¹ de Quiroga, Pedro, Libro intitulado coloquios de la verdad, trata de las causas e inconvenientes que impeden la doctrina e conversión de los indios de los reinos del Perú …, ed. Cuevas, Julián Zarco … (Sevilla, 1922), pp. 107–108 Google Scholar; Antonio de Vega, Historia … de las cosas succedidas en este collegio del Cuzco … de estos Reynos del Perú, desde su fundación hasta hoy … año de 1600, Division of Manuscripts, Library of Congress, fol. 126.

² de Ondegardo, Juan Polo, Informaciones acerca de la religión y gobierno de los Incas, 2da parte, seguidas del estado y economías de los naturales del Perú …, ed. Urteaga, Horacio H. (Lima, 1917), pp. 20–21.Google Scholar In addition to using it in sacrifices, Indians often tossed coca leaves at mountain huacas while traveling to assure their safe passages through the Andes. See Morúa, Fray Martín, Historia de los Incas, Reyes del Perú, ed. Urteaga, Horacio H. … (Lima, 1922), pp. 230–231 Google Scholar; de Molina, Cristóbal, Destrucción del Perú, Crónica escrita por el año de 1553 …, ed. Loayza, Francisco A. (Lima, 1943), p. 39.Google Scholar Another custom, revived among the Indian masses after the conquest, was the interment of coca leaves with the deceased. Lope de Atienza, Compendio historial del estado de los Indios del Perú, con muchas doctrina i cosas notables de ritos, costumbres, e inclinaciones que tienen … [ca. 1583], cap. XLII, Transcript from the original manuscript in Madrid made for E. G. Squier, Rich Collection, Division of Manuscripts, New York Public Library.

³ de Vega Bazán, Estanislao, Testimonio auténtica de una idolatría muy sutil que el demonio avía introducido entre los Indios … hizo por Comisión y Particulares Instrucciones que le dio … Pedro de Villagomes, arzobispo del Lima, 19 de octubre de 1655(Lima, 1655), pp. 2–3.Google Scholar See also Antonio de Vega, Historia del collegio de Cuzco, fol. 147.

⁴ Constituciones y ordenamientos hechos por el Arzobispo de los Reyes, Don Gerónimo de Loayza y los obispos … en un Concilio Provincial …, in Documentos literarios del Perú, ed. de Ordriozola, Manuel (Lima, 1877), 11, 277–278.Google Scholar

⁵ The “Primeros Augustinos,” for example, noting the use of coca in sacrifices, declared: “Sabe el Señor cuantas idolatrías y hechicerías se quitarían si no la [i. e. coca] hobiese …” See “Relación de la religión y ritos del Perú, hecha por los primeros religiosos augustinos que allí pasarón para la conversión de los naturales,” sin fecha (ca. 1559-?), Colección de documentos inéditos relativos al descubrimiento, conquista, y organización de las antiguas posesiones españoles de América y Oceanía (42 vols.; Madrid, 1864–1884), III, 15. Cited hereinafter as CDI. The Second Council of Lima condemned coca as a worthless leaf, serving only to subject the Indians to idolatry. See Concilios Limenses (1551–1772), ed. Ugarte, Rubén Vargas S.J., (2 vols.; Lima, 1951–1954), I, cap. CXXIV,Google Scholar “De coca et damnis quae ex ea proveniunt,” p. 154. Writing in 1562, Bartolomé de la Vega, a missionary in Peru, stated that coca was used primarily in the adoration of the devil. de la Vega, Bartolomé, “Memorial … al Real Consejo de Indias sobre los agravios que reciben los indios del Perú [1562],” Nueva colección de documentos inéditos para la historia de España y de sus Indias, eds. de Zalaburu, Francisco y Rayón, José Sancho (6 vols.; Madrid, 1892–1896), VI, 127–128.Google Scholar In his preface to a law on coca in 1569, Philip II stated that he had been informed of its use in witchcraft and idolatry. He had further been advised that the leaf was the invention of the devil and its sustaining power was actually a diabolical illusion. See Recopilación de leyes de los rey nos de las Indias … (Rev. ed.; 3 vols., Madrid, 1943), II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 306. Cited hereinafter as RLRI.

