Jump to content

History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 2/Chapter 20

Add links
From Wikisource
←
Chapter 19
History of Mexico (Bancroft) (1883)
by Hubert Howe Bancroft
Chapter 20
Chapter 21
→

Table of Contents

2821900History of Mexico (Bancroft) — Chapter 201883Hubert Howe Bancroft
​

CHAPTER XX.

FUTILE ATTEMPTS TOWARD DISCOVERY.

1530-1540.

Authority of Cortés Curtailed — Indian Conspiracy Suppressed — Disturbances in Oajaca — An Empty Title — Cortés and the Colonists of Antequera — Further Disputes with the Audiencia — Cortés Persistent — Baffled Efforts at Discovery — High Hopes and a Lowly Dwelling — Misfortune Follows Misfortune — Guzman's Animosity — Cortés Defiant — He Sails Northward — Failure of the Enterprise — Rivalry of Mendoza — Cortés Disgusted — He Returns to Spain.

Upon the arrival of the second audiencia Cortés hastened to lay before that body his commission as captain-general. Though it was duly recognized by them, the powers it conferred were greatly controlled by a royal order produced by the audiencia, requiring that Cortés, in all his operations, should consult the president and oidores and act only on their approval. This we may well imagine was not pleasing to the marquis,[1] and soon he and the audiencia were engaged in hot disputes. Jealous of their position, and proud of the king's confidence,[2] the oidores were uncompromising in the exhibition of their authority, and carried out their instructions to the letter; while Cortés, ​accustomed to domineer, ill brooked opposition to his views or interests, and pressed matters with a haughtiness that offended the king's judges.

Thus it was that almost immediately an antagonism appeared, regarding questions of minor importance at first, as those of etiquette and precedence,[3] but later affecting weightier matters both public and private.

Unfriendly relations being thus established, the breach grew wider day by day, and their letters were full of bitterness, marked by complaints of grievances on the one side and of obnoxious interference on the other. Such being their respective attitudes, it was with difficulty and delay that even the royal orders were carried out in matters concerning Cortés. Whether the question at issue related to the counting of his vassals, the assignment of towns and lands granted him, or expeditions of discovery, it was in every case attended by many loud and angry words.

The first business in connection with the marquis to which it was necessary the audiencia should give attention was the counting of the twenty-three thousand vassals assigned him by royal grant. Difficulties at once arose which rendered the counting slow,[4] and there were also disagreements between the oidores and Cortés with respect to the method. Moreover as public interests were involved by the establishment of a remarkable precedent, the action of the oidores was closely watched and criticised.[5] ​of this unenviable duty was intrusted to six commissioners, three of whom were appointed by Cortés and three by the audiencia.[6]

The commission, however, after having labored for many weeks in vain efforts to arrive at even an approximate count, reported to the audiencia that the difficulties were insurmountable and a correct numeration impossible, since not one fifth of the estimated population presented itself. The attempt was consequently abandoned, and a compromise entered into by which Cortés, pending instructions from the king, was left in possession of Cuernavaca with its dependent townships and the districts of Tehuantepec and Cuetlachtlan. The valleys of Oajaca and Quilapan, and various towns in the province of Mexico, were also assigned him under the encomienda system, no judicial authority being therewith conferred.[7]

Yet the audiencia considered that the principle on which the king's grants had been made was dangerous, from the fact that the scattered positions of the different districts would give Cortés too wide an ​influence, and the oidor Salmeron had already counselled the king to centralize the authority of the marquis by confining his possessions to one portion of the country.[8] The fact is his power over the natives was such as to cause the oidores heartily to wish him back in Spain.[9]

Nor was the assignment of these grants the only cause of dispute. The erection of his palace, the sale of his houses in the city of Mexico to the audiencia, and his claims to lands within the limits of the city were alike productive of grievances and annoyance.[10]

But the treatment of Cortés by the audiencia in his public capacity as captain-general engendered yet stronger feelings of indignation and wounded pride. He could not shut his eyes to the fact that his high office was one more in name than in reality, and his quick perception soon revealed to him that although the crown had recognized his services it did not intend to allow him much control in the guidance of affairs. ​From the first the new administration avoided consultation with him,[11] and when in military matters he offered suggestions, his views were not accepted, and even his actions were interfered with, while at the same time no means was omitted of impressing upon the natives the fact that the great conqueror was subservient to the higher authority of the audiencia.

The very first attempt made by Cortés to exercise his functions as captain-general caused a rupture between him and the audiencia. The inefficient condition of the available forces in New Spain was such as to excite a fear of an uprising of the natives. With the approval of the audiencia, Cortés therefore proclaimed a general muster in all Spanish towns, attaching certain penalties to those who failed to appear with their arms and horses. The muster in the capital was a failure, and when Cortés sought to enforce the fines upon the delinquents the oidores took umbrage, considering that his action was an encroachment upon their authority.[12]

The weakness displayed by this failure to muster in force and the well known dissension that prevailed among the Spaniards offered a strong temptation to the Indians. They believed that an opportunity for throwing off the Spanish yoke had at last arrived, and they entered into a conspiracy to destroy their oppressors. Straggling Spaniards in the country were murdered, ​and preparations made for a sudden rising in the city. According to Oviedo more than two hundred Spaniards were soon found to be missing, and the alarm became general. The oidores in the emergency recognized that the only man capable of dealing with the excited Indians was the captain-general, and him they now called upon to come to their assistance. With a large force he marched into the capital, and by his decisive measures quiet was restored. Great numbers were made prisoners and the horrors of fire and bloodhounds implanted a wholesome fear upon the natives, who were once more taught that their patriotic struggles only tightened the conqueror's grasp.[13]

