Viceroy Alburquerque got instructions to send another expedition to ferret out other interlopers who might be there. The governor of Veracruz kept those prisoners who were already in Spanish hands in the fortress of San Juan de Ulua, but the king permitted the viceroy to farm them out to obrajes if the security was good. Also in 1703, the governor of Cuba reported that a contingent of over two hundred armed Englishmen had sailed from Jamaica in order to introduce goods into New Spain.53 Thus the twin

22


problems of mercantile and territorial security merged in wartime. The distinction between merchantman and naval vessel was not as great as might be supposed, and the difficulty of clearly classifying a ship as one or the other helps explain the merger of territorial and mercantile concerns in the minds of the king and his subordinates. For example, a cedula of 1706 notified the viceroys and west-coast governors in the Americas that a few English ships carrying letters of marque had entered the Pacific and made a nuisance of themselves there.54 Philip V was less concerned about this handful of enemy ships than he was about 'numerous contingents' of French vessels that had pursued the common enemy into these waters. It seems that the real goal of these allies was to enter Spanish Pacific ports and do a little forbidden trading. The commanders in the New World were, therefore, to close their ports to French vessels and 'enforce the law'. Concern with illegal commerce persisted throughout the war and seems to have been directed for the most part against the French who were trying to exploit their alliance with Spain.55 Frenchmen resident in Seville had long been active in the legal trade between Andalusia and the Indies,56 but new groups of their countrymen now attempted to enter the American trade. In addition to the agreement that gave a French company the legal right to introduce slaves to Spanish America, numerous French ships entered Gulf, Caribbean, and Atlantic ports in contravention of existing laws and treaties. But the violations included even the British enemy. A renegade Spaniard named Fernando de Guzman had facilitated this illicit commerce.57 A resident in England during the war, Guzman had begun to supply English merchantmen with forged documents sometime during 1709. These skillful fakes carried the 'signature' of one of the royal ministers or even the king himself. Some of these documents were passports, and others were licenses to trade with the Indies. A loyal agent in England had sent the Council of the Indies one of these false licenses with blank spaces for the name of the ship and her master. Since the Spaniards knew that the Dutch also prepared phony documents for their merchantmen in the Indies, a royal decree of 1713 restated the ancient prohibition against foreign commerce and forbade American officials to admit alien ships no matter what kind of papers they carried. The authorities were to seize any such vessels as well as any suspected of bearing false papers. They were then to send the occupants to Spain, presumably for trial, and to


23

sell the ship and cargo 'to pay the cost of administration'. Complete inventories were to accompany the prisoners to Spain. Foreign attempts to penetrate the monopoly lasted after the signing of the treaties in 1713 and 1714, and for a variety of reasons Philip V continued to issue orders against trade with alien vessels.58 In 1720 a plague swept France, and Madrid ordered Peninsular, Italian, and American ports to be closed to all Frenchmen and French goods.59 Governors were to go so far as to fire on stubborn vessels even though they might claim lack of supplies or some other distress. The fear was real enough but, as the epidemic subsided, the 'concern' for the public welfare outlasted the danger.60 In 1722, Frederick I, king of Sweden, wrote to Philip V offering to help suppress pirates and corsairs in the Indies in exchange for permission to send two ships annually to America and two to the Philippines.61 Philip naturally declined the offer and ordered the viceroys and governors td suppress corsairs and under no circumstances to permit Swedish ships to enter the ports of the Indies. Taking a different tack in 1724, Philip issued a cedula stating his belief that illicit commerce in America could exist only with cooperation from Spaniards.62 The decree specifically blamed the tolerance of colonial officials and ordered their prosecution along with anyone else caught dealing with illicit traders. As in the legislation of the sixteenth century, the penalty was forfeiture of life and goods. The loss of possessions by a man already condemned to death was not superfluous. Confiscation of his wealth would leave his family destitute. Viceroy Casafuerte published the edict in New Spain in the summer of 1724. Royal concern with illicit traders seems actually to have increased after 1730. In that year Philip ordered Viceroy Casafuerte and other officials in the Indies to remain vigilant and to see that all such malefactors suffered the full force of the law.63 The main threat in these years came from English and Dutch vessels.64 These foreigners sailed freely among the Caribbean possessions of their home governments and stopped along unsettled shores or backwater ports in Spanish colonies to meet and trade with their counterparts in illicit commerce. The king augmented his Caribbean fleet and coast guards to deal with the smugglers and ordered his captains to seize all suspicious vessels encountered in Spanish waters. Yet the Spaniards had to walk a diplomatic tightrope, and the king cautioned that no English or Dutch ships be taken on the high seas lest 'we be at war in no time'. Controlled zeal, however,

24


is a difficult thing to achieve, and the crown was still trying in 1738 to stop illicit commerce without giving cause for war.65 It was to no avail, for an incident off the north coast of South America became an English casus belli in 1739. One of the 'excesses' about which Philip had worried thus provided the excuse for the English declaration which began the War of Jenkins' Ear. That struggle soon faded into the continental War of Austrian Succession which erupted in 1740. The treaties came in 1748, and since the Spanish trading system survived, pressure on the monopoly by other powers continued.66 The reasons parliament declared war in 1739 had little to do with the atrocity of Captain Jenkins' Ear but stemmed rather from a desire to acquire Florida and to extend the Asiento agreement. Due to lapse in 1743, the Asiento agreement had been an appendage to the Treaty of Utrecht ending the War of Spanish Succession in 1713. A significant part of the British price for peace, the agreement had seemed to herald the end of whatever effectiveness remained in the old legislation against foreign trade in the Indies. A cedula of 25 March 1713, informed the viceroys in America of the provisions of the Asiento and ordered them to publish a copy of the agreement in order that the subjects and officials of the kingdoms of the Indies might know the situation.67 The document transferred the exclusive privilege of introducing African slaves, previously held by a French company, to the recently chartered (1711) South Sea Company for a period of thirty years. This concession, then, was to run from 1 May 1713 until the same day in 1743. The British would have the right to introduce 4,000 to 4,800 slaves annually into Spanish America. Thus, the concessioners might sell a maximum of 144,000 slaves or, with Spanish government approval, even more during the thirty-year period. The Spaniards guaranteed that the Company would receive thirty pesos in silver for each young, healthy slave whom it delivered. The normal rates of Spanish taxation would apply. If any black died within fifteen days after arrival, the port officials were not to collect the duty on him. In addition to taxes collected in the ports of entry, the treasury was to receive an initial payment of 200,000 pesos from the slave merchants, and, after twenty years, another 20,000 annually for the duration of the agreement. Except for the duties, the Company was to make all payments in Spain.


25

Handling the affairs of the Company in the New World would be its factors. These trade representatives would, of course, be British subjects and could come from anywhere in either the United Kingdom or the British American possessions. The agreement required the factors and the ships' crews who delivered the slaves to 'avoid all scandal5 against religion, because, if they did commit some error, the Spanish officials would treat them as if the offense had occurred in Spain. Four to six factors and their dependents would reside in each of the major port cities of the Indies. The political and military officials were to allow them the same rights to travel and carry on their business in the interior as those exercised by Spaniards. After end of the agreement, the Spaniards were to allow the agents three years to clear up their affairs and to render full accounts to the Council of the Indies. During this final phase, English ships were to have complete freedom to enter the ports in order to remove the effects of the factors. Before they could leave, however, the representatives of the Company needed to clear up all of their debts. During the period of the Asiento, the agreement allowed the agents to operate farms near the ports and to introduce untaxed supplies to support their slaves, but not without checks. The ships might import only those items, including medicine, necessary for the sustenance of the factors, their dependents, and slaves. In what turned out to be the key profit-making provision of the agreement, the ships of the Asiento were allowed to export American goods duty free, but slave ships might sell nothing but slaves. All else was contraband that the authorities were to seize forthwith. The captain of an offending ship had to pay an amount equal to that already seized from his vessel, and the buyers faced stiff penalties as well. The Company might annually employ one ship of not more than five hundred tons to bring commercial goods to America, but this was all.68 Any other goods introduced would be illicit and subject to the law. In case war broke out between Britain and Spain during the period of the Asiento, the agreement provided a year and a half of grace for everything and everyone associated with the Company. During this time the English might embark, together with their goods and possessions, on English ships or Spanish vessels bound for Spain. Neither the authorities nor those of the allies of Spain might interfere with the safe passage of these ships. All of this looked well enough on paper, but the operation of the Asiento

26


agreement threatened to open a new era of problems for the king concerning foreigners in America. The British thought they had a contract; Philip and the Spaniards knew they had a problem. The threat to the monopoly was there and, left unchecked, sovereignty itself might come under a cloud. That, at least, is the way the king and his advisers must have seen it, and they reacted as might be expected under the circumstances. Besides encouraging officials in the Indies to be legalistic, a familiar delaying tactic of unenthusiastic bureaucrats, Philip seized every opportunity to disrupt the continuity of the Company's operations in his dominions. The first of several openings came with the outbreak of new hostilities in 1718. Disregarding the provisions of the Asiento agreement, Philip issued a cedula in September of that year ordering the immediate seizure of all English goods and properties in the Indies with special attention to the South Sea Company and its resident factors.69 The other arrived in Veracruz by packet {aviso) on 31 December, and by 11 January, Don Andres de Liceaga y Zavala, chief, after the viceroy, of the treasury (Real Hacienda) in New Spain, was on the scene to carry out the sequestering of Company goods and papers. Assisting Liceaga in this task were the governor of Veracruz and local officials of the treasury. Paying as much attention to the goods and effects of servant boys as to the really significant sums, Liceaga and the others eventually dug out a considerable amount of money and property, including slaves who were for the most part sold and converted into cash.70 From the three factors in Veracruz - Charles Reade, William Clare, and John Newton, from Asiento ships seized at sea, and from Spanish 'dependents' of the Company in Mexico City, the authorities in New Spain gathered some 152,000 pesos in cash together with goods that eventually sold for an additional 56,000 pesos. The treasury officials sent everything including inventories to Spain as ordered, but with royal permission held back 6 percent of the cash as payment for 'those who had looked after the goods'. With the end of hostilities, the English recovered the bulk of their sequestered wealth, but the 'shrinkage' to the Company must have been significant, even if only the lost interest is taken into account. With the coming of peace and the re-establishment of the Asiento as provided in the most recent treaties, official Spanish resistance once again went back to the legalistic and the covert. Prodded by the merchant guilds (consulados) of Mexico City and


27

Seville, by colonial officials, and by the crown attorney (fiscal) of the Council of the Indies, Philip signed a decree in 1724 which aimed at circumscribing the activities of the factors of the South Sea Company in New Spain.71 Hereafter the port officials at Veracruz were to check carefully the annual merchandise ship of the South Sea Company to make certain that it was not larger than permitted. Laying aside terms of the original agreement, the cedula of 1724 now denied the factors the right to enter the interior of the viceroyalty. Royal advisers were concerned about potential smuggling of untaxed gold and silver and also about the possible threat to the faith that these Britishers might represent. With these dangers in mind, Philip ordered Viceroy Casafuerte to insure that the factors resided in Veracruz rather than Mexico City. The king further directed the viceroys and port governors to interpret £most narrowly and literally' all royal orders concerning the operation of the Asiento. Clearly, Philip had no intention of allowing the agreement to become something more than it already was. The king was prepared to permit two or three factors to go as far into the interior as Mexico City to sell slaves.72 But they must be Catholics and register with the crown attorney. They might sell nothing else. The king could count on the Consulado of Mexico City to help keep watch for abuses by the factors.73 Renewed war in 1727 brought another round of seizures, and officials in New Spain seized all discoverable assets of the Company.74 The amount confiscated this time was much smaller than in 1718-1720. And the minister of the Indies and of finance, Jose Patino, denied attempts by the factors in Veracruz to exercise their treaty rights to leave the viceroyalty. Preliminary acts of peace in 1728 called for the full restoration of everything seized, but Patino cautioned Viceroy Casafuerte to proceed carefully and base restitution on the inventories of the sequestering officials. Subsequent orders to Casafuerte indicated that the English had the right to remove any of their previously embargoed possessions from the viceroyalty and that the status of the Asiento reverted to what it had been before the recent conflict.75 With the signing of the final peace treaty, Patino directed the viceroy to release the Company ship Prince Philip held in Veracruz and to permit it to return to Europe.76 Hearing that the English had seized a Spanish vessel bound from Cadiz to Cartagena, Casafuerte in 1730 again prepared to move against the Company's holdings in his jurisdiction. Patino notified Casafuerte that the king appreciated his

28


viceroy's zeal but ordered him to wait for royal instructions before acting.77 British recovery of property sequestered in the 1727-29 conflict and re-establishment of the Asiento went slowly. In 1731 the British ambassador to Madrid complained, and the king, no doubt prodded by Patifio, dispatched a new series of orders to Gasafuerte telling him to speed up the process.78 The final phase of the Asiento exhibited all of the old problems with the agreement and highlighted some new ones. Concern that the British send only one merchandise ship annually persisted as did attention to the tonnage of this vessel.79 Tensions rose again in 1732, and Gasafuerte seized Company property in New Spain.80 Patifio ordered it to be returned. The English continued efforts to establish the right to move about freely in the viceroyalty, and in 1733 port officials uncovered smuggled merchandise on a slave ship.81 This case in turn directed Spanish attention to the whole question of duty-free imports allowed by treaty for the sustenance of the slaves. There were disputes over prices paid for slaves, over the arrival of ships, and over the personal baggage permitted to new factors of the Company.82 The Spaniards captured an unauthorized slave ship in 1735.83 The bickering over compensation for the seizures of 1718 and 1727 threatened the peace in 1738, and Philip V ordered restitution of everything still unpaid.84 But Vernon sailed the following year and Viceroy-Archbishop Vizarron directed treasury officials to seize Asiento holdings in New Spain.85 Vizarron stipulated that persons who aided the English in secreting anything would themselves be subject to the loss of goods and ten years enforced service in a presidio. The viceroy interned the factors at Toluca, but received orders to send them to Spain. Vizarron complied, thus finally putting an end once and for all to the South Sea Company presence in New Spain.86 The Asiento had never been all that profitable anyway. Though the agreement had permitted the British to introduce as many as 144,000 slaves to Spanish America in a thirty-year period, they actually imported very few. The total brought to Veracruz from 1716 to 1733 w a s o n ty 2 J 2 1 2 - From 1700 to 1820, estimates for the number of slaves imported from all sources range around 20,000, down from the much larger 120,000 for the previous century. The traditional view holds that the greatest returns the Company produced came from the 'annual' permiso ships of general merchandise.87 But between 1713 and 1739, the South Sea Company only made eight such voyages.88 For profits, home-


29

ward-bound slave ships laden with duty-free vanilla, chocolate, cochineal, and sugar were probably better earners, over the troubled life of the agreement, than were the permiso ships. With its veiled threat to sovereignty, the Asiento agreement had been a central worry for the Spaniards during much of the first half of the eighteenth century. Both they and the British had, perhaps, overestimated its importance. True, the official breach in the monopoly lasted for almost thirty years, but smuggling had reached a high point even before the signing of the Treaty of Utrecht. Ships of the South Sea Company brought British subjects to New Sp#in, and several of these persons, including a few Protestants, stayed on to settle. Yet most foreign immigrants came in other ways. By focusing Spanish attention on a relatively small number of aliens, the Asiento agreement may have indirectly allowed other foreigners to enter the viceroyalty unnoticed. Certainly, a number of them did. Spanish reaction to the Asiento agreement highlighted the political, economic, and social objections to the presence of foreigners in the Indies. But Spanish mercantilism recognized that there were other breeds of foreigners besides the undesirable interlopers, smugglers, and heretics. This realization, in turn, partly explains the acceptance offered to numerous foreigners who entered New Spain before, during, and after the life of the Asiento.

CHAPTER 2

Entering the viceroyalty: immigrants by accident and by design Mercantilist legislation went beyond attempts at controlling balances of trade and encouraging shipbuilding. Good mercantilists recognized that people too were important to the economic power of the nation. These theorists held that large populations were good and that individuals, especially skilled, 'useful3 individuals, were a valued national resource. It follows that the same kind of laws that strove to restrict the export of specie also tried to control the movement of people. The legislation of various European states aimed at keeping nationals, particularly skilled, valued nationals, at home while at the same time encouraging useful foreigners to settle. With certain restrictions, the British extended this policy to the New World, while the Spaniards, Portuguese, and French did not. Or so the colonial laws of these powers might seem to suggest.1 Yet Spanish law in Europe complied fully with the mercantilist rationale.2 The Laws of Castile required a royal license for anyone planning to leave Spain 'with his house and family', while foreigners might immigrate freely and receive for a period of years exemption from certain taxes and service obligations. With the exception of some offices from which they were excluded, foreigners in Spain were otherwise equal to the native-born in all legal matters. This attitude remained in the minds of most Spanish administrators from the king downward, and they persisted in applying it to the Indies as well as Castile. Yet because the Spaniards had been the first Europeans in the New World, it had been their good fortune to establish dominion over already settled areas. They had no need to populate great tracts of wilderness and hence, from the beginning, sought to control the quality of immigrants. Persons deemed undesirable for social, political, economic, or religious reasons would be excluded from America, but others could immigrate or, at least, obtain toleration once they had arrived. 30

Entering the viceroyalty

31

Officials on both sides of the Atlantic were charged with keeping undesirables out of the Indies. The Laws of the Indies required that everyone, Spaniards as well as foreigners, obtain a license before going to the New World, though in 1688 the king amended this provision and thereafter allowed indulgence for Spaniards even if they had crossed illegally.3 Foreigners and married Spaniards traveling without their families were still, in most cases, unwelcome in the Indies. The colonial authorities were to keep a special vigil in the ports for such persons and expel any whom they discovered in America without a specific license to be there.4 It behooved the authorities to comply exactly or not at all, because they might require the captain of the vessel that introduced the undesirable to take him back to Europe without charge to the royal treasury. If the port officials failed to discover the culprit before the ship sailed, they would have to pay the bill for the return passage out of their operating budgets or from the proceeds derived from the public auction of the violator's good and effects. Since immigrants often came to make their fortunes, few had significant assets upon arrival. In Spain the Casa de Contratacion kept a full watch on everyone who sailed from the mother country to the Indies. This agency enforced all measures against persons who attempted to go to America without permission, and issued licenses in the king's name for those who met the qualifications of the Laws of the Indies* Spaniards who were single or were taking their families with them needed only to file an application with the Gasa and pay a small fee to obtain a license. Known criminals and persons under suspicion for their own or a family member's heretical religious past could not legally apply. The fleet (flota) of 1699 bound for New Spain carried 321 licensed passengers including not only heads of households but also their families and retainers.6 Among this aggregate of persons were royal appointees on the way to their jobs, priests and religious bound for their posts, merchants and factors out to sell goods, and agents determined to collect debts owed by someone in the Indies. One woman and her servant went without male escort, but females did not usually travel so freely. Joseph Ruiz de Valenzuela, for example, left his wife in a convent for safe-keeping when he sailed on the flota. All legal passengers had obtained the requisite license from the Casa de Contratacion. The accepted procedure was first to prepare a petition and present it to the officials (jueees oficiales) of that agency. The applicant gave his

32


name and city of residence in Andalusia. Curiously, he did not customarily include his place of birth. He declared that with the permission of the Casa he would go to New Spain on the next flota. He explained in detail his reason for going and gave his marital state. He professed to be a good Catholic of an old Christian family 'free of blood taint'. He listed his parents' names and his own age. He then closed the petition by 'begging and pleading that his request be granted'. The justices then affixed a date to the document and perfunctorily declared their intention to grant the license. The final document which the passenger carried with him was written on stamped paper which cost ten maravedis a page. It restated the particulars of the case and carried the assurance that this individual was 'not of those forbidden to go to the Indies'. Only one of those granted a license in 1699, Johann Steinevert, a Jesuit, was a known foreigner, and he did not sail until 1702. Foreigners naturalized in Spain might emigrate to practice a trade or profession, but if they intended to enter commerce, they had to have a special letter of naturalization issued by the Council of the Indies.7 Under normal circumstances a person naturalized in Spain received his grant of citizenship from the Council of Castile. The requirements were less rigorous and the fees were lower.8 Yet it was not absolutely necessary for foreigners to have a letter of naturalization to obtain a legitimate license to go to the Indies.9 For example, special royal permission allowed a Neapolitan, Claudio Giuseppe Marioni, to sail for New Spain in 1750. His status was not that of an immigrant, and the viceroy retained the option of deporting him at any time.10 Official connections helped other foreigners to bend the statutes. Thus in 1756 three French subjects, Joseph Recole, his wife, and Andre Lûsseau, his assistant, all received licenses to sail for New Spain on condition that they go directly to Mexico City.11 Recole was personal chef to Viceroy Amarillas. Even when the Casa was functioning efficiently and without interference, it could not hope completely to control everything and everyone that sailed on the annual fleets. Control became more slack when the flota system ended in 1740, and ships thereafter crossed individually or in small groups to American ports.12 The Casa itself with all its bureaucracy seems to have been lax from time to time in the licenses it issued. Bribery, friendship, and extended family relationships may have opened the door to some foreigners who failed to meet the legal


33

requirements of Spanish naturalization. In addition, the periodic need for seamen sometimes caused officials of the Casa to overlook the law against foreigners in those posts.13 In any event, licenses were always a handy thing for aliens to have. Although not altogether necessary, the proper papers could save a great deal of inconvenience, including, in some cases, expulsion itself. The majority of immigrants, both Spanish and foreign-born, traveled on legal Spanish shipping. Those who did not obtain their papers from the Casa might turn to the forgers of Seville, who could provide all sorts of official-looking documents for a price. Persons who could not meet the requirements of the Laws had definite need of such help. Whether going legally or not, most of those who sailed from Spain did so from the 'controlled' ports of Andalusia. Others arriving in New Spain on legitimate Spanish shipping might do so with 'passports' obtained from a local governor in some other province of the Indies. This is what Gemelli Gareri had done in his passage from Manila to Acapulco.14 Similar documents could be obtained in the Caribbean or the north coast of South America. The governors might grant a foreigner's request for a passport for any number of reasons. The foreigner might be a religious refugee or a man of proven loyalty to the crown. He might come with the passport of a governor further up the line, or he might offer a venal governor a bribe. Other foreigners might enter from Spanish ships as members of the crew having signed on in some Caribbean port of call, or they might simply be stowaways.15 The king knew that, in spite of the orders and activities of the Casa, 'certain foreigners' without royal licenses embarked on the flotas for the Indies.16 Philip V in 1715 specifically ordered Viceroy Linares to see that any such persons who arrived in Veracruz or other ports of New Spain suffered the full penalty of the law. The punishment was loss of all goods and deportation to Spain. In one of his first decrees, issued in 1701, Philip had directed his officials in America to enforce a similar order of Charles II on the subject of foreigners.17 Antonio de Espinosa Ocampo, fiscal of the Audiencia of Mexico, had seen these earlier decrees and made several comments and recommendations to Viceroy Ortega. Espinosa reported that the cedula of Charles II aimed mainly at preventing the entry of Jews, heretics, and 'other infidels' who adopted the pretext of serving the king. It was 'known' that these persons entered New Spain and observed their

34


'false rites and ceremonies' to the detriment of the Catholic faith. Espinosa reasoned that this penetration was harmful to the interests of the crown and suggested that the colonial government enforce the spirit of the laws, which required that all who went to America should have the license of the king, the Council of the Indies, or the Casa de Contratacion. To be valid, these licenses had to indicate the immigrant's destination. Espinosa strongly recommended the exercise of extraordinary care in seeing that foreigners did not circumvent these provisions. The cedula also specifically excluded from the Indies those convicted of heresy and readmitted to the faith, as well as their sons and grandsons. This final provision applied even to recent converts. In order to see that this last basic cedula of Charles II on foreigners prevailed in New Spain, Espinosa made several additional recommendations to Viceroy Ortega. He suggested that the governors and other officials of the ports of the viceroyalty, in compliance with the regulations, forbid passengers lacking licenses to disembark. He further recommended that the port authorities exercise the greatest diligence when fleets and individual ships from Castile docked. But there were numerous other routes for entering Spanish America besides the normal one from Cadiz to one of the major controlled ports in the New World. The government attempted to curtail the use of these circuitous paths but to little avail.18 Espinosa expressed particular concern that the port officials scrupulously observe the letter of the licenses carried by foreigners since these documents often restricted their bearers to the ports or even to the ship. From time to time, the Casa de Contratacion issued such permits to foreigners who went to Spanish America to sell slaves or merchandise. These licenses were characteristically valid only for a specified length of time and forbade the holder to enter the interior or to send representatives there to sell goods.19 Espinosa also urged the viceroy to send dispatches to the governors of the ports and to the treasury officials who dealt with arriving ships. These authorities should comply precisely and punctually with the spirit of the Laws of the Indies, and, in so doing, impose the sanctions contained in the regulations. On 16 December 1701, Viceroy Ortega issued the decree which Espinosa in the name of the audiencia had requested. In addition, the viceroy ordered his secretary to send copies of the document and the report of the fiscal to the Tribunal of the Inquisition in Mexico City.20


35

Thus customs officials, port governors, and Inquisition agents were all to inspect incoming vessels. Should they discover 'prohibited persons', they were to return foreigners to the Casa de Contratacion in Spain for trial.21 The viceroy might sentence unlicensed Spaniards to serve a period of years in one of the frontier military posts.22 The number of unlicensed individuals the authorities in New Spain had to deal with was smaller than it might have been. All fleets and most individual vessels bound for the viceroyalty from Spain customarily stopped first at either Havana or San Juan de Puerto Rico. Officials in those ports were alert and often took foreigners off the ships before they reached Veracruz.23 As each passenger disembarked in Veracruz he was to pay the notary (escribano) and treasury official (oficial real) of the port two and a half pesos to have his license validated.24 There was no additional fee for family members and retainers. At this late stage, the authorities sometimes discovered an unlicensed foreigner. They occasionally ignored the law, perhaps for a price, and admitted the foreigner as the king feared,25 or they enforced the statutes. Thus in 1702, the corregidor of Veracruz, Francisco Manzo de Zufiiga, apprehended a Frenchman, Jacques Saul, and seized some 6,410 pesos in his possession.26 In spite of the protestations of the commandant of a French squadron, the Count de Chaternau, Manzo sent both prisoner and money to Spain on the return flota. In 1711 a Portuguese, Roque Pereira da Gunha, failed to escape detection and fell into the hands of port authorities. The king ordered him to be sent to Spain after the peace.27 Similarly in 1737 the governor of Veracruz arrested an Englishman, John Hamilton, whose license restricted him to Campeche.28 Because the authorities in Spain had no way of knowing the facts in various cases involving foreigners deported from America, Philip V in 1736 reiterated an order of 1683 requiring that all pertinent records accompany any lawbreaker sent to Europe.29 Even when the colonial officials managed to track down and apprehend foreigners, their superiors in Spain often set aside their decisions. Such was the action of the Council of the Indies in a case that came to its attention during the 1690s. The foreigner was LourenQo de Medina, a Portuguese who came from Coimbra. He carried licenses from the king and the Casa de Contratacion to go to the Philippines via New Spain in order to visit a relative who was a Spanish official in those islands. Though he had begun his journey several years earlier, in 1690 Medina had not yet

36


made it to Manila and had taken up residence in Mexico City. The crown therefore ordered the viceroy to offer Medina citizenship for a fee and to review the case three years later to make sure that the Portuguese had become a good subject. In 1704 Medina still resided in Mexico City.30 In addition to the Spanish ships arriving in New Spain for the port officials to inspect, foreign vessels also stopped there. An undetermined number of illicit trading ships landed in out-of-the way ports with the collusion of local authorities or along deserted beaches without such official cooperation.31 In either case there would have been no inspection, and foreigners aboard who decided to stay would have gotten past the first hurdle, the port officials. In addition to outright smugglers, there were the ships of the Asiento after 1713.32 And treaties allowed the vessels of allied powers to enter American ports 'to escape storms and enemies'.33 By virtue of such an alliance, Philip V permitted French vessels to take on supplies in the Indies during the War of Spanish Succession.34 Between 1701 and 1706, twenty-four French ships landed at Veracruz, and Spaniards, with an interest in the trade monopoly, called them all smugglers.35 But despite the complaints of the Gonsulado of Seville, such activities continued in wartime. Foreign captains sometimes resisted inspection of their ships,36 yet the king authorized non-Spanish vessels to sail from Spain itself when there was a need. The War of Jenkins5 Ear and subsequent European struggle (1739-1748) forced the Spaniards to use foreign ships to avoid capture by British squadrons. Both messages and officials reached the Indies in this way. For example, the new viceroy, the Duque de la Gonquista, came over in a Dutch vessel in 1740, messages arrived on French frigates in 1741 and 1742, and Conquista's successor, Viceroy Fuenclara, did the same in October 1742.37 An additional thirty-seven foreign ships sailed from Andalusia to Veracruz between 1740 and 1748,38 altogether making some thirty-three French vessels, four Dutch, one Swedish, and one Hamburger. Foreign ships did not always arrive of their own volition in wartime. The Spaniards normally directed captured enemy vessels to Havana, Santiago de Cuba, or San Juan in Puerto Rico rather than to Veracruz.39 But New Spain did receive a few. The crews of these ships, as well as prisoners taken along the frontier or in foreign enclaves such as the Laguna de Terminos and Belice, yielded all of the problems associated with handling prisoners of


37

war. The position of the central government was to hold these persons until the fighting had stopped and then to return them to some territory belonging to their sovereign as quickly as possible. Precedent ruled their disposition after the cessation of hostilities.40 But since the agencies or military units that detained these persons bore the cost of maintaining them, the incentive for quick prisoner exchange was always high. A little ransom money might hurry the process. Englishmen captured by the viceroy's subordinates during the War of Spanish Succession were imprisoned at Veracruz or sent inland for safe-keeping.41 But because of continued Spanish efforts against British enclaves in the south of the viceroyalty, prisoners kept coming in after the 'peace' of 1713. Many of these individuals were interned at Antequera de Oaxaca. In August 1717, the bishop of that diocese, Angel Maldonado, complained to Viceroy Valero that there were too many British prisoners in the public jails of Oaxaca and that many of them were ill.42 He blamed overcrowding and lack of adequate food for their unhealthy condition and told the viceroy that he had begun to feed and care for these foreigners. The bishop noted that since there were 'so many' such prisoners in Oaxaca, it was becoming increasingly difficult to continue providing them with 'Christian charity' out of the resources of his own household. The fiscal of the audiencia, Dr Espinosa, noted that too many Englishmen had been piling up in Oaxaca and recommended sending them back to Veracruz. He observed that this would facilitate deporting the prisoners to Spain at the earliest opportunity. Viceroy Valero agreed and ordered the corregidor of Oaxaca, Balthasar de Zuniga y Guzman, to forward the prisoners immediately to the fortress-prison of Veracruz, San Juan de Ulua. The king confirmed the order in 1718,43 but it is doubtful that the prisoners returned home then because war broke out again that very year. Prisoners might also be interned at Toluca or some other city of the viceroyalty.44 But as in the case of the Englishmen in Oaxaca, the authorities disliked keeping too many such persons in one place even if they were under lock and key. Captured enlisted men were often contracted out by the government as laborers in obrajes (workshops). The king forbade such treatment of Spaniards and Creoles believing it 'too degrading and detrimental to their position in the empire'.45 Officers, if there were not too many of them, might be paroled on their own resources. Thus,

38


with enlisted men shut away in workshops and officers on their own, the crown could escape the expense of maintaining prisoners of war. In order to avoid the potential cost of caring for prisoners who could not be farmed out or paroled, the authorities sometimes simply sent them to a possession of their own government, as Viceroy Gasafuerte did in 1727 shortly before the outbreak of renewed fighting.46 Prisoners taken on the frontier in peacetime might receive the same treatment.47 From time to time, the Spaniards had to use prisoners of war as bargaining points in order to get their own people back.48 Such exchanges could be made at any time, not just after a peace agreement. For example, the Spaniards in 1741 and 1742 returned prisoners and paid ransom in order to redeem subjects taken by Vernon in the Caribbean. Prisoners of war presented only some of the problems which the authorities experienced with foreign military personnel. Various powers of the eighteenth century customarily took foreigners into their military establishments even as officers; Spain was no exception.49 Foreigners connected with the Spanish military in the New World were sometimes a source of trouble for colonial officials. According to the law, foreigners could serve in the Indies, but the regulations limited their rights. Ordinarily soldiers enjoyed certain legal privileges and immunities,50 but nonsubjects who offered military service in return for their naturalization and subsequent grants of citizenship could not claim the exemptions of the military privileges.51 The Laws of the Indies forbade the viceroys, as supreme military commanders in their jurisdictions, to appoint foreigners, relatives, or others who might be dangerously loyal to them personally. The king feared that this could lead to unfortunate situations in which the first loyalty of particular generals or admirals would be to the viceroy rather than to the crown.52 Certain military installations were so important that the Laws treated them individually.53 Such were the fortress and associated strong points of Havana. The provisions, nevertheless, probably applied to all similar defensive positions. The law stated that no foreigners could enter any of these places even as prisoners of war. The statute indicated that the military should turn their captives over to the civil authorities, who would place the prisoners in the public jails along with common criminals. The intent was not to degrade foreign subjects, but rather to safeguard the strong points. The prohibition also applied to naturalized foreigners in the Spanish military service.


39

In spite of these old statutes, eighteenth-century colonial authorities routinely detained foreign prisoners in such strong points as San Juan de Ulua in Veracruz. Even Madrid ignored the regulations when concerned with aliens in Spanish employ. Thus, the new government of Philip V recruited a party of Frenchmen in 1701 for service in El Morro de Habana, the very castle noted in the Laws.54 The officers who commanded these soldiers and who had brought them to Cuba were Francois Courbille, a lieutenant, and his father Jean Arnauld Courbille, a major. Certain difficulties with Spanish officers concerning command responsibilities in Cuba had arisen, and a cedula of 1706 provided that any French officers in Spanish service in the Indies who wished to return home could do so with full pay. The cedula specifically ordered that the elder Courbille receive seventy ducats and his son forty for insults they had suffered at the hands of the colonial officials. All told, the Courbilles eventually received 34,951 reales55 in back pay for themselves and their men. They had served Spain for about thirty months. Clearing up the case took a full year and required a trip to Spain by the lieutenant.56 In mainland New Spain, some of the same problems arose. Several French officers sent by Philip V arrived in Veracruz in 1701.57 At least seven such men came that year. The viceroy, Archbishop Ortega, agreed to pay the Frenchmen what their Spanish counterparts received, which was roughly four times what they would have made in France. Ortega and Francisco Manzo, corregidor of Veracruz, both reported to the Council of the Indies, and the viceroy begged his superiors to send the Frenchmen home. He said they should be allowed to £earn honor in the service of their king' and that at any rate no additional officers were needed in New Spain. But Philip V replied that he wanted the French officers to remain and furthermore to receive full pay. Perhaps the foreign-born king did not quite trust his new subjects. It is clear that the presence of these officers created tension in the port of Veracruz. Some of them may have returned home after 1706, but at least one, an engineer named Louis Bourchard de Beaucourt, remained until 1709.58 He had prepared plans for improving the defenses at Campeche. Allies, both military and civilian, presented problems for the proper enforcement of various laws dealing with foreigners. Francisco Santin Villamane, the commissary of the Inquisition in Veracruz, for example, was concerned about the activities of

4-O


Frenchmen in that city and wrote to Joseph Cienfuegos, thefiscalof the Holy Office in Mexico, for instructions. The inquisitor's reply of October 1702, indicated that the major sin of these foreigners was their selling of forbidden books.59 Among the volumes introduced by the French was a commentary on the Talmud, written in Gastilian and published in Amsterdam. Cienfuegos instructed the commissary to go to the French and to remind them that as allies they should refrain from such activities. Because the fiscal understood that it was imprudent to put undue pressure on allies in time of war, he directed his subordinate to aim enforcement proceedings at those who bought the forbidden books. Cienfuegos further suggested that it might be possible to restrict these volumes to the foreign ships by requiring the issuance of licenses for their introduction into the viceroyalty. In November, Santin reported that he had issued a decree to the effect that no one could buy any books from the French without first obtaining his written permission.60 Unfortunately for the peace of mind of the agent of the Inquisition in Veracruz, issuing a decree failed to solve his problems. Inconvenience again arose concerning the war and the difficulties occasioned by the presence of Frenchmen in the port and surrounding region.61 Commissary Santin complained bitterly of the trouble caused by allowing uncommon freedoms to the French. He saw great danger in it and longed for a return to the 'customary' approach. He reported that these foreigners were not very Catholic in their attitudes and were, therefore, a plague. The commissary was at his wit's end and begged the fiscal for instructions. The king himself, now apparently under the influence of Spanish advisers, provided the solution with a decree of 1716.62 Philip directed his officials in the Indies to deport gently all Frenchmen who had taken up residence during or since the war. Viceroy Valero did as he was told but acted selectively. The years between 1716 and 1762 saw a drop in the number of foreign-born military men serving in New Spain, but surviving lists of officers billeted in the viceroyalty in that period contain many suspicious names such as 'Mafei, Ferengan, Exarch, Sallen, Fresne, and Marcheti'. The information is sketchy and contains no other hint of the origins of these men.63 Some royal commissions are more helpful. For example, 'Francisco Manuel Suarez, a native of Madras in the Mogul Empire', received a crown appointment in 1750 as colonel designate of the Tercio de Pardos


41

y Morenos Libres ('Regiment of Free Blacks and Browns').64 He was to receive half salary until he actually assumed command. That such a man could get to New Spain from India is not unbelievable; Gemelli Gareri did it, but that he should want to is perhaps another matter. Beginning in 1762 as part of a general reorganization of imperial defense, considerable numbers of foreigners served in Spanish units stationed in New Spain.65 Some were not good Catholics, and the Inquisition once again reacted to the challenge.66 Certain foreign enlisted men who came during the 17001760 period did so to escape duties elsewhere. European governments in the eighteenth century routinely impressed both seamen and soldiers. Some of these unwilling recruits would desert if given half a chance, and even in the New World, such opportunities sometimes arose. The French services must have been particularly onerous for the ranks, and their deserters were known to seek refuge in Spanish America.67 In spite of orders to the contrary, provincial commanders and governors in the Indies often accepted these men as volunteers into their own military units.68 Higher pay and the acquisition of virtual citizenship acted as incentives for the recruits. Also in search of a better life, runaway foreign slaves occasionally used the same routes as deserters. French blacks escaping to Spanish territories worried even Louis XIV. 69 The flow of these individuals continued intermittently throughout the century with some Spanish officials willing to grant them freedom on arrival. Such was the situation in Texas where Governor Barrios (1751— 1759) was in the habit of recognizing as free men any runaway slaves from Louisiana who reached his settlements.70 He most likely followed this policy because, like St Denis, they might have learned too much about the defenses of his jurisdiction. Granting freedom to such persons was contrary to Spanish law, and the governor's superiors tried to end his liberal practice for fear it might provoke aggressive French actions on the northern frontier. Louisiana was not the only source of runaways. For example, in late 1711 or early 1712, six blacks escaped from their English masters at the Laguna de Terminos in Campeche.71 They paddled west along the coast for some two hundred miles landing short of the small port of Alvarado which they eventually reached on foot. They begged the lieutenant in charge of the local garrison to hide them, and he informed his superior in Veracruz. The

42


commandant in that port, a major, ordered them to be sent to him under guard. The runaways had yet to arrive in Veracruz when Governor Gaspar Saenz Rico reported the entire matter to Viceroy Linares. Saenz promised to interrogate the six and forward any 'useful information'. The viceroy ordered that security be maintained until the motives of the runaways were accurately known. If the applicable statutes were observed, the escapees eventually received their freedom. The general rule, restated many times, was that slaves fleeing from Protestant masters would be freed if they reached haven in Spanish America.72 Beginning at least as early as 1680, various Spanish kings had made and reaffirmed the point that any slave from a foreign colony who came to embrace the Catholic faith would be taken as free forthwith. Under no circumstances were they to be sold as slaves or returned to their former masters. Ferdinand VI knew that such things had happened and in 1750 forbade that it ever happen again. He demanded literal application of his edict and directed his officials in America to free immediately any such blacks held in slavery in their jurisdictions. Commanders in the Indies, doubting the sincerity of the runaways, sometimes ignored this directive and continued to arrange exchanges of escaped slaves with Protestant British, Dutch, and Danish representatives as well as with Catholic Frenchmen.73 The tendency of officials in Spain after 1760 was to support the activities of the men in the field. This attitude did not apply to Indians enslaved by foreigners. Since the Spaniards had no Indian slaves themselves, they freed those who came into their territories from foreign colonies.74 The Spaniards considered Indians reasonable men and had expended tremendous efforts and considerable sums to insure their conversion. One of those orders charged by the kings of Spain with responsibility for proselytizing Indians was the Society of Jesus. The Jesuits were an international order, but the Laws of the Indies had long stated that foreign clergy might not go to America or hold any ecclesiastical office or benefice there unless they had either the express permission of the king or a royal letter of naturalization.75 Since members of the religious orders were outside the direct hierarchy of the government-controlled church, the law was even more stringent in their exclusion than it was in that of the secular clergy.76 Following conventional practice, the king charged his American viceroys, governors, and audiencias,


43

as well as his bishops and archbishops, with the enforcement of these bans. The audiencias were to take special care to send all foreigners who were discovered serving as ecclesiastics, clerics, judges, or religious in America, directly to the Council of the Indies. Actually, the authorities in the New World had little to do with the exclusion of foreign clergy because of the strict control exercised on them by the Gasa de Contratacion. The Casa was under strict orders to forbid any foreign religious to take passage for the Indies. Even if these persons carried the license of their superior in Spain or elsewhere, the Gasa delayed them pending a decision by the Council of the Indies. Yet conversion of the Indians and the pacification of Spanish American frontiers was largely the responsibility of the various religious orders.77 Using this task as an opening wedge, Juan Martinez de Ripalada, Procurator General of the Indies for the Society of Jesus, petitioned Philip V early in 1707 for a relaxation of the restrictions against foreign religious going to America.78 Father Martinez began by reviewing the legislation still current in 1707. He stated that the law required that two-thirds of each group of missionary Jesuits sent to America be Spaniards. The remaining one-third could be foreigners, if they were vassals of the crown. This group included at various times Flemings, Milanese, Neapolitans, Sicilians, and certain others. Yet even this exception, stated Martinez, was insufficient to fill the needs of the Society for manpower in the New World. In 1691 the king had authorized sixty replacements for New Spain, but because the procurator general could locate only twenty-one available Spanish Jesuits, New Spain received fewer than thirty-five men. In 1703 the leader of the Society in New Spain renewed the request, this time for twenty-nine men, but he received only fifteen. Thus, Martinez felt more than justified in presenting the petition of 1707. The essence of the new request was that there be no restriction on the entry of Jesuits who were non-Spanish vassals of the crown. Of course, these new men would have to carry the license of their superiors in Spain or America. Martinez buttressed his petition with an extensive argument outlining the need for missionaries in the New World and by quoting from the Laws of the Indies to the effect that the crown was supposed to do everything in its power to insure the complete conversion of the Indians.79 Anticipating the objections his request would elicit, the general vehemently refuted the idea that foreign Jesuits in the Spanish

44


territories had been anything other than completely loyal to the crown. He pointed out that £many5 of those who had gone to the Indies under the old regulation had died martyrs while carrying out their duties. They had caused no inconvenience, and the general directly challenged anyone to cite a case in which they had. Perhaps the most important point to Martinez was that these foreign Jesuits, with little hope of ever returning to Europe and no other motive but to save souls, had voluntarily abandoned their homes to go forth and propagate the faith among barbarians. The procurator general's use of selflessness and logical arguments about conversion and imperial defense won the king over, but not completely. A royal cedula, issued in February 1707, expanded the license granted to Jesuits from one-third foreign to two-thirds.80 Philip also widened the classification of persons covered by the license to include not only non-Spanish vassals of the crown but also subjects of the Papal States and of nations allied to Spain. The king explained his decision as being the result of the need for men in the missions combined with the 'suspension of correspondence with the provinces of Aragon, Catalonia, and Valencia5.81 This time, then, foreigners were to be used to help keep the Indies in Spanish hands. The foreign Jesuits who served in New Spain in the eighteenth century were probably the largest single group of aliens in the viceroyalty. Available records indicate that there were at least 178 such men in New Spain between 1700 and 1760.82 But since these records are incomplete, it is reasonable to assume that their numbers easily exceeded 200. Of the proven 178, the Italians, Germans, and Bohemians, numbering 60, 48, and 24, respectively, were the most numerous. The others came from a whole series of European states including England, Scotland, Switzerland, and even Sweden. There were no Poles and only one Portuguese. The Catalogues83 give the number of individual foreigners as follows: Jesuits in New Spain, 1744-176184 Catalogue year

Total Jesuits

Foreign Jesuits

Percentage foreign

1744 1748 1751 1755 1761

572 579 624 623 704

68 67 92 87 94

11.9 11.9 14.7 13.9 13.4


45

The individual foreigners in the ranks of the Society in New Spain could be found doing every task from sitting behind desks to opening new territories on the frontiers. Foreigners staffed more than their fair share of Indian missions, particularly in the dangerous northern regions of the viceroyalty, but several of them held high positions in the order. Gianmaria Salvaterra (1704-1706), Gianmaria Casati (1747), Johann Balthasar (1750-1753), and Agostino Carta (1755-1760) served as provincials of the Society, the highest Jesuit post in the viceroyalty.85 Yet a reputation for recruiting and posting aliens did not help the order. In 1760 the Casa de Contratacion ceased issuing licenses for foreign-born Jesuits to go to the Indies, and in 1767 Charles III expelled the Society from all his kingdoms, giving as one reason the large number of foreigners in its ranks.86 Except for a few Italian Capuchins on their way through Mexico to missions in Tibet, the Jesuits were the only foreign churchmen allowed by law to enter the Indies in the eighteenth century.87 From this legal view, it might be assumed that these were all, yet there were exceptions. For example, Father Accurzio Alangi, a Sicilian priest, arrived in Puerto Rico in 1695.88 He came with the permission of his Church superiors but without that of the king. He transferred to New Spain in 1712, and Archbishop Jose de Lanciego y Eguilaz appointed him vicar and ecclesiastical judge of the Valley of Amilpas in 1719. In 1737 Alangi requested and received naturalization without significant difficulty. Less is known about Englishman Charles Watts and Ignatius Lindsay of County Mayo, Ireland, but in 1756 they both cropped up in separate proceedings.89 Lindsay was then deacon (clerigo didcono) of the Bishopric of Puebla and testified in the case of a countryman accused of heresy. Watts, a priest in Orizaba, served as interpreter for Edward Andrews, an English Protestant seeking conversion to Catholicism. Alangi, Lindsay, and Watts were all members of the secular clergy. There was also at least one non-Jesuit religious. This ordained Dominican, 'Domingo' Giraganian, came from Persian Armenia and on orders of his superiors had traveled to his post in Yucatan by way of the Philippines and Acapulco. In 1723 Giraganian refused to incriminate a Persian friend named Saradi who stood accused of being an Orthodox (cismdtico).90 Of these foreigners, only Alangi received official attention from the government, and then it came as a result of the Sicilian's request for naturalization rather than

46


from enforcement of the exclusion of foreign churchmen from the Indies. Thus, foreign churchmen as well as laymen of many vocations appeared in New Spain at various times between 1700 and 1760. While many came by choice, sailors on decommissioned ships, recuperating military men, paroled prisoners of war, fugitives from justice, and many others arrived by chance and stayed. Once in New Spain, all but those who had entered legally and with the proper licenses needed to gain acceptance. Of primary importance was religion.

CHAPTER 3

Religion: the essential requirement

Secular clergy and missionary religious, each operating under their own organizations, shared responsibility with the Holy Office of the Inquisition for maintaining the faith in Spanish America. While the missionaries aimed at the conversion of pagan Indians and the seculars ministered to the faithful, the inquisitors dealt with religious deviation. Philip II had transferred the Inquisition to the New World in the sixteenth century for this specific purpose.1 In an empire where religion was an aspect of citizenship at least as important as birth,2 this responsibility of the Holy Office was indeed a grave one. Non-believers might undermine the faith of Indians and other 'ignorant persons' and thus dilute the purity of America.8 The Laws of the Indies, accordingly, charged the governmental authorities and bishops to rid the Indies of foreigners and other persons 'suspicious in matters of the faith5.4 The Inquisition stood as the first line of defense. Regarding religious conformity, all persons in New Spain were subject to the jurisdiction of the Holy Office.5 The only exceptions were the Indians, and they came under the less formal and reportedly more lenient episcopal inquisition in the hands of the bishops and the secular clergy. Religious, chiefly Dominicans well schooled in canon law, made up the core of the Holy Office itself. Laymen and churchmen alike aided the inquisitors, and the whole functioned much like any other government agency. The main exception was that Inquisition records and proceedings were closed to inspection by viceregal authorities. The chief officers of the Holy Office in New Spain were the members of the Tribunal in Mexico City. The two judges and one fiscal of this court were aided in their work by several assistants.6 A constable [alguacil mayor) made arrests and held prisoners. A treasurer kept track of funds and cared for sequestered property. And four secretaries conducted correspondence and maintained meticulous records of 47

48


proceedings. Cases from the farthest corners of New Spain flowed through the Tribunal, for its territorial jurisdiction exceeded that of the viceroy. Extending authority over this vast area was relatively easy for the Tribunal to achieve. The three inquisitors appointed commissaries (comisarios) in every village or town of any size. These deputies were usually ordained priests and often also held their bishop's appointment as vicar and ecclesiastical judge (juez eclesidstico).1 In this way the Holy Office enlisted able assistants, escaped the necessity of paying them salaries, and avoided conflicts of jurisdiction with the episcopal authorities. Among the most important of the deputy inquisitors were those stationed in the ports of the viceroyalty. It was their job to see that persons suspect in matters of the faith did not enter New Spain. Since effectiveness depended in large part on procedure, Don Joseph Cienfuegos, fiscal of the Tribunal in Mexico City, reissued in 1702 strict instructions to the commissaries in the ports for the proper inspection of all ships, regardless of nationality.8 In cooperation with the other port officials, the commissary, accompanied by an alguacil (or by a familiar of the Inquisition)9 and a notary, was to visit each arriving ship and to conduct an investigation before any goods or persons disembarked. Singling out the master, the pilot, a couple of passengers, and several crew members, the commissary asked them, on pain of excommunication, to answer certain questions truthfully. Why and from where did the ship sail? In what other ports had it stopped? Of what nations, princes, republics, or lords were the persons on board subjects or citizens? Were any among them Jews, Turks, or Moors expelled from Spain, or heretics, Lutherans, Calvinists, or of other sects contrary to the faith? Had those being questioned seen anyone on board who followed the laws, rites, or ceremonies of the Jews, Moors, or heretics? Had they witnessed anyone maltreating images or degrading the faith or the Roman Church? Had they seen anyone breaking the evangelical law, heard anyone speaking against the Holy Faith; blaspheming against God, the Virgin, or the Saints; or questioning the Holy Office? Similarly the Inquisition wanted to know if anyone had disputed the power of the pope or spoken against the king. Fiscal Cienfuegos' instructions also required the commissary to ask a series of questions concerning foreign goods, non-Catholic religious objects, and forbidden books. It was the job of the notary to make a complete copy of


49

the answers given in the questioning. After completing the interrogation of the passengers and crew, the commissary was to conduct a random examination of various areas of the ship and its cargo. If the investigators discovered violations, they were to open all the cartons and to question everyone on board. The commissary was to imprison any non-Catholic and to sequester his goods. If the culprit owned part of the ship, the commissary was simply to require that it remain in port. He need not take actual possession of the vessel. Seeing to the claims of the prisoner's creditors and employees, the notary was to prepare a complete manifest of the things impounded, and the commissary was to insure their proper care. The port officials of the Inquisition were also to forward full information of the case to the Holy Office in Mexico City and await further orders from the Tribunal. If the criminal was obviously a heretic, such as an expelled Morisco or an apostate, he should be kept in prison, if possible at his own cost. A voluntary self-denunciation expressing a desire to convert, however, could gain compassionate treatment from the Inquisition and, after the formalities were completed, admission to the viceroyalty. The process by which heretics became 'reconciled to the brotherhood of the Holy Mother Church5 was known as reconciliation. This procedure applied to repentant Protestants long present in the empire as well as to those discovered in the ports or on incoming vessels. Once gained, reconciliation afforded, in most cases, practical toleration from governmental as well as religious authorities. In cases of reconciliation, the inquisitors usually acted expeditiously. Should the Protestant die outside the Church, his soul would be lost forever, but there was another reason for the speed with which the Tribunal acted. The Counter Reformation was in its highest form an attempt to reconvert Protestants to the true faith, and the Holy Office always kept this concept in mind when dealing with foreign heretics. This view meant that in practice the Tribunal always gave the heretic the benefit of the doubt, especially when he came forward on his own.10 Since agents of the Holy Office might handle the mechanical aspects of such cases if they occurred outside the viceregal capital, Manuel Ramirez de Arellano, then fiscal of the Tribunal, found it convenient to issue instructions to the commissaries in 1719.11 First, the heretic was to notify an official representative of the

50


Holy Office that he wanted to be baptized. The commissary was to have 'prudent doubt' about the sincerity of the petitioner, questioning the local ecclesiastics {ordinarios) and those who had instructed the Protestant in the tenets of Catholicism. The investigator was then to question the friends and companions of the petitioner, ascertaining whether they were themselves Catholics. The commissary in the field, or the Tribunal if the case occurred in Mexico City, would then question the subject himself and obtain his declaracion. This statement, the most important part of the process, was a formal document recorded by a notary as the questioning proceeded. According to a form 'prescribed by law', the interrogator was to find out the heretic's age, native land, marital state, occupation, given names and surnames, and what aliases, if any, he had ever used. In what religion had the man been born? Did he understand and adjure the errors of his sect, particularly those relating to the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist? Did the heretic now believe in the existence of purgatory, the intercession of the saints, canonization, the cult of the sacred images, offerings made in the name of the dead, and the pardon and remission of sins? What was the true Church, and who was its head ? Did the subject now fully understand the gravity of what he had previously believed? The declaracion continued with a series of more specific questions about the course of the petitioner's life. Where had he been born? Who were his parents, and what was their religion? What places had he visited before arriving in New Spain? How long had he stayed in these places? What formal education did he have, and where had he received it? Had he ever practiced his heretical beliefs in any Catholic country or province, thus perverting good Catholics from their faith? Had he ever offered public injury to any of the forms, practices, or beliefs of the Church? Who had instructed him in the faith? When and where had the heretic first recanted his errors, and what had been his motive in doing so? Was he now truly converted, and did he wish to live and die in the Catholic Church? Did he know other heretics in any of the Spanish kingdoms? And if he did, had he had any communication with them? Who were they; where had they come from, and where were they now? Were they practising their faith? Did either he or they have any forbidden books, notes, or papers? And finally, had he answered everything truthfully and out of conscience? Between 1700 and 1760, heretics in New Spain who reached the


51

declaration stage on their way to church membership always gave the right answers. It may be that their instructors had coached them in advance, or it may be that the interrogator himself went over certain key points with the heretic before beginning the formal procedure. At any rate after the questioning was satisfactorily completed, the next step in the reconciliation process was to absolve the heretic of the censure for his past errors. He then received baptism under the direction of a commissary and two ecclesiastics. Now 'reconciled5 to the Church, the new convert could confess his sins and begin a new life. If a commissary outside the capital were to conduct a reconciliation, he had to get separate permission from the Tribunal for each case before he could proceed. If the heretic could not speak Spanish, the commissary was to appoint an interpreter, first swearing him to secrecy. Once the process was complete, the commissary was to inform the Holy Office. He was to tell the new Catholic 'what would happen' if he failed to remain true to the Church. In addition, the commissary was then to keep an eye on all persons who had been 'readmitted' to the faith. The first recorded reconciliation in eighteenth-century New Spain suggests that Fiscal Ramirez' instructions of 1719 had outlined an old procedure.12 Without being called, Jan van der Rose, a Dutch sailor, appeared before the Tribunal in Mexico City in 1705. He stated that he was twenty-five years old, a native of Amsterdam, and had always been a Lutheran. Responding to a series of questions practically identical to those in the document of 1719, Rose told the inquisitors that he wanted to become a Catholic. Raised by Protestant parents, Rose left home as a teenager and eventually sailed to Curasao where he intended to join in attacks on Spanish commerce. For a reason the heretic failed to explain, he left Dutch service in the late 1690s and, early in the War of Spanish Succession, signed on as a gunner with the Armada de Barlovento. Rose told the inquisitors that until recently he had passed himself off as a Fleming and, because of his fear of discovery, had never been able to discuss religion with Catholics. All this changed when he went to a hospital run by the Bethlehemite Order in New Spain. Apparently the Dutch sailor had received a wound or contracted a fever while serving in the Spanish fleet. Realizing that they had a heretic on their hands, the religious brothers had instructed him in the faith, taught him to confess, and improved his Castilian 'like a good Catholic'. The

52


Dutchman told the inquisitors that he had resolved to accept the true faith and to remain in ' the kingdoms of the Spaniards where it is practiced'. With statements about some suspicious persons he had seen in Veracruz and about his own literacy, Rose concluded his interview with the Inquisition. The Tribunal then proceeded to make its decision. In view of Jan van der Rose's voluntary appearance, the inquisitors commissioned Father Joseph de Arjo, a Jesuit,13 to administer further instruction in the faith to the repentant heretic. The Tribunal notified the priest of his new charge and instructed the Jesuit to keep the Holy Office informed of the progress and attitude of the student. A couple of months later Father Joseph reported back to the Holy Office. He said that he had instructed Rose in the tenets of the faith, especially those denied by Lutherans and Calvinists. The priest recommended that the Tribunal arrange for the student to receive a Catholic baptism before they granted formal reconciliation. Considering the evidence and the view of the Jesuit father, the fiscal, Joseph Cienfuegos, advised the other members of the Tribunal to 'readmit' Rose to the Church. The Tribunal reviewed the facts of the case and the opinion of their fiscal, and on the basis of the precedent offered by a 1689 case, ordered that Jan van der Rose receive judicial absolution.14 The inquisitors ordered the Jesuit, Father Joseph, to perform all sacraments necessary to absolve the errors and heresies in which the Dutchman had lived. As for baptism itself, the Tribunal directed Father Joseph to conduct his charge to the curates of the cathedral in Mexico City. The curates would then administer the prescribed rite. In accordance with his instructions, Father Joseph took Rose to the cathedral and reported the baptism to the Holy Office. Fiscal Cienfuegos seconded his own earlier recommendations to the Tribunal. In December 1705, the Holy Office followed through with the formal absolution and final certificates in the case of the Dutch sailor. It had been just over three months since he first appeared before the Tribunal. One of the last foreigners 'reconciled' to the Church before 1760 was Mary Frances Nott, a young Englishwoman who found herself in Veracruz in 1756.15 In May of that year, she appeared before the local commissary of the Holy Office and requested formal admission to the Church. By June he had received the permission of the Tribunal to proceed and had completed the case to everyone's satisfaction. Mary Nott was twenty-five and testify-


53

ing through an interpreter. Her declaration went something like this. She had been married to William Bern O'Neal (Guillermo Bernes Orfiel), also a ' Lutheran', but he was now deceased, and she was a widow. Together they had left London and sailed to Belice on the Guatemalan coast. In 1752 they moved on to the Bay of Honduras where they remained for two years. But Mary's husband died, and being pregnant she decided to find a safer place in Jamaica. On the way to that island, her ship was captured by Spanish corsairs operating out of Campeche. There she found refuge in the home of a local woman of quality, Dona Micalla de Aguirre. It was in Campeche that Mary had her baby, and Dona Micalla acted as the godmother at the child's baptism. Mary told the inquisitors that she was already disposed to Catholicism since it had been the faith of her mother. She received instruction from Dona Micalla and from Father Jacob O'Farrell, Irish priest and chaplain to a Spanish frigate based in Veracruz. It must have been on board this ship that Mary had made her way from Campeche to Veracruz and to the agent of the Holy Office. Finding everything in order, the commissary absolved the young woman of her sins and arranged for her to receive baptism into the Church. After accepting the faith, Mary Nott, like most of the others, faded into the society that surrounded her. Either because the inquisitors did not inform the authorities, or because the government officials in New Spain accepted conversion as tantamount to citizenship, joining the life of the viceroyalty seems to have been relatively easy for converts. Including Mary Frances Nott and Jan van der Rose, at least forty-six foreign Protestants received reconciliacion from the Holy Office in New Spain between 1700 and 1760.16 They were a heterogeneous group. What they did have in common was birth to Protestant parents somewhere in the Western World. Seventeen were no more specific than to say that they were 'Protestants'. That the inquisitors or their agents did not press for more accurate differentiation indicates either a lack of concern with the distinctions between Protestant sects, or, what is more likely, a basic ignorance on the part of numerous commissaries of the disagreements among non-Catholic Christians. More or less volunteering the information, fifteen identified themselves as Anglicans, six as Lutherans, four as Calvinists, three as Presbyterians, and one as a Quaker. Thirty-six were English-speaking, but they came from far corners of the British empire. Twenty-six of these persons

54


appear to have been from England itself, but it is sometimes hard to tell. 'Englishman' {ingles) applied to North Americans and West Indians as well as residents of the southern part of Great Britain. Three of the English-speaking group were Scots, three were Irish, and one each came from the West Indies, Williamsburg, Boston, and Philadelphia. In addition to the thirty-six British subjects, ten other Protestants requested and received 'readmission' to the Catholic Church. Two were French, one Swedish, three Dutch, and four German. Exactly half of the forty-six received their reconciliacion in Mexico City from the Tribunal itself. Commissaries in Puebla admitted ten heretics to the faith. Five Protestants came forward in Orizaba and four in Veracruz. In addition, Cordoba, San Luis Potosi, Valladolid, and Queretaro each had one. Manila on the far fringes of the viceroyalty was a hot-bed of foreigners. Commissaries there converted more non-believers than all the Mexican authorities combined.17 In continental New Spain, repentant heretics usually showed up singly except for the prisoners of war, and even then the numbers were small in any one year. The peak came in 1721, a year that found a number of English prisoners in the country. Six men came forward that year, and all but one were English sailors. The exception, Gotthart Rubberson, a 27-year-old Lutheran from Hamburg, was a seaman in the employ of the South Sea Company. Depending on the strictness of the definition used, between eighteen and twenty-two of the forty-six were or had been prisoners of war. Of the total who did convert, twenty-four were sailors. Several others had served on ships, three as coopers, three as carpenters, one as an armorer, and one as a cabin boy. Eleven men claimed to be medical professionals of one sort or another. There were, in addition, a retired factor of the Asiento, an unemployed gentleman, a scholar who spoke four languages, a weaver turned baker, a journeyman, a silver miner, two women without visible means of support, one man of unknown occupation, and two servants attached to Viceroy Linares. Their average age was only twentyfive. More often than not, prudence seems to have been an important motivating factor in the conversion of Protestants to Catholicism in New Spain between 1700 and 1760. Because most of these people came forward voluntarily, they met with kind treatment by the Holy Office. Reconciliacion in New Spain was supposedly the exclusive


55

privilege (fuero) of the Tribunal of the Inquisition in Mexico City.18 Yet there is enough evidence to suggest that not all reformed heretics took the formal route with the Holy Office.19 These were persons who received the sacrament of baptism from some priest who was, perhaps, oblivious of the technicalities of the law but nevertheless anxious to save a wayward soul. Since the new convert was almost undoubtedly more ignorant of procedure than the priest who absolved his heresy and baptized him, there was probably never any intent by either to cheat the Holy Office of its rights to investigate and to have the final say. Furthermore, even though the Holy Office might be upset that its jurisdiction had been violated, it was unthinkable that the conversion itself might be called into doubt as long as the sacraments had been duly administered and recorded. If the Tribunal learned of an unauthorized reconciliation, the inquisitors would doubtless reprimand the priest involved, but that would usually end the matter. Thus records of conversions housed with the papers of the Inquisition - even if they are substantially complete as far as the Tribunal is concerned — would not include all the persons 'reconciled' to the Church between 1700 and 1760. In addition to persons known to have converted in those years, but who may not have gone through the Holy Office to do so, there are at least two concrete examples of heretics baptized without the consent of the Tribunal. The first came to the attention of the Holy Office in 1711.20 Willem Pobey, a young Dutchman in the service of Viceroy Linares, had been baptized without the prior consent of the Tribunal. After questioning Pobey and the curates who had performed the ceremony, the inquisitors bowed before the shadow of the viceroy and approved the conversion after the fact.21 The second case involved a breakdown of procedure within the Holy Office itself.22 The commissary in Puebla, Joseph de Mercado, a man whose inefficiency is confirmed by other cases, failed either to ask the Tribunal's permission or to inform the inquisitors when he 'reconciled' Jane Catherine Stuart in 1755. When she denounced a Spaniard for making suspicious statements about the faith in 1758, the Tribunal investigated her instead. The inquisitors never told her the conversion had been irregular. No bureaucrat likes to admit a mistake. A case that occurred shortly after 1760 illustrates the importance some inquisitors attached to jurisdictional questions, particularly

56


when they doubted the heretic's sincerity. In 1762, Antoine Guillard, a French Calvinist whom Fiscal Fierros called a liar and a man 'without religion', was baptized by the Jesuit chaplain of the public jails.23 Fearing that the accused would die outside the Church, the Jesuit had proceeded without the inquisitors' approval. They reprimanded him. But after keeping the suspect in custody for three years and, probably, testing his sincerity with torture, the Tribunal released the new convert. Guillard had discovered his desire to accept the true faith only after being imprisoned on suspicion of heresy, but he had been in the viceroyalty for fifteen years. At least from the time of the War of the Spanish Succession and the administration of Fiscal Joseph Gienfuegos, Fiscal Fierros5 predecessors in the years before 1760 were less legalistic, less pompous, and more compassionate than he. The interest the Holy Office had in conversions was not solely the result of the jealousy of inquisitors for their jurisdictional prerogatives. Since the goal of the Inquisition in Spanish America was to achieve religious conformity among non-Indians, the Holy Office was happy to see voluntary conversions of foreigners and always gave them the benefit of the doubt. But there were levels of conformity, and the foreign Protestants were but a tiny fraction of those with whom the Holy Office concerned itself. Almost all of the cases to come to the attention of the Tribunal in Mexico City involved Catholics, a few of whom were foreigners. The bulk of the cases heard by the Holy Office traced to some violation or suspected violation of religious conformity. As a practical matter, the inquisitors could not and did not concern themselves with secret beliefs. In the final analysis, safeguarding a man's soul was his own responsibility, and the inquisitors knew it. But words and actions were different. Heretical or improper statements as well as unconventional religious practices could mislead others, and where such dangers might exist the Holy Office acted — but not always decisively. In a general way, all Inquisition cases involving religious misbehavior were similar. First came the accusation (denuncia). Anyone could make such a statement, and the denuncia might be taken by a commissary or even by one of the members of the Tribunal. Since the Holy Office was at times overwhelmed with denuncias and since it refused to prosecute any but seemingly solid cases, many, probably most, of the cases falling under its


57

purview ended without even an investigation of the charges. The same held true for denuncias taken by commissaries in other cities of the viceroyalty and forwarded by these agents to the Tribunal. That usually ended the matter until such time as further evidence came to light. Because the inquisitors were reasonable men, they declined to prosecute in cases when denuncias lacked substance. For example, Gerard Moore, an Irish lawyer accredited by the Audiencia of Mexico, stood accused of being a Jew in 1729.24 A neighbor based his conclusion that Moore was a Jew primarily on having heard a strange language spoken in the Irishman's apartment. Another neighbor, Maria de Contreras Villegas, based her accusation on 'knowledge' that Moore was circumcised 'like a Jew'. She went to great lengths to explain that her information was not, so to speak, first hand. The inquisitors ignored both denuncias and did nothing. In 1756 Jacques Laine, French bookkeeper to a powerful Mexican merchant, excited the jealousy of an acquaintance by acting on the statement 'simple fornication is not a sin'.25 Though informed of the 'heretical proposition', the inquisitors once again did nothing. The Tribunal also refused to act in obvious cases of malice such as the charges of Judaism leveled by a former servant at the Portuguese nobleman, Dom Alvaro de Figueira Ponce de Leon.26 Idiotic denuncias, such as that charging Felipe de Acosta, Spanish watchmaker, with being a 'Dutch Lutheran who believed that Mohammed was God', also failed to prompt the Holy Office into action.27 If an accusation was a particularly serious one, however, or if the denunciador was known to and trusted by the Holy Office, the inquisitors might call a few witnesses or send an investigator out to see whether there might be something to the charges. When a commissary in some other city took a denuncia, the standard procedure called for him always to make such an inquiry and then to write to the chief prosecutor of the Tribunal for further instructions. Customarily neither the Tribunal nor commissaries in the provinces made arrests or even questioned the accused until the preliminary investigation was completed. If this probe failed to corroborate the accusations made in the denuncia, then once again the case would, in effect, suspend itself. When this happened in Mexico City, no official of the Inquisition made any notation in the accused's folder. The file was simply put away. The same thing happened if the case originated outside the capital,

