No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 December 2015
For nearly three centuries, the vecinos of colonial Paraguay defended Spanish interests in the Upper Plata. Turbulent as they were, protesting with violent regularity against unpopular governors and official policies, these “hijos del país” have traditionally been portrayed as the bedrock from which the Paraguayan people and identity sprang. Offspring of the Spanish conquerors of the 1500s and their guaraní consorts, the “mancebos de la tierra,” possessed the full rights of Europeans. They guarded their noble status jealously, while dominating the rural society of the province. With the passage of time their numbers increased, providing the manpower for Paraguay's eighteenth century frontier expansion. In the course of Paraguay's colonial development, vecinos bore the brunt of the militia defense of the province, “a su costa y minsión,” in an unrelenting struggle against nomadic Indians and the putative designs of neighboring Lusitanians.
1 The best exposition of this “military” origin of Paraguayan identity is found in “La raíz heroica” of Cardozo, Efraím, El Paraguay colonial: las raices de la nacionalidad (Buenos Aires: Nizza 1959), pp. 189–229.Google Scholar
2 Gatimí in Guaraní means “small canoe” and usually referred to the general territory drained by the Ygatimí—the “river of the small canoe.” The Portuguese fort on the Ygatimí must not be confused with the present Paraguayan town of Igatimí as the two are separated by the San Joaquín range. The river—Ygatimí—is now the Carapá. Neither is the Brazilian river—the Iguatemy—north of the Sierra Mbaracayú (the present Brazilian-Paraguayan boundary in this region) to be confused with the Ygatimí river of the 1760s.
3 A good account of the founding and early years of Curuguaití is found in “Diario de Capitán de Fragata D. Juan Francisco Aguirre,” Revista de la Biblioteca Nacional (Buenos Aires), 19, Segunda Parte (1950), II, 201-211. Also see Viola, Alfredo, Orígen de pueblos del Paraguay (Asunción: Comuneros, 1986), pp. 47–53.Google Scholar
4 “Información mandada hacer por este Govierno sobre ilicito introducciones en la Villa de Curuguaití en virtud de Real Provision de su Alteza. 1760,” Asunción, 22 October 1760 in Archivo Nacional de Asunción Sección Histórica, volumen 129. Hereafter cited as ANA-SH 129.
5 “Diario del Teniente General Don Sebastián de Cáceres en la expedición llevada a cabo para demoler y arrancar el marco que se erigió en las cabeceras del Río Gatimí. Asunción del Paraguay, 25 de agosto de 1761.” in Archivo General de la Nación, Campaña del Brasil. Antecedentes coloniales. (1750–1762) (Buenos Aires: Gmo. Kraft, 1939), II, 379–386. Hereinafter cited as Campaña del Brasil. Also in ANA-SH 133.
6 Many of these raiders came out of the Sierra Mbaracayú, crossed the Ygatimí at the “paso de Mbayás” upstream from the future Portuguese settlement, and then using the screen of the San Joaquín range, could strike at will into the Curuguatí district. They were a constant danger.
7 Governor Yegros was not only feuding with the Asunción secular cabildo, but was on very poor terms with the ecclesiastic cabildo of Asunción as well as the cabildo of Curuguatí. Carlos Morphi to King of Spain, Asunción, 18 February 1767 in Manuel Gondra Manuscript Collection, University of Texas, MG 1538.
