History of Mexico (Bancroft)/Volume 2/Chapter 31

by Hubert Howe Bancroft

 

CHAPTER XXXI.

CHURCH GOVERNMENT.

1550-1600.

Archbishop Alonso be Montúfar — Jealousy between the Secular and Regular Clergy — Royal Support of the Friars — Differences between the Friars and the Civil Power — Father Geronimo de Mendieta Defends the Religious — His Works — Position of the Friars and their Influence with the Natives — Persons Excluded From the Priesthood — Religious Riot in Mexico — The Sacramental Dispute — First and Second Ecclesiastic Councils of Mexico — Archbishop Montúfar's Death — The Inquisition — Its Establishment, Privileges, Objects, and Acts — Father Landa's Treatment of Idolaters — Archbishop Moya de Contreras — Third Ecclesiastic Council and its Acts — Archbishop Montúfar's Departure — Alonso Fernandez de Bonilla Succeeds Him — Other Dioceses in the Country and their History.

The vacancy in the see of Mexico caused by the death of Zumárraga was, on the 13th of June, 1551, filled by the appointment of Alonso de Montúfar as archbishop.^[1] He was a prominent Dominican, twice prior of the convent of Santa Cruz de Granada; likewise a doctor of the university there and a censor of the inquisition.^[2] It is said that his acceptance of this see was solely with the view to benefit the native races, and to that end he brought out with him ten Franciscan friars and as many of his own order, among whom two were eminent. Notwithstanding his good-will toward this as well as other orders, the fact remains that he was a Dominican, of whom the Franciscans in particular were very jealous.

Further than this, the time had come when the interests of the secular clergy must clash with those of the regular orders. Owing to the scarcity of ecclesiastics during the earlier occupation of New Spain, the monastic orders acquired undue powers and privileges. When the number of bishoprics was increased, and a more thorough ecclesiastical government organized, the church viewed with jealousy this encroachment on her prerogatives, and was displeased that Franciscans, Dominicans, and Augustinians should exercise jurisdiction independent of her authority. On the other hand, the orders tenaciously maintained what they claimed to be their rights, and by their assertion of judicial authority, especially in the prohibition or sanction of marriages,^[3] occasioned the church much annoyance. Thus arose dissension between the two parties, which in time developed into a bitter feud, during which acrimonious recriminations, scandals, and an unchristian spirit too frequently disgraced the action of both sides. Clergymen and friars each accused the other of neglect of duty; bishops were charged with abandoning their posts,^[4] and members of the orders, with returning to Spain, rich in silver and gold, to buy preferment.

The treatment of the natives, the questions of tribute and tithes, and the administering of the sacraments alike afforded ground for angry dispute,^[5] but of these the bitterest was the question of tithes. The church demanded the payment of tithes to the bishop of each diocese, by all residents within its limits, Indians inclusive. The archbishop of Mexico in a letter of May 15, 1556, to the royal council, had asked that Indians should pay tithes, or rather a tax, for the time being, to be levied at the rate of one out of every fifteen. But the crown would allow no such taxation of natives.^[6] The regular orders, while not opposed to such a source of revenue, objected to the bishops receiving income thus derived, and claimed it for themselves as Levites serving with the pope's license — a doctrine which the ecclesiastical prelates abhorred.^[7] They endeavored, however, to explain the origin of their differences with the church in this respect,^[8] and proposed to leave the question of tithes to the judgment of the king, and their right to protect Indians from abuses, as well as their privileges generally, to arbitrators, but these proposals were not regarded.^[9] Nor did the pertinacious and meddlesome friars confine themselves to throwing down the gauntlet to the church. In political matters also they became aggressive, and consequent hostility arose between them and the local authorities. In Indian towns they attempted to control elections and thereby the municipal governments; but above all they devoted their anxious care and attention to the question of tributes, and the distribution of the surplus proceeds, of which they were eager to have a share. It is true that they had often winked at the rascalities of alcaldes mayores and corregidores; but then they hoped to have their reward, and when this did not correspond with their expectations, wrath and enmity were displayed on both sides.^[10] Nevertheless, the foothold they had gained was strong, and they struggled to maintain it. In 1564 the visitador Valderrama represented to Philip that the orders were striving to keep the control they had hitherto possessed, not only in spiritual but in temporal affairs, which would be no difficult matter, since their influence with the viceroy was so great he expressed fears that whatever he might arrange about Indians and tributes would, after he left Mexico, be undone by the artful friars concealing tribute payers or reporting them as dead.^[11] The friars, he added, decidedly opposed the counting of the Indians, and went so far as to proclaim from the pulpit that the epidemic then raging^[12] was a punishment for enforcing that measure. Indians serving in convents and churches were exempt from tribute; and if the friars could have their way the king would soon have no tributaries. They did not openly say that the king had no right to collect tributes, but they believed it all the same. Some of the friars were indeed good, intelligent men; but the ignorant, whose number was large, claimed that all the benefits accruing from Indians belonged by right to the church and orders, and they did not scruple at tricks to sustain this view.

Among the ede of the religious orders none was more distinguished than the Franciscan father, Gerónimo de Mendieta. This eminent personage was a native of Victoria in the Basque province of Guipúzcoa, and one of forty brothers, all by the same father. He took the habit in Bilbao and came to New Spain in 1554; completed his studies in Xochimilco, and learned the Mexican language. He never preached, being a stutterer; but with his pen he was a master of eloquence and sound reasoning, and was regarded by his brethren and others as the Cicero of the province. Whensoever an address had to be prepared to the king or his council, the viceroy or other personages, or to the superiors of his order, the preparation was invariably intrusted to him. He thus won the regard of many prelates, who sought his companionship. He accompanied Father Miguel Navarro in 1569 to the general chapter of his order held in France, and suffered much hardship on the journey. In 1573 he returned with a reënforcement of friars. During his stay in Spain he dwelt in Castro de Urdiales, and had resolved to end his days there, but holy obedience demanded his return. He filled' several of the highest offices of trust, and was remarkable for the strict performance of his duties, his ceaseless efforts for the better government of the Indies, and his humility.^[13] In 1562 Father Mendieta addressed a letter to Padre Francisco de Bustamante, the comisario general of his order,^[14] in which he makes a vigorous defence of the regular orders, and attributes the evils existing in the country to the interference with the authority and privileges of friars by bishops and oidores. Against the audiencia he inveighs with much severity.^[15] and considers that the viceregal power should be supreme, subject only to the throne.^[16] Carried away by excessive zeal in the friars' cause, he exhibits likewise great animosity toward the public officials in general — Viceroy Velasco only excepted — and all Spaniards living in Mexico who were not friars. He speaks of the discontent prevailing among the religious orders, all members of whom, he asserts, were anxious to abandon a field in which their services were considered no longer useful. Things had come to such a pass, in his opinion, that the 'friar had lost all heart for his work,^[17] the old fervor having died away, both on the part of the missionaries and the recently converted natives.

The position of the friars during this period was, indeed, an unenviable one, and so effectively had the church and audiencia represented them to the throne that certain cédulas were issued against them which caused serious loss of influence. In fact, both Spaniards and Indians openly displayed their lack of reverence.^[18] Even Bishop Quiroga, who had been a warm supporter of the orders, now as warmly defended his prerogatives in this ecclesiastical warfare, and would have closed the Augustinian convents within his diocese but for the interference of the king.^[19] One of the greatest grievances which the regular orders complained of was the refusal of the archbishop and bishops to ordain members of their orders. Efficient priests were becoming scarce in the religious orders, and aged men, whose mental faculties and physical strength were unequal to the task, had almost exclusive charge of Indian conversion. The provincials of the orders brought their complaints before the crown, which expressed its displeasure to the secular prelates and ordered the ordination of friars when required, except such as were mestizos or persons who should not be considered suitable.^[20] Nor was this last prohibition unnecessary. Although as a body the friars were exemplary in their moral conduct, there were unfortunately among their number members whose behavior brought opprobrium upon the orders and required efficacious treatment.^[21]

Another ground of complaint on the part of the regular orders was the exclusion of their ordained members from the right of administering the sacraments, and their being limited to the celebration of mass and the instruction of the Indians. Their consciousness of the prominent part they had taken in conversion, their sincere zeal, and their ardent desire to maintain the superior influence over the natives which they had once possessed, naturally combined to make them claim the privilege of administering the most solemn rites. Apart from what they deemed injustice, to be debarred from the performance of the higher ceremonies lowered their position in the eyes of converts. Their representations to the throne with regard to this matter had the desired effect, and at the request of Philip, Pope Pius issued a bull, on the 24th of March, 1567, granting to the religious orders the privilege of administering the sacraments in Indian towns.^[22]

I may further illustrate the feeling which existed at this time between the ecclesiastical factions and their respective supporters, by describing a tumult which occurred in the city of Mexico in 1569, occasioned by the interference of the clergymen at a procession of the Franciscan friars. On the virgin's day it had long been the custom of this order to march in solemn procession to the church of Santa María de la Redonda, and there celebrate mass; but in this year the secular clergy opposed the performance. The Indian followers of the friars, becoming incensed, began to throw stones at those who interrupted their procession, which led to a volley of similar missiles from natives on the other side. The result was a general disturbance, in which stones and other weapons were freely used, and several persons seriously injured. The clergymen and their defenders were defeated. The public excitement became great, and the viceroy had to exercise all his prudence.^[23]

But with regard to the sacraments, the secular clergy would not yet yield the point, and so steady a pressure was maintained, that on the 31st of March, 1583, the king issued an order commanding the friars to surrender. Archbishop Moya, to enforce the order and at the same time show proper respect for the orders, invited their prelates to meet him at his house, where he courteously reminded them of the king's benevolent intentions, and asked them to choose such houses as they would prefer for their conventual abodes; to which they answered that they wished first to hear further from the king and their superiors, and begged for time to ascertain the views of the other members of their orders. Their request was granted.^[24] On the 23d of October the three orders formally made known their purpose of appealing to the crown. The archbishop then resolved to suspend the execution of the royal cédula, except in urgent cases, till the king's pleasure was again learned on the subject. The audiencia did the same upon the petition of the three orders, who forthwith appointed proctors to present their case to the king.^[25] The result of their pleadings appeared in a royal decree of 1585, to the effect that friars acting as curates were to administer the sacraments to both Indians and Spaniards dwelling with them.^[26] This decree was to have a temporary effect until the issue of a final decision.