58


except that the commissary literally waited forever for his further instructions. If, however, the commissary had been overzealous or perhaps was dealing with someone whom he thought might escape, then he probably arrested the accused without waiting for orders from the fiscal. In such cases, the Tribunal in Mexico City had to have a formal meeting and consider the evidence. If the fiscal believed there was no convincing proof of guilt, he advised dropping the case and freeing the prisoner. The Tribunal almost always followed the counsel. For several reasons, the Tribunal disliked cases involving unnecessary arrest. Procedure had been ignored, and extra work had resulted. But most importantly secrecy, the cardinal principle of the Inquisition, had usually been lost. The Holy Office was not in the business of ruining reputations but, when a man was arrested in a small town by order of the local commisssary, that was the usual effect for the accused. Everyone knew of an arrest in such a place, and they usually knew who had ordered it, even if they were ignorant of the charge. People in eighteenth-century Mexico reacted as people everywhere do in such situations, believing even if the man is subsequently released that 'where there's smoke, there's fire'. Customary procedure thus called for complete secrecy for all Inquisition proceedings. Accusers, witnesses, suspects, interpreters, scribes, all took the oath of secrecy on pain of excommunication. The case of Jean Reytet shows why the inquisitors in Mexico City felt as they did about the necessity for secrecy in serving justice.28 In April 1741, the Tribunal received a letter from its commissary in the village of San Martin Texelucan in Puebla, Juan Cayetano de Gamboa - who was also village priest. Gamboa proudly announced that he had arrested a French Calvinist or Lutheran (eighteenth-century Mexicans often used the words interchangeably) and had impounded the man's goods. Father Gamboa, in his letter, asked for further instructions from the Tribunal. The inquisitors apparently were quick in replying, for in a few months Reytet had been freed, his goods were returned, and he was in Mexico City. In the first week of October, Reytet appeared before Inquisitor Pedro Navarro de Isla. He carried a letter of introduction from Father Gamboa and asked for redress. In his declaracion, the Frenchman identified himself as a native of the city of Pau in Beam province, France. He was fifty-one and had practiced surgery in New France for fourteen years


59

before arriving in San Martin in 1739. He had traveled to New Spain by way of Havana. For two years Reytet had served the residents of San Martin and vicinity. His practice had grown rapidly because people preferred his services to those of his only competitor, a man who was drunk most of the time. This second surgeon, another Frenchman, was Pierre de la Motte. Desiring to destroy his rival, Motte had begun publicly to call Reytet a Jew, a Calvinist, and a Lutheran. As a result of these charges, Reytet found himself imprisoned in the public jails of San Martin for four months. After his release, he found that suspicion remained, and as a result his reputation and his practice were ruined. Reytet asked the Inquisition to restore credit to his name. Navarro was apparently willing because shortly after the declaration, the Tribunal issued a letter to the commissary, Father Gamboa. In this communication, the inquisitors said that they had concluded that Reytet was a good Catholic and that the evidence gathered in San Martin failed to show otherwise. The Tribunal noted that there were only vague rumors about Reytet being a Lutheran or a Calvinist and that this was especially bad in places inhabited by 'rustic and ignorant people'. The inquisitors therefore ordered Gamboa to clear Reytet publicly so that all would know the man was innocent. And the Tribunal cautioned Gamboa to be more circumspect in the future. Should suspicions arise against anyone else, the commissary was to investigate according to established procedure. He was to do so without publicity, keeping everything secret, and informing the Tribunal of what he had discovered. Thus the inquisitors scolded their commissary for allowing his zeal to outrun justice, and let him know that the protections of the Holy Office applied equally to foreigners as they did to Spaniards. Justice counted, as did the inquisitors' operating budget and their appeal to the prudence of those with whom they dealt. The cost of supporting prisoners, even in the 'secret jails' of the Inquisition, was too high to permit numerous arrests. Thus, the Tribunal only detained suspects in serious cases where there was a likelihood that the accused would escape. In morê routine investigations, the inquisitors used subpoena instead. Whether arrested or simply called in, suspects were obliged to make a statement {declaration) or to respond less formally in an interview (audiencia). Though technically different, declaraciones and audiencias were essentially similar and included both an inquiry into the

60


suspect's past and a probing series of questions related to the charges at hand. The inquisitor directing the declaration never told the suspect the name of his accuser, but this may have sometimes been a futile precaution. Reytet had guessed who had started rumors against him, and others charged in like circumstances may have been similarly astute. Most people gave the right answers and got off with a warning and perhaps a little penance. Sometimes there was a fine. The Inquisition in eighteenth-century New Spain rarely used torture in questioning prisoners, so that the main inconvenience to arrested suspects was incarceration itself. If the suspect explained away a supposedly heretical statement by saying, perhaps, that he had been misunderstood by 'ignorant persons', the inquisitors invariably let him off with a stern warning about 'what would happen' should such a slip of the tongue reoccur. The inquisitors issued the same warning if the man admitted his unthinking remark and regretted making it. The members of the Tribunal assumed that the formidable reputation of the Holy Office and what it had the power to do would keep the man out of trouble in the future. This tactic seems to have worked rather well, for there were few repeaters. But an occasional incorrigible proved that bluff was sometimes insufficient. For example, Casar Fallet, convicted apostate, faced excommunication and loss of his worldly goods in 1752.29 Fallet was a native of Neuburg, a small territory in Bavaria belonging to Prussia. His parents were Galvinists, but at seventeen, Fallet had converted to Catholicism in Naples. At the time of his arrest many years later in the Philippines, Fallet was owner and master of a merchant vessel plying more or less illegally between Manila and ports in the Dutch East Indies. He first came to the attention of the Philippine commissary because on one of his trips to Batavia (Djakarta, Java) in 1741 or 1742 the German purchased three Malay slave girls for his 'own illicit pleasure'. After an investigation turned up mountains of evidence that Fallet was not only 'depraved' but also a man 'without religion', the commissary sent him as a prisoner to the Tribunal in Mexico City. Witnesses even swore to having- seen Fallet take communion with Protestants in Batavia. The fiscal, Juan Francisco de Tagle Bustamante, viewed the evidence and reluctantly concluded that the only way to confirm whether Fallet was indeed a backslider was to question him under torture {en tormento). This was indeed a drastic step and inquisitors used it sparingly. The inquiry convinced Tagle of


61

the German's guilt. Fallet had forbidden books and ate meat on Fridays. He rejected papal infallibility, purgatory, the cult of the Virgin, and the Catholic view of the Eucharist. The fiscal recommended the maximum penalties. The Tribunal, seldom as vindicative as its reputation, was more lenient than its counsel.30 Because Fallet appeared contrite and begged forgiveness, the inquisitors sentenced him only to public abjuration of his errors. He was then absolved and sent to the Jesuit College of St Peter and St Paul in Mexico City for three months of enforced reinstruction in the faith. At the end of this seclusion, Fallet was restricted to the 'district' of the Mexican Tribunal. Now officially rehabilitated and his sequestered property being released, Fallet petitioned for permission to return to the Philippines, and since those islands lay within their jurisdiction, the Mexican inquisitors allowed him to go in 1753. Supposedly watched by the island commissary, Fallet avoided trouble for almost ten years. But when the British seized Manila in 1762— 1763, Fallet returned to his old ways. He stopped going to confession, abjured his Catholicism, and married one of his own natural daughters in an Anglican ceremony! He advised the British governor during the occupation and, obviously fearing retribution, left with the invaders after the peace. Reports reaching the inquisitors in Mexico City indicated that the withdrawing British abandoned Fallet's ship but that he had made his way to Macao and later to Madras. The Tribunal could do nothing but order the gathering of testimony in case Fallet should fall into their hands again. He did not. If he had, the Tribunal would probably have avoided the issue by sending the culprit to Spain. No one had been burned at the stake in Mexico since the seventeenth century. But what, the reader may ask, of the Jews? Inquisition prosecutions of Jews and of recent converts from Judaism have long been famous, indeed infamous, in Protestant, Jewish, and free-thinking circles. But eighteenth-century Mexico was not sixteenth-century Spain. The last great round-ups of Jews and Marranos (secret Jews) in the Spanish colonies occurred in the mid-seventeenth century and encompassed, for the most part, Portuguese and Portuguese-descended persons, who had entered the Indies during the union of Spain and Portugal (1580-1640).31 But in the eighteenth century, all but a handful of the Portuguese in the viceroyalty were Catholics, and 'Old Christians' at that.32 One of them was even a familiar of the Inquisition.33 In New Spain

62


between 1700 and 1760, most persons denounced for suspected Judaism were Spanish subjects, usually from the peninsula itself.34 As in other types of cases, the Inquisition did not investigate all charges, and even when it did, arrests seldom followed. Some suspects simply moved on before the Holy Office could act.35 The usual procedure for those convicted of Judaism (they were invariably contrite) was reconciliacion to the Church followed by release from custody.36 Foreigners accused of Judaism were less numerous than Spanish subjects, but were just as likely to be innocent, and received the same sorts of treatment as Spaniards similarly charged. Fernando de Medina, a Portuguese reportedly jailed, and Frangois de la Barrere, a Frenchman also imprisoned, suffered the most severe handling of any of the foreign 'Jews' in Mexico.37 Barrere was so insane that he taunted his Inquisition jailer by saying such things as, 'I am, by the grace of God, a Jew. . . .1 do not believe that Mary was a virgin.' At least for a time, the inquisitors kept him a prisoner, apparently for his own protection. Joseph Obediente, Jewish interpreter to a Dutch slave ship, was simply restricted to his vessel in Veracruz.38 Felix Barrera of Curagao may well have been a Jew, as a Venezuelan witness attested, but the Tribunal suspended the investigation when the commissary from Parral, where the suspect had settled, reported that he knew 'neither good nor bad about the man's customs'.39 Daniel Naiscurine, Frenchman and alleged Jew, turned out to be a reformed Calvinist who requested and received reconciliacion.40 Juan Lopez Mexia of uncertain nationality was a Jew but had converted in Port-auPrince and was not molested by the Mexican Inquisition.41 Like other Sephardic Jews, Lopez Mexia spoke Ladino, Castilian by another name, as his native tongue. There were Sephardic communities in Curasao, Jamaica, and several other Caribbean possessions of Protestant powers. Occasionally individual members of these communities, either in search of opportunity or fleeing an obligation, slipped into Spanish America. From time to time, other foreigners, such as employees of the South Sea Company, recognized Sephardim living as Catholics in New Spain, but, as Protestants, had no inclination to expose anyone to the Holy Office.42 In all, the Holy Office received denuncias for religious infractions against at least fifty-five foreigners present in New Spain between 1700 and 1760.43 In addition to Judaism, their alleged


63

crimes included heresy, blasphemy, rebaptism, apostasy, Eastern Orthodoxy, and making cures with the aid of magic. There were five Greeks, a Persian, and persons from various Western European countries. Only six were Portuguese, but French- and English-speaking suspects each accounted for almost one-third of the denuncias. Well over half of the fifty-five drew attention because they said something out of line. Medical practitioners, used to pontificating on almost any topic, comprised nearly onequarter of the accused. The inquisitors considered sixteen of the denuncias to be unworthy of investigation. Thirteen inquiries ended without arrest or even interrogation of the accused. Five men were indeed arrested but proved their innocence, while four others received only warnings from the Holy Office. The death or departure of key witnesses caused the Tribunal to drop proceedings against three foreigners, and four suspicious aliens slipped through the hands of the inquisitors and disappeared. None but the German apostate, Captain Casar Fallet, and the irregularly converted Antoine Guillard were tested under torture, and Guillard's interrogation came after 1760. Although the Tribunal later regretted its leniency toward Fallet, both were released. The inquisitors 'reconciled' four additional heretics, sent a lunatic Frenchman to a hospital for the insane, confiscated a few forbidden books from an Irish doctor, and detained two foreign 'Jews' for an undetermined length of time. But still the penalties imposed by the Holy Office could hardly be called severe. With suspects lightly treated, the Tribunal paid scant attention to other foreigners uncovered in its investigations. For example, the inquiry into the supposed deism of Paul Archdeacon exposed sixteen English-speaking foreigners living in, or passing through, New Spain.44 Yet nationality did not excite the suspicion of the inquisitors, and they investigated the case as slowly as they could. In February or March 1756, two letters from Dr John MacTagart, a Scottish surgeon resident in Orizaba, arrived in the hands of the Tribunal. In the letters and in a series of follow-up interviews with Inquisitor Joaquin de Arias y Urbina, Dr MacTagart denounced Paul Archdeacon, alias Pablo Blanco, for heresy. He described the accused as an Irish-born merchant of average build, with big eyes, blond hair, and a splotchy complexion. Archdeacon, like MacTagart, was a bachelor of forty-three or forty-four years of age. According to the doctor, Archdeacon had two baptismal certificates, his own and another belonging to a deceased cousin born

64


in Huelva. The Irishman had stolen the second certificate from the 'Book of Baptisms' in Huelva and kept it handy in case he had to pass for a native-born Spaniard. Archdeacon had good family connections in Ireland and in Spain, and for this reason, people in Puebla, where the accused resided, believed the man to be respectable. His brothers, the Arzedeanos (sic), had succeeded to ownership of their uncles' merchant houses in Seville, Malaga, and Huelva. Another brother, Thomas, managed a mine in Temazcaltepec. When they came to New Spain, Paul and Thomas Archdeacon had taken the name 'Blanco' after the Spanish form of 'White', their mother's maiden name. Relatives in Spain had done the same. Two cousins, one a secular priest and the other a religious, held posts in Spain. An uncle served as a priest in Cuba. MacTagart, a resident of New Spain since 1736, described how Paul Archdeacon had visited the viceroyalty in 1732 or 1733 and then returned to settle in the winter of 1749—1750. In December or January of that winter, the accused appeared in Orizaba in the company of Dr John Ingleby, an English doctor. During their stay, the visitors spent most of their time in MacTagart's home. A month or so later, Dr Ingleby's wife Josepha, now deceased, and his son-in-law, George Abercromby, joined the group at MacTagart's. Archdeacon had long conversations about religion with Mrs Ingleby. Abercromby said he had heard such things before but 'never such sermons'. The group remained in touch, and in 1753 MacTagart visited Archdeacon in Puebla. On this occasion, the Irishman talked excitedly about 'the latest news from France' and went on to say how one day God would enlighten everyone, including Catholics, on how to worship. Archdeacon talked about 'natural reason' and criticized those who believed that scripture was 'everything'. MacTagart remained silent while his friend rattled on. The two men later traveled together to Mexico City where they stayed at Abercromby's house. At a social gathering that Abercromby held for his guests, Archdeacon said that Dr Whiston's45 ideas of creation were correct even though they contradicted Church teaching. The guests, including William Butler, the Inglebys, and two Spaniards, were shocked. But Archdeacon did not seem to notice and went on to say that Whiston and another of similar views were brilliant men who were closer to the truth than those who called themselves Christians. According to MacTagart, William Butler's only comment was,

Religion: the essential requirement 4

65

it appears that Pablo has little religion'. Abercromby's wife, now deceased, had concluded that Archdeacon inclined toward New Arianism and that the Irishman was in fact a deist who 'believed only in one person' and thus denied the Trinity. MacTagart accused Archdeacon of saying, 'Job is a fine oriental history but not the word of God' and of doubting the divine inspiration of any of the scriptures. The Scot related that George Abercromby, in lengthy discussions of religion with the accused, had heard similar statements. And he added that the Scottish Jesuit William Gordon, who lived in Puebla, had heard Archdeacon's confession and might also know something of the Irishman's beliefs. Thus naming potential witnesses, MacTagart concluded his testimony, but because he admitted under pressure from Inquisitor Arias that Archdeacon had always prefaced his statements by saying, 'these are the opinions of those I have read and not my own', the Holy Office did nothing. Unwilling to let the matter rest, however, MacTagart returned with new evidence on two separate occasions in May, once going so far as to disturb Inquisitor Arias at home. Arias evidently was convinced by now that MacTagart would persist until something was done. Besides there just might be something to this Archdeacon thing. On 30 May, the inquisitor called William Butler to testify. Butler, a native of London, had married in New Spain and had resided in the viceroyalty for some years. At one time he had lived in Tetela, but his home was now in Orizaba. He was fifty-three. Butler claimed ignorance as to why he was called to testify, but Arias pressed him hard, and things began to come back to him. Butler remembered Archdeacon expressing ideas associated with deism such as 'it is only necessary to believe in God and not the other teachings of the Church'. The witness reported hearing similar ideas from Archdeacon both in Puebla and at Abercromby's house in Mexico City. And Butler remembered MacTagart scolding Archdeacon for such 'liberty of expression'. MacTagart had gone to Puebla without ratifying all of his testimony so the Tribunal had to order the slow-moving commissary in that city, Dr Joseph de Mercado, to complete the required formality. The Tribunal had to harry Mercado again to get him to question others in his jurisdiction who might know Archdeacon. Among those Mercado interviewed was Ignatius Lindsay, an Irish priest. Lindsay testified that Archdeacon's family had suffered religious persecution and monetary losses due

66


to English policies in Ireland, but that they had remained steadfast in the faith. Lindsay also witnessed an exchange between MacTagart and the accused in which Archdeacon made clear that he disagreed with the views of the deists. Meanwhile, in October 1756, MacTagart wrote to the commissary in Orizaba, Justo Pastor Valeriano. The Scot reported that during the previous month in Puebla he had a conversation with Archdeacon in which the Irishman went on about certain ancient Greeks and Romans saying it was hard to believe that God had condemned such men to hell. But MacTagart was only using Archdeacon as an introduction. He had a new heretic to report! Charles Allen, a native of Cork and recently arrived from Peru, had traveled from Acapulco to Mexico City with another Irishman, William White. On the recommendation of Robert Kirban, a respected resident of the capital, the Bethlehemite Convento put the travelers up. About the same time, another Irishman, Ralph Ellerker, arrived in Veracruz on a ship from La Guaira, the port of Caracas. Ellerker wrote to his friend Kirban warning him that Allen was a man of 'little or bad faith' who had swindled Ellerker and others in St Thomas and then fled to Spanish America. But before the letter arrived in Mexico City, Allen was back in Acapulco where he signed on as a gunner on a ship bound for the Philippines. Later when Ellerker arrived in the capital, he stayed with Kirban. And he told Kirban, Abercromby, and Kirban's mother Mary Doyle, who were all present in the house, that he doubted that Allen was a Catholic. It seems that Ellerker knew Allen's brothers in Bristol and Cork, and they were Protestants. Mary Doyle remembered that Allen had no rosary. Just how MacTagart was privy to all this is not clear from his letter, but it does seem that this whole group of English-speaking residents in New Spain kept pretty close tabs on one another. Abercromby and Ellerker had since gone to Veracruz and were there waiting for a ship to take them to Caracas. At the end of October 1756, Commissary Valeriano of Orizaba called MacTagart to ratify the contents of the letter, and on the strength of this testimony, the Tribunal ordered its agent in Acapulco to keep a lookout for Allen. In December MacTagart wrote another letter to Valeriano telling him that Archdeacon was planning a big business trip to Guatemala for January. Poor Archdeacon never suspected that MacTagart was telling the inquisitors everything and had himself


67

written his 'friend' in Orizaba to announce the coming trip. Valeriano forwarded both MacTagart's letter of December and the original correspondence from Archdeacon to the Tribunal in Mexico City. When word reached the capital that the suspect might be planning to leave the country, the inquisitors speeded up the investigation. Pedro Pablo de Ybarra, secretary of the Tribunal, gave an itemized summary of Archdeacon's alleged statements to two Jesuit censors (calificadores) of the Holy Office. Going through the points one by one, the two priests traced the origins of each individual error and concluded that whoever had made the statements was guilty of 'the heresy of Arian'. The commissary in Veracruz reported questioning Abercromby and another man about certain details of the Archdeacon case and forwarded their testimony to the inquisitors. Mercado, the lethargic commissary in Puebla, wrote to the Tribunal in January to say that Archdeacon had voluntarily surrendered two English 'books'.46 Apparently the suspect finally knew that something was afoot and was buying time. The ploy worked. The probable source of Archdeacon's information was George Abercromby who had to pass through Puebla on his way to a personal appearance before the Tribunal in Mexico City. Even though he would have been taking a chance to contact his friend under the circumstances, Abercromby's testimony before Inquisitor Arias indicates that the man had both nerve and a grasp of the situation. On 18 January 1756 when Abercromby appeared before Arias, he said he did not know why he had been called. He identified himself as a native of Scotland, a widower, and a resident of Mexico City. He related how he had once practiced medicine like his father-in-law, John Ingleby, but was now a merchant. He was fifty years old. As Arias slid into the subject of the inquiry, Abercromby began to issue information about Archdeacon, but his testimony was considerably less damaging than MacTagart's. Abercromby told just enough to avoid being accused of perjury, but he 'forgot' a great deal and thus was little help in corroborating MacTagart's story. Arias did learn a few new things. Archdeacon was in business with an uncle in Seville who handled that end of their merchandising scheme. But by far the most interesting section of Abercromby's testimony came in answer to the standard question about 'other foreigners he knew'. Thomas Butler the merchant was now in San Angel and was planning to go to Spain on the next flota. William Butler, at one

68


time a factor of the South Sea Company, was now an accountant (contador) with the Veracruz Customs Office. Ralph Ellerker was in Veracruz planning to go to Caracas, but Abercromby did not mention his own part in that intended trip. When he talked about MacTagart, his tone changed. Abercromby reported that William Butler and others who had seen MacTagart recently had said that the man had lost his judgment. In his own recent encounter with MacTagart, Abercromby had come away with the impression that his countryman had grown absent-minded. The implication of these statements seems to be that Abercromby suspected the identity of Archdeacon's accuser, or at least who the most damaging witness would be, and was trying to destroy MacTagart's credibility. Lulled by Archdeacon's cooperation and by Abercromby's testimony, the inquisitors dragged their feet. Orders to Commissary Mercado in Puebla arrived too late to keep Archdeacon from departing the city and heading for Guatemala. When Mercado finally replied at the end of 1762, it was to report that he had received word that Archdeacon, who had not left Puebla until March or April of 1762, had died at Omoa, a small port and fortification in the Campeche region. The Tribunal ordered letters to be sent to various authorities asking for confirmation of this report, and replies were still coming in as late as 1774. People had trouble remembering who died when, and the inquisitors kept asking for specific information. It is certain, however, that Paul Archdeacon died between April and the end of November 1762. He never stood trial for his unorthodox views, but the investigation had revealed a rather extensive network of successful Englishspeaking settlers in New Spain. As in all of the other inquiries involving foreigners, the inquisitors never moved against anyone solely because of his birthplace. Guarding its jurisdictional independence and unconcerned with helping other officials to do their duty, the Holy Office never informed the governmental authorities when it discovered aliens. Other officials were unconcerned at this lack of cooperation because provincial royal authorities exhibited little interest in individual foreigners either. Religious conformity, though crucial, was seldom a difficult thing to demonstrate or to obtain. Prudence or background dictated which course individual foreigners would follow, and reasonableness, within the limits of the times, governed the response of the Inquisition. Apparently hoping that the grim


69

reaper would help clear its dockets, as happened in the Archdeacon case, the Tribunal pursued suspected religious misfits deliberately, almost reluctantly. Once past the religious test, most foreigners could count on tacit toleration from most local authorities, if they behaved themselves.

CHAPTER 4

Other hurdles to acceptance

Gases tried by the various courts and autonomous tribunals of New Spain might or might not result in expulsion for foreigners caught up in the proceedings. An example of this varied treatment shows up in investigations relating to marriage. From the time of Charles V, Spanish law had encouraged residents in America to marry.1 The original intention of this legislation had been to secure permanence of settlement in the Indies and to promote the social stability of the new colonies.2 As communities developed, the settlers themselves undoubtedly adopted this royal concern with marriage, and for their own reasons. Churchmen, married women, and fathers of daughters, to name but a few, could all be expected to lend full support to the institution. Such persons might also aid the authorities in encouraging single men to marry. In addition, religion sanctified marriage in the Catholic world and demanded that it remain, without exception, permanent. Royal legislation aimed not only at encouraging single men to marry, but also at keeping married men from immigrating without their wives.3 Yet a number of such men, foreigners among them, went to New Spain in the eighteenth century. Being in the Spanish New World while a wife remained in Europe was scarcely a very serious crime. And if the man had any sort of legitimate reason for having come without his wife, it was highly unlikely that the authorities would harass him. Acceptable excuses for this technical violation of law might include anything from poverty to an avowed intention to return home when this or that business affair was completed. But given the legislation calling for their expulsion, married men whose wives remained in Europe sometimes took the easy way out and passed themselves off as single. Though taking such a chance was perhaps more dangerous than telling the truth, dishonesty could facilitate entry into the colonies. The real peril lay in continuing the lie once safely past the port. 70


71

When an immigrant persisted in playing the single man, the pressures of the community, an available local girl, and, perhaps, the wish to forget an earlier mistake, all conspired to push him toward the altar again. If he succumbed, he committed bigamy and became a criminal to be dealt with the instant his sin became known. In its capacity as the legal guardian of the sanctity of the sacraments, the Holy Office of the Inquisition served for many years as almost the only court that actually tried cases involving bigamy. The great distance from Europe encouraged men, and an occasional woman, to take a second spouse on the American side of the Atlantic. Most of these crimes, as with the others with which the inquisitors dealt, involved culprits who were Spanish subjects. Occasionally someone would accuse a foreigner of being twice married. Discovery of such offenses was more likely than it might seem, and the Inquisition reacted with much greater speed than it customarily did in cases of religious nonconformity. Punishments meted out by the Holy Office did not need to be severe to be effective. One hardly legible file relates the case of a Frenchman, Joseph de Gaulle, whose wife in Mexico City accused him of being a bigamist.4 The wife had received information from an unnamed source that her husband had another wife living in a village near Havana. The inquisitors instituted the customary secret investigation to ascertain the truth. The Tribunal summoned Don Baleriano de Soto, a resident of Havana who happened to be in Mexico City at the time, to testify. He told the inquisitors that there was indeed a 'Joseph Gallo' who had a wife and children in Cuba, but the witness doubted that it could be the same man. He said that Gaulle was well-known and respected in the island. Another witness was more certain of the Frenchman's guilt. He even knew the first wife's name. The evidence mounted, but the documents do not reveal what the Tribunal decided to do with this foreigner. The normal practice was to divide the goods of bigamists three ways, one-third for each spouse and one-third for the Tribunal. The Holy Office would impose penance, and the man would be sent back to live with his first wife. That was probably punishment enough. In lieu of the penalties for bigamy, lengthy litigation was often more than a sufficient punishment. Antonio Martins de Robles went to a lot of trouble to obtain legal clearance for his second marriage.5 Declaring himself to be a native of the 'Castilian5

72


border town of Castro Marim,6 Martins appeared before the ecclesiastical judge of the Pacific coast village of Colima in September 1709, to present his petition. The prospective bridegroom declared that he had left his home-town eighteen years earlier and had traveled widely. Five of these years, he certified, had been in Veracruz. For the next eight years he had been in the Philippines. After living and working three years in Acapulco, he had gone to Colima, liked it, and decided to stay. Martins declared that his parents were deceased and that there were no impediments to his marriage. He told the judge that Francisca de Solorzano, the daughter of a Spaniard living in Colima, had consented to marry him. After considering the testimony, the judge gave tentative permission for the marriage, but cautioned Martins that confirmation of the facts would be necessary from his last place of residence. Unwilling to wait, the prospective bridegroom produced several witnesses who testified during the first week of October 1709. First, the local notary of the Holy Office attested to the legitimacy of the bride-to-be. A Castilian declared that he had known Martins for twelve years and that no previous marriage existed. A friend from Veracruz, another Castilian, also stated that there were no impediments. A Filipino gave the same testimony. A native of Caracas, a place where Martins had never been, confirmed that there was no problem. A witness from Acapulco testified that, as far as he knew, Martins was a bachelor. This man's statement that Martins was actually a Portuguese had no effect on the judge. Considering the overwhelming evidence, the judge found no problem and, on 3 October 1709, gave his permission for the marriage to proceed. On the twentieth of the same month, the local priest performed the ceremony, and the notary made a legal record of it. Five months after his marriage, Martins made a business trip down the coast to Acapulco. He was not to see his young bride for some time to come. An old friend from Portugal, who, as chance would have it, returned from the Philippines, saw Martins in Acapulco, and asked questions about him. This friend was Manuel Fernandes, brother of Martins' first wife. The end of a pleasant way of life was at hand. On learning that Martins had married a second time in Colima, the outraged brother-in-law sought out the local ecclesiastical judge and Inquisition commissary, Nicolas Henrique de Xerez, and on 20 March 1710, denounced Martins for bigamy. Swearing to the truth of his statements, Fernandes


73

named others in Acapulco who also knew of the marriage to his sister. Commissary Xerez called these persons to add what they might know. Manuel Rodrigues, countryman and shipmate to Fernandes, had been present when his friend learned of the second marriage. As a native of Faro, he could also attest to the existence of the first marriage. Two other witnesses who sailed with Fernandes, a Galician named Antonio Rodriquez and a Portuguese called Domingos de Abreu, told similar stories. Abreu had learned of the second marriage from Juan de Dios Villegas, a resident of Colima temporarily in Acapulco. Following up this lead, Xerez called Dios Villegas to be his next witness. Once all testimony had been duly recorded, the commissary acted to prevent Martins' escape and ordered for the accused bigamist to be arrested. Xerez then reported everything to the Tribunal in Mexico City and awaited instructions. In receipt of the packet from Commissary Xerez, the inquisitors dispatched two letters to Colima. One 'authorized' the local alcalde mayor to sequester the possessions of the accused;7 the other ordered Commissary Joseph Beltran to investigate the marriage of 'Antonio Martinez and Francisca Moreno'. In his capacity as ecclesiastical judge, Beltran was the very man who had certified that Martins was a bachelor in 1709, and the Tribunal was especially interested in the witnesses who had led their commissary to that decision. Beltran's notary confirmed that the accused, representing himself as a Castilian, had been duly married on 20 October 1709. The commissary himself questioned the twenty-year-old bride, the priest who performed the ceremony, one of the bridesmaids, and three wedding guests. He learned nothing startling but forwarded the testimony to Mexico City. Even before writing to Colima, the Tribunal ordered their agent in Acapulco, Commissary Xerez, to send Manuel Fernandes and the other original witnesses to the capital for further questioning. It was too late; all four sailors had returned to the Philippines. Reminding the inquisitors of the ratified testimony he had already obtained, Xerez complained about having to keep his prisoners in the old fortress in Acapulco. In March 1710, the commissary reported that Martins had twice tried to escape from that castillo and was now lodged in the more secure public jails. Xerez strongly suggested that the Tribunal allow him, as soon as possible, to send the accused bigamist to the capital for safekeeping. The Holy Office obliged, and in June 1710 Martins appeared

74


before the Tribunal in Mexico City. The inquisitors told their prisoner what they knew. Martins learned who had denounced him and that the alcalde in Colima had seized his goods. The inquisitors admitted that they had no power over this property. Trying to turn the charges aside, Martins claimed that his first wife was dead and that he was, therefore, innocent of bigamy. After hearing his plea, the Tribunal ordered the prisoner back to his cell. Martins presented the inquisitors with a manifest of goods the commissary in Acapulco had taken from him at the time of his arrest. The prisoner declared the worth of these goods to be about 750 pesos and indicated that many of the articles were Asian imports. At the same time, Martins gave the Tribunal a copy of a letter which he had arranged for a public scribe to send to a friend, Bartolome de Cosio, in Golima. The prisoner had asked this friend to take charge of his affairs and to provide for the suspect's wife out of whatever possessions could be gathered in that city. After allowing him to stew a few more days in jail, the Tribunal permitted its prisoner to give a full account of his side of the case. Now more contrite, Martins declared that he was a 35-year-old sailor from Faro in Portugal and that for the last two months he had been a prisoner. He testified that his parents were dead but that he had a brother who still lived in Faro. He confessed to having a wife and daughter in Portugal. Martins estimated that his daughter would now be fourteen and that he had been married to Maria Gaga Fernandes for sixteen years. The admitted biga'mist begged pardon and intercession for his sins. Though the accused was born in Albufeira, an uncle in Faro had raised Martins to be a sailor. He thus had no formal schooling and was only marginally literate. At eighteen, Martins married Maria, and they subsequently had two children. After the death of his son, Martins went to Cadiz and took service as a seaman with Admiral Manuel de Zavala. They sailed to Veracruz where the young mariner remained for two years. A slave ship of the Portuguese Asiento then carried him back to Lisbon. In that city Martins soon signed on with another slaver bound for the African coast to load blacks for Spanish America. Collecting his share of the profits, he left the slaver in Veracruz and remained there for about a year before going to Acapulco. He sailed to the Philippines on the Manila galleon and stayed in the islands for another four years before returning to America. Once back in Acapulco, Martins entered


75

into the commerce between New Spain and Peru. Leaving this trade, the drifter remained one more year in Acapulco before finally making his way to Colima to settle. Once there he decided to enter the coasting trade between that city and Acapulco. He had been in Colima two months before contracting his second marriage. Recounting the story of his arrest, Martins declared that he did not know whether his first wife was still alive and had believed her dead until he met Fernandes in Acapulco. Clearing his conscience, the prisoner begged the inquisitors to forgive him, but they doubted his sincerity. After all, he had twice tried to escape and only now appeared to be telling the truth. In spite of their suspicions, the burden of proof still rested upon the Tribunal. In November, the inquisitors wrote to their counterparts in Portugal for further information on the first marriage. This correspondence apparently had to go through the Holy Office in Spain because in June 1712 the Tribunal received notice from that agency that as a result of the war it was temporarily impossible to obtain verification of the marriage between Martins and Maria Gaga Fernandes. In view of this impasse, the Tribunal in Mexico City instructed their fiscal, Dr Cienfuegos, to suspend prosecution and directed the jailer to free Martins from custody. The accused remained under the jurisdiction of the Holy Office, and the Tribunal secured his promise, on pain of excommunication, to remain in Mexico City until further notice. If the information warranted, Martins might still be sent to Spain to receive punishment. In the meantime, the Tribunal ordered the fiscal to see that Martins' wife in Colima received everything that her proper care might require. On releasing the suspect, the inquisitors presented Martins with a bill for 366 pesos, the cost of keeping him in prison for the years 1710 to 1712.8 They made provision for this amount to be paid out of the goods embargoed in Colima. The inquisitors were still trying, without success, to establish their jurisdiction over the property in the hands of the alcalde. Commissary Beltran in Colima complained bitterly that the funds in question remained in the hands of both the alcalde and Martins' friend, Bartolome de Cosio, and that neither would release the assets. The Tribunal issued a direct order for the release of the money, but to no effect. Martins, his wife in Colima, and the Tribunal waited. Bringing the case to a conclusion in 1715, the long-awaited documents from the Portuguese Inquisition finally arrived in Mexico

76


City. The authorities in Portugal certified that the marriage of Maria Gaga Fernandes and Antonio Martins was valid. They thanked the Mexican officials for their interest but said that Maria had died in 1702. Noting that Martins had not contracted his second marriage until seven years after his first wife had died, the inquisitors in Mexico City declared all actions that they and their subordinates had taken against the accused were null and void. Martins' name was finally cleared. The Tribunal directed the proper officials to release his goods to him. The inquisitors ordered the foreigner to return to Golima and to resume living with his wife. In a note appended to their decision, the Tribunal disclaimed any responsibility for the 'inconvenience' since Martins had failed to obtain proof that his first wife was dead before he remarried. This omission was the reason that the Inquisition acted in the first place. He was cleared and freed, but still the troubles of Antonio Martins de Robles continued. After returning home he could not obtain the release of his goods from the stubborn alcalde. Martins wrote to the Tribunal in August 1715 begging them to send the necessary documents in order that he might provide for his family. The inquisitors sent the papers but to no avail. By 1719 Martins had died, and his wife was still trying to recover his goods from the obstinate alcalde. The Tribunal tried to help her, but whether they succeeded in seeing that this unfortunate woman inherited her husband's full estate is unclear. In addition to a view of the workings of Inquisition justice and an insight into the technicalities of the marriage laws, the Martins case illustrates some of the same points that could be drawn from the inquiry into the supposed deism of Paul Archdeacon. A foreigner denounced another foreigner, and additional witnesses from the same country appeared in the proceedings. All four Portuguese in the Martins investigation had apparently entered New Spain without much trouble. They had all served as sailors in the Philippine galleons. According to the Laws of the Indies, foreigners who sailed that long and arduous route gained virtual citizenship as Spaniards.9 Still, Martins had represented himself as a Castilian when he obtained his license to remarry. If the four Portuguese experienced so little trouble due to their nationality, other foreigners must have trod a similar path, escaped the notice of the authorities, and quietly melted into the population of the viceroyalty. If they surfaced in Inquisition proceedings, it was generally a result of something other than their origins.


77

This observation holds true for the remaining handful of foreigners indiscreet enough to get caught up in multiple marriages. In 1715, Luca Fortuna, a Sardinian merchant resident in Mexico City, came forward to denounce a Frenchman for having three wives in Europe and making plans to take a fourth in New Spain.10 This bigamist apparently never learned, but before the Holy Office could teach him a lesson, he died. Such frustrations of justice were common. For example, in questioning Simon de Padilla, governor of Coahuila, about a Spanish bigamist named Bias de Iruegas, the Tribunal learned of a Portuguese bigamist who had died ten years before.11 The culprit's name was Manuel de Mattos, and at the time of his death, he had been a lieutenant (alferez) in Patzcuaro. Mattos left a wife and young son in Oporto when he went to New Spain in 1685. Padilla knew all this because in 1699, several years before he became governor, he made a trip to Portugal and there met the wife. She gave Padilla a letter for her husband explaining that things were hard for her and the boy, but the emissary, on returning to New Spain, learned of Mattos' second marriage and did not deliver the letter. The Tribunal was peeved that Padilla had not come forward years before, but dismissed him, confirmed the death of Mattos, and closed the case. The proceedings against Francesco di Arnautti went somewhat differently.12 This Italian tailor married a second time in January 1726, but before a month had passed, his brotherin-law from the Canaries had denounced him as a bigamist. After a lengthy and embarrassing investigation during which Arnautti's new in-laws and others gave him a bad time, the foreigner proved his innocence and won exoneration. Another man accused of bigamy in 1753 did not fare nearly so well. Jose Sabrados claimed to be the grandson of 'Governor Berlin' of Gibraltar,13 but the investigation, which included examination under torture, revealed that Sabrados was in reality a Spaniard from near Seville.14 The fiscal of the Holy Office, Dr Francisco Ximenez Caro, believed that the sinner was guilty of both bigamy and rebaptism. After all the evidence was in, the inquisitors decided that perhaps the rebaptism was not a punishable offense because Sabrados had been deliriously ill at the time. About the second marriage, however, Sabrados' plea that the ceremony had been forced on him by the family of an ugly girl in Mazapil had no effect on the Tribunal. They sentenced him to 200 lashes, penance, and five years' service in the Morro

78


Castle of Havana. In addition, Sabrados was to stay at least twenty leagues away from both Mexico City and Mazapil for another five years. It could have been worse; the inquisitors might have demanded that he return to Guanajuato and resume living with his first wife. As part of the trend toward a more secular government in the Spanish empire that occurred in the second half of the eighteenth century, the crown officially shifted primary jurisdiction in bigamy cases away from the Holy Office. In a cedula of 1748, Ferdinand VI noted that a dispute had arisen in Bogota in the late 1730s.15 The controversy had been between an alcalde ordinario and the commissary of the Inquisition and revolved around which of these officials had competence to try bigamists. The case in question probably involved a man of wealth, and both bureaucrats wanted to be the one to seize the culprit's belongings. At any rate, the royal inclination was to support the alcalde, but the king also wanted to keep the Holy Office happy and recognized its special role in bigamy proceedings. Ferdinand asked Viceroy Revillagigedo I of New Spain to report on the procedures followed in his jurisdiction. By 1754 the king had made a decision.16 In a cedula of that year, Ferdinand set aside precedent and decreed that bigamy was a mixto fuero (concurrent jurisdiction), in which both the royal authorities and the Holy Office had a role to play. But henceforward royal justices enforcing statutory laws against bigamists were to take precedence. The inquisitors were to deal only with such indications of heresy as might come to light in the proceedings. They were to delay their own prosecution until the civil investigation was completed, and royal authorities had imposed sentence. The cedula of 1754 was printed and distributed to all royal officials in the Indies from governors upwards. The Holy Office in Mexico City also received a copy. A brief examination of the indices to the Ramo (Section) de Inquisicion at the AGN, however, indicates that the cedula of 1754 did not immediately end Inquisition involvement with bigamy cases in New Spain. Those in progress continued, and the Holy Office initiated several more at least into the 1760s. But the volume of such investigations did indeed drop off. It may be that, as the Inquisition got out of the bigamy business, the royal authorities did not step fully into the void. One possible explanation for this development could be that people with knowledge of multiple marriages felt no need to


79

clear their consciences by denouncing offenders to the civil authorities. The Holy Office had benefited from its connection with churchmen, and priests hearing confession often sent parishioners to tell their stories to the Inquisition. Royal governors and alcaldes enjoyed no such help. Another reason that the civil justices apparently failed to pick up where the inquisitors left off, at least regarding foreigners, may have been the result of something else. Should a married foreign resident of the Indies, for example, be suspected of having a wife in some other country, would it not be better to leave him alone and spare his Spanish family rather than disrupt their lives as well as his to benefit some faraway foreign woman? At any rate, the reluctant departure of the Holy Office from bigamy investigations seems to have reduced interest generally in the subject of multiple marriages. Several of the bigamy proceedings already discussed, as well as certain other cases dealing with marriage that the inquisitors investigated, suggest other things about public attitudes toward foreigners.17 In replying to questions about the marriage of Giovanni Battista Franutti, several witnesses told about the custom of publicly announcing marriage banns. The ceremony took place in the village of Acayucan, and as a result of the publication of the banns which included, among other things, the birthplaces of the engaged couple, everyone knew that Franutti was a native of Finale Ligure in northern Italy. Since the publication of banns was normal procedure for all marriages, and since the legality of the union and hence the legitimacy of any children depended, at least in part, on the accuracy of the information contained in the banns, it follows that when a foreigner married, his nationality was, in most cases, revealed to the whole community. That this information did not result in the arrest of the foreigner by the now knowledgeable local representatives of the king indicates an unofficial and informal but widespread toleration of foreigners who were attempting to make themselves good citizens and worthy members of the community. Cliches about Latin respect for love and romance are unnecesary to explain this accommodation of law enforcement to local attitudes of decency. Investigations revolving around bigamous marriages could lead to revelations of totally unrelated crimes. In 1707 the Tribunal of the Holy Office in Mexico City learned about a Portuguese woman living in bigamy with a man in Seville.18 Her name was Maria de Arouz, and her accuser was a Spanish navigator, Joseph

80


Beltran. The informer told the inquisitors that Maria's first husband, a Portuguese named Pedro Lopes Sanches da Penha, was an alguacil mayor19 in the village of Metepec near Toluca. Lopes and Maria had two children, but after he left the country, she had remarried in Spain. According to the informer, Lopes knew what had happened but declined to take any action. The Tribunal called in the quiet husband to learn what he might know. He testified that he was thirty-six and did indeed suspect that something was amiss at home. Hearing rumors that his wife had married a wine merchant in Seville, Lopes had written letters to friends asking for details. He received his first reply from a priest who promised not to take official action until Lopes wanted it. The friend reported that only one of Lopes' daughters was still alive and that she was living with her mother in the house of the second husband, a wine merchant of Seville. Hearing this, the Mexican authorities apparently sent news of the case to their counterparts in Spain, because in March 1708 they received notice that the Spanish inquisitors had placed Maria in jail for bigamy. They reported that she had married Lopes in 1691 and the wine merchant in 1705. The Holy Office in Spain speculated that the reason why Lopes had declined to bring the affair out in the open earlier was that the civil authorities there wanted him on a charge of murder. Learning this startling fact, the Mexican inquisitors alerted the local alcaldes to apprehend the fugitive, but it was too late. The authorities discovered that Lopes had left New Spain at the head of a group of soldiers bound for the Philippines - not to be heard from again. Learning that Lopes had made good his escape, the Tribunal ordered the commissary to obtain the aid of some religious in that town and complete the formalities of the case. In February 1709, the Mexican authorities forwarded to Spain copies of all of the papers pertaining to Lopes' wife to aid in her prosecution there. In a bigamy investigation of 1727, the inquisitors ran across another fugitive murderer, Paul Bussel.20 Unlike Lopes the Portuguese, this Frenchman failed to outrun the authorities. He, like certain others escaping an obligation or authority outside the viceroyalty, discovered that making a fresh start in New Spain was sometimes impossible. Such also was the case with a second Portuguese going by the name of 'Lopez' - Antonio this time.21 Desirous of obtaining clearance so that he could marry, this foreigner prevailed upon a friend, Esteban de Morras, to swear to


81

the Holy Office in 1703 that they had known each other for twenty years and that there were no impediments to Lopez' proposed marriage. Morras, a native of Castile and a chocolate merchant in Mexico City, was glad to do the favor. Perfunctorily, the inquisitors solicited further testimony. They learned that Lopez had lived in the village of Ozumba near Mexico City for several years, and the inhabitants there considered him to be a bachelor. He had asked and received the permission of the parents of Maria Rosales to make her his wife. The testimony of Morras was instrumental in proving that no impediments to the marriage existed, and the inquisitors permitted the ceremony to proceed. As the key witness had really known Lopez for only eleven or twelve years, he became worried lest some irregularity lurk in his friend's past. Following through his concern, Morras wrote to a friend who was a member of the Bethlehemite Order in Old Cordoba, the supposed home of Lopez. When the religious wrote back that he had never heard of Antonio Lopez del Toral, Morras immediately went before the Holy Tribunal to clear his conscience. The informer made his declaration in October 1707. Morras told all. He knew now that Lopez was a Portuguese; others who had heard Lopez rambling in the delirium of a fever had told him. In addition to revealing his nationality, Lopez had reportedly said that he was married elsewhere, or was a Jew, or a renegade religious. The informer was passing these rumors on to the Tribunal for verification. The fiscal, Francisco de Garzaron, acted quickly because within ten months he had confirmed the true identity of the Portuguese. The Tribunal learned that Lopez was actually Brother Joao de Santiago, a runaway member of the Franciscan Order of the Province of Portugal. The cooperation of the Portuguese authorities even in time of war had this time been expeditious and swift. The inquisitors apparently packed the wayward religious off to his homeland, but they were not finished with the matter. The Holy Office was upset that Morras had offered false testimony in 1703, and Fiscal Garzaron recommended a severe reprimand along with a 100-peso fine.22 Other agencies in addition to the Holy Office also unearthed foreign criminals in New Spain. For example, in 1734 port officials in Veracruz routinely prepared to forward two foreigners and a Spaniard to Cadiz as prisoners.23 Arresting the three on the probable charge of trying to enter the viceroyalty without the

82


requisite royal licenses, the authorities had discovered that one of them, Pietro Contarini of Venice, was a fugitive from justice. Gontarini somehow got back to New Spain, perhaps with a forged license, and Viceroy-Archbishop Vizarron, acting on orders from Jose Patifio, the minister of the Indies, arrested the man again.24 The Italian's impudence may have become a topic of conversation among bureaucrats in Madrid because the Venetian ambassador learned of the case. He was on the lookout for Gontarini anyway and immediately presented a petition to the king. The ambassador reported that Gontarini had stolen a large amount of money deposited by two noblemen in a religious house in Venice. Since the funds were as yet not recovered, the viceroy received orders to institute a search and to forward to Spain any assets belonging to Gontarini that might be discovered.25 The authorities probably found nothing. By far the most celebrated case involving a foreigner in New Spain during the first half of the eighteenth century was political and concerned a man named Lorenzo Boturini.26 He first came to the official attention of the authorities in 1742. In that year a new viceroy, Pedro Cebrian y Agustin, Count of Fuenclara, arrived at Veracruz. On his way to Mexico City, Fuenclara, like most travelers, stopped to refresh himself and his retinue at Jalapa. 27 While there, the local alcalde showed him a printed solicitation from Boturini asking for donations to provide a crown for the patron saint of Mexico, the Indian Virgin of Guadalupe. Fuenclara immediately became suspicious that perhaps this was a fraud perpetuated on sincere but naive believers. Newly installed viceroys, eager to demonstrate their zeal, tended to be most direct in enforcing laws.28 Fuenclara was no exception, and the Boturini case would serve as an example to all potential malefactors of what to expect. Arriving in Mexico City in November 1742, the viceroy ordered an investigation and, in February of 1743, reported to the king that Boturini was a foreigner who had come to America without a royal license. Further revelations included proof that this alien had no authorization from the government for his solicitation of funds and was operating solely on a warrant granted by the pope, whose coat of arms Boturini planned to include in the design of the Virgin's crown. Fuenclara was therefore sending Boturini to Spain together with the evidence compiled in the investigation and the money the foreigner had already collected. Lorenzo Boturini, an Italian subject of the Austrian crown, was


83

born to noble parents in the village of Sodrino, some sixty miles north of Milan.29 After being educated in Milan, he went to Vienna with his father and remained at the imperial court for eight years. A linguist and a follower of Vico,30 be became interested in Indian cultures and in the Virgin of Guadalupe even before going to New Spain. Because of his genuine scholarly interest and, no doubt, helped by his political connections, Boturini received the loan of certain valuable sixteenth-century maps and documents from the Vatican. He did more research, made important friends in Spain, and continued to add manuscripts to his collection after he arrived in New Spain in 1736. Boturini's belief, derived from Vico, that the religious piety and morality of a culture determined its level of civilization, led him to study the pre-Columbian societies of Mexico. He was planning to write a 'History of America' culminating in the conversion of the Indians, the appearance of the Virgin at Guadalupe, and her subsequent miracles. But Viceroy Fuenclara had ordered the seizure of all the documents and papers in Boturini's hands as a result of the controversy over the papal bull. The bull had authorized Boturini to collect donations in New Spain for the fabrication of an elaborate crown to be placed on the Virgin's head. The Vatican had even provided the Italian with an outline of the ritual to be used in the 'coronation'. Perhaps it was his own privileged background that caused Boturini to ignore those provisions of Spanish law which required royal permission before putting papal decrees into effect. A more charitable conclusion would be that he was simply too involved with his project or too sincerely committed to it to realize that he was seriously out of line. The royal patronage of the Church was one of the most jealously guarded prerogatives of the Spanish crown, and had been since Ferdinand and Isabella obtained it in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. Boturini's blindness to its importance could not but bring him grief at the hands of royal servants charged with protecting the powers of the crown. After Boturini's arrest, Viceroy Fuenclara ordered an investigation into the Italian's activities. The investigators, headed by Antonio de Rojas y Abreu, alcalde del crimen of the Audiencia of Mexico, made extensive efforts to connect the suspect with ultramontanist ideas. The approach was guilt by association, but Rojas could make no conclusive case for this anti-regal charge. Because Boturini had already collected a considerable sum of

84


money before his arrest, the investigation eventually turned to the question of whether the Italian had misappropriated some of the funds for his own use. Again the inquiry proved no wrongdoing. Being a foreigner was a point against Boturini, but his action without reference to the patronage was his true crime. To have allowed this offense to go unchallenged would have been a very bad precedent, and Viceroy Fuenclara was determined to quash Boturini in spite of the man's noble family and friends at court. After Boturini's humiliating expulsion from New Spain, he made an almost uneventful crossing of the Atlantic.31 But it was wartime, and as the vessel approached Spain, English privateers fell on Boturini's ship and captured her. The English despoiled the travelers of all their worldly possessions and then deposited the prisoners on a deserted stretch of the Spanish coastline. Boturini made his way to Cadiz where he presented himself voluntarily to the Tribunal of the Casa de Contratacion and begged the oidores to see to the protection of his documents and papers seized in Mexico. The justices lacked the authority to order a viceroy to do much of anything, and they sent the petitioner to Madrid. The Council of the Indies heard Boturini's plea. The foreigner stated that the impounded documents included ' numerous old maps and other original manuscripts' amounting to some twenty volumes and loose pieces as well. Boturini was worried lest careless treatment would result in the loss of these valuable papers, and he asked that the Council order them to be properly stored so that humidity and deterioration would not destroy so many old, fragile, and unique manuscripts. The councilors issued the desired order and required the viceroy to report immediately his steps to protect the documents. The Council of the Indies had greater appreciation for historical documents than did Viceroy Fuenclara and acted with dispatch in 1744 to insure the preservation of Boturini's collection. The Italian had been prevented from writing his history because of his political mistake in ignoring the royal patronage of the Church and not because of some obscurantist plot. To suggest that Boturini was a man in the vanguard of Enlightenment ideas in New Spain, who was suppressed by mystery-mongering Spaniards, is hard to accept. His interest in the Virgin of Guadalupe and his activities on her behalf indicate just the opposite. For example, his precis published in 1746 contains the speculation that Quetzal coatl, the feathered serpent/bearded god of the Mexican


85

Indians, was St Thomas come to foretell the coming conversion to Christianity.32 Although a man of Baroque thought, Boturini was a scholar who depended wherever possible on contemporary documentation. His scholarship so impressed the Council of the Indies that they named him 'Cronista en las Indias', awarded him a salary, and gave him permission to complete his work in New Spain. He never went, but he did gain entry into the Academia Valenciana. Still in Spain and with one volume of his history in manuscript, Boturini died in 1755. His principal enemy, Viceroy Fuenclara, seems to have had little appreciation for scholars, but the viceroy was a straightforward and consistent defender of state supremacy over the Church, and in that position he was much more in line with the late eighteenth century than was Boturini. Neither was Fuenclara a xenophobe because at least one foreigner had come over unmolested in his own retinue.33 The Boturini case was spectacular, and it was unique. Other criminal proceedings against foreigners included everything from illegal trade to murder, and the penalties they received suggest that aliens were often treated less severely than were Spaniards accused of similar crimes.34 Yet even potential honor, such as the nomination of Irishman John Gordon to be an alcalde mayor in western New Spain, could bring expulsion.35 Thus, the vast majority of foreigners had no desire to do anything that might draw the attention of the authorities and result in their eviction from the viceroyalty. They were consequently less inclined to commit offenses or to take chances than even law-abiding Spaniards might be. The paucity of prosecutions testifies to the success of foreigners in avoiding such involvements.

CHAPTER 5

The burden of wealth

In addition to the consequences of their own deeds and the basic statutes calling for their arrest and expulsion,1 unnaturalized foreigners resident in the Indies had another major worry. The kings periodically issued decrees calling for special efforts to round up these illegal aliens and to send both the foreigners and their wealth to Spain at the earliest opportunity. These cedulas came, characteristically, when the crown was most worried about the potential dangers foreigners represented to the empire. Need for the money that might be forthcoming in the seizure of the wealth of these persons also played an important part in the timing of orders for direct action against foreign residents. These round-ups thus tended to come just before or during wartime when both the royal concern for imperial defense and the need for increased revenues were most in evidence. There were several such 'reprisals' (represalias) in the course of the eighteenth century. The last came in 1794 and 1795 when orders went out to arrest all Frenchmen and to sequester their holdings.2 Philip V directed the first roundup of the century during the War of Spanish Succession. In a cedula dated 24 July 1702, Philip told Viceroy Alburquerque of New Spain that England, Holland, and the Hapsburgs had declared war.3 Alburquerque was therefore to take 'appropriate measures to embargo all Germans, Dutchmen, and Englishmen' in his jurisdiction. He was to allow absolutely none of these foreigners nor any goods or estates pertaining to them to escape. The king ordered his viceroy to prepare his actions with reserve and to keep everything secret up to the point of execution. Agents of the viceroy were to strike simultaneously everywhere in the viceroyalty so that none of the foreigners would have warning of what was coming and thus have the opportunity to hide valuable items or important papers. In the viceregal capital, Alburquerque was to make use of the judges (oidores and alcaldes del crimen) 86


87

of the Audiencia of Mexico. Elsewhere the provincial governors {alcaldes mayores, corregidores, and gobernadores) were to make the arrests and seizures. These officials together with the local treasury agents would then sell off easily merchantable items and forward the proceeds along with any sequestered cash to the coffers of the General Treasury in Spain. The embargoing officials were to prepare detailed inventories of unmarketable goods and items of disputed ownership and await further orders for their disposition. The king reiterated the all-inclusiveness of his edict by further decreeing that not even a letter of naturalization carrying rights to trade and do business in New Spain should excuse any enemy subject from action under this cedula. The only caution other than to proceed secretly was that the viceroy should be careful that operations against foreign residents not disrupt the commerce of Spanish subjects. Owing to irregular communications with Spain caused by the war, Alburquerque did not receive this important cedula of 1702 until October 1703.4 In the months before the cedula of 1702 arrived, the authorities in New Spain had not been idle.5 Joseph Copado, carrying out the instructions of his superior, the corregidor of Mexico City, had delivered a prisoner to an obraje located in the Barrio (quarter) of Jamaica in March 1703. When Copado arrived at the workshop, he saw and heard six or seven persons within speaking English. Copado told Pedro Roman, lieutenant (alferez) of the palace guards about the incident, and Roman reported to the viceroy. Believing these foreigners to be suspicious persons or even spies, Viceroy Alburquerque acting in his capacity as Captain General assigned Francisco de Valenzuela Venegas, oidor of the Audiencia of Mexico, to look into the matter and to find out whether the English-speaking group in the obraje had correspondence with the enemy. The oidor, as Auditor General of War, followed up his assignment by directing Captain Joseph Alvares of the palace guards to arrest all of the foreigners. Francisco Fernandez, royal notary (escribano real y de la guerra), was to assist Alvares in the proceedings. The two men had orders to pay special attention to papers and documents in the possession of the suspects. On 24 March 1703, Fernandez, Alvares, and several soldiers went to the home and workshop of Bartholomew Raford. Leaving some of the soldiers to guard the doorways, the investigators found Raford, his wife Maria, Jean Serrecer, and Joseph Sunday. Raford was English, Serrecer French and Sunday Irish. Captain

88


Alvares sent his men to search the building, and they rounded up about thirty laborers, all Indians, mestizos, and zambos.6 Alvares dispatched some of his soldiers to conduct Raford and Serrecer to the guardhouse and ordered his sergeant, Francisco Sanchez, to proceed to another house and arrest Ernst Plus and Heinrich Kempe, both 'Germans'. Notary Fernandez and Captain Alvares allowed Sunday, who was ill, and the laborers to remain in the house but cautioned them not to leave. The two investigators then settled down to inventory the contents of the obraje. They apparently found nothing of importance. When the soldiers delivered the suspects to the guardhouse, Oidor Valenzuela was waiting. He questioned each one and came up with a few more names for the soldiers to bring in. All in all the investigation encompassed some six foreign residents. Ernst Plus, an unmarried tailor from near Miinster, had sailed from Amsterdam to Cadiz several years before and had there taken service with Joseph de Escolar, Master of the Chamber for Viceroy Alburquerque. He had no license and had never been asked to produce one. He lived in the house of Heinrich Kempe, a 46-year-old native of the Rhineland. Kempe, an ex-seaman, had come to New Spain several years before and stayed because his ship was decommissioned in Veracruz. He had a wife and children in Cadiz and a son who was an officer in the Spanish infantry at Manila. Kempe, who had also once served in the Spanish army, was now a successful master tailor in Mexico City and had sent for his wife, or so he said. Raford, then forty, had left his hometown of Bristol on board an English vessel bound for Jamaica when he was twenty-three. His ship was captured off Havana, and Raford, along with eighteen companions, was taken to New Spain where he and the others were eventually farmed out to various obrajes in Mexico City. He remained in the workshop of Pedro de Avila for eight years until released by order of the Count of Galve, then the viceroy. Galve had ordered the release of all converts to Catholicism who had been obraje prisoners for an extended length of time.7 Now calling himself Avila after Pedro de Avila, his godfather-employer, Raford was married and had become the manager of the obraje. His French assistant, Serrecer, a native of Normandy, at the age of thirty had gone to the New World with a French expedition. In an attack they made on the English, Serrecer and others were captured and ended up as laborers cutting dyewoods in the Laguna de Terminos. Cap-


89

tured again, this time by Spaniards, he also spent some years as a prisoner in the Avila obraje before being released by order of Viceroy Galve. After completing the initial questioning of Plus, Kempe, Raford, and Serrecer, Oidor Valenzuela released Serrecer and sent Fernandez, the notary, to deposit the other three in the royal jails. When Fernandez returned from the jail, Valenzuela dispatched him with two members of the night patrol (comisarios de rondd) to arrest John King ('Rey'), an Irishman mentioned in the testimony of some of those already in prison. Fernandez conducted King to the royal jails and questioned him a few days later. Like the others, King had come to New Spain in a curious way. He had left his native Dublin at fourteen and gone to Puerto de Santa Maria in Andalusia ' because he wanted to live in a Catholic country'. He stayed with Juan Gonzalez who taught him a tailor's trade and later worked for a time in the house of the Duke of Cesar. King signed on as a soldier assigned to the Armada de Barlovento, but the French navy captured his ship and sent him to Brest where he spent over a year before being paroled and allowed to go to Portugal. He quickly returned to Spain and resumed his military service, which shortly resulted in his being stationed in Veracruz. He married but became so ill as a result of the unhealthy conditions on the coast that he had to give up his military career and move to Mexico City. Now recovered, King supported himself and his family through his small tailor shop. He declared that his nation was not foreign because Ireland 'confesses allegiance to His Majesty whom it loves as a Catholic'. King's countryman, Joseph Sunday of Belfast, was a sick man. Returning to the obraje the afternoon of the first arrests, Notary Fernandez had taken Sunday to the Hospital of Jesus Nazareno and there placed him in the care of Tomas Flores Mufioz, chief medic (enfermero mayor). Like King, Sunday had left home as a boy, gone to Puerto de Santa Maria, and taken service with the Armada de Barlovento. Returning to Europe, he spent three years in London before going back to Spain and on to Veracruz. Sunday also came down with a fever in that port and moved to Mexico City for his health. But despite a stint in the Hospital of San Juan de Dios, he was still sick when Raford took him in. Sunday, like his fellow Irishman King, claimed to be a naturalborn vassal of the crown saying 'no one in my land recognizes anyone except His Catholic Majesty as king'.

