Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T03:30:19.422Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bureaucracy and Disaster: Mexico City and the Flood of 1629

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

Louisa Hoberman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The foundation of cities and the articulation of urban networks are a persistent theme in the history of colonial Spanish America. As administrative-social service centers and as foci of trade and, sometimes, manufacturing, cities were the meeting ground of the policies of the metropolis and the concerns of its subjects, the local creoles, castas, and Indians. This mediating position has influenced the kinds of questions asked about cities by Latin American urban historians. Those who, with this author, believe that the city's administrative function was paramount, consider the following questions most useful in determining the role of urban centers within the Spanish empire: was city government merely the agent of the Crown, was it the spokesman of a local oligarchy, or did it permit some degree of popular participation? Was the operation of municipal government characterized by co-operation or by conflict? What was the relative importance of formal institutions created by the Crown, such as the cabildo and the real acuerdo, and informal institutions, such as the family and the client system, in the conduct of city business?

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Latin American Studies , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , November 1974 , pp. 211 - 230
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Richard, Morse, ‘Recent Research on Latin American Urbanization: A Selective Survey with Commentary’, Latin American Research Review, 4 (Spring 1972),8.Google Scholar

2 Studies such as Stuart, Schwartz, ‘Magistracy and Society in Colonial Brazil’, Hispanic American Historical Review, 50 (11 1970), 715–30,Google Scholar and Stephanie, Blank, ‘Kinship and Political Influence in Colonial Caracas, 1580–1620’, paper presented at the Central States Historical Association, 05 1973,Google Scholar trace the informal, personal ties which some historians consider of chief importance (James, Lockhart, ‘The Social History of Colonial Spanish America’, Latin American Research Review, 7 (Spring 1972), 7).Google Scholar Others suggest that the colonial city is best understood as the arena of tensions between informal and formal institutions, ‘legalism and personalism, populism and elitism, public equity and clientage’. (Richard, Morse, ‘A Prolegomenon to Latin American Urban History’, Hispanic American Historical Review, 52 (08 1972), 371.)Google Scholar

3 Archivo General de Indias, Audiencia de Mexico, legajo 27, Viceroy Velasco the Younger to Crown, , 3 09 1608. Hereinafter cited as AGI, Mexico, 27.Google Scholar

4 Harris, L. E., ‘Land Drainage and Reclamation’, in A History of Technology, ed. by Charles, Singer et al. (5 vols., Oxford, 1957–1958), 111, 311–20;Google ScholarJaime, Vicens Vives, ed., Historia social y económica de España y América (4 Vols., Barcelona, 1957–1961), 111, 185–86;Google ScholarAndré, Maistre, Le Canal des Deux Mers (Toulouse, 1968), p. 93;Google ScholarGösta, E. Sanström, Tunnels (New York, 1963), p. 73.Google Scholar

5 Alexander, de Humboldt, Political Essay on the Kingdom of New Spain (4 vols., 2nd ed., London, 1814), 11, 95.Google Scholar

6 Hamilton, Earl J., American Treasure and the Price Revolution in Spain (Cambridge, Mass. 1934), p. 34;CrossRefGoogle ScholarHuguette, and Pierre, Chaunu, Séville et l'Atlantique, 1504–1650 (8 vols., Paris, 1955–1959), VIII:1:1, 764. Much of this income was spent on local administration and subsidies and never reached Spain.Google Scholar

7 What was not understood until the twentieth century was that the best solution was to redistribute the water within the Valley, where it was badly needed to replenish the dried out soil. Today Mexico City's most serious problem is lack of water. Enrique, Beltrán, El hombre y su ambiente. Ensayo sobre el valle de Mexico (Mexico, 1958), p. 253;Google ScholarDavid, J. Fox, ‘Man-Water Relationships in Metropolitan Mexico’, Geographical Review, 55 (10 1965), 540.Google Scholar

