We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 03 October 2019
In 1657, the marquis of Villagarcía was appointed as president of the Audiencia of Charcas. Although, he eventually declined the post, his nomination generated an unusual trail of private documents. Using my study of this correspondence as a base, I will discuss how the networks of patronage were built and sustained, how they operated, and how they impacted the global mobility of imperial officials. Patronage networks were indispensable to itinerant officials who relied on their clients, patrons, and brokers to help them govern distant regions by gathering resources and information, and implementing their objectives. Moreover, this particular case gives us a glimpse into the relationship between Villagarcía as husband and his wife, and the private assessments and negotiations surrounding the transatlantic journey.
I would like to thank the editorial board of The Americas for this opportunity and, particularly, John Schwaller and Matthew Restall for generously mentoring me in crafting this article. I also thank the two anonymous readers at The Americas for their insightful feedback. Alejandro Cañeque, David Sartorius, Frances Ramos, and Alvaro Caso Bello gave crucial comments on various drafts. Eric Hermann and Timothy Cole polished my English writing in its early stages. The History Department at the University of Maryland and the Universidad de los Andes provided the material support for the research and writing.
1. Propone personas para la presidencia de la audiencia de La Plata, Madrid, September 17, 1657, Archivo General de Indias [hereafter AGI], Charcas, 3.
2. Villagarcía accepted the post in early October 1657, and on April 1, 1658, the king accepted his resignation. Representa las causas porque se excusa el marqués de Villagarcía, Madrid, April 1, 1658, AGI, Charcas, 4.
3. Cartas de enhorabuena a D. Mauro de Mendoza Caamaño y Sotomayor, Marqués de Villagarcía, nombrado Presidente de Charcas, 1657–58, Archivo Histórico Nacional, Madrid [hereafter AHN], Estado, libro 210. Documents of this kind are very rare for the period. The labeling of the letters, as well as some side annotations, suggests that it was the marquis himself who organized and kept the letters.
4. See for example Feros, Antonio, “Clientelismo y poder monárquico en la España de los siglos XVI y XVII,” Relaciones 19:73 (1998): 17–49Google Scholar; Kingship and Favoritism in the Spain of Philip III, 1598–1621 (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000)Google Scholar; Cañeque, Alejandro, The King's Living Image: The Culture and Politics of Viceregal Power in Colonial Mexico (New York: Routledge, 2004)Google Scholar, chapt. 5; Poole, Stafford, “The Last Years of Archbishop Pedro Moya de Contreras, 1586–1591,” The Americas 47:1 (1990): 1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Poole, “The Politics of Limpieza de Sangre: Juan de Ovando and His Circle in the Reign of Philip II,” The Americas 55:3 (1999): 359–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Rosenmüller, Christoph, “The Power of Transatlantic Ties: A Game-Theoretical Analysis of Viceregal Social Networks in Colonial Mexico, 1700–1755,” Latin American Research Review 44:2 (April 2009): 7–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “‘Corrupted by Ambition’: Justice and Patronage in Imperial New Spain and Spain, 1650–1755,” Hispanic American Historical Review 96:1 (2016): 1–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Varela, Ainara Vázquez, “Jorge de Villalonga's Entourage: Political Networking and Administrative Reform in Santa Fe (1717–1723),” in Early Bourbon Spanish America Politics and Society in a Forgotten Era (1700–1759), Eissa-Barroso, Francisco A. and Varela, Ainara Vázquez, eds. (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 111–126Google Scholar; Phelan, John Leddy, “Authority and Flexibility in the Spanish Imperial Bureaucracy,” Administrative Science Quarterly 5:1 (1960): 47–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Phelan, , The Kingdom of Quito in the Seventeenth Century: Bureaucratic Politics in the Spanish Empire (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1967)Google Scholar.
5. Cope, R. Douglas, The Limits of Racial Domination: Plebeian Society in Colonial Mexico City, 1660–1720 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1994)Google Scholar; Suárez, Margarita, ed., Parientes, criados y allegados: los vínculos personales en el mundo virreinal peruano (Lima: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Instituto Riva-Agüero, 2017)Google Scholar.
