See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301903449

Philip II and Indigenous Access to Royal Justice: Considering the Process of

Decision-Making in the Spanish Empire

Article  in  Colonial Latin American Review · October 2015

DOI: 10.1080/10609164.2016.1150035

CITATIONS READS

12 600

1 author:

Caroline Cunill
École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales
64 PUBLICATIONS   216 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Native Languages, Interpreters, and Justice in Latin America (XVIth-XXIth Century) View project

Envoi, réception et circulation de l'art plumassier entre la Nouvelle-Espagne et l'Europe aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Caroline Cunill on 22 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Colonial Latin American Review

ISSN: 1060-9164 (Print) 1466-1802 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ccla20

Philip II and Indigenous Access to Royal Justice:

Considering the Process of Decision-Making in the
Spanish Empire

Caroline Cunill

To cite this article: Caroline Cunill (2015) Philip II and Indigenous Access to Royal Justice:
Considering the Process of Decision-Making in the Spanish Empire, Colonial Latin American
Review, 24:4, 505-524, DOI: 10.1080/10609164.2016.1150035

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10609164.2016.1150035

Published online: 04 May 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 24

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ccla20

Download by: [Tulane University] Date: 20 May 2016, At: 13:04

 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW, 2015
VOL. 24, NO. 4, 505–524
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10609164.2016.1150035

Philip II and Indigenous Access to Royal Justice: Considering

the Process of Decision-Making in the Spanish Empire
Caroline Cunill
Université du Mans

Introduction
In the Gobierno de México section of the General Archive of the Indies in Seville, one finds
a petition written on 4 April 1587. Its author was Bustamante de Andrada, lieutenant to
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

the governor of Yucatán, don Francisco de Solís.1 In this document, Bustamante requested
that the position of defensor de indios, or Indian defender, be restored in the province and,
in an attempt to convince the Council of the Indies, he listed all the difficulties created by
the suspension of the position. To expedite processing of Bustamante’s entreaty, the coun-
cilors produced documents that were attached to the petition and which now form the file
under analysis here: a summary of the lieutenant’s petition and copies of an original con-
sultation regarding the position of Indian defender, along with the resulting 1582 suspen-
sion decree.2 Although the 1582 decree is well known to anyone familiar with the Juzgado
General de Indios [General Indian Court], the consultation that motivated the suspension
has remained unpublished to this day.3
It is, however, a fundamental document for our understanding of the history of the
institutionalization of the General Indian Court, as it presents the arguments put
forward by the Council of the Indies in favor of the suspension of the position of
Indian defender, as well as King Philip II’s opinion on the matter. Until a few decades
ago, the matter of indigenous justice was essentially addressed from the perspective of
the history of ideas, with special emphasis on the person of Fray Bartolomé de las
Casas.4 However, since Lira (1972), Stern (1982), and Borah’s (1983) pioneering works,
a number of studies have analyzed this question from a more political and institutional
perspective, paying special attention to indigenous agency.5 The article thus contributes
to this recent historiography that analyzes indigenous justice from the perspective of
the creation of specific institutions, the role of intermediaries, and the uses of official dis-
courses by indigenous actors themselves.
But the 1587 file also provides insight on the tripartite relationship that arose between
the drafting of reports on the Americas, their assessment by the Council of the Indies, and
executive decisions made by Philip II. Given the complexity of this relationship, a series of
reports, consultations, and decrees drafted in the 1580s, all focused on indigenous justice,
will be examined. As noted by Arndt Brendecke, ‘the connection between knowledge and
the formation of the State has been surprisingly ill explained so far,’ as frequently a com-
parison is drawn ‘in a simplifying way between knowledge and power,’ without

CONTACT Caroline Cunill cunillcaroline@gmail.com

© 2016 Taylor and Francis on behalf of CLAR
 506 C. CUNILL

‘demonstrating in detail that the knowledge accumulated was effectively integrated into
the politico-administrative decision-making process’ (2012, 35). These considerations
link to another historiographical trend focused on the regional and transatlantic circula-
tion of persons and information, their integration within existing networks or factions
inside the Spanish royal court, and their impact on the legal and institutional construction
of the Spanish Empire.6
What reports, then, formed the basis of the consultation that led to the suspension of
the position of Indian defender in 1582? How were these documents discussed by the
Council of the Indies? To what degree does their handling reflect the interests of the mon-
arch’s advisors? What stance did Philip II adopt with regard to his councilors’ proposals?
Were there tensions at the highest levels of imperial power? As a result of what processes
were these debates laid down in legal provisions? I submit three hypotheses: first, I argue
that Philip II’s notable concern for indigenous justice stems from the Junta Magna, the
reformation of the Council of the Indies, and the subsequent reception of the so-called
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

Relaciones geográficas; second, that the factionalism that characterized the exercise of
monarchical power and the existence of competing networks in the Spanish court
might explain the stilted transition from an informative to a regulatory phase in colonial
governance; and finally that, despite the systematic effort made to process information in
the 1580s, the aforementioned tensions led to the implementation of a somewhat contra-
dictory policy in terms of indigenous access to the royal courts and also the legal purview
of the Indian defensor or Protector.

A Brief Description of the 1587 File

The 1587 consultation file lends itself well to an analysis of the relationship between infor-
mation generation and legal process. This is true in part because in sources of this kind, it
was common for the particulars that generated the debate to be recorded along with the
councilors’ opinions and the decision of the monarch (or its postponement while further
information was pending). According to José Joaquín Real Díaz, the consultation is, there-
fore, the ‘act—and the written record thereof—whereby the bodies that advise the king
[ … ] transmit to him their opinions regarding a given matter’ and provide him with ‘suf-
ficient elements so that he may proclaim on the matter to be documented’ (1991, 72–76).
Thus, the value of consultations stems from their internal character, as they ‘reflect the
thoughts of the Council regarding a specific matter and the vicissitudes in the development
of a given issue before the monarch legislates on it definitively’ (Heredia Herrera 1972,
1:12). Despite this richness, historians of Spanish America have paid relatively little atten-
tion to this genre of documentation. In fact, besides the works quoted above by Herrera
Heredia and Real Díaz (focused on diplomatic matters), consultations have generally
been used in biographical studies of Philip II, as well as in institutional analyses of the
functioning of the Council of the Indies.7 Only Silvio Zavala provided reflections on a con-
sultation from the 1590s in which Philip II prohibited any attempts to impose the use of
the Spanish language among the Indians (1946, 159–65). More recently, on the basis of a
series of consultations from 1550 to 1650, Brendecke demonstrated the decisive influence
of the councilors in transmitting information to the monarch and, subsequently, in laying
down an issue in legal provisions. The author calls this process the ‘communicative setting’
(2012, 414–78).
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 507

Given that the organization of the 1587 file reflects the way in which the Council of the
Indies processed the information arriving from the New World, a detailed description of
the document is in order. The file is fifteen pages long and is divided into three sections
with three different notes attached. Bustamante’s petition, which is ten pages long, is pre-
ceded by the following note: ‘From the Licenciado Bustamante, former lieutenant of the
governor of Yucatán, whose entreaty is for all information on this important matter to
be seen, at His Majesty’s service.’ The second note introduces a three-page summary of
the petition prepared by a clerk of the Council; it states: ‘Abridgement of a petition
written by Licenciado Bustamante de Andrada, former lieutenant of Francisco de Solís,
former governor of the Province of Yucatán, addressed to His Majesty from the city of
Mérida in said province and dated 4 April 1587.’ The final note precedes two pages of
legal documents relating to the matter at hand, which were attached to the file at the
request of the king; it says: ‘Information regarding the order to remove the office of
Protector.’
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