8 For an account of this campaign, see Louisa, Hoberman, ‘City Planning in Spanish Colonial Government; The Response of Mexico City to the Problem of Floods, 1607–37’ (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1972), Chap. III.Google Scholar

9 Archivo General de la Nación, Desagüc, Tomo 3, Expediente I, Folio 5. Hereinafter cited as AGN, Desagüe, 3, 1, 5.

10 Rccopilación de leyes de los reynos de las Indias (3 vols., Madrid, 1943),Google Scholar Lib. II, Tit. XVI, Leyes X, XII; Lib. IV, Tit. XVI, Ley II; Juan Francisco Montemayor y Córdoba de Cuenca, comp., Sumarios de las cedulas — (Mexico, 1678), Part II, 42, 50; Part III, 59.Google Scholar

11 AGI, Mexico, 2.

12 The regidor appointed by the cabildo to inspect the barrio of San Juan reported water levels from 2.7 to 8.3 feet throughout the city. AGI, Mexico, 3.

13 Actas de cabildo del ayuntarniento constitucional de Mexico (54 vols., Mexico, 1886–1911), XXVII, 171. Hereinafter cited as AC.Google Scholar

14 Alonso, Franco, Segunda parte de la historia de la provincia de Santiago de Mexico — (Mexico, 1900), p. 452.Google Scholar

15 AGI, Mexico, 3.

16 The figure of 20,000 Spanish families is high in view of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century estimates for the white population of the city (Charles, Gibson, The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule (Stanford, 1964), p. 381)Google Scholar and of two other figures. A copy of Gomez de Trasmonte's map (Wieder, F. C., ed., Monurnenta cartográfica (4 vols., The Hague, 1925–1933), IV, 110) has the notation that there were 10,000 vecinos and 9,000 casas de indios in Mexico in 1628. The number of Indians corresponds fairly closely to other estimates.Google ScholarGibson, , Aztecs, p. 379. In 1636, the cabildo reported 10,000 vecinos in the city. AC, XXX, 214. As for the Indians, there were about 25,740 in the city proper at the time.Google ScholarGibson, , Aztecs, p. 140.Google ScholarFrancisco, Alegre (Historia de la provincia de la compañia de Jesús de Nueva España (4 vols., Rome, 1956–1960), II, 404) states that 27,000 persons remained in the city after the downpour of 21 September, but he gives no source for this information. No one knows the population of the whole city in 1629. We have a reliable figure for the Indian inhabitants in Gibson and we might accept the number of vecinos as 10,000, but we have no vecino: persons ratio, nor do we know the number of mixed bloods.Google Scholar

17 Jean-Pierre, Berthe, ‘La Peste de 1643 en Michoacán: Examen crítico de una tradición’, in Historia y Sociedad en el mundo de habla española. Homenaje a José Miranda, ed. by Bernardo, Garcia et al. (Mexico, 1970).Google Scholar

18 Archivo de Notarias, Andrés, Moreno, 3 10, 1629; 10 11, 1629; 2 02, 1630; 8 03 1630. Hereinafter cited as AN.Google Scholar

19 AN, Andrés, Moreno, 15 02 1630; 22 08, 1630; 26 11, 1630;Google ScholarJuan, Perez de Rivera, 30 01 1631; 17 06, 1631;Google ScholarGabriel, Lopez Ahedo, 8 06 1640.Google Scholar

20 AC, XXVII, 186, 239–43.

21 Ibid., XXVII, 156, 171–72; Alegre, Historia, II, 404;Google ScholarRichard, Konetzke, ed., Colección de documentos — (3 vols., Madrid, 1953–1962), II, Part 1, 335.Google Scholar

22 Estimates of the Indian population of the city (Gibson, , Aztecs, pp. 461–62)Google Scholar do not show any lasting decline over this period. The often cited statement that only 600 tributaries remained in the city comes from a report of 1631, when the flood was in a severe stage, and it does not distinguish between deaths and migration. Silvio, Zavala and María, Castelo, eds., Fuentes para la historia del trabajo en Nueva España (8 vols., Mexico, 1939–1946), VI, 620. As note 16 above suggests, the permanent white migration was not significant.Google Scholar