6. Feros, “Clientelismo y poder monárquico,” 36–41; Lozano, Antonio Terrasa, “Por la polémica gracia del Rey Universal. Las mercedes por servicios de Felipe III en el reino de Portugal: debates y conflictos,” in Servir al Rey en la Monarquía de los Austrias, Estríngana, Alicia Esteban, ed. (Madrid: Sílex, 2012), 303–304Google Scholar; Kettering, Sharon, Patrons, Brokers, and Clients in Seventeenth-Century France (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), 224, 232–237Google Scholar; Kettering, “The Decline of Great Noble Clientage during the Reign of Louis XIV,” Canadian Journal of History/Annales canadiennes d'histoire 24:2 (August 1989): 157–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar. This is not to say that there was a weakening or elimination of the power of the nobility, but that it was incorporated into the royal and imperial apparatus. In fact, the political system was based upon the idea of multiple poles of power. See Hespanha, António Manuel, La gracia del derecho: economía de la cultura en la edad moderna, Haurie, Ana Cañellas, trans. (Madrid: Centro de Estudios Constitucionales, 1993), 307–310Google Scholar.
7. Casey, James, “Some Considerations on State Formation and Patronage in Early Modern Spain,” in Patronages et clientelismes, 1550–1750: France, Angleterre, Espagne, Italie, Giry-Deloison, Charles and Mettam, Roger, eds. (Villeneuve d'Ascq; London: Centre d'histoire de la région du Nord et de l'Europe du Nord-Ouest; Institut Francais du Royaume-Uni, 1995), 109Google Scholar.
8. Trillo, Fermín Bouza-Brey, El señorio de Villagarcía desde su fundación hasta su marquesado (1461–1655) (Santiago de Compostela: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 1965), 87Google Scholar; Rámila, Ismael García, “Del Burgos de antaño,” Boletín de la Comisión Provincial de Monumentos y de la Institución Fernán González de la ciudad de Burgos 28:106 (1949): 18–30Google Scholar; Memorial ajustado, hecho con citación y asistencia […] del pleito que siguen en él doña Inés Armesto y Texeiro […] con don Rodrigo Rodríguez Campomanes […] sobre la tenuta y posesión de los mayorazgos fundados por don Álvaro de Sotomayor y Mendoza y doña María de Zúñiga […] vacantes por muerte de don Joaquín Armesto y Texeyro […] último poseedor (Madrid: Imprenta de I. Sancha, 1820); Antonio Ramos, Aparato para la corrección y adición de la obra que publicó en 1769 el Dor. D. Joseph Berní y Catalá […] con el título Creacion, antiguedad y privilegios de los títulos de Castilla: en el que se corrigen muchas de las equivocaciones que padeció su autor […] (en la Oficina del Impresor de la Dignidad Episcopal y de la Santa Iglesia, 1777), 108.
9. The University of Salamanca and its various colegios mayores prepared hundreds of men who served in the government and administration of the empire at its various levels. Thus, people who studied there, like don Mauro, not only got the necessary preparation and knowledge for occupying imperial offices, but they also got—and perhaps this was more valuable and useful—personal connections and engaged with highly influential networks of patronage. See the various works of María Torres, Ana Carabias, “Catálogo de colegiales del Colegio Mayor de Oviedo (siglo XVI),” Studia historica. Historia moderna 3 (1985): 63–106Google Scholar; Carabias Torres,“El ‘poder’ de las letras. Colegiales mayores salmantinos en la administración americana,” Estudios de Historia Social y Económica de América 16-17 (1998): 2–29; “Excolegiales mayores en la administración española y americana durante el reinado de Felipe IV,” Estudios de Historia Social y Económica de América 16-17 (1998): 55–93.
10. The mayorazgo was founded in 1545 by don Mauro's grandparents, don Álvaro Sotomayor and doña Mayor de Zúñiga, and then it was successively improved by Álvaro's brother, abbot don Rodrigo de Mendoza, and don Mauro's parents. For the history and genealogy of this family, see Bouza-Brey Trillo, El señorío de Villagarcía: memorial ajustado.
11. Mendoza, Mauro de, 1648, AHN, Consejos, 4735, A. 1648, Exp. 19; Marqués de Villagarcía, 1655, AHN, Consejos, 5240, Rel.3 Bis; Mendoza y Sotomayor, Mauro de, April 12, 1655, AHN, Consejos, 9046, Exp. 1; Mendoza, Mauro de, AHN, Consejos, libro 2752, A. 1654, no. 54; Mendoza, Mauro de, AHN, Consejos, libro 2752, A. 1648, no. 126; Ramos, Aparato para la corrección, 108.