90


Valenzuela continued to gather evidence concerning the foreigners whom he and his men had arrested. After hearing appeals from King, Raford, and Kempe asking for freedom on the basis of their past service to the crown and their long residence in Spanish territory, the oidor released the three on bail on 6 April, about two weeks after their arrest. By the middle of May, all of those taken into custody were free on bond pending a final decision on their cases. Clearly the oidor saw them as no security threat. The only one of these foreigners who had nothing in his favor, save his ignorance of the law, was Ernst Plus. Valenzuela granted his release but ordered him to report to Veracruz to await transportation back to Spain. Though he had come in the train of the viceroy, Plus was unmarried, had never served in the Spanish military, and had only been in New Spain a few months. There was simply no basis on which Valenzuela could bend the laws and allow this harmless man to stay. By a decision (real acuerdo) of the audiencia given on i January 1704, Valenzuela's colleagues confirmed his actions and directed the secretaries to forward copies of the proceedings to the king and the Council of the Indies. Between the beginning of Valenzuela's actions against Plus, Raf ord, and the rest in March 1703, and the meeting of the audiencia in February 1704, Philip V's cedula of 1702 arrived in the hands of Viceroy Alburquerque. He took up the matter of a large-scale round-up of enemy aliens with the audiencia.8 Together they decided to strike a month later on 30 November at 9 p.m. It would take that long, they believed, to prepare a list of suspects and to inform the various provincial governors subject to the audiencia. Alburquerque dispatched orders to the Audiencia of Guadalajara to do the same for the western territories. Conducting the proceedings in the capital, Senor Valenzuela was now joined by three fellow oidores and three alcaldes del crimen of the Audiencia of Mexico. They divided up the work in order to make possible simultaneous arrests of all the suspects in the city. The viceroy issued special enabling decrees for each local arrest. Although the various judges of the audiencia went to great lengths to seize numerous foreigners, they had no luck in producing extra revenue for the crown.9 The suspects were easy to find. Valenzuela, for example, arrested Luca Fortuna at the house of Dr Joseph de Osorio y Espinosa, oidor of the audiencia. Fortuna, a successful wholesale merchant, had been accused of


91

being a Dutchman. He turned out to be a Sardinian and was released along with his goods because his homeland had been Spanish for centuries.10 Other justices rearrested Raford, Kempe, and Plus. This time Raford won unconditional freedom because of his long-term residence and proven loyalty. He had little money anyway. Poverty, along with having a useful trade, also earned Plus a release without restriction. Thus being arrested a second time actually improved his status. Kempe had to put up another bail bond, but he too went back to his shop after a short imprisonment. Alonso de Avella Fuentes, alcalde del crimen, arrested Giaeomo Santoni and Domenico Tullio. The viceroy, on the advice of the fiscal, Dr Joseph Antonio de Espinosa y Cornejo, and the consent of the audiencia, freed both men. They were poor, had useful trades, and had both served in the Spanish military. Santoni, as a Corsican, was a subject by birth, and Tullio had been a captain in the Spanish cavalry in Italy. Similarly, Jean Marin of Flanders and Gianmaria Quadrio of Milan won release because their homelands were Spanish controlled and because they practiced the useful trade of tobacconist. They had been arrested by the alcalde del crimen, Manuel Suarez Munis. Alcalde Juan de Ozaetto de Oro, also of the Sala del Crimen, fared no better in his arrests of Girolamo Gerardi of Venice and Girolamo Tozzi of Genoa. Though technically foreigners, both men escaped the loss of their goods and expulsion because Dr Espinosa, the fiscal, declared them exempt from the terms of the 1702 cedula, Tozzi for his useful trade as a tailor and Gerardi for his past military service and marriage to a Spanish subject. Neither man was an enemy alien. Oidor Balthasar de Tovar had even worse luck than his colleagues. He arrested a Basque straight from Spain itself. The local governors in other areas of the viceroyalty showed almost no interest in the orders to enforce the king's cedula of 1702. Only a few even replied.11 Lorenzo de Minano, alcalde mayor of Chalco, arrested Giovanni Stefani, a native of Finale Ligure, a Spanish possession near Genoa. Dr Espinosa declared him not included in the terms of the cedula, and Viceroy Alburquerque ordered the man to be released. Juan Joseph de Veitia Linaje, alcalde mayor of Puebla, uncovered a poor Englishman, c Diego Santiago',12 who was not even worth arresting in the first place. This foreigner had been in New Spain since the 1670s, was married, and had no property whatsoever. The corregidor in

92


Queretaro, Sorani Victoria, uncovered six foreigners, but the two from Milan and the two from Corsica were Spanish subjects, the Florentine was married, and the Portuguese had served in the king's army. All were poor and eventually won release. In Zacatecas the corregidor, Phelipe de Otade, also found some foreigners. In reviewing the evidence, Fiscal Espinosa recommended releasing Giacomo Traviata, the Milanese, but suggested levying a fine 'according to his circumstances' for having come to the Indies without a license. Jean Philippe du Nogal of Corsica should be released without charge since he had come over in a 'military occupation' and hence needed no license. But the case of Pierre du Portail was different. At last the authorities in the viceroyalty had discovered an enemy alien without legal protection, and furthermore, he was not a poor man. Since Portail's homeland, the Duchy of Lorraine, then belonged to the House of Hapsburg,13 Espinosa suggested selling the foreigner's goods and forwarding both the prisoner and the money to Spain at the earliest opportunity. Thus, the viceroy would be able to send his king at least a little 'product' from all the efforts of 1703 and 1704 against Englishmen, Dutchmen, and 'Germans'. Still, the Council of the Indies was disappointed with the paltry fruta, and the councilors hinted that Viceroy Alburquerque might have done more.14 But there was to be yet another round-up before the war was over. By a cedula dated 3 May 1704, Philip V informed his officials in the New World that Portugal had joined the Austrian invasion of Spain. The king therefore ordered his viceroys and governors to move against Portuguese nationals in the Indies. By decrees of June and July, he amended his earlier edict and laid out what he actually wanted done,15 Rather than concentrate simply on obtaining funds from these foreigners, Philip wanted a general expulsion of Portuguese from his domains. He ordered his officials to confiscate everything they owned and to send them and their money to Spain. Yet Philip instructed his men in the field to proceed 'with an inclination toward clemency rather than rigor'. The decree of expulsion applied only to those who had no royal license to be there, and even this requirement was not absolute. If a particular Portuguese had no license but was either married or had paid for indulgence in a previous round-up, he was to be allowed to stay. This exception was total if he had children.16 Philip did not want any Portuguese living in the ports of the


93

Indies and ordered his officials to see that any such persons allowed to stay remain c at least thirty or forty leagues from the seaports'. Furthermore, the king wanted to restrict to six the number of Portuguese-headed families permitted to settle in any one village. Naturally, should any such foreigners arrive without royal license in the future, they were to suffer the full penalty of the Laws including loss of goods and deportation to Spain. As occurred with the cedula of 1702 dealing with the English, Dutch, and Germans, the cedula of May 1704 that aimed at the Portuguese took some time to reach Viceroy Alburquerque.17 The edict arrived in Hispaniola in January 1705, but Alburquerque had no news of it until the governor of Cuba sent him an unofficial copy. Upon receiving the governor's letter in early August of that year, Alburquerque called the audiencia into immediate session. The viceroy and Dr Espinosa, the fiscal, urged action without waiting for an official copy of the cedula. By a real acuerdo of 4 August, the audiencia agreed. The oidores again brought in the alcaldes del crimen to help them in the arrest of Portuguese in Mexico City and this time also included the corregidor of the city as well. The viceroy sent orders to the audiencias of Guatemala and Guadalajara to proceed against Portuguese residents, and the secretaries of the chamber set to work notifying the provincial governors. The authorities of the viceroyalty undertook the round-up of Portuguese with gusto, turning up a hundred such persons in the space of several months.18 The justices of the Audiencia of Mexico found twenty-five in the capital. The port of Gampeche was next with seventeen, and Puebla had ten. The alcalde in Cordoba discovered nine while his counterparts in Oaxaca and Parral each arrested five. Altogether twenty-three provincial governors outside Mexico City detained Portuguese in their jurisdictions and sent reports to the viceroy. Dr Espinosa, as crown attorney, immediately went to work reviewing the cases, reading the evidence, and offering recommendations to the audiencia. In almost every case, that august body accepted the advice of its legal counsel. Of the hundred Portuguese encompassed in these massive proceedings, the authorities took no action at all against ten. Espinosa recommended freeing eighty-eight of the others. One of those freed was fined, and only one man was deported. Two cases were still pending when the documents went to Spain. Clearly neither Dr Espinosa nor the audiencia worried much

94


about 'conviction rates'. This crown attorney, at least, was a man of justice and had taken the king's inclination toward clemency at face value. Espinosa exempted married men and widowers with or without children. He recommended release of single men who were long-term residents. And he was always inclined to favor a man with a useful occupation or anyone with an illness or a handicap, By far the greatest number of the Portuguese who were turned up in the project were poor. Espinosa saw no logic in trying to squeeze these men for a few pesos, and he reasoned persuasively that to expel them would only be to rob their creditors. In cases involving Portuguese born before 1641, the fiscal held that such men had always been subjects of Spain and they were therefore 'not foreigners and never had been5.19 This reasoning carried a great deal of weight with the audiencia especially if the Portuguese in question had spent most of his life in Spain or Spanish America.20 In August 1707, Espinosa forwarded records on forty-seven Portuguese whose cases were closed.21 He reported to his superior, the fiscal of the Council of the Indies, and told that 'very powerful gentleman' that all the evidence on these cases was complete. Espinosa's superior was displeased that rulings by the fiscal in Mexico had exempted all forty-seven from the represalia.22 The king, however, approved Espinosa's decisions in a general way, yet ordered Viceroy Alburquerque to redouble his efforts.23 The Council of the Indies and their crown attorney persisted in the belief 'that the great bulk of Portuguese in New Spain had escaped detection'. The final documents in the cases of the other fifty-three men apprehended in the round-up arrived in Madrid in 1708. Officials in New Spain eventually sent three Portuguese to the Casa de Contratacion in Seville.24 Whether these deportees were from among those arrested in 1705 and 1706 is unclear. Even though authorities in the viceroyalty carried on halfheartedly in their search for Portuguese,25 the conclusion is unavoidable that the represalia de Portugueses was a monumental waste of bureaucratic time, effort, and paper. The main value of the proceedings was in revealing a crosssection of the kinds of foreigners in New Spain. Of those who listed their marital status, about three-quarters were married to women in the viceroyalty. Most of the others (about 60 percent) were probably single. This condition may represent poverty as much as anything else, but it also suggests some social instability


95

as well. Of the fifty-four who gave an occupation, a whole spectrum of success and failure opens up. There were two beggars and several drifters. There were woodcutters, ranch hands, and servants. A few held slightly more prestigious positions such as shoemakers, confectioners, or retail merchants.26 One Portuguese turned up holding a job as a customs (aduana) guard, and another was the stable boss at the viceregal palace and had been for seventeen years. Only a handful could be counted as really successful. There were two ranchers, two mine owners, an apothecary, and a surgeon. One man even held a seat as regidor on the municipal council (cabildo) of the city of Cordoba. Yet because of Dr Espinosa's largesse, not even these produced revenues for the crown. The poor financial results of the 1704-1709 round-up of Portuguese seem to have influenced the shape of such actions in future years. Between 1713 and the 1740s, represalias were aimed primarily at the British. And though the cedulas in question included individuals, the real quarry was the property of the South Sea Company.27 The viceroys and other officials in New Spain always succeeded in squeezing considerable wealth out of that company and thus drew nothing but praise and appreciation from their sovereign. Failing to execute large-scale round-ups of enemy aliens drew no comment from either the king or his Council of the Indies. There was a scare in 1718 over a report that there were a thousand foreigners in Chile, and the king ordered Viceroy Valero to check and see if such could also be the case in New Spain.28 But this was a passing concern and, for the most part, the royal orders calling for round-ups of aliens between 1713 and 1741 had as their true goal revenue rather than purifying the Indies. In line with this view, Viceroy-Archbishop Vizarron in 1736 exempted some foreigners from enforcement of expulsion orders and threatened fines of 500 pesos for subordinate officials who ignored his decrees.29 But viceroys might not go so far as to grant temporary letters of naturalization. For example, the crown scolded Viceroy Valero for doing just this in 1719.30 The Council of the Indies revoked the license that Valero had granted to an Englishman, John Bridges, and ordered the viceroy to refrain from such actions in the future. Viceroy Casafuerte received an apparently similar dressing down in I726.S1 The final round-up before 1760 occurred while Spain was at

96


peace, and it came at the behest of the Consulado of Madrid acting for its sister bodies in Andalusia and Mexico City. The affair began quietly enough. In late 1755 or early 1756, Miguel Gallardo, a resident of Veracruz denounced two Genoans, Giacomo di Antonio and Antonio Maria Catani, to the local governor. That official on investigation learned that these recent arrivals had neither licenses to be in the Indies nor letters of naturalization. He therefore informed Viceroy Amarillas of the arrests and awaited instructions. Amarillas ordered the expulsion of these foreigners, and received warm royal approval of his action in March 1757.32 Meanwhile, the Consulado of Madrid, perhaps having news of the expulsion, brought pressure on the minister of the Indies. He, in turn, directed Amarillas by a royal order of 1756 to push for stringent enforcement of existing legislation against unmarried and unnaturalized foreigners.33 In April 1757, the viceroy promised his king that he would diligently apply the law in this matter.34 On 11 June, Amarillas issued a decree [bando) that all foreigners except those married or having the proper license were to report to Jalapa and register with the local justice.35 Officials of the fleet would then conduct the foreigners to Veracruz and put them on ships bound for Spain. On pain of a ruinous 3,000 peso fine, the provincial governors were to locate all nonexempt foreigners in their districts, inform them of the decree, give them 'passports', and send them on their way. Any too ill to travel were to be reported to the viceroy. It is neither certain how many foreigners Viceroy Amarillas' decree stirred up, nor is it likely that the viceroy fully understood all of the issues behind the royal order of 1756. A game of bureaucratic politics in which both the king and his viceroy were unwitting participants was being played out in Madrid and Cadiz. The Consulado of Cadiz, aided by the consulados of Madrid and Mexico City, had embarked on one of its periodic campaigns to increase profits by restricting participation in colonial trade. But this time, the machinations of the monopolists threatened to weaken the Council of the Indies. The councilors in turn had to move cautiously because the merchants had the ear of the king himself. The controversy began earlier in 1750 and did not come to a conclusion until 1759. In 1750 the king had issued one of those royal commands to enforce the prohibition against foreigners in the Indies.36 This decree made the standard references to past policy, the dangers of


97

laxity, and the need to remain vigilant. The viceroy was to enlist the audiencias and the provincial governors in the execution of the order. After viewing the royal edict of 1750, Viceroy Revillagigedo I discussed the matter of procedure with the fiscal and oidores of the Audiencia of Mexico and decided to entrust general supervision of the round-up to Oidor Domingo Valcarcel, who had handled a similar chore for Viceroy Casafuerte in 17431744.37 Revillagigedo charged Valcarcel to discover all foreigners living in the kingdom without the proper licenses and to proceed against them in the 'customary' manner. Following the form of previous decrees of this sort, Revillagigedo ordered the provincial governors to arrest foreigners in their districts, to seize their goods, and to conduct complete investigations. But reflecting what the authorities in New Spain had learned from the 1704-1709 represalia de Portugueses, Revillagigedo cautioned the governors not to molest Catholic foreigners engaged in useful trades {oficios mecdnicos). The viceroy, no doubt prompted by the fiscal, justified this deviation from the letter of the king's cedula by quoting from the Laws of the Indies. Revillagigedo thus excluded a large number of the foreigners in the viceroyalty from the effects of the decree even before its enforcement was to begin. No authority in Spain complained about the viceroy's amendment to the cedula of 1750 because, by omitting persons who would ultimately be excused anyway, he could allow Valcarcel to concentrate his efforts on merchants and others whose wealth might ultimately benefit the royal treasury. The very legalistic approach which had characterized Philip V's advisers during the War of Spanish Succession had long since been replaced by the more reasonable views exemplified in earlier years by the recommendations of Dr Joseph de Espinosa y Cornejo, fiscal of the Audiencia of Mexico during the investigations of 1704-1709. Gone from the Council of the Indies was that short-lived but insistent harping on total enforcement that had ignored or tried to ignore that foreigners were men and not just potential sources of easily seized wealth. The 'new' approach was not new at all; it was based on legal precedents from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries that were embodied in the Laws of the Indies. The mid-eighteenth-century interpretation of the laws dealing with foreigners was humane and permitted a working compromise between justice and decency on the one hand and the enforcement of revenue-seeking cedulas of expulsion or represalia on the other.

98


Arrived at logically, this balance led in the 1750s to a conflict between the Council of the Indies and the monopoly consulados. Before the controversy surfaced, the Council of the Indies had allowed numerous foreigners caught up in represalias and expulsion proceedings to take advantage of provisions of the Laws dealing with naturalization. There would be a fee called euphemistically a servicio, for the royal treasury, but the foreigner's life would not be unduly disturbed, and he would thus gain immunity from all further round-ups of aliens. The fundamental statutes required that a foreigner requesting naturalization meet certain requirements.38 He was supposed to have lived in Spain or the Indies for at least twenty years. For the last ten of these he was to have had a wife, a house, and real estate. The wife was supposed to be Spanish, Indian, or mestiza, but in practice she could be foreign like her husband. The property requirement stipulated that the petitioning foreigner present proof that he held assets of 4,000 ducats.39 This amount could be in the form of cash or property gained by inheritance, gift, or in commerce. Welldocumented claims against others could also serve. The unstated assumption of the naturalization statutes was that the foreigner, once he had fulfilled the requirements, would present himself voluntarily to the audiencia, governor, or superior judge of the province where he had settled and apply for citizenship. The Laws recognized that at any given time there would be foreigners in the Indies who lacked some of the requirements for naturalization. For these men, if they had some money, the statutes provided another route to official toleration. This process was known as composicion. The legal requirements were the same as for naturalization except that the actual consideration was a fee.40 Before the eighteenth century, at times when the crown needed extra cash, Spanish kings periodically issued cedulas of composicion. The law stated that these documents applied only to those foreigners already in the Indies at the time of their issuance and not to those who came afterwards.41 For the wholesale use of composicion to yield a profit, however, the authorities needed to exercise prudence in its application. The law said that the amount that a foreigner needed to expend for his citizenship should depend on his ability to pay. If the foreigner could not meet the price demanded of him, the officials would have to execute the implied threat and send him back to Spain. But, if he had no money, the cost of his transportation back to Europe would have


99

to be borne by the royal treasury. For this reason, officers charged with the execution of cedulas of composition were to proceed with temperance and moderation. Once a foreigner had paid his fees, he was immune from subsequent cedulas of composition or of expulsion. In practice, however, a foreigner whose composition had failed to result in a royal cedula or letter of naturalization42 was not yet a true subject of the crown. If he wanted full rights c to trade and do business [tratar y contratar] like a Castilian', he had first to obtain the requisite decree from the Council of the Indies. In the eighteenth century, the Council was combining the laws concerning naturalization and the statutes dealing with composition and applying them to successful foreigners uncovered by cedulas of expulsion or represalia. This outcome was precisely that of the cedula of 1750 sent to Viceroy Revillagigedo in New Spain. Oidor Valcarcel's investigation resulted in at least nineteen foreigners applying to the Council of the Indies for letters of naturalization.43 The oidor suspended prosecution while the applications were considered. The Council ultimately issued the requested documents to thirteen of these men and charged all but one an average servicio or fee of just over 200 pesos.44 The effect was that a cedula of expulsion, probably issued at the insistence of the consulados, had resulted in the naturalization of thirteen foreigners, all of whom were known to be merchants of one sort or another.45 Contrary to the law, five of the newly naturalized foreigners lived in port cities of New Spain where their conduct of business meant competition, or so the monopolists believed. Fueling the monopolists' ire still further were, undoubtedly, the large number of naturalizations between 1702 and 1756 that the Council had granted to foreigners resident in Andalusia and the Canaries, naturalizations that gave the new subjects the right to trade with the Indies.46 Of the foreigners naturalized in New Spain as a result of the cedula of 1750, the one whose case became a test of strength between the consulados and the Council was Jean Malibran.47 Malibran's trouble began in 1751 when his name appeared on c the list' of foreigners that Oidor Valcarcel handed over to Juan Bustillo y Vallos, alcalde ordinario of Mexico City.48 Valcarcel ordered Magistrate Bustillo to arrest the individuals named on the list, sequester their goods, and begin proceedings against them. But Bustillo could not locate Malibran. Valcarcel made a note

ioo


in the foreigner's folder that he would arrest Malibran when the man returned to Mexico City, but made no additional efforts to apprehend the fugitive. Malibran evidently knew that he was a wanted man because he wrote to his brother Antoine, a merchant resident in Cadiz, for help. Antoine Malibran got a lawyer and went to see Joseph Xavier de Solorzano, alcalde del crimen of the Audiencia of Seville and alcalde mayor of Cadiz. Antoine and his attorney requested that the judge collect certain documentation, attest to its accuracy, and give copies of the papers to them. They doubtless paid Solorzano for his trouble in preparing what were to become the preliminary documents in Jean Malibran's request for naturalization. Antoine Malibran testified that Jean was a native of Pezenas in the French diocese of Agde and was the legitimate son of Christian parents. He further swore that Jean Malibran had been doing business in the Spanish empire since 1728 without ever being accused of dishonesty or lawbreaking. After making his brief statement, Antoine turned some family documents over to Solorzano for inclusion in the proceedings. Among these papers were Jean Malibran's bapitismal certificates, a letter from the bishop of Agde, and certain other proofs of the birth and family connections of Jean Malibran. Antoine then presented four merchants, all residents (vecinos) of Cadiz, who made favorable statements about Jean Malibran. With the testimony in Cadiz completed, Alcalde Solorzano gave a copy of the proceedings to Antoine Malibran. The brother in Spain must have sent the packet of documents to Jean Malibran in Veracruz, because the next time they surfaced was in Mexico City. In August 1754, Malibran's attorney, Balthasar de Vidairre,49 appeared before Oidor Valcarcel and asked that his client be excused from the expulsion ordered by the cedula of 1750 and be granted a letter of naturalization. In support of this petition, Vidairre presented the documents prepared in Cadiz, a letter from Jean Malibran, and proof that the foreigner owned real estate in Veracruz. After getting legal advice from the fiscal of the audiencia, Valcarcel called three witnesses suggested by Vidairre. The witnesses were all Spanish merchants living in Mexico City who attested to Jean Malibran's long residence in the empire. On 20 August 1754, Oidor Valcarcel acted favorably on Malibran's petition and resolved to send the file to Spain for


101

consideration by the Council of the Indies. The oidor required that the foreigner be bonded by an 'honest and upright' subject, and Vidairre persuaded Andres de Puertas, one of the witnesses, to fill this role. Valcarcel gave Malibran two years to obtain his letter of naturalization from the Council, and in the meantime the oidor issued orders that the foreigner 'not be molested'. In August 1755, Malibran's lawyer in Madrid presented a memorial to the Council of the Indies.50 This petition recounted the Frenchman's legitimate birth, Christian family, long residence in Spain and the Indies, and possession of real estate in Veracruz. In view of these qualities, the memorial requested that Malibran be granted a letter of naturalization enabling him to trade and do business 'as a vassal of His Majesty'. The councilors, as was customary, referred the matter to their fiscal. The crown attorney advised denying the request because Malibran was unmarried, and the Council concurred in September. A second memorial followed in December. In it Malibran pleaded that he had 'a bodily defect' that ruled out marriage and asked that his request for citizenship be reconsidered. Again the councilors turned the Frenchman down, but he would not be dissuaded. In November 1756, a third petition requested that Malibran 'not be molested' while he searched for a wife, but the councilors, perhaps believing that finding the perfect woman might take a lifetime, denied this request too. They thus withdrew the legal protection Malibran had enjoyed while the proceedings continued but sent no orders for his prosecution. Even though his latest ploy had failed to result in official toleration, Jean Malibran remained quietly in Vericruz and, after five years of litigation, must have felt little immediate pressure. But his respite was short-lived. In June 1757, the Marques of Amarillas issued his viceregal orders for the expulsion of foreigners, and Malibran was forced to act. He married Dona Maria Magdalena del Real in July 1757 and had a fourth memorial in the hands of the Council of the Indies before the end of the next January. This time the councilors were willing to grant the Frenchman's request for naturalization, but since their secretary for New Spain reminded them that the whole matter of naturalization was under review, they suspended the proceedings in February pending a decision by the king. That review of naturalization procedures began in September 1756. On 27 September, eleven days after he had dispatched

102


orders to Viceroy Amarillas for the expulsion of foreigners in New Spain, the minister of the Indies, Fray Julian de Arriaga, issued a command to the Council of the Indies.51 The minister, who was also a knight commander (bailio) of Malta, told the councilors that 'it pleased the king' to direct the Council to explain its practice of granting dispensations from the requirements of the Laws in conceding letters of naturalization. Arriaga, who had received a special commission from Ferdinand VI to delve into the matter of foreigners in the Indies' trade, used the inquiry into naturalization procedures as an opportunity for tightening his own control over the Council.52 Perhaps hoping that the 'royal' interest in naturalization would pass, the Council delayed its response to Arriaga's order until May 1757. When their consulta did arrive in the minister's hands, the councilors at last admitted that they had no laws, dispositions, or orders to justify their procedures but added that the practice of granting dispensations from the laws was 'an old one supported by custom'. In the following October, a royal resolution was issued which denied the Council the right to grant further letters of naturalization requiring dispensations without first obtaining 'royal' (i.e., Arriaga's) approval. The Camara ('chamber' or tribunal) of the Council was clearly displeased with this turn of events and asked its fiscal for his views on the change.53 In an opinion filed on 26 January 1758, four days before Malibran's final request for naturalization came in, the attorney reported back. He declared that for the present it was impossible for the Camara to grant any letters of naturalization. No two cases were alike and it would be impossible, he believed, to formulate a general rule that could apply to all cases. But since it was the royal will to limit the competence of the Council in each of these cases, the fiscal was convinced that restrictions should also apply to the Casa de Contratacion in Cadiz, which issued licenses to foreigners going to the Indies. The fiscal reiterated his points about the individuality of foreigners and delivered his opinion to the councilors. They agreed completely with their attorney and forwarded their consulta of 15 March to Arriaga. The minister acted on this report by issuing a royal order to the Casa dated 8 April 1758.54 Arriaga ordered that the Casa, when acting as the court of first instance in naturalization cases, include in the proceedings (autos) a full disclosure of the foreigner's


103

qualifications. For example, if the alien were unmarried, or had resided in the empire for less than twenty years, Arriaga wanted this specifically stated. Thus, the minister indirectly reminded the Casa that in naturalization proceedings it had no more authority than any alcalde mayor in the back-country of the Indies. All judges and tribunals preparing awôs on an application for citizenship had to submit complete records of the proceedings to the Council of the Indies. Arriaga explained that this was necessary for the Council to be able to make full recommendations to 'the king5 on what faculties and restrictions should be included in a particular letter of naturalization. In thus restating what was already customary procedure for courts and justices below the Council of the Indies, Arriaga was making certain that the restrictions on the Council in granting letters of naturalization presaged no corresponding expansion of the role of the Casa de Contratacion. In accordance with its own reduced authority, the Council got back to the Malibran case on 12 June 1758.55 Since this foreigner clearly did not meet the legal requirement of having been married for ten years, the councilors forwarded their report through Arriaga to the king for a decision. The Camara noted that Malibran was a man of 'circumstance' who was useful to the republic. They believed that he was deserving of the king's dispensation and recommended that he be granted naturalization with full rights to trade and hold public office in New Spain. The only restriction on his citizenship should be a prohibition on direct commerce with Spain. The king, advised by Arriaga, concurred with the Council's recommendation and signed a decree granting naturalization in October.56 The Council dispatched the cedula on 21 October, after Malibran's attorney deposited 5 percent of the 3,000 reales de vellon servicio the foreigner had been assessed for this grant (gracia). The deposit was made to the accounting office {contaduria) of the Council. One copy of the letter of naturalization went to the Casa de Contratacion for registration with their contaduria.57 This procedure was customary in cases where only a down payment had been made in Madrid. Since the foreigner was expected to pay the balance into the account of the media anata58 and the books for these revenues were kept in Cadiz, it would be necessary for the accountants of the Casa to keep track of payments and credit the foreigner accordingly. The Casa was also expected to register

104


foreigners naturalized in the Indies and whatever restrictions, if any, their grants of citizenship carried. This would be necessary if the oidores of the Gasa were properly to carry out their duty in the regulation of colonial commerce. In view of this function of the Casa, Ignacio Gallardo, another lawyer acting for Malibran, requested a favorable interpretation of the cedula for his client. The oidores obliged. Thus Jean Malibran finally acquired everything he had sought in his seemingly endless petitions. The secretaries of the Gasa filed Malibran's papers on 17 November, and except for collecting the money still owed on the servicio, the long case should have come to a close. It did not. Through some unofficial channel, the Gonsulado of Cadiz learned of Malibran's letter of naturalization almost as soon as the document arrived at the Casa de Contratacion. But the Consulado was ignorant of the full history of the case. Either the monopolists did not realize the problems that their earlier protestations had caused the Council of the Indies, or the Consulado believed that Arriaga's review of naturalization procedures meant that total victory was at hand. Whichever the case, the merchants committed a serious error when they complained directly to the king about Malibran's letter of naturalization.59 In their representation of 21 November 1758, the Consulado of Cadiz claimed that the grant of citizenship to Malibran was 'very prejudicial' to native-born subjects. Arguing against precedent, the monopolists held that Malibran and other foreigners who had illegally migrated to the Indies should never receive letters of naturalization, no matter how long they had resided in the empire. The merchants of Cadiz also bemoaned Malibran's residence in a port city.60 It would be easy, they believed, for him to evade the restrictions on his trade with Spain and to deal with relatives in Cadiz by using third parties as intermediaries. What neither the Casa nor the Consulado knew was that the king had been consulted in the case of Jean Malibran and had personally concurred with the recommendations of the Council of the Indies. By questioning the Camara and faulting its logic at every turn, the Consulado had unwittingly chastized the king himself. Ferdinand VI saw the disrespectful representation, and Arriaga delegated the rebuttal to the Council of the Indies. The councilors seized the opportunity to defend the royal honor and incidentally to recoup some of their own damaged pride. They lectured the Tribunal of the Casa severely for letting


105

information about royal dispatches fall into the wrong hands, especially those of the self-serving Consulado of Cadiz. The Council indirectly accused the Casa of trying to use consulado pressure to expand its own influence, and the councilors demanded that the Tribunal mind its own business. Thus the controversy over Jean Malibran resulted in both a reduction in the prerogatives of the Council and a slap in the face for the Casa de Contratac'ion. The most telling result, however, was that Arriaga's handling of the conflict ended with his own power being enhanced and with the consulados being excluded from even oblique participation in the naturalization process. Cases that stirred up as much trouble as that of Jean Malibran were indeed rare, but the forty-four known applications for naturalization in New Spain between 1700 and 1760 illustrate that all such proceedings shared an underlying similarity.61 First, the foreigner had to feel that he needed a letter of naturalization. With but a few exceptions, aliens seeking an official grant of citizenship had a significant amount of wealth. Men with something to lose in expulsion proceedings were much more vulnerable than poor men who, as the represalia de Portugueses of 1704-1709 illustrates, would probably be excused anyway. Foreigners successfully engaged in economic activities which were legally denied to them, such as commerce, were under a constant cloud. Significantly, of the foreigners requesting naturalization whose occupations are known, twenty-eight of thirty-seven seem to have been merchants of one sort or another. Aliens resident in port cities lived there in contravention of statute and thirteen applications came from such persons. Jean Malibran fitted each of those categories. Another individual, George Abercromby, who made his request for citizenship as a doctor, clearly had commerce on his mind and eventually became a merchant like most of the others.62 The desire to be eligible for government or Church promotions also figured in some of the requests for naturalization, as did cedulas of expulsion and of represalia even before 1750. Of the forty-four applications, the Council approved thirty-nine.63 Once a foreigner realized he had need of naturalization, he usually retained an attorney with correspondents in Spain. Occasionally the applicant did not hire a colonial lawyer but dealt with his legal representative in Spain by mail or through relatives resident in the peninsula. However represented, the foreigner first had to present himself before a justice or tribunal in his

106


locality. Any court or judge from audiencia to alcalde mayor could serve, and even guild courts such as the consulados (at least before 1750) sometimes prepared the first round of papers.64 Supported by witnesses and documents, the foreigner attested to having met all or most of the legal requirements for naturalization. If the lawyer rather than the applicant appeared at this level of the proceedings, he presented his clients' petition for naturalization. After paying the presiding judge and the notary for their trouble, the foreigner (or his lawyer) forwarded the file to a solicitor in Spain. This lawyer was a man licensed to practice before royal councils and audiencias and always displayed his power of attorney (poder) before presenting his client's petition to the Council of the Indies. In preparing his own presentation to the Council, this Spanish attorney often researched previous grants of naturalization and cited them as precedents.65 The councilors of the Camara accepted the petition and turned it over to their fiscal. If the supporting documentation were especially lengthy, the fiscal arranged for the secretary to prepare a summary of the salient points. The crown attorney then delivered his opinion to the councilors. Once satisfied that they had the facts clear, the councilors rendered their verdict. If they had decided in the foreigner's favor, the Camara then deferred the matter of setting the servicio or fee to one of the consejeros togados, a glorified crown attorney with councilor rank. Only after the controversy of the 1750s did the councilors need to obtain royal permission before issuing individual letters of naturalization, If the foreigner paid his servicio in advance, the accountants of the Contaduria de Indias recorded that fact and forwarded the letter of naturalization immediately.66 Often, however, the foreigner's lawyer paid only a 5 percent deposit in order to get the cedula released, as had the attorney acting for Jean Malibran in 1758. When a foreigner still owed the bulk of his servicio or when he wanted to enter into commerce either as a wholesaler or retailer of imported goods, he got an attorney to petition the Casa de Contratacion for registration of the letter of naturalization. Occasionally a foreigner paid his entire servicio to the royal treasury in his province of residence. This procedure saved some money in lawyers' fees but resulted in an 18 percent higher servicio.67 The high costs of servicios which averaged 270 pesos but sometimes went as high as 1,000 pesos,68 not to mention fees

The burden of wealth 69

107

for lawyers and bureaucrats, dissuaded all but a few of the foreigners resident in New Spain between 1700 and 1760 from even applying for naturalization. For those who needed and could afford such grants of citizenship, naturalization was valuable. Though some decrees contained limitations such as exclusion from oceanic trade or naturalization for the Indies only, most grants were for total equality with Spaniards and specifically included naturalization to Spain as well as the Indies. In addition, all naturalized foreigners had the right to aspire to public office and positions of honor. This privilege was not inconsiderable in a society that placed high value on social prestige. Each letter of naturalization was an exercise of the royal power of dispensation. The original Spanish anti-foreign legislation dated from the Catholic Kings, and all of the cedulas of naturalization mention that the present king Exempts' such and such a foreigner from those and all subsequent anti-foreign decrees. Theoretically, at least, any letter of naturalization could be revoked if the foreigner abused his new privileges or failed to pay the balance owed on his servicio, but neither seems to have happened in New Spain. The Council of the Indies was the sole agency empowered to grant citizenship with rights in the Indies. The Council could issue letters of naturalization for Spain and the Indies, but the Council of Castile declined to contest this and customarily referred applicants in Spain who wanted rights in America to the Council of the Indies.70 In the light of this dual jurisdiction, the Council of the Indies issued numerous letters of naturalization to foreigners resident in Spain who wished to be able to trade with or immigrate to the New World.71 Foreigners naturalized by the Council of Castile might obtain a license to go to America from the Casa de Contratacion, but the Casa could not grant citizenship to anyone. In the early 1720s, both the Casa and the consulados of Seville and Cadiz had tried to establish rights akin to those of the Council and began issuing licenses to trade with America to unnaturalized foreigners and demanding that the Spanish-born sons of such men also obtain licenses before entering the Indies trade. 72 The Council of the Indies stepped in to protect its prerogatives, but the crown overruled them all by reminding everyone that persons born in Spain or the Indies were subjects and should be treated equitably.73 But the consulados persisted, and their actions resulted in

io8


royal cedulas of 1742 and 1747 outlawing such discrimination.74 Thus, even before the controversy of the 1750s, the consulados were the most consistent and determined enemies of both foreigners and their sons. The monopolists tried to protect their own position even in the face of contrary laws and edicts. But as the century progressed, their privileges, like those of the Inquisition over bigamy, began to fall away. Yet because of the activities of the consulados of Seville and Cadiz, a foreigner's son born in the Indies was better off in the New World than a like individual born in Spain. Children fathered by foreigners and born in the Indies needed no permission to reside and to trade in the land of their birth. Simply having such children was of great benefit to foreigners in the Indies. The Laws granted virtual citizenship to married foreigners with children and infants born in Spanish territory.75 The fathers even gained the right to support their families by trading (tratar y contratar). At least by charitable interpretations of the statutes, foreigners with legitimate children were thus exempt both from cedulas of expulsion or represalia and from the need for naturalization. Even though such men do turn up in both sorts of proceedings, it seems likely that many, perhaps most, provincial governors and justices in New Spain routinely exempted foreign fathers from the enforcement of anti-foreign legislation and decrees. If this was indeed the case, then it explains why neither round-ups nor naturalization proceedings yielded more foreigners than they did. Only a meticulous examination of parish marriage and birth registers for all of New Spain would yield a definite answer.76 Such an investigation might also make possible a better guess as to the number of foreign women in New Spain during the first half of the eighteenth century. Such women, like the sons of aliens and legally admitted churchmen, needed no letters of naturalization. Women could neither hold office nor aspire to public honor, and female merchants above the level of shopkeeper were unheard of in eighteenth-century New Spain. There was, however, a double-standard that benefited both the married foreign woman and her husband. If he were also a foreigner, her presence helped him win toleration or even naturalization.77 She in turn acquired the same status as her husband. If she arrived single or as a widow, the foreign woman probably remarried, but at any rate the number of such immigrants must have been very small.78 There


109

is at least one case of a foreign woman who accompanied her adult son to New Spain.79 It may well be that the majority of foreign-born women in New Spain were the wives of Spanish military men assigned to the viceroyalty. In the early years of the century and perhaps later as well, most provincial governors and army officers were men with military experience in Italy, Flanders, or elsewhere outside Spain and the Indies.80 That some of these veterans married foreign women and then brought them to New Spain seems, at least, very likely. Marriage would thus have facilitated both the arrival and the acceptance of foreign women. The final sacrament affected everyone. 'All' estates, meaning those of any significance, passed through the hands of the Juzgado de Bienes de Difuntos. Though a minor tribunal subject to the Audiencia of Mexico, the Juzgado reported to a parent body attached to the Casa de Contratacion, and took for itself 7 percent of every estate it probated.81 If there was a will or if the heirs were readily at hand, the Juzgado distributed the estate as the law directed. But the Juzgado made no effort to locate missing heirs since unclaimed estates escheated to the crown. The goods of foreigners without Spanish heirs also went into the royal treasury.82 In the same way, foreigners could not inherit from subjects. Repeated cedulas and royal orders harried the Juzgado in Mexico to dispatch rapidly all proceeds due to the royal treasury.83 Records concerning the estates of several foreigners, some who died with wills and some who did not, flowed back to Spain among the other masses of paper the Juzgado sent in response to these orders.84 Thus foreigners were to the very end a potential source of revenue to a crown which was always short of money.

Conclusion

Following the collective foreigner from the potential threat that he represented to crown interests, over the various hurdles to acceptance, and on to his death reveals a great deal about both the immigrants and the Spaniards. In the first place, foreign residents of New Spain in the first half of the eighteenth century represented neither a major threat nor an indispensable asset to the viceroyalty. On balance their presence was more positive than negative. Many brought skills, established families, and became loyal subjects of the crown. They were, or they became, or, at least, they pretended to be good Catholics. They did not introduce subversive ideas, and their limited economic impact seems to have been largely internal to New Spain, consonant with the values of the society in which they had come to live, and devoid of direct links with their mother countries. In most cases forbidden to be in the Indies at all, foreigners entered the official record for a variety of reasons. Some represented religious deviation or social problems, but almost as often they appeared as nothing more than witnesses or interpreters. In wartime, colonial authorities occasionally sought out natives of enemy countries, sometimes because of feared subversion, but more likely from a desire to seize their wealth. The same officials or their superiors, however, almost invariably released those aliens discovered in the round-ups. Real enemies were usually only a few poor prisoners of war captured elsewhere and interned in New Spain. Many of these, once released or paroled, elected to remain in the viceroyalty, and when they did, the officials allowed them to do so. In New Spain the tip of the iceberg of unnaturalized but unharried foreigners is apparent in the Mexico City censuses of 1689 and 1753.1 Very few of these men were ever, as far as can be determined, involved with the authorities. Most were married 110

Conclusion

111

and had avoided activities legally denied them. That they lived in the viceregal capital, publicly acknowledged their nationalities, and still escaped harassment as foreigners speaks more eloquently to the level of practical toleration in early Bourbon Mexico than does almost any other evidence cited in this study. It follows, and not just because the historian must account for what he missed, that there were numerous other foreigners in New Spain between 1700 and 1760 besides the 609 aliens listed in the appendices. Excluding slaves, the actual total may have been more like 1,500 for the whole period or around half that number in any given year. Thus, for example, in 1742 foreigners would have accounted for 3 percent of all the 'European-born' men in the viceroyalty.2 These estimates are based, in large part, on a humanistic appraisal of the relative success of various nationalities in adapting to life in New Spain and thereby avoiding negative contacts with the authorities. The Portuguese were probably both the most numerous and the most accomplished at staying out of trouble. Were it not for the unusual represalia of 1704-1709, the appendices would show only about thirty of these men. Their similar language and culture undoubtedly facilitated their adjustment. The Italians rivaled the Portuguese in adaptability, and were almost as successful in avoiding the attention of the authorities. The French, Germans, and most others fell into a middle category, while the British, as a group, were both the easiest to spot and the most disproportionately represented in government and Inquisition proceedings. Adjusting the percentages suggested by the appendices to reflect the relative ease or difficulty different nationalities had in adapting would mean that about 30 percent of the foreigners were Portuguese. Less than 20 percent each were Italian, French, and British, with all others thus making up only a little over 10 percent. In addition to the captured corsairs and foreign merchants long known to have been occasionally in the Spanish colonies,3 several other categories of aliens chose to go to New Spain between 1700 and 1760. Carried by legal Spanish shipping, most got past the port authorities with no trouble. They went as soldiers, mariners, professionals, craftsmen, religious, priests, adventurers, and servants to important or wealthy persons. A few even traveled as viceregal retainers. Foreign military deserters and escaped slaves sometimes found their way into the viceroyalty, as did immigrants

H2


fleeing some obligation or authority in Europe or elsewhere. Still others dreamed of making their fortunes in New Spain. But the viceroyalty, even though rich and beautiful, was no Utopia. Based on the 431 individuals in Appendix I, it appears that about 80 percent of the foreigners stayed. The majority settled in the interior rather than on the coast and, like the Spaniards, they seem to have preferred the cities to the countryside.4 The occupations of foreigners in New Spain ran the gamut of everything from rich mine-owner to beggar. Yet because persons in certain occupations, such as merchants and doctors, drew more concerted official attention than others, the raw tallies, particularly from Appendix I, should not be interpreted as representing an accurate 'sample' of the ways foreigners in New Spain earned their livings. If the estimate of 1,500 foreigners present in the viceroyalty between 1700 and 1760 is reasonably accurate, then it seems fairly certain that some 12 percent of them were churchmen. Other categories are harder to pin down, but they might be as follows: 25 percent skilled persons {mecdnicos), 20 percent unskilled laborers, 10 percent active military personnel, 20 percent merchants, and the remaining 13 percent or so including such diverse groups as unemployed gentlemen of leisure, women, miners, ranchers, farmers, lawyers, and minor government officials. The unskilled laborers and military personnel were among the most likely to be transient, and the churchmen, had it not been for the expulsion of the Jesuits in 1767, most likely to be permanent. Few of the merchants could be classified as international traders with links with either the legal fiota or the illegal smuggling trade. Most were shopkeepers with a more-or-less strictly local business. Some were a success, others were not. Persons who made their living through oficios mecdnicos exercised 'useful trades or professions'. Medical practitioners, some who had degrees and licenses and some who did not, made up about 20 percent of the mecdnicos or about 5 percent of the total foreigners. Small numbers in each of several crafts made up the balance of those in oficios mecdnicos. There were cooks, bakers, confectioners, tailors, tobacconists, coopers, hatters, fishermen, gunsmiths, and many others. Persons in these occupations benefited from legal toleration growing out of the mercantilist desire to encourage such 'useful trades'. Because married foreign males enjoyed toleration, amounting

Conclusion

113

almost to naturalization if they had children, it follows that foreign men would have had one of the highest propensities to marry of any subdivision of the adult population. Yet foreigners without children clearly outnumber all others in Appendix I, including clergymen and prisoners of war. The explanation of this discrepancy seems to lie in the rather high percentage of young, recently-arrived foreigners in the tallies. Such immigrants were precisely that group least likely to have begun families at the time of their first contact with the authorities. This evidence strongly suggests that there were foreigners, perhaps many of them, for whom having a wife and children meant virtual citizenship, escape from negative official attention, and avoidance of my best efforts at ferreting them out. Veterans of the royal military, non-Spanish subjects of the crown, persons naturalized in Spain, foreigners locally converted to Catholicism, religious refugees, and others also enjoyed protections and immunities under the laws or the customary interpretation of anti-foreign legislation. Provincial governors and others charged with enforcement of the statutes may well have applied the laws in ways that benefited old friends, valued members of the community, and poor, harmless persons. Colonial administrators were, for the most part, reasonable men willing to overlook foreigners who conducted themselves as good citizens, conventional Catholics, and law-abiding individuals. The proper papers of naturalization and of reconciliacion (for heretics) were helpful and could prevent or lessen embarrassment at the hands of some petty functionary but, given the exclusionist statutes, avoiding the official attention of the authorities was the foreigners' best protection against expulsion. Only a handful of individuals suffered this fate, but because simply being a foreigner was something that could always be used against such persons, most aliens tried to adapt. Since irascibility and contentiousness brought the danger of official attention, foreigners conformed as best they could. They avoided controversy and do not seem to have participated in spreading 'new' or unconventional ideas in New Spain. Foreigners as such thus had negligible influence as harbingers of change. A few priests and, perhaps, doctors may have had a small impact by virtue of their occupations, but most foreigners sought only assimilation. When they succeeded, the king succeeded as well because foreigners who became loyal and useful members of the

H4


community represented no threat to the chief royal concerns of imperial, mercantile, and religious security. In this curious way, the aliens themselves met the underlying goals of the old antiforeign legislation. Still, the consulados persisted in their exclusionist attitudes, and the impecunious government had a tendency to exploit the legal disabilities of foreigners for the benefit of the royal treasury. Some provincial governors may even have extorted bribes for protection. Unlicensed foreigners who managed to create a successful life for themselves lived under the threat of losing everything, and naturalization, if they sought it, was expensive. Furthermore, agents of the crown hovered ready to seize estates bequeathed to non-Spaniards or goods left intestate. In spite of negative statutes and discriminatory policies, however, the interplay of law and practice in the Spanish system made room for foreigners who conformed. Profoundly influenced by precedent, Spanish justices and administrators customarily made decisions about foreigners that were neither arbitrary nor capricious. Tailoring their judgments to flesh-and-blood individuals, the officials were seldom as harsh as the statutes demanded. This 'small-town' approach, with its personal, very human, and almost private balancing of real people and idealistic law characterized even the Council of the Indies. The inclination of communities, local officials, and the crown was to tolerate individuals while continuing to exclude foreigners as a group. How much of this practical toleration can be read forward into the late eighteenth century or back into the seventeenth and sixteenth centuries is uncertain.5 But the mere existence of such attitudes helps to bring into focus some of what is known about the treatment of foreigners during the Spanish age in America. The more or less ready acceptance of Christian aliens characteristic of medieval Spain in its struggle with the infidel carried over into the early conquest period. But the expulsion of the Jews from Spain, the coming of the Reformation, and the piracy of other nations in the New World brought a growing distrust of all foreigners. This suspicion found outlet in the excesses of the sixteenth-century Inquisition and the harsh legislation of Charles V. The much-maligned Philip II, wittingly or unwittingly, checked the xenophobia of the preceding generation by incorporating Portugal in 1580 and by rein trod ucing legalistic justice to the imperial system. The result was ambivalence in the seventeenth

Conclusion

115

century. Tempered by reality, the still confident bigotry of the age yielded to a policy of alternate expulsion, imprisonment, or toleration for a fee (composition). The Portuguese break for independence in 1640 sparked off a series of 'Jew-hunts' in the Indies. Many of the Portuguese conversos turned up by these investigations lost their property. Most who were convicted of Judaism received reconciliacion to the Church or suffered deportation to Spain. The last third of the seventeenth century ushered in attitudes and policies that persisted, for the most part, until about 1760. Most of the period was characterized by toleration of useful foreigners. A few individuals were exiled for various reasons, but only when there were no mitigating circumstances. Prisoners of war were exchanged, ransomed, or, as in the early seventeenth century, farmed out to workshops (obrajes) until the coming of peace. Enemy aliens might be rounded up in time of war or when the consulados became especially worried about trade competition, but most of these persons won release after the authorities found them harmless. The number of foreigners in the Spanish military service in the New World rose for a short time during the War of Spanish Succession, but the real break came after midcentury. In 1759 Quebec fell to the British. The eviction of the French from North America made useless the Spanish policy of playing off rivals in the New World in order to preserve the empire. The need for greater self-reliance gave an opening to the reformers in Spain. They introduced more 'rational' approaches to government as changes already under way accelerated. A reorganization of imperial defense brought increased numbers of Spanish regulars to the New World, and within the ranks came fresh contingents of foreigners. Spanish acquisition of Louisiana after the Seven Years War made 'subjects' of several thousand former French colonials, a number of whom also drifted into Spanish America. In addition, European scientists, artists, mining experts, and others were encouraged, often by crown grants, to go and further the development of the colonies. But there was another side. The need for revenues to support all this activity put heavier tax burdens on the population and intensified existing government pressure on successful foreign residents. New problems arose as the Inquisition grew concerned with deism and freemasonry, and the government, after the American and French

n6


Revolutions, began to worry about subversive political doctrines. Thus, although there were more foreigners in Spanish America after 1760, their position was more precarious than it had been in early Bourbon Mexico.

Appendices

A note on names

De-Hispanizing foreign names is a tricky, uncertain, but necessary procedure. Modern spellings for given names are preferred almost universally in the following appendices and are based on various dictionaries of non-English to English. For example, the modern Portuguese 'Manuel' is used rather than the archaic 'Manoel'. One should approach dictionaries with caution, however, as the case of ' Jacob' illustrates. The name came into Latin from Greek as 'Iacobus'. The French and the English transformed this to 'Jacob' and split off 'Jacques' and 'James', respectively, as separate names. The Germans adopted 'Jakobus', now shortened to 'Jakob'. The Spaniards and the Florentines, beginning with the Latin ablative, used 'Jacobo'. Variations in Spanish include 'Diego5, 'Santiago', and 'Jacome'. Evolution in Italian produced the dialectal 'Giacob' which most modern Italians now render as 'Giacomo', the same name they use for 'James'. The 'Giacobbe' of the dictionaries is a throwback to Hebrew, and Italians use this form almost exclusively in reference to the Bible. Generally, the appendices employ modern spellings for given names, except when there is no danger of confusion, as in using the Irish 'Denis' rather than the English 'Dennis'. For Savoyards, Bohemians, and certain others from areas of mixed linguistic heritage, the form of the given name chosen as 'best' depended on the probable ethnic classification of the surname. Occasionally it was necessary to move beyond dictionaries to national histories and similar works in order to locate the proper spelling for a particularly unusual given name. Surnames were more troublesome. Where possible, the deHispanized forms presented in the appendices are based on the signatures of the individuals involved, but foreigners and scribes did some unusual things to surnames. Some foreigners refused to change the spelling and lost the original sound. Others chose to

120


preserve the sound and sacrifice the spelling. They often changed surnames to conform to Spanish usage. For example, the Spanish 'de Acosta' might be adopted by a Portuguese named 'da Costa' or an Italian named 'di Aosta' or 'da Gosta'. Another group of foreigners preferred to save the meaning rather than either sound or spelling. Deciding which approach a particular foreigner used was occasionally a problem. For example, was 'Juan ReyV real name 'Ray' or 'King'? Where alphabetizing the appendices demanded a choice, one form was arbitrarily preferred, but the other was included as an alternative. The same procedure was used when different forms of the same name appear in the original language. The form chosen as 'best' for listing is the one closest to the foreigner's own Hispanized signature. Barnhart's Cyclopedia1 was invaluable for checking the spelling of more famous surnames but, as in the case of given names, it was necessary to refer to national histories, genealogical works, and similar sources for more unusual forms. For commonly accepted spellings of some surnames, even foreign telephone directories were helpful. The organization of the appendices is, for the most part, selfexplanatory. Appendix I first shows the reconstructed name with the form(s) used in the sources in parentheses. Appendix II listing Jesuits often shows no Spanish form because the catalogues (the main source) were written in Latin. Listing such artificial forms that were, in any event, usually changes of ending or straight translations, seemed superfluous.2 Many of the Jesuits identified as Coadjutors in Appendix II were also ordained priests, but their function in the order was managerial rather than missionary or educational. They ran haciendas and other enterprises belonging to the Society and otherwise provided necessary support for their order. Both appendices are in alphabetical order, and each is followed by an index to alternative name forms.

APPENDIX I

A partial list of foreigners in New Spain, 1700-1760

Name and origin Abercromby, George

(Jorge), b. Scotland, 17071 Abercromby, Josepha,

Jamaica ?2 Abreu, Domingos de (Domingo de Abreo), Portugal3 Aguiar, Luiz de (Luis de Aguilar), Portugal, married New Spain4 Alangi, Accurzio (Acurcio Alongo), Sicily5 Allen, Charles (Carlos), Cork, Ireland 6 Alves, Manuel (Manuel Alvarez), Portugal, single7 Alves, Manuel (Manuel Alvarez), Portugal8 Ambrose, John (Juan Ambrosio, Ambrojio), b. Scotland, 16649 Andrews, Edward

(Eduardo Andres), b. England, 172610 Antonio, Giacomo di (Jacome Antonio), Genoa 11 Archdeacon, Paul

(Pablo Blanco, Archdekin), b. Cork, Ireland, 1712, d. 176212

When and why noticed

Action taken

requested request naturalization granted 1745 1745 incidental 1736 none

Locale of case

Occupation or profession

resident Campeche, later Mexico Havana, Mexico Acapulco

doctor, later merchant wife of George Abercromby sailor

witness 1710

none

represalia 1705

released for poverty

Papantla

oddjobs

requested naturalization 1737 denounced to Inquisition 1756

request granted

Vallyof Amilpas

ordered found 1762

Mexico

vicar and ecclesiastical judge ship's pilot

represalia 1705

not molested

represalia 1705

freed, lack of wealth

resident village near Queretaro Cordoba

incidental 1732

none

requested admission to Church 1756 no license 1756

request granted

denounced to Inquisition 1756

ex-soldier poor servant unknown

resident valley gunsmith and blacksmith ofTacotalpa, Tabasco sailor Orizaba

sent to Spain

Veracruz

unknown

investigated but never arrested

vecino

merchant

Puebla

121

122

Foreign immigrants in early Bourbon Mexico Locale of case



Action taken

incidental

none

resident mine Temazcaltepec administrator

Arguelhes, Pedro de

represalia J

released

Oaxaca

(Pedro de Arguello), Portugal14

small-time merchant

Arnauld, Henri

denounced to Inquisition

case dropped

Veracruz

unknown

case suspended

Orizaba

tailor

bigamy 1726

census 1753

none

vecino Mexico baker

represalia

naturalized

Celaya

1752

1761

local merchant


freed and exonerated

Oaxaca

'doctor'

denounced charges Joseph Coates investigated for bigamy 1732

Ixtacomitlan and Tabasco

unknown

witness

none

San Pedro

retired army captain

naturalized 1756

Celaya

local merchant

none

Zacatecas

unknown

none

Oaxaca

local merchant

investigated but not arrested

Oaxaca

local merchant

Name and origin Archdeacon, Thomas

(Tomas Blanco, Archdekin), Cork, Ireland 13

(Enrique Arnauld), Languedoc, France15 Arnautti, Francesco di (Francisco de Arnao, Harnao), San Remo, Republic of Genoa16 Arnoux, Guillaume (Guillermo Arniague) France17 Arrighi, Francesco Antonio di (Francisco Arregui, Arrighi), Corsica18 Arrot, Thomas (Arot, Arrott), Aberdeen, Scotland19 Atikson, Robert (Roberto Aducsun, AhDuczon), England20 Ayme', Jean (Juan Ayme, Jaime), France 21 Baldo, Jean Baptiste (Juan Bautista Baldo), Savoy22 Baptiste, Jean (Juan Bautista) Bayonne, France23 Baptistes, Ioannis

Antonios (Juan Bautista Antonio), Greece24 Baptistes, Michael

Antonios (Miguel Antonio Bautista), Greece25 Barrera, Felix,

b. Curacao, (c.) 168526 Barrere, Francois de la (Francisco de la Barrera), b. France, (c.) 173027

7O5

J

7i9

accused of

1724

1721 represalia J

752

denounced to Inquisition J739

denounced as an Orthodox 1711

denounced as an Orthodox 1711

1711-1719

denounced as a Jew 1718 denounced to Inquisition J 759

investigated, resident San 'doctor and not prosecuted Jose del Parral surgeon' arrested but Acayucan quack doctor escaped

Appendix I Name and origin Barros or Barreiros, Jose de (Joseph de Barrios, Barrientos), Portugal28 Bastie, Frederick (Fadrique Bastie), England29 Belloc, Guillaume (GuillermoBelloc), France?30 Bender, Albrecht (Alberto de Vender), Germany31 Benson, Jacob

(Jacobo Benxon), England32


(Boturini Benaducti), Sodrino, Lombardy38 Bouchard de

Beaucourt, Louis (Luis Bouchard de Becour), France39 Boutet, Francois (Francisco, Francoua Boute,Boutte), Anjou40 Boyi or Boyer, Jean Baptiste (Juan Batista Boyee, Bolle, Boises), Louisiana41 Bridges, John (Juan delas Puentes), England42


Puebla

requested reestablishment of factory 1731 requested permission to reside in Veracruz denounced self to Inquisition

request granted

Veracruz

sent to Spain

Veracruz

ex-officer in Armada de Barlovento

admitted to Church

Mexico

retainer to viceroy


disappeared

Orizaba and Campeche

involved with dyewoods

died in jail

Texas and Mexico Veracruz

interloper

Mexico

wealthy miner local merchant

I7O5

captured on (Blancpain), France33 frontier 1756 Booth, William arrested for (Guillermo Booth), murder 1729 England34

Maria (Borrela), Genoa 36 Borgia, Bartolomeo (Bartolome Borga), Finale Ligure 37 Boturini, Lorenzo

Locale of case

freed

represalia

Blanpain,?

Borda, Joseph de la, France?35 Borelli, Antonio

Action taken

123

represalia

sentenced to 5 years in an African presidio ordered arrested goods processed by authorities naturalized

I75i

1752

violated state patronage of religion 1741 sent to New Spain during

sent to Spain 1744, pardoned none

represalia

I75i died 1734

Veracruz

retainer to Manuel Gomes Rebello chief factor South Sea Co.

unknown

(pulpero)

Jalapa

merchant

Mexico

gentleman and scholar

Campeche

military engineer

war

requested admission to Church 1748

request granted

Veracruz

ship's carpenter

arrested, Santa

ordered sent to Spain

Mexico

overland trader

license revoked

Mexico

storekeeper

Fei75i

allowed temporary naturalization 1719

1720, mill

keeper 1738

124


Name and origin


Action taken

Locale of case


requested naturalization 1755 census 1753

request granted 1756

Puebla

none

vecino Mexico unknown

interpreter

none

Acapulco

pilot

imprisoned for, heresy 1764

reconciliation

Mexico

unknown


warned only

Huextla and Yahualica

'surgeon1

represalia

naturalized

Guadalajara

merchant

I75i

1752

represalia 1752

naturalized 1753

Guadalajara

merchant

census 1753

none

vecino Mexico keeper of eating house

Bussel, Paul (Pablo Busel,Gof), France 51

denounced for bigamy 1727

vecino Ciudad sailor, tailor, Real de quack doctor Chiapas

'Bustamante', John

imprisoned Jalapa de Tabasco, result unclear escaped

denounced to Inquisition 1743 incidental 1756 none

Tlaxcala

curandero

Mexico

merchant

admitted to Church 1741

naturalized 1745

Veracruz

denounced to Inquisition 1756 incidental 1735 denounced for blasphemy denounced to Inquisition

disappeared


ex-factor, merchant, government accountant involved with dyewoods

unknown

Puebla

unknown

sent to Spain

Taxco

slave

none

Orizaba

tailor


none

Mexico

surgeon, retainer to viceroy

Brillano, Girolamo

(Geronimo Brillan), Genoa43 Brocado, Giacomo

(Santiago Brocado y Guedo), Genoa44 Brun{6), Jean (Juan Bruno), France 45 Bruun, Roland (Roldan Bruno), b. Denmark, 168746 Bruyke, Alexandre la (Alejandro Labriera), Brest, Brittany47 Bucheli, Bartolomeo (Bartolome Bucheli), Finale Ligure48 Bucheli, Carlo Filippo (Carlos Felipe Bucheli), Finale Ligure49 Bulle or Bouyer, Joachim (Joaquin Bulla), b. France, 1715 50

(Juan), England52

Butler, Thomas, Ireland 53 Butler, William (Guillermo Butler, Butel),b. England, 54

1703 Cabell, George

(Kabel), Ireland55

Cabell, John (Juan Cavallo), England56 Calle, Juan Francisco de la,'Moor' 57 Camel, John Joseph (Juan Joseph Canel), Scotland58 Canin or Cani, Alexandre (Canf, Canin, Canini), b. France, (c.) 171059

local merchant (pulpero)

1712

recommended

Appendix I Name and origin 1i

Capusilat6i',

Bartholomaus (Bartolome), Germany 60 Carpenter, Nicholas

(Nicolas Garpintero), b. England, 1698 61 Carrance, Philippe de (Phelipe de Carranza), Corsica 62 Carter, John Michael (Juan Miguel Carter), England 63 Carvalho, Domingos de (Domingo de Caravallo), Portugal 64 Carvalho, Lourenco de (Lorenzo de Caravallo), Portugal 65 Casella, Domenico de (Domingo de Casela), Genoa 66 Catani, Antonio Maria, Genoa 67 Charvet, Francois (Francisco Sarve), France 68 Chevallier, Aubert

(Alberto Cavallero), France 69 Child, John (Juan Nifio), England 70 Cirino, Giovanni Battista (Juan Bautista Chirino), Italian 7 1 Clare, James (Diego Clero), England 72 Clare, Thomas (Clero), England 73 Clare, William (Guillermo Clero), England 74 Claviere, Jean de

(Juan de Claveria), France, married

1692, d.1720 7 5 Coates, Joseph Lawrence (Lorenzo Cottez, Cotz, Corts, Cotrs, Cotez), b. England, (c.) 169076


Action taken

125 Locale of case


fugitive 1704

none

Veracruz

unknown

captured 1718


Mexico

sailor

represalia

fined 6 pesos,

vecino

craftsman

1703

2 reales

Queretaro

captured 1708

naturalized

Pachuca

merchant

freed

Parral

unknown


Mexico

store employee

goods processed by authorities sent to Spain

Jalapa

unknown

Veracruz

unknown

expulsion recommended

Mexico

I75i

requested naturalization

request granted

Yucatan

infantryman, viceregal palace armorer

admitted to Church 1747 none

Mexico

sailor

Mexico

transient cook

1719


Veracruz and Orizaba

incidental

none

Orizaba

goods seized

Veracruz

once a servant to Charles Reade majordomo to William Clare factor of South Sea Co.

was a prisoner of war

Mexico

unknown

Ixtacomitlan

ex-dyewood cutter

1732 represalia

1705 represalia

1705 died 1750 no license 1756

incidental

1703 captured 1745 denounced to Inquisition represalia

1728 represalia

1721 census 1689

reconciled 1731 outcome married 1732, unclear denounced for bigamy 1732

126


Name and origin Cogan, William (Guillermo Cogan), b. Ireland, 172077 Combemale, Pierre

(Pedro de Guzman y Luna), b. France, 172078 Constant, Jean (Juan Gonstante), Flanders79 Contarini, Pietro Antonio (Pedro Antonio Contarini), Venice80 Corkran, John (Juan Gorekran), Ireland 81 Correa or Correia, Esteban (Esteban Gorreu), Portugal, married82 Correa or Gorreia, Francisco (Francisco Gorreu), Portugal83 Correa or Gorreia de Mattos, Domingos (Domingo Correa de Matos), Lisbon, Portugal, single84 Corso, Giovanni del (Juan del Gorsso), b. Corsica, 166385 Costa, Jose da (Joseph de Acosta), Portugal86 Costa, Lucas da (Lucas de Acosta), Portugal87 Costa, Pedro da (Pedro de Acosta), Portugal88 Costa, Tomas da (Thomas de Acosta), Portugal, married89 Cotaux, Jean (Juan Cotaux), France 90 Cotogini, Giovanni

(Juan Coto), Niza,


Action taken

captured 1741 ? admitted to

Locale of case


Mexico

sailor

Zacatlan

local merchant

Church 1742 represalia

I75i

granted toleration

{pulpero)

1756 census 1753

none

vecino

merchant

forged license and theft 1736

expelled twice

Mexico Mexico

soldier


request granted

Puebla

doctor

represalia

freed for poverty

vecino

unknown

freed for poverty

Campeche

unknown


Mexico

1705

operator of bottle shop

represalia

arrested

vecino

Queretaro

poor craftsman

unknown

Orizaba

poor servant

freed for lack of wealth

Cordoba

ex-factor of Portuguese Asiento unknown

I7°5 represalia

I7O5 represalia

I7O3 represalia

Campeche

1705 represalia

I7O5

freed for lack ofgoods freed, goods represalia released to his 1705 wife declared blasphemous vandalism 1711 insane census 1689 none represalia

I7O5

Campeche Leon (near Guanajuato)

unknown

Acapulco

unemployed

Mexico

gentleman

Tepeaca

unknown

Mexico

merchant

91

Italy, d. 1710, single Cuias, Antonio, Portugal92 Cumani, Constantino Domenico (Constantino Domingo Cumano), Venice93

represalia

I7O5 represalia

1743

freed for poverty naturalized 1755

Appendix I Name and origin Cuore, Ventura de (Guora), Venice94


Action taken

127 Locale of case


request denied

Veracruz

unknown

sent to Portugal 1743 released

Veracruz

ship's captain

Chalapa

worked wife's small rancho

freed for lack ofgoods

Campeche

unknown


Campeche

unknown

1705 represalia

released

Teguacan

farmer

sent to Spain 1757 naturalized 1739 freed for poverty

Texas and Mexico

missionary priest merchant

requested naturalization 1756 captured 1742

Davison, John, England95 Dias, Antonio (Antonio Diaz), Portugal, married96 Dias Cardujo, Francisco (Francisco Diaz Cardujo), Portugal 97 Dias de Florenca, Manuel (Manuel Diaz de Florencia), Portugal, widower98 Dias Telles, Andre (Andres Diaz Telas), Portugal 99 Didier, Jacques (Dides), France 100 Dispart, Philippe (Phelipe), France 101 Domingues, Manuel (Manuel Dominguez), Portugal, married 102 Doyle, Mary (Maria Doile), Ireland 103

incidental 1756

none

Mexico

Drinkwater, Isidor (Isidro Bebeagua), b. Williamsburg, Va.,


request granted

Puebla

requested naturalization 1752? incidental 1728

request granted

Puebla

none

Orizaba


case dropped ?

Guadalajara

represalia 1736 denounced to Inquisition

exempted by viceroy books seized

illness 1747 ? denounced to Inquisition

represalia

I7O5 represalia

I7O5 represalia

1705 captured represalia 1737 represalia

1705

vecino

Veracruz Durango

poor craftsman mother of Robert Kirban carpenter

1721104

Durante, Giacomo (Santiago Dur antes), Genoa105 Effemy, Thomas (Tomas de Efferay), England106 Effraie or Effray, Charles (Carlos Efrain), France? 107 Egan,John (Juan de Egon), Ireland 108 Ellerker, Ralph (Raphael Ellerquer, Eyeker), Ireland109 Ennis, Gabriel (Gabriel Enes), England? 110 Er, 'Monsieur', France 111

local merchant (pulpero) unknown chemist i

quimic6>

Mexico

unknown

Veracruz

doctor

admitted to Church

Puebla

unknown

none

resident Mexico

retainer to viceroy

128


Name and origin Esper e Sette, Domingos de (Domingo de Espericeta), Portugal112 Fabre, Jacques (Diego Fabre), France 113 Fabre, Jean Louis (Juan Luis Fabre), Turin, Savoy, married d. 1702 114 Fallet or Faller, Casar (Cesar de Falliet), Neuburg, Germany 115 Fallot, Jean (Juan de MedarFalot,Fablot), Canada 116 Farge, Antonie du (Antonio de Fars), France 117 Feenstra, Michael (Miguel Finstruel), Flanders118 Fernandes, Domingos (Domingo Fernandez), Cuba, Portugal, married 119 Fernandes, Joao (Juan Fernandez), Portugal120 Fernandes, Joao (Juan Fernandez), Portugal121 Fernandes, Jose (Jose Fernandez), Portugal122 Fernandes, Manuel (Manuel Fernandez), Portugal123 Fernandes Barreiros, Francisco (Francisco Fernandez Varreos),


Action taken

Locale of case


freed for lack of goods

Campeche

unknown

informer 1708 census 1689

none

Mexico

unknown

none

Mexico

vendor

persistent heretic c. 1750

absolved and released 1753

Manila and Mexico

captain of merchant ship

Texas and Mexico

frontiersman

Texas and Mexico

interloper

resident Cunduacan, Tabasco Veracruz

glazier or glassblower

represalia

1705

member St captured and Denis released expedition 1714 captured 1756 sent to Spain witness 1727

none

requested naturalization 1737

request granted

represalia

freed for poverty

Guadalcazar

poor ranch hand

incidental 1721

none

San Pedro

unknown

represalia 1705


Durango

unknown

informer 1710

none

Acapulco

sailor

represalia

freed, eight children

vecino

unknown

I7O5

I7O5

successful merchant

Antequera de Oaxaca

T/'kf'h 1 rro 1 124

r oriugai Fernandes Cardoso, Amaro (Amaro Fernandez Cardoso), Portugal125 Fernandes da Cunha, Manuel (Manuel Fernandez de Acufia), b. Portugal, 1665126

fined and released

Puebla

shopkeeper

1705 represalia

freed

Guadalcazar

rancher

represalia

I7O5

Appendix I Name and origin Fernandes Goncalves, Manuel (Manuel Fernandez Gonzalez), Portugal 127 Fernandes de Govea, Pedro (Pedro Fernandez), Portugal 128 Fernandes Mendes, Antonio (Antonio Fernandez Mendez), Portugal, married 129 Fernandes da Silva, Jose (Jose Fernandez de Silva), Portugal 130 Ferreira, Antonio (Antonio Ferreyra), Portugal 131 Ferreira, Domingos de (Domingo de Herrera), Portugal, married 132 Ferreira, Francisco (Francisco Ferreyra), Portugal 133 Ferreira, Inacio

Locale of case



Action taken

suspicious marriage 1756

case suspended

Campeche

unknown

represalia

freed for poverty

Mexico

unknown

freed because already naturalized

Mexico

master apothecary

freed for poverty

Mexico

unknown

freed for poverty

Jalapa

unknown

I7°5 represalia

freed

vecino

unknown

1705 represalia

1705 represalia

1705 represalia

Campeche

I7O5 represalia

released

Mexico

I7O5 represalia

(Ignacio Ferreira), Portugal, married134

1705

Ferreira, Matias de

represalia

(Mathias de Herrera), Portugal, married135

I7°5

Ferreira, Pedro (Pedro Ferreyra), Portugal 136 Fialho, Manuel (Manuel Fiallo), b. Portugal, 1631137 Figueira Castilho Branco, Julio de (Julio de Figueroa Castillo Blanco), b. Portugal, 1655, married 138 Figueira Ponce de

129

freed

vecino

steward of viceregal stables unknown

Campeche freed for lack of wealth

vecino


Cordoba

unknown

1705 represalia

freed

vecino

wealthy merchant

represalia

Oaxaca

I7O5 represalia

freed

resident San Salvador near Mexico

aduana guard

released

Mexico

gentleman

unclear

Mexico

unknown

1705

represalia

Leon, Alvaro de i7°5 (Alvaro de Figuero Ponce de Leon), Portugal139 Fonte, Jose da (Joseph denounced for delaFuente), Judaism 1717 Portugal140

unknown

Cordoba

130


Name and origin Fors(s), Jakob (JacoboFors), Sweden 141 Fortuna, Luca (Lucas Fortuna), b. Sassari, Sardinia, 1651 142 Fox, William Joseph (Guillermo Joseph Fox), b. England, 1696 143 Fracher, Oliver (Oliver Fraccier), Ireland 144 Fraguier, Clement de (Glemente de Fragua), France 1 4 5 Franutti, Giovanni Battista (Juan Baptista Franyuti), b. Finale Ligure, 1716146 Franutti, Pietro Antonio (Patron Antonio Franyuti), Finale Ligure147 Fraser, Angus (Alejandro Joseph Frazer), b. Inverness, Scotland, 1717148 Frassineto, Giuseppi di (Joseph de Fresinette), b. Pavia, Lombardy, 1670, married149 Frederick, John (Juan Federico), England 150 Frengan, Jean (Jan, J u a n de Escalona, Fraga, Claveria), village near Pau, Beam prov., France 1 5 1 Freyre da Fonseca, Manuel (Manuel Freire de Fonseca), Portugal 152 Furtado, Diogo (Diego Hurtado), Portugal153 Fuscares, Vicentis Stefanos (Vicente Estefano Fuscarin), Greek subject of Venice154


Action taken

Locale of case


captured 1718


Veracruz and Mexico

sailor

represalia

freed

Mexico

wholesale merchant


request granted

Orizaba

gunsmith

dubious license 1725

license disallowed

Mexico

unknown

requested naturalization 1756 dispute with a priest 1754

request denied

resident Puebla

unknown

none

Acayucan

small-time merchant

incidental 1754

none

Acayucan

ship's cook

represalia


Orizaba

seaman for South Sea Co.

none, already naturalized

vecino

unknown

1703

1739 represalia

1703

Mexico

surgeon

Mexico

asentista de pulque

naturalized

Veracruz

merchant (see endnote)

released

Puebla

exonerated and freed

Orizaba

agent for Amaro Fernandes ex-sailor vendor

denounced to none Inquisition 1712 accused of died before bigamy 1715 prosecuted

represalia

Queretaro

1751 represalia

1705 denounced as an Orthodox 1727

Appendix I Name and origin Galanides, Ioannis (Juan Galeano), Greece155 Gambino, Giovanni Antonio (Juan Antonio Gambino), Genoa156 Gannon, John (Juan G a n . . . ? ) , England157 Garrison, Ambrose (Ambrosio Garrazon), Britain? 158 Gaulle, Joseph de (Joseph Gallo), France 159 Gay or Guy, John (Juan Gay), b. Scotland, 1736160 Gazzano, Giuseppe (Jose Gazano), b. Genoa, 1708161 Georgeon, Elie (Elias George, Georgon), France 162 Gerardi, Girolamo (Geronimo), Venice163 Giraganian (Domingo Gieraganes, Guieraganes), b. Persian Armenia, 1677164 Giudice, Carlo (Carlos Yudice), Italy 165 Giudice, Gaetano (Cayetano Judice, Yudice), Genoa166 Godeau, Pierre (Pedro Godoy), Namur, Austrian Netherlands167 Gola, Giovanni Pietro de (Juan Pablo de Gola), Genoa168 Gomes, Domingos (Domingo Gomez), Portugal169 Gomes de Castro, Joao (Juan Gomez de Castro), b. Monzan, Portugal, 1651170


Action taken

witness 1712

none

Oaxaca

local merchant

requested naturalization 1725?