It is worthy of note that the clerk of the Council of the Indies left a wide margin both on
the summary of Bustamante’s petition and in the copies of the legal documents he attached
so that Philip II could comment on the texts, and there are indeed notes written in the
margins of these documents in a different hand, presumably that of the king or of his sec-
retary Mateo Vázquez.8 The following annotation appears alongside the first paragraph of
the summary of the petition: ‘With reference to the Protectors, submit all matters decreed
upon so that the Council may see them.’ This explains why the last section of the file con-
tains the legal texts relating to the position of Indian defender. These were, in fact, working
documents intended to assist the monarch in making the most appropriate decision on the
matter. The final section, in turn, is divided into four clearly defined texts, with different
formats and separate headings: the first is the original report that was the basis for the
debate on the position of defender (‘Copy of a chapter of certain briefs provided to His
Majesty regarding affairs requiring resolution in the Indies’); the second is the consultation
by the Council of the Indies on the matter (‘Copy of what was consulted with His Majesty
with regard to the aforementioned’); the third is the king’s response (‘What His Majesty
responded’); and the final one is the decree setting forth the king’s wishes (‘Copy of the
decree issued in relation hereto’).9
The 1587 file, therefore, actually contains two consultations: the first is the original con-
sultation prompted by receipt of Bustamante’s 1586 petition, in which the latter proposes
the reestablishment of the position of the Indian defender; the second is a copy of a pre-
vious consultation (probably from 1581, as we shall see subsequently) relating to the
matter of the protectorate, which was drawn on to respond to the new petition. This is
emphasized by some of the formal elements of the file. Only the first document has the
main characteristics of an original consultation, namely the Council’s recommendations
in the main body of the text and the monarch’s responses in the margin (Brendecke
2012, 232 and 464). In the second section, the king’s comments are incorporated into
the main body of the text, so that the margins are again left blank for Philip II to add
further comments (which, incidentally, he did not do). This alteration to the customary
format explains why the clerk judged it necessary to add separating notes between each
unit of text. Finally, the inclusion of the decree that resulted from the consultation consti-
tutes another departure from convention, as the legal provision relating to the king’s
orders would generally be issued in an act after the consultation process.
 508 C. CUNILL

What stated, then, the unpublished report that persuaded the Spanish Crown to
suspend the position of Indian defender in 1582? According to its author, the ‘imposition
of Indian Protectors’ took place at the expense of the natives ‘so that the Spanish may be
fed with the sweat of the Indians, as the salaries are the least of what they give and before
this they were able to support themselves better, with fewer taxes.’10 The report also men-
tions the inefficiency of the defenders, the excessive cost that payment of their salaries
implied for indigenous communities, and the supposed gifts that indigenous people
were required to offer to the officeholders. But the argument fails to mention that in
those years only half the cost of compensating the Indian defenders was defrayed by indi-
genous communities. The other half was paid by the Crown treasury (Cunill 2012a, 203–
10). Furthermore, the appointment of salaried, specialized officials to represent indigenous
subjects had come about precisely to prevent the abuses that were often committed against
the Indians by private lawyers (ibid., 60–79; Honores 2003; Gayol 2008). Nonetheless, the
Council ignored all considerations of this kind and, faced with the matter at hand, declared
that it ‘refrained from approving the office of protector and from providing those offices,
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

and has entrusted the protection of the Indians to the Audiencias [royal courts] and its
fiscales [magistrates], and that once again decrees shall be issued for the purposes
thereof and the officeholders shall be removed as protectors.’ Thus, with a single stroke
of the pen, the king’s advisors proposed to put an end to three decades of legal experimen-
tation revolving around the position of the Indian defender.
Philip II’s position on the matter, however, was not so categorical. He began by
acknowledging his ignorance of the position of defender, and only then addressed the
argument by the Council of the excessive burden that the salaries of these officials rep-
resented for indigenous communities: ‘I do not know if the office mentioned here is
necessary, as it may only serve to increase costs and servitude for the Indians.’ The king
went on to add some personal reflections on the jurisdictional conflicts that had arisen
due to the creation of the position, since, as he understood it, ‘these protectors tend to
have differences [of opinion] with ordinary judges, as has been seen.’11 This observation
implies that Philip II was not content to rely on the information provided to him by his
advisors, but instead tried to keep abreast of developments in the Americas and to cross-
check items of ‘news’ so that the decisions he made were as rational as possible. It is worth
remembering that although the Indian defenders did not enjoy jurisdiction of any kind,
their frequent interventions on behalf of indigenous interests often caused a great deal
of tension in local circles of government. In the final analysis, however, the king preferred
to delegate the decision to his Council in order ‘to find the remedy that is most appropriate
and then to put it into action.’
Consequently, a decree published on 27 May 1582 ordered the immediate suspension of
all Indian defenders in the Americas. It was no accident that the decree cited practically
verbatim the arguments that had been deliberated on in the Council’s consultation. As
noted by García Gallo, in the legal documents of the time, ‘the exposition of premises
was not merely informative,’ but allowed a ‘presentation of the situation’ that the provision
was intended to regulate or resolve. In other words, the aim was to ‘substantiate the neces-
sity of the new law and provide timely arguments for its rational basis to be assessed’
(1972, 229).12 Thus, the 1582 decree declared that the ‘office of protector of the
Indians’ had been ‘created to the detriment of the latter,’ causing them ‘notable
damages,’ and because it was the king’s will for his indigenous subjects to be ‘relieved
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 509

of the cost and suffering that follows therefrom,’ the officials in question were suspended.13
As far as we have been able to ascertain, the first suspension decree was sent to the gov-
ernor of Chile on 25 September 1581. Only later would similar orders be dispatched to the
royal courts of New Spain, La Plata, and Quito. In New Spain, the decree for the suspen-
sion of the Indian defenders was circulated on 27 May 1582.14

The Issue of Indigenous Access to the Royal Courts: Some Context

It should be remembered that, from the end of the 1560s, Philip II intended to rationalize
Spanish dominance in the New World. This task was entrusted to Juan de Ovando who
undertook a series of reforms that would lead to the reorganization of the Council of
the Indies, closely linked to a vast program to compile information. The cornerstone of
this drive for information was the dispatch to America of the detailed questionnaires
that would eventually allow the drafting of the famous Relaciones Geográficas.15 As Bren-
decke notes, from the 1570s, ‘the systematic compilation and availability of this knowledge
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

in the royal court and in the Council of the Indies [was] stated as a goal,’ the position of
head cosmographer and chronicler of the Indies was created, ordinances were established
making ‘the permanent description of these territories the duty of all American officials,’
and a start was made on the ‘codification of the law already in effect in the Americas’
(2012, 23–25).
In fact, in this attempt at reform considerable emphasis was placed on the question of
indigenous justice. It is well known that in 1566, the pro-Indian party, led by Bartolomé de
Las Casas and supported by Hernando de Barrionuevo, the Franciscan commissary at
court, the Augustinian Alonso de la Veracruz, and the Franciscan Alonso Maldonado
de Buendía, among others, exhorted Philip II to formulate a more consistent policy for
the New World, especially with regard to native peoples, an idea which was supported
by Pope Pius V.16 Among the friars’ concerns were the perpetuity of encomiendas and
the Indian payment of tithe (Schäfer 2003, 2:249–64; Munford 2009). But the question
of indigenous access to royal courts also featured in memorials presented in those
years, as indicated by the petitions submitted to the Council of the Indies by both Friar
Pedro de la Peña and Friar Alonso de la Veracruz. In 1564, Pedro de la Peña asked
Philip II to appoint Indian defenders in the Spanish court, as well as in the tribunals of
the New World (Ruiz Medrano 2002, 866). Two years later, in response to a letter orig-
inally addressed to Bartolomé de Las Casas by Martín de Arguto y de Mendieta, the
Indian defender of the New Kingdom of Granada, Friar Alonso de la Veracruz, also
appealed for the institutionalization of this office in America (Friede 1976, 5:367, 385).
Indeed, it is interesting to note that Bartolomé de Las Casas had brought together a power-
ful network, which included both civilians and ecclesiastics who sought to consolidate the
position of Indian Protector not only in America, but also in the Spanish court. After the
death of Las Casas, these persons took charge of the project, which aimed to institutiona-
lize this office (Cunill 2012c).
In response to this increasing pressure, Juan de Ovando was appointed to visit the
Council of the Indies and the Junta Magna was organized shortly afterwards (Schäfer
2003, 1:136–71; Poole 2011, 116–37).17 As was to be expected, the issue of the Indians’
relationship to the justice system was discussed on both occasions. Although the question-
naires drawn up by Ovando for the purpose of reforming the Council of the Indies have
 510 C. CUNILL