12. Villagarcía had been appointed city councilor of Santiago in 1649 by the archbishop of the city, his brother Fernando. He went to Madrid as the second procurador, replacing don Antonio de Prada. The other representative of Galicia was José Pardo de Figueroa, who was councilor in the Council of the Indies (1652) and as a reward for serving in the Cortes was granted a seat in the Council of Castile (1659). Then, in 1664, he became president of the House of Trade. Felipe Lorenzana de la Puente, “La representación política en el Antiguo Régimen. Las Cortes de Castilla, 1655–1834” (Doctoral thesis: Universidad de Extremadura, 2010), vol. 3, 88; Víctor Viana Martínez and Juan José Clopés Burgos, El arzobispo Andrade: un vilagarcian ilustre (Vilagarcía de Arousa: Concellería de Cultura, 2004), 28.
13. Lorenzana de la Puente, “La representación política,” vol. 3, 123.
14. Propone personas para la presidencia de la audiencia de La Plata, Madrid, September17, 1657, AGI, Charcas, 3.
15. Sobre conceder licencia para regresar a don Francisco de Nestares Marín, Madrid, December 17, 1655, AGI, Charcas, 3. Nestares was sent to Potosí with the explicit mission of investigating a massive swindle by which millions of coins containing much less of the required silver than was legal were minted. Lane, Kris, “Corrupción y dominación colonial: el gran fraude a la Casa de la Moneda de Potosí en 1649,” Boletín del Instituto de Historia Argentina y Americana “Dr. Emilio Ravignani” 43 (2015): 94–130Google Scholar; Lane, Kris, “From Corrupt to Criminal: Reflections on the Great Potosí Mint Fraud of 1649,” in Corruption in the Iberian Empires: Greed, Custom, and Colonial Networks, Rosenmüller, Christoph, ed. (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2017), 33–61Google Scholar. Incidentally, in the many consultations related to this nomination, there is not a single mention of Nestares and the blatant corruption he was commissioned to fight. It seems that the councilors assumed that the president had finished his job and no further actions were needed.
16. This conflict, usually known as the war of the Vicuñas and Basques, was a confrontation that took place in the 1620s between Spanish factions, mainly aligned in terms of their birthplaces, for the control of Potosí. See Crespo, Alberto, La guerra entre vicuñas y vascongados, Potosí, 1622–1625 (Lima: Tipografía Peruana, 1956)Google Scholar.
17. The togados were usually lawyers or people with knowledge of the law, while the capa y espada were officials with greater expertise in military affairs.
18. The togado candidates were don Lorenzo Santos de San Pedro (oidor of Valladolid), don Luis de Baraona (alcalde de hijosdalgo in the Chancillería of Valladolid), and don Pedro Bazquez de Velasco (president of the Audiencia of Quito). The other two candidates, de capa y espada, were don Alonso Ortiz de Velasco and don Fernando de Villafañe.
19. Cardinal Sandoval, who in 1649 married Philip IV and Mariana of Austria, had profound ties with the marquis's family. In 1639, Fernando de Andrade named him an executor of his will and asked him to take care of his servants. García Rámila, “Del Burgos de antaño,” 29–30.
20. Enhorabuena del cardenal Sandoval, arzobispo de Toledo, Toledo, October 9, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 2. The acquaintance of these men also meant a relationship with their retainers, as the cardinal's servants rushed to congratulate Villagarcía, too. Enhorabuena de don Benito de Aguiar, camarero del cardenal Sandoval, Toledo, October 9, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 3; Don Diego de Vera, secretario de cámara del cardenal Sandoval, Toledo, October 9, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 5.
21. Kettering, Sharon, “Friendship and Clientage in Early Modern France,” French History 6:2 (1992): 139–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Feros, Antonio, “Twin Souls: Monarchs and Favourites in Early Seventeenth-Century Spain,” in Spain, Europe and the Atlantic World: Essays in Honour of John H. Elliott, Parker, Geoffrey and Kagan, Richard L., eds. (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 25–47Google Scholar. On early modern friendship, see Aymard, Maurice, “Friends and Neighbors,” in A History of Private Life, Chartier, Roger, ed., vol. 3: Passions of the Renaissance (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1989), 447–492Google Scholar.
22. Enhorabuena del marqués de los Arcos y de Tenorio, señor de la casa de Sotomayor, gobernador y capitán general de Ceuta, Ceuta, October 31, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 22.