Mexico

merchant

incidental 1735

none

Puebla

unknown

represalia

ordered arrested

Mexico

unknown

accused of bigamy 1707

convicted

Mexico

unknown

captured 1748


Mexico

ship's boy

census 1753

none

vecino

unknown

i75i

Locale of case


Mexico captured 1756

sent to Spain

Texas and Mexico

interloper

represalia

released

Mexico

merchant

witness 1723

none

Mexico, resident Yucatan

ordained Dominica

represalia

goods seized

Celaya

local merchant

naturalized 1753



vecino Cadiz, resident Veracruz Neuvo Leon

merchant

1751?

died 1757

Mexico

unknown

Campeche

unknown

1705

goods processed by authorities freed for lack ofgoods

represalia

released

Tabuco

ex-sailor, woodcutter

1703

1752 represalia

represalia

1705

local merchant

132

Foreign immigrants in early Bourbon Mexico When and why noticed

Action taken

Gomes Rebello, Manuel (Manuel Gomez Ravelo, 171 Rabelo), Portugal

represalia

released

Puebla

barber and surgeon

Gongalves, Benedito

represalia

beggar

I7°5

freed for poverty

Oaxaca

(Benito Gonzalez), Portugal, married172 Gongalves, Martinho

represalia

released

Durango

unknown

(Martin Gonzalez), Portugal, married 173

1705

Gongalves Goelho,

represalia

1705


vecino

Joao (Juan Gonzalez Cuello), Portugal, married174 Gongalves Monteiro, Antonio (Antonio Gonzalez Montero), Portugal175 'Gonzalez*, John Joseph (Juan Jose,

Mexico

employee in peanut store

represalia

uncertain

Parral

unknown


unknown

San Felipe, Guanajuato

unknown

represalia

detained till peace

Veracruz

captain of English slave ship

ordered to Spain sent to Spain and goods seized reins tructed in the faith

Guadalajara

almost alcalde mayor

Veracruz

merchant

Mineral de Corpus

ex-carpenter small merchant merchant

Name and origin

Bautista), England 176 Gordon, Alexander, England 177

Gordon, John (Juan), Ireland 178 Grangent, Bernard

(Bernardo Grangente), France179 Green, Jacob (Jacobo Verde), England180

Locale of case

I7O5

I7O5

1721

nominated alcalde 1745

arrested for illegal commerce 1729 denounced to Inquisition 1732

Grondona, Giovanni

Francesco (Juan Francisco Grondona y Ofieto), Republic of Genoa181 Guile, Alexander Joseph (Alejandro Joseph de Guelle), Scotland182 Guillard, Antoine




Mexico, resident Cordoba

captured 1701

naturalized

Yucatan

arrested for (Antonio Gueliar Protestantism 1761 Rosel, Geliar, Rufel, Ruger, Guiliart; baptized: Antonio Buidias de Tolosa), b. Toulouse, France, 1736183 Gurney, John Joseph witness 1732 (Juan Joseph Gurnia), b London, 1687184

soldier

1719

baptized 1762, Oaxaca released 1765

none

Ixtacomitlan

cook to viceroy, later merchant

unknown

Appendix I Name and origin


Hall, John (Juan Jal), denounced as

England 185 Haman, Mathias William, England 186 Hamilton, John (Juan Hamilton), England 187 Harriman, John (Juan Orimen), England 188 Harvey, John (Juan Harvey), England 189 Hatch, William (Guillermo de Jachi), England 190 Hayden, Henry (Enrique Hayden), Ireland191 Hearn, Gabriel (Gabriel Hernandez), England?192 Hedges, Edward (Eduardo Guillermo Hedegues, Hedgues), Ireland193

Hipkins,John (Juan Xiptocial?), England 194 Howard, Lewis (Luis deHoart), b. 1695, English America 195 Howard, Thomas, England 196 Huart, Michel Philippe de (Miguel Phelipe de Huart, Juson de Moyrien), French Navarre 197 Hucker, John (Juan Huctor, Huctores), England 198 Ingleby, John (Juan Inglevi), England, d. before 1756199 Ingleby, Josepha, England200 Jacob, John Baptist (Juan Baptista Montoya, Jacobo), Jamaica 201 Jasen, Thomas (Tomas Jasen, Jacen), England202

Action taken

Locale of case


escaped

Queretaro

unknown

none

Puebla

unknown

arrested

Veracruz

merchant

incidental 1718

none

captured 1718

admitted to Church 1720 admitted to Church 1721

Puebla and Mexico Veracruz and Mexico Puebla

employee of John Bridges sailor

merchant or commercial agent unknown

heretic 1736 interpreter 1735 lack of license 1737

captured 1714

hatter

licensed to go to New Spain

license limited to two years

Madrid and Mexico

represalia

ordered arrested

Mexico


request granted

Havana and Mexico

cooper

incidental 1728

none

unknown

captured 1718


Orizaba, resident Veracruz Mexico

captured 1718

admitted to Church 1720 ordered expelled

Veracruz and Mexico Mexico

sailor

request granted

Puebla

carpenter

naturalized 1739

eventually resident Mexico

doctor

1751

represalia

1752

requested admission to Church 1735 appeared in Havana 1730

sailor

merchant

denounced as heretic 1736

escaped

Yautepec

wife ofJohn Ingleby (see endnote)

represalia

exempted by viceroy

Mexico

merchant

(see above)

1736

134


Name and origin Jodo, Francisco (Francisco Juan), Portugal203 Joffrin, Pierre (Pedro Jofior), Louisiana204 John-Havens, Augustine (Agustin Jonhevens), England205 Johns, Robert (Roberto Juan), Ireland 206 Jollan, Michael (Miguel Jolham), England207 Jordan, Joseph (Jordon), France 208 Jorge, Domingos (Domingo Jorge), b. Portugal, (c.) 1665209 Joye, Richard (Ricardo Juan, Joie), b. England, 1715210 Jusseraud, Seigneur de St Denis, Louis, Canada 211 Kempe, Heinrich (Henriques, Enrique de Kempis, Quimpis), Germany212 King or Ray, John (JuanRey),b. Dublin, 1667, married213 Kirban, Robert (Roberto Quirban), Ireland 214 Labate, Biagio (Bias Laviate), b. Rome,


Action taken

Locale of case


sent to Spain

Campeche

unknown

arrested Santa Fei75i incidental 1732

ordered to Spain none

Mexico

overland trader unknown

incidental 1735

none

Puebla

unknown

captured 1718


Veracruz and Mexico

sailor

denounced to Inquisition 1738 denounced Joseph Obediente requested admission to Church 1734 crossed Texas 1714

none

Tlaxcala

curandero

(see Obediente)

Veracruz

request granted

Puebla

sailor for Portuguese Asiento ex-sailor assistant to

captured and released

Texas and Mexico

frontiersman

represalia

released

Mexico

master tailor

released

Mexico

ex-sailor, master tailor

ordered arrested

Mexico

unknown

i75i census 1753

none

vecino

tailor

represalia

1705

resident Tabasco

haciendado

1703 represalia

1703

represalia

Mexico

1703215

Laini, Jacques (Diego de la Torre), Bayonne, France 216 Lamartine, Mathieu (Matheo Lasmartres), France217 Ledran, Francois Antoine (Francisco Antonio Ledran), France 218

denounced to Inquisition 1756 requested naturalization 1752 witness 1724

none

Mexico

request denied Mexico none

Mexico

treasurer to important merchant unknown unknown

Appendix I Name and origin Le'grand, Louis (Luis Legrand), France 219 Leleu, Guil (Gil Lelo de la Rea), France 220 Leon, Jean or Joachim de (Juan Joaquin de Leon), b. France, 1717 221 Lincey or Lindsay, Sarah (Sara Maria NicolessaLinci), Pennsylvania 222 Lindsay, Ignatius (Herbagio Ignacio Lince, Lynze), County Mayo, Ireland 223 Listen, Luck (Bentura Leston, Liston), England 224 Lite(e), Jeanne Paschal (Juana Pascuala Leti), French black, Antilles 225 Liti{e), Marie (Maria Gutierrez de Leti), French black, Antilles 226 Lite'{e), Michel (Miguel Leti, Liti), French black, Antilles 227 Lithologos, Georgios (Georgio Tallapiedra), Greek subject of Venice 228 Lombardino, Giuseppe Antonio (Joseph Antonio Lombardino), Rome, married 229 Long, Ralph (Rafael), England 230 Lopes da Costa, Antonio (Antonio Lopez de Acosta), Portugal 231 Lopes da Rosa, Joao (Juan Lopez de la Rosa), Portugal, married 232

When and why noticed requested naturalization 1742 requested naturalization 1723 census 1753

Action taken

'35 Locale of case



Veracruz

request granted

Mexico

merchant ?

vecino

confectioner

none

merchant {tienda abierta),

Mexico


request granted

Veracruz

widow

witness 1756

none

Puebla

clerigo didcono

incidental 1732

none

unknown

incidental 1721

uncertain

resident Tacotalpa, Tabasco San Pedro

incidental 1721

uncertain

San Pedro

'sorceress'

denounced for sorcery

uncertain

San Pedro

curandero

denounced as Orthodox 1743

case suspended 1746

Queretaro

barber and hairdresser

represalia

naturalized 1752

Veracruz

merchant


request granted

Mexico

sailor

represalia


Yautepec

woodcutter ?

I7O5 represalia

freed

Tepeaca

unknown

1705

'sorceress'

{tienda abierta)

136


Name and origin Lopes Sanches da Penha, Pedro (Pedro Lopez Sanchez de la Pena), Portugal 233 Lot, Guillaume de (GuillermodelaO), France 234 Lousseau or Lusson, Andre (Andres Lusso), France 235 Lucas, Joseph, b. Dublin, (c.) 1688236 Luz, Antonio da (Antonio de la Luz), Portugal237 McCarty, Denis (Dionisio Macarti), b. Cork, Ireland, 1688238 McCarty, Mary Josepha (Maria Josepha Macarte), Ireland239 MacDonald, John

(Juan Mack Donald, Magdanal), b. 240

When and why noticed bigamous wife 1707; he was a fugitive 'murderer' denounced for bigamy 1754

Action taken

Locale of case


escaped to Philippines

Metepec

alguacil

unknown

Mexico

unknown

viceregal petition 1756

allowed to sail

Cadiz destination Mexico

witness 1728

none

assistant chef in viceregal kitchen ship's pilot

vecino

Veracruz Orizaba

1705

released for lack of goods

witness 1728

none

Veracruz

servant to Lucas da Costa unemployed

interpreter J 752

none

Veracruz

unknown


request granted

Queretaro

sailor and gunner

freed for lack ofgoods none against MacTagart

Campeche

unknown

vecino

surgeon

released

Mexico

master shoemaker

naturalized 1738

Caracas, Veracruz and Campeche Mexico

unknown

represalia

Scotland, 1716 represalia Machado, Antonio Portuguese mulatto 241 I7O5 Mac Tagart, John informer 1756

(Juan), b. Scotland,

Orizaba

1712 2 4 2

Madeira, Tomas (Thomas Madero), Portugal, married 243 Maguire, Patrick (Patricio Maguier), Ireland 244 Malet, Pierre (Pedro Malec), Louisiana245


Malibran, Jean (Juan

represalia

represalia I7O5

1726

arrested Santa Fei75i

Malibran Bosques), I75i France 246 died 1745 Malino, Nicola (Nicolas Mallen), 247 Naples represalia Manoel, Miguel (Miguel Manuel), 1705 Portugal248 census 1689 Maria, Giacomo (Diego Maria), Rome. d. 1703 2 4 9

ordered to Spain naturalized

Veracruz

overland trader merchant

1758 goods processed by authorities freed

Sonora

unknown

Campeche

soldier in local presidio

none

Mexico

master hatter

Appendix I Name and origin Marin, Jean (Juan), b. Flanders, 1662, single250 Marioni, Glaudio Giuseppe (Claudio Jose Marioni), Naples251 Marques de Sequeira, Domingos (Domingo Marquez), Portugal252 Martin, Thomas (Tomas Martinez), England 253 Martino, Emanuele (Manuel Martinez), Republic of Venice254 Martins, Cristovao (Cristobal Martinez), Portugal255 Martins de Palma, Antonio (Antonio Martinez de Palma), Evora, Portugal256 Martins de Robles, Antonio (Antonio Martinez de Robles), Portugal257 Martins de Solis, Gregorio (Gregorio Martinez de Solis), Portugal, married258 Mattos e Franca, Manuel de (Manuel de Matos y Francia), Lisbon, married, d.

137


Action taken

represalia

released

Mexico

tobacconist

petition 1750

request granted

Spain and Mexico

unknown

represalia

freed for poverty

Mexico

unknown


resident Guanajuato 1704

miner 1699

none

Papantla

unknown


Campeche

unknown

vecino

shoemaker

Locale of case


1704

I7O5 denounced to Inquisition 1699 denounced to Inquisition 1715 represalia

1705 1705

freed for poverty

Acayucan

accused of bigamy 1710

exonerated 1715

resident Colima

coastal trader

represalia

freed

vecino

regidor and

Cordoba

alfirez

vecino

alfirez

represalia

I7O5 represalia

released

Patzquaro

1705

1706 2 5 9

Medina, Fernando de, accused of Portugal260 Judaism 1711 Medina Lourenco de census 1689 (Lorenzo), Goimbra, 261 Portugal, d. 1707 represalia Mendes, Jorge (Jorge Mendez), Portugal262 1705 Mendes, Manuel represalia (Manuel Mendez), I7O5 Portugal263 Mendonga, Jose de represalia (Joseph de Mendoza), 1705 264 Portugal Mendonga Vasconrepresalia cellos, Joao de (Juan 1705 de Mendoza Vascon265 celos), Portugal

reportedly imprisoned naturalized 1704

Mexico

merchant ?

Mexico

merchant

disappeared

Mexico

drifter

left for Peru 1704

Mexico

vendor and drifter


Campeche

unknown

freed

Toluca

store employee

i38


Name and origin Menses or Menez, Pierre (Pedro Menezes), France 266 Miller, David, b. England, 1695267 Millet, Andre (Andres Milo), France 268 Mogodein, Jean Baptiste (Juan Bautista Mogodin), France 269 Montaigne or Montagne, Francois (Francisco Serrano), Paris 270 Moore, Gerard (Gerardo, Geraldo Moro), Ireland 271 Moore, Oliver (Oliver Mora), England 272


Action taken

general expulordered to Spain sion of Frenchmen, 1717 captured 1718? admitted to Church 1721 informer 1708 none

Locale of case


Gu auchinango barber and surgeon

Mexico

sailor

Mexico

unknown

illegal commerce 1727

sent to Spain and there freed

Veracruz

French naval officer

conflict with alcalde 1729

fired but pensioned

Atoyac, Zacatula

teniente actual

none

Mexico

lawyer

request granted

Puebla

sailor

apparently none

Patzcuaro

merchant

San Luis Potosi

unknown

ordered arrested

Mexico

military captain

admitted to

Veracruz and Mexico

sailor

San Martin Texelucan (Puebla) Mexico

surgeon

Veracruz

factor for South Sea Co.

vecino

ex-sailor

denounced to Inquisition 1719 requested admission to Church 1734 Moraca, Pedro, denounced to 273 Inquisition Naples 1699 absolved of Morfill or Morfey, James (Diego Morfin), heresy 1716 England 274 Morozzo, Pedro forged license 1736 (Pedro Moroso), 275 Sicily Morton, Joshua captured 1719 (Josue Morton), England 276 Motte, Pierre de la, or denounced de Lamotte (Pedro de Jean Reytet 1741 la Mota), France 277 denounced for Naiscuriue, Daniel Judaism 1701 (Pedro Necero; baptized Francisco Xavier Naiseras), b. Rochelle, France, 1664278 petitioned Newton, John (Juan Neuton), England 279 release of goods 1719 represalia Nogal, Jean Philippe du (Juan Phelipe del 1704 Nogal), Corsica 280

Church 1720 Reytet arrested admitted to Church

goods seized again 1721 freed

Zacatecas

sailor, tailor

Appendix I Name and origin JVorris, Francis

(Francisco de Naris, Nares, Noriss, Linares), b. Ireland,


Action taken

139 Locale of case



escaped

Mexico

vendor

represalia

ordered arrested request granted

Mexico

unknown

Veracruz

widow

vecino

mine owner

1719 2 8 1

JVorris, Peter (Pedro Norris), England? 2 8 2 JVott, Mary Frances (Maria Francisca Not), England 283 Novaes, Antonio de (Antonio de Novaes, Nobaez), Portugal 284 Nunan, Thomas (Thomas Nunez), b. Waterford, Ireland,

1751 requested admission to Church 1756 represalia

released

Calimaya

1705 denounced for Judaism 1728

charges investigated

resident Mexico

merchant

Obediente, Joseph (Jose), Dutch Sephardic Jew 286 0'Farrell,Jacob (JacoboO'Farril), Ireland287

denounced to Inquisition 1701 incidental 1756

restricted to ship

Veracruz

interpreter on Dutch ship

none

Veracruz

O'Halloran, Nicholas (Nicolas Ohaloran, Oaloran, Aleran), b. Galway, Ireland,


exonerated

Guadalajara

priest and chaplain to Spanish warship doctor

none

Puebla

unknown

none

Acayucan

unknown

goods seized

Celaya

local merchant

case incomplete

Queretaro

craftsman ?

request granted

Mexico

merchant


Cordoba

servant

freed, had been 'composed'in 1690

Cordoba

ex-soldier

1702 2 8 5

1693288

O'Leary, Mathias interpreter (MathiasdeLeris), 1747 Ireland 289 Onetto, Agostino incidental 1754 (AgustinOfieto), Genoa 290 Onetto, Giacomo represalia (Santiago Onetto), 1752 291 Italy represalia Ortes, Giorgio Michele (Jorge 1703 Miguel Ortis),b. 292 Milan, 1653, single Pagliari, Francesco requested Antonio (Francisco naturalization 1728 Antonio Pallares y Gambino), Genoa 293 Palma, Diogo da represalia (Diego de la Palma, I7O5 294 el mozo), Portugal Palma, Diogo de represalia (Diego de Palma, el 1 7O5 viejo), Portugal 295

140


Name and origin Paschal, Jean (Juan Pastel), France? 296 Paton or Patton, William (Guillermo Paton), England 297 Pereira, Joao Antonio (Juan Antonio Pereira), b. Faro, Portugal, 1648, married 298 Pereira de Araujo, Damiao (Damian Pereyra de Araujo), Portugal 299 Pereira Gravos, Francisco (Francisco Perera Grivas), Portugal300 Pereira da Cunha, Roque (Roque Pereyra de Acufia), b. Portugal 1672301 Pereira Pinto, Jose (Joseph Pereyra Pinto), b. Portugal, 1671, married 302 Peres de Madeira, Domingos (Domingo Perez de Madeiros), Portugal 303 Peres Masinoso, Sebastiao (Sebastian Perez Masinoso), Faro, Portugal, married 304 Pierre, Jean (Juan Pedro), France 305 Pimenta, Antonio

(Antonio Pimienta), Portugal, married306 Place, Joseph de (Joseph de Plaza), Namur, Austrian Netherlands307 Plas, Joseph van der (Joseph Vanderplas), b. Holland, 1713308 Plus, Ernst (Ernesto Plus, Puls),b. Minister, 1678, single309 Pobey, Willem (Guillermo Pobey), Holland310


Action taken

incidental 1747 unknown

Locale of case


alleged murderer 1729

acquitted

Mexico and Puebla Veracruz

represalia 1703

uncertain

Queretaro

craftsman ?

incidental 1706

left town 1704

Veracruz

factor of Portuguese Asiento

represalia

naturalized

Patzcuaro

unknown

1705

1711

witness for Inquisition

sent to Spain 1714

Veracruz

merchant


request granted

Veracruz

treasury guard

represalia 1705

not molested

Puebla

unemployed

represalia

released

Tabuco

coastal trader

viceroy ordered release not molested

Veracruz

local merchant

Teguacan

beggar

unknown associated with Asiento ?

1701

1705 accused of illegal commerce 1716 represalia


request granted

Nuevo Leon

local merchant


request granted

Cordoba

doctor

represalia 1703

freed

Mexico

tailor

irregular

approved by Inquisition

Mexico

retainer to viceroy

reconciliation

1711

Appendix I Name and origin Portail or Portal, Pierre du (Pedro del Portal), Lorraine311 Poullain, Jean (Juan de Poullian), b. Rennes, France, 1690 312 Poullain de Tour, Joseph (Jose Pollone de Torre, Polon), France 3 1 3 Power, Thomas (Thomas Pober), Ireland 314 Prado, Santiago Felix de, b. Portugal, 1726 315 Proco, Giovanni (Juan Prozo de Campos), Milan 316 Quadrio, Gianmaria (Juan Maria Quadra), Milan, single 317 Quintal, Pedro (Quintanal), Portugal 318


Action taken

141 Locale of case


sent to Spain and goods seized none against Poullain

Zacatecas

unknown

Mexico

retainer to Marques de Guardiola

arrested 1727

released, warned severely, 1732

Tacotalpa near Guazacualco

'doctor'

incidental 1741

none

vecino

secular priest

represalia

1704 informer 1717

Orizaba denounced to Inquisition 1756 died 1732

represalia

none

Mexico

unknown

goods processed by authorities released

Queretaro

surgeon

Mexico

tobacconist


Puebla

retainer to Manuel Gomes Rebello soldier

1704 represalia

1705

Raabe, Johann (Juan Ra), Germany 319


case dropped

Mexico and Manila

Rqford or Raeford, Bartholomew (Bartolome de Avila, Rafor), Bristol, England, married 320 Ramalho, Clemente (Clemente Ramallo), Portugal 321 Rankill, Peter (Pedro Ronquillo), London 322

represalia

released

Mexico

obraje

operator

I7O3

expulsion order

naturalized I75O

Guadalajara

tax collector

died 1709

goods processed by authorities goods seized again 1721

Veracruz

unknown

Veracruz

Reade, Charles petitioned (Carlos Reade), release of goods 323 England I7i9 Readshaw, Thomas requested (Joseph Miguel Nieto admission to de Almiron y Gomez), Church 1726 b. London, 1708 324 Rebecq, Vincent requested (Vincente Rebequi), naturalization 325 France 1720

request granted

Puebla

chief factor for South Sea Co. unknown

request granted

Mexico

surgeon

142


Name and origin Recole, Joseph (Joseph Recoli), France326 RecoU, Josephine (Josepha la Mota de Recoli), France327 Reine, Jean Marie (Juan Maria Reyna), b. France, 1707328 Reis, Baltasar dos (Balthasar de los Reyes), b. Portugal, 1605329 Reis Cardoso, Manuel (Manuel de los Reyes Cardoso), Portugal330 Renault, Jean Claude (Juan Claudio Renault), Paris 331 Rendell, John (Juan Rendel), England332 Repetto, Niccolo (Nicolas Repeto),b. Genoa, 1699333 Reytet, Jean (Juan Reyntet, Reyes, Bitel yRios),b. Pau, Beam prov., France, 1690334 Ribeiro, Antonio de (Antonio de Rivero), Portugal335 Richards, John (Juan Ricardo de Guzman), b. Waterford, Ireland, 1680336 Rimassa, Andrea (Andres Reimasa), Genoa337 Ripe or Ripert, Francois (Francisco Ripe), France338 Rivett, Edward (Eduardo Rivet), b. White Island, England, 1697339 Rizzo, Francesco (Francisco Rizo Capurro), Genoa, married, d. 1706340

When and why noticed viceregal petition 1756

Action taken allowed to sail

Locale of case Cadiz, destination Mexico

viceroy's chef wife ofJoseph Recole

see above

Mexico

cashier to Jean de Leon

released

Oaxaca

unknown

released

Oaxaca

ex-soldier

goods processed by authorities request granted

Veracruz

artilleryman

Puebla

sailor

vecino

broker

Mexico

{corredor)

census 1753 represalia


vecino

1705 represalia

1705 died 1732 requested admission to Church 1735 census 1753 arrested on suspicion of heresy 1741

freed and exonerated

San Martin Texelucan, Puebla

surgeon

represalia

freed

Mexico

small-time wine seller

none

vecino

unknown

1705 witness 1728

Cuba census 1753

none

Mexico

keeper of eating house

vecino

suspect 1754

sought by Inquisition

Veracruz

unknown

captured 1717 or 1718

admitted to Church? 1719

Mexico

cooper

Mexico

vendor

census 1689

Appendix I Name and origin Roc, Baptiste (BautistaRoc), Louisiana341 Rocque, Francois (Francisco Roque), Flanders342 Rodonia, Ioannis (Juan de la Rosa), Greece343 Rodrigues, Domingos (Domingo Rodriguez), Portugal, single344 Rodrigues, Jorge (Rodriguez), b. Portugal, 1687, single345 Rodrigues, Manuel (Rodriguez), Portugal346 Rodrigues, Manuel (Rodriguez), Portugal347 Rodrigues, Manuel (Rodriguez), Portugal348 Rodrigues, Manuel (Rodriguez), Portugal349 Rodrigues, Manuel (Rodriguez), Portugal, married 350 Rodrigues, Miguel (Rodriguez), Portugal, married351


Locale of case


arrested Santa Fei75i

ordered to Spain

Mexico

overland trader

denounced to Inquisition 1719 incidental 1718

none

Mexico

unknown

none

Oaxaca

unknown

vecino

local merchant (pulpero)

represalia

reed

Tochimilco

I7O5 not molested

Mexico

sausage vendor

witness 1710

none

Acapulco

soldier

represalia


vecino

cavalryman


Guadalcazar

ranch foreman

freed for poverty

Puebla

ex-pilot

1705 represalia

not molested

Puebla

unknown

freed

vecino

unknown

freed

Tangancicuaro, Michoacan Puebla

ex-soldier

freed

vecino

small rancher

represalia

1705

I7O5 represalia

I7O5 represalia

Villa Alta

1705 represalia

1705

Rodrigues Galado,

represalia

Joao (Juan

1705

Rodriguez Galado), Portugal, married 352 Rodrigues Soto, Simao (Simon Rodriguez Soto), Portugal, married 353 Rodrigues de Souza, Bartolomeu (Bartolome Rodriguez de Sosa), Portugal, married 354 /fore, Jan van der (Juan de la Rosa), Holland 355 Rose, Peter (Pedro de la Roza), England356

Action taken

143

represalia

San Juan Bautista Sonora

1705 represalia

freed

requested admission to Church 1705 witness 1753

vecino

unknown

Parral

1705

request granted

Mexico

sailor and gunner

none

Mexico

merchant ?

144


Name and origin


Rosell, Richard, England357 Roux, Joseph (Joseph Rux, Ruy, Rus), b. France, 1678358

informer 1721

Rubberson, Gotthart

(Gottartd, Guadarsete Robeson, Rubberson), b. Hamburg, 1694359 Salvago, Giovanni Antonio (Juan Antonio Salbago), Genoa360 Salvago, Giovanni Stefano (Juan Esteban Berdura, Salbago), Finale Ligure 361 'Santiago, Diego de', England, married362 Santiago, Joao de (Antonio Lopez), Portugal363 Santis, Francesco di (Francisco Santos de Morales), b. Pisa, Duchy of Florence, 1662, married364 Santoni, Giacomo (Xacome Santoni), Corsica365 Saradi, 'Pedro5 (Pedro Saradi, Zarate Quiano, Quixano), b. Isfahan, Persia, 1692366 Saruti, Pietro (Pedro Serruto), b. Genoa,

Action taken

Locale of case


none against Rosell none

Alvarado

unknown

resident Mexico

tailor

captured 1718


Mexico

sailor

died 1757

goods processed by authorities

Yucatan

unknown

represalia

freed

Chalco

ex-soldier

freed for poverty sent back to Portugal

Puebla

oddjobs

1703 suspicious marriage 1707

Mexico

renegade Franciscan

represalia

not molested

vecino

craftsman ?

witness 1701

1703

represalia

1703

represalia

Queretaro

released

Mexico

tobacconist ?

exonerated

Mexico

merchant

none

vecino

merchant

I7O3

denounced as an Orthodox, 1723 census 1753

Mexico

1691367

Saul, Jacques (Diego Saul), France?368 Schulz, Kaspar (Gaspar Schulz), Brandenburg369 Sepler, Henry (Enrique Sepler), England370

lack of license 1702

sent to Spain

Veracruz

unknown

stumbled into Texas 1738


Puebla

soldier

resident in Veracruz

factor of South Sea Co.

Sequeira, JoZ-ode

represalia

Puebla

(Juan de Sequiera), Portugal, married 371

I7O5

employee in Amaro Fernandes' store frontiersman

incidental 1728 none freed for lack of goods

captured and Sergent, Pierre (Pedro member St Sergan), Canada 372 Denis released expedition 1714

Texas and Mexico

Appendix I Name and origin


Serrecer or Serres,

represalia

Jean (Juan Zereceda,

1705

Serecer, Zerezer), b. Normandy, 1659, single373 Silva, Jaco da (Jacome de Silva), Portuguese India 374 Silva, Joao da (Juan de Silva), Portugal375 Silva, Nicolau da (Nicolas de Silva), Portuguese India376 Simoes, Francisco (Francisco Simon), Portugal377 Simoes, Joao de (Juan Simois, de Simodes, Simony), Portugal378 Simoes, Jose de (Joseph Simois, de Simodes, Simony), Portugal 379 Simoes, Luiz de (Luis Simois, de Simodes, Simony), b. Portugal, 1648 380 Soane, Slew (Eslu, HesluSoane), England 381 Spinola, Francisco de (Francisco de Espinola), Portugal 382 Spinola, Matias de (Mathias de Espinola), Portugal 383 Spit, Thomas, England 384 Stevenson, J a m e s

(Santiago Estevanson, Estebanzos), Scotland 385 Strode, James (Diego Estrode), England386

Action taken

Locale of case


released

Mexico

majordomo to Bartholomew Raford

freed for poverty

Mexico

unknown

Campeche

unknown

Mexico

unknown

1705

freed for lack ofgoods freed for poverty

denounced for Judaism 1736

investigation suspended

Mexico

confectioner

represalia

freed

vecino

retainer of Luiz de Simoes retainer of Luiz de Simoes

represalia

I7O5 represalia

1705 represalia

Parral

1705

incorporated as paid 82 pesos, vecino 2 reales in fees Parral familiar of Inquisition 1698 represalia

freed

1705

vecino

mine owner

Parral

captured 1718


Mexico

sailor

represalia

freed for lack of goods

Campeche

unknown

fined and released

Campeche

unknown

resident Veracruz Puebla and

factor of South Sea Co. unlicensed doctor

I7O5 represalia

1705

incidental 1728 none requested naturalization

ordered to Spain 1726

Mexico

1724 represalia

goods seized

Veracruz

her

Mexico

servant to Charles Reade unknown

Mexico

soldier

I7I9

Stuart, Jane Catherine informer 1759 (Juana Catarina Estuardo), b. London,

reconciliacidn

investigated

1727 3 8 7

'Suarez, Francisco Manuel', Madras, Mogul Empire 388

past service 1750

appointed colonel of Tercio de Pardos

146


Name and origin Sunday, Joseph (Joseph Domingo), Belfast, Ireland389 Tasara, Raimondo di (Raymundo de Tazara, Gatasara), Genoa390


Traviata, Giacomo, (Santiago Travito), Finale Ligure, Genoa402 Tullio, Domenico (Dominico Tula alias Rodriguero), b. Venice

Locale of case


freed

Mexico

unemployed soldier

granted toleration 1747

Veracruz

local merchant

request granted

Mexico

baker

gossip 1733

none

Veracruz

represalia


Cordoba

secretary for South Sea Co. unknown

request granted

Puebla

none

Mexico

once involved with dyewoods servant

request granted

Campeche

doctor


Cordoba

unknown

I7O5 represalia

released

Tabuco

fisherman ?

released

Mexico

tailor


none

Mexico

unknown


request granted

Mexico

unknown

represalia

fined and released

Zacatecas

unknown

1704

represalia

released

Mexico

ex-bugler, craftsman

briefly investigated

vecino

Puebla

ex-officer and master confectioner

represalia

1703 requested naturalization 1734

Tdufer, Johann (Juan requested Baptista Saqueniez), b. Magdeburg, Germany, 1719391 Thomas, John (Juan Thomas), England 392 Tiexeira Luiz de (LuisdeTejada), Portugal393 Tile or Teal, Edmund (Edmundo Teyle, Teile), England394 Tillion, Jean Baptiste (Juan Baptista Tillon), Rennes, France395 Tonneilier, Luc (Lucas Toneiro), France 396 Torales, Joao Antonio (Juan Antonio Torales), Portugal 397 Torres, Antonio de, b. Albufeira, Portugal, 1677398 Tozzi, Girolamo (Geronimo Thoza), Genoa 399 Tracy, George Marion (Jorge Mariano Trache, Tracheque, Trachee), England 400 Trand, Louis (Luis Trand), France 401

Action taken

admission to Church 1748

1705 requested admission to Church 1728 denounced to Inquisition 1717 requested naturalization 1738-1739 represalia

1705 represalia

1703

1703-1704

1660 4 0 3

Valladares, Bras de (BlasdeBalladares), Portugal404

denounced for Judaism 1698

Appendix I Name and origin Valladares, Miguel de (brother of Bras), Portugal 405 Vare, Bare, Varey, Vere or Barry, Michael (Miguel Vares), Ireland 406 Veglia, Domenico della (Domingo de la Vegay Ravela), Genoa 407 Ventura, Pierre

(Pedro Ventura), France408 Vidal, John (Juan), b. England, 1706

409

Viegas, Francisco das (Francisco de la Vega), Portugal, single 410 Viegas, Jorge das (Jorge de la Vega), Portugal, single 411 Viegas, Manuel das (Manuel de la Vega), Portugal, single 412 Vila-Lobos, Manuel

Luiz de (Manuel Luis de Villalobos), Portugal413 * Villanueba, Antonio

When and why noticed denounced for Judaism 1698

Action taken briefly investigated

incidental 1752 none

147 Locale of case vecino

Mexico

Occupation or profession master confectioner

Yucatan and Veracruz

unknown


request granted

Puebla

merchant


exonerated

Mexico

baker


request granted

Mexico

represalia

escaped arrest

Mexico

pilot, later liquor merchant drifter

escaped arrest

Mexico

drifter

released

Mexico

vendor

released

Durango

unknown

case dropped

Mexico

vendor

none

Orizaba

secular priest

case incomplete

Orizaba

servant ?

died during proceedings

Mexico

treasurer for merchant

none

resident Veracruz

factor of South Sea Co.

none

Mexico

unknown

1708

I7O5 represalia

I7O5 represalia

!7O5 represalia

1705

denounced to Inquisition 1718414 1738 Watts, Charles (Carlos interpreter 1741 Watts, Montes), England415 Watts, Nathaniel requested (Watts, Gaut),b. admission to 416 England, 1714 Church 1733 Whit(e), Francis requested (Francisco Xavier naturalization 1752 Whit or Blanco), 417 Ireland Whitam, Thomas incidental 1728 (Tomas Huitum), England418 White, William incidental 1756 (Guillermo Blanco), 419 Ireland de', b. England,


148

Name and origin Williams, Robert (Roberto Williams), England420 Bernard (Bernardo), French black421 Eilis or Elizabeth (Isabel), Ireland 422 Frangois (Francisco), France 423 George, Greece424 George (Jorge), England425 Joseph, French black 426 1 Don Juan',

foreigner427

'Martin', foreigner428 Mary Catherine (Maria Catherina), mulata, Jamaica 429 Michael (Miguel), Ireland430 Pieter (Pedro), Flanders431

When and why noticed denounced to Inquisition 1756 captured 1756

Locale of case


disappeared


involved with dyewoods

sent to Spain

Texas and Mexico Orizaba and Campeche

slave ?

Action taken

denounced to Inquisition 1756 suspicious character 1717 incidental 1718 incidental 1718

disappeared

none none

captured 1756

sent to Spain

none

none denounced to Inquisition 1743 incidental 1718 none incidental 1738 none associated with a heretic

none

soliciting women 1713

none

mistress to Jacob Benson

Huejutla and Yahualica Oaxaca Puebla

'surgeon'

Texas and Mexico Mexico

slave ? vendor

Oaxaca resident Orizaba

sailor mistress to John Bridges

Havana, Veracruz and Mexico Mexico

sailor ?

unknown unknown

store employee

GROSS REFERENCE TO SURNAMES IN APPENDIX I: DOCUMENTARY FORM(S) TO 'ORIGINAL' Abreo - see Abreu Acosta - see Costa Aducsun - see Atikson Aguilar - see Aguiar Ah Duczon — see Atikson Aleran - see O'Halloran Alongo - see Alangi Alvarez — see Alves Ambrojio - see Ambrose Ambrosio - see Ambrose Andres - see Andrews Archdekin — see Archdeacon Arguello - see Arguelhes Arnao - see Arnautti Arniague — see Arnoux Arot - see Arrot Arregui - see Arrighi Arrot - see Arrot

Avila — see Raford Balladares - see Valladares Baptista — see Jacob, Taufer Barrera - see Barrere Barrientos - see Barros Barrios — see Barros Bautista - see Baptiste, Baptistes Bebeagua - see Drinkwater Becour — see Bouchard de Beaucourt Benxon — see Benson Berdura - see Salvago Boute - see Boutet Bitel - see Reytet Blanco - see Archdeacon, Whit, White Blancpain - see Blanpain Boises — see Boye Bolle-seeBoye Borga - see Borgia

Appendix I Boutte - see Boutet Boyee - see Boye Brillan - see Brillano Brocado y Guedo - see Brocado Buidias - see Guillard Bulla - see Bulle Busel — see Bussel Butel - see Butler Canel - see Camel Canini — see Ganin Garavallo - see Carvalho Garpintero — see Carpenter Garranza - see Carrance Casela - see Casella Catasara — see Tasara Cavallero - see Chevallier Cavallo-seeCabell Ghirino — see Cirino Glaveria — see Glaviere, Frengan Clero — see Clare Constante - see Constant Corekran — see Corkran Correia de Mattos - see Correa Gorreu - see Correa Corsso - see Corso Corts - see Coates Cotez - see Coates Coto - see Gotogini Cotrs - see Coates Gottez — see Coates Cotz — see Coates Cumano — see Cumani Cuora — see Cuore Diaz - see Dias Dides — see Didier Doile - see Doyle Domingo — see Sunday Dominguez — see Domingues Durantes - see Durante Efferay — see Effemy Efrain - see Effraie Egon - see Egan Ellerquer - see Ellerker Enes — see Ennis Escalona - see Frengan Espericeta - see Esper e Sette Espinola - see Spinola Estebanzos - see Stevenson Estevanson — see Stevenson Estrode - see Strode Estuardo - see Stuart Eyeker — see Ellerker Fablot - see Fallot Falliet - see Fallot Falot - see Fallot

Fars - see Farge Federico — see Frederick Fernandez - see Fernandes Ferreyra - see Ferreira Fiallo — see Fialho Figuero - see Figueira Figueroa - see Figueira Finstruel - see Feenstra Fraccier - see Fracher Fraga - see Frengan Fragua — see Fraguier Franyuti - see Franutti Frasinette — see Frassineto Frazer — see Fraser Freire - see Freyre Fuente - see Fonte Fuscarin - see Fuscares Galeano — see Galanides Gallo — see Gaulle Garrazon - see Garrison Gaut - see Watts Gazano — see Gazzano Geliar - see Guillard George - see Georgeon Georgon - see Georgeon Gieraganes - see Giraganian Godoy - see Godeau Gof- see Bussel Gomez - see Gomes Gonzalez — see Gonc.alves Grangente — see Grangent Gueliar - see Guillard Guelle-see Guile Guieraganes - see Giraganian Guiliart - see Guillard Gurnfa - see Gurney Guzman y Luna - see Combemale Harnao — see Arnautti Hedegues - see Hedges Hedgues - see Hedges Hernandez - see Hearn Herrera - see Ferreira Hoart — see Howard Huctor — see Hucker Huctores - see Hucker Huitum - see Whitam Hurtado — see Furtado Inglevi — see Ingleby Jacen-seejasen Jachi - see Hatch Jacobo — see Jacob Jaime - see Ayme Jal-see Hall Jofior — see Joffrin Joie-seejoye

>49

150


Jolham - see Jollan Jonhevens - see John-Havens Juan - see Joao, Johns, Joye Judice - see Giudice Kabel-seeCabell Kempis — see Kempe Labriera — see Bruyere Lasmartes - see Lamartine Laviate - see Labate Lelo - see Leleu Leris - see O'Leary Leston — see Liston Leti - see Lite Linares - see Norris Lince — see Lindsay Linci — see Lincey Lopez - see Lopes, Santiago Lusso - see Lousseau Lynze — see Lindsay Macarte - see McCarty Macarti - see McCarty Mack Donald — see MacDonald Madero — see Madeira Magdanal - see MacDonald Maguier - see Maguire Malec - see Malet Mallen - see Malino Manuel — see Manoel Marquez — see Marques Martinez - see Martino, Martins Matos — see Mattos Mendez — see Mendes Mendoza — see Mendonca Menezes - see Menses Milo - see Millet Mogodin — see Mogodein Mora - see Moore Morfin — see Morfill Moro — see Moore Moroso - see Morozzo Mota — see Motte Naiseras - see Naiscuriue Nares - see Norris Necero - see Naiscuriue Neuton — see Newton Nieto - see Readshaw Nino-see Child Nobaez — see Novaes Noriss - see Norris Not - see Nott Niifiez - see Nunan O - see Lot Oaloran - see O'Halloran O'Farril - see O'Farrell Ohaloran — see O'Halloran

Oneto - see Onetto Orimen - see Harriman Ortis — see Ortes Pallares — see Pagliari Pastel - see Paschal Pedro - see Pierre Perera — see Pereira Pereyra - see Pereira Perez - see Peres Pimienta — see Pimenta Plaza - see Place Pober - see Power Pollone — see Poullain Portal - see Portail Prozo - see Proco Puentes — see Bridges Puls — see Plus Quadra — see Quadrio Quimpis - see Kempe Quintanal — see Quintal Quirban - see Kirban Ra - see Raabe Rafor — see Raford Ramallo - see Ramalho Rebequi - see Rebecq Recoli — see Recole Reimasa - see Rimassa Rendel-seeRendell Repeto — see Repetto Rey - see King Reyes - see Reis, Reytet Reyna — see Reine Ricardo - see Richards Rivero - see Ribeiro Rivet - see Rivett Rizo — see Rizzo Robeson - see Rubberson Rodriguero — see Tullio Rodriguez - see Rodrigues Ronquillo - see Rankill Roque - see Rocque Rosa - see Rodonia, Rose Roza - see Rose Rufel-seeGuillard Ruger - see Guillard Rus - see Roux Rux - see Roux Ruy — see Roux Salbago - see Salvago Santos - see Santis Sarve — see Charvet Sequiera - see Sequeira Serecer - see Serrecer Sergan - see Sergent Serrano - see Montaigne

Appendix I Serruto - see Saruti Simodes - see Simoes Simois — see Simoes Simon — see Simoes Simony — see Simoes Tallapiedra — see Lithologos Tazara - see Tasara Teile - see Tile Tejada - see Tiexeira Teyle - see Tile Thoza - see Tozzi Tillon — see Tillion Toneiro — see Tonneilier Torre - see Laine Trache - see Tracy

Trachee - see Tracy Tracheque - see Tracy Travito - see Traviata Tula — see Tullio Vanderplas — see Plas Vares — see Vare Vega - see Veglia, Viegas Vender - see Bender Verde - see Green Villalobos - see Vila-Lobos Xiptocial - see Hipkins Yudice — see Giudice Zarate — see Saradi Zereceda - see Serrecer Zerezer — see Serrecer

151

APPENDIX II

Jesuit foreigners in New Spain, 1700-17601

Name Alagna, Guiseppe Saverio (Jose Javier Alagana, Alafia, Alano)

Origin birth-death

Sources2

Post Colegio Havana 1748, 1755-1761; Durango — 1751

Aspurz, p. 304; Kratz,p.37; Catalogi IPM,

Sicily 1694-1746?

Colegio de San Luis de la Paz - 1744

Burrus, pp. 43-45 Aspurz, p. 299; Catalogus IPM,

Genoa 1685-1749? Bavaria ? before 1744 ? Strasbourg (French from 1704) 1717-1772

Colegio Maximo (Mexico) ?

Sicily (Palermo) i707-1767

1748,1751,1755; Amendola, Guiseppe

(Jos6 Maria)

1744 Ansaldo, Matteo (Ansaldi) Aschenbrenner, Teofilus

(Teofilo) Baegert, Johann Jakob (Jacobo, Begert or Vegert)

1744 Aspurz, p. 306

California

Aspurz, p. 312; Odlozilik, pp. 447448; Catalogi IPM, I75i,i755,i76i; Burrus, p. 99 Colegio San Gregorio Aspurz, p. 927; (M6xico); Sonora Catalogi IPM, 1744; Colegio Maximo 1744,1748,1751, - 1748; Mexico -1751; 1755, 1761; Burrus, Colegio San Andres PP-49-51 (Mexico)- 1755, 1761 Pimeria Alta — 1751, Aspurz, p. 312; 1755; Sonora-1761 Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogi IPM, I75i,i755,i76i Colegio San Francisco Aspurz, p. 312; - 1751; Tepozotlan Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogi IPM, 1755,1761

Balthasar, Johann Anton (Juan Antonio)

Switzerland (Lucerne) 1697-1763

Bauer, Franz (Francisco Pauer, Pawer)

Moravia 1721 — after 1761

Bauer, Michael (Miguel Pauer, Baur)

Hesse (Mainz) 1712 - after 1761

Baum, Franz (Francisco)

? Bavaria ? - before 1744 ? Sonora-1751, 1755, Bavaria 1761 1716 — after 1761

Benz, Anton Maria (Antonio Bens) 3

Catalogus IPM,

152

Aspurz, p. 299 Aspurz, p. 312; Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogi IPM, 1751,1755, 1761

J

Appendix II Name

Origin birth-death

Berns, Johann (Joannes Berens, Berent) Coadjutor

Palatinate (Coblenz) i709-1758?

Bischof, Johann (Juan Bischoff)

Bohemia (Prague) 1710-?

Bonali, Francesco

Lombardy (Cremona)

Borio, Guglielmo (Guillermo)

Savoy (Turin) 1705 - after 1761? Bohemia ?-?

Borudradskj, Simon —

Coadjutor Branchetti, Cesare

(Cesar Binangueti, Blancheti, Bianqueti) Coadjutor Braun, Bartholomaus

Lombardy 1702-1758?

Switzerland 1718-after 1761 Bravo, Emanuale Lombardy ? (Brava) - Coadjutor 1737-after 1761 Bruno, Francesco Sicily Saverio Maria (Francisco ? - ? 1 ciVI Cr lV±3.rlcly

Butler, Thomas Ignatius 4 Ireland 1723 after 1761 Callisto, Pietro Francesco (Pedro Francisco Calixto) Carbone, Francesco (Francisco) Caroti, Carlo Antonio (Carlos Antonio) Carta, Agostino (Agustin)

Carta, Angelo (Angel) Coadjutor

Papal States ?- ?

Post Colegio Maximo 1744; Colegio San Gregorio (Mexico) 1748; Tepozotlan 1751,1755 California - 1748, 1751,1755 p

Sonora - 1744, 1748, 1751,1755, 1761 Sacristan, Colegio Maximo (Mexico) Colegio Merida — 1744, i75i;Valladolid-1755

Sources2 Catalogi I P M 1744,1748,1751, 1755 Aspurz, p. 307; Odlozilik, p. 446; Catalogi IPM, Aspurz, p. 304

Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748,1751, *755,1761 Aspurz, p. 287; Odlozilik, pp. 43043l Aspurz, p. 304; Catalogi IPM, 1744,1751,1755

Seminario Tepozotlan -1761

Aspurz, p. 312; Catalogi IPM, 1751,1755, 1761 Catalogus IPM, 1761

S t u d e n t - 1719

Aspurz, p. 297

Colegio Maximo 1748; Colegio Havana

Catalogi IPM, 1748,1751,1755, 1761 Aspurz, p. 299

Tarahumara - 1751, 1755, 1761

p

Sicily (Palermo) p ?— ? p Italy? ?- ? Sardinia Mexico- 1744; Queretaro - 1748; 1699-1767 Pimeria Alta - 1751; M e x i c o - 1761 Sardinia 1717-1772

53

Mexico-1751, 1755, 1761

Aspurz, p. 297 Aspurz, p. 293 Aspurz, p. 305; Kratz,p. 3 8; Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748,1751, 1761 Aspurz, p. 313; Kratz, p. 38; Catalogi IPM,

154


Name

Origin birth-death

Casati, Gianmaria (Juan Lombardy Maria Casato) (Milan) 1691 after 1761

Castanes, Jacob (Jacobo) - Coadjutor Cesa, Angelo (Angel Quessa)5 Chainau, Auguste (Agustin)

Provence I7I7-I753? Sardinia 1734 - after 1761 FranceFlanders?

Chiara, Giovanni (Juan, Quiara) - Coadjutor

Lombardy (Cremona) 1698-1749?

Chiaramonte, Andrea (Andres) - Coadjutor Chiari, Guglielmo (Guillermo Clero) Coadjutor Chigi, Benedetto (Benedicto Ghissi) Chinglese, Ignazio Maria (Ignacio Maria Quingles, or Guinglez)

Italy ?- ? Venetia 1662-1746? Venetia ?- ? Sicily (Palermo) 1700 - after 1761?

Cino, Eusebio Francesco Tyrol (Segno, Italian speak(Kino, Chino, Chini, Cini, Kuhn) 6 ing) 1645-1711 Cosu, Francesco Sardinia (Francisco Cos or Coz) - 1707-1768 Coadjutor Cubiddu, Giovanni (Juan Cubedu or Cubedo)

Sardinia 1703 - after 1761

David{e), Guglielmo (Guillermo) Doox, Francois

Savoy (Turin) ?- ? Flanders

^rranciscoy Doye, Jacob (Jacobo Daye)

Flanders 1678-1749?

Sources2

Post Rector, Colegio San Gregorio- 1729; Mexico - 1744, 1748, 1751; Colegio San Andres (Mexico) — 1761 Tepozotlan — 1751 Mexico- 1761

Gaceta,

1,211;

Aspurz, p. 299; Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748, 1751, 1761 Catalogus IPM, 1751 Catalogus IPM, 1761

Student - 1712

Aspurz, p. 294

Colegio Maximo 1744; Seminario San Ildefonso (Mexico) 1748 ?

Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748

Colegio de Santo Espiritu (Puebla) 1744

p

Aspurz, p. 299 Catalogus IPM. 1744 Aspurz, p. 294

Tepozotlan — 1744; Aspurz, p. 303; Colegio San Ildefonso Catalogi IPM, (Puebla)-1748, 1751, 1744,1748,1751, 1755; Seminario San 1755,1761 Geronimo — 1761 California; Sonora; Aspurz, p. 287; and Pimeria Alta Odlozilik, pp. 4 3 1 435 Mexico-1744, 1751, Aspurz, p. 307; 1755; Colegio QuereKratz, p. 38; taro - 1748; Colegio Catalogi IPM, Santo Espiritu 1744,1748,1751, (Puebla)-1761 I755,i76i Aspurz, p. 307; Sinaloa — 1748; Kratz, p. 38; Chinipas- 1751, Catalogi IPM, I755,i76i 1748,1751,1755, 1761 p Aspurz, p. 303 p Nayarit — 1744, 1748

Aspurz, p. 294 Aspurz, p. 294; Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748

Appendix II Name

Origin birth-death

Druet, Jacob or Giacomo (Jacobo)

Savoy (Turin)

Ducrue, Bennus (Benno, Benias Ducray)

Bavaria 1721 after 1761

Duquesney, Jea.nBaptiste (Juan Baptista Quesnoy) Einmann, Franz (Francisco Inama)

North France 1685-1749?

1699-1753?

155 Post

California - 1744, 1748, 1751 Colegio San Francisco Javier (Puebla) 1751; California -1755,1761 Sonora - 1744, 1748

Austria 1720 after 1761

California - 1751, 1755,1761

Erwin, Thuribius (Hervin, Herbin) Coadjutor

Scotland 1695 after 1761

Eymer, Wenceslaus (Wenceslao, Vaclav) Falconbelli, Giuseppe Luigi (Jose Luis Falconvelli, Falcumbeli)

Bohemia ?- ? Savoy (Turin) 1698-after 1761

Colegio Queretaro — 1744,1748, 1751, 1755; Colegio Santo Espiritu — 1761 Tarahumara

Favier, Joseph (Jose)

Switzerland ?

Frankenhauser, Johann (Juan Baptista Franchenhausen) — Coadjutor Franzen, Heinrich

Bavaria 1721 - after 1761 Bavaria

Colegio Havana 1761

Austria 1727 — after 1761

Sinaloa- 1761

Sources 2 Aspurz, p. 303; Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748, 1751 Aspurz, p. 313; Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogi IPM, J75 1 ,J755, X 7 6 1 Aspurz, p. 297; Catalogi IPM, 1744-1748 Aspurz, p. 312;

Catalogi IPM, 1751, 1755, 1761

îLnricjue^

Freidenegg, Georg (Jorge Fraidenegg)

Galgliardi, Luigi (Luis Sicily Gallordo) ?- ? Gallarate, Constanzio Papal States? (Constancio Gallarati) ?- ? Papal States Garofolo, Ignazio ?- ? (Ignacio Garofalo) Garrucci, Giuseppe (Jose Sardinia Garrucho, Garruche, 1711-1785 Garrucio) Gasteiger, Joseph (Jose)

Austria 1703-1758?

Sinaloa - 1744, 1748; Pimeria Alta - 1755; Chinipas - 1751, 1761

p

?

before 1744

1744,1748,1751, I755,i76i Aspurz, p. 291; Odlozilik, p. 438 Aspurz, p. 299; Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748,1751, 1755,1761 Aspurz, p. 306 Aspurz, p. 317; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Aspurz, p. 299

p

Aspurz, p. 316; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Aspurz, p. 297

p

Aspurz, p. 299

p

Aspurz, p. 299

Sonora-1748, 1755, 1761; Pimeria Alta 1751 California — 1744, 1748, 1751, 1755

Gay, John (Juan Gaei) - England 1688- Hacienda of San Coadjutor 7

Catalogi IPM,

Joseph de Oculma 1721

Kratz,p.39; Catalogi IPM, 1748,1751,1755, 1761; Burrus, p. 95 Aspurz, p. 305; Odlozilik, p. 454; Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748, 1751, X 755 (see endnote)

Foreign immigrants in early Bourbon Mexico Name

Origin birth-death

Genovese, Giuseppe Maria (Jose Maria Genovesse or Genoese)

Sicily i682-1758?

Gerardi, Francesco Saverio (Francisco Javier Geraldi, Gerade, Girardi) — Coadjutor Geri, Lorenzo (Gera)

Corsica 1707-1786 Venetia 1693-1753?

Post Colegio San Andres (Mexico)-1744; Colegio Maximo 1748,1751,1755 Colegio Santo Espiritu (Puebla)-1744, 1748, 1751, 1755, 1761

Tarahumara -1744, 1748,1751

Getzner, Michael

Bavaria ? 1723 — Sonora-1761 after 1761

Gill, Maximilian (Maximiliano Gil)

Flanders ? 1716-after 1761 Sicily 1686-1753?

Giucca, Giovanni Giuseppe (Juan Jose Yuca, Huica, Guica) Glandorf, Franz

Hermann (Francisco German Glandorff, Glandorp) Glig, Adam Gnetel, Joseph (Jose) Coadjutor Gobi, Joseph (Jose Gobel, Guebel) Coadjutor Gommersbach, Johann (Juan Gomersbach) Gonzere, Jacob (Jacobo) - Coadjutor Gordon, William (Guillermo) 8

Rhineland (Cologne) 1689-after 1761 Moravia (R^mafov) 1 653-1729? Germany ? ?- ? Silesia 1714-after 1761 Switzerland ?- ? Burgundy 1689-1746? Scotland (Aberdeen) 1697-1753? Italy? ?- ?

Govini, Michele Angelo (Miguel Angel Govino, Giovino) Grashofer, Johann (Juan Bautista Grazhoffer) Greber, Ignaz (Ignacio

Austria ?— ? Austria

Grever) Hdberle, Georg (Jorge Haberl, Kaberl) Coadjutor

Bavaria 1697-after 1761

Sources 2 Aspurz, p. 294; Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748, 1751, 1755 Kratz,p. 39; Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748, 1751, 1755, 1761 Aspurz, p. 297; Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748,1751 Aspurz, p. 316; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Aspurz, p. 313; Catalogi IPM, 1751,1755, 1761 Aspurz, p. 297;

Colegio de Santo Espiritu (Puebla) I75i,i755,i76i Colegio Santo Espiritu (Puebla)-1744, 1748, Catalogi IPM, 1751 1744,1748,1751 Tarahumara — 1744, Aspurz, p. 297; 1748,1751,1755, 1761 Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748,1751, Pimeria Alta and California ? Colegio San Gregorio (Mexico) - 1748, I75i,i755,i76i ?

Aspurz, p. 289; Odlozilik, pp. 435438;Burrus, p. 29 Aspurz, p. 307 Aspurz, p. 313; Catalogi IPM, 1748,1751,1755, 1761 Aspurz, p. 299

Catalogus IPM, Colegio Maximo (Mexico) - 1744 1744 Colegio Santo Espiritu Aspurz, p. 299; (Puebla)-1744, 1748, Catalogi IPM, 1751 1744, 1748, 1751 Aspurz, p. 293 ? ? ?

Aspurz, p. 303; Odlozilik, p. 452 Aspurz, p. 304

Aspurz, p. 299; Colegio Maximo (Mexico)-1744, 1748, Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748, 1751, I75i,i755,i76i

Appendix II Name

Origin birth-death

Haffenrichter, Joseph (Hoffenrichter, Haffenzichter)

Bohemia 1729 - after 1761

Helen, Eberhard (Everardo Hellen, Helem)

Rhineland (Cologne) 1697-1758?

Herrer, Peter (Pedro Herrera) - Coadjutor

Sweden 1675-1758?

Hinteregger, Johann (Hintregger, Hinrenegger, Interegger) Coadjutor Hlava, FrantiSek

Austria 1726 - after 1761

Holub, Wenzeslaus (Vaclav, Wenceslao Holuh) Hostel, Landbert (Lamberto Hostell) Hostinskj>,Jvti

Bohemia (Prague) 1725 - after 1761 Bohemia 1734 - after 1761 Rhineland (Minister) 1707 - after 1761 Moravia ?-after 1761

Hiittl, Anton (Antonio Hutl)


Tiling, Wilhelm (Vilem)

Bohemia ?-after 1706

Januske, Daniel (Jannske) Justes, Pierre (Pedro Justos) — Coadjutor Kapp, Franz (Francisco Kap, Kapf) - Coadjutor Keller, Anton (Antonio Keler) - Coadjutor

Bohemia ? - after 1723 France 1697-1746? Germany 1705-1746? Strasbourg 1687-1746?

Keller, Ignaz (Ignac, Ignacio Javier)

Moravia (Olmiitz) 1703-1759

157 Post

Sources2

Aspurz,p. 315; Odlozilik, pp. 450452; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Tepozotlan — 1744, Aspurz,p. 297; 1748,1751,1755 Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748, 1751, 1755 Mexico - 1744, 1748; Catalogi IPM, Colegio Santo Espiritu 1744,1748,1751, (Puebla)-1751,1755 1755 Tepozotlan - 1751; Aspurz,p. 313; Colegio San Luis Catalogi IPM, Potosi - 1755; Colegio i75i 5 1755, 1761 Santo Espiritu - 1761 Sinaloa- 1761 Aspurz,p. 316; Odlozilik, pp. 450452; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Aspurz,p. 316; Chinipas- 1761 Odlozilik, pp. 450452; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Aspurz, p. 305; California — 1744, 1748,1751,1755,1761 Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748, 1751, 1755,1761 Aspurz, p. 289; Tarahumara Alta Odlozilik, pp. 435and Chinipas 437 Tarahumara - 1761 Aspurz, p. 316; Odlozilik, pp. 450452; Catalogus IPM 1761 Tarahumara and Aspurz, p. 289; Chinipas Odlozilik, pp. 435437 Pimeria Alta Aspurz, p. 291; Odlozilik, p. 439 Colegio Santo Espiritu Catalogus IPM, (Puebla) - 1744 1744 Colegio Santo Espiritu Catalogus IPM, (Puebla)- 1744 1744 Colegio Maximo Aspurz, p. 299; (Mexico) - 1744 Catalogus IPM, 1744 Sonora - 1744, 1748; Aspurz, p. 303; Odlozilik, p. 446; Pimerfa Alta - 1751, Catalogi IPM, 1755 1744,1748,1751, i755;Burrus,p. 57 Sonora — 1761

.58

Foreign immigrants in early Bourbon Mexico Name

Kern, Philipp (Felipe Kern) - Coadjutor 9 Kleber, Emanuel (Manuel Klever) Klesinger, Johann (Jan, J u a n Bautista) Konttak, Ferdinand (Konsag, Consag, Konskac, Conscak, Konschak, Konschac) 10

Origin birth-death Bavaria ?- ? Rhineland (Mannheim) 1720 - after 1761 Bohemia ? - 1731 en

route (Cuba) Croatia (Varazdin)

Post Colegio San Ildefonso (Puebla)-1738, 1739 Chinipas-1751, 1755, 1761

Aspurz, p. 312; Catalogi IPM, 1751, 1755, 1761 Aspurz, p. 303; Odlozilik, p. 446

California - 1744, 1748, 1751,1755

Aspurz, p. 303: Odlozilik, p. 442; Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748,1751, i755;Burrus, p. 63 Aspurz, p. 303; Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogi IPM,

Kurtzel, Heinrich (Enrique Kiirset, Kurzel, Kirtzel)

Silesia 1722-after 1761

Lauri, Cristoforo di (Cristobal de Lauria), student on leaving Spain Lautner, Johann (Juan Launert, Laudner) — Coadjutor

? Papal States (Rome) ? - before 1744 ? Bohemia ? Mexico - 1748, 1751, 1755,1761 1707 - after 1761

Linck, Wenzeslaus (Vaclav, Winceslao Link) 1 1

Bohemia 1736-1788?

California

Mdlek, Kfes'tan (Christian, Xptianus Maleik) - Coadjutor


Colegio San Gregorio (Mexico)

Marchese, Agostino (Marquez)

Papal States ?

Marciano, Luigi Maria (Luis Maria Marziano) Marin, Jean (Juan Marint) — Coadjutor

Colegio Maximo — 1744; Tepozotlan — 1748; Colegio San Gregorio (Mexico) 1751, 1755; Mexico - 1761 ?

Sicily ? - before 1744 ? France Colegio Puebla 1751; Colegio 1706 - after 1761 Valladolid - 1755; Colegio Guanajuato -1761 Sicily Sinaloa - 1744, 1748 1673-1749? Bavaria ? ? - before 1744 ?

Marini, Ignazio (Ignacio Marine) Martini, Anton (Antonio)

Aspurz, p. 306

not applicable

1703-1768

1714-after 1761

Sources 2

Colegio Santo Espiritu (Puebla) - 1751; Sonora- 1755, 1761

Aspurz, p. 297

Aspurz, p. 307; Catalogi IPM, 1748,1751,1755, 1761 Aspurz, p. 316; Odlozilik, p. 447; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Aspurz, p. 316; Odlozilik, pp. 450452; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Catalogi IPM,

1744,1748,1751, I7553i76i

Aspurz, p. 297 Catalogi IPM, *75l> !755> X76i

Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748 Aspurz, p. 297

Appendix II Name

Origin birth-death

159 Post

Sinaloa - 1744, 1748; Chinipas — 1751, 1755,1761

Aspurz,p. 305; Kratz,p. 39; Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748, 1751, 1755, 1761 Aspurz, p. 293

en route missions — 1761

?

Aspurz, p. 313; Odlozilik, pp. 450452; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Aspurz, p. 316; Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogus IPM, 1761; Burrus, p. 89 Aspurz, p. 307; Kratz, pp. 39-40; Catalogi IPM, 1748,1751,1755, 1761 Catalogus IPM, 1744 Aspurz, p. 304

?

Aspurz, p. 293

Massidda, Pietro Paolo (Pedro Pablo Massida)

Sardinia i703-1768

Meiner, Franz (Francisco Mayneri) Michel, Andreas (Andres)

Germany ? ? - before 1744 Bohemia 1732 - after 1761

Middendorf, Bernhard (Bernardo)

Westphalia 1723-1794

Sonora- 1761

Miralla, Gaspare Maria (Gaspar Maria Maralla, Miraglia, Miralla)

Sicily (Palermo) 1719-1810

Colegio San Gregorio (Mexico) - 1748, i75i 5 1755, J 76i

Mot, Ignazio (Ignacio Moy) - Coadjutor Monaco, Giuseppe Maria (Jose Maria) Montani, Francesco (Francisco) Motz{el), Martin

Sardinia

Mexico

1711-1746? Naples ? - before 1744 Italy? ? - before 1744 Rhineland 1685-1746?

(Martin Motsch) Coadjutor Mura, Benedetto (Muru, Sardinia 1708-after Muro) - Coadjutor Mura, Leonardo da (Leonardo de Muro) Napoli, Ignazio Maria (Ignacio Maria)12 Nascimbene, Pietro (Pedro Masimbene, Nassemben, Nacimben, Nascimben) Nentwig, Johann (Juan Hentwig) 13

Neumann, Joseph 14

Sources2

Colegio Maximo (Mexico) - 1744 Colegio Havana 1761

1761 ? Sardinia ? — before 1744 ? Sicily California - 1 7 2 1 ; (Palermo) Sonora — 1744 1691-1746? Venetia California — 1748, 17O3-I758? Bohemia 1713-1768

Primeria Alta - 1751; Sonora- 1755, 1761

Netherlands (Brussels) 1648-1723

Tarahumara

Aspurz, p. 299; Catalogus IPM, 1744 Catalogus IPM, 1761 Aspurz, p. 303 Gaceta, 1,20; Aspurz, p. 297; Catalogus IPM, 1744 Aspurz, p. 303; Catalogi IPM, 1748, 1751, 1755; Burrus,p. 71 Aspurz p. 312; Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogi IPM, 1751, 1755,1761; Burrus, p. 91 Aspurz, p. 287; Odlozilik, pp. 433435

160


Name

Origin birth-death

Post

Sources2

Neumeir, Karl (Carlos Neumayr, Neumayer)

Bohemia i708-1764

Tepehuana - 1744; California — 1748, 1751,1755, 1761

Aspurz, p. 306; Odlozilik, p. 446; Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748,1751, I755,i76i

Nortier, Johann Franz (Franciscus Nortiel) — Student Nuri, Devoue (Didacus ?) - Coadjutor

Holland 1726 - after 1761 France 1689-after 1761

Catalogi IPM,

Och{s), Joseph (Jose) 15

Bavaria (Wiirzburg) 1724-1767?

Tepozotlan - 1751, 1755; Colegio M a x i m o - 1761 Colegio Maximo 1744,1751, 1755, 1761; Seminario San Ildefonso (Mexico) 1748 Sonora- 1761

Pfefferkorn, Ignaz (Pfferkorn)16

Germany (Mannheim)

Piccolo, Francesco Maria (Francisco Maria Picoli) 17 Pignone, Luigi (Luis Pifion) - Coadjutor Piller, Matthaus Martin (Matias Martin) Coadjutor Pira, Giovanni di (Juan Piras, Liras, Piro, Lira) Coadjutor

Sicily (Palermo) 1654-1729 Lombardy (Milan) ? - ? Austria ?- ?

Turahumara ?

Sardinia 1708-1758?