It was during Montúfar's occupation of the archiepiscopal seat, and under his direction, that the first ecclesiastical council proper was held in Mexico.^[27] The efforts of the missionary friars at their convention in 1526 to establish rules for the guidance of ecclesiastics had, from the want of an organized government and the spiritual condition of the natives, been attended with few results; and after the lapse of thirty years, and the extension of the church, the necessity of a provincial synod became urgent. The archbishop therefore formally convoked a synodical council, and it began its labors on the 17th of November 1555. This council, over which Montúfar presided, was attended by the bishops of Tlascala, Chiapas, Michoacan, and Oajaca, by the viceroy and royal audiencia, and by a number of other officials both ecclesiastic and civil.^[28]

At this meeting ninety-three chapters of declarations and rules adapted to the requirements of the period were passed. The aim was to regulate the conversion of the natives, and defend them from irregular exaction of tribute; to reform society and the mode of life followed by many of the clergy, to whom gambling, mercantile pursuits, and the practice of usury were forbidden under heavy punishments; and to systematize the administration of the archbishopric and parochial churches.^[29]

In 1565 a second ecclesiastical council was convoked by the archbishop, the chief object being the recognition of the acts promulgated by the ecumenical council of Trent in 1563. The suffragan bishops who attended it were those of Chiapas, Yucatan, Tlascala, Nueva Galicia, and Oajaca.^[30] Twenty-eight chapters were enacted, many of them constituting amendments of declarations passed at the previous council, which had proved in a great measure to be but a mere display of authority without effect.^[31]

 

On the 7th of March 1572 the venerable Archbishop Montúfar died at an advanced age, after a painful and lingering illness of eighteen months,^[32] and was buried in the Dominican convent. The fatherly solicitude which he had ever displayed for his flock caused his death to be deeply regretted.^[33] He had devoted himself earnestly to the duties of his calling, and never lost sight of the fact that the church in New Spain needed much reformation and a more regular organization. While he steadily opposed the encroachments of the regular orders, he was not blind to the shortcomings of the secular clergy and the abuses which prevailed in his see. In his administration he ever sought the advice of men prominent for their excellence and sound judgment. In the Franciscan lay brother Pedro de Gante he reposed great confidence, and with open candor acknowledged him as his trustworthy guide, being wont to say that Gante and not himself was the true archbishop of Mexico. Another of his advisers was his old friend and companion, Father Bartolomé de Ledesma. Named assistant in the administration of the archdiocese, Ledesma shared largely in its duties during the last twelve years of Montúfar’s episcopate. In the same year that Montúfar died Pedro de Moya y Contreras had been made coadjutor of the archbishop, with the right of succession.

 

Toward the close of Montúfar’s rule the tribunal of the inquisition was formally established in New Spain. During the earlier years of the conquest there existed representatives only of the institution, the first of whom was the Franciscan missionary Valencia. When the Dominicans arrived, superiors of their order acted as agents of that court, and still later inquisitors, rightly so called, were officially appointed.^[34] By a decree of the inquisition general of Spain, dated the 27th of June 1535, the ecclesiastical court was empowered to exercise jurisdiction and inflict punishment in all cases where heresy was concerned, but it was rarely deemed necessary to display imposing severity.^[35] In 1558, however, Robert Tomson, an Englishman, and Agustin Boacio, a Genoese, after a long imprisonment, were conducted through the streets of Mexico, in the presence of thousands of spectators, and compelled in sambenito to do penance on a high scaffold on which they received sentence.^[36]

While officially constituted representatives of the inquisition were thus not immoderately exercising the terrible power with which they were invested, it is painful to note that friars, carrying out their aggressive system, laid hands upon its prerogatives. When from the gloom of the past the outline of a repulsive figure can be well marked, I cannot regard it as the shade of a companionless Frankenstein. The saintly Landa, provincial of the Franciscans, became aware in 1562 that the inhabitants of the ancient city of Maní in Yucatan^[37] still retained some veneration for the worship of their forefathers. But more than this, his investigations satisfied him that the bodies of renegades had been buried in consecrated ground. Their remains were disinterred and scattered in the neighboring woods. The idolatrous propensity must be stopped, and what more effective method could be adopted than the Spanish inquisition? So Landa determined to celebrate the event by a kind of informal rattling of the machinery, and called upon the sheriff and prominent Spaniards of the province to assist him. They readily responded and the ceremony was witnessed by a multitude of native Americans.^[38] Thus for a time the rule of the rack was quite benignant. But when a generation had passed away and Christianity had planted firmly her foothold in the conquered country, apostasy was regarded as without excuse. Moreover, the land was full of adventurers who scoffed at religion and interfered with the work of conversion. Philip was a most Catholic king, and with the effect of Luther's preaching before him he would, if possible, save his American dominions from the sanguinary religious wars then desolating Europe. Thus it came about that a regular tribunal of the inquisition was sent out to New Spain in 1571, there to be received with demonstrations of joy and pomp, covering a wide-spread feeling of apprehension and horror.^[39] The chief inquisitor was Doctor Pedro de Moya y Contreras, the same who some years later became archbishop of Mexico and afterward viceroy of New Spain. The first appointee to the office had been the licenciado Juan de Cervantes, but he died on the passage from Spain, whereupon Moya succeeded him, and installed the court on the 11th of November of the same year, in the large buildings of Juan Velazquez de Salazar, the dean of Mexico. Alonso Fernandez de Bonilla was the first fiscal or prosecuting officer of the court,^[40] who in 1583 became chief inquisitor.

The tribunal had jurisdiction over all Catholics who by deed or word gave signs of harboring heretical or schismatical opinions; and also over such persons not Catholics as attempted to proselyte, or uttered heretical sentiments, or were known to be hostile to the church. Foreign Protestants brought within its reach, and all offenders against the laws of the church, were also fit subjects for its tender mercies. And probably nothing better proves the honesty of the king and the good faith of the ecclesiastical authorities than the fact that Indians were made exempt, except in extreme cases, on the ground that they, as a race, were insufficiently instructed in the tenets of the faith, and therefore liable to fall, without malice, into error.^[41] In so fresh a field full of reckless adventurers, intermingled with Moorish, Jewish, and other elements, the tribunal could not fail to obtain subjects, and a number were soon arraigned. The first auto-de-fé decreed by the court was in 1574, and took place in the small plaza of the marqués del Valle, between the door of the principal church and the marquis' buildings. According to Torquemada, the victims numbered sixty-three, of whom five were burned. It was a most dramatic affair, attended by thousands of spectators from far and near.^[42]

The next public affair of the kind was in 1575, when the number of penitentes was smaller. From that year till 1593 there took place seven more, making nine from the installation of the court. The tenth occurred on the 8th of December, 1595, and of this I will give a description. Preparations on a grand scale were made to present to the authorities and people a spectacle worthy of the cause. To increase the solemnity of the occasion, the day fixed upon was that of the immaculate conception; and the place, the chief plaza with its extensive appointments of railings covered with platforms, and thousands of seats or benches arranged as in an amphitheatre, which was used after the celebration as a bull-ring.

The time having arrived, the viceroy, conde de Monterey, accompanied by the justices and officers of the audiencia, the royal treasury officials, military officers, and other members of his suite repaired to the inquisition building, where the inquisitors Bartolomé Lobo Guerrero, an archbishop elect, and Alonso de Peralta, subsequently bishop of Charcas, awaited them. Sixty-seven penitents were then led forth from the dungeons, and the procession marched to the plaza. A great concourse of people, from far and near, followed the procession and occupied windows and squares to the very gate and houses of the holy office.^[43]

The prisoners appeared, wearing ropes round their necks, and conical hats on which were painted hellish flames, and with green candles in their hands, each with a priest at his side exhorting him to Christian fortitude. They were marched under a guard of the holy office. Among those doomed to suffer were persons convicted of the following offences: Those who had become reconciled with the church and afterward relapsed into Judaism, in sambenitos, and with familiars of the inquisition at their side; bigamists, with similar hats descriptive of their crime; sorceresses with white hats of the same kind, candles and ropes; blasphemers with gags to their tongues, marching together, one after the other, with heads uncovered and candles in their hands. First among them came those convicted of petty offences, followed in regular order of criminality by the rest, the last being the relapsed, the dogmatists, and teachers of the Mosaic law, who wore the tails of their sambenitos rolled up and wrapped round their caps to signify the falsity of their doctrine. On arriving at their platform the prisoners were made to sit down, the relapsed, the readers of Mosaic law, and dogmatists occupying the higher seats; the others according to their offences, last being the statues of the dead and absent relapsed ones. The reconciled and other penitents occupied benches in the plaza. On the right side of the holy office was a pulpit from which preached the Franciscan friar Ignacio de Santibañez, archbishop of the Philippines.^[44] Then followed the usual admonitions, opportunities to recant, to repent, and finally the fierce flames, the foretaste of eternal torments.