23. On the definition and history of ‘family,’ see Metcalf, Alida C., Family and Frontier in Colonial Brazil: Santana de Parnaíba, 1580–1822 (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2005), 13Google Scholar; Tadmor, Naomi, Family and Friends in Eighteenth-Century England: Household, Kinship, and Patronage (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Mangan, Jane E., Transatlantic Obligations: Creating the Bonds of Family in Conquest-Era Peru and Spain (Oxford University Press, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
24. Kettering, Sharon, “Patronage and Kinship in Early Modern France,” French Historical Studies 16:2 (1989): 430CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Studnicki-Gizbert, Daviken, A Nation upon the Ocean Sea: Portugal's Atlantic Diaspora and the Crisis of the Spanish Empire, 1492–1640 (Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), 80–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
25. Premo, Bianca, Children of the Father King: Youth, Authority, and Legal Minority in Colonial Lima (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2005), 9–10Google Scholar. However, Kimberly Gauderman argues that a focus on patriarchy is not helpful for understanding the social and familial dynamics of the early modern Spanish world, as it tends to depict the power of men as unchallenged while women appear powerless and completely dominated, forgetting that power was in fact decentered and subject to constant negotiations; Gauderman, Women ’s Lives in Colonial Quito: Gender, Law, and Economy in Spanish America (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2003), 11–15.
26. For a thorough study of the familial networks of Luis de Velasco the younger, son of New Spain's viceroy, Luis de Velasco, as well as his early involvement in court dynamics and royal service, see John F. Schwaller, “The Early Life of Luis de Velasco, the Younger: The Future Viceroy as Boy and Young Man,” Estudios de Historia Novohispana 29 (July 2003): 17–47.
27. Fernando de Andrade y Sotomayor (born in Vistalegre in 1578; died in Santiago, January 22, 1655) was an important figure in the religious and political life of his time who came under the protection of his uncle, the powerful priest Antonio de Sotomayor, who in turn became the Inquisition's General Inquisitor (1632–1645) and was a major actor in contemporary politics. Andrade was bishop of Burgos, Sigüenza, and Santiago de Compostela (one of the few Galicians who held such post), and temporary viceroy of Navarra, even leading the military defense of that kingdom against the French attack in 1637. Andrade's efforts to advance his family reached a high point when the king granted him, shortly before his death, the marquisate of Villagarcía. Moreover, when his brother Lope de Mendoza died, Andrade took care of his orphaned nephews, don Rodrigo de Mendoza y Sotomayor (who inherited the mayorazgo in 1633 and kept it to his death in 1641) and Fernando de Mendoza, taking them with him to Burgos to educate them. Likewise, the bishop donated several of his jewels and artworks, as well as his archive and library to his relatives so that they could embellish their homes. Andrade was also the main responsible of the construction in his native Vistalegre of the church and convent of Augustinian Recollect sisters, which harbored the family mausoleum. Fernández, Abel Lobato, “Arte y promoción personal de un prelado durante el reinado de Felipe IV: el caso de don Fernando de Andrade y Sotomayor,” De Arte: Revista de Historia del Arte 12 (2013): 153–174Google Scholar; Viana Martínez and Clopés Burgos, El arzobispo Andrade; Antonio López Ferreiro, Historia de la Santa a. m. iglesia de Santiago de Compostela, vol. 9 (Santiago, Impr. del Seminario Conciliar Central, 1907), 105–114. On Antonio de Sotomayor, see Jaime Contreras, El Santo Oficio de la Inquisición en Galicia, 1560–1700: poder, sociedad y cultura (Madrid: Akal, 1982), 208–231.
28. Diego Crespí de Valldaura Cardenal, “Nobleza y corte en la regencia de Mariana de Austria (1665–1675)” (Doctoral thesis: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 2005), 76–77; María del Carmen Martín Rubio, El marqués de Villagarcía, virrey del Perú (1736–1745) (Madrid: Polifemo, 2010), 31–51; Francisco Andújar Castillo, “Antonio Domingo Mendoza Caamaño y Sotomayor,” Diccionario Biográfico Electrónico (Real Academia de la Historia): dbe.rah.es.
29. Nonetheless, the lack of specifics does not deny noblewomen's important role in the networks of patronage, as they could act as patrons and brokers. See Kettering, Sharon, “The Patronage Power of Early Modern French Noblewomen,” Historical Journal 32:4 (December 1989): 817–841Google Scholar; Harris, Barbara J., “Women and Politics in Early Tudor England,” Historical Journal 33:2 (1990): 259–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Harris, , English Aristocratic Women, 1450–1550 Marriage and Family, Property and Careers (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002)Google Scholar; Daybell, James, Women and Politics in Early Modern England, 1450–1700 (Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate, 2004)Google Scholar. Likewise, several women wrote to the king asking to be rewarded in their condition of widows, daughters, mothers, or sisters. See Ghirardi, M. Mónica and Vassallo, Jaqueline, eds., Tres siglos de cartas de mujeres: reedición comentada de la obra Literatura Femenina de Pedro Grenón (Buenos Aires: Ediciones CICCUS, 2010)Google Scholar.