The revolt seems to have extended far southward, for during the early part of 1531 the Zapotecs in Oajaca and Impilcingo were in rebellion, and a number of Spaniards who had entered the district in search of gold had been slaughtered.[14]

The ayuntamiento of Antequera despatched all available force against the insurgents, but as this left the town without defenders it was necessary to send assistance from Mexico. But even under these circumstances, in which the experience and military ability of Cortés ought to have been respected, his views met with opposition, and the conqueror of New Spain deemed it prudent to yield in all points to the opinions of the oidores on the ground that his would be the blame in case of mishap. The revolt was suppressed, but the expeditions sent out by the captain-general encountered unnecessary difficulties, owing to the interference of the audiencia.[15] ​Thus thwarted in every public and private measure, Cortés felt bitterly the humiliations to which he was subjected. Accustomed to command so long without restriction, his position became distasteful. His great achievements merited, he thought, a higher appreciation than that which made of him but a mere figurehead of power; and with wounded heart, and in disgust at his empty title of captain-general, he begged the king, since his ability was held in so poor esteem, to appoint a more competent person to take his place.[16]

But after all the misery was not wholly on one side. Cortés was to the audiencia as a thorn in the flesh. His friends were numerous, and their ranks were reenforced by discontented encomenderos who saw their interests attacked by the audiencia, which endeavored to suppress repartimientos. In July 1532 President Fuenleal suggested the recall of Cortés to Spain, with four or five others who were causing trouble.[17]

Meantime Cortés had left the city and retired in disgust to Cuernavaca, where he had caused a palace to be built on the outskirts of the town. Here he ​occupied himself with agriculture and stock-raising, entertaining meanwhile various projects of discovery.

On taking possession of the domains of his marquisate, in the valley of Oajaca, the inhabitants of the town refused to accept him as their feudal lord.[18] This action of the Indians was doubtless owing to the town having been included in the limits of the Spanish settlement of Antequera which adjoined it;[19] and from this time forward the people of Antequera and Cortés were involved in frequent and violent disputes. The marquis justly regarded the founding of the city as an encroachment upon his domain, a hostile intrusion. His people were always in trouble with the Spanish residents, who in their turn appropriated portions of the best ground, seized upon his water privileges, and treated his agents with indignity.[20]

The central and advantageous position of the town had induced Cortés to begin building a palace in Oajaca, but he now discontinued the work, and erected a house a quarter of a league distant. This removal of his seat and the narrow confines to which Antequera was limited effectually checked the prosperity of the city,[21] and instead of a flourishing settlement, ​in a few years its residents were reduced to actual distress.[22]

Other matters during this period became grounds of contention between him and the ruling powers, such as the payment of tithes,[23] forest, pasture, and water rights, to which he laid exclusive claim in the district of Cuernavaca,[24] and complaints made by his vassals of the excessive tribute imposed upon them.[25] Moreover, the much vexed question of the number of his vassals was again brought forward, the proceedings in the matter being marked by want of liberality in the actions of the audiencia, and by petulant complaints on the part of Cortés.[26] Yet no adjustment could be arrived at. The marquis, though deprived of ​some portion of his grant, adhered to his claims and defended his rights as tenaciously as the audiencia assailed them, filing protests and making appeals to the crown whenever loss was threatened.[27]

Again, in 1537 and 1538, under the administration of Viceroy Mendoza, an attempt was made to bring affairs to a satisfactory adjustment.[28] Again the marquis in a letter to the India Council, dated 20th of September 1538, enters at length into the troubles and expenses attending the count, and having been deprived of many townships, impoverished by the heavy expenses of unremunerative expeditions, in reduced circumstances, and oppressed with debt, he asks relief in order that he may live. Poor conqueror![29]

But it is time to consider the efforts made by Cortés to extend discoveries in the South Sea, and mark how his exertions were cramped and his prospects of success marred by the same watchful opponents.

The reader is already aware that previous to his departure to Spain, Cortés had despatched a fleet to the Moluccas, and that the commerce he wished to establish there might be permanent, he began the construction of other vessels at Tehuantepec with the intention of sending them to support the first expedition. Four vessels were already built when he left ​New Spain, and a fifth was completed later. The fleet was almost ready to sail, when the oidores of the first audiencia interfered. They seized and sent prisoner to Mexico the officer in charge, dismissed the Indians employed, and suspended work. The ship tackle and stores were stolen, and the vessels were left to rot. Or. the return of Cortés they were almost ruined, and the loss which he sustained amounted to more than twenty thousand castellanos.[30]

Nor did Cortés meet with that coöperation from the second audiencia which he had expected. Not disheartened by the discouraging result of his former attempt, shortly after his return to New Spain he hastened to carry out his contracts with the king. He began the construction of four new vessels, two at Tehuantepec and two at Acapulco, and succeeded in getting them launched about the beginning of 1532. But the audiencia, which at first had encouraged him to proceed with the execution of his schemes,[31] now, to the marquis' cost, and notwithstanding a decree forbidding its interference,[32] caused him much trouble. Acapulco[33] was inaccessible to carts and pack animals, and Cortés found it necessary to employ native carriers to transport tackle and stores for his ships. The opening policy of the new audiencia with respect to the treatment of the natives was that of strictly ​enforcing the laws of protection. Accordingly, his Indians were taken away, his operations ordered discontinued, and a fine of forty thousand pesos imposed.[34]

Thwarted at every turn, Cortés gave way to despair. "I obeyed their order," he writes, "and ceased my preparations, so that neither by sea nor land can I do your Majesty any service," and in his heart doubted whether the exploration of the South Sea was a matter of any interest to the crown. Such is the version given by the marquis, but the audiencia tell a somewhat different tale, and inform the queen that Cortés paid no heed to the alguaciles whom they had sent to release the natives from their servitude, but defiantly ordered the carriers to continue their labors. Whereupon the audiencia instituted proceedings against him.[35] 'There was undoubtedly truth in what the oidores said.