been lost, thirty-one testimonies that were among the responses sent to the Spanish Crown
between 1567 and 1568 can be found in the British Library (Poole 2011, 117). It is worthy
of note that some of the authors, like the priest Cristóbal Ayala de Espinosa, expressed
concerns about the insufficient number of officials providing justice to the native
people in the audiencia of Mexico, and the incessant abuses perpetrated by some of the
nahuatlatos or interpreters in those courts. Friar Francisco de Morales also asserted
that the Indians ‘have no obligation to contribute except to the support of the preaching
of the gospel and the administration of justice.’18 It should come as no surprise, then, that
in addition to payment of the tithe by the Indians and the perpetuity of the encomiendas,
the advisors of the Junta Magna also dealt with the issue of indigenous access to the Amer-
ican royal courts.19
Consequently, the questionnaires that Ovando and his collaborators sent to the Indies
from 1573 onward contained some aspects relating to this topic. In the ‘Ordinances for the
Formation of the Description of the Indies,’ promulgated on 3 July 1573, royal officials
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

were asked to write accounts of the indigenous pre-Hispanic kingdoms, kings, jurisdic-
tions, and forms of governance, as well as of the new indigenous councils, caciques,
Indian defenders, and alcaldes ordinarios de indios [mayors of the indigenous provinces].
The Indians were required to participate in drafting these registers.20 Although these
aspects almost disappeared from the 1577 questionnaire, a notification was circulated
on 23 September 1580, in which the Council of the Indies instructed the oidores
[judges] of the American royal courts to send ‘complete information on the customs
and traditions in terms of justice that the Indians had prior to the Spanish conquest,
since they shall continue to be governed thereby.’21 Similarly, on 4 March 1581 another
notification was sent instructing judges to draw up ‘a list of all the Spanish and Indian
towns within their jurisdiction, of the way in which justice is administered in them and
of the exercise, jurisdiction and salary of the positions of corregidor, alcalde mayor,
regidor perpétuo, and other officers, their titles and appointments and the length of
time they exercise said positions.’22 In relation to this point, it should be remembered
that in the early colonial period the authorities of the royal court of New Spain did not
hesitate to refer specific cases to indigenous judges for them to impart justice (Ruiz
Medrano 1991, 38; and 2010, 33–48). Also well-known is the decree issued in 1555,
whereby the Crown authorized for don Juan Apobazt and the other indigenous chiefs
of Verapaz ‘all that you have ordered and may order from now on concerning the
method of choosing a governor and justice among yourselves, following the days of the
aforementioned don Juan, and the matters and cases that in relation hereto you have
jointly ordered or may order by common consent, in all fairness and virtue.’23 There
can be little doubt, therefore, that indigenous access to justice was among Philip II’s pre-
occupations, and that this issue was incorporated into the Spanish Crown’s information
policy drafted by Juan de Ovando in the 1570s.
We thus agree with Pilar Ponce Leiva, who emphasized that the term ‘geographic,’
associated with those reports and popularized by Jiménez de la Espada toward the end
of the nineteenth century, masked the true scope of the project, which went far beyond
a territorial description. According to the author, ‘given the results obtained by the ques-
tionnaires, the almost complete focus on geographic issues at the time is no longer justi-
fied.’ Furthermore, Ponce Leiva believes that many reports, which have been studied as
‘isolated, sterile documents,’ were in fact the ‘product of an information policy pursued
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 511

by the State, one that relied on a range of mechanisms’ (1991, xxii, xxv). These consider-
ations force us to reconsider many documents that made their way to the Spanish royal
court in the 1580s, and which are not usually linked to the Relaciones Geográficas. This
might have been the case, for example, with the ‘description of the province and city of
Tlaxcala (ca. 1581–84)’ by Diego Muñoz Camargo (Kranz 2011), or with the ‘account
of some customs (1582)’ by Gaspar Antonio Chi, descendent of the Xiu from Maní,
Yucatán (Strecker and Artiega 1978). These reports contain extensive deliberations on
pre-Hispanic justice, and the link between the latter one and the relaciones geográficas
is evident, as Gaspar Antonio played a key role in the preparation of both texts.24
Alonso de Zorita’s Relation of New Spain, concluded in 1585, can also be considered
one of the results of the Spanish Crown’s information policy (Zorita 1999 [1585]). More-
over, Renzo Honores mentions a 1583 document drafted by Polo de Ondegardo’s son-in-
law, the corregidor of Cuzco Pedro de Córdoba Mejía, who described the ‘uses and
customs’ of the Incas. According to Honores, the initiative was due to receipt of a royal
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

decree accompanied by a nineteen-item questionnaire focused on those issues (2014,

28–29).25 In 1581, an extensive memorial dealing with indigenous justice was submitted
to the Council of the Indies by the Provincial of the Dominican Order in the Viceroyalty
of New Granada, Friar Pedro Mártir. How were these documents discussed by the Council
of the Indies?

From Reports to Consultations: The Impatience of a Prudent King?

Friar Pedro Mártir’s memorial appears to have played a key role in the legal process aimed
to improve indigenous access to royal justice that started in the 1580s. The reception of the
petition evidently made an impression on the king, who demanded that his advisors not
only read it, but also propose measures to improve the government of the indigenous
population. Indeed, if we review the consultations from the year 1581, we find one
dated 24 April in which Philip II instructs his councilors to examine a petition from
Friar Pedro Mártir on ‘the things that [ … ] should be remedied in the Indies concerning
good government and the treatment of the Indians.’26 The importance of the matter may
also be gauged by the exceptionally extensive response issued by the Council of the Indies,
which consists of no fewer than thirty-one sections. However, it is interesting to note that
the king’s councilors simply drew on orders that were already in effect for the majority of
their proposals. This could be interpreted as a strategy to insinuate to the king that Friar
Mártir’s complaints were somewhat behind the times. Indeed, just such a criticism is
openly expressed in a comment that precedes the suggestions, where the Council
advised the king that it had ‘experience of some religious men from the Indies who
write many things such as this and others like it, without being particularly well or appro-
priately informed.’ Nonetheless, Philip II remained determined to take the matter
seriously, and responded to each of the thirty-one proposals one-by-one ‘on separate
sheets of paper’ and not in the margins, as was his habit.27
The split between the king and the Council over their assessments of the importance of
the issue of indigenous justice was further documented in another consultation from 8
May 1581, in which Philip II deviated from the main matter under discussion with his
advisors to refer back to the petition sent by Friar Pedro Mártir. One month after receiving
the text, the king observed that he was still ‘considering how you responded to the chapters
 512 C. CUNILL