30. Andrade held Navia in great esteem and trusted him greatly. Navia even lent Andrade money on at least one occasion and acted in his name in several important businesses, in such actions as buying land or obtaining the formal title of bishop of Santiago. Moreover, Andrade offered Navia the privilege of burial in the family's recently built mausoleum in Vista Alegre. Viana Martínez and Clopés Burgos, El arzobispo Andrade, 103–106, 171.
31. On the king's confessors, see Contreras, Jaime Contreras, “La conciencia real: ¿confesor o ministerio?,” in Política y cultura en la época moderna (cambios dinásticos, milenarismos, mesianismos y utopías), Ezquerra, Alfredo Alvar, Contreras, Jaime Contreras, and Rodríguez, José Ignacio Ruíz, eds. (Alcalá de Henares: Universidad de Alcalá de Henares, 2004), 491–505Google Scholar; Peñas, Leandro Martínez, El confesor del Rey en el Antiguo Régimen (Madrid: Editorial Complutense, 2007)Google Scholar; and Reinhardt, Nicole, Voices of Conscience: Royal Confessors and Political Counsel in Seventeenth-Century Spain and France (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.On ‘popular’ spiritual advisors, see Bilinkoff, Jodi, Related Lives: Confessors and Their Female Penitents, 1450–1750 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2005)Google Scholar.
32. Carta del inquisidor don Pedro de Navia, arcediano de Mendo y canónigo de Santiago, al marqués Santiago, October 7, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 43.
33. Carta de don Pedro de Navia a la marquesa de Villagarcía, Santiago, October 8, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 44.
34. Although the silver production of Potosí had been declining for some decades and the mines of New Spain had gained importance, this American mine was still the major producer of silver in the world. See TePaske, John J. and Brown, Kendall W., A New World of Gold and Silver (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010), 150–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
35. Papel que me dio don Juan de Santa Ana de noticias individuales de la Provincia, presidencia de Los Charcas en donde vivió muchos años y se casó, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 35.
36. Don Alonso Troncoso de Sotomayor, da la enhorabuena y dice en pro y en contra en cuanto a hacer la jornada, Leiro (Spain), November 11, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 42.
37. Navia a la marquesa, Santiago, October 8, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 44.
38. Hanley, Sarah, “Engendering the State: Family Formation and State Building in Early Modern France,” French Historical Studies 16:1 (1989): 4–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Adams, Julia, “The Rule of the Father: Patriarchy and Patrimonialism in Early Modern Europe,” in Max Weber's Economy and Society: A Critical Companion, Camic, Charles, Gorski, Philip S., and Trubek, David M., eds. (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2005), 237–266Google Scholar; Espinosa, Aurelio, “Early Modern State Formation, Patriarchal Families, and Marriage in Absolutist Spain: The Elopement of Manrique de Lara and Luisa de Acuña y Portugal,” Journal of Family History 32:1 (2007): 3–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
39. José María Imízcoz notes that patronage was concomitant to inequality and one of the most effective mechanisms of social control. Imízcoz, “Las relaciones de patronazgo y clientelismo. Declinaciones de la desigualdad social,” in Patronazgo y clientelismo en la Monarquía Hispánica (siglos XVI–XIX), José María Imízcoz and Artola Renedo Andoni, eds. (Bilbao: Universidad del País Vasco, Servicio Editorial, 2016), 19–28.
40. Carta de Navia a la marquesa, Santiago, October 8, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 44.
41. Carta de la marquesa de Villagarcía al marqués, Vista Alegre, October 11, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 45.
42. In 1586, Phillip II put an end to the prevailing arbitrary use of treatments and issued a normative on how to properly use them. This regulation was followed throughout the seventeenth century. Pragmática […] en los tratamientos y cortesías de palabra y por escripto […] (Alcalá: Juan Íñiguez de Lequerica, 1586).