Notwithstanding all the machinations of the evil ones, Cortés despatched from Acapulco in May 1532 two ships, the San Marcos and the San Miguel,[36] under Hurtado de Mendoza, the details of which expedition, as well as those of the subsequent maritime efforts of the marquis, may be found in my History of the North Mexican States.

With this beginning Cortés next determined to superintend in person the completion of his ships at Tehuantepec, and repairing thither hastened his ​preparations as rapidly as possible, living in a hut on the beach, and even laboring with his own hands.[37]

Yet with all his eagerness the work went slowly on. For a year and a half he lived in his cabin on the sand, and though in January 1533 he reported to the king his expectation to be ready in March, it was not till the 29th of October following that his vessels, the San Lázaro and the Concepcion, left port.[38]

The enterprise, which led to the discovery of lower California, was attended with disaster. About the middle of 1534 the Concepcion was brought into the port of Chiametla by six or seven sailors,[39] the sole survivors of her crew, who had much to tell of mutiny and murder.[40] She had become separated from the San Lázaro, which afterward found her way to Tehuantepec. The reports of lands discovered brought by these men excited in Nuño de Guzman a desire to continue the adventure on his own account. So he seized the vessel and held the sailors, that the news might not reach Cortés. But the marquis heard of it,[41] and appealed to the audiencia, only to enter upon fresh complications. That body, though it issued an order in the king's name commanding Guzman to surrender the ship, and prohibiting him from prosecuting the discovery, ordered Cortés also to desist from further exploration m that direction.[42] The marquis appealed to the crown, maintaining that ​Guzman had neither sent nor could send an expedition, since he had no vessel of his own, and the Concepcion was stranded. At the opening of his protest he significantly calls attention to the fact that he was acting in conformity with his Majesty's commands and with the contract which he held.

The action taken by the audiencia after this protest was no more favorable to the efforts of the marquis than had been its previous course. The truth is that the oidores were secretly supported by the throne, a course at once cowardly and base on the part of Charles, who through very shame could not cast off one to whom he owed so much, and yet he feared to permit him to prosper. Gonzalo Ruiz was commissioned on the 22d of August to proceed to Nueva Galicia and investigate the matter; but nothing was done in favor of Cortés, whose repeated appeals to the audiencia were responded to with such lukewarmness that he rightly concluded that their neglect was intentional.[43] He therefore determined to take matters into his own hands, despatch a third expedition, and command it in person. At the same time he would call to account his adversary of New Galicia. About midwinter 1534-5 he despatched from Tehuantepec for Chiametla three vessels, the San Lázaro, the Santa Agueda, and the Santo Tomás, thoroughly equipped and well supplied with stores. About the same time he started by land for Chiametla at the head of a considerable force.[44] But Guzman, too weak to contend with him, avoided hostilities, and, during the time Cortés was in Jalisco, preferred to be absent, occupying himself with the suppression of an Indian outbreak in the valley of Banderas.[45] The land and sea expeditions were thus ​reunited at Chiametla without molestation, and Cortés, after inspecting the Concepcion which he found in an unserviceable condition, proceeded to make an attempt to found a colony on the eastern shore of the Californian peninsula.

The failure of the scheme, unless additional vessels and supplies were provided for the colony, soon became apparent to Cortés, and he returned with the Santa Agueda and Santo Tomás to Acapulco with the intention of fitting out a new fleet for that purpose. Moreover news of the arrival of Mendoza as viceroy had been brought to him by a vessel under the command of Francisco de Ulloa, and this, together with an earnest request from his wife, was an additional motive for his return.[46] Though little is known of his operations during the following two or three years he did not give up the hope of attaining some brilliant success, and with his customary activity made preparations for another expedition. In September 1538 he informed the India Council that he had nine good ships already built, but not yet launched, owing to the want of navigators,[47] and in 1539 his enthusiasm was raised by the marvellous reports brought by Marcos de Niza of the cities of Cíbola.

Whatever had been the captain-general's hopes of assistance on the arrival of a viceroy in New Spain, the change in the form of government only brought into the field a new and powerful competitor. Mendoza himself would like to be a great explorer, and in 1537 he asked of the king permission to participate in enterprises of discovery.[48]