Before the installation of the dread tribunal it was not known that the country's religion was in danger from Jews or heretics; had the number of dissenters been large, and the danger imminent from any action on their part, the community, consisting mostly of Catholics, would have taken the alarm, and the ecclesiastical court have laid a heavy hand on the obnoxious members, as in 1558, with regard to Tomson and Boacio. It is indeed remarkable how quickly after the court went into existence it managed to find subjects to work upon, especially among the Portuguese, persecuted for reasons foreign to religion. The charges made were often without the slightest foundation, personal grievance or vindictiveness alone prompting the informers. Else it would have been impossible for the court to pick out of the small population of Mexico over two thousand persons who had within thirty years made themselves amenable to punishment. It must be borne in mind that it had been made obligatory upon all persons to report to the inquisition, under the charge of secrecy, everything heard or seen that savored of heresy in the witness' estimation. Hence the holy office before long became as much dreaded as had been the Aztec war-god. The authority of the inquisitorial court was paramount to all others, and its officers and servants were privileged. Any act or expression against that tribunal or its supremacy would sooner or later reach its knowledge, and the person so speaking be made to feel its power.^[45] On the death of Montúfar the archbishopric of Mexico was conferred on the inquisitor Moya y Contreras, and if zeal and ability alone be considered he deserved the promotion. There are some interesting features in the biography of this remarkable man. Beginning his career as a page of Juan de Ovando, president of the royal council of the Indies, in time he became his private secretary. Having completed his studies at Salamanca we next find him chancellor of the cathedral of the Canary Islands, which office he held until 1570. In 1571 he was ordained a presbyter in Mexico, having formerly filled high ecclesiastic positions in the Canaries, Murcia, and Mexico before this. He was exceedingly charitable, and it is told of him that he would often take whatever money there might be at his disposal and give it to the poor, regardless of the amount.^[46]

On the 20th of October 1573 the ecclesiastical chapter placed in his hands the administration and government which had been in their charge since Montúfar's death. He had been confirmed in the office by Gregory XIII. since June 15th, but the bulls had not come out, and in fact were not received in Mexico until the 22d of November. His consecration by Bishop Morales, of Puebla, took place in the old cathedral of Mexico on the 8th of December.^[47]

Not long after the appointment of Moya a serious rupture occurred between him and Enriquez. The apparent cause was trivial, but in its significance serious. The underlying stratum of discord was pregnant with future contention for power between church and state. When Moya received the pallium a farce was publicly represented in which figured as one of the characters a collector of the excise.^[48] The viceroy and audiencia interpreted the introduction of this character as the expression of a sarcastic disapproval of an unpopular impost lately established. Stringent orders were issued forbidding the production of such pieces without the sanction of the audiencia. The blame of it all was laid upon the archbishop. The prelate's authority was ignored, and many persons, including such as enjoyed ecclesiastical privileges, were arrested. Henceforth harmony was at an end, and various petty insults were from time to time offered by the viceroy to the archbishop. Moya naturally complained, and had the satisfaction to receive the royal approval of his course, an approval which in 1584 made itself manifest in his appointment to the vacant viceroyalty.^[49]

 

The results of the previous convocations had been not altogether satisfactory, and in 1585 the third provincial council in the city of Mexico took place, summoned on the 30th of March of the previous year by Archbishop Moya. It was formally opened January 20th, presided over by the archbishop, who was now also the viceroy, governor, and captain general of New Spain, as well as visitador. The suffragan bishops in attendance were: Juan de Medina Rincon, of Michoacan; Domingo Arzola, of Nueva Galicia; Diego Romano, of Puebla; Bartolomé de Ledesma, of Oajaca; Gomez de Córdoba, of Guatemala; and Gregorio de Montalvo, of Yucatan.^[50]

There were also present at the installation, besides the legal advisers and other officers of the council, the oidores of the royal audiencia, namely, doctors Pedro Farfan, Pedro Sanchez Paredes, Francisco de Sande, Fernando de Robles, and Diego García de Palacio; the alcalde de Chanchilleriá, Doctor Santiago del Riego, and the fiscal, Licenciado Eugenio de Salazar. The secretary of the council was Doctor Juan de Salcedo, dean of Mexico and professor of canonical law in the university.

The labors of this council terminated in the latter part of September. Some of the chief measures enacted by it were an ecclesiastic code of discipline, a newly arranged catechism, and many other rules and regulations to improve the civil and ecclesiastical government of New Spain. The proceedings embraced five hundred and seventy-six paragraphs, divided into five books under various titles. Neither those of the first council in 1555 nor those of the second in 1565, whose chief end had been to recognize and enforce the acts of the ecumenical council of Trent concluded in 1563, had been approved by the holy see. Owing to this, all the chapters of the two preceding councils were embodied in the third, so as to secure the pontifical sanction to all. It was also necessary to accommodate the exigencies of the church to the peculiar traits of Indian character and administration of the Indies; hence the expediency of this provincial synod. The bishops wished to carry out at once the acts passed, but the viceroy, in obedience to a royal order of May 13, 1585, suspended their execution till the king's approval. This was given on the 18th of September, 1591, when the viceroy, audiencia, and all officials, civil or ecclesiastic, in New Spain, were commanded to aid in every possible way the enforcement of the decrees passed by the council. That cédula was reiterated February 2, 1593, and again February 9, 1621.^[51] Soon after the closing of the council the successor of Moya y Contreras in the viceroyalty and annexed offices arrived. His release from those duties did not, however, relieve him from those of visitador of the courts till he completed his task in 1586. During all this time he never lost sight of the grave responsibilities of the archiepiscopal office. He made pastoral visits over a large part of his district, which had been till then deprived of that benefit, and confirmed great numbers of his flock. He would likewise perform humbler duties, which devolved upon others. Once on his return he found the priests whose place he had taken awaiting him; they began to make excuses, to which he answered: "Fathers, it does not surprise me; for the city is large; for which reason I must also be a curate, and your comrade to assist you." As soon as he finished his work as visitador he made preparations for his departure, and after placing the archdiocese in charge of the notable Dominican friar Pedro de Právia, in the month of June he celebrated mass and bid farewell to the people of Mexico whom he had called together for that purpose.^[52] On arrival at Vera Cruz he was apprised by his steward that he was in debt to the amount of $20,000. But he had not to wait long before a larger sum came as a donation, which enabled him to pay off the indebtedness, and to make gifts to the hospitals of Vera Cruz and give alms to the poor. Further information on this interesting man will appear in connection with his life as viceroy of Mexico.^[53] Pedro de Právia administered the archbishopric till near the end of 1589, when he died. After that the diocese was governed by the dean and chapter sede vacante.

The successor appointed to fill the office of archbishop of Mexico was the bishop elect of Nueva Galicia, and visitador of Peru, Alonso Fernandez de Bonilla, a native of Córdova. He was elected on the 15th of March, 1592, and it is said that he chose the archdeacon of Mexico, Juan Cervantes, for governor of the archdiocese during his absence, which office Cervantes held till the see was declared vacant by the death in Peru of Bonilla in 1596, shortly after his consecration. The archbishop's remains were interred in Lima.^[54] The archdiocese remained vacant till 1601, for, though the friar García de Santa María y Mendoza, of the order of St Jerome, was chosen to the office in 1600 and accepted it, he did not take possession till the following year.^[55] By this time the

church had grown to large proportions. According to reliable contemporaneous authority there were in New Spain then 400 convents of the several orders, and 400 districts in charge of clergymen, making a total of 800 ecclesiastic ministries for the administration of the sacraments and for instruction in Christianity. Each convent and each parish had many churches in towns and hamlets, which were likewise visited at certain intervals, and where Christian doctrine was taught the natives.^[56] The whole was now under six prelates, the youngest of whom were those of Yucatan and Nueva Galicia, appointed in 1541 and 1544 respectively. The former district had been given a bishop in Julian Garcés, already in 1519,^[57] but the failure of settlers to occupy it caused the transfer of Garcés to Tlascala. After Montejo's conquest it was included in the adjoining diocese of Chiapas, and the celebrated Las Casas presented himself in 1545 to exact recognition, but his fiery zeal in behalf of the enslaved natives roused the colonists, and he was obliged to depart. The growing importance of the peninsula caused it to be erected into a special see, by bull of December 16, 1561,^[58] with the seat in Mérida.

The prelacy was first offered to the Franciscan Juan de la Puerta, who died as bishop elect,^[59] and Francisco de Toral, provincial of the same order at Mexico, was thereupon chosen.^[60] He declined, but was prevailed upon to accept, and took possession in 1562. His efforts to secure the prerogatives of his office, hitherto enjoyed to a great extent by friars, caused a rupture, and the provincial, Diego de Landa, departed in hot haste to lay his complaints before the court. The result was unfavorable to Toral, who, after vainly seeking to resign, retired to the convent at Mexico, where he died in April 1571.

The prelacy was then conferred on Landa, partly because of his influential connection,^[61] and partly because of his long and zealous services in Yucatan. He came out in 1573, and his despotic and meddlesome disposition soon led him into fresh complications with the civil authorities,^[62] his Franciscan co-laborers being on the other hand allowed a liberty that degenerated into abuse. His rule was short, however, for he died suddenly in April 1579, leaving a high reputation for benevolence and piety among his contemporaries, which to us appears ineffaceably stained by an imprudent severity toward idolaters, and by his reckless destruction of aboriginal documents and relics. He was the Zumárraga of the peninsula. His successor, Gregorio Montalvo, bishop elect of Nicaragua, was a Dominican,^[63] which in itself augured well for needed reforms; but the Franciscans hampered him on every side, as might be expected from the hostility prevailing between the two orders.^[64] In 1587 he was promoted to the see of Cuzco, where he died six years later. The Franciscan Juan Izquierdo succeeded, but took possession only in 1591, ruling harmoniously till his death in 1602. The dedication of the cathedral at Mérida, one of the finest in New Spain, took place during his rule.^[65]

Nueva Galicia.

Nueva Galicia was on July 31, 1548,^[66] segregated from Michoacan and made a distinct bishopric, possessing at the time nearly fifty benefices.^[67] Compostela was designated as the seat, and Antonio de Ciudad Rodrigo, one of the twelve Franciscan apostles, received the appointment, which he humbly declined, whereupon it was conferred upon Juan Barrios, a knight of Santiago^[68], but he died before consecration and was buried at Mexico.