43. Alejandro Cañeque argues that the early modern understanding of friendship, which involved “mutual good will, trust, and well-wishing,” was founded on the Aristotelian discourse in which “friendship gives rise to and sustains the most long-lasting political bonds.” Very importantly, this relationship was not only among equals; it could also involve people with different degrees of power. Therefore, political love and friendship—Greeks used the same word, philia, for these two concepts—bound rulers and ruled, and ultimately legitimized the king's rulership. Cañeque, , “The Emotions of Power: Love, Anger, and Fear, or How to Rule the Spanish Empire,” in Emotions and Daily Life in Colonial Mexico, Villa-Flores, Javier and Lipsett-Rivera, Sonya, eds. (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2014), 93Google Scholar.
44. On the history of marriage and its multilayered nature, see Cott, Nancy F., Public Vows: A History of Marriage and the Nation (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2000)Google Scholar; Coontz, Stephanie, Marriage, a History: From Obedience to Intimacy or How Love Conquered Marriage (New York: Viking, 2005)Google Scholar; and Karras, Ruth Mazo, Unmarriages: Women, Men, and Sexual Unions in the Middle Ages (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
45. Carta de la marquesa de Villagarcía al marqués, October 11, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 45.
46. Cañeque, The King's Living Image, chapt. 2.
47. Other children of the marquises were Baltasar Francisco, 13 years old at the time, and Gaspar José, Fernando, and Melchora María.
48. Carta de la marquesa al marqués, October 11, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 45.
49. Carta de la marquesa al marqués, Vista Alegre, October 18, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 47.
50. Carta de la marquesa al marqués, October 11, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 45.
51. Copia del papel de don Juan Bautista Sanz de Navarrete, secretario de la Cámara de Indias, Madrid, February 8, 1658, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 49. The name of the secretary appears in the documentation indiscriminately as Saez, Sanz or Saenz. I use Sáenz, the modern and most accepted form of the name, and also how the secretary himself signed.
52. Respuesta del marqués, Madrid, February 15, 1658, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 49.
53. Copia del segundo papel de Sanz de Navarrete, Madrid, February 18, 1658, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 50.
54. Respuesta del marqués, Madrid, February 28, 1658, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 50.
55. Carta del marqués a Sanz de Navarrete, Madrid, October 4, 1658, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 51. The chamber did, however, discuss Villagarcía's resignation, which the king eventually approved, shortly after the marquis's last response. Representa las causas porque se excusa el marqués de Villagarcía, Madrid, April 1, 1658, AGI, Charcas, 4.
56. Respuesta de la Cámara, Madrid, October 12, 1658, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 51. Baraona was appointed after don Fernando de Villafañe and Garci Pérez de Ulloa, oidor in Valladolid, successively refused the post. However, although Baraona had initially accepted the assignment to Charcas, he eventually declined it, claiming that he had been waiting over a year and a half to embark in the fleet and in the meantime his wife had gotten pregnant. The king then appointed don Diego de Salcedo and don Luis Moreno Ponce de León, who successively were unwilling to accept the office. Finally, in 1660, the king chose don Pedro Vásquez de Velasco (a candidate who had been proposed in almost all of the previous consultations), who happily moved from Quito to Charcas. Unfortunately for Nestares Marín, his successor arrived too late, and he was never able to leave La Plata, as he died there in April 1660. Propone personas para presidente de Los Charcas, Madrid, September 2, 1658, AGI, Charcas, 4; Respuesta de Garci Pérez de Ulloa, Valladolid, September 2, 1658, AGI, Charcas, 4; Da cuenta de haber aceptado el licenciado don Luis Baraona Saravia la plaza de presidente de Los Charcas, Madrid, October 2, 1658, AGI, Charcas, 4; Propone personas para presidente de Los Charcas, Madrid, March 8, 1660, AGI, Charcas, 4; Propone personas para presidente de Los Charcas, Madrid, May 10, 1660, AGI, Charcas, 4.
57. Kimberly Gauderman has already challenged the idea that women were helpless and shown that they were in fact protected by the political and judiciary systems. Gauderman, , “The Authority of Gender: Women's Space and Social Control in Seventeenth-Century Quito,” in New World Orders: Violence, Sanction, and Authority in the Colonial Americas, Smolenski, John, ed. (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005), 71–91Google Scholar.
58. Carta de Navia a la marquesa, Santiago, October 8, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 44.
59. Carta del inquisidor don Pedro de Navia al marqués, Santiago, October 7, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 43.