8 Cabildo of Curuguatí to Governor Yegros, Curuguatí, 8 March 1765 in ANS-SH 134.
9 Cabildo of Curuguatí to that of Asunción, Curuguatí, 26 August 1765 in ANS-SH 134.
10 Aguirre, pp. 212–218. Also see Viola, pp. 53–55.
11 Aguirre, p. 222.
12 While the history of the Portuguese settlement of Ygatimí is not the theme of this study, copious documentation upon it exists in Archivo do Estado de Paulo, S., Publicacão oficial de documentos interessantes para a historia e costumes de S. Paulo (São Paulo, 1894–1902), 6–9 Google Scholar. A brief Brazilian view of the founding and existence of Ygatimí is de Almeida, Aluzio, “O Maldito Iguatemí,” Revista do Arquivo Municipal (São Paulo), 9 (1944), 111–151.Google Scholar
13 While the Paraguayan response to Ygatimí is the focus of this paper, rather than the Brazilian occupation, it should be noted that Viceroy Marquis de Lavradio in Rio de Janeiro was rather dubious about the utility of that settlement, considering its maintenance too costly, and the impracticability of its retention in the face of possible Spanish military pressure out of Asunción. But over the ten years of its existence, the Captain General of São Paulo was able to mobilize opinion at the Lisbon court and Ygatimí continued to receive reinforcements and supplies. The Captain General argued that with Ygatimí in Portuguese hands the cattle pastures east of the Paraná between the western Rio Grande and São Paulo were more secure against Spanish attack; Mato Grosso and Goiás were protected against Spanish moves out of Paraguay; there was a possibility now of clandestine trade with Paraguayan towns during peace; it might act as an outpost for attacks against Paraguay in time of war; and finally it placed pressure upon the Spanish to divide their forces between Buenos Aires and Asunción. Most of these justifications were very weak, but with court support for Ygatimí, Lavradio reluctantly accepted its existence. The best source for this debate is found in Alden, Dauril, Royal Government in Colonial Brazil, with Special Reference to the Administration of the Marquis of Lavradio, 1769–1779 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1968), pp. 459–471.Google Scholar
14 Morphi’s less-than-sure grasp of the situation was revealed when he permitted the Asunción cabildo to persuade him NOT to make a personal visit to the Ygatimí-Curuguatí region and there punish guilty vecinos, even though ordered to do so by the viceroy. It appears that the failure to comply with that viceregal order was later held against him at a high level. Royal Order of Charles III to Viceroy of Perú, El Pardo, 7 February 1772 in Archivo General de Indias (Sevilla), Audiencia de Buenos Aires, legajo 540. Hereinafter cited as AGI-BA 540.
15 Bucareli to Morphi, Buenos Aires, 17 June 1767 in Archivo General de la Nación (Buenos Aires), Legajo 9-4-3-5. Hereinafter cited as AGN 9-4-3-5.
16 Morphi to Bucareli, Asuncion, 2 August 1767 in AGN 9-4-3-5. It is revealing to give in full Morphi’s assessment of the military condition of the province. “Las continuas guerras defensivas que mantienen los Naturales de este País, contra los Enemigos Ynfieles del Chaco que lo invaden indefectiblemente todos los meses tienen deterriorados los animos y la industria de sus labradores de suerte que entran y salen de Guardia en toda la extension de las Fronteras de ocho en ocho dias maneniendose a su costa y minsion, sin esperanza de alivio ni alteración.He encontrado la Provincia exhausta de un todo, sin Ramo de Guerra y todos sus Presidios dismantelados, sin municiones y con seis quintales de Pólvora, y el gasto de esta especie es grande por causa de los Canonaros que mensualmente se tiran para avisar los Habitantes de los Valles de la Entrada de los Enemigos. En este estado tengo la Prov.a, y sin arbitrios para mejorarla, solo el diminutivo de admitir algunos individuos a composición con el ramo pagando guarenta pesos huecos para eximirse del servicio por el termino de un año, con cuyo único he juntado hasta dos mil pesos que vienen a ser 500 p.os en plata.”
17 Lugar Teniente Gral. de Governador, Justicia Mayor y Cap.n de Guerra de la Villa de San Ysidro Labrador de Curuguatí Joseph González Bejarano to Morphi, Gatimí, 30 December 1767 in AGN 9-4-3-5.
18 Morphi to Bucareli, Asunción, 19 January 1768 in AGN 9-4-3-5.
19 Lieutenant Governor Joseph González of Curuguatí to Governor Carlos Morphi, Curuguatí, 24 February 1768 in ANA-SH 144.
20 Aguirre, pp. 529–530.
21 “El gobernador del Paraguay, D. Carlos Morphi, informa al rey que los portugueses paulistas se han establecido sobre el Río Gatimí, en dominios de España apoyados por los rebeldes de Curuguatí, hallándose sin fuerzas competentes para desalojarlos, Asunción, 17 de abril de 1768” and “Enterado el rey de España del nueva avance portugues recomienda al gobernador del Paraguay ‘Que esté vigilante, y de quenta de quanto ocurra en estos asuntos al virrey, y al gov.or de B.s Ayres, y obedesca lo q.e le manden, pidiendoles los auxilios q.e necesite,” Madrid, 4 de enero de 1769,” both in Archivo General de la Nación (Buenos Aires), Campaña del Brasil (Buenos Aires, Gmo. Kraft, 1941), III, 214–217 and 217, respectively.