​At first the relations between Mendoza and Cortés were not of an unfriendly nature, but the extreme punctiliousness which presently arose indicated a growing jealousy,[49] and the regulations defining certain formalities which for the sake of harmony they agreed to observe, were ineffective to prevent a rupture; and now when men became wild over the rich realms to be found in the north, each wished the other in the foul pit. Cortés, determined that the exclusive right of northern exploration to which he laid claim should not be wrested from him, hastened his preparations, and in spite of the viceroy's attempts to prevent him, succeeded in despatching a portion of his fleet from Acapulco, under the command of Francisco de Ulloa.[50] But Mendoza threw every possible obstacle in the way, seizing upon the captain-general's remaining vessels at Tehuantepec, forbidding any one to leave New Spain without his permission, and sending a strong force up the coast to prevent the entrance of Ulloa's ships into any of the ports. A messenger despatched to Cortés from Santiago in Colima was seized and tortured, that information might be obtained from him; and shortly afterward, one of the vessels putting into Guatulco[51] under stress of weather, the pilot and sailors were made prisoners.[52] All future efforts of the marquis to prosecute ​discoveries or obtain redress for his grievances were futile. His prestige was lost, his power in the country gone, and his petitions to the king unnoticed.[53] Thus harassed by his enemies and neglected by his sovereign, the great conqueror thought once more to plead his cause in person before the throne, and early in 1540 he left forever the shores of New Spain, which, after having been the scene of his grand achievements, had now become the witness of his failures and deep humiliation.[54] ​