Mexico- 1744, 1751, 1755; Colegio Puebla - 1748

Planck, Johann (Juan Plank)

Bohemia 1732-after 1761

Sonora- 1761

Polio, Antonio (Polo)

Sardinia

Colegio Santo Espiritu (Puebla)-1751; Nayarit-1755, 1761

Sonora - 1761

1725-179 O S

1721-1789 Prechi, Michele (Miguel Prek) - Student Rancurel, Devoto (Didecus ? Rancuel) Coadjutor

Papal States? ?- ? Portugal 1717 - after 1761

Rapicani, Alexander (Aleiandro)

Bremen 1703 - after 1761

California - 1721

1751,1755, 1761

Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748,1751, I755,i76i Aspurz, p. 316; Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Aspurz, p. 316; Catalogus IPM, 1761; Burrus, p. 115 Gaceta, 1,10; Burrus, p. 31

?

Aspurz, p. 292

?

Aspurz, p. 316

?

Aspurz, p. 306; Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748,1751, 1755 Aspurz, p. 316; Odlozilik, pp. 450452; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Aspurz, p. 313; Kratz, p. 40;

Catalogi IPM, 1751,1755, 1761 Aspurz, p. 299

Catalogi IPM, Tepozotlan- 1748; Colegio Santo Espiritu 1748,1751, 1755, (Puebla)-1755; 1761 Mexico- 1751, 1761 Sonora- 1744, 1751, Aspurz, p. 306 1755; Sinaloa - 1761 Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748,1751,

Appendix II Name Rauch, Baltasar

Raynaut, Jean (Juan Rainaut) - Coadjutor Retz, Georg (Jorge Redhs, Reths) Rinaldini, Benito

Origin birth-death Bavaria ? - before 1744 France (Carcassonne) 1711-1749? Palatinate (Coblenz) 1717-after 1761 Tyrol 1696 -after 1761

Ripoli, Vencenzo (Vicente Ripoli) Rosa, Agostino della (Agustin de la) Ruhn, Heinrich (Enrique Ruen, Ruhen)

Sardinia ?- ? Sicily ?- ? Rhineland 1717-1753?

Sacchi, Nicola (Nicolas Sachi, Zachi)

Naples 1703-1774

161

Post

Sources2 Aspurz, p. 297

Colegio Havana 1744, 1748

Catalogi IPM 1744,1748

California - 1751, 1755, 1761

Aspurz, p. 312; Odlozilik, p. 448; Catalogi IPM,

Piastla- 1744;

I75i,i755,i76i Aspurz, p. 297; Catalogi IPM,

Tepehuana — 1748, i75i;Parral-i755; Tarahumara - 1761 ? ?

1744,1748,1751, 1755,1761 Aspurz, p. 312 Aspurz, p. 297

Pimeria Alta — 1751

Aspurz, p. 312; Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogus IPM,

Tarahumara - 1744; Sinaloa - 1748, 1755; Chfnipas- 1751, 1761

Aspurz, p. 305; Kratz, p. 40;

Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748, 1751,

Sacher, Johann (Juan Sacker, Sazcher) — Coadjutor Sales, Guillaume (Guillermo Salos) — Coadjutor Salvaterra, Gianmaria (Juan Maria Salvatierra) 18 Sanfilippo, Francesco Maria (Francisco Maria San Felipe) Schenk, Leopold (Leopoldo Schente) Coadjutor Schultz, Georg (Jorge Schuls) - Coadjutor Sedelmeir, Jakob (Jacobo Sedelmayr, Sedelmayer) 19

Aspurz, p. 313; Catalogi IPM, I75 1 , J 755, J 76i Catalogi IPM, 1755,1761

Bohemia 1712-after 1761 Provence 1697-after 1761 Lombardy (Milan) ?-i7i7 Papal States? ?- ?

Colegio de Patzcuaro - 1751, 1755, 1761 Mexico-1755; Colegio de San Andres (Mexico) - 1761 Tepozotlan; California ; Chinipas, Sinaloa; Sonora

Bavaria 1696-1749?

Tepozotlan - 1744, 1748

Aspurz, p. 299; Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748

Germany 1722 - after 1761 Bavaria 1703-1779

Colegio Maximo (Mexico)-1751, I755,i76i Sonora - 1744, 1748, 1755, 1761; Primeria Alta - 1751

Catalogi IPM,

?

Aspurz, p. 288

Aspurz, p. 299

I75i, J 755, 1761 Aspurz, p. 305; Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748, 1751, 1755, i76i;Burrus, PP- 57-58

162


Name

Origin birth-death

Segesser, Philipp (Felipe Segenser)20

Lucerne 1689-after 1761

Silai, Bacco (Baquis ? Silay) Slezdk, Frantisek (Francisco Juan Glerac, Slesac) Speziali, Pietro (Pedro Spitiali, Spitali)

Sardinia ?- ? Bohemia 1728 - after 1761 Papal States? ?- ? Bohemia 1734 — after 1761

Steffel, Matthaus (Matias Stesel) Steinevert, Johann (Juan deSteynefert) 21 Steinhdfer, Johann (Jan, Juan Steinefer, Esteyneffer)22

Germany ?- ? Moravia (Iglau) I664-I7I6

Stepp, Johann (Juan Stieger, Kaspar (Gaspar Stiger, Styger)

Bohemia 1735 - after 1761 Switzerland 1695-1761

Straub, Anton (Antonio) Sraznoskj), Antonin (Sterkanovsky, Stiazouscki)

Bohemia ? - ? Moravia 1728 - after 1761

Strenzel, Joseph (Jose Stenft) - Coadjutor

Bohemia (Prague) 1711-1746? Westphalia 1707 - after 1761

Step, Steb)

Sumziel, Bernhard (Bernardo Sumpsiel, Zumziel) Tariani, Rodolfo

(Tarianni) Tell, Thomas (Tomas Tela)-Coadjutor 23 Tempis, Anton (Antonio)

Post Sonora - 1744, 1748, 1751^755, 1761

?

Chinipas - 1761

Sources2 Aspurz,p. 303; Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748,1751, 1755,1761 Aspurz, p. 305 Aspurz,p. 315;

Catalogus IPM, ? en route missions 1761 ?

1761 Aspurz, p. 299 Aspurz, p. 315; Odlozilik, pp. 450452; Catalogus IPM, 1761 (see endnote)

California

Aspurz, p. 291; Odlozilik, p. 445; Burrus, p. 47 Colegio Santo Espiritu Aspurz, p. 315; (Puebla)-i76i Catalogus IPM, 1761 1761 Sonora — 1744, 1748, Aspurz, p. 303; 1761; Pimeria Alta Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogi IPM, !75i 1744,1748,1751, 1761; Burrus, p. 61 Aspurz, p. 313 Tarahumara - 1761 Aspurz, p. 316; Odlozilik, pp. 450452; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Tepozotlan - 1744 Aspurz, p. 306; Catalogus IPM, 1744 California - 1744, Aspurz, p. 306; 1748; Colegio Leon Catalogi IPM, 1751; Colegio San 1744, 1748, 1751, Luis Potosi - 1755, 1755, 1761 1761 Aspurz, p. 299

Venetia (Padua) ? - ? England Colegio Santo Espiritu (see endnote) ?-before 1744? (Puebla)-i728 Moravia California — 1744 Aspurz, p. 305; 1704-1746? Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogus IPM, 1744

163

Appendix II Name

Origin birth-death

Post

Tirsch, Ignaz (Ignacio Thinsch)

Bohemia

Traballi, Sigismondo (Segismundo Tarabal, Taraval) 2 4

Lombardy (Lodi) 1700 - after 1761

California — 1744, 1748; Colegio Guadalajara - 1751, 1755, 1761 Colegio Puebla i 7 5 i ; S i n a l o a - 1755; Chinipas— 1761

1733 - after 1761

en route missions — 1761

Vazek, Josef (Jose

Moravia

Waltzek, Vatzek Watzek)

1721 — after 1761

Villa, Giuseppe Ignazio (Jose Ignacio Vila) Coadjutor Villars, Francois (Francisco) - Coadjutor

Sardinia ?- ?

Visconti, Honorato (Vizconti)

Lombardy (Milan)

Vigue, Jacob (Jacobo Vuege, Viuge) Coadjutor

France 1697-1758?

Wagner, Franz Xavier (Francisco Javier)

Hanover

Weber, Franz Anton (Francisco Antonio) Weis, Franz Xavier (Francisco Javier)

Austria ?- ? Bavaria 1710 —after 1761

Wille, Georg (Jorge)

Rhineland

Wirtz, Michael (Miguel Wirst, Wirs, Wirts, Virtz)

West Prussia 1 7 1 3 - after 1761

Tarahumara - 1748,

Wolff, Bartholomaus (BartolomeWolft)

Rhineland (Aachen) 1710- after 1761

N a y a r i t - 1751, 1755, 1761

France 1716-1758?

17O3-I753?

7

Mexico- 1744; Colegio San Andres (Mexico) — 1751; Colegio Maximo — J 748, 1755 Colegio Santo Espiritu (Puebla)-1744-1751, *755 Colegio San Gregorio (Mexico)-1744; Colegio Maximo — J 748, 1751; Colegio San Andres (Mexico) -J755 California - 1744

1707-1746?

Sources 2 Aspurz, p. 315; Odlozilik, p. 454; Catalogus IPM, 1761 Aspurz, p. 299; Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748,1751, 1755, i76i;Burrus, p. 69 Aspurz, p. 313; Odlozilik, p. 452; Catalogi IPM, 1751,1755,1761 Aspurz, p. 304

Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748, 1751, 1755 Aspurz, p. 299; Catalogi IPM, 1744,1748, 1751

Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748, 1751, 1755

Aspurz, p. 306;

Catalogus IPM, ?

1744 Aspurz, p. 312

Tarahumara - 1748, Aspurz, p. 307; 1751; Chinipas- 1755, Odlozilik, p. 452; 1761 Catalogi IPM, 1748, 1751, 1755, 1761 Aspurz, p. 299 ? 1751; Chinipas 1755,1761

Aspurz, p. 30 7; Catalogi IPM, 1748, 1751, 1755, 1761 Aspurz, p. 312;

Catalogi IPM, 1751,1755, 1761


164 Name

Origin birth-death

Wos, Michael (Miguel Vos, Bos) - Coadjutor

Brandenburg 1705 - after 1761

Zambelli, Geno (Eugenio Sambelli) Coadjutor

Lombardy (Milan) 1707-1768

Post Colegio Maximo — 1744, 1748; Colegio Santo Espiritu (Puebla) - 1751, 1755; Mexico— 1761 Colegio Valladolid 1744,1748,1761; Colegio Santo Espiritu (Puebla)-1751,1755

Sources 2 Aspurz, p. 306; Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748, 1751, i755>1761 Aspurz, p. 304; Kratz, pp. 40-41; Catalogi IPM, 1744, 1748, 1751, 1755,1761

GROSS REFERENCE TO SURNAMES IN APPENDIX II: DOCUMENTARY FORM(S) TO 'ORIGINAL' Alagana - see Alagna Alafia - see Alagna Alano - see Alagna Ansaldi — see Ansaldo Baur — see Bauer Bergert - see Baegert Bens — see Benz Berens — see Berns Berent - see Berns Binangueti — see Branchetti Bianqueti — see Branchetti Bischoff- see Bischof Blancheti - see Branchetti Bos — see Wos Brava — see Bravo Calixto - see Callisto Casato - see Casati Chini — see Cino Chino - see Cino Cini - see Cino Clero - see Chiari Consag - see KonScak Conscak — see Kon§cak Cos — see Cosu Coz — see Cosu Cubedo - see Cubiddu Cubedu - see Cubbidu Daye — see Doye Ducray — see Ducrue Esteyneffer - see Steinhofer Falconvelli - see Falconbelli Falcumbeli - see Falconbelli Fraidenegg - see Freidenegg Franchenhausen - see Frankenhauser

Gaei - see Gay Gallarati — see Gallarate Gallordo — see Galgliardi Garofalo - see Garofolo Garruche - see Garrucci Garrucho — see Garrucci Garrucio - see Garrucci Genoese - see Genovese Genovesse — see Genovese Gera - see Geri Gerade - see Gerardi Geraldi — see Gerardi Ghissi — see Chigi G i l - s e e Gill Giovino — see Govini Girardi - see Gerardi Glandorff- see Glandorf Glandorp — see Glandorf Glerac — see Slezak Gobel-see Gobi Gomersbach - see Gommersbach Govino — see Govini Grazhoffer - see Grashofer Guebel-see Gobi Guica — see Giucca Guinglez - see Chinglese Haberl — see Haberle Haffenzichter — see Haffenrichter Helem — see Helen Hellen - see Helen Hentwig — see Nentwig Herbin — see Erwin Herrera - see Herrer Hervin — see Erwin Hinrenegger - see Hinteregger

Appendix II Hintregger - see Hinteregger Hoffenrichter - see Haffenrichter Holuh - see Holub Hostell - see Hostel Huica — see Giucca Hutl-seeHiittl Inama - see Einmann Interegger — see Hinteregger Jannske - see Januske Justos — see Justes Kaberl - see Haberle Kap - see Kapp Kapf - see Kapp Keler-see Keller Kerp - see Kern Kino - see Cino Kirtzel - see Kiirtzel Klever — see Kleber Konsag - see Kon§c*ak Konschak — see Konscak Konskac - see Konscak Kiihn - see Gino Kiirset - see Kiirtzel Kiirzel - see Kiirtzel Launert - see Lautner Lauria - see Lauri Link - see Linck Lira - see Pira Liras - see Pira Maleik-seeMalek Maralla - see Miralla Marine - see Marini Marint — see Marin Marziano - see Marciano Masimbene — see Nascimbene Massida - see Massidda Mayneri - see Meiner Miraglia - see Miralla Motsch - see Motz(el) Moy - see Moi Muro — see Mura Muru - see Mura Nacimben — see Nascimbene Nascimben - see Nascimbene Nassemben - see Nascimbene Neumayer - see Neumeir Neumayr — see Neumeir Nortiel - see Nortier Pauer - see Bauer Pawer - see Bauer Pfferkorn - see Pfefferkorn Picoli - see Piccolo Pifion — see Pignone Piras - see Pira Piro - see Pira

Plank-see Planck Polo-see Polio Prek — see Prechi Quesnoy - see Duquesney Quessa - see Cesa Quiara - see Chiara Quingles - see Chinglese Rainaut - see Raynaut Rancuel - see Rancurel Redhs - see Retz Reths - see Retz Ripoll - see Ripoli Ruen - see Ruhn Ruhen — see Ruhn Sachi — see Sacchi Sacker - see Sacher Salos - see Sales Salvatierra - see Salvaterra Sambelli — see Zambelli San Felipe - see Sanfilippo Sazcher - see Sacher Schente - see Schenk Schuls - see Schultz Sedelmayer - see Sedelmeir Sedelmayr - see Sedelmeir Segenser - see Segesser Silay - see Silai Slesac - see Slezak Spitali - see Speziali Spitiali - see Speziali Steb — see Stepp Steinefer — see Steinhofer Stentf- see Strenzel Step — see Stepp Sterkanovsk^ - see Straznovsk^ Stesel-seeSteffel Steynefert — see Steinevert Stiazouscki — see Straznovsk^ Stiger - see Stieger Styger - see Stieger Sumpsiel - see Sumziel Tarabal-seeTraballi Taraval - see Traballi Tarianni - see Tariani Tela-see Tell Thinsch - see Tirsch Vatzek - see Vazek Vegert - see Baegert Vila-see Villa Virtz - see Wirtz Viuge - see Vigue Vizconti - see Visconti Vos - see Wos Vuege - see Vigue Waltzek - see Vazek

165

166


Watzek - see Vazek Wirs - see Wirtz Wirst - see Wirtz Wirts - see Wirtz

Wolft - see Wolff Yuca - see Giucca Zachi - see Sacchi Zumziel - see Sumziel

Abbreviations and conventions

ARCHIVES AND THEIR SUBDIVISIONS, PERIODICALS AG AGI AGN AGS AHH AM

Seccion de Gobierno, Audiencia de Guadalajara, AGI Archivo General de Indias, Seville Archivo General de la Nacion, Mexico City Archivo General de Simancas Archivo Historico de Hacienda, Mexico City Seccion de Gobierno, Audiencia de Mexico, AGI

BAGN

Boletin del Archivo General de la JVacion, Mexico City

Bandos CC CG GP

Ramo de los Bandos de los Virreyes, AGN Seccion de la Casa de Contratacion, AGI Seccion de Contadurfa General de Indias, AGI Ramo de General de Parte, AGN

HAHR

Hispanic American Historical Review

Historia IG INE Inq. Mineria MP RC RCD Titulos

Ramo de Historia, AGN Seccion de Gobierno, Indiferente General, AGI Seccion de Gobierno, Indiferente de la Nueva Espaiia, AGI Ramo de la Inquisicion, AGN Ramo de Mineria, AGN Seccion de Mapas, Pianos, Dibujos y Estampas, AGI Ramo de Reales Cedulas Originales, AGN Ramo de Reales Cedulas Duplicadas, AGN Direccion General del Tesoro, Contaduria General de Valores, Titulos de Indias, AGS Virreyes Ramo de la Correspondencia de los Virreyes, AGN

SPANISH LANGUAGE AND SPECIALIZED ABBREVIATIONS exp(s). f(s). fol(s). NE pag(s). r.c(s). r.cta(s). r.o(s). SE S.I.

SM

s.n. SO

expediente(s) foja(s) folio(s) Nueva Espafia pagina(s) real(es) cedula(s) real(es) carta(s) real(es) orden(es) Su Excelencia sin lugar Su Majestad sin numero Santo Oficio de la Inquisicion (except as noted) de Mexico 167

168


CONVENTIONS When lower-case abbreviations appear at the beginning of a sentence or of a document description, the initial letter is capitalized. The first number in archival citations gives the appropriate bundle (legajo) or volume number. The conventional 'leg.' and 'vol.' are thus omitted. Citations from the great codes {Recopilacion de las leyes de Indias [4 vols., 1681, reprinted Madrid, 1973]; Recopilacion de las leyes destos reynos [3 vols., Madrid, 1640]) omit the standard designations: libro, titulo, and ley. For example, Recopilacion, xxv, v, 5 represents libro 25, titulo 5, ley 5. Following the custom in English, Recopilacion in the text is called the Laws of the Indies. Unless otherwise qualified, 'virrey' and 'arzobispo' in notes signify 'virrey' or 'arzobispo' de la Nueva Espafia. 'Mexico' (with accent) indicates Mexico City. Similarly 'audiencia' represents Audiencia de Mexico or (the same institution) Audiencia de la Nueva Espana. 'Sr Inquisidor Fiscal' always means el Sr Inquisidor Fiscal del Santo Oficio de la Inquisicion de Mexico.

Notes

Introduction Recopilacion, rx, xxvii, 28. Richard Konetzke, 'Emigracion de gente extranjera', Re vista Internacional de Sociologia, 111 (1945), 275, notes that the prohibition on Aragonese participation in the early conquests attributed to Isabella by Fernandez de Oviedo and Antonio de Herrera is not supported by sixteenth-century documentation. Konetzke's point holds equally well for the eighteenth century and is verified by the Laws of the Indies. AGN Inq. 824, exp. 14, fs. 23 2-7v., Reconciliacion de Isidro Bebeagua, hereje protestante, de nacion ingles, Puebla, 1747. For a discussion of the methodology used in restructuring foreign names, see 'A Note on Names', pp. 119-20 above. [Alexander von] Humboldt, Ensayo politico sobre Nueva Espana, ed. by Luis Alberto Sanchez (Santiago de Chile, 1942), p. 34. Peter Gerhard, Mexico en 1742 (Mexico, 1962), pp. 9, 28—47. Available population figures for eighteenth-century New Spain are hardly as reliable as a recent census. The best source for the early years is the royal cosmographer, Joseph Antonio de Villasenor y Sanchez, Theatro Americano, descripcion general de los reynos y provincias de la Nueva Espana y sus jurisdicciones (2 vols., 1746 & 1748, reprinted Mexico, 1952). Hereafter Villasenor y Sanchez, Theatro Americano. Supplementing his figures with later estimates and using Gerhard's method of multiplying households by five to yield the approximate number of individuals, I have presented all totals as they were in 1742, except where otherwise indicated. Gerhard, Mexico en 1742, pp. 9-17. Humboldt, Ensayo politico, pp. 40-51, 63-83, n o , 132-3. Angel Rosenblat, La poblacion indigena de America desde 1492 hasta la actualidad (Buenos Aires, I 945)> PP- J 36-7, 209-13. Hereafter Rosenblat, La poblacion indigena de America. Angel Rosenblat, La poblacion indigena y el mestizaje en America (2 vols., Buenos Aires, 1954), 1, 124. Sherburne F. Cook and Woodrow Borah, The Population of Mixteca Alta, I52o-ig6o (Berkeley, 1968), p. 47. Mario Hernandez y SanchezBarba, La poblacion hispanoamericana y su distribucion social en el siglo XVIII', Revista de Estudios Politicos, LII (1954), 111-42. Oriol Pi Sunyer, 'Historical Background to the Negro in America', Journal of Negro History, XLII (1957), 237-46. The most recent survey for Latin America as a whole is Nicolas Sanchez-Albornoz, La poblacion de America Latina desde los tiempos precolombianos at ano 2000 (Madrid, 1973). Casta should not be confused with castizo, a term meaning persons

169

170

8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15

16 17

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Notes to pages 4-9 of mostly white but some Indian blood. Castizos were generally classed as Creoles and counted as Spaniards before the law. The authority on miscegenation in Latin America is Magnus Morner, Race Mixture in the History of Latin America (Boston, 1967). The term chino, literally 'Chinese', was used in western New Spain and at times elsewhere in the viceroyalty to refer to Filipinos. However, the term was also regularly applied to mulattoes and certain others of mixed parentage. [Giovanni Francesco] Gemelli Careri, Viaje a la Nueva Espana, trans, by Jose Maria Agreda y Sanchez with introd. by Fernando B. Sandoval (Mexico, 1955), p. 83. AGN Historia 386, fs. 74-5, Autos sobre la prision que los chinos y mulatos hicieron — la justicia mayor de Zacatula, Acapulco, 1729. Humboldt, Ensayo politico, p. 173. Manuel Carrera Stampa, 'Pianos de la ciudad de Mexico', Boletin de la Sociedad Mexicana de Geografia y Estadistica, Lxvn (1949), plates. [Giovanni Francesco] Gemelli Careri, Las cosas mas considerables vistas en la Nueva Espana, trans, by Jose Maria de Agreda y Sanchez with prologue by Alberto Maria Carrefio (Mexico, 1946), pp. 90—8. Villasefior y Sanchez, Theatro Americano, 1:34, 60. Carrera Stampa, 'Pianos', 289-90, 319-20, plate 1. Gemelli Careri, Las cosas, pp. 43, 128-33. Carrera Stampa, 'Pianos', 287. Villasefior y Sanchez, Theatro Americano, 1: 56. Gemelli Careri, Las cosas, pp. 43, 129-33. Villasefior y Sanchez, Theatro Americano, 1: 34. Carrera Stampa, 'Pianos', 285-91. Gemelli Careri, Las cosas, p. 42. In British North America, the largest city was Philadelphia, with a population of only about 40,000 at the end of the colonial period. Oscar T. Barck, Jr and Hugh T. Lefler, Colonial America (New York, 1958), p. 267. Gemelli Careri, Las cosas, p. 42. Villasefior y Sanchez, Theatro Americano, 1: 35. Charles Gibson, The Aztecs under Spanish Rule, a History of the Indians of the Valley of Mexico, I5ig-i8io (Stanford, 1964), p. 380. J. Ignacio Rubio Mane, 'Gente de Espana en la ciudad de Mexico, ano de 1689', BAGN, VII (1966), 5-406. Eduardo Baez Macias, 'Pianos y censos de la ciudad de Mexico, 1753', BAGN, vn-vm (1966-7), 407-1156. Humboldt, Ensayo politico, p. 40. Gemelli Careri, Las cosas, p. 43. Carrera Stampa, 'Pianos', 286, 305-6, plates 21-6. Gemelli Careri, Las cosas, pp. 116-18. Carrera Stampa, 'Pianos', 286. Villasefior y Sanchez, Theatro Americano, 1: 60. Carrera Stampa, 'Pianos', 286, 302-10. Humboldt, Ensayo politico, pp. 114-16, 167. Gemelli Careri, Las cosas, p. 126. Gibson, Aztecs, p. 149. Gemelli Careri, Las cosas, p. 44. One silver peso equaled about one US dollar in 1800. Villasefior y Sanchez, Theatro Americano, 1: 26, 37-42, 57-8. Gemelli Careri, Las cosas, p. 77. Villasefior y Sanchez, Theatro Americano, 1: 50, 56, 58. Gerhard, Mexico en 1742, pp. 21, 33, 38. Villasefior y Sanchez, Theatro Americano, 11: 8-12, 47-9, 90-4, 112-14, 157-68, 204-7, 220-3,

Notes to pages g-14 26 27 28

171

Gemelli Careri, Viaje, pp. 7—9. Gemelli Gareri, Las cosas, pp. 157-202. Giovanni Francesco Gemelli Gareri, Giro intorno al Mondo (6 vols., Naples, 1699-1700). Chapter 1

1 Recopilacion, ix, xxvii, 1. 2 Charles Gibson, ed. and trans., 'Royal Instructions to Ovando', Granada, 16 Sept. 1501, The Spanish Tradition in America (New York, 1968), pp. 55-7. 3 AGI IG 539, tomo 1, fs. 180-3 and AGN RG 70, esp. 5, R.c al virrey, Buen Retiro, 6 marzo 1750. 4 The minister, actually called Secretary of State for the Indies, was a personal adviser to the king and acted at his command. The Council of the Indies was a permanent advisory, legislative, judicial, and policy committee with staff functions roughly comparable to that of a modern ministry and high court for colonial affairs. The Council had its own bureaucracy and served at the pleasure of the crown. 5 The subject of religion was of such importance to individuals that it will receive more detailed treatment in ch. 3. 6 AGN RG 30, exp. 80, R.c. al virrey-arzobispo, Barcelona, 6 diciembre 1701. 7 AGN RGD 40, exp. 239, fs. 316-17, R.c. al virrey, Barcelona, 24 febrero 1702. 8 AGN RC 35 exp. 46, fs. 135-6, R.c. al virrey, Corella, 20 julio 1711. 9 AGN RG 39, exp. 121, R.o. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 16 septiembre 1718. 10 AGN RG 40, exp. 141, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 25 noviembre 1719. 11 AGN RC 45, exp. 63, R.c. al virrey, Buen Retiro, 26 marzo 1726. 12 AGN RC 58, exp. 37, R.o. al virrey-arzobispo, Madrid, 1 abril 1738. 13 AGN RG 59, exp. 97, R.o. al virrey-arzobispo, Madrid, 16 agosto 1739. 14 AGN Bandos 3, exp. 17, Cotejo de la conducta de SM con la del Rey Britanico, reimpreso en Mexico, 1740. AGN RC 61, exp. 1, fs. 1—2v., R.o. al virrey, el Pardo, 13 enero 1741; exp. 77, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 24 octubre 1741. AGN RC 62, exp. 4, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 2 enero 1742; exp. 78, fs. 227—8, R.o. a la audiencia, San Lorenzo, 4 diciembre 1742. 15 AGN RC 31, exp. 52, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 20 septiembre 1702. 16 AGN RC 31, exp. 146, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 26 octubre 1703. AGN RC 32, exp. 120, R.c. al virrey, Buen Retiro, 22 abril 1705. 17 AGN RC 32, exp. 196, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 2 noviembre 1705. AGI INE 88, fol. 9, fs. 33-8, Exp. sobre el desalojamiento de los ingleses en varias provincias de NE, 1717. 18 AGN RG 37, exp. 117, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 22 diciembre 1716. AGN RC 38, exp. 27, R.c. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 3 junio 1717. 19 AGN Historia 380, fs. 170-283, Exp. sobre la expedicion de D. Sancho Fernandez de Angulo y Sandoval, gobernador y capitan general de Yucatan a la Laguna de Terminos y contra los ingleses, 1742-3. AGN RC 58, exp. 58, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 3 junio 1738. Gerhard, Mexico en 1742, pp. 32-3. Lillian E. Fisher, Viceregal Administration

in America

(Berkeley, 1926), p. 2 7 1 .

172 20

Notes to pages 14-16

AGN RG 45, exp. 100, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 26 mayo 1726; exp. 122, R.c. al virrey, San Ildefonso, 19 agosto 1726. AGN RG 64, exp. 118, R.c. al virrey, Buen Retiro, 12 diciembre 1744. AGN RG 72, exp. 22, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 23 marzo 1752; exp. 70, Dos r.os. al virrey, Madrid, 26 junio 1752. AGN RG 74, exp. 68, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 4 septiembre 1754. AGN Historia 436, exp. 27, fs. 238-76, D. Francisco Cajigal de la Vega al Conde de Revillagigedo, enero—julio 1755. 21 AGI AM 633, Exp. sobre entrada y poblacion de franceses en el Seno Megicano y Santa Maria de Galve y otros, 1701-19. 22 John Bartlet Brebner, The Explorers of North America, 14Q2-1806 (Cleveland, 1964), pp. 269-89. 23 AGN Historia 27, exp. 12, fs. 170V.-171, Patente concedido por Antonio de la Mothe Cadillac al Senor de San Denis y 24 canadinos para que con varios indios salvajes vayan a buscar la mision de Fray Francisco Hidalgo, y a ganado para la Luisiana, 1711. 24 AGN Historia 27, exp. 13, fs. 171-80V., Declaration ante el interprete Gerado Mora, comisionado del virrey de Nueva Espafia, por D. Luis San Denis y D. Medar Fablot, naturales de Nueva Francia, Mexico, 22 junio 1715. 25 AGN Historia 28, exp. 4, fs. 95V.-114, Paracer del Auditor de Guerra, el Marques de Altamira, Mexico, 4 junio 1744. 26 Differing in some details is Maria del Carmen Velazquez, Establecimiento y perdida del septentrion de Nueva Espafia (Mexico, 1974), pp. no—14. Also see her impressive bibliographical essay, pp. 4-21. While Velazquez sees St Denis as a spy from the outset, his marriage and offers of service suggest that he was of a somewhat different sort. At various times during the Spanish colonial experience in America, a number of 'spies' did supply intelligence to the enemies of Spain. Most of these persons were, more clearly than St Denis, disgruntled individuals who had left or fled the Spanish empire for some reason and then sought advantage or revenge by supplying information to foreign powers. Thus the homesick Dominican, Thomas Gage, changed his religion and returned to England where his knowledge of Spanish America contributed, perhaps, to Cromwell's Western Design. See Thomas Gage, The English-American, A New Survey of the West Indies, 1648, ed. with an introduction by A. P. Newton (London, 1928). In addition, Boleslao Lewin, La rebelion de Tupac Amaru y los origenes de la emancipacion americana (Buenos Aires, 1957), pp. 21 ff., among others, mentions Gage and additional individuals, most of whom were renegade Spaniards or Spanish Americans. Clandestine traders and wandering Sephardim also provided possible sources of intelligence. The flow of 'refugees' went in both directions, as the presence of Irishmen in Spain and the empire testifies. 27 Domingo Ramon was the son of Diego Ramon. AGN Historia 27, exps. 17-19, fs. 184V.-212, Capitan Domingo Ramon al virrey, Texas, 17 febrero, 22 y 26 julio 1716. 28 AGN RC 39, exp. 68, R.c. al virrey, Balsam, 11 junio 1718. A royal order of 1717 instructed the viceroy to intercept French attempts to establish new settlements on the Gulf. AGN RC 38, exp. 60, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 26 diciembre 1717. 29 The governor was to send the commander of the interloping party

Notes to pages 16-ig

30

31

32 33 34

35 36 37

38 39 40 41 42

173

to the fortress of Acapulco for safekeeping and the troops to the work shops (obrajes) of Mexico City. Englishmen captured on the southern frontier usually ended up in Veracruz or in other cities of eastern New Spain with the officers often being paroled and the others being farmed out to obrajes where they assisted in textile manufacture. For example, AGI INE 88, fol. 8, fs. 37V.-38, Decreto del virrey, Ghapultepec, 11 julio 1716. AGN Historia 28, exp. 4, fs. 95V.-114, Paracer del Auditor de Guerra, el Marques de Altamira, Mexico, 4 junio 1744. AGN RG 40, exp. 3, R.o. al virrey, el Pardo, 12 enero 1719; exp. 4, R.c. al Marques de Valero, Buen Retiro, 22 abril 1719. AGN RG 42, exp. 12, R.c. al virrey Madrid, 6 marzo 1721; exp. 30, fs. 48-9, R.c. al virrey, Buen Retiro, 10 marzo 1721; exp. 54, R.c. al virrey, Aranjuez, 26 mayo 1721. AGN Historia 28, exp. 1, fs. 1-62, Diario del viaje del Marques de San Miguel de Aguayo, Moncalvo, 31 junio 1722. AGN Historia 27, exp. 27, fs. 278V.-285, Directorio para el viaje a la provincia de Texas, Mexico, 11 marzo 1718. AGN RG 67, exp. 84, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 28 septiembre 1747. AGN RG 72, exp. 81, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 26 julio 1752. Instrucciones que los virreyes de Nueva Espana dejaron a sus sucesores (2 vols., Mexico, 1867-73), I : 94-IO3> Instruccion reservada que trajo el Marques de las Amarillas recibida del Exmo. Sr D. Julian de Arriaga, Ministro de Indias. Fisher, Viceregal Administration, p. 273. Instrucciones de los virreyes de Nueva Espana, 1: 5-35, Instruccion del Sr Gonde de Revillagigedo al Sr Marques de las Amarillas, Mexico, 28 noviembre 1754. AGN Virreyes 1, exp. 72, fs. 191-2V., Virrey Amarillas al Rey, Mexico, 14 marzo 1756. AGN Virreyes 2, exp. 330, f. 268, Virrey Amarillas al Rey, Mexico, 9 diciembre 1757. The authorities in New Spain had been routinely shipping interlopers to Spain for some time. AGN Historia 294, exp. 1, fs. 1-83V., Autos sobre haber aportado a Nuevo Mexico cuatro franceses, Mexico, 1751. AGN RG 77, exp. 81, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 19 julio 1757. AGN Virreyes 3, exp. 435, f. 162, Virrey Amarillas al Rey, Mexico, 23 septiembre 1758. AGN RG 79, exp. 53, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 31 marzo 1759. Clarence H. Haring, Trade and Navigation between Spain and the Indies in the Time of the Hapsburgs (Cambridge, Mass., 1918), pp. 4-5For a brief discussion of the historical controversy concerning the seventeenth-century economic condition of New Spain, see J. I. Israel, Race, Class, and Politics in Colonial Mexico, i6io-i6yo (London, 1975), pp. 26-32. There is more agreement concerning the economic weakness of the metropolis during the same period. J. H. Elliott, Imperial Spain, I46g-iji6 (New York, 1966), especially pp. 329-45. Trade between Spain and Mexico declined seriously after 1620. See Pierre and Huguette Chaunu, Seville et VAtlantique, 1504-1650 (8 vols., Paris, 1955-9). Since a reading of the synthetic Israel and Elliott accounts, taken together, strongly suggests that Spain was in much worse shape in the seventeenth century than was Mexico, it follows that New Spain retained more of its former ability to trade than did the mother country. Thus Mexican trade

174

43 44 45 46 47 48

49 50 51 52 53 54 55

56 57 58

59 60

Notes to pages 20-3 may well have declined after 1620, but it was also seeking new outlets. The known growth of legal trade with other Spanish colonies supports this assessment. See Eduardo Arcila Farias, Comercio entre Venezuela y Mexico en los siglos XVII y XVIII (Mexico, 1950), pp. 51 ff. The other alternative was smuggling. Both its growth in the seventeenth century and its continuation in the eighteenth are standard fare. See for example, Haring, Trade and Navigation and his earlier work, The Buccaneers in the West Indies in the Seventeenth Century (London, 1910). Velazquez, Establecimiento y perdida, pp. 65-8, adds some new insights concerning the regularization of foreign-based trading contacts with Spanish America. Richard Pares, War and Trade in the West Indies, 1739-1763 (1936, reprinted London, 1963) treats the story from the other side and carries the theme well into the eighteenth century. Recopilacion, ix, vx, 53. An armada was a naval fleet, while a fiota was a merchant fleet. Recopilacion, ix, xxx, 22. Recopilacion, rx, xv, 91; ix, xxvii, 7-8. The alcaldes, alguaciles, and other officials hardly ranked as a unified police force. There were also constables (comisarios de ronda) who patroled the streets at night. In the same vein was penas de cdmara, a procedure by which officeholders might legally pocket fines. In some positions it was a perquisite of office. In such cases, the crown got its share through the selling of the offices. Clarence H. Haring, The Spanish Empire in America (1947, reprinted New York, 1963), p. 152. Recopilacion, ix, xvii, 5. Recopilacion, ix, xvii, 4, 36. AGN RC 32, exp. 73, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 7 diciembre 1704. AGN RG 31, exp. 132, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 28 septiembre 1703. It is probable that these Englishmen were actually going to Tabasco to cut dyewoods. They had brought slaves. AGN Historia 346, exp. 2, fs. 37-45V., Gobernador de Cuba al virrey, Havana, 15 diciembre 1703. AGN RC 33, exp. 2, R.c. a los virreyes del Peru y NE y los presidentes, audiencias, gobernadores de los puertos de ambos reinos, Madrid, 24 enero 1706. AGN RC 34, exp. 107, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 15 marzo 1710. AGN RC 35, exp. 27, R.c. al virrey, Zaragoza, 9 marzo 1711. AGN GP 21, exp. 82, f. 96, Virrey Linares al gobernador y los oficiales reales de la Veracruz, Mexico, 20 septiembre 1713. Haring, Trade and Navigation, p. 177. AGN RC 36, exp. 79, R.c. a los virreyes, gobernadores y ministros del Peru y NE, Madrid, 13 noviembre 1713. AGN RC 36, exp. 94, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 8 enero de 1714; exp. 128, R.c. a los virreyes del Peru y NE, y los gobernadores de los puertos de las Indias, Madrid, 10 agosto 1714. AGN RC 41, exp. 42, R.c. a los virreyes del Peru, NE y Santa Fe, gobernadores, oficiales reales de los puertos de las Indias, San Lorenzo, 20 julio 1720. AGI IG 538, tomo 3, fs. 110-13 and AGN RC 41, exp. 74, R.c. al virrey, y gobernadores de los puertos y Islas de Barlovento, Madrid, 5 diciembre 1720. AGI IG 538, tomo 3, fs. 134V.-137V., 146-50V., 201-6, 209-10,

Notes to pages 23-7

61 62 63 64

65 66

67 68 69 70

71 72 73

74

75 76

175

R.cs. al virrey de NE y las audiencias, gobernadores, oficiales reales y cabildos seculares de aquel reino, San Lorenzo, 30 julio 1721; San Lorenzo, 23 agosto 1721; Madrid, 8 febrero 1723; Aranjuez, 1 mayo 1723. AGN RG 44, exps. 41-2, R.c. y r.o. al virrey, Balsain, 26 y 29 junio 1723. AGN RG 44, exp. 72, R.c. al virrey de NE y los audiencias, gobernadores, oficiales reales y cabildos seculares de ella3 Madrid, 21 febrero 1724. AGN Bandos 2, exp. 18, Bando del Marques de Gasafuerte, insertando r.c. que prohibe el extrangero, Mexico, 19 junio 1730. AGN RG 51, exp. 138, R.c. a los gobernadores de los puertos y plazas de America, Madrid, 2 diciembre 1732. AGN RG 52, exp. 42, Dos r.os. al virrey, San Ildefonso, 22 julio 1733. AGN RG 53, exp. 22 and AGI IG 1597, fol. i, R.c. a los virreyes, presidentes de las audiencias y gobernadores de los reinos del Peru y NE, Buen Retiro, 30 mayo 1734. AGI IG 1597, fol. 5, R.c. a los virreyes y gobernadores de las Indias, San Ildefonso, 20 julio 1738. AGN RG 69, exp. 46, R.o. al virrey, Aranjuez, 23 abril 1749. AGN RG 78, exp. 158, R.o. a los gobernadores y oficiales reales de Veracruz, Santo Domingo, Cartagena, Cuba, Buenos Aires, Campeche, Margarita, Guatemala y Gomayagua, Madrid, 10 octubre 1758. Peter Gerhard, 'A Dutch Trade Mission to New Spain, 17461747', Pacific Historical Review, xxm (1954), 221-6. Fisher, Viceregal Administration, p. 269. AGN Bandos 1, exp. 12, Bando del Duque de Linares, Mexico, 1713. This limit was later raised to just over six hundred tons. AGI AM 863, fol. 3, Diligencias formadas sobre la represalia de ingleses, Veracruz, 1719—20. AGI AM 868, Cartas y expedientes de los oficiales reales de [Veracruz] sobre efectos represalidos a ingleses y remitidos a Espana, 1721-2. AGI IG 1601, fol. 19, R.c. al virrey, Balsain, 23 octubre 1722, r.c. a los virreyes y gobernadores de las Indias, San Ildefonso, 16 agosto 1721. AGN RG 40, exps. 156-7, Dos r.cs. al virrey, Madrid, 10 diciembre 1719. AGN RG 43, exp. 58, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 2 noviembre 1722. Only 132,918 pesos were actually sent to Spain. AGN RG 44, exp. 122, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 5 diciembre 1724. AGN RG 46, exp. 40, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 4 abril 1727. AGN RG 46, exp. 42, R.c. al virrey, Buen Retiro, 5 abril 1727; exp. 73, R.cta. al virrey, Madrid, 29 julio 1727. In a case decided against the factors, the consulado exposed a Spanish associate of the Company for selling English merchandise in Mexico City. AGN RG 45, exp. 35, R.c. al virrey, Aranjuez, 2 junio 1724. AGN RC 47, exp. 85, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 7 junio 1728. AGN RG 48, exp. 115, R.o. al virrey, Sevilla, 20 octubre 1729. AGI IG 1601, fol. 19, R.c. a los virreyes y gobernadores de las Indias, Sevilla, 14 diciembre 1729. AGN RC 48, exps. 132-3, Dos r.cs. a los virreyes y gobernadores de las Indias, Sevilla, 14 diciembre 1729. AGN Bandos 2, exp. 16, Bando del Marques de Casafuerte, San Agustin de las Cuevas, 31 mayo 1730.

176


77 AGN RG 49, exp. 63, R.o. al virrey, Cazalla, 8 agosto 1730. 78 AGN RG 50, exp. 26, R.o. al virrey, Sevilla, 28 marzo 1731; exp. 95, R.cta. al virrey, Sevilla, 1 agosto 1731. AGI IG 1597, fol. 1, f. 5, R.c. al virrey, Sevilla, 7 diciembre 1731. 79 AGN RG 51, exp. 70, R.o. al ministerio de Veracruz, con copia al virrey, Sevilla, 21 julio 1732. 80 AGN RG 51, exp. 96, R.o. al virrey, Sevilla, 29 septiembre 1732; exp. 137, R.o. al virrey, Sevilla, 2 diciembre 1732. 81 AGN GP 31, exp. 173, fs. 111V.—112, Virrey al gobernador de Veracruz, Mexico, 10 septiembre 1737. AGN RG 52, exp. 4, R.cta. al virrey, Madrid, 11 febrero 1733; exp. 39, R.o. al gobernador y oficiales reales de Veracruz, San Ildefonso, 22 julio 1733. 82 AGN RG 54, exp. 8, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 1 febrero 1735. AGN RG 55, exp. 30, R.o. al ministerio de Veracruz, San Ildefonso, 31 julio 1735; exp. 49, R.o. al gobernador de Veracruz, San Ildefonso, 31 julio 1735. 83 AGN RG 56, exp. 12, R.o. al virrey, Aranjuez, 27 abril 1736. 84 AGI IG 1597, fol. 1, f. 6, R.c. al virrey, San Ildefonso, 13 octubre 1738. 85 AGN Bandos 3, exp. 16, Bando del Arzobispo Vizarron, Mexico, 21 noviembre 1739. 86 AGN RG 62, exp. 11, R.o. a la audiencia, Madrid, 11 enero 1742; exp. 16, R.o. a la audiencia, el Pardo, 5 marzo 1742. AGN RG 63, exp. 12, R.cta. al virrey, el Pardo, 26 marzo 1743. 87 Gonzalo Aguirre Beltran, 'The Slave Trade in Mexico', HAHR, xxiv (1944), 412-51. Herman J. Muller, 'British Business and Spanish America, 1700—1800', Mid-America, xxxix (1957), 3-20. 88 John H. Parry, The Spanish Seaborne Empire (New York, 1966), p. 296. Chapter 2 1 Antonio Lopes da Gosta Almeida, ed., Repertorio remissivo da legislagao da marinha e do ultramar comprehendida nos annos de 1317 ate 1856 (Lisbon, 1856). William Arthur Shaw, ed., Letters of Denization and Acts of Naturalization for Aliens in England and Ireland, 1603-1800, Huguenot Society of London, Publications XVIII, XXVII, xxxv (London, 1911-23). Lawrence Counselman Wroth and Gertrude L. Annan, eds., Acts of the French Royal Administration concerning Canada, the West Indies, and Louisiana, prior to 1791 (New York, 1930). John Duncan Brite, The Attitude of European States Toward Emigration to the American Colonies and the United States, 1607—1820 (Chicago, 1929). Emberson Edward Proper, Colonial Immigration Laws: A Study of the Regulation of Immigration by the English Colonies in America (New York, 1900). Recopilacion. Brite says (pp. 195-8) that European governments and their official clergies were telling their charges as early as the sixteenth century that it was a sin to leave the lands of their birth. He notes (pp. 134, 197) that the Swiss cantons, after 1730, made attempted immigration to the New World a criminal offence, as had the German states in 1721. Yet Brite (pp. 134, 146, 152, 199, 223) and Proper (p. 195) agree that no European legislation was really effective in stopping emigration by those determined to leave. 2 Leyes destos reynos, 11, iv, 66.

Notes to pages 30—5 3

4 5 6 7

8 9 10

n 12 13 14

15 16 17 18

19 20 21 22 23 24

177

Recopilacion, iv, xxii, 1; ix, xxvii, 3 1 ; ix, xli, 21. AGN RG 31, exp. 87, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 20 abril 1703. AGN RG 56, exp. 10, R.c. a los virreyes del Peru y NE, Aranjuez, 25 abril 1736. Antonio

Muro Orejon, ed., Cedulario americano del sigh XVIII (2 vols., Seville, 1956), 1: 196, R.c. a los virreyes del Peru y NE, Madrid, 30 septiembre 1688. Recopilacion, 11, i, 14; rx, xxvii, 25. Recopilacion, rx, xxvii, 2. AGI GG 5459, Pasajeros a Indias, 1699. Eusebio Bentura Belena, ed., Recopilacion sumaria de todos los autos acordados de la real audiencia y sala del crimen de esta Nueva Espana (2 vols., Mexico, 1787), 1: 187-8. Recopilacion, ix, xvn, 10. AGN RG 41, exp. 72, R.c. al virrey de NE, audiencias, gobernadores y demas justicias de aquel reino, Madrid, 5 diciembre 1720. Leyes destos reynos, 11, iv, 66. Recopilacion, rx, xxvii, 17. AGN RG 70, exp. 99, R.o. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 18 noviembre 1750. A similar case arose in 1756. AGN RG 76, exp. 131, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 2 noviembre 1756. AGN Virreyes 2, carta 283, f. 202, Virrey al Rey, Mexico, 20 junio 1757. AGN RG 76, exp. 113, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 28 septiembre 1756. AGN Virreyes 2, carta 210, f. 96, Virrey al Rey, Mexico, 25 abril 1757. Haring, Spanish Empire in America, pp. 315-16. Paul S. Taylor, 'Spanish Seamen in the New World', HAHR, v (1922), 631-61. Recopilacion, rx, iv, 16. Manila served as a point of departure for others besides Gemelli Gareri, and some of them found it advisable to obtain clearance from the Inquisition as well as the lay authorities. AGN Inq. 920, fs. 250-6, Exp. formado con las diligencias practicadas por el comisario de Manila, Fr Juan de Arechederra, sobre la licencia que pidieron para pasar a NE, Moises Juan y Jorge Simone, naturales de Belen en Palestina, Manila, 1745. AGN RG 77, exp. 129, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 24 noviembre 1757. Jose Maria Vigil de Quinofies, Tolizones de la carrera de Indias', Revista General de Marina, CXLVII (1954), 373-9. AGN RG 37 exp. 46, R.c. al virrey, Buen Retiro 27 julio 1715. AGN Inq. 1176, exp. 10, fs. 140-3, SO al virrey, Mexico, 5 diciembre 1701; f. 143, Respuesta del fiscal, Don Antonio de Espinosa Ocampo y consejo al virrey, Mexico, 10 diciembre 1701. Recopilacion, ix, xli, 14-20, 25. These laws specifically mention the Gape Verdes, the Canaries, and Brazil. In addition, foreigners might land at some out-of-the-way port and then quietly melt into the local population. The Laws of the Indies covers the same point. Recopilacion, ix, xxvii, 4-5. The special role of the Inquisition in the boarding and inspection of incoming ships provides an introduction to ch. 4. Recopilacion, rx, xxvii, 35. Fisher, Viceregal Administration, p. 309. AGI GG 4886, Exps. sobre soltura de presos, 1700-58. AGI IG 821, fol. s.n., Arancel de los derechos que se han de cobrar, asi en Cadiz, como en los puertos de las Indias, de los provistos en empleos, comerciantes y duefios de navios, Madrid, 1720.

178

Notes to pages 35-8

25 AGN RG 23, exp. 78, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 22 septiembre 1690. 26 AGI AM 460, fol. 1, Extractos; corregidor de Veracruz, D. Francisco Manzo de Zufiiga al Gonsejo de Indias, nums. 2 & 4, Veracruz, 11 junio 1702; Extracto: audiencia al Consejo de Indias, num. 15, Mexico, 26 mayo 1702. 27 AGN RG 36, exp. 157, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 30 diciembre 1714. 28 AGN GP 31, exp. 173, fs. IIIV.—112, Virrey al gobernador de Veracruz, Mexico, 10 septiembre 1737. 29 Muro Orejon, Cedulario, 1: 196. R.c. al gobernador de Cuba, Madrid, 31 julio 1683. AGN RG 59, exp. 41, R.c. a los virreyes de NE y Peru, Aranjuez, 15 mayo 1739. 30 AGN RG 23, exp. 112, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 30 diciembre 1690. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 1. 31 Because of the nature of such enterprise, no accurate tallies exist. 32 Francisco Gonzalez de Gossio, ed., Gacetas de Mexico, Castorena y Ursua (1722) - Sahagun de Arevalo (1728 a 1742) (3 vols., Mexico, I949-5O), 1: 7,45, 58. 33 AGN RG 45, exp. 79, fs. 308-23V., Tratado de navegacion y comercio ajustado entre esta Corona y el Emperador de Romanos, Viena de Austria, 1 mayo 1725, Impreso: Mexico, 29 agosto 1726. This treaty is also in AGN Bandos 2, exp. 7. 34 AGN RG 30, exp. 3, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 11 enero 1701. 35 AGI IG 2751, ramo 1, fol. 34, Copia de una razon de los navios franceses que han entrado en el puerto de la Veracruz desde el afio de 1701, Sevilla, 10 mayo 1707; fol. 36, Proposicion al Gonsejo de Indias del Gonsulado de Sevilla, Sevilla, 10 mayo 1707. 36 AGN RG 66, exp. 50, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 20 julio 1746. 37 Gonzalez de Gossio, Gaceta, m: 238, 252, 266, 272. 38 AGI GG 1478-82, Registros de las naos que fueron sueltas a NE, 1700-43. AGI GG 1484-1562, Registros de las naos sueltas que fueron a Veracruz, 1702—60. AGI GG 1613-15, Registros de las naos sueltas que fueron a Gampeche, 1655-1777. AGI GG 1612, Registros de las naos sueltas que fueron a Tabasco, 1703-56. 39 AGI IG 1597. Exp. sobre reclamaciones y devoluciones de presas entre ingleses y espafioles, 1718—65. 40 AGN RG 25, exp. 38, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 1 julio 1693. AGN RG 28, exp. 7, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 10 febrero 1698. 41 AGN RG 31, exp. 146, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 26 octubre 1703. AGN RG 32, exp. 120, R.c. al virrey, Buen Retiro, 22 abril 1705. 42 AGN GP 21, exp. 295, fs. 339-9V., Virrey al corregidor de Oaxaca, Mexico, 21 agosto 1717. 43 AGN RG 39, exp. 122, R.o. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 16 septiembre 1718. 44 AGN RG 62, exp. 16, R.o. a la audiencia, el Pardo, 5 marzo 1742. 45 Richard Konetzke, ed., Coleccion de documentos para la historia de la formation social de Hispanoamerica, I4Q3-I8IO (3 vols., Madrid, !953)J m : x 89-91, R-c- a* presidente y oidores de Mexico, Madrid, 21 septiembre 1726. 46 AGN RG 47, exp. 15, R.o. al virrey, el Pardo, 2 febrero 1728. 47 Gonzalez de Gossio, Gaceta, 11: 113-14. AGN RG 72, exp. 70, Dos r.os. al virrey, Madrid, 26 junio 1752. 48 AGN RG 61, exp. 7, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 27 febrero 1741; exp. 14, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 20 marzo 1741. AGN RG 62, exp. 41,

Notes to pages 38-41 49

50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

58

59 60 61 62

63 64 65

66

179

R.c. a la audiencia, Madrid, 22 marzo 1742. Shaw, Letters and Acts, xvm, xxi; xxvn, 3, 11, 13-17, 37, 113-18. Wroth and Annan, Acts of the French Royal Administration, p. 112. AHH 460, exp. 52, Dos reglamentos en forma de r.cs. a los gobernadores, capitanes generales y otros oficiales, Buen Retiro, 15 diciembre 1760. The immunities were embodied in a collection of law and practice known as the fuero militar or 'military privilege'. Recopilacion, ix, xxvii, 11. Recopilacion, m, ii, 33. Recopilacion, in, viii, 10. AGN Historia 345, exp. 7, fs. 216-24, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 29 octubre 1706. A hundred years later eight silver re ales (one peso) equaled one US dollar. Discounting inflation, the value of the Frenchmen's back pay would thus have been about $4,370 (c. 1800). AGN Historia 346, exp. 7, fs. 215-24, Exp. sobre unos franceses en Cuba, Havana, 1702-7. AGI AM 460, fol. 1, Extractor D. Francisco Manzo de Zufiiga, corregidor de Veracruz, al Gonsejo de Indias, num. 1, Veracruz, 6 junio 1702; fol. 5, Extractor virrey al Consejo de Indias, Mexico, 26 enero 1702. AGI AM 474, fol. 1, Virrey al Rey, Mexico, 20 diciembre 1702. AGN RG 31, exp. 128, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 28 septiembre 1703. AGI AM 2424, fol. s.n., R.c. concediendo titulo de ingeniero militar a D. Joseph Mazzoni, Zaragoza, 29 abril 1711. AGI MP, mapa 1009, Mapa de la Giudad de San Francisco de Gampeche y sus contornos, Gampeche, 25 octubre 1705, por el ingeniero frances D. Luis Bouchard de Becour, remitido por el virrey con exp. y carta, Mexico, 24 marzo 1706. AGN Inq. 721, exp. 8, fs. 153-3V., Sr Inquisidor Fiscal al comisario de Veracruz, Mexico, 31 octubre 1702. AGN Inq. 721, exp. 8, f. 158, Comisario de Veracruz al Sr Inquisidor Fiscal, Veracruz, 6 noviembre 1702. AGN Inq. 724, exp. 2, fs. 14-16, Gonsulta del comisario en Veracruz al Sr Inquisidor Fiscal, Veracruz, 17 junio 1702. AGN GP 21, exp. 242, fs. 283-3V., Decreto del virrey, Mexico, 26 noviembre 1716; exp. 243, fs. 284-4V., Despacho del virrey, Mexico, 5 diciembre 1716; exp. 276, f. 318, Providencia del virrey, Mexico, 15 abril 1717. AGI AM 2424, 2428, Patentes y nombramientos militares, 16341814, 1748—1814. AGI AG 506, Patentes y nombramientos militares, 1699-1717. AGI AM 2424, Un fol. s.n. con el patente de coronel del tercio de pardos y morenos libres de la NE de Francisco Manuel Suarez, Aranjuez, 30 junio 1750. In 1788 the Regiment of the Grown, stationed in New Spain, had 1,014 enlisted men. Some 101 or 10.2% of them were foreigners. See Ghriston I. Archer, 'To Serve the King: Military Requirement in Late Colonial Mexico', HAHR, LV (1975), 228. Their sins included making heretical statements, apostacy, Protestantism, blasphemy, superstition, freemasonry, and sodomy. AGN Inq. 1000, exps. 15, 26, 28, 34; AGN Inq. 1001, exp. 21; AGN Inq. 1002, exp. 10; AGN Inq. 1014, exp. 28; AGN Inq. 1045, exps. 20,

180

67 68 69 70 71 72

73 74 75 76 77 78

79 80 81 82 83

Notes to pages 4.1-4. 23; AGN Inq. 1050, exps. 5, 19; AGN Inq. 1057, exps. 3, 6; AGN Inq. 1063; exps. 8, 9; AGN Inq. 1079, exp. 9; AGN Inq. 1081, exp. 8; AGN Inq. 1090, exp. 1; AGN Inq. 1093, exps. 1, 2; AGN Inq. 1099, e x P- J 2 ; AGN Inq. 1100, exp. 1; AGN Inq. 1103, exp. 25; AGN Inq. 1104, exp. 4; AGN Inq. 1131, exp. 9; AGN Inq. 1135, exp. 15; AGN Inq. 1168, exp. 23; AGN Inq. 1333, exp. 4, Documentos referentes a soldados extranjeros denunciados al SO, Mexico y Veracruz, 1762-70. Wroth and Annan, Acts of the French Royal Administration, pp. 70, 81, 107, 113. Brite, Attitude of European States, p. 132. AGI IG 538, tomo 2, fs. 40V.-41, R.c. a los gobernadores de los puertos de las Indias, Buen Retiro, 3 junio 1703. Wroth and Annan, Acts of the French Royal Administration, pp. 42-5. Instrucclones de los virreyes de Nueva Espana, 1: 96-7, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 30 junio 1755. AGN GP 21, exp. 9, fs. 8-8v., D. Gaspar Saenz Rico, gobernador de Veracruz, al virrey, Veracruz, 24 febrero 1712. Konetzke, Coleccion de documentos, m: 266-7, R.c. a los virreyes de las Indias, Madrid, 21 octubre 1753. AGN RC 70, exp. 25, R.c. al gobernador de la Florida y los otros de America, Buen Retiro, 24 septiembre 1750. AGI IG 539, tomo 1, fs. 190-90V., R.c. al virrey de la NE, audiencias, gobernadores, y los jueces y justicias de aquel reino, Buen Retiro, 24 septiembre 1750. AGI IG 2787, Ordenes y exps. sobre esclavos fugativos de las colonias extrangeras, 175 2-1802. Konetzke, Coleccion de documentos, m: 279-80, R.c. al presidente y oidores de Espanola, Madrid, 7 febrero 1756. Recopilacion, 1, vi, 31. The same restrictions applied to Spain itself. Leyes destos reynos, 1, iii, 14—16. Recopilacion, 1, xiv, 12; n, xv, 144. This function of the orders is discussed in Herbert Eugene Bolton, Wider Horizons of American History (1939, reprinted Notre Dame, 1967). AGN Historia 393, exp. 10, fs. 99-108, Peticion al Rey del P. Juan Martinez de Ripalada, Procurador General por las provincias de Indias y sus misiones, para que se permitiese que pasaran a estas, jesuitas de origen extranjero, Madrid, 1707. The first regular permission for foreign Jesuits came in 1664 when the king allowed up to one-fourth of any contingent of the Society's missionaries to be foreign born. Such persons had to spend one year at Toledo before embarking for America 'in order that their customs might be observed'. The king raised the limit to one-third in 1674. Lazaro de Aspurz, OFM, La aportacion extranjera a las misiones espanolas del patronato regio (Madrid, 1946), pp. 227, 236-7. Recopilacion, 1, i. 1; n, i, 8; 11, ii, 8. AGN Historia 393, exp. 10, f. 109, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 18 febrero 1707. During the War of Spanish Succession, the Austrian pretender maintained an army in eastern Spain from 1704 until well into 1707. The decree of 1707, however, was not rescinded until 1760. These men are listed in Appendix II, Jesuit foreigners in New Spain. AGN Historia 309, fs. 46-72v., Catalogus Iesus, Provincia Mexicana a P. Ghristophoro de Escobar Provinciali confectus, et ad Rm.

Notes to pages 44-7

84 85 86

87 88

89

90

181

admodem P.N. Generalem missus die Maii anno 1744; fs. 73-99V., Gatalogus Iesus, Provincia Mexicana a P. Andrea Xaviero Garcia Provinciali confectus, et ad Rm. admodem P.N. Generalem missus die 1 Julii anno 1748; fs. 237-65V., Gatalogus Iesus, Provincia Mexicana a P. Joanne Antonio Balthasar Provinciali confectus, et ad Rm. admodem P. N. Generalem missus die 1 Decembris anno 1751; fs. 306—37V., Gatalogus Iesus, Provincia Mexicana a P. Ignatio Galderon Provinciali confectus, et ad Rm. admodem P.N. Generalem missus die 19 Januarii anno 1755; fs. 413-46V., Gatalogus Iesus, Provincia Mexicana a P. Pedro Reales Provinciali confectus, et ad Rm. admodem P. N. Generalem missus 12 Julii 1761. Hereafter AGN Historia 309, fs. 46-72V., 73-99V., 237-65V., 306-37V., 41346V., Gatalogi IPM, 1744, 1748, 1751, 1755, 1761. These figures include only foreigners listed in the Catalogues. If other foreign Jesuits are added, the percentages on the right increase. Francisco Javier Alegre, SJ, Historia de la Provincia de la Compania de Jesus de Nueva Espana (4 vols., Rome, 1956), iv, 15—16. Aspurz, Aportacion extranjera, pp. 252, 257—8. Although the results are unclear, other foreign-born churchmen fell under similar orders in 1767 and 1768. AGN RG 91, exp. 101, R.c. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 17 octubre 1767. AGN Bandos 7, exp. 8, Bando del Virrey Groix, Mexico, 24 febrero 1768. Virulent anti-Jesuit propaganda began to appear in the Spanish world after the Marques de Pombal expelled the order from the Portuguese empire. Such was also the case in Mexico. AGN Inq. 1070, exp. 24, fs. 350-1, Un papel anonimo con motivo la expulsion de los P.P. Jesuitas, Mexico, 1763. Aspurz, Aportacion extranjera, pp. 228-30, 256. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventario de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687—1760, articulo 7. AGI AM 650, fol. 8, Fol. sobre la licencia de Br D. Acurcio Alonge Hurtado de Mendoza, natural de Sicilia, para residir en Indias, 1719—37. AGN Inq. 961, exp. 5, fs. I - I I 6 V . , El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Pablo Ignacio Blanco, alias Archdekin, natural de la ciudad de Waterford en Irlanda, por proposiciones hereticas o sospechosas de herejia, Mexico, 1756. AGN Inq. 978, exp. 1, fs. 1—19, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Eduardo Andres, ingles, Orizaba, 1756. AGN Inq. 829, exp. 7, fs. 544-60V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Pedro de Zarate de nacion armenio, por sospechas de ser cismatico, Mexico, 1723. Persia permanently incorporated about one-third of Armenia in 1639. Chapter 3

1 Haring, Spanish Empire in America, p. 188. 2 This attitude was not unique to Spain, and some authorities trace its origins back at least to Rome. Jacob Salwyn Schapiro, Anticlericalism, Conflict between Church and State in France, Italy, and Spain (Princeton, 1967), p. 11. 3 Some Indians were none too secure in their new Catholic faith as it was. Remnants of their pre-Christian beliefs survived, even in some settled areas. Gemelli Careri, Las cosas, p. 112. Humboldt, Ensayo politico, pp. 111-12.