⁶ Located some twenty Spanish leagues east of Cuzco, Andes Province had been the site of the more important Inca plantations. Following the conquest, it quickly became the richest producing area in Peru, noted for its excellent coca. See de la Gasea, Pedro, “Carta … al Consejo de Indias avisando las disposiciones que se habían adoptado respeto al repartimiento de coca que tuvo Francisco Pizarro. Los Reyes, 16 de setiembre de 1549,” Gobernantes del Perú, cartas y papeles, siglo XVI, documentos del Archivo de Indias, ed. Levillier, Roberto (14 vols.; Madrid, 1921–1926), 1, 216–218.Google Scholar Cited hereinafter as GPCP. Vázquez de Espinosa gives one of the better descriptions of Andes Province in the early seventeenth century. See Espinosa, Antonio Vázquez, Compendium and Descrption of the West Indies, trans. Clark, Charles Upson (Washington, D. C, 1942), pp. 474, 600–601.Google Scholar Other important coca-producing areas are described in “Relación de … los Primeros … Augustinos,” CDI, III, 15; de la Vega, Garcilaso, Los comentarios reales de los Incas, ed. Urteaga, Horacio H. (2nd ed.; 6 vols.; Lima, 1941–1946), III, 56–58Google Scholar; de León, Pedro de Cieza, The Incas of Pedro de Cieza de León, ed. von Hagen, Victor Wolfgang (Norman, Oklahoma, 1959), p. 260 Google Scholar; de Solórzano Pereyra, Juan, Política indiana … [1647], ed. de Valenzuela, Francisco Ramiro (5 vols.; Madrid, 1930), I, 213—214.Google Scholar

⁷ de las Casas, Bartolomé, De las antiguas gentes del Perú, capítulos de la “Apologética historia sumaria” escrita antes del año de 1555, director Loayza, Francisco A. (Lima, 1948), p. 150.Google Scholar

⁸ “Apuntamientos para el asiento del Perú, sin fecha,” CDI, XI, 51. Writing in 1586, several years after reforms had been made in Andes Province, Rodrigo de Loaisa wrote that one half of the workers still died each year. “… de diez que entran a los Andes no salen cinco. …” de Loaisa, Fray Rodrigo, “Memorial de las cosas del Peru tocantes a los indios. Madrid, 5 de mayo de 1686,” Colección de documentos inéditos para la historia de España, ed. de Navarrete, Martín Fernández, et al. (112 vols.; Madrid, 1842—1895), XCIV, 592.Google Scholar Cited hereinafter as CDIHE. Juan Matienzo, a lobbyist for the coca interests, gave a surprisingly high estimate of the death rate. He stated that those involved in coca cultivation believed that approximately forty percent of the camayos died of various causes. de Matienzo, Juan, Gobierno del Perú, obra escrita en el siglo XVI (Buenos Aires, 1910), p. 94.Google Scholar Although they are vague as to numbers, several other sixteenth-century writers commented on the enormity of deaths among the camayos. See, among others, de la Vega, Bartolomé, “Memorial,” 6, 111, 128Google Scholar; Quiroga, , Coloquios de la verdad, pp. 106–107 Google Scholar; Falcón, Francisco, Representación hecha … en Concilio Provincial sobre los daños y molestias que se hacen a los indios, ed. Urteaga, Horacio H. (Lima, 1918), p. 165 Google Scholar; de Santillán, , Historia de los Incas y relación de su gobierno … (crónicas del siglo XVI), ed. Urteaga, Horacio H. (Lima, 1927), p. 107 Google Scholar; “Provehimientos generales y particulares del Pirú, sin fecha,” CDI, XI, 40. Population statistics for the year 1583 reveal that there were approximately 5700 Christianized Indians permanently residing in Andes Province. The figure includes neither the mita camayos, who worked for a specified period and then left the province, nor the Indians of several small villages. The repartimientos of Tonono y Colquepata and Paucartambo were the largest with 1555 and 1531 Christianized Indians, respectively. See Enriquez, Martin, “Relación hecha … de los oficios que se proveen en la gobernación de los reinos y provincias del Perú, 1583,” GPCP, 9, 165–166.Google Scholar