60. Nestares is famous for having investigated the massive fraud in Potosí’s mint and punished the main culprits.
61. Kettering, Patrons, Brokers, and Clients, 42–44.
62. Mauro de Pardiñas, born in Rianxo in 1615, was the son of Juan de Pardiñas Villar de Francos and Lucía Seco de Caamaño. He had several American connections thanks to his many years serving in Cádiz and with the navy and the fleet. Years later, his two sons, Bernardino and Juan Isidro, building on their father's career, became knights of Santiago, and continued the relationship with America. Bernardino served in the Royal Councils, and his son Nicolás was the first count of Castelo. Juan Isidro carried out his services in Cádiz under the command of his father until he moved to New Spain, where he settled and became governor of Nueva Vizcaya. Jaime Bugallal y Vela and Jesús Ángel Sánchez García, “Vilardefrancos. Reconsideración de un gran pazo y su linaje,” Quintana 1 (2002): 168Google Scholar; José Pardiñas Villalovos Soto y Romero de Caamaño, Breve compendio de los varones ilustres de Galicia: nativos, y próximos originarios […] (La Coruña: Andrés Martínez, 1887), 145–146.
63. Enhorabuena del capitán don Mauro de Pardiñas Villar de Francos, Cádiz, October 28, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 19.
64. El capitán Pardiñas propone el medio para hacer el viaje a Los Charcas, Cádiz, October 29, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 20.
65. Carta de don Francisco de Soto Guzmán al capitán Mauro de Pardiñas, Posada, November 3, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 38. Born in 1618 in Briviesca, Castile, Soto Guzmán served as infantry captain some years in Tucumán in the late 1640s. In 1651 he was granted license to return to Spain, and was back in Buenos Aires by 1659. He proved to be as determined as he was competent and had a quick social and economic rise: in 1664 he entered the Order of Santiago; in 1674, he was named alguacil mayor of the Council of War, and in 1689, while residing in Cádiz, he bought the title of marquis of Torre Soto. Melero, Carlos Polanco, “Piedad y poder, iglesia y linaje en Briviesca en el siglo XVII: los Soto Guzmán (I),” Boletín de la Institución Fernán González 228 (2004): 65–67Google Scholar.
66. Papel de Soto Guzmán sobre el viaje a Charcas, November 3, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 39.
67. Papel de Soto y Guzmán sobre pedir navío de registro, Cádiz, November 11, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 40.
68. Soto Guzmán was indeed invested in the transatlantic trade. In 1662, he was accused of being a front man for English and Dutch merchants who smuggled goods into Buenos Aires. El fiscal con Francisco de Soto y Guzmán, 1662, AGI, Escribanía, 1029B.
69. Enhorabuena de don Gómez Dávila, corregidor nombrado de Potosí, Seville, October 16, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 7.
70. Sobre petición de don Felipe de Obregón y Cereceda, Madrid, February 3, 1657, AGI, Charcas, 3; Carta del secretario del Consejo a la Casa de Contratación, Madrid, April 24, 1657, AGI, Charcas, 416, libro5, fols. 154v–155.
71. Lane, “From Corrupt to Criminal,” 35.
72. The miners received a fixed amount of mercury based on the expected amount of silver to be refined. Héctor Noejovich has found that, especially around those years, the consumption of mercury did not match the silver produced, signaling that miners and imperial authorities alike were involved in a major effort to defraud the crown. “El consumo de azogue: ¿Indicador de la corrupción del sistema colonial en el virreinato del Perú? (siglos XVI–XVII),” Fronteras de la Historia 7 (2002): 77–98.
73. Papel que me dio don Felipe Obregón, vecino de Potosí, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 31.
74. Noticias de Potosí, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 34.
75. The salary of the president of Charcas was set at 5000 pesos. Recopilación de leyes de los Reynos de las Indias, vol. 1 (Madrid: Boix, 1841), 167.
76. Noticias sobre Los Charcas, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 32.
77. For an updated review of this debate, see Leiva, Pilar Ponce, “Debates y consensos en torno a la corrupción en la América hispana y portuguesa, siglos XVI–XVIII. Presentación,” Revista Complutense de Historia de América 43:0 (2017): 15–19Google Scholar; and Rosenmüller, Christoph, ed., introduction to Corruption in the Iberian Empires: Greed, Custom, and Colonial Networks (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2017), 1–12Google Scholar.