  1. ↑ Cortés professes to have been at first satisfied with this order; 'y fué para mí muy gran merced, porque siempre querria tales testigos de mis servicios.' Cortés, Escritos Sueltos, 191.
  2. ↑ When the audiencia attended mass on the arrival at the capital the bishop of Tlascala in the prayer for the royal family, after the words, 'regem nostrum cum prole regia,' added, 'et ducem exercitus nostri,' whereupon Oidor Salmeron admonished him to observe the king's preëminence: 'é yo le amonesté que guardase al Rey su preeminencia Real en aquello.' Salmeron, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 192.
  3. ↑ Salmeron complainingly reports to the king the prominent position in which Cortés caused his chair to be placed in the church, and the fact that he took precedence in church ceremonies: 'y al ofrecer, nos porfiamos todos, y él ofrece el primero; y la paz saca un sacristan, y vá primero á nosotros, y tómala el primero.' Id.
  4. ↑ The oidores reported to his Majesty that the Indians, at the instigation of their chiefs, evaded the count. This they could readily do owing to the facility with which they removed from place to place. The duties of the commission appointed to take the count were thus made irksome in the extreme, and the result inaccurate. They were employed during the whole of lent in determining the population of a single town in the district of Cuernavaca without satisfactory result, and there were not less than 20 others in that district. Relacion, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiv. 330; Audience, Lettre, in Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série ii. tom. v. 151, 197-8.
  5. ↑ Cortés maintained that the heads of families only should be counted, while the oidores claimed that the individual members ought to be included. Again, several families occupied the same dwelling, separated from each other by partitions of bamboo. The oidores complain to the king that many of these houses were found empty, although they were convinced that the inhabitants had only temporarily removed. In other instances the partitions had been taken down so that several families might appear to belong to one and the same head; and the audiencia considered that all houses ought to be counted whether occupied or not. Id. Moreover strictness in count was warmly discussed by the encomenderos who recognized that the decision on this point materially affected themselves. Several witnesses testified that the contador, Rodrigo de Albornoz, had asserted that the count ought not to be taken too strictly as the difference of 50 macehuales more or less was a matter of slight importance. Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xvi. 548-54.
  6. ↑ The audiencia appointed Cristóbal de Barrios, Gerónimo Ruiz de la Mota, and Ruiz Gonzalez; the representatives of Cortés were, Andrés de Tapia, Juan de Salcedo, and Francisco de Terrazas. Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série ii. tom. v. 197. Cortés complains that two of his greatest enemies were chosen by the audiencia. Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 22-3.
  7. ↑ The marquis complained of this limitation of his jurisdiction, and also protested against the appointment of corregidores of certain towns claimed by him as pertaining to his grant. Id., 155, and Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiv. 331-2. A description of the different districts and townships included in the assignments will be found in Id., 333-7, and Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série ii. tom. v. 153-5. A copy also of the agreement between the audiencia and Cortés is contained in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xii. 514-20. Cortés engaged to surrender all claim to any districts which might afterward be found outside of his grant.
  8. ↑ In March 1531. Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 203-4.
  9. ↑ In August of the same year Salmeron remarks, 'il a un tel pouvoir sur les indigènes, que d'un seul mot il pourrait tons les faire révolter,' and later adds: 'Il dit. . . qu'il retournera en Espagne. Plût au ciel qu'il le fit; cela serait heureux pour la Nouvelle-Espagne.' Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série ii. tom. v. 196. In the same letter he expresses the conviction that it would be well not to include the township of Antequera Oajaca in the grant, while Oidor Quiroga apprises the king that the assignment to Cortés of the town of Tacubaya, so near the capital, would be greatly prejudicial to the city. Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 427-8.
  10. ↑ By a letter of the oidores, dated 14th of August 1531, already frequently quoted, the king was informed that Cortés was building in the city a palace more pretentious than any to be seen in Spain, and that the work had been interrupted by the audiencia placing the towns from which the marquis drew his laborers under the corregimiento system. He had, however, been allowed to employ the Indians of Chales, on the condition that he paid them wages. This he had failed to do, and the oidores had stopped the work. With regard to his houses in the city Cortés complains, in 1533, that the audiencia had neither paid him for them, nor were willing to give up the property, not even the traders' buildings which, according to agreement, he was to retain; and he requests the council to interfere in his behalf. Carta, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xii. 550-1. Certain lands lying within the city commons, were granted to Cortés by royal order of July 27, 1524, but he was dispossessed of them by the oidores of the first audiencia. In 1531 he claimed restitution, which was resisted, and the audiencia decided to submit the matter to the India Council. Id., xxix., passim. The queen, in April 1533, empowers the audiencia to investigate the matter and decide according to justice. Puga, Cedulario, 86.
  11. ↑ The audiencia informed the king that their policy was to avoid seeking the advice of Cortés in matters affecting the government, Salmeron, Carta, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 191. Cortés also complained to the king that he was not allowed to consult with the audiencia, but was simply required to obey orders. Id., 12. In his Relacion de Servicios he states that the audiencia construed the king's instructions relative to himself to suit themselves, and that without voice or vote in their councils he was compelled simply to execute their orders. Failures could thus be charged to his account, while the credit of his successes could be appropriated by the president and oidores. Escritos Sueltos, 217-18.
  12. ↑ This question of prerogative was still unsettled in April 1532. Cortés writing to the king on the 20th remarks: 'y asi se ha quedado hasta hoy gue ninguna érden ni concierto hay.' Id., 191. A similar failure occurred at Vera Cruz. Id., 220. The audiencia attributed this failure to the action of the enemies of Cortés who 'aimeraient mieux perdre tout ce qu'ils possèdent que le reconnaítre pour leur supérieur.' Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série 11. tom. v. 155-6.
  13. ↑ Oviedo, iii. 521. A false alarm was raised one night in the capital which caused general consternation. The originator of it was not discovered, but it afforded an additional motive for suppressing the conspiracy. Torquemada, i. 605; Cavo, Tres Siglos, i. 99-100. Consult also Herrera, dec. iv. lib. ix. cap. iv.