⁹ Quiroga, , Coloquios de la verdad, pp. 101–102;Google Scholar Matienzo, , Gobierno del Perú, pp. 89, 93–94Google Scholar; Falcón, , Representación, pp. 164–165;Google Scholar “Fray Antonio Zúñiga al Rey Don Felipe II, Peru, 15 de julio de 1579,” CDIHE, XXVI, 93. Las Casas claimed that Sierra Indians from as far away as sixty leagues and more were brought into Andes Province. Their inability to tolerate this sudden change was a major source of death, he concluded. Casas, Las, Las antiguas gentes, p. 150.Google Scholar Polo de Ondegardo wanted not only a more careful selection of mita camayos but of miners as well. He criticized the practice of forcing valley Indians to work in the mines, where they suffered from melancholia. de Ondegardo, Polo, Informaciones de los Incas, p. 148.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Quiroga, , Coloquios de la verdad, pp. 101–192.Google Scholar The disease was regarded by some as incurable after two days. See Santillán, , Historia de los Incas, p. 108.Google Scholar Many also believed the dread disease to be contagious. Matienzo, , Gobierno del Perú, p. 89.Google Scholar According to Loaisa, the disease, known also as Andeongo, resembled not only cancer and leprosy but also a mountain illness contracted in the high Andes. He speculated that decay was spread inside the wound by worms which thrived and multiplied because of the hot and humid climate in Andes Province. See Loaisa, , “Memorial,” CDIHE, XCIV, 601.Google Scholar Luis Capoche considered the mal de los Andes more malignant than a tumor. It consumed its victim to such an extent that only bared bones and ulcerated skin remained. In such a debilitated condition, the diseased Indian died with extreme pain. Luis Capoche, Del abuso de la coca y de los daños que de ella se siguen a los indios [ca. 1585], fol. 89. Transcript of part of a sixteenth-century manuscript. This transcript was kindly loaned to me by Professor Lewis Hanke of Columbia University.

¹¹ de la Vega, Bartolomé, “Memorial,” 6, 128.Google Scholar

¹² During a discussion of hygienic conditions in Andes Province, bishops at the Second Council of Lima learned that the underfed Indians gorged themselves when they returned to their villages. Their debilitated and constricted stomachs were unable to digest large quantities of the poorly cooked food that the Indians usually ate. The result was serious illness and even death. Concilios Limenses, I, cap. CXXV, pp. 154–155.

¹³ …donde la coca nasze, raras son las mugeres que conciben; y si algun niño nasce, no escapa de ser loco, o mudo, o ciego, o sordo, y otros defectos de naturaleza. …” Quiroga, , Coloquios de la verdad, p. 102.Google Scholar

¹⁴ lbid., p. 103; de la Vega, Bartolomé, “Memorial,” 6, 128.Google Scholar The Second Council of Lima was concerned with the effects of work in Andes Province on procreation among the Indians. “…they themselves [the Indians] affirm that they die extremely quick after copulation,” the bishops were informed. Concilios Limenses, I, cap. CXXIV, p. 155. For other comments on hygienic conditions in Andes Province, see especially Loaisa, , “Memorial,” CDIHE, XCIV, 592, 600–601Google Scholar; Santillán, , Historia de los Incas, p. 108 Google Scholar; Matienzo, , Gobierno del Perú, p. 89 Google Scholar; Basadre, Jorge, “El Regimen de la Mita,” Letras. Organo de … la Universidad Mayor de San Marcos, 3 (Tercer Cuatrimestre de 1937), 336.Google Scholar

¹⁵ “Zúñiga a Felipe II,” CDIHE, XXVI, 90.