The position was next tendered to Pedro Gomez Maraver, late dean of Oajaca and counsellor to Viceroy Mendoza, who entered with great zeal upon his duties, but lived only till 1552. The Franciscan Pedro de Ayala assumed the office in July 1555, and assisted at the removal of the seat to Guadalajara, where he laid the foundation of a cathedral.^[69] He died in 1569, and was succeeded by the Franciscan Gomez de Mendiola, who ruled from 1571 to 1579, and left so high a reputation for benevolence and sanctity that efforts were made to obtain his beatification.^[70] The Jeronimite Juan de Trujillo was appointed successor, but failed to take possession,^[71] and the see passed to Domingo de Arzola, a Dominican, lately. vicar-general and visitador of his order in Peru and New Spain, who died in 1590 while on a pastoral visit.^[72] His successor was an Augustinian, Juan Suarez de Escobar, who did not survive long enough to be consecrated, whereupon Doctor Francisco Rodriguez Santos García,^[73] lately ruler of the archbishopric, occupied the prelacy till 1596, when it passed to Alonso de la Mota, of whom I shall speak hereafter.^[74]

In the adjoining see of Michoacan, Bishop Quiroga had inaugurated a veritable golden era with his indefatigable efforts for the protection of the natives,

Michoacan.

the establishment of hospitals and schools, and the promotion of exemplary life.^[75] After his deeply regretted death in 1565, the distinguished preacher Antonio Ruiz de Morales y Molina,^[76] of the order of Santiago, ruled until 1572, when he was promoted to Puebla, partly on account of ill-health. He had taken a dislike to Patzcuaro as the episcopal residence, and after a quarrel with the local authorities, while they were celebrating the anniversary of the conquest of Michoacan, he made strong efforts for removing the seat to Valladolid, a change which was effected a few years later. Meanwhile the Augustinian Alonso de la Vera Cruz was tendered the prelacy, but declined in favor of a colleague named Diego de Chavez, and, he dying^[77] before the confirmatory bulls arrived, Juan de Medina Rincon,^[78] late provincial of the same order, was consecrated in 1574. For fourteen years he ruled, living ever the austere, self-denying life of the exemplary friar, and devoting his income to the sick and poor.^[79]

His successor was appointed only in 1591, in the person of Alonso Guerra, a Dominican, born in Lima, Peru, and promoted to this see from that of Paraguay. He died in 1595,^[80] and Domingo de Ulloa, another Dominican of high family, and lately bishop of Nicaragua and Popayan, took possession of the office in 1598, but he lived only four years.^[81] At this time the see contained forty-five parishes in charge of secular clergy, a dozen of them among the Spanish settlers and miners.^[82]

On the death of Bishop Zárate of Oajaca,^[83] another prominent Dominican, Bernardo Acuña de Alburquerque,^[84] was chosen his successor, and since he

Oajaca.

had already occupied this field as a friar, he gladly resumed his task, and labored with tireless ardor and self-denial.^[85] Hardly less pious and benevolent was

the third bishop, the Dominican Bartolomé de Ledesma, who ruled from 1581 to 1604, and left a distinguished name as a writer and patron of education.^[86] When the first bishop took possession the diocese was exceedingly poor, with friars alone for ministers, but toward the close of Ledesma's rule there were forty well supplied parishes in charge of the secular clergy,^[87] distributed among several hundred villages and four Spanish towns, the latter being Antequera, now quite a populous place, San Ildefonso, among the Zapotecs, Santiago de Nejapa, and Espiritu Santo, in Goazacoalco.^[88]

 

One of the most favored dioceses was Puebla, which extended over Huexotzinco, Tlascala, Puebla, and Vera Cruz districts, with over a thousand native settlements, about two hundred of them designated as towns, and divided into more than eighty parishes, half in charge of convents, of which nineteen were Franciscan, twelve Dominican, nine Augustinian, and one Carmelite. The native tributaries numbered more than two hundred thousand, not counting Tlascala, whose people paid but a nominal tax. Of the Spanish towns Puebla had about five hundred settlers, and Vera Cruz three hundred, while a considerable number were scattered throughout the country, and in such towns as Carrion, founded in Atlixco Valley by royal permit of 1579.^[89] Puebla had fast assumed the second rank as a city in Mexico, and justly so with its respectable population, its cathedral,^[90] and its many convents, representing nearly all the orders in New Spain.^[91]

Tlascala

Bishop Julian Garcés, the first appointed prelate in New Spain, had died in 1542 at the advanced age of ninety,^[92] deeply regretted for his unobtrusive earnestness and his unostentatious benevolence. His successor, Pablo Gil de Talavera, appointed in 1543, survived his arrival in 1545 only a few days,^[93] and the see was bestowed on Martin Sarmiento of Hojacastro, lately comisario of the Franciscans in New Spain, who emulated Garcés in earnest zeal, and showed himself ever the self-denying friar. He died in 1558,^[94] and was succeeded by Fernando de Villagomez,^[95] who ruled till 1571, when the vacancy was filled by the promotion from Michoacan of Bishop Morales y Molina. He lived only until 1576, after which Diego Romano, canon of Granada and inquisitor, was appointed, with the additional task of taking the residencia of Viceroy Zúñiga and of the audiencia at Guadalajara.^[96] The selection proved admirable, for Romano possessed high administrative ability, combined with energy and zeal, and showed himself a patron of education by founding several colleges.

Blindness and other infirmities coming upon him, he received a coadjutor, and died shortly after, in April 1606.^[97]

 

 