  14. ↑ One Alonso Tabera and several companions were killed, and shortly afterward six other Spaniards with a large number of slaves were put to death. Carta del Ayunt., in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 182-3.
  15. ↑ Cortés, Escritos Sueltos, 191-8, 218-19. Even the punishment of insubordination in his ranks was not allowed him by the audiencia. Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série ii. tom. v. 156; and when on one occasion an officer exceeded his instructions and reduced to slavery some prisoners captured in the Impilcingo campaign, the marquis was reprimanded for not having given sufficiently definite orders to his lieutenant, and the officer was arrested. Quiroga, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 424-6. The king in March 1532 instructs the audiencia not to proceed against either the captain, Vasco Porcallo, or the marquis in this matter. Puga, Cedulario, 79. Nor could Cortés obtain any redress from the audiencia when Captain Luis de Castilla, whom he had sent with an expedition to colonize part of the country previously pacified, was seized by Guzman and kept prisoner till his followers disbanded. Escritos, Sueltos, 192-3.
  16. ↑ His letter is dated April 20, 1532, and he remarks: 'Porque pues hasta aquí no he errado, no querria errar de aquí adelante: yo, como un vecino, seguiré lo que ine mandaren.' Escritos Sueltos, 193. On the 20th of March preceding, the queen issued the following somewhat indefinite instructions to the andiencia regarding the duties of the captain-general: 'El Marques ha de vsar el oficio de capitan general en la nueva España en las cosas, q͏̄ por nos especialméte le fueren mandadas, o alla por vosotros en nuestro nombre se le mandaren, y no en otra cosa, mirareys bien siempre lo que les encomendays y mandays, porque se escusen diferencias, teniendo siempre respecto a la persona del marques.' Puga, Cedulario, 79.
  17. ↑ Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 226. This advice was again given by the audiencia in November following. Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série ii. tom. v. 208-9. Herrera is alone with respect to the relations between Cortés and Fuenleal. He describes them as amicable, and asserts that the president continually consulted Cortés. dec. iv. lib. ix. cap. xiv.
  18. ↑ The towns of Oajaca and Antequera may be considered as one. The first audiencia founded the Spanish town of Antequera close to the Indian village of Oajaca on land belonging to the marquis. Cortés maintained that this was done to injure him, and presented a petition to the second audiencia regarding the matter. Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série 11. tom. v. 146-7. Florencia states that the king granted Cortés four villas in exchange for the city. Comp. de Jesvs, 231.
  19. ↑ In March 1531 the oider Salmeron informs the India Council that the settlers in Antequera wished to have the villa removed elsewhere, before they had erected many buildings; or have the town of Oajaca given to them. Salmeron advises that the latter proposition be adopted. Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 203.
  20. ↑ On one occasion the alcaldes imprisoned his agent, Diego del Castillo, and submitted him to outrageous treatment. Id., xii, 551-4.
  21. ↑ Charles gave it the name and privileges of a city April 25, 1532. Medina, Chron. San Diego, 246. Villa Señor names April 25, 1531, as the date, Theatro, ii. 112, which is probably incorrect, as Cortéz, writing on the 25th of January, 1533, to the Council of the Indies, represents that a proctor had been despatched to Spain by the Spaniards of Antequera for the purpose of petitioning that their villa be elevated to the rank of a city, and opposes the request by bringing forward his own claims. Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xil. 545-6. According to Herrera, exemption was granted the city for 30 Years, 'del seruicio ordinario.' dec. v. lib. ii. cap. vii.
  22. ↑ Antequera was raised to the rank of a cathedral town in 1534, but the description of it given by Bishop Zárate in 1544 indicates the victory of Cortés. The city, he writes, was in such a condition that its abandonment would be no loss. The distress of the inhabitants was owing to the city possessing no lands, all the surrounding country being owned by Cortés, Provisions consequently commanded exorbitant prices. The town had been founded out of malice to the marquis, but the scheme only worked to the injury of the settlers, who had not even commons for pasturage. A change, however, might be effected by a proper arrangement with Cortés, which would make Antequera one of the most important places in the country. Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série i. tom. x. 293-8.
  23. ↑ Cortés had obtained from the pope a bull granting to him immunity from tithes on the domains granted to him by the king. 'The audiencia report his consequent refusal to pay them. In 1533 royal orders were issued to the effect that he was not to be exempt from the payment, since such exemption would be prejudicial to the royal patronato, which it was not the pope's intention to injure. Montemayor, Svmarios, 49; Puga, Cedulario, 84.
  24. ↑ The queen by cédula of April 20, 1533, ordered that these forests, waters, and pastures be common property of the Spaniards. Id., 85.
  25. ↑ The natives of the Cuernavaca district presented to Pedro García, the interpreter of the audiencia, eight paintings descriptive of the tributes they had paid to the marquis, and stated that they were treated by his underlings more like slaves than vassals. García, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiv. 142-7. The king in September 1533, directed the audiencia to determine the tribute to be paid by the vassals not only of Cuernavaca but of all his domains. Puga, Cedulario, 87.
  26. ↑ In April 1532 the audiencia informs the crown that in order to arrive at some knowledge of the number, Indians in the guise of traders had been secretly sent into the district of Cuernavaca. These had made drawings of the towns and villages in the valley, from which it appeared that in that district only there were more than 20,000 houses each containing several families. The audiencia believed that Cortés had received more than his right. Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série ii. tom. v. 204-5. The queen in April 1533 approved the suggestion made by the audiencia that President Fuenleal and two oidores should proceed to Cuernavaca and verify the paintings, taking with them the natives that had drawn them. Puga, Cedulario, 83-4.
  27. ↑ Cortés, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xii. 541-9, 554-63. On account of the enmity displayed by the audiencia he petitioned the king to send a special commissioner to make the count and deliver him his vassals, or to empower a commission of prelates and friars in New Spain to do so, otherwise a settlement would never be accomplished. Id., xiii. 24-5.
  28. ↑ Viceroy Mendoza and Vasco de Quiroga, bishop elect of Michoacan, were empowered, November 30, 1537, to count the vassals. Id., xii. 314-18.