¹⁶ Matienzo, , Gobierno del Perú, pp. 94, 102.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Ibid., 94, 101; de Toledo, Francisco, “Ordenanzas … relativos al cultivo de la coca, trabajo de los indios en él y obligaciones de los encomenderos; enfermedades de indios, hospitales, prohibiciones, y penas. Cuzco, 3 de octubre de 1572,” GPCP, 8 passim Google Scholar; RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 306, passim. See also Solórzano, , Politica indiana, 1, libro ii, cap. X, p. 213;Google Scholar Falcón, , Representación, pp. 165–166.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Matienzo, , Gobierno del Perú, pp. 104–105.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Ibid., p. 105. The legislation concerning the maize rations was frequently violated. See Quiroga, , Coloquios de la verdad, p. 107;Google Scholar Concilios Limenses, I, cap. CXXIV, pp. 154–155.

²⁰ Matienzo, , Gobierno del Perú, p. 105.Google Scholar

²¹ The coca allotment for the return trip was actually specified as one twenty-four pound basket for every eight camayos. Ibid., p. 104.

²² Cañete’s concern with labor dislocations, however, did not prompt him to exclude Sierra Indians from working in Andes Province. See de Cañete, Marqués [de Mendoza, Andrés Hurtado], “Carta … a S. M. dando cuento minucioso de como halló el reino … Los Reyes, 15 de setiembre de 1556,” GPCP, 1, 290.Google Scholar

²³ Matienzo, , Gobierno del Perú, p. 102.Google Scholar For concern expressed over the expansion of coca cultivation at the expense of essential staples, see also Solórzano, , Política indiana, 1, libro ii, cap. X, pp. 214, 215.Google Scholar

²⁴ Matienzo, , Gobierno del Perú, p. 111.Google Scholar The ordinance further prohibited the development of plantations licensed before the law was issued but as yet unstarted.

²⁵ Ibid., pp. 107–109. Those who received licenses to make clearings for the cultivation of staples were asked to use Negroes rather than Indians, since they were considered better suited for such arduous work in the hot climate of Andes Province. Ibid., p. 103.

²⁶ Santillán, , Historia de los Incas, pp. 107–108;Google Scholar Falcón, , Representación, pp. 165–166;Google Scholar Matienzo, , Gobierno del Perú, p. 93;Google Scholar Concilios Limenses, I, cap. CXXIV, p. 154.

²⁷ RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 307. The law further prohibited camayos from performing any other duties while engaged in coca cultivation.

²⁸ “La Audiencia de Charcas a S.M. … 2 de noviembre de 1556,” Audiencia de Charcas, correspondencia de presidentes y oidores, documentos de Archivo de Indias, ed. Levillier, Roberto (3 vols.; Madrid, 1918–1922), I, 201–202.Google Scholar Cited hereinafter as ACC.

²⁹ The original declaration of the council condemning coca concluded with the appeal “… and let our Spaniards procure better things for the Indians than leaves of coca trees, which, would be to God, might be seized by the wind and blown far, far away.” Concilio Limenses, I, cap. CXXIV, p. 155. The summary of the declaration, however, was more compromising. It stated: “Coca is a thing without benefit and is often used in superstitious practices of the Indians. Chewing it, the Indians derive very little sustenance. Its cultivation is … arduous, and it … has taken and takes the lives of many. It is desired that the governors withdraw the Indians from the cultivation of coca, or at least not force them to work against their will.” Ibid., I, 239.

³⁰ “La Audiencia de Charcas a S.M., 1566,” ACC, I, 201.

³¹ RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, pp. 305–306.