182 4 5 6 7

8

9 10 11

12 13 14

15 16

Notes to pages 47-53 Recopilacion, ix, xxvii, 9. Haring, Spanish Empire in America, pp. 188-91. Villasefior y Sanchez, Theatro Americano, 1: 38. After about 1760, the three inquisitors seem to have rotated the function of fiscal among themselves so as to share the work load. A juez eclesidstico was that official appointed by the bishop to exercise ordinary jurisdiction over diocesans in religious matters. In this position he heard cases involving Indians, and as commissary of the Inquisition, he heard cases involving anyone else. AGN Inq. 721, exp. 8, fs. 152-9, Impreso: Instruccion para la visita de los navios en los puertos de NE y distrito de la Inquisicion de Mexico, 1702. The motive for reissuing the instructions in 1702 probably stemmed from the problems Commissary Santin was then having with the French in Veracruz. See above, pp.* 39-40. The king and the Supreme Tribunal of the Inquisition in Spain had issued very similar instructions in the sixteenth century. Irving Leonard, Books of the Brave (Ann Arbor, 1966), pp. 172-3. A familiar was a layman associated with the Inquisition. In theory he was to aid the Holy Office in the conduct of its duties, but in practice the position was largely honorary. Reconciliacion was available to Spanish- and foreign-born Jews on the same basis as to Protestants. AGN Inq. 777, exp. 67, fs. 512—17, Instrucciones a los comisarios del SO, del Inquisidor Manuel Ramirez de Arellano, Mexico, 17 octubre 1719. Similar instructions were also issued later in the century. AGN Inq. 843, exps. 9-10, fs. 434-57V., Exp. formado sobre la impresion de la Instruccion de Gomisarios y modo de proceder con los herejes espontaneos que se presentan pretendiendo ser absueltos o admitidos al Gremio de Nuestra Santa Madre Iglesia o reconciliarse con ella, Mexico, 1768. Prompting the earlier order was the presence of.a number of English prisoners of war in 1719. The later order was in response to the significant number of Protestants who turned up in royal military units after 1762. AGN Inq. 546, exp. 6, fs. 445-71, Autos sobre la reconciliacion al gremio de Nuestra Santa Madre Iglesia, de Juan de la Rosa de nacion holandes, hereje luterano, Mexico, 1705. It was customary in such cases to call on Jesuits to administer this instruction. The inquisitors recognized the special competence of the Society for dealing with Protestants. The precedent to which the Tribunal referred in making its decision was contained in a Royal Order of 28 Feb. 1689, a copy of which is filed with the Rose case. It concerned the 'readmission' of a Scot by the name Eduardo Orda. The Council of the Indies had directed that all such cases be dealt with by the Holy Office. The councilors pointed out that reconciliacion without absolution applied only to apostates. All aspects of cases dealing with the 'readmission' of heretics fell under the jurisdiction of the Inquisition. See n. 18 below. AGN Inq. 932, exp. 46, fs. 217-22V., Documentos sobre la reconciliacion de Maria Not, natural de Londres, de secta Luterana, Veracruz, 1756. Archival references to these cases are listed under the names of converted individuals in Appendix I. See: Edward Andrews, Albrecht Bender, Francois Boutet, William Butler, Nicholas Carpenter, John Child, James Clare, William Cogan, John Corkran,

Notes to pages 54-7

17

18 19

20 21

22

23 24

25

26 27

183

Isidor Drinkwater, Gabriel Ennis, Jakob Fors, William Joseph Fox, Angus Fraser, John Gay, John Harvey, William Hatch, Edward Hedges, Lewis Howard, Thomas Howard, John Hucker, Michael Jollan, Richard Joye, Sarah Lincey, Ralph Long, John MacDonald, Thomas Martin, David Miller, Oliver Moore, James Morfill, Joshua Morton, Daniel Naiscuriue, Mary Frances Nott, Joseph van der Plas, Willem Pobey, Thomas Readshaw, John Rendell, Edward Rivett, Jan van der Rose, Gotthart Rubberson, Kaspar Schulz, Slew Soane, Johann Taufer, Edmund Tile, John Vidal, and Nathaniel Watts. Many of the Philippine converts were Dutch Protestants, but, unlike New Spain proper, many others were Armenian Orthodox. AGN Inq. 861, exp. 25, fs. 435-51, Reconciliacion al gremio de Nuestra Santa Madre Iglesia de treinta holandeses, calvinistas y luteranos, Manila, 1736. AGN Inq. 857, exp. 38, fs. 158-90; exp. 40, fs. 198236; AGN Inq. 861, exp. 24, fs. 425-34; AGN Inq. 911, exp. 18, fs. 377-85; AGN Inq. 946, esp. 6, fs. 85-94V.; AGN Inq. 1024, exp. 2, fs. 6-10; AGN Inq. 1035, ex P- I3> fs - 361-3V.; AGN Inq. 1095, exp. 6, fs. 219—23, Reconciliaciones de varios armenios cismaticos, Manila, 1735-65. AGN Inq. 546, exp. 6, f. 465, R.o. al SO, Madrid, 28 febrero 1689. Documents relating to the following named men indicate that they had converted in New Spain, but records of their reconciliaciones are not indexed with Inquisition papers at the AGN: John Michael Carter, William Glare, Jacob Green, and Alexander Joseph Guile. Archival references to these men are listed under their names in Appendix I. AGN Inq. 750, exp. 34, fs. 557-97, Reconciliacion a la Santa Madre Iglesia de Guillermo Pobey, de nacion holandes, Mexico, 1711. The viceroy discovered a second heretic retainer in 1712, but to avoid a repetition of the embarrassing events of 1711, Linares sent Albrecht Bender directly to the Tribunal for reconciliacion. AGN Inq. 745, exp. 47, fs. 434-40, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Alberto de Vender, Mexico, 1712. AGN Inq. 922, exp. 14, fs. 402—6, Denuncia de Juana Gatarina Estuardo de nacion inglesa contra Manuel Garcia Mendieta, Mexico, 1759AGN Inq. 1071, exp. 3, fs. 5-12ov., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Antonio Geliar de nacion frances detenido en la Real Carcel de Oaxaca, por hereje protestante, Antequera de Oaxaca, 1761. AGN Inq. 803, exp. 41, fs. 358-6 iv., Denuncia por D. Andres de Rivas contra un irlandes llamado D. Gerardo Moro, por presunciones de hereje, Mexico, 1729. AGN Inq. 1169, exp. 8, fs. 98-102, Denuncia que hace Da. Maria de Gontreras Villegas contra D. Gerardo Moro, abogado de la Real Audiencia, por judio y enemigo de las practicas religiosas, Mexico, 6 septiembre 1729. AGN Inq. 924, exp. 7, fs. 113-21V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Diego de la Torre, cajero mayor de D. Bias Romero, flotista que reside en esta ciudad, de nacion frances, natural de Bayona, por proposiciones, Mexico, 1756. AGN Inq. 753, exp. 4, fs. 432-6V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Alvaro Ignacio de Figueroa Ponce de Leon, caballero del habito de Avis, de nacion portugues, por indicios de judio, Mexico, 1714. AGN Inq. 926, exp. 20, fs. 258-64V., El secretario que hace oficio

184 28 29

30

31

32

33

34

35

Notes to pages 57-62 de Fiscal contra D. Felipe de Acosta, espafiol, de oficio relojero, sospechoso de luterano, Pachuca, 1754. AGN Inq. 911, exp. 4, fs. 38-8V., El Fiscal del SO contra D. Juan de Bitel y Rios, de nacion frances, por calvinista, San Martin Texelucan, 1741. AGN Inq. 913, exp. 10, fs. 262—360, Relacion de la causa contra D. Cesar Fallet, natural de Neoburg, principado del Rey de Prusia, por delito de dichos y hechos calvinistas, Mexico, 1750. AGN Inq. 924, exp. 9, fs. 332-448V., Continuan los actos del proceso contra D. Cesar Fallet natural de la ciudad de Neoburg, principado del Rey de Prusia, Mexico, 1752. AGN Inq. 1069, exp. 2, fs. 27bis~7iv., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra el Capitan Cesar Fallet, por apostata, hereje formal, fautor de herejes y haberse huido con los ingleses que conquistaron Manila, Manila, 1765; exp. 3, fs. 7ibis-io8v., Diligencias practicadas contra Cesar Fallet, en obedecimiento de un edicto de los Illmos. Srs Inquisidores de Mexico, Manila, 1768. For a discussion of Portuguese Jews in seventeenth-century New Spain, see J. I. Israel, 'The Portuguese in Seventeenth-Century Mexico', Jahrbuch fur Geschichte von Staat, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft Lateinamerikas, xi (1974), 12-32. Also see his Race, Class and Politics, pp. 110-3 1, and Seymour B. Liebman, 'The Jews of Colonial Mexico5, HAHR, XLIII (1963), 95-108. Emphasizing another area of the Indies is Lewis Hanke, 'The Portuguese in Spanish America, with Special Reference to the Villa Imperial de Potosi', Revista de Historia de America, LI (196 I), 1—48. Old Christians were those persons without the 'blood taint' of Jewish or Moslem ancestors. New Christians were converts or the descendants of converts from either of these faiths. By the eighteenth century, these distinctions meant little to the Inquisition. A Catholic was a Catholic. Only 6 of the 121 Portuguese listed in Appendix I were even accused of Judaism. See those persons listed as Portuguese in Appendix I. AGN Inq. 706, exp. 25, fs. 237-47, Autos que se formaron sobre la incorporacion que se mando hacer en el distrito de esta Inquisicion de Mexico, de Jose Simois de nacion portugues, familiar del SO de Coimbra, San Jose del Parral, 1698. Initial denuncias against twenty such persons led to investigations that encompassed others as well. AGN Inq. 543, exp. 65, fs. 480-8; AGN Inq. 718, exps. 11-12, fs. 88-115V.; AGN Inq. 721, exp. 7, fs. 117-51; AGN Inq. 722, exp. 10, fs. 268-79; AGN Inq. 731, exp. 20, fs. 260-2; AGN Inq. 745, exp. 48, fs. 442-62V.; AGN Inq. 748, exp. 13, fs. 554-64V.; AGN Inq. 758, exp. 11, fs. 428-32; AGN Inq. 760, exp. 44, fs. 509-53V.; AGN Inq. 761, exp. 40, fs. 569-98V.; AGN Inq. 775, exp. 3, fs. 15-2OV.; AGN Inq. 792, exp. 15, fs. 301-3; AGN Inq. 817, exp. 21, fs. 431-5; AGN Inq. 818, exp. 6, fs. 84-9; AGN Inq. 841, exp. 12, fs. 210-20; AGN Inq. 876, exp. 41, fs. 225-77V.; AGN Inq. 978, exp. 23, fs. 337~8v.; AGN Inq. 1175, exp. 30, fs. 298—323, Denuncias y diligencias contra varios espafioles, por sospechosos de ser judios, NE, 1696-1755. For example, AGN Inq. 873, exp. 14, fs. 419-47, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Jose de Villaurriti, alias Diego Rodriguez o Garcia, vecino y obligado de las carnicerias de la ciudad de Tlaxcala, por sospechas de Judaizmo, Puebla, 1733.

Notes to pages 62-4 36

37

38

39 40 41 42 43

44

45

185

For example, AGN Inq. 546, exps. 2-3, fs. 168-373, El Sr Inquisidor contra D. Andres Gonzalez de Saavedra, por proposiciones, e indicios de observante de la ley de Moises, Mexico, 1705. AGN Inq. 748, exp. 5, fs. 461-508V., Relacion de la causa que siguio contra Fr Jose de S. Ignacio, alias Juan Fernandez de Leon, expulso de la Religion Betlemitica, por hereje blasfemo, judaizante dogmatista, Mexico, 1706-12. AGN Inq. 1007, exps. 1-2, fs. I-I35V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra el Lie. Francisco de la Barrera que se dice ser frances y de profesion medico, por decirse haber proferido proposiciones hereticas, Acayucan, 1760-62, AGN Inq. 750, exp. 11, fs. 447-50V., Declaracion del Br D. Antonio Vasquez Salgado contra Miguel Antonio Bautista, Antequera de Oaxaca, 29 noviembre 1718. AGN Inq. 718, exp. 21, fs. 300-5, Denuncia de Domingo Jorge contra un judio, con las diligencias de la causa, Veracruz, 1701. AGN Inq. 729, exp. 29, f. 604, Gomisario de Veracruz al Santo Tribunal de Mexico, Veracruz, 1 octubre 1701. AGN Inq. 772, exp. 8, fs. 509-43V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Felix Barrera, de estado casado en el Real de los Alamos, por sospechas de judio, San Juan Bautista de Sonora, 1718. AGN Inq. 544, exp. 22, fs. 428-52, El Sr Fiscal contra Pedro Necero por hereje o judaizante, Mexico, 1701. AGN Inq. 821, exp. 14, fs. 215—41, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Juan Lopez Mejia, de oficio corredor en la ciudad de la Veracruz por sospechas de judaizante, Mexico, 1728. AGN Inq. 848, exp. 41, fs. 565-72V., Denuncia que hace D. Antonio Dionisio Garote, vecino de la ciudad de la Nueva Veracruz, contra varios judios que practican la religion Catolica, Veracruz, 1733. These persons are in addition to the forty-six voluntary reconciliaciones. Archival citations for the fifty-five are noted under their names in Appendix I. See: Charles Allen, Paul Archdeacon, Henri Arnauld, Thomas Arrot, Jean Baptiste, Ioannis Antonios Baptistes, Michael Antonios Baptistes, Felix Barrera, Frangois de la Barrere, Roland Bruun, Alexandre la Bruyere, John 'Bustamante', John Joseph Camel, Alexandre Canin, Giovanni Battista Cirino, Pierre Combemale, Jean Cotaux, Charles Effraie, Ralph Ellerker, 'Monsieur' Er, Casar Fallet, Alvaro de Figueira Ponce de Leon, Jose da Fonte, John Frederick, Vicentis Stefanos Fuscares, John Joseph 'Gonzalez', Jacob Green, Antoine Guillard, John Baptist Jacob, Joseph Jordan, Jacques Laine, Michel Lite, Georgios Lithologos, Thomas Martin, Emanuele Martino, Gerard Moore, Daniel Naiscuriue, Francis Norris, Joseph Obediente, Nicholas O'Halloran, Joseph Poullain de Tour, Santiago de Prado, Jean Reytet, Francois Ripe, Frangois Rocque, 'Pedro' Saradi, Jean Serrecer, Francisco Simoes, Jean Baptiste Tillion, George Marion Tracy, Bras de Valladares, Miguel de Valladares, Pierre Ventura, 'Antonio de Villanueba', 'Don Juan'. AGN Inq. 961, exp. 5, fs. I - I I 6 V . , El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Pablo Ignacio Blanco, alias Archdekin, natural de la ciudad de Waterford en Irlanda, por proposiciones hereticas o sospechosas de herejia, Mexico, 1756. The scribe's 'Dr Wiston' almost certainly referred to William Whiston, who succeeded Newton in the Lucasian professorship at Cambridge. Whiston denied the Trinity and called himself an Arian.

186

Notes to pages 6y-jy

A. R. Humphreys, The Augustan World: Society, Thought, and Letters in Eighteenth Century England (New York, 1963), pp. 140, 145. Roland N. Stromberg, Religious Liberalism in Eighteenth Century England (Oxford, 1954), pp. 5-180 passim. 46 One of these 'books' was a 1733 issue of The Spectator. The other was a political booklet published in London in 1702 and called A Discourse Upon the Union of England and Scotland.

Chapter 4 1 Recopilacion, iv, v, 5. 2 The crown could never quite forget the problems caused by wandering Spanish vagabundos in the sixteenth century. The Cetina murder is only the best-told of these stories. See: John Tate Lanning, Pedro de la Torre, Doctor to the Conquerors (Baton Rouge, 1974), pp. 43-88. 3 Recopilacion, ix, xxii, 1; ix, xxvii, 25, 31; rx, xli, 21; 11, i, 14. 4 AGN Inq. 731, exp. 9, is. 129-39V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Joseph Gallo, frances, por delito de dos veces casado, Mexico, 1707. 5 AGN Inq. 715, exp. 16, fs. 471-3, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Antonio Martinez de Robles, natural de la ciudad de Faro en los reinos de Portugal, por casado dos veces, Acapulco, 1710. AGN Inq. 781, exp. 2, fs. 10-72, El Sr Inquisidor del SO, contra Antonio Martinez de Robles, por casado dos veces, Acapulco, 1709-19. 6 Castro Marim is actually on the Portuguese side of the border, near the mouth of the Rio Guadiana. 7 Although conclusive documentation is missing, it appears that the inquisitors delegated this authority to the alcalde because they knew that he had already seized everything that he could identify as belonging to Martins. This local official had probably learned of the troubles of the bigamist through some unofficial channel. Beating the Holy Office to the punch, he sequestered the goods, using a statute which called for impounding all Portuguese property, to justify his action. (See ch. 5 for a discussion of such legislation, some of which appeared only a few years before Martins' arrest.) By empowering the alcalde to do what he had already done, the Tribunal attempted to regain jurisdiction over the goods in question. The motive of the inquisitors was not altogether altruistic. Someone had to pay for the support of the prisoner in jail. 8 This practice of requiring prisoners to pay for their own support in jail, if they were able, was a logical way of reducing the costs of administering justice. Other courts did the same. 9 Recopilacion, rx, xlv, 37. 10 This foreigner's name was Jean Frengan. AGN Inq. 760, exp. 4, fs. 105-10, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Jan Frengan, de nacion frances, natural de la Villa de Montaut, Principado de Bearne, alias Juan de Escalona, alias Juan de Fraga, alias Juan de Claberia, asentista del pulque, vecino de Mexico, por casado tres veces, Mexico, I7I511 AGN Inq. 824, exp. 6, fs. 29-4OV., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Manuel de Matos, portugues, por casado dos veces, Patzcuaro, 17!7* 12 AGN Inq. 813, exp. 2, fs. 16-36, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Francisco de Arnao, genoves, por casado dos veces, Orizaba, 1726.


187

13 There was never a governor of Gibraltar by this name. David P. 14

15 16 17

18 19 20 21 22 23 24

25 26 27 28

Henige, Colonial Governors from the Fifteenth Century to the Present (Madison, 1970), pp. 118-19. AGN Inq. 923, exp. 14, fs. 164-85v., Relacion de la causa contra Jose Sobrados, espanol, alias Jose Amaquibar y Sobrados, alias Jose Mariano Berlin y Pedro Berlin, de nacion ingles, por el delito de casado dos veces, Mazapil, 1753. AGN Inq. 988, exp. 1, fs. 1—248, Diligencias de oficio ejecutadas por el cura del Mazapil contra un hombre llamado Jose Sabrados, alias Jose Mariano Berlin, ingles, por casado dos veces, Mazapil, 1758. AGN RG 68, exp. 13, fs. 56-8, R.c. al virrey, Aranjuez, 27 abril 1748. AGN RG 74, exp. 22, fs. 65-5V., R.c. al virrey y SO, Buen Retiro, 19 marzo 1754. AGN Inq. 974, exp. 13, fs. 666-77, Diligencias sobre averiguar la vida y conducta religiosa de D. Juan Baptista Franyuti natural del Final, casado con Da. Ana Maria Regalado, Acayucan, 1754. AGN Inq. 976, exp. 3, fs. 47—8v., Sobre el conocimiento de D. Juan Franyuti, y si es casado en este pueblo, y con que clase de persona, Acayucan, 1754. AGN Inq. 776, exp. 36, fs. 382—3v., Procedase a la justificacion en forma del matrimonio contrahido en la villa y puerto de Campeche de Manuel Fernandez Gonzalez, de nacion portugues, con una mujer llamada Dorotea, Mexico, 1756. AGN Inq. 836, exp. 16, fs. 345—75, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Joseph Lorenzo Gottez, de nacion ingles, por casado dos veces, Ixtacomitlan, 1732. AGN Inq. 735, exp. 35, fs. 589-602, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Maria de Arnauz, Toluca, 1707-8. An alguacil mayor was a constable associated with the cabildo (town council). He was secondary to the alcaldes and was concerned with police matters. AGN Inq. 817, exp. 31, fs. 527-36, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Pablo Gof, de nacion frances, de oficio sastre, alias Pablo Busel, por casado dos veces, Giudad Real de Chiapa, 1727. AGN Inq. 735, exp. 36, fs. 603-1 ov., Exp. sobre Esteban de Morras y D. Antonio Lopez, Mexico, 1707. 100 pesos was a huge fine. The Mexican silver peso, it may be remembered, was equivalent to the US dollar in the late eighteenth century. AGI CC 4886, Un fol. s.n. sobre la remision a Espafia de tres presos, Veracruz, 29 abril 1734. AGN RG 52, exp. 73, R.o. al virrey, San Ildefonso, 1 agosto 1733. An alternate view would be that Contarini somehow escaped expulsion and had thus been in New Spain the whole time. AGN RG 56, exp. 21, R.cta. al virrey-arzobispo, Aranjuez, 15 mayo 1736; exp. 64, R.o. al virrey-arzobispo, San Ildefonso, 3 septiembre 1736. AGN RG 58, exp. 100, R.o. al virrey-arzobispo, Madrid, 13 noviembre 1738. Among others, see Fisher, Viceregal Administration, p. 221. AGN RG 64, exp. 32, fs. 100-2V., R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 20 abril 1744. One famous example of this principle in action is the attack Viceroy Martin Enriquez ordered when he discovered John Hawkins smuggling slaves in Veracruz in 1569.

188

Notes to pages 82-8

29 AGN Historia 1, exps. 8, 9, 12, 21-7, fs. 170-6, 188-95V., 250-92, Exps. referentes a la causa de D. Lorenzo Boturini Benaduci, Mexico, I738-43-. 30 Giambattista Vico of Naples, a philosopher of history and culture, falls into the last phase of the Italian Baroque, a movement largely ignored in the Enlightened second half of the eighteenth century, but which had seminal impact on the Romantics. Vico, for example, influenced both Goethe and Michelet. For a discussion of Vico's masterwork La Scienza Nuova and for a recent bibliography of Vichiana, see Leon Pompa, Vico, A Study of the 'New Science' (Cambridge, 1975). 31 AGN RG 64, exp. 95, fs. 315-16, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 10 noviembre 1744. 32 Lorenzo Boturini Benaduci, Idea de una nueva historia general de la America Septentrional (1746), reprinted with 'Estudio preliminar' by Miguel Leon-Portilla (Mexico, 1974), p. 107. Jacques Lafaye, Quetzalcoatl and Guadalupe, the Formation of Mexican National Consciousness, 1531-1815 (Chicago, 1976), is the best discussion of the sixteenth-century origins of 'Quetzalcoatl — St Thomas' and also of the Virgin of Guadalupe's syncretic relationship with the Aztec mother-goddess, Tonantzin. Lafaye contends (pp. 263-4) that the prosecution of Boturini was 'implicitly' an attack on a Creole and anti-imperial set of beliefs. 33 AGI AM 650, fol. 18, Exp. sobre la licencia de D. Miguel Phelipe de Huart Juson de Moyrien, natural de Baxa Navarra [French Navarre], Madrid, 1752. 34 AGI CC 4886, Un fol. sobre la causa contra D. Cristobal Silbestre Cubillas, Veracruz, 27 septiembre 1730; R.o. al presidente y asesores del Tribunal de la Casa de Contratacion, Madrid, 4 noviembre 1727; Un fol. sobre D. Juan Bautista Mogodein, frances, 1727; Borador de una carta: presidente de la Casa de Contratacion al secretario de la Negociacion de Nueva Espana del Consejo de Indias, Cadiz, 11 noviembre 1727; Fol. sobre presos remitidos a Espana, Veracruz, 1730, AGN GP 21, exp. 303; fs. 348-9, Virrey al gobernador de Veracruz, Mexico, 18 octubre 1717. AGN RC 50, exp. 6, R.c. al virrey, Sevilla, 26 enero 1731. 35 AGN RC 65, exp. 57, fs. 120-1, RC al virrey, Buen Retiro, 4 julio 1745Chapter 5 1 Recopilacion, ix, xxvii, 9-10, 35. 2 John Rydjord, Foreign Interest in the Independence of New Spain (1935, reprinted New York, 1972), pp. 144-7. 3 AGI IG 538, tomo 2, fs. i8v.—20v., R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 24 julio 1702. This edict is also in AGN RC 31, exp. 39. 4 AGN RC 31, exp. 39, Nota del virrey sobre la r.c. de 24 julio 1702, Mexico, 30 octubre 1703. 5 AGI AM 639, fol. 10, Testimonio de las diligencias executadas contra algunos extrangeros por el Sr D. Francisco de Valenzuela Venegas, orden de Santiago, oidor de la audiencia, Mexico, 1704. 6 Technically the word zambo means the offspring of a black and an Indian. In this case the scribe used the pejorative term lobo {lwoW). 7 Raford had converted in 1683.

Notes to pages go-3 8 9

10 11

12 13 14 15

16 17 18 19

189

AGI AM 639, fol. 1, Virrey Alburquerque al Rey, Mexico, 6 diciembre 1703. AGI AM 639, fol. 3, Testimonios de los autos y diligencias hechos por D. Francisco de Valenzuela Venegas contra D. Lucas Fortuna, extrangero, Mexico, 1703; fol. 4, Testimonios de los autos y diligencias hechos por Sr Dr D. Juan de Escalante Mendoza y Colombres, oidor de la audiencia, contra Ernesto Plus, aleman, Mexico, 1703—4; fol. 5, Testimonio de autos y diligencias en la represalia de Xacome Santoni y Dominico Tula, Mexico, 1704; fol. 6, Testimonios de los autos hechos por el Sr Lie. D. Juan de Ozaetta de Oro, alcalde de la Real Sala del Grimen desta corte contra D. Geronimo Gerardi y Geronimo Thoza, Mexico, 1704; fol. 9, Testimonio de los autos hechos sobre la averiguacion de la naturaleza de Bartholome de Avila, ingles, Mexico, 1703-4; fol. 11, Testimonios de autos hechos en virtud de decreto de SE por el Sr D. Joseph de Luna contra Enrique de Quimpis por ser de nacion Imperial, Mexico, 1704; fol. 14, Diligencias de la prision y embargo de Juan Marino, flamenco, y Juan Maria de Quadro, milanes, 1704; fol. 15, Testimonio de los autos hechos sobre la naturaleza y origines de Dominico Tula, alias Rodriguero, Mexico, 1704; fol. 18, Testimonio de autos hechos en virtud de r.c. y orden de SE sobre la represalia de la persona y bienes de D. Joseph de Lezama y Axpi, Mexico, 1704. Sardinia, a possession of the crown of Aragon, belonged to Spain until 1713 when it passed to Austria as a result of the War of Spanish Succession. AGI AM 639, fol. 8, Testimonios de los autos hechos contra Juan Esteban Berdaron, natural de Milan, Chalco, 1704; fol, 12, Testimonio de autos hechos en virtud de orden de SE por el Sr D. Juan Joseph de Veitia Linaje alcalde mayor de la Puebla sobre la aprehencion de ingleses, olandeses e imperiales: Diego de Santiago, ingles, Puebla, 1704; fol. 13, Testimonio de autos hechos en virtud de orden del Exmo. Sr Duque de Alburquerque por el alcalde mayor de Queretaro, Queretaro, 1704; fol. 17, Testimonio de autos hechos sobre la aprehencion de los extrangeros de la jurisdiccion de la Real Audiencia de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, 1704. This name was acquired at the Englishman's Mexican baptism rather than from his parents. Lorraine was Austrian from 1697 to 1735. AGI AM 639, fol. 2, Acuerdo del Gonsejo de Indias, Madrid, 21 mayo 1704. AGI AM 640, fol. 2, fs. i-2v., R.c. al gobernador y capitan general y presidente de la Audiencia de Espanola, Gampo Real de Nisa, 30 mayo 1704. AGN RG 32, exp. 23, R.c. al virrey, Campo Real de Nisa, 15 junio 1704. AGI IG 538, tomo 2, fs. 81-4, R.c. al corregidor de la Veracruz, Taupallo, 7 julio 1704. A child born in Spanish territory was a subject, and no king of Spain wanted to deprive a subject of his father unless absolutely necessary. AGI AM 640, fol. 2, Testimonio de los autos, r.c, decretos y ordenes del Exmo. Sr Duque de Alburquerque, sobre la represalia de Portugueses, 1705. AGI AM 640—1, Testimonios de los autos hechos en la represalia de Portugueses en NE, 1705-6. Portugal was a possession of the Spanish Hapsburgs from 1580 to

190

20 21 22 23 24 25 26

27

28 29 30

31 32 33 34 35

Notes to pages g$-6 1640. Though still not 'Spaniards', Portuguese born during this period were subjects by definition. Baltasar dos Reis, for example, was a centenarian who in 1705 had been in New Spain for seventytwo years. AGI AM 641, fol. 5, fs. 137—258, Testimonios de los autos hechos por el alcalde mayor de Oaxaca sobre la represalia hecha en las personas y bienes de Manuel Fiallo, Francisco Varreos, Pedro de Arguellez, Balthazar, y Manuel de los Reies, Benito Gomes, Portugueses, Antequera de Oaxaca, 1705. Many Italians benefited from identical logic after 1713. AGI AM 641, fol. 1, Nota del Fiscal Espinosa sobre una r.c. de 7 julio 1704, Mexico, 22 agosto 1707. AGI AM 640, fol. 1, Respuesta del fiscal del Gonsejo de Indias sobre la represalia de Portugueses en NE, Madrid, 5 enero 1708. AGN RG 33, exp. 98, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 19 enero 1708. AGI AM 460, fol. 40, Indice de los pliegos y cartas que los juezes oficiales de la real hacienda de Veracruz remiten a SM en el aviso del cargo de Pedro de Tranzate Zamora, carta 5, 21 agosto 1708. AGN GP 19, exp. 203, fs. 150-50V., Garta del oidor Joseph de la Gerda Moran al justicia de Sinapequaro, Mexico, 19 julio 1709. There were three groups of merchants in colonial Spanish America. The wholesalers who imported merchandise were moderately to very important commercial figures. Independent shopkeepers were of small to moderate importance and limited themselves to retail. There were also poor vendors who sold goods on the streets or in market stalls. None of the Portuguese produced in the investigation of 1704-9 fell into the top category of wholesale merchant. AGI AM 863, Gartas y exps. de los oficiales reales de aquellas cajas sobre efectos represalidos a ingleses y remitidos a Espana, 1721—2. AGN RG 39, exp. 119, R.c. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 14 septiembre 1718; exp. 123, R.o. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 23 septiembre 1718; exp. 134, R.o. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 25 octubre 1718. AGN RG 40, exp. 112, R.c. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 24 octubre 1719; exp. 147, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 2 diciembre 1719. AGN RG 46, exp. 26, R.c. al virrey, Buen Retiro, 27 marzo 1727; exp. 95, R.c. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 30 octubre 1727. AGN RG 59, exp. 105, R.c. a los virreyes y otros oficiales de las Indias, San Ildefonso, 27 agosto 1739. AGN Bandos, 3, exp. 16, Bando del Arzobispo Vizarron y Eguiarreta, Mexico, 21 noviembre 1739. AGN RG 39, exp. 127, R.c. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 30 octubre 1718. AGN GP 31, exp. 18, fs. 15-15V., Decreto del virrey, Mexico, 16 febrero 1736; exp. 74, fs. 46-7, Decreto del virrey, Mexico, 27 agosto 1736. AGN RG 40, exp. 155, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 10 diciembre 1719. AGN RG 42, exp. 11, R.cta. al virrey, Madrid, 2 marzo 1721. Bridges escaped expulsion and moved to another town in the viceroyalty. See Appendix I. AGN RG 45, exp. 75, R.cta. al virrey, Madrid, 2 abril 1726. AGN Virreyes 1, carta 27, Virrey Amarillas al gobernador de Veracruz, Mexico, 7 febrero 1756. AGN RG 76, exp. 73, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 25 agosto 1756. AHH 550, exp. 91, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 16 septiembre 1756. AGN Virreyes 2, Garta 214, Virrey Amarillas al Rey, Mexico, 27 abril 1757. AGN Bandos 5, exp. 10. fs. 30-iv., Bando del Virrey Amarillas,

Notes to pages 96-9

36

37 38 39 40

41 42

43

44

45

46

191

Mexico, 11 junio 1757. Printed in Belena, Autos Acordados, 1: 188-9. AGI AM 650, fol. 26, fs. i-6v., R.c. al virrey, Buen Retiro, 6 marzo 1750. Technically, cedulas de represalia (reprisal) were issued only in time of war. The distinction between these and the more general cedulas of expulsion was only one of degree. AGI AM 650, fol. 26, fs. 6v.-gv., Decreto del virrey, Mexico, 23 abril 1751. Valcarcel had also put the finishing touches on the Boturini case for Viceroy Fuenclara in the 1740s. See above pp. 82-5. Recopilacion, ix, xxvii, 31-2, 34. In naturalization proceedings for the first half of the eighteenth century, the Council of the Indies accepted a property valuation of 5,000 silver pesos as meeting the 4,000-ducat requirement. In constant need of money to administer a huge empire, the Spanish kings allowed their subjects to exempt themselves from the operation of certain laws or to gain new status and public office by the payment of fees to the royal treasury. For example, even native-born Spaniards, if they had crossed without a license, might be required to pay a fee in order to avoid expulsion. Balentin Antonio de Monteverde, a native of Cadiz, paid such a fee (50 pesos) to Viceroy Gelve in the late seventeenth century. AGI AM 640, fol. 4, fs. 174—90, Testimonio de los autos hechos en la represalia de la persona y vienes de D. Antonio Balentin, de nacion portugues, Mexico, 1705. Recopilacion, ix, xxvii, 13-14. Though almost always written in the form of a royal letter (real carta), the letters of naturalization were alternately called cedulas, decretos, and titulos. A carta de tolerancia often granted reduced rights, excluding, for example, the right to hold office. Archival citations for these men are located under their names in Appendix I. See: Jean Baptiste Baldo, Bartolomeo Borgia, Girolamo Brillano, Carlo Filippo Bucheli, Bartolomeo Bucheli, Pierre Combemale, Constantino Domenico Cumani, Ventura de Cuore, Giacomo Durante, Clement de Fraguier, Manuel Freyre da Fonseca, Gaetano Giudice, Michel Philippe de Huart, Mathieu Lamartine, Louis Legrand, Giuseppe Antonio Lombardino, Jean Malibran, Domenico della Veglia, and Francis Whit(e). These are silver pesos escudos rather than gold pesos fuertes. Since different servicios are listed in either of these coinages or in copper reales} the average here presented is only approximate and assumes that one peso escudo equals fifteen reales de vellon. Actually, fifteen of the nineteen applicants received a favorable hearing. Pierre Combemale, a French pulpero in Zacatula, received a carta de tolerancia. Francis Whit(e), bookkeeper to a merchant in' Mexico City, would have received naturalization had he lived. The investigation of naturalizations for New Spain uncovered forty such grants made to foreigners resident in Andalusia. At least ten additional persons in the Canaries also received naturalization. All fifty included rights to the Indies' trade. AGI CG 238, ramo 2, fols. 22-43, Cartas de naturaleza a extrangeros para contratar en Indias, 1702-6. AGI CG 239, ramo 4, fols, 75-7, 86, 88-96, R.cs. de naturaleza de extrangeros para poder tratar y contratar en Indias, 1702-33. AGS Titulos 182, fol. 417, Carta de naturaleza a Joseph Maria Jordan y Sierra, genoves, vecino de Cadiz, 5 septiembre 1750;

192

47 48

49 50

51 52

53

54 55 56 57

Notes to pages 99-103 fol. 583, R.c. concediendole naturaleza a D. Phelipe Piar, Aranjuez, 15 mayo 1747; fol. 621, Garta de naturaleza a Pablo Capitanache o Capittanachi, griego, residente en Cadiz, 19 septiembre! 1750. AGS Titulos 183, fol. 314, Traslado de la cedula de SM concediendole naturaleza a D. Guillermo Vanden Heede Duxardin, Buen Retiro, 21 agosto 1753; fol. 364, Garta de naturaleza a Juan Angel Belloni, milanes, vecino de Cadiz, 28 junio 1751; fol. 365, Carta de naturaleza a Juan Domingo Moris, saboyano, vecino de Cadiz, 28 junio 1751; fol. 450, Carta de naturaleza a Juan Francisco de Superviela y Arriaga, frances, vecino de Cadiz, 20 junio 1756; fol. 734. R.c. concediendole naturaleza a D. Phelipe Smith, irlandes, vecino de Cadiz, 8 abril 1753. AGI CC 596A, 2 fols, s.n., R.ctas. concediendole naturaleza a D. Phelipe Smith y Roman Vienne, 1753 y 1756. AGI CG 596B, 4 fols. s.n., Toma de razon de r.cs. concediendo naturaleza a Pablo Capitanache, Juan Francisco Superviela y Arriaga, Joseph Maria Jordan y Sierra, Juan Angel Belloni y Juan Domingo Moris, Cadiz, 1750—6. AGI AM 650, fol. 25, Cinco exps. sobre la licencia de Juan Malibran Bosques, frances, para residir en Indias, 1758. AGI AM 650, fol. 25, exp. 5, Testimonio de los autos seguidos contra D. Juan Malibran Bosques, originario de la ciudad de Pezenas, diocesis de Agde, Reynos de Francia, y vecino de la ciudad de Veracruz, Mexico, 1754. 'The list' may well have been prepared by the Consulado of Mexico City and presented to the viceroy for action. The procedure was not unknown. Arriaga's order of 16 September 1756 to Viceroy Amarillas mandated the same thing. AHH 550, exp. 91. Vidairre was one of the procuradores del numero licensed to practice before the Audiencia of Mexico. AGI AM 650, fol. 25, exp. 1, D. Juan Malibran Bosques de nacion frances y vecino de la ciudad de Vera Cruz sobre que se le conceda carta de naturaleza para todos los dominios de SM [Madrid], 1758. Representing the Council throughout the Malibran case were three consejeros de cdmara: Jose Cornejo e Ibarra, Francisco Fernandez Molinillo, and Manuel Pablo de Salcedo. They signed their names: Cornejo, Molinillo, and Salcedo. AGN AM 650, fol. 25, exp. 1, Dictamen del consejero de camara, D. Manuel Pablo Salcedo, Madrid, 1758. The representation to the king from the Gonsulado of Madrid dated 30 June 1756 had resulted in Arriaga being commissioned to handle the whole matter of foreigners resident in the Indies and trading without permission. AHH 550, exp. 91. Naturalization was a gracia similar to a grant of legitimacy or lirapieza de sangre (purity of blood). For this reason, the Camara rather than the whole Council dealt with these matters. The Council was concerned with de justicia cases, i.e. lawsuits and matters of policy. AGI IG 539, tomo 2, pags. 32-3, R.o. al presidente y oidores de la Real Audiencia de la Gontratacion de Indias, Madrid, 8 abril 1758. AGI AM 650, fol. 25, exp. 1, Real acuerdo de la Camara de Indias, Madrid, 12 junio 1758. AGI INE 16, fol. 19, Real titulo concediendo naturaleza a D. Juan Malibran Bosques, Villaviciosa, 5 octubre 1758. AGI GC 596B, fol. s.n., Toma de razon de la r.c. de 1758 concediendo naturaleza a D. Juan de Malibran, Cadiz 1758.


193

58 The media anata, a sort of legalized kickback dating from the seventeenth century, was an account established to receive a set percentage of salaries and other emoluments paid to government officials. Haring, Spanish Empire in America, pp. 273—4. 59 AGI AM 650, fol. 25, exp. 2, Exp. que motiva una representacion del Gonsulado de Cadiz, de resulta de averse concedido carta de naturaleza a D. Juan Malibran Bosques de nacion franees, residente en Veracruz, Madrid, 1758-9. 60 Such residence was a technical violation of the law. Recopilacion, ix, xxvii, 21 stipulated that foreigners should live at least twenty leagues (about 112 km) from the ports and frontiers. But in practice, foreigners do not seem to have been molested simply for having taken up residence in a port city of the Indies. For individuals requesting naturalization, however, living in a port city often increased the amount of servicio they had to pay. 61 In addition to the nineteen foreigners in New Spain known to have sought naturalization as a direct or indirect result of the cedula of 1750, at least twenty-five other foreigners in the viceroyalty applied for citizenship between 1700 and 1760. As with the post-1750 group, those applying between 1700 and 1750 are listed with archival citations in Appendix I. See: George Abercromby, Accurzio Alangi, William Butler, John Michael Carter, Aubert Chevallier, Philippe Dispan, Domingos Fernandes, Antonio Fernandes Mendes, Giovanni Antonio Gambino, Pierre Godeau, Giovanni Francesco Grondona, Alexander Joseph Guile, John Ingleby, Guil Leleu, Patrick Maguire, Lourenc,o de Medina, Francesco Antonio Pagliari, Francisco Pereira Cravos, Roque Pereira da Cunha, Jose Pereira Pinto, Joseph de Place, Clemente Ramalho, Vincent Rebecq, Raimondo de Tasara, and Luc Tonneilier. 62 Abercromby, it will be remembered, was a key witness in the Inquisition's investigation of Paul Archdeacon. See above pp. 64-8. 63 Francis Whit(e) would have made forty, but he died while the Council processed his application. 64 AGI INE 16, fol. 12, R.c. concediendo naturaleza a D. Francisco Antonio Pallares y Gambino, el Pardo, 8 abril 1728; fol. 13, R.c. concediendo naturaleza a D. Juan Antonio Gambino, Buen Retiro, 28 marzo 1728. 65 Since records of such cases thus cited as examples by the attorneys are sometimes not in the archives with other letters of naturalization, it may be that either the attorneys borrowed and failed to return the missing papers, or when they did return the files, the secretaries put the documents in the wrong bundle of papers. 66 AGI INE 16, fol. 16, R.c. concediendo naturaleza a Alexandra Joseph de Guelle, Lisajo, 30 junio 1719. 67 AGI INE 16, fol. 8, R.c. por la qual le concede SM naturaleza a D. Patricio Maguier, San Lorenzo, 26 octubre 1738. Supposedly because of the increased costs of administration, all payments to the account of the media anata were 18 percent higher in the Indies than in Spain. See: Haring, Spanish Empire in America, pp. 273-4. 68 AGI CG 239, ramo 4, fol. 87, R.c. concediendo naturaleza a Gil Lelo, frances, vecmo de Mexico, Buen Retiro, 10 diciembre 1723. 69 Authorized fees due to the accountants and royal officials of the Contaduria totaled 8J pesos just for registering and dispatching letters of naturalization. AGI IG 821, fol. 16, Arancel de los

ig4

70 71 72

73

74 75 76

77 78 79

80 81

82

83

Notes to pages ioj-g derechos que debe cobrar la Gontaduria General de Indias por empleos, gracias, dignidades, cargos, y ramos de todas clases en conformidad al Real Arancel de 17 inoviembre 1749; fol. 19, Impreso: Arancel de los derechos que han de percibir y llevar los Gontadores del Real y Supremo Gonsejo de Indias y los Oficiales de su Gontaduria, asi por lo perteneciente a lo eclesiastico, como a lo secular, s.L, 22 diciembre 1749. AGI GG 596B, fol. s.n., Toma de razon de la r.c. de 1753 concediendo naturaleza destos reynos para comerciar en los de Indias a D. Phelipe Smith, irlandes, Cadiz, 1753. All of the grants of citizenship made by the Council of the Indies to foreigners in Spain fell into this category. See p. 191 above, n. 46. AGI IG 1538, ramo 1, fol. 4, Impreso: Peticion al Rey en nombre de los hijos, nacidos en Espana, de extrangeros, presentado por D. Joseph del Duque, circa 1723; ramo 2, fol. 17, Joseph de Valdivieso al Andres de Elcorobarrutia, Cadiz, 11 enero 1723. AGI IG 1538, ramo 1, fol. 8, R.o. a los senores presidente y asesores del Tribunal de la Casa de Contratacion de Cadiz, Madrid, 17 agosto 1723. AHH 599, exp. 10, Resumen de un real decreto al Real Consejo de Indias y Tribunal de la Casa de Contratacion, s.l., 27 febrero 1726. The law in question was Leyes destos reynos, 11, iv, 66. The Laws of the Indies upheld the same principle. Recopilacion, rx, xxvii, 27. AHH 599, exp. 10, Resumen de una r.c. al Consulado de Cadiz, Aranjuez, 20 abril 1742, y resumen de una r.c. al Consulado de Cadiz, s.L, 5 mayo 1747. Recopilacion, ix, xxvii, 13, 15, 27. Though beyond the scope of this study, documentation is available. The Archivo Microfilmeco de Genealogia y Heraldica in Mexico City holds an estimated 90,000 rolls of microfilm (some 85,000,000 photographed pages) of Mexican birth, confirmation, marriage, and death entries from parish registries. The Genealogical Society of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Salt Lake City) has copies of all of the film in Mexico. See Josepha and John Ingleby in Appendix I. Jane Stuart and Mary Nott both entered New Spain as widows. See Appendix I. Mary Doyle was the mother of Robert Kirban, Irishman, and lived with him in Mexico City. ANG Inq. 961, exp. 5, fs. 1-1 i6v., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Pablo Ignacio Blanco, alias Archdekin, natural de Waterford en Irlanda, por proposiciones hereticas o sospechosas de herejia, Mexico, 1756. AGI INE 135—6, Relaciones de meritos de personas seculares, 16991701, 1650-1704. Villasenor y Sanchez, Theatro Americano, 1: 37. AGN Bandos 2, exp. 1, fs. 23-39v., Impreso: Aranzel de los derechos que deben llevar los ministros de Juzgado General de Bienes de Difuntos, Mexico, 1723. Recopilacion, 11, xxxii, 44. Later in the century, Viceroy Bucareli, prompted by Charles III, had to reiterate the exemption allowed to the estates of foreigners who died leaving wives and children. AGN Bandos 9, exp. 362, Bando del Virrey Bucareli, Mexico, 8 noviembre 1776. AGN RG 29, exp. 109, fs. 244-51, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 21 agosto

Notes to pages iog-12

195

1700. AGN RC 33, exp. 117, fs. 335-5V., R.c. a los virreyes y audiencias del Peru y NE, Madrid, 13 febrero 1708. AGN RG 36, exp. 90, fs. 249—50, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 30 diciembre 1713. AGN RG 37, exp. 34, fs. 94-4V., R.c. al virrey, Aranjuez, 28 mayo 1715. AGN RG 61, exp. 1, Impreso; R.c. a los jueces generales de bienes de difuntos y oficiales reales en las Indias. Buen Retiro, 25 enero 1749. AGN RG 68, exp, 5, fs. 24-4V., Impreso: R.c. a los jueces generales de bienes de difuntos y oficiales reales en las Indias, Buen Retiro, 20 febrero 1748. 84 AGI GG 5585, fol. 96, Autos sobre los bienes de D. Pedro Ronquillo, ingles, difunto en Veracruz, 1709. AGI CG 5593, fol. 6, Autos sobre los bienes de D. Juan Prozo de Gampos, cirujano, natural de Milan, difunto en Queretaro, 1732. AGI CG 5594, fol. 5, Autos sobre los bienes de Juan Glaudio Renault, frances, difunto en Veracruz, 1732. AGI GG 5596, fol. 11, Autos sobre los bienes de Antonio Maria Borrela, genoves, difunto en Veracruz, 1734. AGI GC 5599, fol. 1, Autos sobre los bienes de Juan Siscard, frances, difunto abordo, 1737. AGI GG 5600, fol. 3, Autos sobre los bienes de Fernando de Urguieta, frances, difunto abordo, 1738. AGI CG 5602, fol. 4, Autos sobre los bienes de Nicolas Mallen, natural de Napoles, difunto, Villa de Santa Ana, Sonora, 1745. AGI GC 5607, fol. 6, Autos sobre los bienes de D. Cayetano Maria Paredes, genoves, difunto, abordo, 1749. AGI GC 5612, fol. 6, Autos sobre los bienes de Domingo de Casela, genoves, difunto sin testamento, Jalapa, 1750. AGI GG 5633, fol. 4, Autos sobre los bienes de D. Juan Antonio Salbago, genoves, difunto, Yucatan, 1757; fol. 6, Autos sobre los bienes de D. Juan Pablo de Gola, genoves, difunto sin testamento, Mexico, 1757. Conclusion 1 Rubio Mane, 'Gente de Espafia', 5—406. Baez Macias, 'Pianos y censos', 407-1156. 2 The American- and Asian-born subjects of other nations are here lumped with 'Europeans'. 3 Haring, Spanish Empire in America, p. 189. 4 The laws forbade even naturalized foreigners to settle on or near the coasts, but almost 25 percent of those aliens in Appendix I had their encounters with the authorities in these 'forbidden' areas. Given the reasons for these encounters, however, permanent settlers, as opposed to transients, had less to worry about from port authorities than they did from the generally unhealthy conditions of the tropical coasts. Climate and economic opportunities seem to have been more important than royal law in turning foreigners toward the interior. Consulting mostly Mexican documents (none from the AGI and the AGS), Houdaille found [758] 'Frenchmen' (including Corsicans, Savoyards, Alsatians, French-speaking Swiss, French colonials, and some Flemings) present in New Spain at one time or another between 1700 and 1820. Of these, 83 were there before 1760. Out of the 83, 48 (including, among others, settlers in Texas and New Mexico and transients) are included in neither of my appendices. Adding them would raise Appendix I from 431 to 479 or the total for both appendices to 659. See Jacques Houdaille, 'Frenchmen and Francophiles in New Spain from 1760 to 1810'. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation (Catholic University of America, 1956), pp. 227-77;

196

5

Notes to pages 114.-21 entries: 6, 8, 30, 42, 59, 70, 82, 147, H9, 159, 164, 177, 188, 190, 195, 216, 248, 264, 291, 305, 317, 3i8, 321, 333, 364, 382, 383, 415, 432a, 447a, 449, 453, 460, 472, 485, 506, 528, 693, 701, 703, 726, 731, 760, 772, 778,811, 817, 824. For a discussion of some of the authorities, see the introductory paragraphs of the Select Bibliography. A note on names

1 Clarence L. Barnhart, ed., New Century Cyclopedia of Names (3 vols., New York, 1954). 2 Separating foreigners from Spaniards by birthplace, however, required the use of specialized references such as Pierre Charles Ernest Dechamps, Dictionnaire de geographie ancienne et moderne (Paris, 1954). Appendix I 1 Abercromby, while a resident of Campeche, requested naturalization as a doctor. By 1752 he was in Mexico City and was a merchant. He was still there at least as late as 1765. His wife Josepha was John Ingleby's daughter. By 1756 she was deceased. AGI INE 16, fol. 52), Real titulo de naturaleza a D. Jorge Abercromby, San Lorenzo, 3 noviembre 1745. AGN, Mineria 123, exp. 4, fs. 18—32V., Autos hechos a pedimiento de D. George Abercromby sobre pesos, Mexico, 1753, AGN RC 86, exp. 67, fs. 120-1, R.c. al virrey, el Pardo, 24 febrero 1765. Also see citations, nn. 12 (Paul Archdeacon) and 242 (John MacTagart). 2 Josepha Abercromby was one of two daughters of John and Josepha Ingleby, and with her sister accompanied her parents to New Spain in the mid-1730s. She and George Abercromby eventually resided in Mexico City after their marriage. See citations, nn. 1 (George Abercromby) and 199 (John Ingleby). 3 See second citation, n. 257 (Antonio Martins de Robles). 4 AGI AM 640, fol. 14, fs. 359-68, Testimonio de autos hechos en virtud de orden de SE por el alcalde mayor de Papantla, sobre la prision y embargo de bienes de Luis de Aguilar, portugues de nacion, 17055 AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 7. AGI AM 650, fol. 8, Fol. sobre la licencia del Br D. Acurcio Alonge Hurtado de Mendoza, natural de Sicilia, para residir en Indias, 1719-37. 6 Attempts by the Inquisition to locate Allen in 1762 failed because he had moved on to the Philippines. See citation, n. 12 (Paul Archdeacon). 7 Alves had served in the presidio at Pensacola for four years. He became ill and moved to New Spain for his health. AGI AM 640, fol. 16, fs. 379bis.—82, Testimonio de los autos hechos sobre la represalia contra Manuel Alvarez de nacion portugues, Mexico, 17058 AGI AM 641, fol. 10, fs. 453-540V., Testimonio de autos hechos en virtud de orden de SE por el alcalde mayor de Cordoba contra diferentes Portugueses por incursos en la represalia, Cordoba, 1705-6. 9 Ambrose, a married man, testified in the Joseph Coates case. See citation, n. 76 (Joseph Coates).

Notes to pages 121-2 10 11 12

13 14

15

16 17 18 19

20 21 22

23 24 25

197

AGN Inq. 978, exp. 1, fs. 1—19, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Eduardo Andres, ingles, Orizaba, 1756. AGN Virreyes, 1, carta 27, f. 39, Virrey Amarillas al gobernador de Veracruz, Mexico, 7 febrero, 1756. AGN Inq. 961, exp. 5, fs. 1—II6V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Pablo Ignacio Blanco, alias Archdekin, natural de la ciudad de Waterford en Irlanda, por proposiciones hereticas o sospechosas de herejia, Mexico, 1756. Thomas was Paul Archdeacon's brother. See citation, n. 12 (Paul Archdeacon). Arguelhes had been a vecino of Oaxaca for thirty-five years in 1705. AGI AM 641, fol. 5, fs. 139-258, Testimonios de los autos hechos por el alcalde mayor de Oaxaca sobre la represalia hecha en las personas y bienes de Manuel Fiallo, Francisco Varreos, Pedro de Arguellez, Balthasar y Manuel de los Reis, Benito Gomez, Portugueses, Antequera de Oaxaca, 1705. The case against Arnauld was dropped when the key witness against him died. Arnauld had been accused of making disparaging remarks about the worship of sacred images and annual confession. AGN Inq. 777, exp. 5, fs. 30-43, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Enrique Arnauld, frances, por negar el anual precepto de la confesion y la adoracion a las imagenes, Veracruz, 1719. AGN, Inq. 813, exp. 2, fs. 16—36, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Francisco de Arnao, genoves, por casado dos veces, Orizaba, 1726. Arnoux was a married man. Baez Macias, 'Pianos y censos', p. 526. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132—4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687—1760, articulo 21. Also see second citation, n. 22 (Jean Baptiste Baldo). Arrot was just an apothecary (boticario), but he practiced medicine and surgery as well. His rapid success in Oaxaca was probably behind the charges against him. He carried a 'passport' from the governor of Panama and had entered New Spain by way of Guatemala. Arrot's cousin, William Gordon, who was then a student at the Jesuit Colegio Maximo in Mexico City, came forward to clear Arrot, and the Inquisition ordered the accused man's reputation to be cleared. AGN Inq. 811, exp. 4, fs. 310-54, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Tomas Arrot, ingles o escoces, por proposiciones hereticas, Oaxaca, 1725. See citation, n. 76 (Joseph Goates). See citation, n. 227 (Michel Lite). AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 26. AGI AM 650, fol. 24, Exp. sobre la licencia de D. Juan Bautista Baldo de nacion saboyano para residir en Indias, 1752-6. AGI INE 16, fol. 41, Carta de naturaleza de D. Juan Bautista Baldo, Buen Retiro, 18 julio 1756. Baldo, a long-time resident of New Spain, came to the attention of the authorities again in the 1780s. AGN Historia 294, exps. 4-5, Dos exps. sobre Juan Bautista Baldo, de Genova, 1781—4. AGN Inq. 876, exp. 20, fs. 75-5V., El Br D. Jose Rivera y Villalobos, denuncia contra un sujeto originario de Bayona nombrado Juan Bautista, por blasfemo, Zacatecas, 1739. AGN Inq. 750, exp. 9, fs. 429-37v., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Miguel Antonio Bautista y Juan Bautista Antonio, Antequera de Oaxaca, 1711-12. Michael was either the brother or cousin of Ioannis Baptistes.

198

26 27

28

29 30 31 32 33 34 35

36 37

38

Notes to pages 122-3 AGN Inq. 750, exps. 10-11, fs. 438-45V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Miguel Antonio Bautista, de nacion griego, Antequera de Oaxaca, 1713-18. AGN Inq. 772, exp. 8, fs. 5 09-43 v., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Felix Barrera, de estado casado en el Real de los Alamos, por sospechos de judio, San Juan Bautista de Sonora, 1718. Arriving in New Spain in the early summer of 1759, Barrere found his way from Tabasco to the village of Acayucan. He claimed to be a doctor, but following his total failure to effect cures, he was denounced to the Inquisition. Arrested and released several times, he escaped but was rearrested in 1760 or 1761 and remained in the jails of Antequera de Oaxaca until 1772 when he was sent to Mexico City. It was his religious statements and not his lack of medical proficiency that kept the Holy Office interested in this quack. The inquisitors believed that he was insane. AGN Inq. 1007, exps. 1—2, fs. 1—133V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra el Lie. Francisco de la Barrera que se dice ser frances y de profesion medico, por decirse haber proferido proposiciones hereticas, Acayucan, 1760-2. AGI AM 641, fol. 13, fs. 578-683, Testimonio de autos hechos por D. Pedro Escalante de Mendoza alguacil mayor de la Puebla contra la persona y bienes de Joseph de Barrientos, Pedro de Quintana, Manuel Gomez Rabelo, Joseph Ruiz por nacionales de Portugal, Puebla, 1705. AGI IG 1597, fol. 1, R.c. al virrey, Sevilla, 7 diciembre 1731. AGN RG 52, exp. 73, R.o. al virrey, San Ildefonso, 1 agosto 1733. AGI GG 4886, Fol. s.n. sob re la remision a Espafia de tres presos, Veracruz, 29 abril 1734. AGN Inq. 745, exp. 47, fs. 434-40, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Alberto de Vender, Mexico, 1712. See citation, n. 10 (Edward Andrews). See citation, n. 117 (Antoine du Farge). AGI GG 4886, Fol. s.n. sobre presos remitidos a Espafia, Veracruz, 1730. AGI AM 650, fol. 25, fs. 3-4, Respuesta de D. Domingo Valcarcel, oidor, al virrey, Mexico, 9 octubre 1751. Borda was a noble. He amassed a great fortune and passed it on to his children. See Doris M. Ladd, The Mexican Nobility at Independence, 1280-1826 (Austin, 1976), pp. 33, 53, 62, 91, 151, 184, 236 n. 14. AGI GG 5596, fol. 11, Exp. sobre los bienes de Antonio Maria Borrela, difunto, Veracruz, 1734. Borgia was born while his homeland was still a Spanish possession. In Spain by 1715, he was shipwrecked in Gampeche in 1740 and had been in New Spain ever since. He held a militia commission at the time of his arrest. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventario de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687—1760, articulo 16. AGI AM 650, fol. 16, Exp. sobre la licencia de D. Bartholome Borga, extrangero, para residir en Indias, 1753. AGI INE 16, fol. 45, R.cta. de naturaleza a D. Bartholome de Borga, Buen Retiro, 2 diciembre 1753. AGN Historia 1, exps. 8, 9, 12, 21-7, fs. 170-6, 188-95V., 250-92. Exps. referentes a la causa de D. Lorenzo Boturini Benaducti, Mexico, 1738-43. AGN RG 64, exp. 32, fs. 99-102v., R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 20 abril 1744. AGN RC 64, exp. 95, fs. 315-16. R.o. al virrey Madrid, 10 noviembre 1744. AGN RG 67 exp. 14, R.c. al virrey, Buen Retiro, 10 julio 1747. Fisher, Viceregal Administration, p. 221.

Notes to pages 123—4

199

39 A military engineer in Spanish employ, Bouchard prepared a map of Gampeche in 1706. AGI MP mapa 1009, Mapa de la ciudad de Gampeche y sus contornos, Gampeche, 25 octubre 1705, por el ingeniero frances, D. Luis Bouchard de Becour. AGI AM 2424, fol. s.n., R.c. concediendo titulo de ingeniero militar a D. Joseph Mazzoni, Zaragoza, 29 abril 1711. 40 AGN Inq. 916, exp. 17, fs. 336-46, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Francisco Boutte, de la provincia de Anjou, Veracruz, 1748. 41 See citation, n. 245 (Pierre Malet). 42 Bridges' license was revoked by the king, but the foreigner remained in the viceroyalty. He simply took his mulata mistress, Mary Catherine, and moved to Orizaba where he operated a sugar mill. AGN RG 40, exp. 155, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 10 diciembre 1719. AGN RG 42, exp. 11, R.cta. al virrey, Madrid, 2 marzo 1721. Also see citations, nn. 148 (Angus Fraser), 81 (John Gorkran), 198 (John Hucker), and 414 (Antonio de Villanueba). 43 Brillano, like most local merchants, was a member of the militia. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132—4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 23. AGI AM 650, fol. 23, Exp. sobre la licencia de D. Geronimo Brillan, natural de Genova, para residir en Indias, 1756. AGI INE 16, fol. 40, Titulo de naturaleza destos reynos y los de las Indias concediendo a D. Geronimo Brillan, Buen Retiro, 18 Julio 1756. 44 Brocato, in 1753, was married and had five children. Baez Macias, 'Pianos y censos', p. 560. 45 See citation, n. 90 (Jean Cotaux). 46 Bruun was seventy-seven years old in 1764. He had almost certainly been in New Spain before 1760. AGN Inq. 1019, exp. 7, fs. 203—6v., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Roldan Bruno, alias Lorenzo, natural del reino de Dinamarca, de estado soltero y de setenta y siete afios de edad, por hereje luterano, Mexico, 1764. 47 Also called a 'quimico' and a *curandero\ Bruyere was the partner of another Frenchman named 'Francisco'. This partner escaped without even being investigated. Bruyere was accused of some disrespect toward the Virgin of Guadalupe, and both Frenchmen were also accused of using aphrodisiacs on women whom they desired. Bruyere had been in New Spain for six years and a resident of the above region for two-and-a-half years. AGN Inq. 767, exp. 8, fs. 199—213, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra un frances llamado D. Alejandro Labriera, de oficio quimico, residente en el pueblo de Aguatipango, jurisdiccion de la Villa de Valles, por negar la veneracion y culto a las sagradas imagenes, Yahualica, 1717. AGN Inq. 1051, fs. 112-14V., El comisario del SO en Yahualica D. Francisco de Arriaga remite los autos formados contra unos f ranceses curanderos o quimicas, por usar de unos polves para que los mujeres los quisieran, Huejutla, 1717. 48 AGI INE 16, fol. 47, R.cta. de naturaleza a D. Bartolome Bucheli, Buen Retiro, 12 septiembre 1752. 49 Carlo Bucheli had a wife in Spain. AGS Titulos 183, fols. 149-50, Dos copias de la carta de naturaleza destos reynos y de los de Indias que se le dispacho a D. Carlos Phelipe Bucheli, Buen Retiro, 7 julio y 14 agosto 1753. AGI CC 596B, fol. s.n., Toma de razon de la r.c. de 1753 concediendo naturaleza a D. Carlos Phelipe Bucheli, Cadiz,

200

50 51

52

53 54

55 56 57 58

59

60 61

Notes to pages 124-5 1753. AGI INE 16, fol. 44, R.cta. de naturaleza a D. Carlos Phelipe Bucheli, Buen Retiro, 14 agosto 1753. In 1753 Bulle was married. Baez Macias, 'Pianos y censos', p. 562. Bussel and several other foreigners arrived in Veracruz as sailors in the Armada de Barlovento in 1722 and went to Chiapas. There were three Germans: Joseph Miller (Milert or Milerst), 'Durst', and Sebastian Pommer (Pomer). Besides Bussel, two were French, Jean Souriau (Juan Soro) and Francois Reis (Francisco de los Reies). All but Souriau stayed. Because they settled in an area subject to the Audiencia of Guatemala, only Bussel is included in this appendix. Bussel was a fugitive murderer from Haiti, but the inquisitors were more interested in his purported bigamy. AGN Inq. 817, exp. 31, fs. 527—36, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Pablo Gof, de nacion Frances, de oficio sastre, alias Pablo Busel, por casado dos veces, Ciudad Real de Chiapas, 1727. Some local bullies had baited this man into saying some suspicious things about religion while he was drunk, but he moved on before they could denounce him to the commissary of the Inquisition. AGN Inq. 969, exp. 15, fs. 186-97, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Juan de Bustamente de nacion ingles, por proposiciones malsonantes, Tlaxcala, 1743. See citation, n. 12 (Paul Archdeacon). William Butler went to New Spain as a factor of the South Sea Company. He converted to Catholicism, married, and eventually obtained naturalization. AGN Inq. 906, exp. 15, fs. 185—8, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia del factor de la nacion inglesa, D. Guillermo Butler, Veracruz, 1741. AGI INE 16, fol. 51, Real titulo de naturaleza de los Reynos de las Indias a D. Guillermo Butler, San Lorenzo, 3 noviembre 1745. Also see citations, nn. 12 (Paul Archdeacon) and 10 (Edward Andrews). See citation, n. 10 (Edward Andrews). See citation, n. 198 (John Hucker). AGN Inq. 721, exp. 20, fs. 263-80V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Juan de la Calle, moro, Taxco, 1702. The only evidence against Camel was offered by his wife. AGN Inq. 921, exp. 4, fs. 114-16, El Secretario que hace oficio del Sr Fiscal contra Juan Jose Canel, de nacion irlandes, por blasfemo e irrision de las sagradas imagenes, Orizaba, 1744. Some of Canin's books had been seized by customs officials in Veracruz, but the inquisitors took no action then or when he was denounced for saying that keeping a mistress was not a sin. AGN Inq. 1000, exp. 4, fs. 18-28, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Alejandro Canini, franees, de oficio cirujano, por decir que amancebarse con una mujer no era pecado, Mexico, 1760. Capusilato was in Veracruz in 1704, presented some false papers, and then went to Caracas. AGN RC 32, exp. 180, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 30 agosto 1705. AGN Inq. 791, exp. 4, fs. 185-9, Reconciliation al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Nicolas Carpintero, marinero ingles, Mexico, 1721.

62

63

A resident of Queretaro for sixteen years, Carrance paid a fine of six pesos and two reales in 1704 for having come without a license. AGI AM 639, fol. 13, Testimonio de autos hechos en virtud de orden del virrey, por el alcalde mayor de Queretaro, 1704. An Anglican sailor captured in 1708, Carter converted to Catholic-


64 65 66 67 68

69

70 71

72

73 74

75 76

77 78

201

ism in 1709 and remained in New Spain after the war. AGI INE 16, fol. 10, R.c. por la qual le concede SM naturaleza de estos Reynos y que pueda tratar y comerciar en los de las Indias a Juan Miguel Garter, Sevilla, 21 diciembre 1732. A long-time resident, Carvalho was in jail for three months before being set free. AGI AM 640, fol. 21, fs. 486-545, Testimonios de los autos hechos sob re la represalia de Portugueses del Parral, 1705. AGI AM 640, fol. 10, fs. 311—21, Testimonios de los autos hechos por el corregidor de la ciudad de Mexico sobre la represalia de Lorenzo de Caravallo de nacion portugues, Mexico, 1705. AGI GG 5612, fol. 6, Exp. sobre los bienes de Domingo de Gasela, difunto, Jalapa, 1750. See citation, n. 11 (Giacomo di Antonio). In the aftermath of the arrest in New Mexico of four French smugglers from Louisiana, Gharvet was detained in the royal jails of Mexico City. He may well have been freed after the controversy died down. See citation, n. 245 (Pierre Malet). Chevalier was a vecino of Merida. He was sixty in 1703 and had been in New Spain for thirty-eight years. AGI INE 16, fol. 17, R.c. concediendo naturaleza a Alverto Gavallero, Madrid, 15 septiembre 1703. Also see citation, n. 302 (Roque Pereira da Cunha). AGN Inq. 824, exp. 18, fs. 251-6, Restitucion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Juan Nino, ingles, Mexico, 1747. Accused by a doctor of bad-sounding propositions flowing from 'invincible ignorance', Cirino moved on before the inquisitors could act. AGN Inq. 986, exp. 17, fs. 189-96V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Juan Bautista Chirino de oficio cocinero y de nacion extrangera, por dedicarse, a la curacion de diversas enfermedades por medio de la magia blanca, Mexico, 1752. Clare went to New Spain as a boy. He arrived in 1719 and could then speak no Spanish. He was the younger brother of William Clare. AGN Inq. 818, exp. 48, fs. 618-26V., Autos hechos sobre la reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de D. Diego Clero de nacion ingles, Orizaba, 1728. Also see citation, n. 386 (James Strode). See citation, n. 143 (William Fox). Although Clare was a known heretic, as the William Fox case shows, the inquisitors took no action. AGI AM 863, fol. 6, Testimonios contra el presidente y factores de la Real Compafiia de Granbretafia, Veracruz, 1721. Also see citation, n. 143 (William Fox). Rubio Mane, 'Gente de Espana', p. 52. Coates, who had spent time in Veracruz on his way to Tabasco, was sent to work in one of the 'king's factories' in Cuba, pending the outcome of the bigamy investigation. AGN Inq. 836, exp. 16, fs. 345—75, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Joseph Lorenzo Cottez, de nacion ingles, por casado dos veces, Ixtacomitlan, Chiapas, 1732. AGN Inq. 824, exp. 7, fs. 41— 7v., Reconciliacion de Guillermo Cogan, hereje protestante de la secta Anglicana, quien detesto de la hereje, y se reunio en la Santa Madre Iglesia, 1742. Combemale, who had arrived in New Spain in 1736, did not receive a formal grant of citizenship because he could not raise the money for his servicio. He was, however, allowed to stay in New Spain 'unmolested'. In 1766 he denounced himself for being a secret Protestant and was reconciled to the Church. AGN Inq. 1171, exp. 3, fs. 95-107, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Pedro Combemale

2O2

79 80

81 82 83 84 85 86

87 88 89 90 91 92 93

94 95 96 97 98

Notes to pages

126-j

Guzman y Luna, natural de Viala en el Reino de Francia, vecino de Zacatlan, por hereje apostata dogmatizante, espontaneo, Zacatlan, 1766. AGI AM 1687, ramo i, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 24. AGI AM 650, fol. 26, Exp. tocante a D. Pedro de Guzman y Luna, vecino y del comercio de Pueblo de Zacatlan en NE, en que solicita que se le concede naturaleza de las Indias y en que el Sr Fiscal es de parecer favorable, 1756. In 1753 Constant was married. Baez Macias, 'Pianos y censos', p. 616. AGN RG 56, exp. 21, R.cta. al virrey-arzobispo, Aranjuez, 15 mayo 1736. AGN RG 58, exp. 100, R.o. al virrey-arzobispo, Madrid, 13 noviembre 1738. AGI CG 4886, Fol. s.n. sobre la remision de tres presos, Veracruz, 29 abril 1734. Also see citation, n. 275 (Pedro Morozzo). AGN Inq. 775, exp. 39, fs. 490-8, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de John Corkran de nacion irlandes, hereje protestante, Puebla, 1718. AGI AM 640, fol. 28, fs. 690-748, Testimonio de los autos hechos por el governador y capitan general de Gampeche sobre la represalia de Portugueses, Gampeche, 1705. See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). AGI AM 640, fol. 17, fs. 382^3-389, Testimonio de los autos hechos sobre la represalia de Portugueses contra Domingo Correa de Mattos, Mexico, 1705. Corso, who was orphaned, came to New Spain as a boy and had been a vecino for seventeen years. He was poor and was almost certainly released. See citation, n. 62 (Philippe de Carrance). Jose da Costa came over with Lucas da Costa. AGI AM 640, fol. 8, fs. 241-3v., Testimonio de los autos hechos sobre la represalia de Portugueses de Orizaba por el alcalde mayor de dicho partido, Orizaba, 1705. Costa arrived in Veracruz in 1700 and went to Cordoba in 1704. See citations, nn. 8 (Manuel Alves), 301 (Roque Pereira da Cunha), and 86 (Jose da Costa). See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). See citation, n. 351 (Miguel Rodrigues). AGN Inq. 751, exp. 18, fs. 281-94V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Juan Cotaux, frances, Acapulco, 1711-12. Cotogini arrived in New Spain in 1671. Rubio Mane, 'Gente de Espafia', p. 284. See citation, n. 232 (Joao Lopes da Rosa). AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 19. AGI AM 650, fol. 22, Exp. sobre la licencia de D. Domingo Cumano, natural de Venecia, para residir en Indias, 1744-55. AGI INE 16, fol. 42, R.cta. de naturaleza a D. Domingo Cumano, San Lorenzo, 18 octubre 1755. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 27. AGN RC 63, exp. 12, R.cta. al virrey, el Pardo, 26 marzo 1743. AGI AM 641, fol. 16, fs. 749-85, Testimonio de autos hechos por el alcalde mayor de Tezcuco contra Antonio Diaz por incurso en la represalia de Portugueses, Chalapa, 1705-6. See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa).