22 “En vista de los progresos que realiza la ocupación portuguesa en el Gatimí, en cuyas fortificaciones se han concentrado 20 piezas de artilleria, Ilegando a 1000 hombres de armas su guarnición, el virrey del Peru ordena al gobernador de Buenos Aires envie con prontitud los auxilios necesarios para que el gobernador del Paraguay proceda a desalojar a los intrusos. Lima, 22 de enero de 1771” and “En respuesta al requerimiento del virrey del Peru para que acuda en auxilio del gobernador del Paraguay en su intento de desalojar a los portugueses del Río Gatimí, el gobernador de Buenos Aires expone lo peligroso que resultaría desguarnecer para ello los lugares de su jurisdicción, en vista del seguro rompimiento con la corte de Londres y los anuncios de inminentes ataques en la costa del Plata. Buenos Aires, 26 de Marzo de 1771” both in Campaña del Brasil, III, 234-235 and 235, respectively.
23 Viceroy of Peru Manuel de Amat to Governor Carlos Morphi of Paraguay, Lima, 30 January 1771 in ANA-SH 144.
24 José González Bejarano to Governor Morphi, Gatimí, 30 December 1767 in “Expediente relativo a la población de Portugueses sobre la orilla de Ygatimí. Año 1768,” in ANA-SH 135. The only result of this extensive correspondence that continued for a decade between Asunción and Ygatimí, as well as to the Captain General in São Paulo, was an excellent review of the activities of the Spanish and the Portuguese in the Alto Paraná-Siete Quedas regions since the 1500s. The flavor of this exchange may be seen in Governor Carlos Morphi of Paraguay to Captain General Antonio Luis de Sousa of São Paulo, Asunción, 18 September 1770; and Sousa to Morphi, São Paulo, 17 July 1771, both respectively in Aguirre, 565–577 & 577–595. Similar correspondence may be found in Campaña de Brasil, III; and AGN 9-4-3-6 (Portugueses conflictos en el Río de la Plata. 1776-1777). An interesting aspect of this correspondence is that Governor Morphi realized immediately that the true instigator of this incursion was Spain’s old nemesis in the Upper Plata—São Paulo—and thus directed much of his protest to the paulista Captain General rather than the viceregal court at Rio de Janeiro.
25 Cabañas to Bucareli, Asuncion, 3 March 1768 in AGN 9-4-3-5.
26 Morphi to Bucareli, Asunción, 24 April 1768 in AGN 9-4-3-5.
27 Bucareli to Morphi, Candalaria, 15 August 1768 in AGN 9-4-3-5.
28 Morphi to Bucareli, Asuncion, 8 October 1768 in AGN 9-4-3-5. The matter of authority of Bucareli over Morphi was complicated by earlier powers of the former relative to the latter during the period of the expulsion of the Jesuits. Later, on his relief as governor of Paraguay, Morphi attacked Bucareli as the instigator of most of his troubles with Paraguayan leaders, “tuvo a perseguirme por todos terminos, y modos, animando e invitando, a varios de mis subditos en el Paraguay de hacerme frente en las deliberaciones de mi Govierno, a quienes acaloró bajo de su patrocinio, y amparo, inspriandoles el equivoco concepto de que el era el Capitan General de aquella Provincia.” Morphi to S.or Gov. y Capitan General Vertiz, Buenos Aires, 4 January 1773 in AGN 9-4-3-5.
29 Any establishment in the Ygatimí area needed the importation of cattle, mules, etc. as large livestock did not flourish in this region. I am informed by Dr. Domingo Rivarola, a prominent Paraguayan scholar and scion of a ranching family with roots in the colonial era, that the lack of salt licks in the Alto Paraná watershed of this region precluded an effective cattle industry. If so, this also explains why not until the late nineteenth century was there really any concerted development of this area—and then mainly for its yerba mate resources.
30 “Declaración” of Pedro Xavier de Rojas Aranda, Asunción, 12 September 1770 in ΑΝΑ-Nueva Encuademación, volumen 524. Hereafter cited as ANA-NE 524. Morphi was outraged at this defense by Rojas and demanded action against an Asunción presbítero, Francisco Amancio González, who helped Rojas prepare his insulting declaration. Morphi to Dean y Cabildo Eclesiástico Govierno Episcopal, Asunción, 24 September 1770, also in ANA-NE 524.
31 “Ynstrucciones y ordenes que el Theniente de Governación de la Villa de Curuguatí debe observar &,” Governor Morphi, Asunción, 1770 in ANA-SH 144.
32 “Bando,” Governor Morphi, Asunción, 1 June 1779 in ANA-SH 144.
33 Viola, p. 72.
34 Informe of the cabildo of Asunción to the Council of the Indies, Asunción, 13 July 1772 in AGI-BA 192. Much of the Asunción cabildo’s concern appears to be driven by fear of Portuguese penetration into the rich yerbales of the headwaters of the Jejuí and Ypané rivers.