of complaints from the New Kingdom of New Granada’ and demanded of his councilors
that they propose measures to improve the situation reported in the petition. The king
even went so far as to make a few suggestions of his own to the Council of the Indies.
He wondered, for example, ‘if it would be wise [ … ] to publish that if any Indians or
other persons feel overly burdened [ … ] they may present themselves before the audien-
cias or before the main town councils [cabezas de los partidos] to ask for justice and to seek
redress.’ He also stated that it was necessary to write to ‘those who are to provide redress
[to inform them] what they must do.’ In other words, Philip II sought resolution of two
interrelated matters: (1) the extension of rights to the Indians, and (2) the distribution
of authority over indigenous affairs within the institutions of the monarchy.
The king also elucidated the intent behind these measures when he issued orders to
‘press greatly on all matters relating to this, in such a way that all may find effective
remedy and understand that my concern is the reason they are well treated and receive
justice.’ It should be noted that Philip II fully accepted the association between
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

monarch and dispenser of justice that was in vogue in the political philosophy of the
time. However, it seems that even these robust comments were not enough for the
king, and at the end of the consultation he once again exhorts the Council ‘to send
orders to press for these provisions to be implemented,’ as he observed that ‘if they are
then forgotten it is as if nothing had been decreed.’ He also recommended again that
his councilors assess ‘what other means and remedies we may use to comply with the obli-
gation we have.’28 It seems, then, that it was the express wish of Philip II for justice to reach
the Indians or, if attainment of this ideal was not possible, for his indigenous subjects to at
least be aware that this was his intention.
Just two months later the king once again weighed in on the matter, openly expressing
his displeasure and impatience with his councilors’ inertia. A consultation from 29 July
1581 begins with a forthright admonishment: ‘I have been waiting for days for your
opinions on what I wrote to you recently concerning the burdens suffered by the
Indians and my wishes for a solution.’ It is likely that the king was referring here to the
consultation dated 8 May, mentioned above. Philip II goes on to restate his intention
for the Indians ‘and everyone else to publicly be informed that they shall receive all due
amends and shall have justice done.’29 These comments do not simply reveal a degree
of impatience on the part of a king traditionally known—and sometimes even criticized
—for his prudence; they are also indicative of the existence of tensions in the highest
spheres of monarchical power. It seems that the Council of the Indies was evincing
little desire to improve indigenous access to the royal system of justice, contrary to the
express wishes of the king himself who had been insisting on the matter for several
months.
It is worth noting that, from 1580 to 1584, the Council of the Indies was leaderless,
which would explain the inertia observed by the monarch not only in the aforementioned
consultations, but also in the private correspondence that Philip II held with his secretary
Mateo Vázquez in the same years.30 Furthermore, according to Poole, after Cardinal Diego
de Espinosa’s and Juan de Ovando’s deaths, in 1572 and 1575 respectively, the Letrado
party upper hand in royal policies regarding the Indies was notably weakened. The so-
called Letrado party was led by Espinosa, of whom Ovando was a client, as well as
Vázquez, the king’s secretary, and Francisco de Toledo, whose appointment as Viceroy
of Peru was the work of both Espinosa and Ovando. Its influence was eclipsed by the
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 513

rise of the Ebolista faction, which was constituted by Ruy Gómez, prince of Eboli, Fran-
cisco de Eraso, Pedro de Cabrera, the count of Chinchón, Gómez Suárez de Figueroa,
the first duke of Feria, Gómez Zapata, advisor of the Council of the Indies, and Francisco
de Garnica, from the Council of Finances (Poole 2011, 130–31).31 It is thus highly prob-
able that, in the 1580s, the Ebolistas may have tried to impede the attempt at reforms set in
motion by Juan de Ovando with Cardinal Espinosa’s support in the 1570s, as revealed by
the aforementioned reluctance to implement a set of measures recommended by the king
himself.
The handling of a complaint that Viceroy Francisco de Toledo sought to present to the
king in 1577 strengthens this hypothesis. Aware of the difficulties of communicating with
King Philip, due to the ‘confusion’ that characterized the functioning of the Council of the
Indies, Toledo did not provide a written report, but rather sent an agent to the Spanish
court to inform the king directly of a series of issues. However, the agent was not given
a personal audience with the Spanish monarch, who only received a note indicating
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

that the relator of the Council of the Indies would inform him orally of what had been
said in an interview, and this message was accompanied with a brief summary of
Toledo’s agent’s exposition. Furthermore, at the same moment, the king was informed
by councilor Benito López de Gamboa that Viceroy Toledo had a bad reputation in
much of Peru. According to Brendecke, the ‘communicative setting’ in which the viceroy’s
complaint was handled had the effect of devaluing the scope and legal impact of Toledo’s
projects, a situation that was clearly encouraged by some of the king’s advisors (2012, 466–
68). In this respect, it must be remembered that Francisco de Toledo was favorable to the
institutionalization of the position of Indian defender not only in America, but also in the
Spanish court, as evidenced by the ordinances and appointments he made in the Viceroy-
alty of Peru in 1575, but also by a petition he sent to Philip II in 1573.32 It seems, therefore,
that neither Viceroy Toledo nor the friars from the pro-Indian party could counteract the
pressure that would lead to the suspension of this position in 1582.

From Consultations to the Reformation of Indigenous Justice

The series of consultations relating to indigenous justice dated 24 April, 8 May, and 29 July
1581 reveals that Philip II wanted to transition from an informative to a regulatory phase
of Indian governance. It seems clear that the monarch’s attempt at reform was based on a
policy of information characterized by a systematic approach, on the one hand, and by
close links to the decision-making process, on the other. But did the impatience expressed
by the king have any effect on his councilors’ willingness to improve indigenous peoples’
access to justice? As a matter of fact, we can see that the increasing pressure exerted by
Philip II on the Council of the Indies began to produce dividends from September
1581. It was around this time that a series of notifications were circulated with the aim
of making amends for abuses suffered by indigenous people in the field of justice.
These measures were generally preceded by the usual consultations, intended not only
to determine the king’s opinion and obtain his approval, but also to demonstrate to
him that his advisors were implementing the royal will.
Evidently, therefore, the consultation from September 1581 regarding the office of
Indian defender and the subsequent suspension decree must be viewed within this
context. In light of the dates, the fragment of text concerning those officials quoted in
 514 C. CUNILL

the consultation could have been taken from Friar Pedro Mártir’s petition. Although it
might seem odd that a Dominican friar would criticize the office of Indian defender,
since Friar Bartolomé de Las Casas had created a powerful pro-defender network, it
should be noted, however, that Friar Pedro Mártir was supported by Tunja’s conquista-
dors, as shown by the letter they sent to the king in his favor in 1582, whereas he was bit-
terly criticized in an anonymous pro-Indian memorial of 1584.33 This might explain why
the Provincial Priest of the New Kingdom of Granada adopted a surprising position with
regard to the office of the Indian defender.
In any case, the 1581 decree for the suspension of the position was not an isolated
measure, but was part of a series of consultations from the beginning of the 1580s that
focused on the issue of indigenous justice. On 7 October 1581 the Council made a pro-
posal to Philip II to ‘write to the authorities in the Indies so that they send a list of the
peoples inhabiting each province and the offices of justice and clerkship that they
have.’ The king approved the measure, but not without making the observation that
just such a list should have been obtained by the Council of the Indies ‘before now.’
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