203

99 Dias owed money to the Church tithe accounts at the time of his arrest. He had been in New Spain for eighteen years and in Teguacan for thirteen. AGI AM 641, fol. 11, fs. 541-61, Testimonio de autos hechos por el alcalde mayor de la ciudad de Teguacan contra Andres Diaz Tellez y Antonio Pimentta por incursos en la represalia de Portugueses, 1705. 100 AGN Virreyes 2, exp. 330, f. 268, Virrey Amarillas al Rey, Mexico, 9 diciembre 1757. 101 AGI INE 16, fol. 6, R.c. por la qual concede SM naturaleza a D. Phelipe Dispan, Aranjuez, 12 mayo 1739. 102 Married to a widow with children, Domingues owned only a few tools. AGI AM 640, fol. 25, fs. 622-58, Testimonios de los autos hechos sobre la represalia de Portugueses del Reino del Parral, Durango, 1705-6. 103 See citation, n. 12 (Paul Archdeacon). 104 AGN Inq. 824, exp. 14, fs. 232-7V., Reconciliacion de Isidro Bebeagua, hereje protestante, de nacion ingles, Puebla, 1747. 105 Durante had been in New Spain since 1733. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687—1760, articulo 17. AGI AM 650, fol. 19, Exp. sobre la licencia de D. Santiago Durantes, natural de Genova, para residir en Indias, 1753. AGI INE 16, fol. 46, R.cta. de naturaleza a D. Santiago Durantes, Buen Retiro, 16 diciembre 1753. 106 Effemy was the interpreter in the reconciliacion of James Glare. See citation, n. 72 (James Glare). 107 AGN Inq. 721, exp. 11, fs. 169-73, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Carlos Efrain, extrangero, Guadalajara, 1702. 108 Egan was a vecino of Guadalajara. AGN GP 31, exp. 74, fs. 46-7, Decreto del virrey, Mexico, 27 agosto 1736. 109 Arriving in Veracruz in 1756 as a ship's doctor on a vessel from La Guaira, Ellerker was denounced for having a forbidden Spanishto-English dictionary. This and other books were seized, but he suffered no punishment except to be restricted to the area of Veracruz for a few months. AGN Inq. 951, exp. 3, fs. 28-60, Denuncia de D. Miguel Araoz presbitero, capellan de navio, de un libro diccionario ingles en espanol. El que carga un ingles llamado D. Rafael Eyeker, Veracruz, 1756. Also see citation? n. 12 (Paul Archdeacon). n o See citation, n. 104 (Isidor Drinkwater). i n 'Monsieur' Er was a friend and, perhaps, retainer of Viceroy Linares. AGN Inq. 760, exp. 17, fs. 206-1 iv., Denuncia; que hace el maestro escuela de Valladolid, Lie. D. Mateo de Hijar Espinosa, contra un caballero frances que lo es de habito, llamado Mr Er, por proposiciones, Valladolid, 1715. 112 See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). 113 See citation, n. 408 (Pierre Ventura). 114 Rubio Mane, 'Gente de Espafia', p. 176. 115 AGN Inq. 913, exp. 10, fs. 262-360, Relacion de la causa contra D. Cesar Fallet, natural de Neoburg, principado del Rey de Prusia, por delito de dichos y hechos calvinistas, Mexico, 1750. AGN Inq. 924, exp. 9, fs. 332-448, Continuan los actos del proceso contra D. Cesar Fallet, natural de la ciudad de Neoburg, principado del Rey de Prusia, Mexico, 1752. Fallet relapsed again in the 1760s. AGN Inq. 1069, exps. 2-3, fs. 28-1 o8v., Dos exps. sobre Capitan Cesar Fallet, Manila, 1765-8.

204 116

117 118 119

120

121 122 123 124 125

126

127

128

129

Notes to pages 128-g It is unknown whether Fallot returned to Louisiana with St Denis or if he remained in New Spain. Fallot did go to Texas with Domingo Ramon in 1716—17. See citations, nn. 211 (Louis Jusseraud) and 372 (Pierre Sergent). AGN RG 77, exp. 81, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 19 julio 1757. AGN Virreyes 1, carta 72, fs. 191-2V., Virrey Amarillas al Rey, Mexico, 14 marzo 1756. See citation, n. 51 (Paul Bussel). Fernandes' servicio for naturalization was 800 pesos. In 1737 he had been a resident of New Spain for fourteen years, was married, and owned some real estate. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 1324, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687—1760, articulo 8. AGI AM 650, fol. 10, Fol. sobre la licencia de D. Domingo Fernandez, portugues, para residir en Indias, 1737. This foreigner was employed by another Portuguese, Manuel Fernandes da Gunha. AGI AM 640, fol. 8bis. fs. 244-302, Testimonio de los autos hechos por el alcalde mayor de las Reales Minas de Guadalcazar sobre la represalia de Portugueses, Guadalcazar, 1705. A witness in the Michel Lite case swore that Fernandes was the victim of a curse. See citation, n. 227 (Michel Lite). See citation, n. 102 (Manuel Domingues). See citations, n. 257 (Antonio Martins de Robles). A vecino for forty years, Fernandes also had a letter of naturalization. See citation, n. 14 (Pedro de Arguelhes). Fernandes Cardoso was the working partner of a store specializing in goods from Manila and the Orient. He had few assets of his own. AGI AM 641, fol. 15, fs. 691-737, Testimonio de los autos hechos por D. Hipolito de Saldana y Tapia, theniente general de D. Juan Joseph Veitia alcalde mayor de la ciudad de Puebla contra Amaro Fernandez Cardoso, Juan de Sequeira y Diego Hurtado por incursos en la represalia de Portugueses, Puebla, 1705. Fernandes de Cunha was a valued citizen who had been in New Spain for thirty years. He paid composition in 1690 and received a commission as the captain of the Armed Horse of Guadalcazar in 1692. See citation, n. 120 (Joao Fernandes). The Holy Office's request for information produced no reply from Campeche, and the case died. AGN Inq. 776, exp. 36, fs. 382—3v., Procedase a la justificacion en forma del matrimonio contrahido en la villa y puerto de Campeche de Manuel Fernandez Gonzalez de nacion portugues con una mujer llamada Dorotea, Mexico, 1756. AGI AM 641, fol. 2, fs. 16-81, Testimonio de autos hechos por el Sr Manuel Suarez Munis alcalde de corte desta Real Audiencia contra Antonio de Viera, Pedro Fernandez de Govea, Domingo Marquez, Joseph Fernandez, Jacome de Silva, Nicolas de Silva, por incluidos en la represalia de Portugueses, Mexico, 1705. Fernandes Mendes had lived in Cadiz for a number of years before going to New Spain in 1684. In 1688 the Protomedicato of Mexico investigated him and recommended that he be permitted to stay. Viceroy Monclova agreed and issued a decree amounting to composition. Fernandes paid fifty pesos for having come without a license. In 1704 he had eight children and was a wealthy man worth several thousand pesos. AGI AM 641, fol. 9, fs. 398-452, Testimonio de los autos hechos por el Sr Valenzuela contra Antonio Fernandez Mendez de nacion portugues sobre represalia, Mexico, 1705-6. AGI AM 1687, ramo i, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios

Notes to pages / 2 9 - 3 0

130 131 132 133

134 135 136 137

138

139

140 141 142 143 144

205

de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 2. AGI AM 650, fol. 3, Fol. sobre la licencia de Antonio Fernandez Mendez, portugues, para residir en Indias, 1702-4. See citation, n. 128 (Pedro Fernandes de Govea). AGI AM 641, fol. 15, fs. 738-48, Testimonio de autos hechos por el alcalde mayor de Jalapa, provincia de Veracruz, contra Antonio Ferreira, Jalapa, 1705. In 1705 Ferreira had eight or nine children from two marriages. See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). Ferreira had several children. He had come to New Spain seventeen years prior to his arrest in 1705. He had come in the retinue of Viceroy Galve and had served in the palace ever since. He earned four reales per day and had remarried after his first wife died. AGI AM 641, fol. 12, fs. 567V.-577V., Testimonio de los autos hechos por el Sr D. Miguel Calderon oidor desta Real Audiencia contra Francisco Ferreira por incurso en la represalia de Portugueses, Mexico, 1705. This foreigner was married and had been a vecino for twenty-five years. See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). This foreigner also had children in New Spain. See citation, n. 8 (Manuel Alves). See citation, n. 8 (Manuel Alves). Fialho left home at the age of fourteen and had been a resident of Oaxaca for forty years. He had a letter of naturalization issued in 1677, for which he paid a 200 peso servicio. See citation, n. 14 (Pedro de Arguelhes). Figueira had been in New Spain for twelve years in 1705. He had held his position of aduana guard for ten years. Prior to going to New Spain, this foreigner had been an alferez in the Canaries for eighteen years. AGI AM 640, fol. 6, fs. 2i8bis-229v., Testimonio de las diligencias que executo el Sr Lie. D. Balthasar de Tovar oidor desta Real Audiencia sobre la represalia de los bienes de Julio de Figueroa de nacion portugues y aprehencion de su persona, Mexico, 1705. Dom Alvaro, a nobleman, had come to New Spain with a royal license and maintained a residence on the main plaza of Mexico City. Accused of Judaism in 1714, he was not molested by the Holy Office. AGI AM 640, fol. 19, fs. 432-62, Testimonio de autos hechos por el corregidor de Mexico sobre la represalia de la persona y bienes de D. Alvaro de Figuero, Mexico, 1705. AGN Inq. 753, exp. 4, fs. 43 2-6v., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Alvaro Ignacio de Figuero Ponce de Leon, caballero del habito de Avis, de nacion portugues, por indicios de judio, Mexico, 1714. AGN Inq. 767, exp. 13, fs. 276-88, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Jose Pimentel, por indicios de judio, Mexico, 1717. AGN Inq. 787, exp. 3, fs. 37-40V., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Jacobo Fors de nacion sueco y hereje luterano, Mexico, 1720. AGI AM 639, fol. 3, Testimonies de los autos y diligencias hechas contra D. Lucas Fortuna, extrangero, Mexico, 1703. Also see citation, n. 151 (Jean Frengan). AGN Inq. 818, exp. 45, fs. 581-90V., Autos hechos sobre la reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Guillermo Fox, de nacion ingles, Orizaba, 1728. AGN RC 45, exp. 75, Rxta. al virrey, Madrid, 2 abril 1726.

206 145 146

147 148

149

150 151

152

153 154

155 156

Notes to pages 130-1 AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 26. Giovanni went to New Spain with his father in 1730 or 1731. The younger Franutti was then fourteen or fifteen. They lived for a time in Acayucan but quarreled, and the father returned to Europe alone. Giovanni left the village for about a year in the service of a Genoan, Agostino Onetto, but returned, married, and eventually became a small-time merchant. He got into trouble when he suggested to some Indians that they were being exploited by the village curate. The Holy Office took no action. AGN Inq. 974, exp. 13, fs. 666-77, Diligencias sobre averiguar la vida y conducta religiosa de D. Juan Baptista Franyuti natural de Final, casada con Da. Ana Maria Regalado, Acayucan, 1754. AGN Inq. 976, exp. 3, fs. 47-8V., Exp. sobre el conocimiento de D. Juan Franyuti, y si es casado en este pueblo, y con que clase de persona, Acayucan 1754. Pietro Franutti does not seem to have been in New Spain for much over a year. See citations, n. 146 (Giovanni Franutti). After his arrest in Veracruz, Fraser, a Presbyterian, was sent toward Mexico City with about thirty other Asiento employees. Falling ill, he was left behind in Orizaba where the local English-speaking community cared for him. He recuperated in the home of John Bridges. Dr John Ingleby treated him. Father Charles Watts served as his interpreter before the Inquisition, and Father Thomas Power heard his first confession. AGN Inq. 906, exp. 14, fs. 177-83V., Autos sobre la reconciliacion al gremio de Nuestra Santa Madre Iglesia de Alexandro Joseph Frazer, natural de la villa de Inverness, en el reino de Escocia, hereje de la secta presbiteriana, residente en Orizaba, Orizaba, 1741. Frassineto had obtained a license from the Casa de Contratacion before going to New Spain. It cost him thirty pesos. When naturalized in the 1690s, he paid a servicio of 100 pesos. See citation, n. 62 (Philippe de Carrance). AGN Inq. 748, exp. 19, fs. 601—6v., El Sr Inquisidor contra Juan Federico, ingles, Mexico, 1712. Luca Fortuna (n. 142) accused Frengan of double bigamy, but the suspect died before the inquisitors could investigate the charges. AGN Inq. 760, exp. 4, fs. 105-10, El Sr Inquisidor contra Jan Frengan, de nacion frances, natural de la Villa de Montaut, Principado de Bearne, alias Juan de Escalona, alias Juan de Fraga, alias Juan de Claberia, asentista del pulque, vecino de Mexico, por casado tres veces, Mexico, 1715. In 1751, Freyre had been in New Spain for twenty-three years. He had served as a notario of the Inquisition, as arrendador of alcabalas, and as alferez real for Old Veracruz. AGI CC 596B, fol. s.n., Toma de razon de la r.c. de 1751 concediendo naturaleza a D. Manuel Freyre de Fonseca, natural del reino de Portugal, Cadiz, 1753. AGI INE 16, fol. 50, R.cta. de naturaleza a D. Manuel Freyre de Fonseca, Buen Retiro, 28 septiembre 1751. See citation, n. 125 (Amaro Fernandes Cardoso). As a sailor, Fuscares came to Veracruz in the mid-1690s and again in 1715. He settled in 1724 or 1725. AGN Inq. 817, exp. 10, fs. 265-304, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Vicente Estefano Fuscarin de nacion Veneciano, por proposiciones, Orizaba, 1727. See citation, n. 24 (Ioannis Antonios Baptistes). Gambino paid 200 pesos servicio for his naturalization. AGI INE 16,


157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166

167

168 169 170

171 172 173 174

175 176

207

fol. 13, R.c. concediendo naturaleza a D. Juan Antonio Gambino, Buen Re tiro, 28 marzo 1726. His case was cited as precedent in the application of Roque Pereira da Cunha. See citation, n. 301 (Roque Pereira da Cunha). See citation, n. 198 (John Hucker). See citation, n. 35 (Joseph de la Borda). AGN Inq. 731, exp. 9, fs. 129-37V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Joseph Gallo, por casado dos veces, Mexico, 1707. AGN Inq. 885, exp. 6, fs. 165-70, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Juan Gay, de nacion escoces, Mexico, 1749. Married with three children in 1753, Gazzano had been in New Spain for seventeen years. Baez Macias, 'Pianos y censos', p. 701. See citations, n. 117 (Antoine du Farge). AGI AM 639, fol. 6, Testimonios de los autos hechos contra Geronimo Gerardi y Geronimo Thoza, Mexico, 1704. AGN Inq. 829, exp. 7, fs. 544-60V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Pedro [de Zarate] de nacion armenio por sospechosas de ser cismatico, Mexico, 1723. Giudice's case is incomplete. See second citation, n. 22 (Jean Baptiste Baldo). Giudice was a resident of Veracruz at the time of his naturalization. AGS Titulos 183, fol. 152, Despacho de SM concediendole naturaleza de estos Reynos para comerciar en las Indias por ser natural de Genova y vecino de Cadiz a D. Cayetano Judice, Buen Retiro, 16 diciembre 1753. AGI CC 596B, fol. s.n., Toma de razon de la r.c. de 1753 concediendo naturaleza a D. Caietano Yudize, Cadiz, 1754Godeau may also have had some involvement with mining. AGS Titulos 180, fol. 519, R.c. en que se les concede naturaleza de los reynos de Indias a Pedro Godoy y Joseph de Plaza, Buen Retiro, 10 diciembre 1738. The same document is in AGI INE 16, fol. 9. AGI CC 5633, fol. 6, Exp. sobre los bienes de D. Juan Pablo de Gola, difunto, Mexico, 1757. See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). Gomes de Castro entered the Spanish military when he was fifteen. He had served in the royal fleet, the Morro Castle in Havana, the Armada de Barlovento, and in Panama. He settled in New Spain in 1699. AGI AM 640, fol. 26, fs. 659-64, Autos hechos por D. Carlos Colomo alcalde mayor del partido de Guachinango sobre la represalia de los Portugueses, Tabuco, 1705—6. See citation, n. 28 (Jose de Barros). See citation, n. 14 (Pedro de Arguelhes). Gongalves was a long-time resident of the empire who went to New Spain with a license. See citation, n. 102 (Manuel Domingues). This foreigner had gone to New Spain with the Portuguese Asiento. He had been in New Spain for seven years, had one surviving child, and earned four pesos a month. AGI AM 641, fol. ibis, fs. 1—16, Testimonios de los autos hechos por el Sr Escalante sobre la represalia de Juan Gonzalez Cuello, portugues, Mexico, 1705. See citation, n. 64 (Domingos de Carvalho). 'Gonzalez' probably escaped punishment when absolute proof of his first baptism could not be found. AGN Inq. 841, exp. 4, fs. 43-70, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Juan Jose Gonzalez, alias Juan Bautista, de nacion ingles o irlandes por haberse bautizado dos veces, San Felipe el Real, 1733.

208 177 178

179 180

181

182 183

184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195

Notes to pages

132-3

AGI AM 863, fol. 2, Oficiales reales de Veracruz al Rey, Veracruz, 12 abril 1721. An ex-interpreter for the South Sea Company, Gordon was nominated by the president of the Audiencia of Guadalajara to be the new alcalde mayor of the Pacific port of Gentipec. The Council of the Indies disapproved and ordered Gordon to Spain. AGN RC 65, exp. 57, fs. 120-1, R.c. al virrey, Buen Retiro, 4 julio 1745. Grangent's crime was illicit trade with New Orleans. AGI CC 4886, Fol. s.n. sobre la causa contra D. Cristobal Silbestre Cubillan, Veracruz, 27 septiembre 1730. Green had only recently converted and did not yet fully understand his new Church. AGN Inq. 849, fs. 286-99V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Jacobo Verde, de nacion ingles, por proposiciones, Mineral de Corpus, 1734. Grondona conducted regular commercial relations with two merchant uncles who lived in Cadiz. AGI INE 16, fol. 14, R.c. concediendo naturaleza a D. Juan Francisco Grondona y Oneto, Balsain, 24 julio 1723. Also see citation, n. 16 (Francesco di Arnautti). Guile converted to Catholicism in 1702 or 1703 and served for a time in the Spanish artillery. AGI INE 16, fol. 16, R.c. concediendo naturaleza a Alejandro Joseph de Guelle, Lisajo, 30 junio 1719. Guillard arrived in New Spain in 1746 in the train of Viceroy Revillagigedo I. He was the viceroy's cook for four years. AGN Inq. 1071, exp. 3, fs. 5-120, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Antonio Geliar de nacion frances, detenido en la real carcel de Oaxaca, por hereje protestante, Oaxaca, 1761. Gurney had a wife in New Spain and testified in favor of Joseph Coates, See citation, n. 76 (Joseph Coates). Hall tried to dissuade John Vidal and John MacDonald from seeking reconciliation. See citation, n. 240 (John MacDonald). See citation, n. 332 (John Rendell). AGN GP 31, exp. 173, fs. 111V.-112, Decreto del virrey-arzobispo, Mexico, 10 septiembre 1737. See citation, n. 81 (John Corkran). AGN Inq. 787, exp. 6, fs. 49-52, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Juan Harvey, ingles, hereje protestante, Mexico, 1720. AGN Inq. 791, exp. 3, fs. 176-84V., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia Catolica Romana, de Guillermo Jachi de nacion ingles, Puebla, 1721. AGN RC 76, exp. 131, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 2 noviembre 1756. See citation, n. 35 (Joseph de la Borda). AGN Inq. 785, exp. 5, fs. 219—23, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Eduardo Hedegues, Mexico, 1740. See citation, n. 143 (William Fox). AGN Inq. 796, exp. 54, fs. 524-7V., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Luis de Hoart, hereje protestante, Mexico, 1721.

196 AGN Inq. 787, exp. 5, fs. 45-8, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Thomas Howard, ingles de nacion, hereje protestante, Mexico, 1720. 197 This foreigner's request for naturalization was denied. He had tried to claim citizenship as a native of 'Navarre'. AGI AM 650, fol. 18, Exp. sobre la licencia de D. Miguel Phelipe de Huart Juson de


198 199

200 201

202

203 204 205 206 207 208

209 210 211

212

209

Moyrien, natural de Baxa Navarra, 1752. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 12. AGN Inq. 857, exp. 39, fs. 191-7, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Juan de Huctores, de nacion ingles, de la secta de los protestantes, Puebla, 1735. Ingleby was a Catholic who suffered persecution in Jamaica. In 1730 he went to Havana and eventually gained the Mexican viceroy's permission to take his wife and two daughters to New Spain. Arriving in Mexico City in 1738, he was examined by the Protomedicato and permitted to practice medicine. The Council of the Indies granted him citizenship in 1739 and charged no servicio. AGI AM 650, fol. 2, Fol. sobre la licencia de D. Juan Inglevi, medico ingles, para residir en Indias, 1739. AGI INE 16, fol. 7, R.c. por la qual le concede SM naturaleza en estos reynos y los de las Indias a Dr D. Juan de Inglevy, Aranjuez, 30 mayo 1739. Ingleby and his family are also mentioned in the Paul Archdeacon case. See citations, nn. 12 (Paul Archdeacon) and 148 (Angus Fraser). See citations, n. 199 (John Ingleby). Originally captured off Campeche, this foreigner was probably a sailor. AGN Inq. 859, fs. 392-6, Autos contra Juan Bautista Montoya o Jacobo, de nacion ingles, sobre si ha reconciliado a la Santa Iglesia Catolica, Yautepec, 1736. Jasen had lived in Mexico City for ten years. AGN GP vol. 31, exp. 18, fs. 15-15V., Vuestra Excelencia en conformidad de la r.c. inserta manda que D. Tomas Jasen, de nacion ingles sea atendido y tratado como vasallo del Rey Nuestro Senor y que las justicias no le molestan pena de 500 pesos, como se previene, Mexico, 16 febrero 1736. Joao was sent back to Spain because he had a wife there. See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). See citation, n. 245 (Pierre Malet). See citation, n. 76 (Joseph Coates). See citation, n. 198 (John Hucker). AGN Inq. 787, exp. 4, fs. 41-4, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Miguel Jolham, hereje protestante, Mexico, 1720. Jordan was a doctor, hired by a haciendado, D. Miguel de Soto, to cure Indians on the hacienda during the great epidemic of the 1730s. The Frenchman was denounced by a Jesuit for having been baptized twice and for making 'bad-sounding' propositions about the faith. The Holy Office declined to pursue the matter. AGN Inq. 1365, exp. 14, fs. 165-8, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Joseph Jordon, frances, medico o curandero, por proposiciones malsonantes, Tlaxcala, 1738. AGN Inq. 718, exp. 21, fs. 300-5, Denuncia de Domingo Jorge contra un judio, con las diligencias de la causa, Veracruz, 1701. AGN Inq. 854, exp. 6, fs. 198-213, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Richard Juan, ingles, de la secta de los protestantes, y residente en Puebla, 1734. AGN Historia 27, exps. 12-13, 17-19, 26-7, Exps. sobre franceses en Texas, 1711-18. AGN Historia 28, exp. 1, fs. 1-62, Diario del viaje del Marques de San Miguel de Aguayo a la provincia de Texas, Monclavo, 31 junio 1722; exp. 4, fs. 95V.-114, Paracer del Auditor de Guerra, el Marques de Altamira, Mexico, 4 junio 1744. AGI AM 639, fol. 11, Testimonio de los autos hechos en virtud de

210

213

214 215 216

217

218 219

220

221 222 223 224 225 226 227

228

Notes to pages 134-5 decreto de SE por el Sr D. Joseph de Luna contra Enrique de Quimpis por ser de nacion Imperial, Mexico, 1704. Also see citations, nn. 321 (Bartholomew Raford) and 213 (John King). King had entered New Spain as a sailor on the Armada de Barlovento. AGI AM 639, fol. 10, Testimonio de las diligencias executadas contra algunos extrangeros por el Sr D. Francisco de Valenzuela Venegas del orden de Santiago, oidor de la Audiencia, Mexico, 1704. Also see citation, n. 321 (Bartholomew Raford). See citations, nn. 12 (Paul Archdeacon) and 35 (Joseph de la Borda). Married with four children in 1753, Labate owned his own shop and had been in New Spain for twenty-five years. Baez Macias, Tlanos y censos', p. 750. AGN Inq. 924, exp. 7, fs. 113-21V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Diego de la Torre, cajero mayor de D. Bias Romero, flotista que reside en esta ciudad, de nacion frances, natural de Bayona, por proposiciones, Mexico, 1756. AGI AM 650, fol. 15, Fol. sobre la licencia de D. Matheo Lasmartres, frances, para residir en Indias, 1753. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132—4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 15. See citation, n. 385 (James Stevenson). Legrand's first request for naturalization was denied, but he was not expelled, and he later met the requirements. AGI AM 650, fol. 17, Exp. sobre la peticion de D. Luis Legrand, frances, para residir en Indias, 1742-4. AGI INE 16, fol. 49, R.cta. de naturaleza a D. Luis Legrand, Buen Retiro, 12 febrero 1752. Leleu arrived in Spain in 1688 and went over to New Spain in 1710. When naturalized in 1723, he paid a servicio of 1,000 pesos escudosl AGI GG 239, ramo 4, fol. 87, R.c. por la qual le concede SM naturaleza de estos reynos a D. Gil Lelo de la Rea de nacion frances, vecino de Mexico, Buen Retiro, 20 marzo 1723. This grant is also located in AGI INE 16, fol. 15. A married man, Leon had been in New Spain for eight years by 1753. Baez Macias, 'Pianos y censos', p. 744. AGN Inq. 720, exp. 12, fs. 227-37, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Sara Lenci, inglesa protestante, Veracruz, 1752. Father Lindsay appeared as a witness in the Paul Archdeacon case. See citation, n. 12 (Paul Archdeacon). Referred to as a man 'rude de capacidad\ Liston was mentioned in the Goates bigamy investigation. He was married. See citation, n. 76 (Joseph Coates). Jeanne was the half-sister of Michel Lite. See citation, n. 227 (Michel Lite). Marie was the mother of Jeanne and Michel Lite. See citation, n. 227 (Michel Lite). Lite was literate, but even to call him a curandero is probably overly complimentary. He admitted to using 'white magic' to neutralize curses but claimed that his efforts were in vain. AGN Inq. 738, exp. 7, fs. 109—22, Denuncia hecha por Juan Crisostomo Vicente contra Miguel Litee, negro frances, por curandero supersticioso, San Pedro, 1721. Lithologos arrived in Cadiz in 1731 and went to Veracruz in 1736. He soon settled in Queretaro and opened his shop. When accused of being a Greek Orthodox, he cast enough doubt on the charge to


229

230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237

238 239 240 241 242

243

244

2.1.1

have the proceedings suspended. AGN Inq. 912, exp. 35, fs. 94-6, El P. Fr Melchor de San Jose carmelita descalzo del convento de Queretaro, denuncia a un barbero griego, sobre una proposicion, Queretaro, 1743. AGI AM 650, fol. 12, Fol. sobre la licencia de Joseph Antonio Lombardino, natural de la ciudad de Roma, para residir en Indias, Madrid, 1752. AGI INE 16, fol. 48, R.cta. de naturaleza a D. Joseph Antonio Lombardino, Buen Retiro, 3 septiembre 1752. AGN Inq. 785, exp. 4, fs. 212— i8v., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Rafael Long, de nacion ingles, Mexico, 1740. AGI AM 640, fol. 9, 3O2bis-3io, Testimonio de los autos hechos en la represalia de Portugueses executada por el alcalde mayor de Guernavaca, 1705. AGI AM 640, fol. 20, fs. 462^5-485, Testimonio de los autos hechos en la represalia de las personas y bienes de Miguel Lopez de la Rosa y Antonio de nacion Portugueses, Tepeaca, 1705. AGN Inq. 735, exp. 35, fs. 589-602, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Maria de Arnauz, Toluca, 1707—8. AGN Inq. 981, exp. I3bis., f. i85bis., El secretario que hace oficio de fiscal contra Guillermo de la O, de nacion frances, natural de la provincia de Lemocin, por el delito de poligamia, Mexico, 1754. See citation, n. 327 (Joseph Recole). AGN Inq. 821, exp. 14, fs. 215-41, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Juan Lopez Mejia, de oficio corrector en la ciudad de Veracruz, por sospechas de judaizante, Mexico, 1728. Luz came over with Lucas da Costa. AGI AM 640, fol. 8, fs. 2413V., Testimonio de los autos hechos sobre la represalia de Portugueses de Orizaba por el alcalde mayor de dicho partido, Orizaba, 1705. Also see citations, nn. 8 (Manuel Alves), 301 (Roque Pereira da Gunha), and 86 (Jose da Costa). See citation, n. 236 (Joseph Lucas). See citation, n. 222 (Sarah Lincey). AGN Inq. 1138, exp. 18, fs. 201-10, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Juan Magdanal de nacion escoces, hereje presbiteriano, Queretaro, 1736. See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). In spite of their differences in the Archdeacon case, MacTagart and George Abercromby remained friends. In 1736, MacTagart petitioned the Holy Office to order the release of some books Abercromby had inherited from John Ingleby. AGN Inq. 1042, fs. 141—5, Solicitud que hace D. Juan Mactagat, Veracruz, 1763. AGN Inq. 1043, exp. 1, fs. I-IV., Exp. sobre los libros pertenecientes a D. Jorge Abercromby, Puebla, 1765. Also see citation, n. 12 (Paul Archdeacon). Madeira escaped being sent back to his wife in San Lucar because he did not have enough property to cover the cost of transportation. AGI AM 640, fol. 7, fs. 229bis-24O, Testimonio de los autos hechos de orden de SE por el Sr Lie. D. Juan de Ozaeta y Oro alcalde del crimen desta Real Audiencia sobre la aprehencion de Nicolas, sastre, y Thomas Madeiro, zapatero, de nacion Portugueses, Mexico, 1705. Maguire's first request for naturalization was denied, and he fled to Curasao where he married an Irishwoman. In 1733 he and his wife arrived in Campeche 'to practice their faith3, and in 1737 Maguire made another request for citizenship. This time he received the

212

245 246

247 248 249 250 251

252 253

254

255 256

257

258 259

Notes to pages 136-7 desired grant, and the servicio was low. AGN RG 46, exp. 58, R.c. al virrey, Aranjuez, 5 junio 1727. AGI INE 16, fol. 8, R.c. por la qual le concede SM naturaleza en estos reynos en atencion a sus meritos a D. Patricio Maguier, San Lorenzo, 26 octubre 1738. AGN Historia 294, exp. 1, fs. 1-83V., Autos sobre haber aportado a Nuevo Mexico cuatro franceses, Mexico, 1751. AGI AM 650, fol. 25, Exp. sobre la licencia de D. Juan Malibran Bosques, frances, para residir en Indias, Madrid, 1758. AGI GG 596B, fol. s.n., Toma de razon de la r.c. de 1758. AGI INE 16, fol. naturaleza a D. Juan de Malibran, Cadiz, 1758. AGI INE 16, fol. 19, Real titulo concediendo naturaleza a D. Juan Malibran Bosques, Villaviciosa, 5 octubre 1758. AGI GG 5062, fol. 4, Exp. sobre los bienes de Nicolas Mallen, difunto, Santa Ana, Sonora, 1745. See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Gorrea). Rubio Mane, 'Gente de Espana', p. 199. Marin arrived in New Spain in 1694. He had no license. AGI AM 639, fol. 14, Diligencias de la prision y embargo de Juan Marin, flamenco, y Juan Quadro, milanes, Mexico, 1704. Marioni was allowed to sail from Cadiz without first obtaining naturalization. The viceroy retained the right to send him home at any time. AGN RG 70, exp. 99, R.o. al virrey, San Lorenzo, 18 noviembre 1750. See citation, n. 128 (Pedro Fernandes de Govea). Martin's name also turned up in the represalia proceedings of 1704. He was not molested. AGN Inq. 710, exp. 1, fs. 1-6, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Tomas Martinez, de nacion ingles, y contra otro de su nacion, por diferentes hechos, Maravatio, 1699. Also see citation, n. 213 (John King). Martino was about eighty in 1715 and had been in Papantla for some forty years. He was denounced for saying that he had had conversations with his father's spirit, but the inquisitors did not consider senility a crime. AGN Inq. 760, exp. 35, fs. 364-79V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Manuel Martinez, de nacion griego, por fingir revelaciones y apariciones de animas con otros muchos embustes y disparates, Papantla, 1715. See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). Martins was married. AGI AM 641, fol. 7, fs. 356-60, Testimonio de autos hechos por el alcalde mayor de Guazaqualco contra Antonio Martin, zapatero, por incurso en la represalia de Portugueses, Guazaqualco, 1706. AGN Inq. 715, exp. 16, fs. 471—3, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Antonio Martinez de Robles, natural de la ciudad de Faro en los reinos de Portugal, por casado dos veces, Acapulco, 171 o. AGN Inq. 781, exp. 2, fs. 10-72, El Sr Inquisidor contra Antonio Martinez de Robles, por casado dos veces, Acapulco, 1709-19. Martins had been in New Spain for thirty-five years. Several of his children were married to 'principal persons' in Cordoba, and he may have even been naturalized. See citation, n. 8 (Manuel Alves). Mattos was about seventy years old in 1705. He had been in New Spain for at least twenty years and perhaps longer. He was a bigamist, but this was not revealed until after his death. AGI AM 640, fol. 18, fs. 390-431, Testimonios de los autos hechos por el alcalde mayor de Valladolid provincia de Michoacan en virtud de orden de SE sobre la aprehencion de D. Manuel de Matos y


260 261

262

263

264 265

266 267 268 269 270

271

272

213

Francia y D. Francisco Perera Cribas, de nacion Portugueses, Patzcuaro, 1705. AGN Inq. 824, exp. 6, fs. 29-4.OV., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Manuel de Matos, portugues, por casada dos veces, Patzcuaro, 1717. See citation, n. 25 (Michael Antonios Baptistes). Medina had gone to New Spain in the retinue of Viceroy Veragua in 1673. With the exception of five years spent in the Philippines, he had been in Mexico City ever since. He obtained a letter of naturalization in 1704, having previously paid a semi-official servicio of 200 pesos to Viceroy Galve for the privilege of staying in the viceroyalty. AGN RG 23, exp. 112, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 30 diciembre 1690. AGI AM 640, fol. 27, fs. 655-89V., Testimonio de los autos hechos de orden de SE contra D. Lorenzo de Medina vecino de Mexico sobre el sequestro de su persona y bienes por ser natural de Portugal comprehendido en la represalia expedida por SM, Mexico, 1705. AGI AM 650, fol. 5, Fol. sobre la peticion de D. Lorenzo de Medina, portugues, 1704. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs., 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias 1687-1760, articulo 1. Rubio Mane, 'Gente de Espaiia', p. 266. A brother of Manuel, Jorge had left Mexico City 'in search of his fortune'. He escaped arrest. AGI AM 640, fol. 15, fs. 368bis-379, Testimonio de los autos hechos sobre la represalia de Portugueses executada en Jorge Rodriguez y Manuel de la Vega, Mexico, 1705. Manuel escaped arrest because he had left for Peru in 1704. The route that some foreigners took from New Spain to Peru indicates that not all of the Portuguese in the southern viceroyalty came by way of Brazil. See citation, n. 262 (Jorge Mendes). See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). Mendonc,a was a widower who supported his infant son on a salary of four pesos per month. He had been in Toluca for only one year. AGI AM 641, fol. 8, fs. 361-97, Testimonios de los autos hechos por el corregidor de Toluca sobre la prision y embargo de bienes de Juan de Mendoza Vasconcelos por nacional de Portugal, Toluca, 1705. AGN GP 21, exp. 276, f. 318, Virrey a la justicia de Guauchinango, Mexico, 15 abril 1717. AGN Inq. 791, exp. 5, fs. 190-3V., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de David Miller, protestante ingles, Mexico, 1721. See citation, n. 408 (Pierre Ventura). AGI GG 4886, Dos fols. s.n. sobre D. Juan Bautista Mogodein, frances, Madrid y Cadiz, 1727. 'Serrano' could also be a Hispanized form of any of several French names beginning with Ser or Serr. AGN Historia 386, fs. 91-5, Autos sobre D. Francisco Serrano y presos chinos y mulatos, Provincia de Zacatula, 1729. AGN Inq. 803, exp. 41, fs. 358-61V., Denuncia por D. Andres de Rivas contra un irlandes llamado D. Gerardo Moro, por presunciones de hereje, Mexico, 1719. AGN Inq. 1169, exp. 8, fs. 98-102, Denuncia que hace Da. Maria de Contreras Villegas contra D. Gerardo Moro, Abogado de la Real Audiencia, por judio y enemigo de las practicas religiosas, Mexico, 1729. Also see citation, n. 339 (Edward Rivett). See citation, n. 210 (Richard Joye).

214 273

274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281

282 283

284

285 286 287 288

289 290 291 292

Notes to pages 138-9 In 1699 Moraca had lived in Patzcuaro for two years. He made enemies quickly and was denounced for having items associated with superstitious beliefs. AGN Inq. 710, exp. 2, fs. 7-18, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Pedro Moraca, de nacion Napolitano, por supersticioso, Patzcuaro, 1699. AGN Inq. 1051, fs. 59-9V., Dr D. Phelipe de Ocio y Ocampo, comisario del SO, al Sr Inquisidor Fiscal, San Luis Potosi, 13 julio 1717. AGN RG 56, exp. 64, R.o. al virrey-arzobispo, San Ildefonso, 3 septiembre 1736. AGN Inq. 787, exp. 2, fs. 33-6, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Josue Morton, hereje protestante, Mexico, 8 octubre 1720. See citation, n. 334 (Jean Reytet). Naiscuriue was a Calvinist whose plans to convert preceded him to the Holy Office. AGN Inq. 544, exp. 22, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Pedro Necero por hereje o judaizante, Mexico, 1701. See citations, nn. 386 (James Strode) and 74 (William Clare). AGI AM 639, fol. 17, Testimonios de autos hechos sobre la aprehencion de extrangeros de la jurisdiccion de la Real Audiencia de Guadalajara, Guadalajara, 1704. This foreigner was also sought by the secular authorities. He fled Mexico City after being interviewed by the Inquisition and, perhaps, headed for the Philippines. AGN Inq. 866, exp. 54, fs. 269-77, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Francisco de Naris, ingles u holandes por proposiciones, Mexico, 1738. Also see citation, n. 414 (Antonio de Villanueba). See citation, n. 35 (Joseph de la Borda). AGN Inq. 932, exp. 39, fs. 179-80, Reconciliacion de Maria Francisca Not, natural de la corte de Londres, Veracruz, 1756. AGN Inq. 932, exp. 46, fs. 217-22V., Documentos sobre la reconciliacion de Maria Not, natural de Londres, de secta luterana, Veracruz, 1756. Novaes resided in the village of Galimaya and had lived in New Spain for about thirty years. He made generous gifts to charitable causes. AGI AM 641, fol. 18, fs. 805-48, Testimonio de los autos hechos por el alcalde mayor de Metepec contra Antonio de Veira y Antonio de Nobaez, por incursos en la represalia de Portugueses, Metepec, 1705-6. See citation n. 236 (Joseph Lucas). AGN Inq. 729, exp. 29, f. 604, Comisario de Veracruz al SO, Veracruz, 1 octubre 1701. Also see citation, n. 209 (Domingos Jorge). See citation, n. 283 (Mary Frances Nott). O'Halloran was a resident of the village of Zayula and was accused of making heretical statements. He successfully defended himself, and the Holy Office suspended proceedings against him. AGN Inq. 861, exp. 31, fs. 577-626, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Nicolas de Otalora, de nacion irlandes, natural de la ciudad de Dublin, por proposiciones, Guadalajara, 1736. See citation, n. 104 (Isidor Drinkwater). Onetto surfaced in the proceedings against Giovanni Franutti. See citation, n. 146 (Giovanni Battista Franutti). See second citation, n. 22 (Jean Baptiste Baldo). Ortes had been in the Indies for twenty years at the time of his arrest. See citation, n. 62 (Philippe de Carrance).

Notes to pages i^g-40 293 294 295

296 297 298 299 300

301

302

303

304 305

306 307 308 309

215

This foreigner was a cousin of Giovanni Battista Gambino. AGI INE 16, fol. 12, R.c. concediendo naturaleza a D. Francisco Antonio Pallares y Gambino, el Pardo, 8 abril 1728. See citation, n. 8 (Manuel Alves). A widower, Palma had been in New Spain for twenty-three years. He became ill while serving in the fortress of San Juan de Uliia and had moved to Cordoba for his health. In 1690 he paid twenty-five pesos in composition. See citation, n. 8 (Manuel Alves). See citation, n. 104 (Isidor Drinkwater). See citation, n. 34 (William Booth). Pereira went to the Indies as a soldier, served in the Morro Castle in Havana, became ill, and went to Puebla for his health. He eventually settled in Queretaro. See citation, n. 62 (Philippe de Carrance). Pereira de Araujo was in Veracruz from 1700 to 1704. See first citation, n. 301 (Roque Pereira da Cunha). Exempted from the represalia of 1704-9, Pereira Cravos seems to have received naturalization in 1711. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132—4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 4. Pereira da Cuhna went to New Spain in 1700 with the two factors of the Portuguese Asiento. In 1701, he alerted the Holy Office to the presence of a Dutch Sephardic Jew in Veracruz. When the Portuguese asientistas left in 1704, he stayed. He won release in the represalia of 1705 but was ordered to Spain in 1714. AGI AM 650, fols. 6-7, Fols. sobre la peticion de D. Roque Pereyra y Acufia, portugues, para licencia a residir en Indias, 1706—1711. AGN RC 36, exp. 157, R.c. al virrey, Madrid, 30 diciembre 1714. Also see citation, n. 209 (Domingos Jorge). Pereira Pinto went to New Spain in 1697 with the Portuguese Asiento. He later served in the presidio of Veracruz, married, and eventually became a guard for the royal treasury in Veracruz. AGI AM 650, fol. 9, Fol. sobre fo. licencia de D. Joseph Pereira Pinto, portugues, para residir en Indias, 1724. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132—4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 6. Peres had gone to New Spain in the service of a Spanish sea captain in 1690 or 1691. He became ill and remained in the viceroyalty, worked for a while at a sugar mill in Izucar, and later lived off the generosity of Joao Gomes Calado. See citation, n. 352 (Joao Rodrigues Calado). This foreigner had been in New Spain for about ten years. See citation, n. 170 (Joao Gomes de Castro). Falsely accused of illegal commerce, Pierre obtained an order from Viceroy Valero for the release of his goods. AGN GP 21, exp. 303, fs. 348-9, Virrey Valero al governador de Veracruz, Mexico, 18 octubre 1717. Pimenta took refuge in a church, but it was his poverty rather than respect for sanctuary that saved him from deportation. See citation, n. 99 (Andre Dias Telles). Place also belonged to the militia and had some involvement with mining. See citations, n. 167 (Pierre Godeau). AGN Inq. 906, exp. 16, fs. 189-212V., Autos sobre la reconciliation al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Jose Vanderplas, de nacion holandes, Cordoba, 1741. Also see citation, n. 148 (Angus Fraser). AGI AM 639, fol. 4, Testimonio de los autos y diligencias hechas

216

Notes to pages 140—2

contra Ernesto Plus, aleman, Mexico, 1703-4. Also see citations, nn. 321 (Bartholomew Raford) and 213 (John King). 310 AGN Inq. 750, exp. 34, fs. 557-97, Reconciliacion a la Santa Madre Iglesia de Guillermo Pobey, de nacion holandes, Mexico, 1711.

311 312 313

314 315

316 317 318 319 320

321

322 323 324

3 25

326 327 328

See citation, n. 280 (Jean Philippe du Nogal). Poullain had been in New Spain since 1710. See citation, n. 395 (Jean Tillion). Jailed in Jalapa de Tabasco by royal officials in 1727, Poullain de Tour denounced Paul Bussel for bigamy. See citation, n. 51 (Paul Bussel). Poullain, a quack, got into trouble after his release, and the inquisitors warned him severely before letting him go a second time. AGN Inq. 836, exp. 13, fs. 318-28, El Sr Fiscal del SO contra Jose Pollone de Torre, de nacion frances y de oficio medico, por tener en una pierna pintada una cruz con la efigie de Gristo Nuestro Senor, Tacotalpa, 1732. Father Power heard Angus Fraser's first Catholic confession. See citation, n. 148 (Angus Fraser). Denounced for saying that fornication was not a sin and for refusing to buy indulgences, Prado was ignored by the Holy Office. AGN Inq. 924, exp. 5, fs. 95-101 v., El Sr Inquisidor del SO contra D. Santiago Felix del Prado, de nacion portugues, por proposiciones, Mexico, 1756. AGI GG 5593, fol. 6, Exp. sobre bienes de difunto, D. Juan Prozo de Campos, Queretaro, 1732. Quadrio had been in New Spain for eight or nine years. See citation, n. 250 (Jean Marin). See citation, n. 28 (Jose* de Barros). Raabe had received reconciliacion in Mexico City in 1701. AGN Inq. 720, exp. 1, fs. 1-78, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Juan Ra, aleman, Mexico y Manila, 1702. AGI AM 639, fol. 9, Testimonio de los autos hechos sobre la averiguacion de la naturaleza de Bartholome de Avila como adento se expresa es de nacion ingles, Mexico, 1703-4. Also see first citation, n - 373 (Jean Serrecer). Ramalho went to Seville when he was four. He had been in New Spain for twenty years. AGI INE 16, fol. 4, R.c. concediendo naturaleza de ambos reynos a D. Clemente Ramallo, Buen Retiro, 12 agosto 1750. AGI CC 5585, fol. 96, Exp. sobre los bienes de D. Pedro Ronquillo, difunto, Veracruz, 1709. See citations, nn. 386 (James Strode) and 74 (William Clare). AGN Inq. 1241, exp. 11, fs. 155-64V., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Thomas Readshaw, Puebla, 1726. Ten years later Readshaw acted as interpreter in the reconciliacion of John Macdonald. See citation, n. 240 (John MacDonald). Rebecq went to New Spain as personal physician of Viceroy Linares. The Frenchman's request of 1720 for naturalization was supported by Viceroy Valero, the Audiencia, the Ayuntamiento, and the Protomedicato. AGI AM 650, fol. 1, Fol. sobre la licencia de D. Vicente Rebequi, frances, para residir en Indias, 1720—2. AGN Virreyes 2, exp. 210, f. 96, Virrey Amarillas al Rey, Mexico, 25 abril 1757. See citation, n. 326 (Joseph Recole"). Reine was married. Baez Macias, 'Pianos y censos', p. 943.

Notes to pages 142-3 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339

340 341 342

343 344

345 346 347

348 349

350

217

See citation, n. 14 (Pedro de Arguelhes). This nephew of Baltasar dos Reis had been in New Spain for fortynine years. His military service had been with the army (ejercito) in Oaxaca. See citation, n. 14 (Pedro de Arguelhes). AGI CC 5594, fol. 5, Exp. sobre los bienes de Juan Glaudio Renault, difunto, Veracruz, 1732. AGN Inq. 857, exp. 41, fs. 237-42V., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Juan Rendel, de nacion ingles, natural de Londres, Puebla, 1735. Repetto was married and had two children in 1753. Baez Macias, * Pianos y censos', p. 940. AGN Inq. 911, exp. 4, fs. 28-38V., El Fiscal del SO contra D. Juan de Bitel y Rios, de nacion frances, por calvinista, San Martin Texelucan, 1741. See citation, n. 128 (Pedro Fernandes de Govea). Questioned in Mexico City about a case in Veracruz, Richards had a wife in Cuba. See citation, n. 236 (Joseph Lucas). Rimassa was married and had four daughters in 1753. Baez Macias, 'Pianos y censos', p. 938. AGN Inq. 932, exp. 16, f. 46, Miguel Francisco de Herrera al SO, Veracruz, 6 noviembre 1754. A Quaker, Rivett along with others, was captured at the Bay of Honduras by an Irishman in Spanish service. With Gerard Moore acting as his interpreter, Rivett requested reconciliacion in 1719. His request was presumably granted. AGN Inq. 777, exp. 2, fs. 15— i8v., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia Catolica de Eduardo Rivet, Mexico, 1719. Rubio Mane, 'Gente de Espafia', p. 116. See citation, n. 245 (Pierre Malet). AGN Inq. 777, exp. 68, fs. 518-19V., Denuncia contra Francisco Roque, natural de Flandes, por decir que con solo un relicario que traia consigo se veria libre de ser herido con arcabuz, espada, etc., Mexico, 1719. See citation, n. 25 (Michael Antonios Baptistes). AGI AM 640, fol. 13, fs. 349bis~359v., Testimonies de autos hechos en virtud de orden de SE por el alcalde mayor de Tochimilco sobre la prision y embargo de los bienes de Domingo Rodrigues de nacion portugues, Tochimilco, 1705. Jorge Rodrigues was in a hospital for a 'cure5 of syphilis, and the authorities accorded him immunity from arrest. Rodrigues was a cousin of the Viegas brothers. See citation, n. 262 (Jorge Mendes). See second citation, n. 257 (Antonio Martins de Robles). Rodrigues was a retainer of the local alcalde and had served with him in Catalonia before going to New Spain. AGI AM 640, fol. 22, fs. 545bis-55iv., Autos hechos por D. Diego de Rivera de Cotes alcalde mayor de la Villa Alta de San Udefonso sobre la represalia de los Portugueses, Villa Alta, 1705-6. This foreigner worked for Manuel Fernandes da Cunha, another Portuguese. See citation, n. 120 (Joao Fernandes). Rodrigues was a charity case at the time of his arrest. AGI AM 641, fol. 14, fs. 683bis-69ov., Testimonio de los autos hechos por D. Pedro Davila Galindo alcalde ordinario de la Puebla contra D. Juan, D. Manuel y D. Mattheos Pdez de Bana y Manuel Rodriguez por incursos en la represalia de Portugueses, Puebla, 1705. Rodrigues was in a hospital and had no goods. AGI AM 641, fol. 4,

218

351

352

353 354 355 356

357 358 359 360 361 362

363 364 365 366

367

Notes to pages 143-4 fs. 100-83, Testimonios de los autos hechos par D. Sebastian de Echeverria, alcalde ordinario de Puebla contra Juan Rodriguez Galdas, Domingo Perez y Manuel Rodriguez, Puebla, 1705. This foreigner was heavily in debt. AGI AM 641, fol. 17, fs. 786804, Testimonios de los autos hechos por el alcalde mayor de la villa de Leon contra Miguel Rodriguez en la represalia de Portugueses, Leon, 1705-6. This foreigner went to Puerto Rico as a soldier in 1677. For the twenty-six years prior to his arrest in 1705, Rodrigues had been a resident of Puebla. He had twelve children. See citation, n. 350 (Manuel Rodrigues). AGI AM 640, fol. 24, fs. 592-621, Testimonios de autos hechos sobre la represalia de Portugueses de la provincia de Sonora, San Joseph del Parral, 1705-6. See citation, n. 64 (Domingos de Garvalho). AGN Inq. 546, exp. 6, fs. 445-67, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia, de Juan de la Rosa, Mexico, 1705. AGN Inq. 923, exp. 14, fs. 164—85V., Relacion de la causa contra Jose Sobrados, espanol, alias Jose Amaguibar y Sabrados, Jose Mariano Berlin, Pedro Berlin, de nacion ingles, por el delito de casado dos veces, Mazapil, 1753. AGN RG 43, exp. 11, R.o. al virrey, Madrid, 10 marzo 1722. See citation, n. 278 (Daniel Naiscuriue). AGN Inq. 791, exp. 6, fs. 194-6V., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Gotthartd Rubberson, de nacion hamburguesa, hereje protestante, Mexico, 1721. AGI GG 5633, fol. 4, Exp. sobre bienes de D. Juan Antonio Salbago, difunto, Yucatan, 1757. Salvago was a veteran of the Spanish army in Europe. AGI AM 639, fol. 8, Testimonios de los autos hechos contra Juan Esteban Berdura, natural de Milan. Chalco, 1704. This foreigner's name is a baptismal alias. He was captured in the Laguna de Terminos in 1679 and had been in New Spain ever since. In 1703 he had been married to a woman in Puebla for twenty-four years. AGI AM 639, fol. 12, Testimonio de autos hechos en virtud de orden de SE por el Sr D. Juan Joseph de Veitia Linaje alcalde mayor de la Puebla sobre la aprehencion de ingleses, olandeses e imperiales contra Diego de Santiago, ingles, Puebla, 1704. AGN Inq. 551, exp. 83, fs. 431-iv., El Br Onofre Miguel del Castillo relativo a un ingles y cuatro judios, Mexico, 1714. AGN Inq. 735, exp. 36, fs. 603-iov.. Exp. sobre Esteban de Morras y D. Antonio Lopez, Mexico, 1707. Santis paid a six-peso 'fine' in 1704 for having come without a license. See citation, n. 62 (Philippe de Carrance). AGI AM 639, fol. 5, Testimonios de autos y hechos en la represalia de Xacome Santoni y Dominico Tula, Mexico, 1704. Suspected of being an Orthodox, Saradi was questioned and released in 1731. He had traveled to New Spain via India and the Philippines. His French partner 'Don Esteban' died in Acapulco, and Saradi remained in New Spain. AGN Inq. 829, exps. 6-7, fs. 5236ov., Relacion de la causa contra D. Pedro de Zarate, por sospechosas de ser cismatico y por proposiciones, Mexico, 1723-30. In 1753 Saruti had been in New Spain for thirty-six years. He was married and had five children. Baez Macias, 'Pianos y censos', p. 1012.


21

9

368 AGI AM 460, fol. 1, num. 15, Extractor Audiencia al Gonsejo de Indias, Mexico, 26 mayo 1702. AGI AM 460, fol. 1, num. 2, Extractor corregidor de Veracruz, D. Francisco Manzo de Zufiiga al Gonsejo de Indias, Veracruz, 11 junio 1702. 369 While in Puebla, Schulz received instruction in the faith from another German, Father Philipp Kern, SJ. AGN Inq. 876, exp. 37, fs. 198—205V., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Fe Catolica de Gaspar Schulz, de nacion aleman, Puebla, 1739. 370 See citation, n. 143 (William Fox). 371 See citation, n. 125 (Amaro Fernandes Cardoso). 372 Sergent accompanied Domingo Ramon's return expedition to Texas in 1716-17. AGN Historia 27, exps. 17-19, fs. 184V.-212, Capitan Domingo Ramon al virrey, Texas, 17 febrero, 22 y 26 Julio 1716. 373 Besides the round-up of 1703, Serrecer's troubles included being accused of blasphemy in 1710. He was guilty, and the Inquisition imposed penance. AGN Inq. 909, exp. 28, fs. 271-5, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Juan de Zereceda, extrangero, Mexico, 1710. Also see citations, nn. 321 (Bartholomew Raford) and 213 (John King). 374 See citation, n. 252 (Domingos Marques). 375 See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). 376 See citation, n. 252 (Domingos Marques). 377 All witnesses against Simoes were slaves or other blacks. AGN Inq. 859, exp. 31, fs. 429—33V., Testimonio contra un confitero llamado Francisco Simon, que vivo detras de la Iglesia Mayor, por usar practicas judaicas, Mexico, 1736. 378 Joao and Jose Simoes had come over to join their rich brother Luiz. Joseph de Simoes, a familiar of the Inquisition of Goimbra, won similar status from the Holy Office in Mexico City. Like his brothers, he was caught up in the represalia of 1705 and was eventually freed. AGN Inq. 706, exp. 25, fs. 237-47, Autos que se formaron sobre la incorporacion que se mando hacer en el distrito de esta Inquisicion de Mexico, de Jose Simois de nacion portugues, familiar del SO de Goimbra, San Jose del Parral, 1698. Also see citation, n. 64 (Domingos de Garvalho). 379 See citation, n. 64 (Domingos de Carvalho). 380 Luiz de Simoes, a vecino of Parral for thiry-three years, shared his good fortune with two brothers and with the Church. See citation, n. 64 (Domingos de Carvalho). 381 AGN Inq. 791, exp. 7, fs. 197-200, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Slew Soane, de nacion ingles, anglicano, Mexico, 1721. 382 See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). 383 See citation, n. 82 (Esteban Correa). 384 See citation, n. 143 (William Fox). 385 Stevenson presented himself as a 'professor of medicine'. AGN RC 45, exp. 68, R.c. al virrey, el Pardo, 2 marzo 1726. Also see citation, n. 19 (Thomas Arrot). 386 AGI AM 863, fol. 3, Testimonio de un quadnero de diligencias formadas sobre la represalia de ingleses que produce el cargo de 19 pesos, Veracruz, 1719-20. 387 AGN Inq. 922, exp. 14, fs. 402-6, Denuncia de Juana Catarina Estuardo, de nacion inglesa, contra Manuel Garcia Mendieta, Mexico, 1759. 388 AGI AM 2424, Fol. s.n. con el patente de coronel del Tercio de

220 389 390

391 392 393 394 395

396

397 398 399 400

401 402 403

404

Notes to page 146 Pardos y Morenos Libres de NE de Francisco Manuel Suarez, Aranjuez, 30 junio 1750. Sunday suffered from malaria. See citation, n. 320 (Bartholomew Raford). Tasara arrived in Veracruz in 1714. AGI AM 650, fol. 20, Exp. sobre la peticion de D. Reymundo de Tazara, extranjero, para residir en Indias, 1735. AGI AM 650, fol. 11, Exp. sobre la licencia de D. Raimundo Catasara, extranjero, para residir en Indias, 1743— 7. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687-1760, articulo 11. Taufer was a weaver before he became a baker. AGN Inq. 931, exp. 22, fs. 424-36, Denuncia espontanea y reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Juan Bautista Saquenez, Mexico, 1748. AGN Inq. 848, exp. 41, fs. 565-72v., Denuncia que hace D. Antonio Dionisio Garote, vecino de la ciudad de Nueva Veracruz, contra varios judios que practican la religion Catolica, Veracruz, 1733. See citation, n. 8 (Manuel Alves). AGN Inq. 821, exp. 34, fs. 523—3ov., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Edmundo Teyle de nacion ingles, Puebla, 1728. Tillion was in Mexico City for only about two months before he left for Guatemala. The Holy Office made no effort to track him down. AGN Inq. 1231, exp. 12, fs. 319-20, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Juan Baptista Tillon, de nacion frances, por supersticioso, Mexico, 1717. In 1739 Tonneilier had been in San Francisco de Gampeche for twenty-two years. He had a wife and four children. AGI INE 16, fol. 5, R.c. por la qual le concede SM naturaleza en los reynos de las Indias a D. Lucas Toneiro, Aranjuez, 21 mayo 1739. See citation, n. 8 (Manuel Alves). Serving as a cabin boy on a Spanish flota, Torres went to New Spain when he was eight years old. See citation, n. 170 (Joao Gomes de Castro). See citation, n. 163 (Girolamo Gerardi). Tracy's crime, which the Holy Office did not investigate, was to proposition a woman, telling her that fornication was not a sin. AGN Inq. 906, exp. 21, fs. 454-6, El Secretario que hace oficio de Fiscal de la Inquisicion contra un ingles llamado Jorge Trache, por decir que solo el pecado de adultero es el que se prohibe en el sexto mandamiento, Mexico, 1745. AGI AM 1687, ramo 1, indice 213, fs. 132-4, Inventarios de cartas, diarios e instancias, 1687—1760, articulo 10. Traviata paid a small fine for having gone to New Spain without a license. See citation, n. 280 (Jean Philippe du Nogal). Tullio was a veteran of the Spanish army in Italy and had gone to New Spain in the party of Viceroy Galve. AGI AM 639, fol. 15, Testimonio de los autos hechos sobre la naturaleza y origen de Dominico Tula, alias Rodriguero, Mexico, 1703. Also see citation, n. 365 (Giacomo Santoni). Not molested in the Judaism investigation of 1698, Bras and Miguel Valladares were then both about fifty years of age. Bras had served as a soldier in Cadiz for eighteen years and had commanded his company for the last five of these. He had married in Cadiz and had several children. By the time Bras was arrested and then released in the represalia of 1705, his Spanish-born son, Joseph, held the title to


405 406 407

408 409

410 411 412 413 414

415 416 417

418 419 420 421 422 423

221

their two stores in Mexico City; so, this property was exempt from seizure. Both father and son belonged to the confectioners' guild in Mexico City. Bras and Miguel had two Spanish-born nephews, Antonio and Joseph Suarez de los Rios, who were master confectioners in Veracruz. AGN Inq. 540, exp. 25, fs. 304-10, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Miguel de Valladares, confitero, y otros, por sospechas de judaismo, Mexico, 1698. AGI AM 640, fol. 5, fs. igobis—2i8v., Testimonio de los autos hechos sobre la represalia de personas y bienes de Bias de Balladares y Joseph de Balladares, su hijo, Mexico, 1705. Miguel presented proof of his birth to Viceroy Sarmiento in 1698 but died before the investigation of 1705. See citations, n. 404 (Bras de Valladares). See citation, n. 222 (Sarah Lincey). In 1754 Veglia had been in Puebla for thirty-two years. AGI AM 650, fol. 21, Exp. sobre la licencia de D. Domingo de la Vega Ravela para residir en Indias, 1754. AGI INE 16, fol. 43, Titulo por lo qual le concede SM naturaleza a D. Domingo de la Vega y Ravela, Buen Retiro, 11 agosto 1754. AGN Inq. 859, exp. 32, fs. 434-5V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra un mozo llamado Pedro Ventura, por proposiciones, Mexico, 1708. AGN Inq. 861, exp. 26, fs. 452—9, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Juan Vidal de nacion ingles, hereje presbiteriano, natural de la ciudad de Cantobery, Mexico, 1736. Also see citation, n. 240 (John MacDonald). Francisco das Viegas had two brothers, Manuel and Jorge, who also spent some time in New Spain. Neither Francisco nor Jorge das Viegas was ever arrested. See citation, n. 345 (Jorge Rodrigues). See citations, nn. 345 (Jorge Rodrigues) and 410 (Francisco das Viegas). See citations, nn. 345 (Jorge Rodrigues) and 410 (Francisco das Viegas). A long-time resident of Spain and the Indies, Vila-Lobos was a wealthy man. See citation, n. 102 (Manuel Domingues). Villanueva was the name of this foreigner's godfather in Tepeaca. AGN Inq. 866, exp. 58, fs. 313-2OV., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra un ingles u holandes llamado Antonio, por rebautizante, Mexico, 1738. See citations, nn. 148 (Angus Fraser) and 10 (Edward Andrews). AGN Inq. 840, exp. 2, fs. 265-70, Autos sobre la reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Nathaniel Watts, Orizaba, 1733White had been in New Spain for ten years at the time of his application for citizenship, but he died before the proceedings were completed. He had a brother, John, who was a merchant and vecino of Seville. AGI AM 650, fol. 13, Exp. sobre la licencia de D. Francisco Xavier Whit, alias Blanco, de nacion irlandes, para residir en Indias, Madrid, 1752. See citation, n. 143 (William Fox). William White was a friend of the fugitive Charles Allen. See citation, n. 12 (Paul Archdeacon). See citation, n. 10 (Edward Andrews). See citations, n. 117 (Antoine du Farge). See citation, n. 10 (Edward Andrews). Also called a quimico and a curandero, Francois was a partner of

222 424 425 426 427

428 429 430 431

Notes to pages 148-54 Alexandre la Bruyere. See citation, n. 47 (Alexandre la Bruyere). See citation, n. 25 (Michael Antonios Baptistes). See citation, n. 81 (John Gorkran). See citations, n. 117 (Antoine du Farge). 'Don Juan' ordered some suspicious carvings from two sculptors. They denounced him, but the Holy Office took no action. AGN Inq. 891, exp. 6, fs. 245-55V., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra un extrangero nombrado D. Juan, al parecer mercachilfe por sospechas de usar de cosas supersticiosas, Mexico, 1743. See citation, n. 25 (Michael Antonio Baptistes). In 1738 Mary Catherine and John Bridges lived in Orizaba where he was the dueno of a mill. See citation, n. 414 ('Antonio de Villanueba'). See citation, n. 193 (Edward Hedges). A member of one of the religious orders accused Pieter of making improper advances to women who frequented the clothing store where he worked. The Holy Office took no action. AGN Inq. 746, exp. 73, f. 608, Denuncia contra un flamenco llamado Pedro, Mexico, 30 marzo 1713.

Appendix II 1 Because of the sources and available manuscripts, this listing can not be considered complete. The greatest gaps exist in the years prior to 1744. 2 AGN, Historia 309, fs. 46-72v., 73-99V., 237-65V., 306-77V., 41346V., Gatalogi IPM, 1744, 1748, 1751, 1755, 1761. Aspurz, Aportacion extranjera. Guglielmo Kratz, SJ, 'Gesuiti italiani nelle missione spagnuole al tempo dell'espulsione, 1767-1768', Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, xi (1945), 27—68. Otakar Odlozilik, 'Czech Missionaries in New Spain', HAHR, xxv (1945), 428-54. Ernest J. Burrus, SJ, La obra cartogrdfica de la Provincia Mexicana de la Compania de Jesus, i^6y-ig6y (2 vols., Madrid, 1967), 1. Gonzalez de Cossio, Gaceta. 3 Peter M. Dunne, SJ, and Ernest J. Burrus, SJ, 'Four Unpublished Letters of Anton Maria Benz, Eighteenth Century Missionary to Mexico', Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, xxiv (1955), 336—78. 4 Father Butler instructed and acted as an interpreter for a thirteenyear-old Scot in 1749. AGN Inq. 885, exp. 6, fs. 165-70, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Juan Gay, de nacion escoces, 1749. 5 Denounced by a homosexual lover, Cesa was expelled from the Society and imprisoned by the Holy Office. AGN Inq. 632, exp. 2, Relacion de la causa que en este SO sigue al Sefior Fiscal contra D. Angel Maria Quesa de nacion sardo o sevillano presbitero expulso de la Compania de Jesus extinguida y domiciliado en este Arzobispado por solicitante, Mexico, 1765. 6 The man's proper Italian name 'Cino' (current variations Chini and Cini) translates into the Spanish adjective (and noun) 'Chino', a term with racial connotations in colonial Mexico. (See p. 170, n. 8 above.) From the German manner of treating 'ci' in Latin, this famous Jesuit adopted the name 'Kino'. The best account of his activities is Herbert Eugene Bolton, Rim of Christendom: A Biography of Eusebio Francisco Kino, Pacific Coast Pioneer (New York,

1936). Bolton also edited and translated Kino's Historical Memoir of


7

8

9

10

11

12 13 14 15

223

Pimeria Alta (2 vols., 1919, reprinted in 1 vol., Berkeley, 1948). There are several other things available. Ernest J. Burrus, SJ, Kino Reports to Headquarters, Correspondence of Eusebio F. Kino, S.J., From New Spain with Rome (Rome, 1954). Pietro Tacchi Venturi, SJ, 'Nuove lettere inedite del P. Eusebio Francesco Chino', Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, in (1934), 248-64. Francisco Fernandez del Castillo, ed., Las misiones de Sonora y Arizona, por Eusebio Francisco Kino (Mexico City, 1913-22). Brother Gay instructed Nicholas Carpenter in the tenets of the faith and served as his interpreter before the Inquisition. AGN Inq. 791, exp. 4, fs. 185—9, Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Nicolas Carpintero, marinero ingles, Mexico, 1721. As a trusted member of the community, Gordon was instrumental in helping three English-speaking Protestants through the process of reconciliacion. They were William Cogan, Isidor Drinkwater, and John Child. AGN Inq. 824, exp. 7, fs. 41-7V., Reconciliacion de Guillermo Cogan hereje protestante de la secta Anglicana, quien detesto de la heregia y se reunio en la Santa Madre Iglesia, Mexico, 1742. AGN Inq. 824, esp. 14, fs. 232—7v., Reconciliacion de Isidro Bebeagua hereje protestante de nacion ingles, Puebla, 1747. AGN Inq. 824, exp. 18, fs. 251-6, Restitucion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Juan Nino, ingles, Mexico, 1747. A cousin of Gordon's, Thomas Arrot, found himself in trouble with the Inquisition. Gordon, then a student at the Jesuit Colegio Maximo in Mexico City, came forward to help clear his relative. AGN Inq. 811, exp. 4, fs. 310-54, El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra Thomas Arrot, ingles, por proposiciones hereticas, Oaxaca, 1725. Father Gordon also appeared as a witness for the defense in the case of Paul Archdeacon, 'NewArian'. AGN Inq. 961, exp. 5, fs. i-n6v., El Sr Inquisidor Fiscal contra D. Pablo Ignacio Blanco, alias Archdekin, natural de la ciudad de Waterford en Irlanda, por proposiciones hereticas o sospechosas de herejia, Mexico, 1756. By 1739 Father Kern had been ordained. In that year he instructed a fellow German and acted as his interpreter before the Inquisition. AGN Inq. 876, exp. 37, fs. 198-205V., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Fe Catolica de Gaspar Schulz, de nacion aleman, Puebla, 1739There are two biographies of Konscak. M. D. Krompotic, Life and Works of the Reverend Father Ferdinand Konscak, S.J., 1703-1759, An Early Missionary in California (Boston, 1923). Francisco Zevallos, The Apostolic Life of Fernando Consag, Explorer of Lower California, trans, by Manuel P. Servin (Los Angeles, 1968). Ernest J. Burrus, SJ, ed., Wenceslaus Linck, Reports and Letters, 1762-1788 (Los Angeles, 1967). Ernest J. Burrus, SJ, ed., Wenceslaus Linck's Diary of his 1766 Expedition to Northern Baja California (Los Angeles, 1966). Roberto Ramos, ed., Relacion del Padre Ignacio Maria Napoli acerca de la California hecha en el ano de 1721 (Mexico, 1958). Alberto Francisco Pradeau, 'Nentuig's Description of Sonora', Mid-America, xxxv (1953), 81-90. Allan Christelow, 'Father Joseph Neumann, Jesuit Missionary to the Tarahumares', HAHR, xix(i939), 423-42. Joseph Och, Missionary in Sonora: The Travel Reports of Joseph Och, S.J., 1755-1767, trans, and annotated by Theodore E. Treutlein (San Francisco, 1965).