78. See for example Andrien, Kenneth J., “Corruption, Inefficiency, and Imperial Decline in the Seventeenth-Century Viceroyalty of Peru,” The Americas 41:1 (July 1984): 1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
79. Cañeque, The King's Living Image, 176–183; Herzog, Tamar, Upholding Justice: Society, State, and the Penal System in Quito (1650–1750) (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2004), 153–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For studies on the use and understanding of “corruption” in the early modern Spanish world, see Rosenmüller, “‘Corrupted by Ambition’”; Castillo, Francisco Andújar, Feros, Antonio, and Leiva, Pilar Ponce, “Corrupción y mecanismos de control en la Monarquía Hispánica: una revisión crítica,” Revista electrónica de Historia Moderna 8:35 (2017): 284–311Google Scholar.
80. Moutoukias, Zacarías, “Power, Corruption, and Commerce: The Making of the Local Administrative Structure in Seventeenth-Century Buenos Aires,” Hispanic American Historical Review 68:4 (November 1988): 771–801CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
81. Moutoukias, “Power, Corruption, and Commerce,” 772.
82. Pietschmann, Horst, El estado y su evolución al principio de la colononización española de América (Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1989), 163–182Google Scholar. The author has been revising his position on this issue over time. See “Burocracia y corrupción en Hispanoamérica colonial: una aproximación tentativa,” Nova Americana 5 (1982): 11–37Google Scholar; and “Corrupción en las Indias españolas: revisión de un debate en la historiografía sobre Hispanoamérica colonial,” Memorias de la Academia Mexicana de la Historia 40 (1997): 39–54Google Scholar. See also Pietschmann, Horst, “‘Corrupción’ en el virreinato novohispano: un tercer intento de valoración,” e-Spania 16 (2013)Google Scholar: http://journals.openedition.org/e-spania/22848, accessed July 6, 2019.
83. Burkholder, Mark A. and Chandler, D. S., From Impotence to Authority: The Spanish Crown and the American Audiencias, 1687–1808 (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1977)Google Scholar.
84. Scholars are rethinking the relationship between American elites and the Spanish crown. They are finding that autonomy, flexibility, and negotiation were fundamental elements of the political system. Under this perspective, American interests did not go against royal authority, nor weaken it, but rather these deals strengthened and united the empire. See for example Irigoin, Alejandra and Grafe, Regina, “Bargaining for Absolutism: A Spanish Path to Nation-State and Empire Building,” Hispanic American Historical Review 88:2 (May 2008): 173–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
85. Pardiñas dice las conveniencias que hay para que solicite navío, Cádiz, November 26, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 27.
86. Pardiñas …, Cádiz, November 26, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 27.
87. Unfortunately, although agents’ importance is well acknowledged, studies on them are lacking. One of the few (if not the only) monographs is Gómez, Oscar Mazín, Gestores de la real justicia: procuradores y agentes de las catedrales hispanas nuevas en la corte de Madrid (Mexico City: Colegio de México, 2007)Google Scholar. Also relevant is Alvariño, Antonio Alvarez-Ossorio, “‘Pervenire alle orecchie della Maestà’: el agente lombardo en la corte madrileña,” Annali di storia moderna e contemporanea 3 (1997): 173–223Google Scholar. Ángel Sanz Tapia analyzes agents’ role in the purchase of offices in ¿Corrupción o necesidad?: la venta de cargos de gobierno americanos bajo Carlos II (1674–1700) (Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2009), 87–116. The agents of the Peruvian indigenous elites and towns are studied in de la Puente Luna, José Carlos, Andean Cosmopolitans: Seeking Justice and Reward at the Spanish Royal Court (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2017), 77–84Google Scholar. Guillaume Gaudin attempts to sketch some of the agents’ features in “Un acercamiento a las figuras de agentes de negocios y procuradores de Indias en la Corte,” Nuevo Mundo Mundos Nuevos (October 2, 2017): http://journals.openedition.org/nuevomundo/71390, accessed July 20, 2019.
88. Sobre la pretensión de Felipe de Obregón y Cereceda, Madrid, July 20, 1657, AGI, Indiferente, 771. Obregón asked to be favored with an office back in Charcas and the habit of any of the military orders. The council, however, did not seem impressed by Obregón's services and quickly dismissed him without granting him any reward.
89. Pardiñas para que solicite navío, Cádiz, November 26, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 27.
90. Some scholars even see the Jesuits and their far-flung networks as the spearheads of early modern globalization. See Clossey, Luke, Salvation and Globalization in the Early Jesuit Missions (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Banchoff, Thomas F. and Casanova, José, eds., The Jesuits and Globalization: Historical Legacies and Contemporary Challenges (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2016)Google Scholar.
91. Enhorabuena del Provincial de la Compañía de Jesús de Castilla, Santiago, November 3, 1657, AHN, Estado, libro 210, no. 24.