The king also ordered written requests to be sent to the viceroys of Peru and New
Spain for them to ‘notify us of all Indian encomiendas that there are [ … ] and what
each is worth and how many Indians each has and what [medium] they pay their
taxes in and who the trustees are, so that everything is accounted for in a book to be
kept for that purpose.’34
Nonetheless, the main legislative effort on the part of the Spanish Crown took place in
May 1582, when, in less than a month, eight royal decrees were enacted focusing on the
question of indigenous justice. On the one hand, as we have already mentioned, the decree
for the suspension of the position of Indian defender was reaffirmed and was extended to
the entire territory. On the other hand, trial and presiding judges in the American royal
courts were instructed to send a ‘list of the rates of taxation imposed on the Indians,’
and not to ‘allow them to be collected for deceased or absent Indians.’35 Another decree
ordered information to be collected on ‘local leaders and mayors [ … ] guilty of having
mistreated Indians’ and for them to be punished with the full weight of the law for any
such crimes.36 Application of this provision was even extended to Indian encomenderos
and ‘administrators,’ who were reminded that it was their duty to protect indigenous
peoples.37 The dispatch of judges [visitadores] to territories such as the New Kingdom
of Granada was even contemplated.38
It is interesting to note that the Spanish Crown made a particular effort to involve the
Church in its program for justice. Mariano Cuevas (1946, 290) mentions a decree dated 14
May 1582, in which Philip II reminded ecclesiastical dignitaries in the Americas of their
duty to watch over the indigenous population and implored them to do anything they
could ‘to avoid the oppression and disorders suffered by the Indians [ … ] without con-
spiring with those who neglect this universal obligation and much less with any ministers
or persons who, though they should be making amends for any damages, profit from the
omission thereof.’ On 27 May, the Council of the Indies also instructed the bishops of the
New World to oversee ‘compliance with the provisions dispatched to viceroys, royal courts
and governors in favor of the Indians’ and, if they observed that these were not being
adhered to, to notify the king so that he could take measures.39 An echo of these
demands may be found in a letter written to Philip II slightly before the Third Mexican
Council of 1585, in which the prelates claimed responsibility for the conscience of
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 515

American governors by ‘showing them how they were affected by the mistreatment and
abuse of these Indians, as they await the judgment of God.’40
Ultimately, the dominant theme of this legal scenario was actually the desire for infor-
mation and a much more vigilant and punitive approach to controlling the officers in
charge of indigenous justice: the corregidores and the alcaldes mayores. In reality, the
decree for the suspension of the office of Indian defender was the only one that affected
the institutional framework within which indigenous justice was administered in
America.41 This surprising decision indicates that the argument for Indian welfare
might have been skillfully used by the some of the king’s councilors to eliminate an
office that, in fact, was defended by the pro-Indian party—and, thus, appeared to have
been beneficial for the native people in the second half of the sixteenth century—while
satisfying the monarch’s claim to champion indigenous justice. This ambiguity seems to
be confirmed by the fact that just one year later Philip II decided to consolidate the pos-
ition of interpreter of indigenous languages in the colonial courts, an office closely related
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

to that of Indian defender. In a royal decree implemented on 10 May 1583, the profession
of interpreter was associated with the correct functioning of the justice system. The docu-
ment placed emphasis on ‘the damages and disadvantages that may occur if an interpreter
of the language of the Indians is not of the required fidelity, Christianity, and virtuousness,
since he is the instrument through which justice must be done.’ The presiding and trial
judges [presidente y oidores] of American royal courts were therefore required to take
great care to insure that the holders of these offices had ‘the aptitudes, qualities and suffi-
ciency that are so important’ and that they were paid from the budgets of the judiciary or
the courts, or from petty fines.42 It remains remarkable, thus, that while on the one hand
the profession of linguistic intermediary was taking shape, on the other that of legal
advisor, represented by the Indian defender, was being dismantled.
This lack of coherence in Spanish monarchical policy with regard to indigenous justice
was in fact relatively short-lived. After 1589, the Indian defenders were reinstated and they
became a key element in the General Indian Courts that were institutionalized in 1591
throughout the American continent (Borah 1996 [1985]; Cunill 2012a; Cutter 1986; Rui-
gómez Gómez 1988). It is likely that petitions such as the one submitted by Bustamante,
which was received at court in 1587, played a fundamental role in this process of reconsi-
deration of Spanish crown strategy. Indeed, among other difficulties highlighted by the
former provincial governor’s lieutenant was the complaint that during the residencia
[trials of audit] to which justice officials were subject, there was no one to represent the
Indians and sue for any amends they were owed. Additionally, in the same years the
Council of the Indies received documentation of the merits and services of interpreter
Antonio Nieto, who noted that in the absence of an Indian defender he had been
obliged to take on the legal claims presented by the Yucatec Maya.43 In the 1580s, the
Augustinian friar Pedro Suárez de Escobar asked Philip II to appoint in Mexico City a
‘letrado, an advocate, and an interpreter, who would deal with the Indians’ affairs and
trials,’ as well as a Protector in the Spanish royal court.44 In 1590, Alonso Palomino,
who had held the position of Indian defender in Tabasco, testified that the caciques of
several indigenous communities had begged him to represent them in the royal court of
Mexico, notwithstanding the fact that he had been suspended from his duties. Indeed,
the Indians stated that they were ready to ‘handsomely pay him for all the expenses he
would have to pay out in order to defend them’ in Mexico City.45 Finally, the key role
 516 C. CUNILL

played by Viceroy Luis de Velasco the Younger must be taken into account to understand
the process that led to the restoration of the office of Indian defender in America, since this
issue was mentioned in several letters the viceroy sent to King Philip II in the last quarter
of the sixteenth century.46
Along with these documents, the aforementioned reports from people favorable to the
position of Indian defender received from the 1550s onward, notably those submitted by
Friar Bartolomé de Las Casas, Friar Pedro de la Peña, and Viceroy Francisco de Toledo,
might also have contributed to persuading the king to reconsider this question. Thus,
the decree dated 10 January 1589 ordered that ‘since the members of my Royal Council
of the Indies have discussed this matter in particular length,’ the office of Indian defender
should be reestablished. The text delved into the problems arising from the absence of
these officials in American courts and emphasized the large number of suits brought by
Indians, the long voyages they were forced to make from their communities to present
their cases to the royal courts, and finally the considerable costs they incurred in legal pro-
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

ceedings, as they were forced to retain the services of unscrupulous lawyers who charged
excessive fees. As an aggravating circumstance, mention was made of the supposed ignor-
ance of the Indians, who did not know ‘what they were supposed to be paid, or whether
their case was good or bad, as if they were handed any of the roles to which they are natu-
rally inclined.’ The Crown’s intention, therefore, was to eliminate these problems by
appointing protectors who would be given ‘instructions and orders’ to defend the
Indians ‘without indulging any harm to them, as they shall be held accountable for
their actions in the residencias that they shall undergo.’47 Indeed, the appointment of
attorneys specialized in indigenous affairs, who were paid a salary and subject to strict
royal control, seemed the best option. The decree went into effect for the entire American
continent by order of the king, issued 9 April 1591.48

Final Considerations
This series of documents shows that, as much as Philip II tried to maintain a comprehen-
sive view of what was going on in America and to control the rulings issued by the Council
of the Indies, the king’s advisors played a defining role in the decision-making process.
Although the system of consultations was intended to make royal supervision of sensitive
matters easier, the repeated reprimands issued by the king to his councilors, even from the
position of absolute authority that he enjoyed within the monarchical system, reveal
the limits of his power and the obstacles that his wishes came up against within the
reduced confines of the Spanish court. In this regard, the tensions perceptible in the
exchange between Philip II and the Council of the Indies could be interpreted not just
from the perspective of the history of ideas, but also from that of patron-client networks.
It seems clear that the 1582 decree whereby the position of Indian defender was suspended
was one result of the program set in motion in the 1570s, which had two closely related
goals: first, to obtain information about pre-Hispanic systems of justice, as it was the
Crown’s intention for officials from the Indian republics to administer justice in the
first instance with a certain degree of autonomy, which meant that their practices had
to be approved by the Council of the Indies; and second, to obtain information on how
Spanish officials were imparting justice to indigenous subjects, given the desire to limit
abuses and to make the mechanisms of defense available to the Indians more efficient.
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 517

Thus, royal policy in the 1580s was global in scope, in terms of both cognitive intent and
the will to regulate royal law as related to the indigenous population. However, the limit-
ations of this policy are also evident, as the suspension of the Indian defenders may be
interpreted as a blunder in the overall effort to improve indigenous access to justice, as
suggested by the fact that the office was reinstated and institutionalized just a few years
later across the entire American continent.