1. This appointment was made by Charles V. at the recommendation of the marqués de Mondéjar, to whom Montúfar had been father-confessor. It was officially made known to the audiencia of Mexico Sept. 4, 1551. The consecration took place in 1553, and the archbishop came out to Mexico the following year. Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 31-2.
2. He was a native of Loja, and took the habit of his order in May 1512, at the age of fifteen. Dávila Padilla, Hist. Fund., 610-12; Concilios Prov., MS., 1° y 2° 214; Fernandez, Hist, Ecles., 114-15; Panes, in Mon, Domin, Esp., MS., 82; Alcedo, v. 540.
3. At the solicitation of the bishop the crown had, in 1552 — not 1554 as Beaumont has it — forbidden friars from exercising judicial authority in marriage cases, and at the same time accused them of usurpation of powers. The Mexican provincial council of 1555 decreed the above prohibition, and forbade the founding of convents and churches by the religious orders. This gave rise to much disturbance in the church, stopped only in 1557 by the powerful arm of the royal authority, favoring the claims of those orders. Beaumont, Crón, Mich., v. 380-3, 452-3, 463-8; Puga, Cedulario, 193-212; Cédula, in Prov. del S. Evang., No. 4, MS., 108-12.
4. The Franciscan comisario general for the Indies complained to the king that the aged bishop of Michoacan passed much of his time in Mexico causing disturbances, and during the 15 years of his episcopate he had neither ordained any priests, nor preached, confessed, baptized, or confirmed any Indian. Mena, Gob., in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xi. 190-1. Under a brief of Pope Gregory XIII., Feb. 28, 1568, issued by the king's request, bishops elect for the Indies were not to receive emoluments of office till they actually resided in their dioceses; the emoluments during vacancies were to accrue to the respective churches. Upon the king's authorities was enjoined the exact fulfilment of the brief; and deans and chapters of cathedrals were specially requested not to give the bishops elect any of the emoluments collected till they had actually entered upon the discharge of their episcopal duties. This same thing had been decreed in 1561. No archbishop or bishop was to go to Spain without the king's permission. Zamora, Bib. Leg. Ult., iv. 484-6, 491; Recop. de Ind., i. 54-5.
5. In 1556 the complaints of the archbishop of Mexico were loud and bitter against the religious orders, for their assumption of power in the treatment of Indians, and for their disregard of his authority. He asserted that the three orders had banded to effect their purposes of laying before the court false charges against him, the bishops, and the oidores. The demands of the orders, he said, were both unreasonable and unjust. The same year the king reprimanded the three religious orders for their disputes. Arzobispado, Rel., in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., iv. 491-530.
6. Philip II., on promulgating the order of the council of Trent upon payment of tithes by the faithful, expressly exempted the Indians. Puga, Cedulario, 194-5; Torquemada, iii. 263.
7. Mich. Prov. S. Nicolas, 38.
8. Feb. 25, 1561. Peña et al., Carta al Rey, in Cartas de Indias, 147-51.
9. Martin Cortés, the marquis, recommended in 1563 that tithes should be abolished, and that the king should support the friars in general, excepting those living in towns given in encomienda, who should be supported by the respective encomenderos, on condition that none of them should receive other emolument for services. Many of the less scrupulous secured a maintenance for their relatives out of what they obtained from the Indians. The visitador, Valderrama, confirmed the statement with these words, 'y tambien algo en parientes y otras cosillas.' Cortés quaintly remarks, 'esta invencion, de cobrar de tributos, la inventó algun fraile.' According to his computation the whole expense the king would incur could not much exceed 70,000 pesos, allowing each friar 100 pesos a year — 70 pesos really sufficed — and also a small additional sum to cover the cost of wine, oil, and church effects. Cortés, Carta, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., iv. 454-7; Valderrama, Cartas, Id., iv. 360.
10. Carta, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., iv. 455-6.
11. 'Ora sea diciendo que son muertos los tributarios, ora escondiéndolos, ó por otros muchos caminos que ellos saben.' Valderrama, Cartas (Feb. 24, 1564), in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., iv. 365, 372.
12. It was not a dangerous one. Mendieta attributed it to the anger of God, when the visitador had the Indians counted, and their tribute augmented, Valderrama, Cartas, Id., iv. 360; Mendieta, Carta, in Icazbalceta, 11. 515.
13. He died after a lingering illness at the Franciscan convent in Mexico, May 9, 1604. Torquemada, ii. 561-3; Mendieta, Carta, in Icazbalceta, Col. Doc., ii.; Mendieta, in Prov. S. Evang., MS., No. 16, 201-26; Dice. Univ. Hist. Geog., v. 238. Fray Gerónimo de Mendieta was the author of several works, of which I enumerate the following: Carta al Rey Don Felipe desde Toluca en 8 de Octubre de 1565, sobre gobernacion de las Indias, MS., fol. 9 pp. This letter is said to have been forwarded in duplicate or triplicate by different conveyances. The present copy is specially recommended, January 20, 1570, by the provincial and definitorio of the Santo Evangelio (Franciscan province), to which the author belonged. It contains 24 articles expressive of the king's duty to provide the best possible government for the Indians, including the religious instruction of the natives and their amelioration in general. ide from the author's excessive preference for the religious, and manifest prejudice against the secular clergy, his letter is commendable as embodying much wisdom. Correspondencia con varios personages desde 1570 á 1572 sobre asuntos de Nueva España é Indias, MS., fol. 26 pp., contains six letters from Father Mendieta to Licenciado Juan de Ovando, of the royal council in the holy and general inquisition, and visitador of the said royal council; one from Ovando to him; and one from Mendieta to the comisario general of the Indies for the Franciscan order. The first letter is highly important, wherein he gives his views on three points upox which Ovando had doubts, namely: 1. How to bring about harmony and good understanding between bishops and friars in the Indies. 2. How to get tithes from the Indians without oppressing them. 3. How Spaniards were to form settlements in the Indies without injuring the natives. His views are expressed in a clear, unbiassed manner. Another letter, the third alluded to, sets forth the best mode, in his opinion, to rule the religious order of Saint Francis in the Indies, for obtaining the greatest good from it. Ovando's letter expresses his high regard for Mendieta's advice, and calls for more of it. But his most noted work was Historia Eclesiástica Indiana, Mexico, 1870, 1 vol. 8vo, 790 pp., preceded by 45 pages of matter pertinent to the author and his work, the whole carefully edited by Joaquin García Icazbalceta. It is properly a history of the conversion of the Indians of New Spain, from the time of the conquest to about the close of the sixteenth century; but as the earlier friars and prelates played so important a part in public affairs, the volume also gives much valuable information on such matters not to be found elsewhere except, perhaps, at second hand. Icazbalceta added to the value of the book by a notice of the author and his work, careful and exhaustive as are all such notices by him; and by an elaborate collation of Mendieta's Historia and Torquemada's Monarquía Indiana, showing how extensively and openly the latter plagiarized from the former. Mendieta's production, finished in 1596, remained in obscurity 274 years. He had sent the manuscript to Spain for publication, but it never appeared till Icazbalceta, as he tells us, discovered it in the library of Bartolomé José Gallardo just deceased, and issued it at his own expense, for which he should receive due credit. The editor gives, moreover, the authorities that Mendieta availed himself of in the preparation of his work, some of whom have reached us only in name, and the later ones that took advantage of his labors, among whom the most noted is Torquemada.
14. Mendieta, Carta, in Icazbalceta, Col. Doc., ii. 515-44.
15. 'Porque es verdad (coram Deo) que es tanta la desórden, y tantos los males que de ella se siguen, que yo tuviera por mas seguro para la conciencia de 8. M. dejar á estos naturales penitus sin justicia ni hombre que la adiministrara que habérsela dado de la arte y manera que ahora la tienen.' Id., 532.
16. 'No sea reino diviso con muchas cabezas . . . Quiero decir que su visorey, mes su nombre y titulo denota que es imágen del rey y que tiene las veces y lugar del rey, de facto lo sea, y no lo supedite, ni apoque, ni deshaga lo que él hace . . . . otro que el mismo rey.' Id., 530.
17. 'Dicen que ya: ni aun confesar ni predicar, sino meterse en un rinçon, y lo ponen por obra.' Id., 517; Prov. del S. Evang., MS., No. 16, 201-6. The Franciscan friar Mena also reported to the king, relative to the existing management of affairs, that 'si en esto no se pone remedio, téngase por cierto, que los religiosos dejarán la tierra.' Mena, Gobierno, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xi. 190, 192, And he adds that it would be well if the king sent for the archbishop and retained him in Spain, as had been done with Las Casas, and thus prevent him from doing further mischief.
18. Martin Cortés, writing in October 1563, says: 'Desde que comenzaron á venir estas cédulas, estaban los españoles tan contentos, y les habian perdido el respeto . . . diciendo y dando á entender á los indios que habian de quitar todos los frailes desta tierra,' and adds that the consequence was that many Indians 'les perdian el respeto y reverencia que les solian tener.' Carta, in Pacheco and Cardenas, Col. Doc., iv. 454-5. 'Aora estan tan predicados que el fraile | no tiene q entremeterse en sus negocios, ni que dezirles como han de viuir.' Franciscanos, Abandono, in Prov. S. Evang., No. 12, 169-70.
19. A royal cédula of July 11, 1562, directed the bishop not to molest the Augustinians in the possession of their convents. Beaumont, Crón. Mich., v. 469-71, 521, 574-89.
20. In 1555 the king forbade the indiscriminate ordaining of Spaniards and half-breeds. Puga, Cedulario, 153, 190; Romero, Not. Mich., in Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, viii. 540, states that Pablo Caltzontzin, a son of the last king of Michoacan, was the first Indian who received sacred orders in Mexico.
21. Yet it was deemed expedient, for the honor of the church, that reprimands or punishments of offenders of the cloth should be secretly inflicted, so that not even the Spaniards should know of them. This had been recommended by Martin Cortés in 1563. The king went further in 1565, for by his cédula of June 6th, received the next year in Mexico, it was ordered that the regular orders should be respected, and the investigation and punishment of their offences, unless they had been committed with great publicity and scandal, be left to their own prelates; and only in the event of the latter refusing to heed the complaint of the royal judicial authorities should the cases be sent to the crown. Cortés, Carta, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., iv. 457; Recop. Ind., i. 123; Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 36; Zamora, Bib. Leg. Ult., v. 332; Beaumont, Crón. Mich., v. 569-78. The archbishop, Moya, at a later date, furnished the crown with a list of the clergymen of all ranks existing in his diocese, accompanied with a memorandum of the qualifications, character, and conduct of each. Some of them were set down as unworthy of the priesthood for immorality, misbehavior, or ignorance; others were praised. A number were natives of Mexico, even among the dignitaries, canons, and stipendiaries of the crown. There were then 3 dignitaries, 10 canons, 6 full stipendiaries, and one who received only a half ration. Moya y Contreras, in Cartas de Indias, 195-218. In 1588 archbishops and bishops of the Indies were permitted to ordain as priests mestizos residing in their respective dioceses and having a moral character and education. Women of the same class, of approved moral conduct, were allowed to enter as nuns.