2 24 16

Notes t o pages

Ignaz Pfefferkorn, SJ, Sonora: A Description of the Province, trans, and ed. by Theodore E. Treutlein (Albuquerque, 1949). 17 Francisco Maria Piccolo, SJ, Informe on the New Province of California, 1702, trans, and ed. by George P. Hammond (Los Angeles, 1967). Ernest J. Burrus, SJ, 'Francesco Maria Piccolo, 16541729, Pioneer of Lower California in the Light of Roman Archives', HAHR, xxxv (1955), 61-76. 18 Under his Spanish name, Juan Maria Salvatierra, he wrote Mision de la Baja California, ed. by R. P. G. Bayle, SJ (Madrid, 1946). There are several things available. Miguel Venegas, SJ, Juan Maria Salvatierra of the Company of Jesus, Missionary in the Province of New Spain and the Apostolic Conqueror of the Californias, trans, and ed. by Marguerite Eyer Wilbur (Cleveland, 1929). Pietro Tacchi Venturi, SJ, ed., 'Per la biografia del P. Gianmaria Salvaterra, Tre nuove lettere', Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, v ( J 936), 76-83. Bolton, Rim of Christendom, pp. 345, 534 If. 19 Peter Dunne, SJ, ed., Jacobo Sedelmayr: Missionary, Frontiersman, Explorer in Arizona and Sonora, Four Original Manuscript Narratives, 1744-1751 (Tucson, 1955). 20 Theodore E. Treutlein, 'The Relation of Philipp Segesser: The Pimas and Other Indians', Mid-America, xxvn (1945), 142-87. 21 AGI GC 5459, fol. 161, Exp. sobre P. Juan de Steynefert de la Gompafiia de Jesus, pasajero a Mexico, Sevilla, 1699—1702. 22 Odlozilik reports (p. 445) that Steinhofer wrote a medical book of some importance, Florilegio medicinal o breve epitome de las medicinas y cirujia (Mexico, 1713). This book was reprinted in Madrid and Amsterdam, and as late as 1887 in Mexico City! 23 AGN Inq. 821, exp. 34, fs. 523-30V., Reconciliacion al gremio de la Santa Madre Iglesia de Edmundo Teyle, de nacion ingles, Puebla, 1728. Tell acted as instructor and interpreter for the heretic in these proceedings. 24 Sigismundo Taraval, SJ, The Indian Uprising in Lower California, 1734-1737, trans, and ed. by Marguerite Eyer Wilbur, Quivira Society Publications, vol. 11 (Los Angeles, 1931).

Bibliography

COMMENT Traditional unannotated listings are the most efficient means of presenting bibliographical information. Such listings have been invaluable to this author in making quick checks in the works of others, and, for this reason, the newer essay form, more useful to the student than to the specialist, has only a limited introductory role in this select bibliography. The standard statement on foreigners in the Spanish empire of the sixteenth century is Richard Konetzke, * Emigration de gente extrangera', Revista Internacional de Sociologia, m (1945), 269-302. Also helpful are portions of two books by J. M. Ots Capdequi: El estado espanol en las Indias (1941, reprinted Mexico, 1975) and Estudios de historia del derecho espanol en las Indias (Bogota, 1940). Additional studies emphasizing maritime and imperial questions are legion; for example, Maria Encarnacion Rodriguez Vicente, 'Los extranjeros y el mar en el Peru (fines del siglo xvi y comienzos del xvn) J , Anuario de Estudios Americanos, xxv (1968), 619-29. Richard E. Greenleaf, The Mexican Inquisition of the Sixteenth Century (Albuquerque, 1969), deals with some foreigners and the Holy Office in the sixteenth century. His projected studies of the Mexican Inquisition in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries should also be helpful. Seminal articles dealing with foreigners in seventeenth-century Spain, implying conclusions for the American empire as well, are: Antonio Dominguez Ortiz, 'Los extranjeros en la vida espanola durante el siglo XVII', Estudios de Historia Social de Espaha, ed. Carmelo Vinas-Mey (4 vols., Madrid, i960), iv 291-355, and in the same work, Hipolito Sanchez de Sopranis, 'Las naciones extranjeras en Cadiz durante el siglo XVII1, iv, 639-877. Dealing with the Portuguese and Jewish questions of the mid-seventeenth century are: J. I. Israel, 'The Portuguese in Seventeenth-Century Mexico', Jahrbuch fur Geschichte von Staat, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft Lateinamerikas, xi (1974), 12-32, and his Race, Class, and Politics in Colonial Mexico, i6io-i6yo (London, 1975), pp. 110-31. Also see works by Seymour B. Liebman, for example, 'The Jews of Colonial Mexico5, HAHR, XLIII (1963), 95-108, and Lewis Hanke, 'The Portuguese in Spanish America, with Special Reference to the Villa Imperial de PotosF, Revista de Historia de America, LI (1961), 1-48. The most influential works dealing with, or touching on, foreigners 225

226

Bibliography

in eighteenth-century Spanish America have emphasized intellectual and political questions after 1750. See: Arthur R. Steele, Flowers for the King: the Expedition of Ruiz and Pavon and the Flora of Peru (Durham, 1964), and his bibliography; John Rydjord, Foreign Interest in the Independence of New Spain (1935, reprinted New York, 1971); and Harry Bernstein, Origins of Inter-American Interest, ijoo-1812 (1945, reprinted New York, 1965). For a discussion of some of the problems faced by one group of foreigners in late-eighteenth-century New Spain, see Jacques Houdaille, 'Frenchmen and Francophiles in New Spain from 1760 to 1810', The Americas, xm (1956), 1-29, and his dissertation (listed below). Also see R. G. [sic], ' Prision de franceses en la Nueva Espafia en 1795 s, BAGN, xxiv (1953), 91—110. Ghriston I. Archer in 'To Serve the King: Military Recruitment in Late Colonial Mexico', HAHR, LV (1975), 226-50, touches on the question of foreigners in the military units of late-eighteenth-century Mexico. And the late John Tate Lanning's monumental study of Spanish colonial medicine, being edited for publication by John Jay TePaske, will contain a chapter on foreign doctors. In addition to these works and those cited in the text, several books and articles listed below under 'Other Authorities' may also be consulted with profit. MANUSCRIPTS Faced with a myriad of interpretive legal and administrative problems, the Spanish bureaucracy must have supported a thriving paper industry. Masses of this paper survive in several depositories on both sides of the Atlantic. By far the greatest number of documents dealing with colonial Mexico are in the Archivo General de Indias (Seville) and the Archivo General de la Nacion (Mexico City). In addition, several other collections such as the Archivo Historico de Hacienda (Mexico City) and the Archivo General de Simancas near Valladolid also contain important papers. These four, especially the AGI and the AGN, provided the bulk of the documentation for this study. MANUSCRIPTS CITED AGI

Archivo General de Indias, Seville

CC Seccion de la Casa de Contratacion Leg. 596B. Legs. 1478-82. Legs. 1484-562. Legs. 1612-15. Leg. 4886. Leg. 5459. Leg. 5585, fol. 96. Leg. 5593, fol. 6. Leg. 5594, fol. 5. Leg. 5596, fol. 11. Leg. 5599, fol. 1. Leg. 5600, fol. 3. Leg. 5602, fol. 4. Leg. 5607, fol. 6. Leg. 5612, fol. 6. Leg. 5633, fols. 4, 6. CG Seccion de Contaduria General de Indias Leg. 238, ramo 2, fols. 22-43. Leg. 239, ramo 4. AG Seccion de Gobierno, Audiencia de Guadalajara Leg. 506.

Bibliography

227

AM Section de Gobierno, Audiencia de Mexico Leg. 460, fols. 1, 5, 40. Leg. 474, fol. 1. Leg. 633. Legs. 639-41. Leg. 650, fols. 1-3, 5-13, 15-26. Leg. 863, fols. 2, 3, 6. Leg. 1687, ramo 1, indice 213. Leg. 2424. Leg. 2428. INE Section de Gobierno, Indiferente de la Nueva Espana Leg. 16, fols. 4-10, 12-17, 19, 40-50, 52. Leg. 88, fols. 8, 9. Legs. 135-6. IG Section de Gobierno, Indiferente General Leg. 506. Leg. 538, tomos 2-3. Leg. 539, tomos 1-2. Leg. 821. Leg. 1538, ramos 1-2. Leg. 1597. Leg. 1601, fol. 19. Leg. 2751, ramo 1, fols, 34, 36. Leg. 2787. MP Section de Mapas, Pianos, Dibujos y Estampas Mapa 1009. AGN

Archivo General de la Nacion, Mexico City

Bandos Ramo de los Bandos de los Virreyes Vol. 1, exp. 12. Vol. 2, exps. 16, 18. Vol. 3, exps. 16, 17. Vol. 5, exp. 10. Vol. 7, exp. 8. RCD Ramo de Reales Cedulas Duplicados Vol. 40, exp. 239. GP Ramo de General de Parte Vol. 19, exp. 203. Vol. 21, exps. 9, 82, 242, 243, 276, 295, 303. Vol. 31, exps. 18,74, 173. Historia Ramo de Historia Vol. 1, exps. 8, 9, 12, 21-7. Vol. 27, exps. 12, 13, 17-19, 26-7. Vol. 28, exps. 1, 4. Vol. 294, exps. 1, 4, 5. Vol. 309. Vol. 345, exp. 7. Vol. 346, exps 2, 7. Vol. 380, fs. 170-283. Vol. 386, fs. 74-5, 91-5. Vol. 393, exp. 10. Vol. 436, exp. 27. Inq. Ramo de la Inquisition Vol. 540, exp. 25. Vol. 543, exp. 65. Vol. 544, exp. 22. Vol. 546, exp. 6. Vol. 551, exp. 83. Vol. 632, exp. 2. Vol. 706, exp. 25. Vol. 710, exps. 1, 2. Vol. 715, exp. 16. Vol. 718, exps. 11, 12, 21. Vol. 720, exps. 1, 12. Vol. 721, exps. 8, 11, 20. Vol. 722, exp. 10. Vol. 724, exp. 2. Vol. 729, exp. 29. Vol. 731, exp. 9. Vol. 735, exps. 35, 36. Vol. 738, exp. 7. Vol. 745, exps. 45, 47, 48. Vol. 746, exp. 73. Vol. 748, exps. 5, 13, 19. Vol. 750, exps. 9-11, 34. Vol. 751, exp. 18. Vol. 753, exp. 4. Vol. 758, exp. 11. Vol. 760, exps. 4, *7> 35- Vol. 761, exp. 40. Vol. 767, exps. 8, 13. Vol. 772, exp. 8. Vol. 775, exps. 3, 39. Vol. 776, exp. 36. Vol. 777, exps. 2, 5, 67, 68. Vol. 781, exp. 2. Vol. 785, exps. 4, 5. Vol. 787, exps. 2-6. Vol. 791, exps. 3-7. Vol. 792, exp. 15. Vol. 796, exp. 54. Vol. 803, exp. 41.

228

Bibliography

Vol. 811, exp. 4. Vol. 813, exp. 2. Vol. 817, exps. 10, 21, 31. Vol. 818, exps. 6, 45, 48. Vol. 821, exps. 14, 34. Vol. 824, exps. 6, 7, 14, 18. Vol. 829, exps. 6, 7. Vol. 836, exps. 13, 16. Vol. 840, exp. 2. Vol. 841, exps. 4, 12. Vol. 843, exps. 9, 10. Vol. 848, exp. 41. Vol. 849, fs. 28699V. Vol. 854, exp. 6 Vol. 857, exps. 38-41. Vol. 859, fs. 392-6, 4345v., 452-9. Vol. 861, exps. 24-6, 31. Vol. 866, exp, 54, 58. Vol. 873, exp. 14. Vol. 876, exps. 20, 37, 41. Vol. 885, exp. 6. Vol. 891, exp. 6. Vol. 901, exp. 28. Vol. 906, exps. 14-16, 21 Vol. 911, exps. 4, 18. Vol. 912, exp. 35. Vol. 913, exp. 10. Vol. 916, exp. 17. Vol. 920, fs. 250-6. Vol. 921, exp. 4. Vol. 922, exp. 14. Vol. 923, exp. 14. Vol. 924, exps. 5, 7, 9. Vol. 926, exp. 20. Vol. 931, exp. 22. Vol. 932, exps. 16, 39, 46. Vol. 946, exp. 6. Vol. 951, exp. 3. Vol. 961, exp. 5. Vol. 969, exp. 15. Vol. 974, exp. 13. Vol. 976, exp. 3. Vol. 978, exps. 1, 23. Vol. 981, exp. 13DIS. Vol. 986, exp. 17. Vol. 988, exp. 1. Vol. 1000, exps. 4, 15, 26, 28, 34. Vol. 1001, exp. 21. Vol. 1002, exp. 10. Vol. 1007, exps. 1, 2. Vol. 1014, exp. 28. Vol. 1019, exp. 7. Vol. 1024,ex P- 2- Vol. 1035, exp. 13. Vol. 1042, fs. 141-5. Vol. 1043, exp. 1. Vol. 1045, exps. 20, 23. Vol. 1050, exps. 5, 19. Vol. 1051, fs. 599V., 112-14V. Vol. 1057, exps. 3, 6. Vol. 1063, exps. 8, 9. Vol. 1069, exps. 2, 3. Vol. 1070, exp. 24. Vol. 1071, exp. 3. Vol. 1079, exp. 9. Vol. 1081, exp. 8. Vol. 1090, exp. 1. Vol. 1091, exps. 1, 2. Vol. 1095, exp. 6. Vol. 1099, exp. 12. Vol. 1100, exp. 1. Vol. 1103, exp. 25. Vol. 1104, exp. 4. Vol. 1131, exp. 9. Vol. 1135, exp. 15. Vol. 1138, exp. 18. Vol. 1168, exp. 23. Vol. 1169, exp. 8. Vol. 1171, exp. 3. Vol. 1175, exp. 30. Vol. 1176, exp. 10. Vol. 1231, exp. 12. Vol. 1241, exp. 11. Vol. 1333, exp. 4. Vol. 1365, exp. 14. Mineria R a m o de Mineria Vol. 123, exp. 4. R G R a m o de Reales Gedulas Originales Vol. 23, exps. 78, 112. Vol. 25, exp. 38. Vol. 28, exp. 7. Vol. 29, exp. 109. Vol. 30, exps. 3, 80. Vol. 31, exps. 39, 52, 87, 128, 132, 146. Vol. 32, exps. 23, 73, 120, 180, 196. Vol. 33, exps. 2, 98, 117. Vol. 34, exp. 107. Vol. 35, exps. 27, 46. Vol. 36, exps. 79, 90, 94, 128, 157. Vol. 37, exps. 34, 46, 117. Vol. 38, exps. 27, 60. Vol. 39, exps. 68, 119, 121-3, 127, 134. Vol. 40, exps. 3, 112, 141, 147, I55-7- Vol. 41, exps. 42, 72. Vol. 42, exps. 11, 12, 30, 54. Vol. 43, exps. 11, 58. Vol. 44, exps. 41, 42, 72, 122. Vol. 45, exps. 35, 63, 68, 75, 79, 100, 122. Vol. 46, exps. 26, 40, 42, 58, 95. Vol. 47, exps. 15, 85. Vol. 48, exps. 115, 132, 133- Vol. 49, exp. 63. Vol. 50, exps. 6, 26, 95. Vol. 51, exps. 70, 96, 138. Vol. 52, exps. 4, 42, 73. Vol. 53, exp. 22. Vol. 54, exp. 8. Vol. 55, exps. 30, 49. Vol. 56, exps. 10, 12, 21, 64. Vol. 58, exps. 37, 58, 100. Vol. 59, exps. 41, 97, 105. Vol. 61, exps. 1, 7, 14, 77. Vol. 62, exps. 4, 11, 16, 41, 78. Vol. 63, exp. 12. Vol. 64, exps. 32, 95, 118. Vol. 65, exp. 57. Vol. 66, exp. 50. Vol. 67, exps. 14, 84. Vol. 68, exps. 5, 13. Vol. 69, exp. 46. Vol. 70, exps. 5, 25, 99. Vol. 72, exps. 22, 70, 81. Vol. 74, exps. 22, 68. Vol. 76, exps. 73, 113, 131. Vol. 77, exps. 81, 129. Vol. 78, exp. 158. Vol. 79, exp. 53. Vol. 91, exp. 101.

Bibliography

229

Virreyes Ramo de la Gorrespondencia de los Virreyes Vol. 1, cartas 27, 72. Vol. 2, cartas 210, 214, 283, 330. Vol. 3, carta 435AGS

Archivo General de Simancas

Titulos Direction General del Tesoro, Contaduria General de Valores, Titulos de Indias Leg. 180, fol. 519. Leg. 182, fols. 417, 583, 621. Leg. 183, fols. 149, 150, 152, 314, 364, 365, 450, 734. AHH

Archivo Historico de Hacienda, Mexico City

Leg. 460, exp. 52. Leg. 550, exp. 91. Leg. 599, exp. 10. P R I M A R Y A N D C O N T E M P O R A R Y S O U R C E S (Printed) Belefia, Eusebio Bentura (ed.). Recopilacion sumaria de todos los autos acordados de la real audiencia y sola del crimen de esta Nueva Espana. 2 vols. Mexico, 1787 Bolton, Herbert Eugene (ed.). Kino's Historical Memoir of Pimeria Alta. 2 vols. Cleveland, 1919. (Reprinted in 1 vol., Berkeley, 1948) Boturini Benaduci, Lorenzo. Idea de una nueva historia general de la America Septentrional. 1746. (Reprinted with 'Estudio preliminar' by Miguel Leon-Portilla, Mexico, 1974) Burrus, Ernest J., SJ (ed.). Wenceslaus Linck's Diary of his 1766 Expedition to Northern Baja California. Los Angeles, 1966 (ed.). Wenceslaus Linck, Reports and Letters, 1762-1788. Los Angeles, 1967 Dunne, Peter, SJ (ed.). Jacobo Sedelmayr: Missionary, Frontiersman, Explorer in Arizona and Sonora, Four Original Manuscript Narratives, 1744-1751. Tucson, 1955 Dunne, Peter, SJ, and Ernest J. Burrus, SJ. 'Four Unpublished Letters of Anton Maria Benz, Eighteenth Century Missionary to Mexico', Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, xxiv (1955), 336-78 Gage, Thomas. The English-American: A New Survey of the West Indies, 1648. Edited with an introduction by A. P. Newton, London, 1928 Gemelli Careri, Giovanni Francesco. Giro intorno al Mondo. 6 vols. Naples, 1699-1700 Las cosas mas considerables vistas en la Nueva Espana. Translated by Jose Maria de Agreda y Sanchez with a prologue by Alberto Maria Carrefio. Mexico, 1946 Viaje a la Nueva Espana. Translated by Jose Maria de Agreda y Sanchez with an introduction by Fernando B. Sandoval. Mexico, 1955 Gibson, Charles (ed. and trans.). The Spanish Tradition in America. New York, 1968 Gonzalez de Cossio, Francisco (ed.). Gacetas de Mexico, Castorena y

230

Bibliography

Ursua {1722) - Sahagun de Arevalo (1728 a 1742). 3 vols. Mexico, 1949-50 Humboldt, Alexander von. Ensayo politico sobre Nueva Espaha. Edited by Luis Alberto Sanchez. Santiago de Chile, 1942 Instrucciones que los virreyes de Nueva Espana dejaron a sus sucesores. 2 vols. Mexico, 1867-3 Kino, Eusebio Francisco. Las misiones de Sonora y Arizona. Edited by Francisco Fernandez del Castillo. Mexico, 1913-22 Konetzke, Richard (ed.). Coleccion de documentos para la historia de la formation social de Hispanoamerica, 1493-1810. 3 vols. Madrid, 1953 Lopes da Costa Almeida, Antonio (ed.). Repertorio remissivo da legislaqao da marinha e do ultramar comprehendida nos annos de 1317 ate 1856. Lisbon, 1856 Muro Orejon, Antonio (ed.). Cedulario americano del siglo XVIII. 2 vols. Seville, 1956. Pfefferkorn, Ignaz, SJ. Sonora: A Description of the Province. Translated and edited by Theodore E. Treutlein. Albuquerque, 1949 Piccolo, Francisco Maria. Informe on the New Province of California, 1702. Translated and edited by George P. Hammond. Los Angeles, 1967

Ramos, Roberto (ed.). Relation del Padre Ignacio Maria Napoli acerca de la California hecha en el ano de 1721. Mexico, 1958 Recopilacion de las leyes de las Indias. 4 vols. Madrid, 1681. (Reprinted, Madrid, 1973) Recopilacion de las leyes destos reynos. 3 vols. Madrid, 1640 Salvatierra, Juan Maria. Mision de la Baja California. Edited by R. P. C. Bayle, SJ. Madrid, 1946 Shaw, William Arthur. Letters of Denization and Acts of Naturalization for Aliens in England and Ireland, 1603-1800. 3 vols. London, 1911 Taraval, Sigismundo, SJ. The Indian Uprising in Lower California, 1734-1737. Translated and edited by Marguerite Eyer Wilbur. Quivira Society Publications, vol. 11. Los Angeles, 1931 Treutlein, Theodore E. (ed.). Joseph Och, Missionary in Sonora: The Travel Reports of Joseph Och, S.J., 1735-1767. San Francisco, 1965 Venegas, Miguel, SJ. Juan Maria Salvatierra of the Company of Jesus, Missionary in the Province of New Spain and the Apostolic Conqueror of the Calif ornias. Translated and edited by Marguerite Eyer Wilbur. Cleveland, 1929 Venturi, Pietro Tacchi. 'Nuove lettere inedite del P. Eusebio Francesco Chino', Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, m (1934), 248-64 (ed.), 'Per la biografia del P. Gianmaria Salvaterra, 'Tre nuove lettere', Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, v (1936), 76-83 Villasefior y Sanchez, Joseph Antonio de. Theatro Americano, description general de los reynos y provincias de la Nueva Espana y sus jurisdicciones. 2 vols. Mexico, 1952. (Reprint of 1746-8 edition) Wroth, Lawrence Counselman, and Gertrude L. Annan (eds.). Acts of the French Royal Administration concerning Canada, the West Indies, and Louisiana, prior to 1791. New York, 1930.

Bibliography

231

Zevallos, Francisco. The Apostolic Life of Fernando Consag, Explorer of Lower California. Translated by Manuel P. Servin. Los Angeles, 1968 AUTHORITIES CITED Aguirre Beltran, Gonzalo. 'The Slave Trade in Mexico', HAHR, xxiv (1944), 412-51 Alegre, Francisco Javier, SJ. Historia de la Provincia de la Compania de Jesus de Nueva Espana. Edited, annotated, and with a bibliography by Ernest J. Burrus, SJ and Felix Zubillaga, SJ. 4 vols. Rome, 1956 Arcila Farias, Eduardo. Comercio entre Venezuela y Mexico en los sighs XVII y XVIII. Mexico, 1950. Aspurz, Lazaro de, OFM. La aportacion extranjera a las misiones espanolas del patronato regio. Madrid, 1946 Baez Macias, Eduardo. 'Pianos y censos de la ciudad de Mexico, 1753', Boletin del Archivo General de la Nacion, vii-vm (1966-7), 4071156 Barck, Oscar T., Jr, and Hugh T. Lefler. Colonial America. New York, 1958 Barnhart, Clarence L. (ed.). New Century Cyclopedia of Names. 3 vols. New York, 1954 Bolton, Herbert Eugene. Rim of Christendom: A Biography of Eusebio Francisco Kino, Pacific Coast Pioneer. New York, 1936 Wider Horizons of American History. Notre Dame, 1967. (Reprint of 1939 edition) Brebner, John Bartlet. The Explorers of North America, i4Q2-i8o6. Cleveland, 1964 Brite, John Duncan. The Attitude of European States Toward Emigration to the American Colonies and the United States, 160J-1820. Chicago, 1929 Burrus, Ernest J., SJ. Kino Reports to Headquarters, Correspondence of Eusebio F. Kino, S.J., From New Spain with Rome. Rome, 1954 'Francisco Maria Piccolo, 1654-1729, Pioneer of Lower California in the Light of Roman Archives', HAHR, xxxv (1955), 61-76 La obra cartogrdfica de la Provincia Mexicana de la Compania de Jesus, i§6y-ig6y. Madrid, 1967 Carrera Stampa, Manuel. 'Pianos de la ciudad de Mexico5, Boletin de la Sociedad Mexicana de Geografia y Estadistica, LXVIII (1949), 263-427. 183 plates Chaunu, Pierre and Huguette. Seville et VAtlantique, 1504-1650. 8 vols. Paris, 1955-9 Christelow, Allan. 'Father Joseph Neumann, Jesuit Missionary to the Tarahumares', HAHR, xix (1939), 423-42 Cook, Sherburne F., and Woodrow Borah. The Population of Mixteca Alta, 1520-1 g6o. Berkeley, 1968 Dechamps, Pierre Charles Ernest. Dictionnaire de geographie ancienne et moderne. Paris, 1954

232

Bibliography

Dunne, Peter, SJ. Juan Antonio Balthasar: Padre Visitador to the Sonora Frontier, 1744-1745- Tucson, 1955 Elliott, J. H. Imperial Spain, 1460-1716. New York, 1966 Fisher, Lillian E. Viceregal Administration in America. Berkeley, 1926 Gerhard, Peter. 'A Dutch Trade Mission to New Spain, 1746-1747', Pacific Historical Review, xxm (1954), 221-6. Mexico en 1742. Mexico City, 1962 Gibson, Charles. The Aztecs under Spanish Rule: A History of the Indians of the Valley of Mexico, 1519-1810. Stanford, 1964 Spain in America. New York, 1966 Haring, Clarence H. The Buccaneers in the West Indies in the Seventeenth Century. London, 1910. The Spanish Empire in America. New York, 1963 Trade and Navigation between Spain and the Indies in the Time of the Hapsburgs. Cambridge, Mass., 1918 Henige, David P. Colonial Governors from the Fifteenth Century to the Present. Madison, 1970 Hernandez y Sanchez-Barba, Mario. 'La poblacion hispanoamericana y su distribution social en el siglo XVIII, Re vista de Estudios Politicos, LII (1954), 111-42 Houdaille, Jacques. 'Frenchmen and Francophiles in New Spain from 1760 to I 8 I O \ Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of History, Catholic University of America, Washington, DC, 1956 Humphreys, A. R. The Augustan World: Society, Thought, and Letters in Eighteenth Century England. New York, 1963 Kratz, Guglielmo, SJ. 'Gesuiti italiani nelle missione spagnuole al tempo dell'espulsione, 1767-1768', Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu, xi (1945) 27-68 Krompotic, M. D. Life and Works of the Reverend Father Ferdinand Konscak, S.J., 1703—1759: An Early Missionary in California. Boston, 1923 Ladd, Doris M. The Mexican Nobility at Independence, 1780-1826. Austin, 1976 Lafaye, Jacques. Quetzalcoatl and Guadalupe, the Formation of Mexican National Consciousness, 1531-1815. Chicago, 1976 Lanning, John Tate. Pedro de la Torre, Doctor to the Conquerors. Baton Rouge, 1974 Leonard, Irving. Books of the Brave. Ann Arbor, 1966 Lewin, Boleslao. La rebelion de Tupac Amaru y los origenes de la emancipacion americana. Buenos Aires, 1957 Liebman, Seymour B. 'The Jews of Colonial Mexico', HAHR, XLIII Morner, Magnus. Race Mixture in the History of Latin America. Boston, 1967 Muller, Herman J. 'British Business and Spanish America, 1700-1800', Mid-America, xxxix (1957), 3-20 Odlozilik, Otakar. 'Czech Missionaries in New Spain', HAHR, xxv (1945), 428-54

Bibliography

233

Pares, Richard. War and Trade in the West Indies, 1739-1763. London, 1963. (Reprint of 1936 edition) Parry, John H. The Spanish Seaborne Empire. New York, 1966 Pompa, Leon. Vico, A Study of the 'New Science9. Cambridge, 1975 Pradeau, Alberto Francisco. 'Nentuig's Description of Sonora', MidAmerica, xxxv (1953), 81-90 Proper, Emberson Edward. Colonial Immigration Laws: A Study of the Regulation of Immigration by the English Colonies in America. New York, 1900 Rosenblat, Angel. La poblacion indigena de America desde 1492 hasta la actualidad. Buenos Aires, 1945 La poblacion indigena y el mestizaje en America. 2 vols. Buenos Aires, 1954 Rubio Mane, J. Ignacio. 'Gente de Espaiia en la ciudad de Mexico, afio de 1689 s, Boletin del Archivo General de la Nacion, vn (1966), 5-406 Sanchez-Albornoz, Nicolas. La poblacion de America Latina desde los tiempos precolombianos al aho 2000. Madrid, 1973 Schapiro, Jacob Salwyn, Anticlericalism, Conflict between Church and State in France, Italy, and Spain. Princeton, 1967 Stromberg, Roland N. Religious Liberalism in Eighteenth Century England. Oxford, 1954 Sunyer, Oriol Pi. 'Historical Background to the Negro in America', Journal of Negro History, XLII (1957), 237-46 Taylor, Paul S. 'Spanish Seamen in the New World', HAHR, v (1922), 631-61 Treutlein, Theodore E. 'The Relation of Philipp Segesser: The Pimas and Other Indians', Mid-America, xxvn (1945), 142-87 Velazquez, Maria del Carmen. Establecimiento y perdida del septentrion de Nueva Espana. Mexico, 1974 Vigil de Quinones, Jose Maria. 'Polizones en la carrera de Indias', Revista General de Marina, CXLVII (1954), 373-9 OTHER AUTHORITIES (Selected) Astrain, Antonio. Historia de la Compania de Jesus, en la asistencia de Espana. 7 vols. Madrid, 1902-25 Bakewell, Peter J. Silver Mining and Society in Colonial Mexico: Zacatecas, 1546-1700. Cambridge, 1971 Brading, David A. Miners and Merchants in Bourbon Mexico, 17631810. Cambridge, 1971 Cooper, Donald. Epidemic Disease in Mexico City, 1761-1813. Austin, 1965 Dominguez Company, Francisco. 'La condition juridica del extranjero en America (Segun las Leyes de Indias)' Revista de Historia de America, xxxix (1955), 107-17 Flores Salinas, Berta. 'El viajero Lorenzo Boturini Benaduci en Nueva Espaiia*, Memorias de la Academia Mexicana de la Historia, xxv (1966), 150-9

234

Bibliography

Gerhard, Peter. A Guide to the Historical Geography of New Spain. Cambridge, 1972 Gringoire, Pedro. ' Protestantes enjuiciados por la Inquisicion ', Historia Mexicana, xi (1961), 161-79 Houdaille, Jacques. 'Les Frangais au Mexique et leur influence politique et sociale (1760-1800)', Revue Frangaise d'Histoire D'Outre-Mer, XLVIII (1961), 143-223 Lea, Charles Henry. The Inquisition in the Spanish Dependencies. New York, 1922 Manzano Manzano, Juan. Historia de las recopilaciones de Indias. 2 vols. Madrid, 1950-6 Mateos, Francisco. 'Sobre misioneros extranjeros en Ultramar', Missionalia Hispdnica, xv (1958), 245-51 Morner, Magnus. The Expulsion of the Jesuits from Latin America. New York, 1965 Mufioz, Perez Jose. 'Un dato erudito relativo a Lorenzo Boturini (1746)', Re vista de Indias, xvi (1956), 295-7 Smith, Robert Sidney. The Spanish Guild Merchant: A History of the Consulado, 1250-ijoo. New York, 1972. (Reprint of 1940 edition) Treutlein, Theodore E. 'Non-Spanish Jesuits in Spain's American Colonies', Essays in Honor of Herbert Eugene Bolt on. Berkeley, 1945, PP. 219-42 Vinas-Mey, Carmelo (ed.). Estudios de Historia Social de Espaha. 2 vols. Madrid, i960 Vivanco, Tulio. Notas sobre la condicion legal del extranjero en el Reino de Chile. Santiago de Chile, 1958 Wolff, Inge. 'Zur Geschichte der Auslander in Spanischen Amerika, Die Stellung des Extranjero in der Stadt Potosi vom 16. bis 18. Jahrhundert', Europa und Ubersee, Festschrift fiir Egmont Zechlin. Hamburg, 1961, pp. 78-108

Index

Abercromby, George, 64-8, 105 Abreu, Domingos de, 73 Academia Valenciana, 85 Acapulco, 4, 18, 33, 66, 72-4 Acayucan, 79 Acosta, Felipe de, 57 Acufia y Manrique, Juan de see Gasafuerte African, 74 Agde, 100 Aguirre, Dona Micalla de, 53 Ahumada y Villalon, Agustin de see Amarillas Alangi, Father Accurzio, 45 Albufeira, 74 Alburquerque, Francisco Fernandez de la Cueva Enriquez, Duke of, x, 14, 21, 86-8,90-4 alcaldes, 74, 75, 76, 79, 80, 82, 93

archbishop of Mexico, 7-8, 12 Archdeacon, Paul, 63—8, 76 Archive of the Indies (AGI), 1 Archive of Mexico, National (AGN) 1

Arians, 67, 186 n.45 Arias y Urbina, Joaquin de, 63, 65, 67 Arjo, Joseph de, SJ, 52 armada, 174 n. 44 Armada de Barlovento (Spanish Caribbean fleet), 14, 51, 89, 207 n. 170

Armenia, 2, 45; see also Orthodox Arnautti, Francesco di, 77 Arouz, Maria de, 79 Arriaga, Friar Julian de, minister of the Indies, 18, 102-5 Arrot, Thomas, 223 n. 8 Asian-born, 195 n.2 alcaldes del crimen, 21, 83, 86, 90-1, 93, Asiento, 36, 54, 206 n. 148; see also Portuguese Asiento, South Sea 100 Company alcaldes mayores, 85, 87, 91, 100, 103, Asiento agreement, 24—9 106 alcaldes ordinarios(magistrates), 8, 78,99Atlantic, 71, 83 Alencastre Norefia y Silva, Fernando audiencia (governmental body), x-xi, de see Linares 7-8, 90, 97J IQ 6 alguaciles mayores (constables), 47, 80,audiencia (interview), 59 187 n. 19 Audiencia of Guadalajara, 90, 208 Allen, Charles, 66 n.178 Alvarado, 41 Audiencia of Mexico, 3, 7-8, 33, 57, Alvares, Captain Joseph, 87-8 83, 87, 93, 97, 109 Amarillas, Agustin de Ahumada y Audiencia of Seville, 100 Villalon, Marques de, xi, 17-18, Auditor General of War, 87 32, 96, 101 Augustinians, 5 American-born, 195 n.2 Austria, 82, 92 American Revolution, 115-16 autos, 102-3 Amsterdam, 40, 51, 88 Avella Fuentes, Alonso de, 91 Andalusia, 19, 21, 32-3, 89 Avila, Pedro de, 88-9 Andrews, Edward, 45 Ayuntamiento, 8 Anglicans, 53, 61, 200 n.63 Aztecs, 5 Antequera de Oaxaca, 9, 37 Antonio, Giacomo di, 96 bailio, 102 Aragon, 44, 169 n. 1 Balthasar, Johann, SJ, 45 235

236

Index

bando, 96 Barrera, Felix, 62 Barrere, Francois de la, 62 Barrios y Jauregui, Jacinto de, governor of Texas, 17-18, 41 Basques, 2, 91 Batavia, 60 Bavaria, 60 Bay of Honduras, 53, 217 n.339 Beam province, 58 Bebeagua, Isidro see Drinkwater, Isidor Belfast, 89 Belice, 14, 36, 53 Beltran, Commissary Joseph, 73, 75, 79 Bender, Albrecht, 183 n.21 'Berlin, Governor', 77 Bethlehemites, 51, 66, 81 bigamy, 71-9, 108 Biloxi, 15 blacks, 4-5 Blanco, Pablo, 63-4; see also Archdeacon Blanpain, 17 'blood taint', 32, 184 Bogota, 78 Bohemians, 44 'Book of Baptisms', 64 books, forbidden, 40, 63 Boston, 54 Boturini, Lorenzo, 82—5 Bourchard de Beaucourt, Louis (French engineer), 39 Brazil, 177 n. 18 Brest, 89 Bridges, John, 95, 206 n. 148 Bristol, 66, 88 Britain, British ambassador, 28 employees, 27, 61, 95 policy of immigration, 30 prisoners, 37 subjects, 25, 29, 54, i n British Honduras, 14 Bruyere, Alexandre la, 221 n. 423 Bucareli y Urzua, Antonio Maria de, Viceroy of New Spain, 1771-9, 194 n.82 Bussel, Paul, 80, 216 n. 313 Bustillo y Vallos, Juan {alcalde ordinario), 99 Butler, Thomas, 64-5, 67-8 Butler, William, 68 cabildo, 95, 187 n. 19

Cadiz, 19, 21, 27, 34, 74, 81, 84, 88 Cajigal de la Vega, Francisco, Governor of Cuba, Viceroy of New Spain, xi califtcadores (censors), 67 California, 3 Calvinists, 52-3, 59-60, 62, 214 n.278 Camara of the Council of the Indies, 102-4, 106

Campeche, 13-14, 39, 41, 53, 68 Canadians, 15 Canary Islands, 77, 99, 177 n. 18 Cape Verde Islands, 177 n. 18 Capuchins, 45 Caracas, 66, 68, 72 Caribbean, 3, 19, 23, 33, 38, 62 Carpenter, Nicholas, 223 n. 7 Carta, Agostino, SJ, 45 Cartagena, 27 siege of, 13 Casa de Contratacion, 19, 31-5, 43, 45, 84, 94, 102-6, 109, 206 n. 149 Casafuerte, Juan de Acuna y Manrique, Marques de, x, 13, 23, 27-8, 38, 95, 97 Casati, Gianmaria, SJ, 45 castas, 4, 169-70 n.7 Castile, Castilians, 30, 34, 71-3, 76, 81, 99 language, 40, 51,62 castizo, 169—70 n.7 Castro Marim, 72 Castro y Figueroa, Pedro de see Conquista Catalans, Catalonia, 2,12,44 Catani, Antonio Maria, 96 Catholic Kings see Ferdinand and Isabella Catholicism, Catholics, 18, 32, 34, 40-1, 50-2, 53-4, 56, 60-2, 64-5, 68, 88-9,97, n o , 113 Cebrian y Agustin, Pedro see Fuenclara cedulas of expulsion, 108, 191 cidulas de represalia, 191 n.36 censuses of 1689 and 1753, 6, 11011

Central America, 3 Cerda Sandoval see Galve Cesar, Duke of, 89 Cetina murder, 186 n. 2 Chalco, 91 Charles II of Spain, 12, 21, 33-4 Charles III, 13, 45, 194 n.82 Charles V, 10, 68, 114

Index Ghaternau, Count de (French officer), 35 Chiapas (bishopric), 8 chief medic {enfermero mayor), 89 Child, John, 223 n.8 children of foreigners, 107-8, 113, 189 n. 16 Chile, 95 chino, 170 n.8 Christianity, Christians, 53, 85 Church, 50-1, 62, 64-5, 85 royal patronage, 83-4 churchmen, 68 Cienfuegos, Joseph, fiscal of the Holy Office, 40, 48, 52, 56, 75 cismdtico see Orthodox: Armenian, Greek Clare, William, 26 clirigo didconOy 45

Coahuila, 3, 77 Coates, Joseph, 208 n. 184 Gogan, William, 223 n.8 Coimbra, 35 Colima, 72-6 Combemale, Pierre, 191 n.45 commissaries (comisarios) of the Inquisition, 7, 39-40, 48-51, 53-5, 57-9, 66-8, 72, 75, 78, 80, 182 composition, 98—9, 115, 204 nn. 126 and 129, 215 n.295 Conquista, Pedro de Castro y Figueroa, Duke of, xi, 36 consejeros togados, 106 constables (comisarios de ronda), 174 n. 47; see also alguaciles mayores consulado, 18, 26, 98-9, 102, 106-7, 114-15 Consulado of Cadiz, 96, 104-5 Consulado of Madrid, 96 Consulado of Mexico City, 27, 96 Consulado of Seville, 19, 36 contador, 68 contaduria, 103 Contaduria de Indias, 106 Contarini, Pietro, 82 Contreras Villegas, Maria de, 57 conversos, 115

Copado, Joseph, 87 Cork, 66 corregidores, 35, 87, 91, 92 Corsica, Corsicans, 91, 92 Cortes, Hernan, 10 Cosio, Bartolome de, 74-5 Council of Castile, 107 Council of the Indies, 4, n , 14, 22,

237

25, 27, 32, 34-5, 39, 43, 84-5, 90, 92, 94-5, 97, 98, 99, 101-7, 114, 171, 182, 191 Counter Reformation, 49 Courbille, Lt Francois, 39 Courbille, Major Jean Arnauld, 39 Creoles, 37 Cromwell's Western Design, 172 n. 26 'Cronista en las Indias', 85 Cruillas, Marques de, xi Cuba, 39, 64, 71 Curasao, 51, 62 curates, 52, 55 customs officials, 35 Cyclopedia (Barnhart), 120 decision (real acuerdo), 90 declaration (statement), 50-1, 53, 58-60 deism, 115 Denmark, 19 denunciador, 57 denuncias, 56-7, 62-3 deserters, 17, 41, i n Didier, Jacques (French cleric), 18 Dios Villegas, J u a n de, 73 dispensation, royal power of, 107 Djakarta, 60 Dominicans, 5, 45 Doyle, Mary, 66, 194 n. 79 Drinkwater, Isidor, 2, 223 n.8 Dublin, 89 Durango, 9 'Durst', 200 n.51 Dutch, Dutchmen, 51-2, 54-5, 86, 91-3; see also Holland East Indies, 60 Lutheran, 57 Protestants, 183 n. 17 vessels, 23, 36 dyewoods, 13-14 Ellerker, Ralph, 68 emigration, from Europe, 176 n. 1 England, English, 12, 14, 19, 35, 37, 44, 45, 52-4, 55, 66-8, 86, 87-8, 91-2, 95,172 n.29, 174 n. 52, 182 n. 11 language, 53-4, 63, 66, 87 merchants, 28 Protestant, 45 ships, 22-3, 25 Enlightenment, 1, 84 Enriquez de Almanza, Martin (sixteenth-century viceroy), 188 n. 28 Escolar, Joseph de, 88

238

Index

escribano (notary), 35 Espinosa Ocampo y Cornejo, Dr Joseph Antonio de, 33-4, 91-4, 97 estates, 109, 114 Eucharist, 50, 60 Europeans, 2, 4, 6, 195 n.2 Spaniards, 2 exemptions, for a fee, 191 n.40 extranjero, contemporary definition, 2 factors, 27-8 Fallet, Casar, 60-1 familiar of the Inquisition, 48 Family Compact, 16 Faro, 73-4 Ferdinand and Isabella, 11-12, 19, 83 Ferdinand VI (1746-59), 11, 16-18, 42, 78, 102, 104 Fernandes, Manuel, 72 Fernandes, Maria Gaga, 74-6 Fernandes da Cunha, Manuel, 217 n.348 Fernandez, Francisco, 87-9 Fernandez de la Cueva Enriquez, Francisco see Alburquerque, Duke of Fernandez de Oviedo, Gonzalo, 169 n. 1 Fierros, fiscal of the Inquisition, 56 Figueira Ponce de Leon, Dom Alvaro de, 57 Filipinos, 2, 72, 170 n.8 Finale Ligure, 79, 91 fiscals, 18, 27, 33-4. 37, 4O> 48, 52, 56, 58, 61, 75, 94> 97> i O I - 2 , 106 Flanders, 91, 109 Flemings, 2, 43, 51 Florentine, 92 Florida, 3, 13-14 flota, 31-3, 35, 67, 112, 174 n.44 foreign enclaves, 13-15, 36-7 merchants, 1 population, 2 vessels, 36 'forbidden' areas, 195 n.4 Fortuna, Luca, 77, 90 France, French, 16-18, 22, 23, 35, 39-40, 54, 56, 57, 58, 62, 71, 80, 86, 99-106, i n , 191 n.45 corsairs, 10 frigates, 36 officers, 39 policy of immigration, 30

Revolution, 115 squadron, 35 subjects, 32 vessels, 33, 36 Franciscans, 5, 15 Order of the Province of Portugal, 81 Franutti, Giovanni Battista, 79 Fraser, Angus, 216 n.314 Frederick I of Sweden, 23 freemasonry, 115 Frengan, Jean, 186 n. 10 Fuenclara, Pedro Cebrian y Agustin, Count of, xi, 82-3, 85, 191 n.37 fuero, 55 Gage, Thomas, 172 n.26 Galician, 73 Gallardo, Ignacio, 104 Gallardo, Miguel, 96 Gallo, Joseph, 71 Galve, Gaspar de la Cerda Sandoval Silva y Mendoza, Count of, x, 88—9, 205 n. 133, 213 n.261, 220 n.403 Galveston Bay, 17 Gambino, Giovanni Battista, 215 n.293 Gamboa, Father J u a n Cayetano de, 58-9 Garzaron, Francisco de, 81 Gemelli Careri, Francesco, 5, 7, 9-10, 33, 41, 177 n. 14 General Treasury, 87 Genoa, Genoans, 91, 96 Georgia, 13-14 Gerardi, Girolamo, 91 Gerhard, Peter, 169 n.5 Germans, 44, 54, 60, 86, 92-3, 111 Gibraltar, 77 Giraganian, Father 'Domingo', 45 Giro intorno al Mondo (Gemelli Careri), 10

given names, 119 gobernadores, 87 Gomes Calado, Joao, 215 n. 303 Gonzalez, Juan, 89 Gordon, John, 85 Gordon, William, SJ, 65, 197 n. 19 gracia, 103, 192 n.53 Greeks, 63; see also Orthodox Guadalajara, 8-9, 93 Guadalcazar, Armed Horse of, 204 n. 126 Guanajuato, 78 guardia, 6

Index Guatemala, 8, 53, 66, 68, 93 Giiemes y Horcasitas, Francisco de see Revillagigedo Guillard, Antoine, 56 Gulf Shore, 14 Guzman, Fernando de, 22 Hamburg, 54 Hamilton, John, 35 Hapsburgs, 13, 86, 92 Havana, 35-6, 38, 59, 68, 77, 88 Hawkins, John (English smuggler), 188 n. 28 heresy, 63, 67, 78 heretics, 11, 29, 33, 48-9, 52, 55, 66 Herrera, Antonio, 169 n. 1 Hidalgo, Francisco (Spanish Franciscan), 15 Hispaniola, 11, 93 'History of America' (Boturini), 83 Holland, 19, 86 Holy Office of the Inquisition, 8, 47, 49-55, 58-60, 62-3, 65, 67-8, 7*> 73, 75, 7779, 81, i82n. 14; see also Inquisition Honduras (bishopric), 8 Hospital of Jesus Nazareno, 89 Hospital of San Juan de Dios, 89 House of Trade see Casa de Contratacion Huelva, 64 illicit traders, 1 Imperial Convento de Santo Domingo, 8 India, 2, 41 Indians, 4-7, 15, 18, 43, 47, 84, 88 missions, 45 slaves, 42 Ingleby, Dr John, 64, 67 Ingleby, Josepha, 64 Inquisition, 1, 5, 35, 39-41, 48-9, 52, 55, 76, i n , 114-15, 177 n - H ; see also Holy Office inquisition, episcopal, 47 inquisitors, 63, 68, 76, 78 interlopers, 29 Ireland, Irish, 53-4, 63-6, 87, 89, 172 n.26, 194 n.79, 217 n.339 Iruegas, Bias de, 77 Isabella, 83,169 n. 1; see also Ferdinand and Isabella Italians, 2, 5, Italy, 12, 44-5,-77, 79, 82-4, 91, 109, i n , 190 n.20 Ixtacalco, 7

239 Jalapa, 82 Jamaica, 14, 62, 87-8 Jamaica, canal of, 7 Java, 60 Jesuits, 1, 5, 42-5, 52, 56, 65, 67, 112, 132, 180 n. 78, 182 n. 13, 209 n.208 College of St Peter and St Paul, 61 'Jew hunts', 115 Jews, 11, 33, 48, 57, 61-2, 81, 114, 182 n. 10 Juan Fernandez Islands, 18 Judaism, 57, 61-2, 115 jueces qficiales of the Casa de Contra taci on, 31 juez eclesidstico (ecclesiastical judge), 48, 182 n.7 Jusseraud, Louis de see St Denis Juzgado de Bienes de Difuntos, 109 Kempe, Heinrich, 88-91 Kern, Philipp, SJ, 219 n.369 King, John, 89-90 Kirban, Robert, 66, 194 n. 79 Konetzke, Richard, 169 n. 1 Ladino, 62 La Guaira, 66 Laguna de Terminos, 13-14, 36, 41, 88 Laine, Jacques, 57 Lake Texcoco, 5 Lanciego y Eguilaz, Jose de, Archbishop of Mexico, 45 La Traza, 5 Laws of Castile, 30 Laws of the Indies, 11, 20-1, 31, 33-4, 38-9, 42-3, 47, 76, 93, 97, 168, 169 n. 1 legislation, mercantilist, 30 Liceaga y Zavala, D. Andres de, 26

limpieza de sangre, 192 n. 53 Linares, Fernando de Alencastre Norefia y Silva, Duke of, x, 33, 42, 54-5, 203 n . i u , 216 n.325 Lindsay, Father Ignatius, 45, 65-6 Lisbon, 74 lobo, 189 n. 6 London, 65, 89 Lopez Mexia, Juan, 62 Lopez del Toral, Antonio, 81 Lorraine, Duchy of, 92 Louis XIV, 12,41 Louisiana, 13-17, 41, 115, 201 n. 68

Index

240

Lutherans, 48, 51-4, 57, 58-9 Lousseau, Andre, 32 Macao, 61 MacDonald, John, 208 n. 185 MacTagart, Dr John, 63-8 Madras, 40, 61 Malaga, 64 Maldonado, Angel, Bishop of Oaxaca, 37 Malibran, Antoine, 100 Malibran, Jean, 99-106 Malta, 102 Manila, 4, 18, 33, 54, 60-1, 74, 88 177 n. 14 Manzo de Zuniga, Francisco, Corregidor of Veracruz, 35, 39 Marin, Jean, 91 Marioni, Glaudio Giuseppe, 32 Marranos, 61 marriage, 70, 79, 109 Martinez de Ripalada, Juan, Procurator General of the Indies for the Society of Jesus, 43-4 Martins de Robles, Antonio, 71-2, 75-6 Master of the Chamber, 88 Mattos, Manuel de, 77 Mayorga, Viceroy Martin de, 14 Mazapil, 77 mecdnicos, 112; see also qficios mecdnicos

media anata, 103, 193 n.67 medical practitioners, professionals, 54, 63, 112 Medina, Fernando de, 62 Medina, Lourenco de, 35-6 Mediterranean, 9 Mercado, Joseph de (Commissary), 55, 65, 67 merchants, 190 n. 26 Merida, 9 mestizos, 4-5, 9, 88, 98 Metepec, 80 Michoacan, 3 Milan, Milanese, 2, 43, 83, 91-2 Miller, Joseph, 200 n.51 Minano, Lorenzo de, 91 Minister of the Indies, 11, 96, 102, 171 n.4 mixto fuero, 78

Mobile, 15-16 Moctezuma y de Tula, Jose Sarmiento Valladares, Count of, x, 9, 12, 21

Mogul Empire, 40 Mohammed, 57

Monclova, Melchor Portocarrero Lazo de la Vega, Count of (Viceroy of New Spain, 1686-8), 204 n. 129 Montezuma, Aztec ruler, 3 Moore, Gerard, 57, 217 n.339 Moors, 11, 48 Morisco, 49 Morras, Esteban de, 80-1 Morro Castle (Havana), 39, 77, 207 n. 170, 215 n.298 Mothe-Cadillac, Antoine de la, 15 Motte, Pierre de la, 59 mulattoes, 5 Munoz, Tomas Flores, 89 Minister, 88 Nacogdoches, 15 Naiscuriue, Daniel, 62 names, 2-3, 40, 119-20, 222 n.6 Naples, 9, 60 Natchjtoches, 15 naturalization, 32, 38, 87, 95-6, 98108, 113, 191 nn.39 and 42, 192 n-53 Navarro de Isla, Pedro (inquisitor), 58-9 Nayarit, 3 Neapolitans, 2, 5, 32, 43 Neuburg, 60 New Arianism, 65 New Christians, 184 n.32 New France, 58 New Mexico, 3 New Orleans, 15, 17 New Spain, Kingdom of, 3 New Vizcaya, 3, 8 Newton, John, 26 Nicaragua (bishopric), 8 night patrol {comisarios de ronda), 89

Nogal, Jean Philippe du, 92 Nombre de Dios, 3 Normandy, 88 North Americans, 54 Nott, Mary Frances, 52-3 Nuevo Leon, 3 Oaxaca (bishopric), 8 Obediente, Joseph, 62 obrajes, 4, 17, 21, 37, 87-9, 115, 172-3 n.29 O'Farrell, Father Joseph, 53 oficial real (Treasury official), 35 oficios

mecdnicos,

9 7 , 112

oidores, 84, 86-7, 90, 93, 97, 99, 101, 104

Index

241

Portail, Pierre du, 92 Old Christians, 61 Portobello, sack of, 13 Omoa, 68 Portugal, Portuguese, 35, 44, 61-3, O'Neal, William Bern, 53 72-7, 79-8i, 89, 92-5, i n , 115, Onetto, Agostino, 226 n. 146 184 n.32, 186 n.7, 190 n. 19 Oporto, 77 Asiento, 74, 207 n. 174, 215 nn. Orda, Edwardo {reconciliacidn precedent), 182 n. 14 301-2 ordinarios, 50 Inquisition, 75 Orizaba, 45, 63-7 Jews, 184 n. 31 Oriiel, Guillermo Bernes, 53 nobleman, 57 Ortega, Juan de (bishop, archbishop, policy of immigration, 30 Power, Father Thomas, 206 n. 148 viceroy), x, 12, 14, 33-4, 39 pre-Columbian societies, 83 Orthodox 45, 218 n.366 Presbyterians, 53, 206 n. 148 Armenian, 183 n. 17 prisoners of war, 1, 20, 37-8, 46, 54, Eastern, 63 Greek, 210 n.228 115, 182 n. n Osorio y Espinosa, Dr Joseph de, 90 procuradores del niimero, 192 n. 47 Otade, Phelipe de, 92 Procurator General of the Indies for Ozaetto de Oro, Juan de, Alcalde, the Society of Jesus, 43 Protestants, 1, 29, 42, 49-54, 56, 60-2, 66, 182 nn. 11 and 13 Ozumba, 81 Protomedicato, 8, 204 n. 129, 216 Pacific, 22, 72 n. 325 Prussia, 60 Padilla, Simon de, 77 Papal States, 44 Puebla (bishopric), 8-9, 45, 64-8, 91 pardoSy 4 Puertas, Andres de, 101 parish registries, Mexican, 194 n.76 Puerto Rico, 45 Puerto de Santa Maria, 89 Parral, 62 Patirio, Jose, 27-8, 82 Quadrio, Gianmaria, 91 Patzcuaro, 77 Quakers, 53, 217 n.339 Pau, 58 Quebec, 115 Pedrigal, 7 Queretaro, 9, 92 penas de cdmara, 174 n. 48 Quetzalcoatl, 84 Pensacola, 13, 196 n. 7 Pereira da Cunha, Roque, 35 Quintana, D. Joseph de la (royal permiso ships, 28-9 minister), 13 Persia, Persians, 2, 45, 63 Persian Armenia, 45 Ramirez de Arellano, Manuel, 49, 51 Peru, 4, 18, 66, 75 Ram6n, Captain Diego, 15 P6zenas, 100 Ramon, Captain Domingo, 16, 204 Philadelphia, 54, 170 n. 15 n. 116 Philip II, 47, 114 Rayford, Bartholomew, 87, 88-91 Philip V, 12-13, 16, 23-4, 26-8, 33, Reade, Charles, 26 Real, Dona Maria Magdalena del, 35~6> 39> 43~4> 86, 90, 92, 97 101 Philip of Anjou, 12 Philippines, 3, 12, 18, 23, 35, 45, 60-1, real acuerdo, 93 Recole, Joseph, 32 66, 72-4, 76, 80 reconciliacidn, 49, 51-5, 62, 113, 115, plague, 23 Plus, Ernst, 88-91 182 n. 14 Pobey, Willem, 55 Reconquest, 12 poder, 106

Poles, 44 Pommer, Sebastian, 200 n.51 population, estimate, 4, 169 n. 5 Port-au-Prince, 62 port authorities, 34

Reformation, 114 regidor, 95

Regiment of the Crown, 179 n. 65 Reis, Baltasar dos, 190 n. 19 Reis, Francois, 200 n. 51 renegade religious, 81

242

Index

represalias, 86, 97-8 dePortugueses (1704-9), 92-5, 97, 105 representation, 104 Revillagigedo, Francisco de Giiemes y Horcasitas, First Count of, xi, 16-17, 78, 97, 99, 208 n. 183 Reytet, Jean, 58-60 Rhineland, 88 Rigaud, Pierre Francois de, governor of Louisiana, 16-17 Rio Grande, 15 Rodrigues, Manuel, 73 Rodriguez, Antonio, 73 Rojas y Abreu, Antonio de, 83 Roman, Pedro, 87 Rosales, Maria, 81 Rose, Jan van der, 51-2 round-ups, 86-110 royal notary (escribano real), 87 Royal and Supreme Council of the Indies, 3 Rubberson, Gotthart, 54 Ruiaguda, Alvaro de, 14 Ruiz de Valenzuela, Joseph, 31 Sabrados, Jose, 77 Saenz Rico, Gaspar, governor of Veracruz, 42 sailors, 54 St Denis, Louis de Jusseraud, Seigneur de, 15-17, 41, 172 n. 26, 204 n. 116 St Thomas (Virgin Islands), 66 Sala del Crimen, 91 Salvaterra, Gianmaria, SJ, 45 San Angel, 67 San Antonio, 16 San Juan Bautista (presidio), 15 San Juan de Puerto Rico, 35, 36 San Juan de Ulua, 21, 37, 39, 215 n. 295 San Luis Potosi, 9 San Marcos River, 15 San Martin Texelucan, 58-9 Sanches da Penha, Pedro Lopes 80 Sanchez, Francisco, 88 Santa Fe, 15 Santiago, Brother Joao de, 81 Santiago, Diego, 91 Santiago de Cuba, 13, 36 Santin Villamane, Francisco, commissary of the Inquisition, 39-40, 182 n.8 Santoni, Giacomo, 91 Saradi, 45

Sardinia (Spanish possession), Sardinians, 2, 77, 91, 189 n. 10 Sarmiento Valladares, Jose, 22 m. 405; see also Moctezuma Saul, Jacques, 35 Scotland, Scots, 44, 54, 63, 65-6, 67, 222 n.4 Secretary of State for the Indies, 4, 171 senility, 212 n.254 Sephardic Jews, Sephardim, 62, 172 n.26, 215 n.301 Serrecer, Jean, 87-9 servicio, 98-9, 103-4, 106-7, X93 n -6o, 204 n. 119, 210 n.220 Seville, 19, 21, 27, 66-7, 77, 79-80 ships, 27, 35-6, 62, 174 n.44 Sinaloa, 3, 43, 45 slaves, 2, 14, 24-5, 27-8, 41-2, 60, 74, i n , i74n.52 smugglers, smuggling, 21, 29, 36, 173-4 n. 42 Society of Jesus see Jesuits Sodrino, 82 Solorzano, Francisca de, 72 Solorzano, Joseph Xavier de, 100 Soto, Don Baleriano de, 71 Soto, D. Miguel de, haciendado, 209 n. 208 Souriau, Jean, 200 n.51 South America, 2, 18-19, 28, 33-4, 43, 56, 62, 66, 68, 74, 94 South Sea Company, 24-5, 26-9, 54, 62, 68, 95, 200 n.54, 208 n. 177 Spanish corsairs, 53 fleet, 51 immigrants, 4, 31-2, 35

Jesuits, 43 language, 51 law, 30, 68 mercantilism, 29 military, 38 naturalization, 33 officials, 31 shipping, 25, 27, 33, 36, i n spies, 172 n.26 Stefani, Giovanni, 91 Steinevert, Johann, SJ, 32 stowaways, 33 Stuart, Jane Catherine, 55 Suarez, Francisco Manuel, 40 Suarez de los Rios, Antonio and Joseph, 220-1 n.404 Suarez Munis, Manuel, 91 Sunday, Joseph, 87-9.

Index surnames, 119-20 Sweden, Swedes, 44 ships, 23, 36 Switzerland, 44 Tabasco, 3, 14, 21 Tagle Bustamante, Juan Francisco de, 60 Talmud, the, 40 Taos, 15 Tejas Indians, 15 Temazcaltepec, 64 Tercio de Pardos y Morenos Libres, 40-1 Tetela, 65 Texas, 3, 12, 14-15 Texcoco, Lake, 5 Tibet, 45 Tierra del Fuego, 12 Tlaxcala, 3 Toluca, 28, 37, 80 Tonantzin (Aztec goddess), 188 n.32 Tovar, Balthasar de, 91 Tozzi, Girolamo, 91 trade monopoly, 18-20, 23, 29

243

Veracruz, 4-5, 13, 26-8, 33, 35-7, 39, 41, 52, 62, 66-8, 72, 74, 81-2, 88-90 Veragua, Pedro Nufio Colon de Portugal, Duke of, 213 n.261 Vernon, Admiral Edward, 13, 28, 38 Viceroy, 3, 7-8, 32, 34-5, 82, 85-6, 95-6 Vico, Giambattista (Neapolitan philoosopher), 83, 188 n.30 Victoria, Sorani, 92 Vidairre, Balthasar de, 100 Vidal, John, 208 n. 185 Vienna, 83 Villasefior y Sanchez, Joseph Antonio de, 169 n. 5 Virgin of Guadalupe, 82-4 Virginia, 2 Vizarron y Eguiarreta, Juan Antonio de, Archbishop of Mexico, xi, 13, 28, 82, 95 voyageurs, 15

Wars American Revolution, 14 tratar y contratar, 99, 108 Austrian Succession, 24 Traviata, Giacomo, 92 Jenkins' Ear, 24, 36 Tribunal of the Inquisition, 34, 47-9, Polish Succession (1733-8), 13 51-2, 54-63, 65-9, 73-7, 79-81. Seven Years 13—14 84; see also Inquisition, Holy Spanish Succession, 12,14-15,36-7, Office 51, 56, 86, 97, 115, 180 n.81 Tullio, Domenico, 91 Watts, Father Charles, 45, 206 n. 148 Turks, 48 West Indians, 54 Western Europeans, 63 Ursiia, Martin de, 14 Whiston, William, 64, 186 n.45 Utrecht, Treaty of, 24, 29 White, John, 221 n.417 White, William, 66 vagabundos, 186 n . 2 whites, 6 Valcarcel, Domingo, oidor, 97,99-100, Williamsburg, 3, 54 191 n.37 women, 4, 108-9 Valdivia, 18 Valencia, 44 Xerez, Henrique de, 72-3 Valenzuela Venegas, Francisco de, Ximenez Caro, Dr Francisco, 77 87-90 Valeriano, Justo Pastor, 66 Valero, Baltasar de Zufiiga y Guzman, Ybarra, Pedro Pablo de, 67 Marques de, x, 10, 16, 37, 40, 95, Yucatan, 3, 8-9, 14, 45 215 n.305 Valladares, Joseph, 220-1 n.404 Zacatecas, 9, 92 Valladolid (Morelia), 9 Zambos, 88, 189 n. 6 Vatican, 83 Zavala, Admiral Manuel de, 74 vecinos, 100 Zufiiga y Guzman, Baltasar de, Veitia Linaje, Juan Joseph de, 91 Corregidor of Oaxaca, 37 Venezuelans, 3, 62 Zufiiga y Guzman, Baltasar de, Venice, 82, 91 Viceroy of New Spain see Valero

Foreign Immigrants in Early Bourbon Mexico, 1700–1760 (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 31))

Politics and Trade in Mexico 1750–1821 (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 12))

Colombia before Independence: Economy, Society, and Politics under Bourbon Rule (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Church and State in Bourbon Mexico

Silver Mining and Society in Colonial Mexico, Zacatecas 1546-1700 (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Silver Mining and Society in Colonial Mexico, Zacatecas 1546-1700 (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Latin American Party Systems (Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics)

Politics and Religion in Early Bourbon France

Unions and Politics in Mexico: The Case of the Automobile Industry (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 49))

Housing, the State and the Poor: Policy and Practice in Three Latin American Cities (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 50))

The New Latin American Mission History (Latin American Studies)

Coronelismo: The Municipality and Representative Government in Brazil (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 28))

The Demography of Inequality in Brazil (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 67))

A History of Chile, 1808-2002 (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

The Cuban Slave Market, 1790-1880 (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Oil and Politics in Latin America: Nationalist Movements and State Companies (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Oil and Politics in Latin America: Nationalist Movements and State Companies (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

The Central Republic in Mexico, 1835-1846: 'Hombres de Bien' in the Age of Santa Anna (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Troubled Harvest: Agronomy and Revolution in Mexico, 1880-2002 (Contributions in Latin American Studies)

The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations

The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations

Deference and Defiance in Monterrey: Workers, Paternalism, and Revolution in Mexico, 1890-1950 (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Democracy, Revolution, and Monarchism in Early American Literature (Cambridge Studies in American Literature and Culture)

Studies in Latin Poetry (Yale Classical Studies (No. 21))

The Spanish American Regional Novel: Modernity and Autochthony (Cambridge Studies in Latin American and Iberian Literature)

The Spanish American Regional Novel: Modernity and Autochthony (Cambridge Studies in Latin American and Iberian Literature)

Challenging Neoliberalism in Latin America (Cambridge Studies in Contentious Politics)

Legislative Politics in Latin America (Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics)

Myth and Archive: A Theory of Latin American Narrative (Cambridge Studies in Latin American and Iberian Literature)

Imagining Equality in Nineteenth-Century American Literature (Cambridge Studies in American Literature and Culture (No. 157))

Foreign Immigrants in Early Bourbon Mexico, 1700&ndash;1760 (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 31))

Politics and Trade in Mexico 1750&ndash;1821 (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 12))

Colombia before Independence: Economy, Society, and Politics under Bourbon Rule (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Church and State in Bourbon Mexico

Silver Mining and Society in Colonial Mexico, Zacatecas 1546-1700 (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Silver Mining and Society in Colonial Mexico, Zacatecas 1546-1700 (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Latin American Party Systems (Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics)

Politics and Religion in Early Bourbon France

Unions and Politics in Mexico: The Case of the Automobile Industry (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 49))

Housing, the State and the Poor: Policy and Practice in Three Latin American Cities (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 50))

The New Latin American Mission History (Latin American Studies)

Coronelismo: The Municipality and Representative Government in Brazil (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 28))

The Demography of Inequality in Brazil (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 67))

A History of Chile, 1808-2002 (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

The Cuban Slave Market, 1790-1880 (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Oil and Politics in Latin America: Nationalist Movements and State Companies (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Oil and Politics in Latin America: Nationalist Movements and State Companies (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

The Central Republic in Mexico, 1835-1846: 'Hombres de Bien' in the Age of Santa Anna (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Troubled Harvest: Agronomy and Revolution in Mexico, 1880-2002 (Contributions in Latin American Studies)

The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations

The Cambridge History of American Foreign Relations

Deference and Defiance in Monterrey: Workers, Paternalism, and Revolution in Mexico, 1890-1950 (Cambridge Latin American Studies)

Democracy, Revolution, and Monarchism in Early American Literature (Cambridge Studies in American Literature and Culture)

Studies in Latin Poetry (Yale Classical Studies (No. 21))

The Spanish American Regional Novel: Modernity and Autochthony (Cambridge Studies in Latin American and Iberian Literature)

The Spanish American Regional Novel: Modernity and Autochthony (Cambridge Studies in Latin American and Iberian Literature)

Challenging Neoliberalism in Latin America (Cambridge Studies in Contentious Politics)

Legislative Politics in Latin America (Cambridge Studies in Comparative Politics)

Myth and Archive: A Theory of Latin American Narrative (Cambridge Studies in Latin American and Iberian Literature)

Imagining Equality in Nineteenth-Century American Literature (Cambridge Studies in American Literature and Culture (No. 157))

Recommend Documents

Foreign Immigrants in Early Bourbon Mexico, 1700–1760 (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 31))

Politics and Trade in Mexico 1750–1821 (Cambridge Latin American Studies (No. 12))