Notes
1. ‘Memorial del licenciado Bustamante, teniente que fue del gobernador de Yucatán, supli-
cando se vea toda, que informa de cosas muy cumplideras al servicio de Su Majestad,’
Mérida, 4 April 1587. Archivo General de Indias [AGI], México, 359, R. 7, N. 32.
2. Indeed, as Heredia Herrera explains, many consultations form part of ‘files on issues or
matters already resolved, to which they were attached as supplementary information’
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

(1972, 1:2).
3. ‘Cédula que manda se quiten y consuman todos los protectores de indios y la Audiencia
tenga a cargo de ampararlos y el fiscal de defenderlos,’ Lisbon, 27 May 27 1582, in
Encinas 1946, 4:333. With reference to this document, see Borah 1996, 353. It is worthy of
note that the decree dated to 1582, but took effect in Yucatán only in 1586 (Cunill 2012a,
132–36).
4. See, for example, Friede 1953, Hanke 1968 and 1971, Bataillon and Saint-Lu 1976.
5. See Cutter 1986, 1995, and 1997, Kellogg 1995, Rappaport and Cummins 1998, Honores
2003, Devineau 2004, Poloni-Simard 2005, Puente Brunke 2005, Owensby 2008 and 2011,
Ruiz Medrano and Kellogg 2010, Traslosheros and Zaballa Beascoechea 2010, Yannakakis
2008 and 2013, Zaballa Beascoechea 2011, Cunill 2012b, among others.
6. With regard to the role of transatlantic networks in the governance of the Spanish Empire,
see Parker 2001, Elliott 2006, Mazín Gómez 2007, Glave Testino 2008a and b, Daniels and
Kennedy 2008, Muñoz Lacueva and Cunill 2010, Puente Luna 2006 and 2014.
7. See Parker 1998 and 2001, Román Gutiérrez and Martínez Ruiz 2002, Escudero 2002, and
Schäfer 2003, 258–91.
8. On Mateo Vázquez de Leca, see Lovett 1977, Parker 1998, and Poole 2011, 48–53.
9. Petition by Bustamante, Mérida, 4 April 1587, cit.
10. Ibid.
11. Ibid.
12. Real Díaz also notes that petitions were ‘the direct origin, strictly speaking, of many docu-
ments’ and that part of the content of legal texts was set forth ‘in the clause referred to as
exposition of motives or preface’ (1991, 59).
13. ‘Cédula que manda se quiten y consuman todos los protectores de indios,’ Lisbon, 27 May
1582, cit.
14. ‘Real cédula al gobernador de Chile que envíe razón sobre que se ha entendido que los indios
reciben agravios de los protectores y en el entretanto provea lo que convenga y quite los
dichos protectores y no consienta el servicio personal,’ Lisbon, 25 September 1581, cited
by Jara 1961, 113. With reference to the suspension of the defender at La Plata and Quito,
see Colección de documentos 1867, 18:533, and Mora 1944, 106. The suspension decree
sent to New Spain was compiled by Encinas 1946, 4:333.
15. On those topics, see Manzano Manzano 1970, Sánchez Bella 1987, and Poole 2011, 116–38.
With reference to the Geographic Relations, see Cline 1972, Acuña 1982–1986, Solano and
Ponce Leiva 1988.
16. For a more detailed discussion of the pressure that Las Casas and his followers, on the one
hand, and Rome, on the other, brought to bear on the Spanish Crown in 1566, see Poole 2011,
104–5 and 111–14. Pedro Borges (1960, 131–37) reproduces the memorial submitted to the
 518 C. CUNILL

Council of the Indies by Alonso Maldonado in 1566. On the pro-Indian party, see Friede
1952 and 1953.
17. Poole notes that the ‘two moving spirits behind the junta were Cardinal Espinosa who, as
president of the Council of Castile, was the presiding officer, and Ovando’ (2011, 129).
18. ‘Testimonio del licenciado Cristóbal Ayala de Espinosa,’ 23 December 1567, British Library
(BL), Additional Manuscripts, 33983, ff. 195r–98v. ‘Testimonio de fray Francisco de
Morales,’ 2 January 1568, BL, Additional Manuscripts, 33983, f. 256r. Both documents are
cited by Poole 2011, 128.
19. The main documents produced during the Junta Magna can be found in the Instituto de
Valencia de Don Juan, Madrid, Spain (IVDJ). See Lovett 1973, 255–61, and Poole 2011,
131–32.
20. ‘Ordenanzas para la formación del libro de las descripciones de Indias,’ San Lorenzo del
Escorial, 3 July 1573, in Solano and Ponce Leiva 1988, 19, 22–23, 25, and 31–32.
21. ‘Real cédula a Martín Enríquez, virrey del Perú, mandándole que envíe al Consejo de Indias
una información completa de las usos y costumbres que en materia de justicia tenían los
indios antes de la conquista española, pues por ellos deben regirse,’ Badajoz, 23 September
1580. AGI, Indiferente General, 427, L. 30, ff. 323r–24r, also published by Konetzke 1953,
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

1:529–30. A note in the margin states that ‘other such decrees have been dispatched to the
other royal courts and governors of the Indies.’ Indeed, Encinas makes reference to a docu-
ment of this nature, entitled ‘capítulo de la instrucción que se da a los virreyes del Perú que
manda se informe de la manera de gobernación que tienen entre sí los indios y envíe relación’
(1946, 4:356–57). The 1577 questionnaire had been published by Solano and Ponce Leiva
(1988, 79–87) under the title ‘Cédula, instrucción y memoria para la formación de las rela-
ciones y descripciones de los pueblos de Indias.’
22. ‘Real cédula a Martín Enríquez, virrey del Perú, mandándole hacer una relación de todos los
pueblos españoles e indios del distrito de su jurisdicción, de la forma en que se administra en
ellos justicia, y del ejercicio, jurisdicción y salario de los cargos de corregidores, alcaldes
mayores, regidores perpetuos y otros oficios, sus títulos y nombramientos y el tiempo que
los ejercen, y que envíe dicha relación junto con la de los oficios que estén vacantes al
Consejo de Indias,’ Portalegre, 5 March 1581. The decree was for the Indies in general.
AGI, Indiferente General, 427, L. 30, ff. 328v–29v.
23. ‘Real cédula en que se aprueba a los indios lo que tienen ordenando cerca de elegir goberna-
dor y justicia,’ Valladolid, 5 August 1555, in Encinas 1946, 4:356. With reference to the cus-
tomary law and its implication for native people, see Manzano Manzano 1967, González de
San Segundo 1995 and 2011, and Honores 2014.
24. With reference with the role played by Gaspar Antonio Chi in the drafting of the relations of
Yucatán, see Mercedes de la Garza’s introduction to the Relaciones histórico-geográficas de
Yucatán (1982, 1:x–xxviii). Walter Mignolo (1987) also demonstrated the connection that
existed between the questionnaires of 1577 and the report of Tlaxcala.
25. The royal decree was published by Levillier 1924, 9:268–69.
26. ‘Sobre las cosas que según memorial de fray Pedro Mártir, provincial de la Orden de Santo
Domingo, conviene remediar en Indias acerca del buen gobierno y trato de los indios. Acom-
paña unas advertencias de cosas de Indias que tiene necesidad de remediar,’ Madrid, 24 April
1581. AGI, Santa Fe, 1, N. 28, 10 ff.
27. Ibid.
28. Consultation dated 8 May 1581, cited by Heredia Herrera (1972, 1:321). AGI, Indiferente
General, 739, N. 325, 2 ff.
29. Consultation dated 29 July 1581, cited by Heredia Herrera (1972, 1:334–35). AGI, Indiferente
General, 739, N. 349, 2 ff.
30. As noted by Parker (1998, 27), the power of the king’s secretaries, especially of its private sec-
retary Mateo Vázquez, must have been greater during this period. In a billete [internal mem-
oranda] of 13 May 1583 the monarch said: ‘We will see this matter concerning the Indies
tomorrow, yet it is quite convoluted in the same way that things are going here,’ in Riba
García 1959, 278.
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 519