35 Pinedo’s authority and control is even more striking when one considers that it was under his administration that some of the first concrete steps against the continuance of the traditional encomienda were taken. Those actions were bitterly protested. Saeger, James R., “Survival and Abolition: The Eighteenth Century Paraguayan Encomienda,” The Americas, 38:1 (July 1981), pp. 69–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36 See various “declaraciones” of curuguatano cabildantes and members of the militia stationed in that area in November of 1773. “Expediente sobre informaciones tomadas en Curuguatí respecto a los Portugueses de Ygatimí, Ano 1773,” in ANA-SH 139. On a visita to Curuguatí in 1774, Pinedo conducted his own investigation of the charges against de la Rosa. The upshot was a severe punishment of a cabildante of that villa who had acted against de la Rosa in a “spirit of vengeance.” Pinedo, Curuguatí, May 1774 in ANA-SH 139.
37 De la Rosa to Pinedo, Curuguatí, 2 February 1774 in AGI-BA 540. Pinedo to de la Rosa, Asunción, 16 December 1776 in AGI-BA 543.
38 Pinedo to Council of Indies, Asunción, 29 July 1774 in AGI-BA 540.
39 Aguirre, pp. 223–225. Almeida, pp. 148–149.
40 Beverina, Juan, La expedición de don Pedro de Cevallos (en 1776–1777) (Buenos Aires: Editoral Rioplatense, 1977),Google Scholar passim. Gammalson, Hialmar Edmundo, El virrey Cevallos (Buenos Aires: Editorial Plus Ultra, 1977), pp. 162–182.Google Scholar
41 Pinedo to Cevallos, Asunción, 29 August 1777 in AGI-BA 543. The Paraguayan governor actually had begun the financial preparation for a possible expedition in March of that year. “Cuenta en Relación de los gastos …,” Asunción, March-December 1777 in ANA-SH 143. He evidently did keep expenses as low as possible since the Asunción Treasury was in the black for 1777, even with the extraordinary costs of the expedition. “Cuenta del año de 1777,” Ministro de R.I Hacienda Dn. Martin Joseph de Aramburu, Asunción in AGI-BA 451.
42 Cevallos to Pinedo, Fuerte de Santa Teresa, 3 September 1777 in AGN 9-5-3-7. The viceroy was careful to see that the royal official in charge of the mails officially acknowledged the transmission of that order by passing it through the latter’s hands in the new viceregal capital. Diego de Salas to Cevallos, Buenos Aires, 7 October 1777 in AGN 9-5-3-7. From Buenos Aires the directive travelled overland northward on 6 October. One may accept at face value this cumbersome transmission as simple compliance with bureaucratic form. However, since a mounted courier could have sped that order from Santa Teresa directly through the Misiones more rapidly, it is more likely that Cevallos was deliberately giving Pinedo as much time as possible for the conquest of Ygatimí before the Paraguayan governor officially knew of the armistice. Cevallos, experienced in platine matters and a competent soldier, well knew that a fait acompli had a way of becoming permanent, regardless of diplomatic negotiation after the fact.
43 Pinedo to Ceballos, Asunción, 28 December 1777 in AGI-BA 58.
44 Pinedo to Gálvez, Campamento de Mandiho, 22 September 1777 in AGI-BA 543.
45 “Yntimación” of Pinedo, Campamento al frente Ygatimí, 16 October 1777 in AGI-BA 543.
46 “Estado que manifiesta el que tenia la Plaza de los Plazeres de Ygatimí …. ” Pinedo, Ygatimí, 27 October 1777 in AGI-BA 543.
47 Order of Pinedo, Asunción, 23 December 1777 in AGI-BA 53, and Pinedo to Cevallos, Asunción, 28 December 1777 in AGI-BA 58. There is no reason to doubt Pinedo’s word that the captured Portuguese did not wish to return to Ygatimí. Conditions were wretched there, as testified to by a former Portuguese officer who had inspected that site earlier. José Custodio de Sá e Faria to Viceroy Cevallos, Buenos Aires, 25 November 1777 in AGI-BA 57.
48 José de Gálvez (?) to Pinedo, Aranjuez, 3 June 1778 in AGI-BA 543. A brief addendum to this note stated, “Contestesele manifestandole la gratitud del Rey.” Regardless of Paraguayan complaints about the service of Pinedo—those complaints mainly from encomenderos and the cabildo of Asunciónãhis governorship was so well esteemed by superiors that he was appointed to the presidencia of the Audiencia of Charcas, unfortunately dying before assuming that post.