22. Having passed the council, it was, by royal order of January 15, 1568, published in Mexico, though it had been made known to the clergy the previous year. Toral, Cartas al Real Cons. (May 15, 1558, Feb. 20, 1559), in Cartas de Ind., 132-4, and fac-sim. M; Peña, et al., Carta al Rey, in Id., 144-6, and fac-sim. N; Puga, Cedulario, 189-90, 211; Torquemada, iii. 265-8; Beaumont, Crón. Mich., v. 519-20; Bvla Confirm. et Novae, 1-22; Recop. Ind., i. 116; Religiosos, etc., in Prov. del S. Evang., MS., No. 3, 93-4; Órdenes de la Corona, MS., ii. 27; Defensa de la Verdad, 6, 7.
23. Torquemada, i. 638-40; Zamacois, Hist, Méj., v. 150-1; El Museo Mex., 482.
24. Some of the friars well understood the justice of the royal measures, but found it difficult to yield. 'Por condesçender con la maior cantidad nacidos en estas partes, y venidos de esas, que gustan de mandar siendo prelados y biuiendo liçençiosamente como hasta aquí, no osan publicar su sentimiento.' Moya y Contreras, Carta al Rey (Oct. 26, 1583), in Cartas de Ind., 334-7.
25. The Dominicans, friars Gabriel de San José and Cristóbal de Sepúlveda, who were then in Spain; the Franciscans, friars Buenaventura de Paredes and Pedro Mellendes; the Augustinians, friars Diego de Soria and Gerónimo de Morante. The last four named embarked, and after being shipwrecked, finally reached their destination in the New Spain fleet of 1584. With the aid of the abbé of Burgundy, who had been visitador in New Spain, the proctors were presented at court. Grijalua, Chrón. S. Augustin, 172-5.
26. 'Le an de hazer no ex voto charitatis, como allá lo platicais, sino de justicia y obligacion.' Grijalua, Chrón. S. Augustin, 176; Torquemada, i. 649.
27. The council of friars held in 1526 has been called by some an ecclesiastical council and regarded as the first. But this term applied to that convention isinaccurate. Bishop Zumárraga had also held an ecclesiastical meeting in 1539, at which the bishops of Oajaca and Michoacan, and the prelates of the different orders attended. Among other questions was discussed that of confirmation of the natives, which was again brought forward in 1546 at a meeting called by Visitador Tello de Sandoval.
28. The names of the bishops were respectively: Martin Sarmiento de Hojacastro, Tomás de Casillas, Vasco de Quiroga, and Juan Lopez de Zárate. The last-named prelate died during the session. The bishop of Guatemala was represented by the clergyman Diego de Carbajal. There were also present the dean and chapter of the metropolitan church, as also those of the cathedrals of Tlascala, Guadalajara, and Yucatan, the prelates of the several religious orders, and the corregidor and members of the city council of Mexico. Concilios Prov., MS., No. 1, 191-239; No. 3, 298-326, 363-86; Id., 1555 y 1563, pp. iv.-vi., 335-184.
29. Concilios Prov., MS., No. 1.
30. The bishop of Michoacan was represented by a proctor. There were present also the visitador general, Valderrama, the oidores, the king's treasury officials, the dean, chapter, and vicars of the archbishopric, and the alcaldes and regidores of the city. Id., i. 160-9; Id., 1555-65, vi.-vii. 185-212.
31. Priests were forbidden to charge fees for the administration of the sacraments to Indians, and it is noticeable that again the tendency of the clergy to lend money at usury and engage in trading speculations is exposed. Among other enactments that which exempted the natives from the payment of tithes may be mentioned. The chapters were published on the 11th of November 1565, and on the 12th of December following the archbishop and bishops decreed the fulfilment of them. Id.
32. During his long archiepiscopal career he never ceased to be an humble friar, and his charity was limited only by the means at his command. Dávila Padilla, Hist. Fvnd., Id.
33. The above date is given by Sosa, Episcop. Mex., 17, 24-6, who claims that the writers, Dávila Padilla, Gonzalez Dávila, Vetancurt, Eguiara, Lorenzana, Beristain, and others are in error in assigning the year 1569 as the date of Montufar's death. Sosa founds his assertion on the fact that several acts of the ecclesiastic chapter of Mexico down to Sept. 3, 1571, show that there was an archbishop in Mexico, and he could be none other than Montúfar. He also furnishes a copy of his portrait, which exists in the gallery of the cathedral. At the foot there is an inscription of the artist, who also states that Montúfar died in 1569, at the age of 80 years. Dávila Padilla, Hist. Fvnd., 509-11, gives 92 years as his age.
34. A cédula of Charles V., dated 1531, invested the visitador Juan de Villa-Señor with power to act in matters concerning the inquisition. Beaumont, Crón. Mich., iii. 413-17. Tello de Sandoval was made inquisitor in 1540. Peralta, Not. Hist., 279-80.
35. A chief of Tezcuco, Cárlos de Mendoza, was burned by order of Bishop Zumárraga for having made sacrifices to idols. Upon this becoming known in Spain, the inquisition was forbidden to proceed against Indians. Peralta, Not. Hist., 279.
36. The badge consisted of half a yard of yellow cloth with a hole in the middle to pass the head through, one flap hanging before, and the other behind; on each flap was sewn a red cross of Saint Andrew. Boacio was condemned to perpetual imprisonment in Spain; Tomson for a term of three years. Both penitents had to wear the sambenito. I have not discovered Boacio's offence; he was brought from Zacatecas. Tomson, by his own account, expressed himself at a dinner-table on religious subjects and as a disciple of Luther. He served his term in Seville, and afterward, being already 'reconciliado con la iglesia,' married a wealthy young lady from Mexico whose affection rewarded him for his past sufferings. Boacio escaped at the Azores, where the ship conveying him and Tomson touched for supplies. Tomson, in Haklvyt's Voy., iii. 450-1.
37. For particulars regarding this city see Native Races, iv. 220, v. 634, this series.
38. Many of the captured offenders evaded public cremation by hanging themselves. Their bodies were thrown into the forests to be food for wild beasts. Cogolludo says nothing about the punishment inflicted on the culprits who did not hang themselves. But he assures us that for many years after that bright example of Christian charity, cases of idolatry were never again heard of. The blessed father was called cruel, but what of that? Doctor Don Pedro Sanchez de Aguilar, whoever he might be, held a very different opinion on his action in the report he made against the idolaters of the country. Cogollvdo, Hist. Yuc., 309-10. The visitador Vivanco reported to the crown in 1503 that the provincial had the victims subjected to the torture of cord and water; triced up with weights of from 50 to 75 pounds attached to their feet, and then flogged; he also had their flesh burned with flames or with hot wax; he made them suffer in various other cruel ways, all without any trial having been given them. The result was that the unfortunates in their horrible agony would confess offences they had never committed, among them idolatrous rites. In this way many idols were brought to light which they had possessed before their conversion, and whose existence they had almost forgotten. Many Indians perished, and others were maimed for life. These cruelties were continued till Bishop Toral arrived in August and stopped them. Petitioners begged in the name of humanity and of the hapless sufferers that such miscreant tormentors should be punished, and taken away from Yucatan. Bibanco, Carta al Rey, in Cartas de Ind., 392-6. The alcalde mayor in his report corroborates much of the above, of course covering his own procedure, and adding that upwards of 2,000,000 idols were found, some old and others new, besmeared with blood. Six Indians hanged themselves and two others committed suicide in prison. Quixada, Carta al Rey, March 15, 1563, in Cartas de Ind., 382-3. Rodriguez Vivanco, official defender of the Indians, supported their complaints that the charge of apostasy had not been well founded, and that the proceedings had been excessively cruel: 'hagan allá penitencia Fr Diego de Landa y sus compañeros, del mal que hizieron en nosotros, que hasta la quarta generaçion se acordarán nuestros descendientes de la gran persecucion que por ellos nos vino.' Yucatan, Carta de los indios gobernad. de varias prov., al Rey, in Cartas de Ind., 407-10. However, in 1567 ten caciques prayed the king to give them Franciscans, for whom they expressed a strong preference, that being the order from which they first received baptism. Carta de diez caciques d S. M. al Rey, in Cartas de Ind., 367-8, and fac-sim. U. I cannot find that the complaints were heeded or the grievances redressed; on the contrary, it is seen that the man complained against was placed in a higher position than ever. Calle gives a royal order of July 25, 1586, prescribing means to be taken for the extirpation of idolatry among the Indians.
39. Peralta rejoices at the installation of the holy office: 'para que se perpetuase en la tierra, defendiéndola de la mala seta luterana, y que castigase los que se hallasen con culpa de abella admitido ó tuviesen algunas ynsinias della.' Not. Hist., 281. He would hardly have dared to express any other sentiments. Torquemada, i. 648, regards it as very efficient and useful to the country, which was 'contaminadisima de Judios, y Hereges, en especial de Gente Portuguesa.' The court was founded 'sin ruido de martillo, y con muy grande opinion ... la Inquisicion es vn freno para desalmados, y libras de lengua.' Moya, Carta al Rey., in Cartas de Indias.
40. The third inquisitor was Pedro Ramirez Granero, who in 1574 was made archbishop of Charcas. Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., ii. 32; Mendieta, Hist. Ecles., 371.
41. Robertson and others who have followed him are rebuked by Zamacois, Hist. Méj., v. 159-65, for their assertions on this point. It is untrue, the latter alleges, that the Indians were declared incapable of committing heresy, for a number of them were admitted to the Catholic priesthood; and quoting from Abbé de Nuix, adds: 'It is not necessary to possess more talent to be a bad heretic than a good priest.' Zamacois bitterly inveighs against writers that have accused Spaniards in general for the acts of the inquisition when in their own countries at that period, and also much later, the torture and other acts of brutality were in common practice. In evidence of which he quotes well-known events in the history of England and her American colonies, of France, Germany, Portugal, and Russia.
42. Torquemada, iii. 377-9. Philips says three were burned; another has it two only. Peralta, Not. Hist., 281. This author adds, 'era de ver la jente que acudió á vello de ḿás de ochenta lehuas.' Gonzalez Dávila gives 63 victims, of whom 21 were followers of Luther. Teatro Ecles., i. 34. The number may have been larger. Those who received sentence on good Friday of that year, including the men of Hawkins' expedition brought from Pánuco, were 71, as Philips has it.
43. 'Fué cosa maravillosa, la Gente, que concurrió á este célebre, y famoso Auto, y la que estuvo á las Ventanas, y Plaças, hasta la Puerta, y Casas de el Santo Oficio, para vèr este singular acompañamiento, y Procesion de los Relaxados, y Penitenciados.' Torquemada, iii. 379-80.