31. On the topic of factionalism and, more generally, on the role of the royal courts in the exer-
cise of monarchical power in Spain, see Lovett 1973 and 1977, Martínez Millán 1989, 1992,
and 1994, Quijada and Bustamante 2002, and, for a European perspective, see Michon 2012.
32. With reference to the ordinances for the Indian defender of Peru, see Ruigómez Gómez 1988.
In 1573 Toledo had recommended the appointment of an Indian Protector in the Council of
the Indies. ‘Carta del virrey Toledo al monarca,’ La Plata, 30 November 1573, in Levillier
1924, 5:225–26.
33. ‘Carta de los vecinos conquistadores de la ciudad de Tunja en que informan a favor de los
religiosos de aquella ciudad sobre todo de los dominicos y su provincial fray Pedro
Mártir,’ Tunja, 1 November 1582. AGI, Santa Fe, 66, N. 89, 2 ff. ‘Relación hecha por un
natural del Nuevo Reino de Granada por la que describe el estado en que se hallaba la con-
versión de aquellos miserables indios y la vejación y trabajos que padecían, anónimo,’ 1584.
AGI, Patronato, 231, N. 6, R. 5, 12 ff.
34. Consultation dated 7 October 1581. AGI, Indiferente General, 739, N. 370, 4 ff.
35. ‘Real cédula a la Audiencia de México mandándoles que le envíen relación sobre las tasas de
tributos que se les imponen a los indios y no permitan que les hagan pagar por los indios
muertos o ausentes,’ Lisbon, 27 May 1582. AGI, Indiferente General, 427, L. 30, f. 340.
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

36. ‘Real cédula al presidente y oidores de la Audiencia de México mandándoles que se informen
sobre los corregidores y alcaldes mayores de dicho distrito culpables de haber maltratado a
los indios y les castiguen con rigor y que no permitan que se les obliguen al servicio personal
vigilando que se cumplan las cédulas dadas a su favor,’ Lisbon, 27 May 1582. AGI, Indiferente
General, 427, L. 30, f. 340v.
37. ‘Real cédula al presidente y oidores de la Audiencia de Santa Fe de Nueva Granada mandán-
doles que pongan en ejecución las disposiciones provistas a favor de los indios y que casti-
guen con rigor a los encomenderos y administradores que les maltraten, pues son
encargados y responsables de su defensa y que envíen una información de cómo se les admin-
istra la justicia,’ Lisbon, 27 May 1582. AGI, Indiferente General, 427, L. 30, ff. 344v–45r.
38. ‘Real cédula al presidente y oidores de la Audiencia de Santa Fe de Nueva Granada mandán-
doles que envíen relación sobre los agravios que reciben los indios de dicho distrito y sobre la
conveniencia de enviar un visitador para remediarlo y que castiguen con rigor a los que les
maltraten,’ Lisbon, 11 June 1582. AGI, Indiferente General, 427, L. 30, f. 347r.
39. ‘Real cédula al arzobispo de México encargándole que vigile el cumplimiento de las provi-
siones enviadas a los virreyes audiencias y gobernadores a favor de los indios, y, si ve que
no se cumplen, avise al rey para que ponga remedio,’ Lisbon, 27 May 1582. AGI, Indiferente
General, 427, L. 30, ff. 345v–46v, also reproduced in Encinas 1946, 4:266.
40. ‘Cosas que se avisan y suplican,’ Mexico, 16 October 1585, in Llaguno 1962, 319.
41. As is the case for all other documents cited until now, the suspension decree is on file at the
general registry where the decree notifications valid for all American territories are located.
AGI, Indiferente General, 427, L. 30, f. 342v.
42. ‘Real cédula para que los intérpretes de los indios tengan las partes y calidades necesarias y se
les pague el salario de gastos de justicia, estrados o penas de cámara,’ Aranjuez, 10 May 1583,
in Recopilación de Leyes de Indias, Book II, Title 29, Law 1. Regarding the matter of interpret-
ing, see Cunill 2013, Yannakakis 2014, and Puente Luna 2014.
43. ‘Antonio Nieto, vecino de la ciudad de Mérida de la provincia de Yucatán, intérprete general
de los indios de la dicha provincia, sobre que se le confirme cierta ayuda de costa y otras
cosas,’ 1595. AGI, México, 116, R. 3.
44. ‘Carta de fray Pedro Juárez de Escóbar a Felipe II sobre el gobierno de las Indias,’ undated, in
Colección de documentos 9:198. This letter must be after 1573, since the author explained that,
at this time, there were two archbishoprics in Mexico, two bishoprics in Tlaxcala, one in
Oaxaca, two in Chiapas, two in Yucatán, and one in Jalisco.
45. ‘Respuesta de Alonso Palomino a las acusaciones de Rodrigo Pérez de Ribera, Santa María de
la Victoria,’ 31 March 1590, ‘en el pleito de Rodrigo Pérez de Ribera contra Alonso Palo-
mino.’ Archivo General de la Nación de México [AGN/M], Civil, 682, exp. 2, ff. 117–20.
On the Indian defenders of Tabasco, see Cunill 2012d.
 520 C. CUNILL

46. ‘Carta del virrey Velasco al rey Felipe II,’ Mexico, 14 July 1589. AGI, México, 22, N. 115, 8 ff.
‘Carta del virrey Velasco al rey,’ Mexico, 5 June 1589. AGI, México, 22, N. 16, 41 ff. ‘Carta del
virrey Velasco al rey,’ Mexico, 1591. AGI, México, 22, N. 58, 10 ff.
47. ‘Cédula que manda al virrey del Perú que provea los oficios de protectores de indios que solía
haber en personas de edad, aprobación y cristiandad para que defiendan sus causas,’ Madrid,
10 January 1589, in Encinas 1946, 4:334–35.
48. ‘Real cédula al gobernador para que se vuelva a poner protector que defienda a los indios,
procurador y letrado que los ayude en sus pleitos,’ Madrid, 9 April 1591, cited by Borah
1996, 105–6.

Acknowledgements
A preliminary version of this article was presented in Frankfurt, on 16 September 2013. I wish to
thank the Max Planck Institute for European Legal History and its director, Dr. Thomas Duve, for
granting me the fellowship that enabled me to elaborate the present essay. I also wish to thank Alis-
tair McCreadie for translating it. I am very grateful to Renzo Honores and the two anonymous
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

referees from CLAR for their valuable comments and suggestions.