23 Allen, Barton, Communities in Disaster (New York, 1969), p. 66 ff.Google Scholar

24 AC, XXVII, 139–41. on 8 October the regidores asked for 3,500 CSOS more. Ibid., p. 144. Alegre, , Historia, II, 405; AGI, Mexico, 3.Google Scholar

25 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 49.

26 AC, XXVII, 169−70; AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 4.

27 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 50.

28 AC, XXVII, 156–58, 183–85.

29 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 44–50, 60, 65; Bernabé, Cobo, Obras (2 vols., Madrid, 1956–1957), II, 469; AGI, Mexico, 3.Google Scholar

30 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 45–53.

31 AC, XXVIII, 148–49.

32 Ibid., p. 155–58.

33 Ibid., 148–51; AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 42, 93, 104; Franco, , Historia, p. 456; AGI, Mexico, 147.Google Scholar

34 AN, Andrés Moreno, 8 January, 1630, and 7 September, 1630; Juan, Perez de Rivera, 16 08, 1630; 30 01 1631; AC, XXVII, 142−45.Google Scholar

35 Woodrow, Borah, Social Welfare and Social Obligation in New Spain: A Tentative Assessment, Center for Latin American Studies, No. 282 (Berkeley, 1966), p. 52.Google Scholar

36 AC, XXVII, 145.

37 Ibid., pp. 155–56.

38 AGI, Mexico AGN, Historia 1, 18, 28.

39 See Flusche, Della M., “The Cabildo and Public Health in 17th Century Santiago, Chile”, The Americas, 29 (10, 1972), 176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

40 In 1645, in Quito a combination of earthquake, epidemic, and volcanic eruption caused a Jesuit to offer himself as a penitential victim. John, Leddy Phelan, The Kingdom of Quito in the 17th Century (Madison, 1968), pp. 191–92.Google Scholar See Kendrick, T. D., The Lisbon Earthquake (London, 1955), p. 55 ff. for a description of the clergy using the occasion of a disaster to frighten people out of their wits.Google Scholar

41 Barton, , Disaster, p. 83.Google Scholar

42 Fernando, Cepeda and Fernando, Alfonso Carrillo, Relación universal legitima — ( 2vols, Mexico, 1637), I, Part II, 27.Google Scholar

43 AC, XXVII, 139; AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 45–64.

44 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 59–60; AGI, Mexico, 147.

45 Zavala, , Trabajo, VI, 286, 457, 461, 610; AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 58.Google Scholar

46 Zavala, , Trabajo, VI, 443. 445, 510; AGN, Desagüe 3, 3, 19, 19, 40–41, 52.Google Scholar

47 AC, XXVII, 191, 199.

48 AGI, Mexico, 147.

49 AGI, Mexico, 3.

50 AC, XXVII, 145–47; AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 57.

51 AC, XXVII, 148–49.

52 Ibid., p. 151.

53 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 64–65.

54 AC, XXVII, 194–96. The usual cost of wine was set between two and three reals a cuartillo; a cuartillo was about nineteen fluid ounces.

55 Ibid., pp. 241–251; Andrés, San Miguel, ‘Informe inédito dado en 1636 —’, Anales del Museo Nacional de México, 1st Series, 4 (1887), 174.Google Scholar

56 Cooper, Donald B., Epidemic Disease in Mexico City (Austin, 1968), pp. 8–9, 81;Google ScholarAgustín, Vetancurt, Teatro mexicano (3 vols., Madrid, 1960), III, 335;Google ScholarEnrico, Martinez, Reportoria de los tiempos e historia natural de Nueva España (Mexico, 1606), pp. 179–80.Google Scholar

57 Cepeda, , Relación legítima, I, Part II, 37–47; AC, XVII, 254–55, 260; AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 101, 112.Google Scholar

58 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 85, 99, 130−35; General de Parte, 7, 258, 362; Zavala, , Trabajo, VI, 512, 527. Two hundred and fifty were taken from Cholula, AGN, Desagüe, 3, 5, 28–69.Google Scholar

50 AGN, General de Parte, 7, 61, 189–93, 256–58.

60 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 151, 191.