³² Plantations started after that date were to be uprooted and burned. Additional penalties which could be imposed included a 2000 peso fine and exile from Andes Province for four years. Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 14, 18–19.Google Scholar

³³ Ibid., VIII, 16. “De virreyes y gobernadores del Pirú, Virrey D. Francisco de Toledo,” CDI, VIII, 260.

³⁴ The three investigators were Juan de Buyen, an Augustinian preacher, the licentiate Alegría, a physician, and the licentiate Estrada, a lawyer. Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” 8, 15–16.Google Scholar

³⁵ “De virreyes … del Pini,” CDI, VIII, 260–261.

³⁶ Santillán, , Historia de los Incas, pp. 108–109.Google Scholar

³⁷ Matienzo further asserted that since coca was a gift from God, created to mitigate pangs of hunger and thirst, keep the Indians warm, and give them stamina, it should not be prohibited. Matienzo, , Gobierno del Perú, pp. 89–90.Google Scholar

³⁸ Ibid., pp. 21, 48, 89, 94.

³⁹ Ibid., p. 90. For comments concerning the influence of Matienzo on the crown, see Solórzano, , Política indiana, 1, libro ii, cap. X, p. 213.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ de Toledo, Francisco, “Puntas de la carta … a S.M. sobre … viaje y visita … Cuzco, 1 de marzo de 1572,” GPCP, 4, 227.Google Scholar

⁴¹ \de Toledo, Francisco, “Sumario y decretos de una carta … a S.M. en materia de hacienda, Cuzco, 1 de marzo de 1572,” GPCP, 4, 276.Google Scholar See also Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 16.Google Scholar

⁴² Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 17.Google Scholar For a first offense of this ordinance, a cacique was to be deprived of his office for an undetermined period. A second violation could be punished by exile from Peru for ten years.

⁴³ Ibid., pp. 16–17, 21. A first offender forfeited his income from the plantation for one year. Although the planter might not be involved and his overseer were actually responsible for the use of forced labor, the penalties remained the same.

⁴⁴ Ibid., p. 23. Pius V admonished the Spaniards that Christian Indians were to be paid a just wage in keeping with St. Paul's letter to Philemon. Pius V to Giambattista Castagna, Papal Instruction concerning the Treatment of the American Indians, 1566 [1568], Ursuline Collection of transcripts from Spanish and Roman Archives relating to the history of Peru, 1534-1600 and later (obtained by Sister Monica, O. S. U.), Division of Manuscripts, Library of Congress.

⁴⁵ RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 307. See also Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 23.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 26, 27–28.Google Scholar The crown firmly supported this restriction on mita service in Andes Province. Planters who detained the Indians beyond the twenty-four days with promises of larger salaries were to be fined 500 pesos for each offense. RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 307.

⁴⁷ Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 26–27.Google Scholar If a mita camayo worked more than half of a day and was forced to stop because of inclement weather, he was to receive credit for a full day's work. His time was to be counted as a half-day if he worked half of a day or less. Ibid., pp. 25–26.

⁴⁸ Ibid., p. 26. RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 307.

⁴⁹ Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 26.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Ibid., p. 24.

⁵¹ Ibid., p. 21.

⁵² Ibid., p. 24.

⁵³ Ibid., pp. 24, 25, 26.

⁵⁴ Ibid., p. 24.

⁵⁵ Ibid., pp. 25–26.

⁵⁶ Ibid., p. 17.

⁵⁷ LRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 306.

⁵⁸ Ibid.

⁵⁹ Each camayo was to receive at least eight ounces of either llama, beef or pork for each day of travel. The food provision was to be sufficient for at least ten days of travel. Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 25, 27.Google Scholar The daily food allotment for the camayos while they were in Andes Province and during their return to their villages was determined by the provincial justicia. See RLRI, libro VI, título XIV, pp. 306–307.

⁶⁰ Spaniards who violated this prohibition were subject to a fine of 20 pesos and exile from Andes Province for six months. Indians, mestizos, Negroes, or mulattoes who bought the maize from the camayos were to receive 100 lashes as were the camayos who sold it. Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 27.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Matienzo, , Gobierno del Perú, p. 110.Google Scholar See also “Indice de escrituras públicas del Cuzco, año 1560,” Revista del Archivo Histórico, Año IV, No. 4 (1953), p. 30.