44. Torquemada, iii. 380, after an elaborate description of the whole affair, fails to give the number of each class, and the punishments awarded. Some of them were as a matter of course burned alive. Respecting this last class, he adds, 'cada vno de estos porfiados Judios, podia ser Rabino en vna Sinagogo. Celebròse con grande Magestad, quedaudo el Pueblo, con no poco asombro de los Ritos, y Ceremonias, de estos Hereges Judaiçantes, y delitos graves, que allí se leieron.'
45. A case in point, in the proceedings in Mérida, Yucatan, and in Mexico against 'Nicolas de Aquino, notario deste Sᵗᵒ officio en Mérida de Jucatan,' and against Francisco de Velazquez de Xixon, governor of Yucatan, and Gomez del Castillo, alcalde ordinario in 1575, for contempt, resulting from the prosecution and imprisonment of Aquino in Mérida by the alcalde supported by the governor, though he had pleaded his privilege of a servant of the inquisition. The case was not terminated, or it may be that the latter portion of the proceedings is missing or lost. In this case the inquisitors were the licenciados Coniella and Ávalos, and the notary Pedro de los Rios. Aquino et al., Proceso contra, MS., 1-141. Other authorities consulted upon this subject are: Vazquez, Chrón. de Gvat., 227; Alaman, Disert., ii. 194; Cavo, Tres Siglos, i. 194-5; Arróniz, Hist, y Crón., 77-9; Rivera, Gob. de Méj., i. 45-7; Gaz. Mex. (1784-5), i. 77; Medina, Chrón. S. Diego, 236-7; Diario Mex., viii. 145; Morelli, Fasti Novi Orbis, 244-5; Salazar, Monarq. de Esp., ii. 85-6; Escosura, Conjuration, i. 33-4; Mora, Mej. Rev., iii. 232-6; Codex. Tell. Rem., Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq., vi. 153; Cartas de Ind., 755, 774; Sosa, Episcop. Mex., 28; Guerra, Rev. N. Esp., ii. 632; Pensador, Mex., 39-50; Dicc. Univ., iv. 272-84; Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, 2da ép. i. 209.
46. On one occasion when his pages were accused of purloining some articles, he said that they were innocent, for the things had been taken by 'un ladron secreto que Dios tiene en esta casa, que no es bien que sepais quien es; baste deciroslo yo.' Sosa, Episcob., 27-32, with his portrait; Concilios Prov., 1555-65, 214-15; Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 35-6; Datos Biog., in Cartas de Indias, 810; fac-sim. of his writing, P, and of his signature in drawing, viii. A number of his autograph signatures may be seen in Concilios Prov., MS. He was a native of Pedroche in the bishopric of Cordova, Spain, and descended on both sides from families of rank. Moya brought from Spain a little girl two years of age, named Micaela de los Ángeles, supposed to have been of royal blood, and appearing as his niece. She was brought up in a nunnery, and at the age of 13 became insane. The utmost care was taken of her and much money expended in the efforts to restore her reason, but without avail. Sigüenza y Góngora, Parayso Occ., 18.
47. During this year, while Moya was still archbishop elect, the corner-stone of the great cathedral was laid with appropriate ceremonies in the presence of the viceroy and all the high functionaries of church and state. In the erection of this edifice Moya took great interest, making it an object of constant attention during the last months of his sojourn in Mexico. He donated to it beautiful paintings that he had brought from Spain, chalices, and costly ornaments, and left it blazing with gold, though still a-building; he also gave it his mitre and pastoral staff, together with a much venerated fragment of the lignum crucis.
48. The viceroy had, in 1573, established the alcabala, or excise, which merchants had till then been exempt from. The measure was very unpopular, and the government had been the object of many a diatribe for it.
49. On another occasion, at the funeral of Francisco de Velasco, the brother of the second viceroy, in Dec. 1574, Enriquez caused the prie-dieu that had been placed for the prelate in the church to be taken away, claiming that he was the sole person that could use that article. Later he inflicted the same insult on the bishop of Michoacan at the Saint Augustine church, though on the next day he caused the prie-dieu to be placed for him in the church of Santa Catarina, having probably been reminded that the bishop had a brother who was a member of the royal council. Moya accused the viceroy and audiencia of a marked hostility toward him, and of having repeatedly attempted to weaken his authority and prestige. Moya y Contreras, Carta, in Cartas de Indias, 176-88.
50. The bishop of Chiapas was not present, having been forced to return home, owing to an accident on the journey. The bishop of Vera Paz had made his preparations to depart for Spain and could not delay his voyage. Ponce, Rel., in Col. Doc. Inéd., lvii. 46-7; Torquemada, i. 649; Concilios Prov., MS., No. 3, 50, 57; Pap. Var., xv. pts. 2, 19-20, 22.
51. Concilios Provinciales Mexicanos, MSS., 4 parts, fol. Nos. 1-4, bound in parchment. Being the original records and minutes of the three ecclesiastic councils held under the presidency of the archbishop of Mexico as metropolitan in the years 1555, 1565, and 1585. No. 1, 320 folios, gives all the orders, correspondence, and other proceedings, as well as the chapters or acts passed by the three councils, and every paper connected therewith in Spanish or Latin, to which are appended the signatures of the archbishops and bishops who took part therein; also the catechism adopted by the third council. No. 2, 100 folios, is an authenticated copy in Spanish, under the seal of the archbishopric of Mexico, of the acts passed by the third council in 1585, with the autograph signatures of Archbishop Moya and the suffragan bishops of Guatemala, Yucatan, Michoacan, Nueva Galicia, Antequera, or Oajaca; countersigned by Doctor Juan de Salcedo, secretary of the council. No, 3, 455 folios. Correspondence, edicts, decrees, in Latin and Spanish, and others papers relating to the qualifications and duties of priests. No. 4, 354 folios. Papers that the third council consulted, including copies of the acts of the first council of Lima in 1582, and that of Toledo of 1583. The acts of the first council, and the original minutes, as well as those of two subsequent councils, were printed in Mexico by Juan Pablo Lombardo in February 1556. This issue appears to have been withdrawn by order; and to avert recurrence of such publications without the royal exequatur having been first obtained, the king directed in cédula of Sept. 1, 1560, reiterating a previous order of Sept. 1, 1556, that prelates before printing and publishing their synods should lay them before the council of the Indies for the royal sanction. Concillos Prov., MS., No. 1, 265-6; Puga, Cedulario, 201.
    The acts of the second council were not published till Archbishop Lorenzana in 1769 issued it in connection with that of the first. It forms a 4to of 396 pages, containing on the first 208 pages the chapters of the respective meetings, and on the remainder the lives of all the bishops in New Spain, together with an account of the founding of the different sees and other material. The acts of the third council did not see print till 1622, when they were issued in Latin at Mexico, in two parts, of 102 and 39 folios respectively, the first containing the acts or chapters; the second, the ordinances of the council as confirmed by the papal court on October 27, 1589. Another Latin edition appeared at Paris in 1725, 599 pages 12mo, with biographical sketches of the prelates attending the council. A third bears the imprint Mexico 1770, in two parts, of 328 and 141 pages, with biographical additions, issued probably by Lorenzana as a complement to his edition of the first councils. All of these manuscript and rare printed sets form part of my collection, together with a number of catechisms, ordinances, and other matter, issued by order of the councils, or in connection with their labors. A modern edition of the third council acts, in Latin and Spanish, appeared at Mexico in 1859, containing a number of documents, and notes by the Jesuit Arrillaga.
52. His house was crowded with people who went to manifest their love and sorrow at his departure, carrying gifts and mementos. The Indians hastened to kiss his hands, and the negroes placed at his feet a plate into which they threw money as a fund for his comfort on the journey. This was kept up night and day, and there was no end to the contributions. The concourse became so large at the last moment that the authorities had finally to place guards near the prelate's person from fear that he might be crushed. He had a large popular escort as far as the villa of Guadalupe. Gutierrez de Luna, Biog., in Sosa, Episcop., 37-8.
53. For additional information on Moya y Contreras, see Peralta, Not. Hist., 281-2; Rivera, Gob. Mex., i. 48-9; Leyes, Varias Anot., 7; Vetancvrt, Trat. Mex., 23; Diar. Mex., vii. 6; Zamacois, Hist. Méj., v. 173, 175.
54. Bonilla had been dean of the cathedral, fiscal of the inquisition, and on April 8, 1583, became chief inquisitor. Panes, Virreys, in Monum. Dom. Esp., M.S., 91; Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 40-1; Sosa, Episcop., 41-2; Dicc. Univ., iii. 396.
55. Sosa, Episcop., 41-3, with his portrait; Panes, Virreys, in Monum. Dom. Esp., MS., 91; Mex. Hieroglyph. Hist., 157, and many others. See also Concilios Prov., 1555-65, 215-16, 340; and Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 40-1.
56. The Franciscan province of the Santo Evangélio of Mexico alone claimed over 1,000. Mendieta, Hist. Ecles., 54-9; Torquemada, iii. 385-6.
57. See p. 296, this volume.
58. Concilios Prov., 1555-65, 351; Morelli, Fasti Novi Orbis, 201. 'Que se nombrasse de Yucathàn, y Cozumèl.’ Cogolludo, Hist. Yucathan, 206. Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., 206, 211, is misleading in naming a bishop as early as 1541, and mentioning that the church was by bull of Oct. 23, 1570, erected into a cathedral, dedicated to San Ildefonso.
59. Torquemada, iii. 384. Calle states that the Franciscan Juan de San Francisco had been chosen in 1541 to govern the see as bishop, without waiting for bulls. If he ever was appointed it could have been merely as representant of Las Casas, bishop of Chiapas. Calle continues by saying that Puerta received his appointment on June 17, 1555. Mem. y Not., 82. Gonzalez Dávila, loc. cit., follows, but appoints Puerta on Feb. 20, 1552. He died without consecration.
60. He was a native of Úbeda, Spain, and long labored in New Spain, which he in 1553 represented at Salamanca as delegate. He returned with a large mission of friars, and while holding the position of provincial, the appointment of bishop reached him. Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles, i. 21 1-12. He took possession August 15, 1562. Although Las Casas visited Tabasco in 1561, Remesal, Hist. Chyapa, 626, it no doubt passed about this time under Yucatan, both ecclesiastically and politically. A cédula of 1559 ordered the audiencia to report on the expediency of erecting this province into a separate see. Puga, Cedulario, 207. The report was unfavorable.
61. He was a member of the Calderon family, born at Cifuentes in 1524.
62. See Sierra, Consid. sobre el orígen, etc., de la sublevacion, in Ancona, Hist. Yuc., ii. 102.
63. He was a native of Coca, Segovia, and became a friar in 1550, displaying great eloquence and administrative ability.
64. They accused him of severity against relapsed idolaters, who were sentenced to exile and hard labor at Vera Cruz and other places. Cogollvdo, Hist. Yucathan, 398-9.