  29. ↑ Cortés, in Carta, Col. Doc. Inéd., iv. 194-201. His expenses in fitting out armaments had been enormous, besides other calls upon his purse, which was ever an open one. He thus describes his straitened circumstances: 'Con las ayudas de costa que dese Real Consejo se me han hecho . . . yo tengo harto que hacer in mantenerme en un aldea, donde tengo mi muger, sin osar residir en esta cibdad ni venir á ella, por no tener que comer en ella.' And he entreats the council, 'dar . . . órden como en mis dias tenga de comer y despues dellos se conozca en mis hijos que su padre meresció algo.' Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., iii. 589. But no final settlement of his claims was made in his lifetime, and it was only after his death that the latter wish obtained recognition, when the original grant was confirmed to his son, with a slight reservation and without limitation as to the number of vassals, by Philip II.
  30. ↑ As a further injustice the oidores, according to the representation of Cortés to the king, condemned the officer in charge to pay 3,000 castellanos, claimed by the carpenters as compensation for the loss of work for nearly a year. Property belonging to Cortés was sold to meet this demand. Carta, in Col. Doc. Inéd., i. 39-40. The amount of loss is stated by the attorney of Cortés at a later date to have exceeded 30,000 castellanos. Cortés, Escritos Sueltos, 217.
  31. ↑ Gomara, Hist. Mex., 287-8.
  32. ↑ 'Aunque yo he visto una provision, en que se manda al presidente y cidores que no se entremetan en cosa deste descubrimiento, sino que libremente me dejen hacer.' Cortés, Escritos Sueltos, 194.
  33. ↑ Acapulco was the capital town of the Cohuixcas under the Aztec empire. It had been visited at an early date by explorers of the south coast sent by Cortés. The port was recognized by Cortés as affording facilities for shipbuilding, and vessels were constructed and despatched here at an early date. It is mentioned by the audiencia in 1532, Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série ii. tom. v., but can hardly be considered as a recognized Spanish settlement till 1550. Philip II. elevated it to the rank of a city.
  34. ↑ Cortés in his account to the king of this interruption explains that the natives employed were those of his own encomienda; that he paid them for their labor, and that the ordinance prohibiting the employment of Indian carriers had been violated with impunity by others. Carta, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xii. 548; Col. Doc. Inéd., iv. 175-7. Alonso de Zurita, writing in the last half of the 16th century, 'oydor que fue de la real audiencia,' represents that the construction of fleets by Cortés cost the lives of thousands of Indians. Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., ii. 113-14.
  35. ↑ Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série ii. tom. v. 203-4.
  36. ↑ Pacheco and Cárdenas, xii. 541. These vessels were built under contract by Juan Rodriguez de Villafuerte, for 1,500 castellanos, to be delivered before Christmas, 1531. Cortés, in Col. Doc. Inéd., ii. 416-19. The ill-fated vessels were both lost, and nearly every one of the crews, weakened by sickness and famine, massacred by the natives. Cortés attributed the failure of this expedition to the enmity of Guzman, who prevented his captains landing for supplies and repairs. Real Provision, in Icazbalceta, Col. Doc., ii. 35.
  37. ↑ Id., 35-6. The port of Tehuantepec was called Port of Santiago. Romay, Cuenta, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xii. 298.
  38. ↑ Cortés, Ecritos Sueltos, 250. The cost of the two vessels amounted to 9,000 pesos de oro de minas. Romay, Cuenta, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xii. 298-313. Zamacois, Hist. Méj., iv. 564, 574, erroneously regards the two expeditions as one, and has confused the events of the latter with those of the former.
  39. ↑ 'Con hasta siete hombres.' Cortés, Escritos Sueltos, 263.
  40. ↑ See Hist. North Mex. States, i., this series.
  41. ↑ Writing on this matter Cortés says: 'Supe casi por milagro, segund la diligencia que Nuño de Guzman puso en guardar el secreto,' etc. Escritos Sueltos, 263.
  42. ↑ The reason given by the oidores was that they had heard that Guzman had already despatched an expedition to the discovered land, and that 'escándalos, muertes de hombres é otros incovenientes' would be the consequence if the two should meet. The order sent to Guzman is dated August 19th, that to Cortés the 2d of September, 1534. Real Provision, in Icazbalceta, Col. Doc., ii, 31-40, and in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xii. 418-29.
  43. ↑ Comision, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xii., 429-39.
  44. ↑ A witness in a subsequent lawsuit testified that there were 400 Spaniards and 300 negroes. Bernal Diaz, Hist. Verdad., 233-4, says the expedition consisted of 320 persons, including 34 married couples.
  45. ↑ Guzman, writing in June 1535, claims that the bad policy of Cortés while passing through Jalisco was the cause of these Indian troubles, Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xiii. 414-17.
  46. ↑ Respecting the returning fleet and all other particulars, see Hist. North Mex. States, vol. i. this series.
  47. ↑ He had sent to Panamá and Nicaragua for sailors, but without success. He therefore despatched at this time Juan Galvano to Spain in order to procure them. Cortés, Carta, in Col. Doc. Inéd., iv. 193-4. See also Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., iii. 585-43, and Escritos Sueltos, 281. Motolinia, Hist. Ind., 171, followed by Mendieta, Hist. Ecles., 398, makes mention of an expedition sent out by Cortés some time during this year, and accompanied by three Franciscan friars; but I do not find the assertion of these authors supported by any other authority.
  48. ↑ And for the same favors granted to others in like cases. Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., ii. 211.
  49. ↑ They agreed to address each other by the title of 'señoría;' that the viceroy when entertained at the house of the marquis should take the head of the table, 'y á ambos se sirviese con salva y maestresalas,' that at the viceroy's table no chair was to be placed at the head when Cortés was being entertained, but that they should occupy the respective sides, the viceroy being seated on the right. When together the viceroy was also to occupy the right position. The arrangement of their seats in the church was, moreover, decided upon, and the first rupture between them arose from an attempt of the servant of Cortés to advance his master's chair to the line of the viceroy's, Peralta, Not. Hist., 141-2.
  50. ↑ Mendoza, however, though too late to prevent the departure of Ulloa, detained six or seven vessels of the marquis, and ordered them not to go on the expedition. Cortés, Descub., in Col. Doc. Inéd., iv. 218.
  51. ↑ Guatulco, a port on the western shore of the gulf of Tehuantepec. Ogilby, 1671, writes Aguatulco, the next name west being Marila, Aquatulco Capalita; Dampier, 1699, Port Guatulco; Laet, 1633, Aguatulco; West-Ind, Spieghel, 1624, Guatulco; Colom, 1663, Aguatulco; Jefferys, Guatulco; Kiepert, Huatulco. Cartog. Pac. Coast, MS., ii. 348.
  52. ↑ 'Y se perdió el navio.' Cortés, Escritos Sueltos, 303-4.
  53. ↑ As early as February 1535 he complained that he did not receive replies to letters addressed by him to the India Council. Escritos Sueltos, 260-1.
  54. ↑ The exact date of his departure to Spain is not known, but he addressed a letter from Habana to Oviedo, dated February 5, 1540. Oviedo, iv. 19.