⁶² The planters had proposed that several small hospitals be established in Andes Province. Considering this plan wasteful, Toledo directed the expansion and improvement of San Juan Baptista. Toledo, “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 29–30.Google Scholar

⁶³ Ibid., p. 28.

⁶⁴ RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 307.

⁶⁵ Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de lo coca,” GPCP, 8, 29.Google Scholar RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 307.

⁶⁶ Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 29–30.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Ibid., p. 28. Pius V had admonished Toledo to do all that was necessary to promote the propagation of the faith and the spiritual welfare of the Indians in Perú. Pius V to Don Francisco de Toledo, Papal Brief, August 18, 1568. Ursuline Collection of Transcripts. Philip II was informed that the Indians were often prevented from attending Mass because they often had to pick and dry coca on Sundays and holy days. He ordered the planters to cease such practices and to take special care that the Indians attend Mass and participate in the doctrina. RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 307.

⁶⁸ Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 23. Google Scholar In his “Instruction on the General Treatment of the American Indians,” Pius V wrote “It will … be praiseworthy to oblige the pagan Indians to observe the laws of marriage and to see … that a woman has not several husbands.” Pius V to Castagna, Ursuline Collection of Transcripts. In a law of 1574, Philip II directed the planters and their majordomos to learn if the women accompanying the camayos were their wives or persons of questionable virtue. Suspicious women were to be reported to the justicia and doctrinero so that corrective measures could be taken. RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 307.

⁶⁹ Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 20.Google Scholar According to a seventeenth-century source, Toledo attempted to diminish the use of coca throughout the vice-royalty. Ostensibly, the five percent alcabala he placed on coca was intended to discourage a “superfluous thing and vice.” See de Escalona, Gaspar y Agüero, , Gazofilacio real del Perú, tratado financiero del coloniaje (1647), 2nda Serie, No. 1 of Biblioteca boliviana (La Paz, 1941), libro ii, cap. XXV, p. 260.Google Scholar In 1574 the crown forbade merchants to sell coca anywhere except at active mines. RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 307.

⁷⁰ Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 27.Google Scholar Disturbed by reports of alcoholism among the Indians, Pius V urged colonial officials to encourage sobriety. Pius V to Castagna, Ursuline Collection of Transcripts. For additional comments showing Toledo's concern with the problem of drunkenness among the Indians, see “Francisco de Toledo a S.M. sobre materias tocantes al buen gobierno y justicia de las provincias del Perú, Los Reyes, 8 de febrero de 1570,” GPCP, III, 346.

⁷¹ Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” ibid., 8, 32.Google Scholar Toledo did not specify, however, how often the justicia was to visit the plantations.

⁷² Ibid., p. 32. Nothing is mentioned in the ordinances concerning the salary of the justicia. In 1563, however, during the lax administration of the Conde de Nieva, the justicia for Andes Province received an annual salary of 2000 pesos, which was paid by the planters. See “El Conde de Nieva a S.M. sobre … la audiencia de Charcas y otros asuntos … Los Reyes, 10 de setiembre de 1563,” ACC, I, 603.

⁷³ Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 33.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Ibid., pp. 33–34; RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 306.

⁷⁵ RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, p. 306.

⁷⁶ Ibid. Planters who wished to increase their production to the level permitted by the crown were instructed to apply for licenses from the viceroy. They were to promise that they would not extend their plantations beyond the 500-basket limit. The crown was silent on the matter of new plantations. Apparently, however, Philip II agreed with Toledo that none should be started.

⁷⁷ “Zúñiga a Felipe II,” CDIHE, XXVI, 90.

⁷⁸ Ibid.