65. In 1563 provision had been made for building it, one third of the cost to be defrayed by the crown, Spaniards, and Indians, respectively. The work began with the ready contribution of 50,000 natives, each giving two reales, both settlers and crown being too poor to pay. Quixada, Carta, 1563, in Cartas de Indias, 386. The architect was Juan Miguel de Agüero, who made himself a name thereby. The king gave 500 ducats for church ornaments, and an equal sum for a hospital. On these and other matters touching the bishopric, see letters of Bibanco, Toral, Quijada, etc., in Cartas de Indias., 238, and passim, 372-94, 783; Cogolludo, Hist. Yucathan, 206-10, 290-1, 322-4, 352-71, 376, 394-6, 409; Concilios Prov., MS., No. 3, 1-3, and print, vii.; Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 211-15, 220; Vetancvrt, Menolog., 42, 80, 135, 187, 140; Ponce, Rel., in Col. Doc. Inéd., lvii. 182, lviii. 394, 401, 423, 451-2.
66. Concilios Prov., 1555-65, 336; Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 179. Morelli writes July 13, Fasti Novi Orbis, 160; and others place the seat wrongly at Guadalajara.
67. In 1596 the number had not materially changed. Mendieta, Hist. Ecles., 547-8. The distinguished Diego Ramirez was appointed in 1551 to mark the boundary lines between the dioceses of Michoacan and Guadalajara, and between those of Mexico and Michoacan. The bishops of the first two named dioceses objected to the lines he established, but they were approved by the crown August 28, 1552. The question remained an open one, nevertheless, and was but partially settled in 1564. Reopened in 1596, the final settlement took place only in 1664. Beaumont, Crón. Mich., v. 155-222.
68. Successor of Bishop Zumárraga in the office of protector of Indians; a native of Seville. Mota Padilia, Cong. N. Gal., 198; Alcedo, Dicc., ii. 242.
69. This removal may have drawn upon him the dislike of the chapter, which in 1570 declared that his appointment had been a mistake, for he knew nothing of letters or law. Icazbalceta, Col. Doc., ii. 486.
70. When exhumed in 1599 his body was found undecayed, and so it continued for nearly 200 years.
71. Alcedo, Dicc., ii. 243, places him after Arzola.
72. At Atoyac, February 15th. He had been appointed on July 6, 1582.
73. A native of Madrigal, and a most benevolent man. He is supposed to have died at Mexico, June 28, 1596. Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 182. Alcedo blunders about the date.
74. Successively dean at Michoacan, Tlascala, and Mexico, and highly esteemed for his exemplary life and deeds. He was appointed October 22, 1597. Gonzalez Dávila Teatro Ecles., i. 93, 182, 193; Vetancur, Trot. Mex., 23, 51; Concilios Prov., MS., No. 1, 160-9, 185, 337; Id., vii. 336-40; Figueroa, Vindicias, MS., 70.
75. This will be more fully narrated on a succeeding page.
76. Whose history he wrote. He was a native of Córdova, and nephew of the chronicler Morales. Concilios Prov., 1555-65, 246.
77. February 14, 1573. Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 120, places his appointment after 1588, and states that he declined.
78. A native of Segovia. He came to New Spain with his father, who held a high office in the real audiencia. In 1542 he took the habit of an Austin friar. Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 115-20. Vetancurt, Menolog., 82, asserts that the mitre was tendered by Philip II. to the Franciscan Juan de Ayora, and the royal cédula was found in the old friar's breviary after his death. The author leaves us in the dark as to the date of such choice. Ayora went to the Philippines in 1577, and died there in 1581.
79. Rather than submit to a violation of the rules in regard to dress, which was a necessity in the tierra caliente, when provincial he threw up the doctrinas in Pánuco and some in Michoacan. However, after becoming bishop he recovered as many of them as he could. Mich., Prov. S. Nic., 100.
80. Calle, Mem. y Not., 72. Some say in 1596. Figueroa, Vindicias, MS., 74.
81. He died in Mexico and was there buried in the convent of his order. There is confusion among the old writers about the time of the appointment of this bishop and of his death. Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., ii. 70, appoints him to Yucatan before he comes to Michoacan, which is probably an error in writing that word for Popayan. He also in the same page gives his death in 1599. Another author places his appointment to Michoacan in Feb. 1599, stating that he ruled four years, in which last statement he follows Gonzalez Dávila. Touron, Hist. Gen., vii. 247-8. A sister of his had founded three Jesuit colleges in Castile. The enemies of the order endeavored to influence him against its members but without avail. Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus, i. 369.
82. Gonzalez, Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 91, 112-22; ii. 96; Concilios Prov., MS., 1-4; Id., 1555-66, vi.-vii. 320-4; Beaumont, Crón. Mich., v. 574-8; Grijalva, Crón. S. August., 143-5; Mich. Anál. Estad., 5; Queipo, Col., 50; Florencia, Hist. Prov. Jesus, 210; Mich. Prov. S. Nic., 19; Calle, Mem. y Not., 62, 72. Vetancort, Trat. Mex., Fernandez, Hist. Ecles., 116, 131; Mendieta, Hist. Ecles.,
83. See pp. 391-2, this volume.
84. During his labors in Oajaca he nad written a catechism in Zapotec, and after his ministry here he attained to the highest honors of his order in New Spain.
85. He founded at his own expense the convent of Santa Catarina de Sena, at Antequera, and endowed it. The dedication took place in October 1577, with three Santa Clara nuns and seven novices, two being his nieces. Burgoa, Geog. Discrip., Oaj., i. 89-92. Here his remains were deposited, after having been buried in San Pablo convent. The cathedral also claims to hold the grave of this saintly man.
86. He founded the college of San Bartolomé, with a rental of 2,000 pesos for 12 poor collegians, who must be natives of the province; and he established the first chair of moral theology in New Spain. To his native town of Salamanca he left several endowments for poor clergymen. He died in February 1604 and was buried in the cathedral. One of his books, De Septem Novæ Legis Sacramentis, was printed at Mexico in 1568. 'Probably the first book printed in roman letter in Mexico,' says Rich, who also refers to an edition of 1566. Several other works were lost while on the way to Spain to be printed. Concilios Prov., MS., No. 1; Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 227.
87. 'Seran tambien ricos.' Mendieta, Hist. Ecles., 547.
88. Burgoa, Geog. Descrip., Oaj., i. 64-80, ii. 410-11; Mex., Informes, in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xv. 449-51; Dávila Padilla, Hist. Fvnd., 291-303; and books already quoted.
89. Torquemada, i. 319-22. In San Pablo Valley were a number of Spanish agriculturists; at Tlascala resided 50; Atlixco Valley yielded fully 100,000 fanegas of wheat. The estimates of English visitors in 1556 to 1572 give Puebla 600 to 1,000 households; Tlascala, 200,000 Indians, who paid 13,000 fanegas of corn yearly. Hawks makes its population in 1572, 16,000 households, which paid no tribute. Huexotzinco had been reduced to 8,000 families, through disease and oppression. Cholula is credited with 60,000 Indians—others say 1,000 houses—and Acatzinco with 50,000. Cochineal culture was proposed for Tepeaca in 1580. Henriquez, Instruc., in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., iii. 489; Chilton, Hawks, and Tonison, in Hakluyt's Voy., iii. 453-63; Eerste Scheeps-Toqt, in Aa, Naaukeurige Versameling, xxii.; Mendieta, Hist. Ecles., 546; Franciscanos, Rel., in Prov. del S. Evang., MS., 183-200; Vetancurt, Chron., 27-9. Tlascala still enjoyed special protection, and by decree of 1552 no Spaniard could there form estates to the prejudice of the natives. Órdenes de la Corona, MS., ii. 14.
90. The latter was begun in 1552, according to the plans of Juan Gomez de Mora. Owing to frequent interruptions it stood still unfinished at the close of the century. Garcia, Cated. Puebla, in Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, viii. 175.
91. One dedicated to the stigmata of Saint Francis, built upon a site chosen in 1530 by Father Toribio Motolinia, on the bank of the River Atoyac, and containing a novitiate and a school of philosophy with over 70 religiosos. It was the burial-place of the blessed Sebastian de Aparicio, and contained a venerated image like that of Remedios, within a silver eagle, originally presented by Cortés to the Tlascaltec chief Acxotecatl Cocomitzin. Santa Bárbara of the barefooted Franciscans, founded in 1591, had a school of philosophy, and fifty religious; amongst its novices once was Felipe de Jesus, patron saint of the city of Mexico. The Dominicans had three convents and houses; the principal, containing the school and novitiate, the college of San Luis, and the Recoleccion de San Pablo. The Austin friars possessed one convent devoted to serious studies; it was the novitiate, with more than 40inmates. The Carmelite convent, founded in 1586, was to contain, as a relic, one half of the cloth with which the virgin Maury wiped off the tears of her son; well authenticated. It owned also a piece of the true cross. The Jesuits had a college, and it is barely possible that the friars of San Juan de Dios had a hospital. Vetancvrt, Trat. Puebla, 54-5; Id., Chron., 132, 148; Dávila, Continuacion, MS., 154. By cédula of February 24, 1561, the city received the title of 'muy noble y muy leal,' and in 1567, the right of electing three alcaldes, one for Atlixco. Among its colleges was San Luis, a Dominican institution founded in 1558.
92. Vetancvrt, Trat. Puebla, 50; Monum. Domin. Esp., MS., v. 50. Calle writes 1543, Mem. y Not., 62, and Alcalá, Descrip. Puebla, MS., 51, has 1541. He was buried in the Dominican convent. Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i. 80-4.
93. He was a native of Navamorquende and professor of canonic law at Valladolid university. His friend Fuenleal, the former president of the audiencia at Mexico, secured his appointment. Concilios Prov., 1555-65, 244.
94. August 30th. Vetancvrt, Trat. Puebla, 51. 'Duró todo su gobierno hasta 19 de Octubre de 1557,' says Lorenzana, Concilios Prov., 1555-65, 245, but Gonzalez Dávila favors 1558.
95. Lorenzana, ubi sup., points out that Vetancurt errs in calling him Bernardo. He was appointed February 10, 1559, and characterized as 'perspica, instructos, perfulgens.'
96. He was born in 1538, and after studying at his native place of Valladolid, he became a doctor at Salamanca university.
97. Concilios Prov., 1555-65, 248. Vetancurt writes 1607. Trat. Puebla, 513 Calle, Mem. y Not., 62; Mendieta, Hist. Ecles., 680-4; Villagomez, Testam., in Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xi. 102-18. For additional authorities on the different bishoprics see Gonzalez Dávila, Teatro Ecles., i., passim; Mendieta, Hist. Ecles., 383 et seq., 680-4, 702-3; Concilios Prov., MS., Nos. 1-4, passim; Id., 1555-65, 209 et seq.; Franciscanos, Rel., in Prov. S. Evang., 193 et seq.; Vetancvrt, Menolog., passim; Florencia, Hist. Prov. Jesus, 202-10, 230; Fernandez, Hist. Ecles., 60-2, 113-16, 184; Mich., Prov. S. Nic., 59-61; Pacheco and Cárdenas, Col. Doc., xi. 102-18; xv. 449-57; N. Esp., Breve Res., MS., ii. 273-4, 300-15; Moreno, Fragmentos, 37-8; Alcedo, Dicc., iii. 323, 409, etc.; Cartas de Indias, 661, 827-8; Dicc. Univ., i. 269, 439; ii. 410-11; iv. 680-1; v. 214-15; vi. 479, 524-8, 665; ix. 415, 804-5; x. 823; Soc. Mex. Geog., Boletin, i. 181, 230; viii. 175, 539-44; 2da ép., iv. 188, 639-42; Touron, Hist. Gen., vii. 9-27, 237, 289; Zamacois, Hist. Méj., v. 167; Museo Mex., i. 447-51; Vazquez, Chron. Gvat., 535-6; Torquemada, iii. 535-8; Beaumont, Crón. Mich., v. 102-3, 498; Castillo, Dicc. Hist., 16, 156-7; Grijalua, Cron. S. August., 201-2; Tello, Hist. N. Gal., 360; Mota Padilla, Cong. N. Gal., 209; Doc. Hist. Mex., série i. tom. iii. 240; Iglesia, Fund. y Descrip., 15-21; Iglesias y Conventos, 324-7; Kingsborough's Mex. Antiq., v. 157; Ancona, Hist. Yuc., 104-23; Fancourt's Hist. Yue., 170-1; Mendoza, Noc. Cronol., 161-2; Gonzalez, Col. N. Leon, 372-3; Jal., Mem. Hist., 181.