61 Ibid., pp. 140–42.

62 Ibid., p. 130.

63 AC, XXVII, pp. 172–73, 256; AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 82. Just at this time too the farmer of the tax for the dcsagüuc was discovered to be using the proceeds to pay his personal debts. Ibid., pp. 61–63.

64 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 58–59. 100, 110–11, 129; AC, XXVII, 215–30, XXX, 144.

65 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 97, 113; Fabian, de Fonseca y Carlos, de Urrutia, Historia general de real hacienda (6 vols., Mexico, 1845–1855), V, 369–70. A pipa was about 124 gallons.Google Scholar

66 AGN, General de Parte, 7, 47–48, 78.

67 Cepeda, , Relación legítima, I, Part II, 42; Part III, 3–4.Google Scholar

68 Ibid., Part III, 7–8; AC, XXX, 173.

69 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 74–75.

70 Ibid., p. 91. Cepeda, , Relación legítima, I, Part III, 5–6.Google Scholar

71 AGI, Mexico, 147.

72 Alberto, Maria Carreño, Cedulario de los siglos XVI y XVII (Mexico, 1947), pp. 333–34;Google ScholarCepeda, , Relación legítima, I, Part III, 9–11.Google Scholar

73 Andrés, Cavo, Los tres siglos de Mexico durante el gobierno español (Mexico, 1949), p. 89.Google Scholar

74 These regidores were: Francisco Guerrero Dávila, Alonso Galván, Gerónimo López de Peralta, Diego Moreno de Monroy, Alonso Valdés, and Fernando Angulo Reinoso (Guillermo, Fernández de Recas, Mayorazgos de la Nueva España (Mexico, 1965), pp. 61–233, passim)Google Scholar and Francisco Escudero de Figueroa, Alonso Rivera y Abendaño, Francisco Solis y Barraza, and Rafael Trejo (Dominic, Nwasike, Mexico City Council, 1580–1640: A Study in Alder-manic Background and Performance’ (unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of (Wisconsin, 1972)).Google Scholar

75 Genaro, Gonzalez, ‘Huehuetoca —, un pueblo más allá de Cuautitlán’, Boletín de la sociedad mexicana de geografía y estadistica, 77 (03, 1954), 224.Google Scholar

76 Cepeda, , Relación legítima, I, Part III, 12.Google Scholar

77 AC, XXVII, 156, 171–72.

78 Gonzalez, , ‘Huehuetoca’, p. 221.Google Scholar

79 AGN, Desagüe, 3, 3, 85, 114, 131.

80 Ibid., 6, 1, 31–33; San, Miguel, ‘Informe’, p. 189.Google Scholar

81 Memoria histórica, técnica y administrativa de las obras del desagüc del valle de México, 1449–1900 (2 vols., Mexico, 1902), 1, 217–19, 239, 250.Google Scholar

82 Beltrán, , Hombre y ambiente. pp. 173–75; ‘Fox, Man-Water Relationships’ p. 543; El Dia, 10 09, 1973. I wish to thank Ing. Francisco García Meza, Jefe, División Hidrométrica del Valle de México, and Ing. Guillermo Flores, Jefe, Oficina de Prensa, of the Secretaria de Recursos Hidráulicos, for their assistance in giving me a tour of the drainage works, past and on-going, of the Valley this past summer.Google Scholar

83 Memoria, I, 378, 529, 624–25, 655–58.Google Scholar