49 Viceroy Marquis de Lavradio to Cevallos, Rio de Janeiro, 8 January 1778 in AGI-BA 58.
50 Gálvez to Cevallos, Aranjuez, 7 June 1778 in AGI-BA 543.
51 As for Ygatimi, the focus of so much concern to Paraguayan governors in the 1760s and 1770s, little was done to maintain an effective occupation of this region. The movement of the province to the north along the Paraguay River, and subsequent exploitation of the yerba mate and cattle frontiers inland from the mouths of the Jejuí, Ypané and Aquidabán Rivers diverted economic attention from the remote Ygatimí region. See Cooney, Jerry W., “North to the Yerbales: The Exploitation of the Paraguayan Frontier, 1776–1810,” in Guy, Donna J. and Sheridan, Thomas, eds., Contested Ground: Comparative Frontiers on the Northern and Southern Edges of the Spanish Empire (Tucson, University of Arizona Press, 1998), pp. 135–149 Google Scholar, passim. Even so, yerberos out of Curuguatí continued to exploit this region, and utilized this “back door” to the Paraná for the illegal transport, of yerba mate down the Alto Paraná to the south, thus evading provincial duties on this commodity. “Razón de los Tercios de yerba que salieron de esta Provincia en el último quinquenio,” Ministros Prales de R.I Hacienda Pedro de Oscariz and José Elizalde, Asunción, 18 November 1808 in ANA-NE 1790. Militia patrols out of Curuguatí also kept an eye on this region. Marqués de ? to governor Lázaro de Ribera of Paraguay, Buenos Aires, 16 May 1799 in ANA-NE 256. The Spanish commander of the Third Division of the Joint Boundary Commission, Félix de Azara, was well aware of this region’s immediate history and worked diligently, and eventually successfully, to establish Paraguay’s northeastern boundary at the Paraná and the Cordillera de Mbaracayú. Félix de Azara to Viceroy Nicolás de Arredondo, Asunción, 12 April 1791; and same to same, Curuguatí, 20 June 1791, both in de Azara, Félix, Memoria sobre el estado rural del Río de la Plata y otros informes (Buenos Aires: Bajel, 1943), pp. 106–109 and 112–119, respectivelyGoogle Scholar. The history of that commission has not yet been written and such a study would throw much light upon Spanish and Portuguese policy in the Alto Paraná in the 1780s and 1790s, as well as being an important contribution to the frontier study of this region.
52 For the concern about Portuguese expansion down the Paraguay River in the late eighteenth century see Frakes, Mark A., “Governor Ribera and the War of Oranges on Paraguay’s Frontiers,” The Americas 45:4 (April 1989), passim.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
53 As late as 1800–1801, on the eve of the War of Oranges with Portugal, fully one third of the vecinos of the province claimed exemption from military service by benefit of contracts with the royal tobacco monopoly. “Hijos del país” were sick and tired of military service. See Frakes, pp. 494–495.
54 The commonly accepted interpretation of an organic, evolutionary origin of Paraguayan nationalism may be traced to the influence of one particular scholar of the colonial period, Dr. Efraím Cardozo. His superiority as a historian, as well as a subtle Catholic and humanistic approach, has had a tremendous impact upon historians of Paraguay, both native and foreign. Since his synthesizing efforts of the 1950s and 1960s, new studies on colonial elites, the encomienda, the activities of the Franciscans, the provincial economy, and the era of the intendentes—just to mention a few—have appeared. Nonetheless, for an overview of the colony, and one that is now dated and suspect, we are still forced to rely upon Cardozo—in particular his often cited work, El Paraguay colonial: las raices de la nacionalidad. It is now time for some historian of Paraguay to approach the whole of the colonial experience with the new knowledge we possess.
55 Confirming the traditional view of a vast hecatomb of the Paraguayan population as a result of the War of the Triple Alliance is Whighman, Thomas L. and Potthast, Barbara, “The Paraguayan Rosetta Stone: New Insights into the Demographics of the Paraguayan War, 1864–1870,” Latin American Research Review 34:1 (1999): 174–186.Google Scholar
56 A neglected aspect of Paraguayan history is Francia’s inheritance of benefits of intendencia reforms. When the first great dictator of Paraguay assumed full power in 1814, he ruled a state more accustomed to centralized power through a tradition of strong, effective gobernadores-intendentes, and possessing a more pervasive bureaucracy, a more efficient military system, and a stronger economy that in the pre-intendencia era. The Paraguay of 1814 was greatly different than that which greater either Morphi or Pinedo in the 1760s and 1770s.