    I may mention as additional authorities on the preceding chapters the following: Burgoa, Geog. Descrip. Oajaca, i. 5, 13-139; ii. 199-361; Calle, Mem. y Not., 71-6; Dávila Padilla, Hist. Fund. Mex., 105-583, passim; Dávila, Continuacion, MS., 185-98, 284; Diezmos de Indias, iv. 1-3; Fernandez, Hist. Ecles., 58-60; Florencia, Hist. Comp. de Jesvs, 231-2; Cortés, Corresp., 366 — 72; Gomara, Hist. Mex., 292; Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 19-28, 107-13, 222-3; Grijalva, Cron. S. August., 34; Mendieta, Hist. Ecles., 222-736, passim; Oviedo, iii, 521, 544; Ordenes de la Corona, MS., i. 10-11; Puga, Cedulario, 21-118, passim, 167; Recop. de Ind., i. 543; ii. 25; Reales Cedulas, MS., 1. 105; Torguemada, i. 605-13; iii. 35-9, 302-580, passim; Vetancurt, Menolog., 61-259, passim, 425-35; Id., Trat. Mex., 6-9, 17-18; Id., Chron., 127-8; Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., ii. 179-362; iii. 83-4; xii. 133-562, passim; xiii. 25-6, 213-50, 427-50; xiv. 142-7, 329-47; xxiii. 423-67; xxix. 326-577; Alaman, Disert., i. 203, 261, 267-8, 270, app. i. 28; ii. 33-6, 127-78, passim; 206-318, passim; iii. 94-100, app. 9-11; Beaumont, Crón. Mich., ii. 479-80; iii. 138-553, passim; iv. 1-602, passim; v. 238-41; Id., MS., 122, 925; Alaman, in Prescott's Mex., i. 60; Bercerra Tanco, Felic. Mex., 1-109; Concilios Prov., 1555-65, 213-335; Cavo, Tres Siglos, i. 71-151; Cabrera, Escudo de Armas, 6-475, passim; Figueroa, Vindicias, MS., 106-9, 112; Figueroa, Becerro, MS., 35, 41; Pap. Francis., MS., i. ser. i. No. 1; Fvnd. Prov. Santiago, MS., 2-6; Icazbalceta, Col. Doc., i. 147, 173-4; ii. 41-61, 190-7, 552; Monumen. Dom. Esp., MS., 61, 69, 76-9, No. ii. 240-1; No. v. 7-8; No. vi. 320-1, 352-4; Moreno, Fragment. de Quiroga, 1-202; Medina, Chron. S. Diego Mex., 122-3, 236-46; Pizarro, Varones Ilustres, 120-1; Ramirez, Doc., MS., 5-6, 216-63; Romero, Not. Mich., 9-25; Remesal, Hist. Chyapa, 56-8, 106-52, 458, 465, 525-38; Rivera, Hist. Jal., i. 53-9; Centro América, Extractos Sueltos, MS., 22; Salazar, Mex. in 1554, 53-4, 164-5; Sigüenza y Góngora, Anot. Crit., MS., 2-6, 28-385; Ternaux-Compans, Voy., série i. tom. x. 287-8; série ii. tom. v. 155-278, passim; Salazar, Cong. Mex., 441-57; Florida, Col. Doc., 119-39; Veitia, Linage, MS., 3-26; Doc. Ecles. de Mex., MS., i. No. v.; Arévalo, Compend., 98-100, 251; Arroniz, Hist. y Cron., 57-62; Antinez, Mem. Hist. 132-4; Bartolache, Manif. Guad., 3-105, end app.; Bustamante, Aparic. Guad., 5-75; Id., Manifest., 16, 22; Id., Inform., 1-26; Guadalupe, Col. Ob. y Opusc., 1-815, passim; Heredia, Serm. y Desert., Guad., iii. 1-29; iv. 1-55; v. 1-201; Hernandez, Comp. Geog. Mich., 8; Iglesias y Conventos, 230-3, 268-73; Lorenzana, Hist. N. Esp., 13-14, 35-6; Lacunza, Discurs. Hist., 458, 460-2; Lebron, Apolog. Jurid., 1-124; Papeles en Derecho, pt. iv.; Montemayor, Svmarios, 49, 150-2; Morelli, Fasti Novi Orbis, 103-14; Nouvelles An. des Voy., xcix. 192; cxxxi., 245; Marcou, Notes, 5; Mich. Prov. S. Nic., 32-5, 101-2; S. Miguel, Mex., ii. 34, 13, 68-81; Mex. Not. Ciud. Mex., 400-5; Peralta, Not. Hist., 140-3, 162-3, 279-80; Conejares, Maravil. Aparic., 1-214; Cuatro Imágenes, Milag, MS., 1-43; Doc. Ecles. Mex., MS., i. No. v.; Conde y Oquendo, Disert. Ap. Guad., i-ii.; Guridi, Aparic, Guad., 1-210; Gomara, Hist. Mex., ii. 87, 169-75; Beltrami, Mex., 219-29; Crepo, Mem. Ajust., 5-6; Carriedo, Estud. Hist. i. 104-5, 112-13; Episcopado Mex., 7; Frejes, Hist. Breve, 203; Guadalupe, Inform., 1-26; Michuacan, Anal. Estad., 5; N. Esp. Brev. Res., i. 120-39; Mayer's Mex. Aztec., i. 1389-42; Ribera, Gob. de Mex., i. 23, 57-60; Repertorio Gen., 35-7; Id., Literat., i. 241-8; Prov. de Santo Evangelio, No, iii; Silicio, Foment. Col. Ind., ix. 32-47; Sardo, Relac. de Chalma, 1-142; Parras, Cong. Jal., MS., 84-5, 222-65; Jalisco, Mem. Hist., 175-6; Viagero, Univ., xxvii. 87; Touron, Hist. Gen, Am., vi. 34-6; Zamacois, Hist. Méj., iv. 470-715; v. 19-20, 105-26; Ribadeneyra, Man. Patronato, 400-8; Fricius, Indianischer Relig., 22-44; Corral, Serm. Hist., pp. vii. 24; Cartas de Indias, 56-61, 684-870, passim; Alm. Calend., 1856, No. vi. 56; Brasseur de Bourbourg, Hist. Nat. Civ., iv. 732-3, 762-87; Bussiere, L'Empire Mex., 355-863 Barros, Serm., 14-19; Cortés, Diario, 1820, iii. 155; Dic. Univ., passim; El Liceo Mex., i, 163-73; Granados, Tardes Am., 332-9; Gordon's Hist. Geog. Mem., 29; La Cruz, 1. 201-8; La Estrella de el Norte, 3-29; Museo Mex., i. 165-197, passim, 447-51; Mosaico Mex., ii. 342, 461; Robertson's Hist. Am., ii. 141-5; Villa Señor, Teatro Am. i. 14-16, 28; Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, i. 153-230; vii. 162-237; viii. 167-610; ix. 1-82, Da ép. iv. 639-42; Pap. Var., v. No. ii. 58-6; cxliii. No. xi.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_Mexico_(Bancroft)/Volume_2/Chapter_20&oldid=10012530"