⁷⁹ Ibid., p. 93. Earlier criticism of the Bishop of Cuzco and other members of the hierarchy who gained revenue from coca was expressed by Ludovico López, a Jesuit. Writing to the General of his Order, he stated: “… y así se están los indios tan metidos en sus idolatrías como antes. Y los ayuden los españoles, dándoles instrumento délias, que es la coca, por sacarles plata. Cosa de grandísima lástima, que aun los obispos, por no perder sus diezmos permitten se venda y crie este género de abominación. ….” “Ludovico López a Padre Francisco Borgiae, Lima, 29 de diciembre de 1569,” Monumenta Peruana, ed. de Egaña, Antonio S. J., (2 vols.; Roma, 1954–1958), I, 327.Google Scholar Writing near the beginning of the seventeenth century, Pedro Lizárraga complained that many clergymen did not condemn coca because it was a source of ecclesiastical income. Lizárraga, Fray Reginaldo, Descripción breve de toda la tierra del Perú, Tucumán, Río de la Plata y Chile, ed. Rojas, Ricardo (2 vols.; Buenos Aires, 1916), I, 207.Google Scholar The doctrineros and other clergymen in Andes Province derived part of their income from the sale of coca in the Cuzco market. Toledo, , “Ordenanzas de la coca,” GPCP, 8, 30.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ “Zúñiga a Felipe II,” CDIHE, XXVI, 93. Writing approximately a decade later, Guarnan Poma expressed similar sentiments. The use of coca harmed the Indians, he wrote, for they neglected to eat and became emaciated. What they needed was a more adequate food supply rather than coca, he asserted. Felipe Guamán Poma de Ayala, El primer nueva crónica y buen gobierno, interpretada por Luis Bustíos Gálvez (Lima, 1956), p. 113.

⁸¹ “Zúñiga a Felipe II,” CDIHE, XXVI, 93, 94. Zúñiga recommended a plan to enforce prohibition. After all plantations were destroyed, severe penalties should be imposed on Indians who continued to grow or chew the leaf. He proposed that those who illegally planted coca be enslaved for life in the service of some church or hospital; and those who refused to relinquish the habit be enslaved for at least two months. Ibid., pp. 92–93. Philip II was no more influenced by Zúñiga than he had been by earlier missionaries who had asserted that the eradication of coca would foster Christianity among the Indians. He found it expedient to accept Matienzo's claim that the Indians were already Christians and that the prohibition of coca would cause them to return to the paganism they had known under the Incas.

⁸² Concilios Limenses, I, 239.

⁸³ Falcon, , Representación, p. 165.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Although he was not specific concerning how many plantations were under cultivation in 1582, when he made his representation, he asserted that there was a thousand times more coca than in the time of the Incas. “… hoy hay mil veces mas coca que de la había en tiempos de los Ingas. …” Ibid., p. 165.

⁸⁵ Ibid., pp. 165–166.

⁸⁶ Ibid., p. 165.

⁸⁷ Luis Capoche, for example, like the earlier opponents, stated that Christianity could be furthered if the Indians relinquished their superstitious uses of coca. He realized that this would be impossible, however, for the prohibition of coca would disrupt mining operations at Potosí. Luis Capoche, Abuso de la coca, fol. 89.

⁸⁸ Valera, Blas, Las costumbres antiguas del Perú y la historia de los Incas (siglo XVI) …, ed. Loayza, Francisco A. (Lima, 1945), p. 131.Google Scholar An anonymous source from approximately the same period took exception to this view. “What sustenance can it give the body when it never enters it?” the writer asked. “Apuntamientos,” CDI, XI, 51–52. Joseph de Acosta, however, disagreed with those who claimed that the sustaining powers of coca were diabolical illusions. He had seen Indians travel long distances and perform prodigious feats of strength while subsisting on only a handful of coca. See de Acosta, Joseph, Historia Natural y Moral de las Indias … (2 vols.; Madrid, 1894), I, 381.Google Scholar Bernabé Cobo stated that he had observed coca chewers who did twice as much work as non-chewers. He concluded that the chewers did not merely imagine that they had more stamina, but that the leaves actually gave them additional endurance. See Cobo, Bernabé, Historia del Nuevo Mundo …, ed. de la Espada, Marcos Jiménez (4 vols.; Sevilla, 1890–95), I, 475.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Valera, Blas, Las costumbres, pp. 131–132.Google Scholar Garcilaso de la Vega, who borrowed so extensively from Blas Valera, repeated this argument. See de la Vega, Garcilaso, Los Comentarios, 3, 57.Google Scholar For comments concerning missionary efforts to Christianize the use of coca, see Jara, Sergio Quijada, La coca en las costumbres indígenas (Apuntes de folklore), (Huancayo, Peru, 1950), p. 11, passim.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Lizárraga, , Descripción breve, 1, p. 207.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Ibid., p. 207. In 1601 and 1609 the crown found it necessary to repeat the laws concerning the use of forced labor in the cultivation of coca. RLRI, II, libro VI, título XIV, pp. 300-301. See also de Montesclaros, Marqués, “Relación del estado de gobierno de estos reinos que hace … Marquez de Montesclaros al … Principe de Esquilache, su sucessor, 12 de diciembre de 1615,” Memorias de los virreyes que han gobernado el Perú durante el tiempo del coloniaje español, ed. Fuentes, M. A. (6 vols.; Lima, 1859), I, 26.Google Scholar

⁹² Arriaga, Pablo Joseph, La extirpación de la idolatría en el Perú [ca. 1620], ed. Urteaga, Horacio H. (Lima, 1920), pp. 44–45, 139.Google Scholar

⁹³ During the waning days of the coca opposition, Pedro de Villagomes, archbishop of Lima, exhorted missionaries to maintain vigilance in preventing the use of coca in idolatry. See de Villagomes, Pedro, Exortacìones e instrucción acerca de las idolatrías de los indios …, ed. Urteaga, Horacio H. (Lima, 1919), pp. 53–54, 206.Google Scholar Complying with the instruction, Francisco Patino, a missionary in the Cuzco region, infosmed Villagomes that among the Indians he had observed, those who chewed coca demonstrated slight interest in becoming Christians. See Patino, Francisco, “Carta y apuntamientos … Cuzco, 14 de octubre de 1648,” ibid., p. 283.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Cobo, , Historia, 1, 474;Google Scholar Lizárraga, , Descripción breve, 1, 203, 207Google Scholar; de Montesclaros, Marqués, “Relación del Gobierno,” Memorias de los virreyes, 1, 26–27.Google Scholar The declining demand for coca probably contributed to the reduction of the alcabala on it from five percent to two percent. The tax, nevertheless, produced an average revenue of 52,000 pesos in the Lima area alone during the administration of Esquilache. See Diccionario histórico biográfico del Perú, ed. de Mendiburu, Manuel (11 vols.; 4 vols. Appendices; Lima, 1931–1938), III, 107.Google Scholar In a letter to the crown, dated November 1, 1619, Esquilache noted the sharp decline in the cultivation of coca and shipments to Cuzco and other markets. He planned to begin an investigation to find means to restore the coca trade to its former status. Solórzano, , Política indiana, l, libro II, cap. X, pp. 217–218.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Solórzano, , Política indiana, l, libro II, cap. X, p. 214.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Among the other precedents to justify the sale of coca to the Indians was the practice of Christian merchants selling lambs to Jews, even though the animals might be used as sacrifices. Ibid., p. 217. The Council further discussed whether the Indians broke the Eucharistie fast if they chewed coca before receiving Communion. Although Solórzano does not clearly explain the decision, the theologians apparently felt that they did. Ibid. It must be kept in mind that few of the prohibitionists opposed coca on grounds other than its association with superstition and witchcraft. They did not consider it to be a narcotic, and indeed could not have known of its narcotic properties, which would not be discovered until the nineteenth century.