Notes on contributor
Caroline Cunill, agrégée in Hispanic Literature and Civilization since 2003, received her Ph.D. in
Latin American History from the University of Toulouse in 2011. She is currently Assistant Pro-
fessor at the University of Le Mans. In the course of her research, she has received scholarships
from the Académie Française and the Max Planck Institute for European Legal Studies. From
2013–2014, she held a postdoctoral position at the Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas
(UNAM). In addition to her monograph Los Defensores de Indios de Yucatán y el acceso de los
mayas a la justicia colonial (2012), she has published articles in Colonial Latin American Review,
Journal de la Société des Américanistes, Anuario de Estudios Americanos, Historia Mexicana, and
Colonial Latin American Historical Review.

References
Acuña, René. 1982–1986. Relaciones geográficas del siglo XVI (México y Guatemala). Mexico City:
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Bataillon, Marcel, and André Saint-Lu. 1976. El padre Las Casas y la defensa de los indios. Barcelona:
Editorial Ariel.
Borah, Woodrow. 1983. Justice by insurance: The General Indian Court of colonial Mexico and the
legal aides of the half-real. Berkeley: University of California Press.
———. 1996. El Juzgado General de Indios de Nueva España [1985]. Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura
Económica.
Borges, Pedro. 1960. Un reformador de Indias y de la Orden Franciscana bajo Felipe II: Alonso
Maldonado de Buendía, O.F.M. Archivo Ibero-Americano, Revista Trimestral de Estudios
Históricos 20: 281–337; 487–535; and 21: 108–52.
Brendecke, Arndt. 2012. Imperio e información. Funciones del saber en el dominio colonial español.
Madrid and Frankfurt: Iberoamericana, Vervuert.
Cline, Howard. 1972. The Relaciones geográficas of the Spanish Indies, 1577–1648. Hispanic
American Historical Review 12: 182–242.
Colección de documentos inéditos relativos al descubrimiento, conquista y organización de las anti-
guas posesiones españolas en América y Oceanía. Madrid: Imprenta de Frías y Compañía, 1867.
Cuevas, Mariano. 1946. Historia de la Iglesia en México. Mexico City: Editorial Patria.
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 521

Cunill, Caroline. 2012a. Los defensores de indios de Yucatán y el acceso de los mayas a la justicia
colonial, 1540–1600. Mérida: Centro Peninsular Humanidades y Ciencias Sociales,
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
———. 2012b. La negociación indígena en el Imperio Ibérico: aportes a su discusión metodológica.
Colonial Latin American Review 21 (3): 391–412.
———. 2012c. Fray Bartolomé de las Casas y el oficio de defensor de indios en América y en la Corte
española. Nuevos Mundos Mundo Nuevo, online since 09/18/2012, consulted 02/18/2013.
<http://nuevomundo.revues.org/63939>.
———. 2012d. Los defensores de indios de la alcaldía mayor de Tabasco (siglo XVI). Historia
Mexicana 62 (2): 551–90.
———. 2013. Negociación entre los intérpretes de Yucatán y la Corona española: iniciativas privadas
en la fragua del Imperio hispano. Colonial Latin American Historical Review, Second Series 1 (4):
361–80.
Cutter, Charles R. 1986. The Protector de Indios in colonial New Mexico, 1659–1821. Albuquerque:
University of New Mexico Press.
Cunill, Caroline. 1995. Indians as litigants in colonial Mexico. In De la Ciencia Ilustrada, ed.
Alejandro Díez Torre, 21–32. Madrid: Ateneo de Madrid.
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

———. 1997. The legal culture of northern New Spain, 1700–1800. Albuquerque: University of New
Mexico Press.
Daniels, Christine, and Michael V. Kennedy, eds. 2002. Negotiated empires: Centers and peripheries
in the Americas, 1500–1820. London: Routledge.
Devineau, Julie. 2004. Dossier: Indígenas y derecho. Trace 46.
Elliott, John H. 2006. Empires of the Atlantic World. Britain and Spain in America, 1492–1830. New
Haven: Yale University Press.
Encinas, Diego de. 1946. Cedulario indiano. 4 vols. Madrid: Ediciones de Cultura Hispánica.
Escudero, José Antonio. 2002. Felipe II. El rey en el despacho. Madrid: Real Academia de Historia.
Fischer, Andrew B., and Matthew D. O’Hara, eds. 2009. Imperial subjects: Race and identity in colo-
nial Latin America. Durham: Duke University Press.
Friede, Juan. 1952. Las Casas y el movimiento indigenista en España y América en la primera mitad
del siglo XVI. Revista de Historia de América 34: 339–411.
———. 1953. Fray Bartolomé de las Casas, exponente del movimiento indigenista español del siglo
XVI. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas.
———. 1976. Fuentes documentales para la historia del Nuevo Reino de Granada. Bogotá: Biblioteca
Banco Popular.
García Gallo, Alfonso. 1972. Estudios de historia del derecho indiano. Madrid: Instituto Nacional de
Estudios Jurídicos.
Garza, Mercedes de la, ed. 1982. Relaciones histórico-geográficas de la gobernación de Yucatán.
Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.
Gayol, Víctor. 2008. Los gestores de los indios. La relación entre las comunidades litigantes y los
juzgados de la Real Audiencia a través de la correspondencia de Manuel Salvador Muñoz,
indio cacique de Contla, 1788–1803. Historias–Revista de la Dirección de Estudios Históricos
del Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia 69: 37–55.
Glave, Luis Miguel. 2008a. Gestiones transatlánticas. Los indios ante la trama del poder virreinal y
las composiciones de tierras (1646). Revista Complutense de Historia de América 34: 85–106.
———. 2008b. Cultura política, participación indígena y redes de comunicación en la crisis colonial.
El Virreinato peruano, 1809–1814. Historia Mexicana 58 (1): 369–426.
González de San Segundo, Miguel Ángel. 1995. Un mestizaje jurídico: el derecho indiano de los
indígenas. Madrid: Facultad de Derecho.
———. 2011. El componente indígena del derecho indiano y la obra de Alfonso García-Gallo.
Cuadernos de Historia de Derecho 18: 211–40.
Hanke, Lewis. 1968. Estudios sobre fray Bartolomé de las Casas y sobre la lucha por la justicia en la
conquista española de América. Caracas: Ediciones de la Biblioteca.
———. 1971. A modest proposal for a moratorium on grand generalizations: Some thoughts on the
Black Legend. Hispanic American Historical Review 51 (1): 112–27.
 522 C. CUNILL

Heredia Herrera, Antonia. 1972. Catálogo de las consultas del Consejo de Indias. 2 vols. Madrid:
Dirección General de Archivos y Bibliotecas.
Honores, Renzo. 2003. La asistencia jurídica privada a los señores indígenas ante la Real Audiencia
de Lima, 1552–1570. Latin American Studies Association. Dallas, 27 March 2003. <www.
uoregon.edu/~caguirre/Honores.pdf>.
———. 2014. El licenciado Polo Ondegardo y el derecho consuetudinario en el Perú del siglo XVI.
Unpublished manuscript. Personal communication from the author.
Jara, Alfonso. 1961. El salario de los indios y los sesmos del oro en la tasa de Santillán. Santiago de
Chile: Centro de Investigaciones de Historia Americana-Universidad de Chile.
Kellogg, Susan. 1995. Law and transformation of Aztec culture, 1500–1700. Norman: University of
Oklahoma Press.
Konetzke, Richard. 1953. Colección de documentos para la historia de la formación social de
Hispanoamérica, 1493–1810. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas.
Kranz, Travis B. 2011. Visual persuasion. Sixteenth-century Tlaxcalan pictorials in response to the
conquest of Mexico. In The conquest all over again, ed. Susan Schroeder, 41–73. Brighton: Sussex
Academic Press.
Lavallé, Bernard, ed. 2005. Máscara, tretas y rodeos del discurso colonial en los Andes. Lima: Instituto
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

Francés de Estudios Andinos, Instituto Riva-Agüero, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.
Levillier, Roberto. 1924. Los gobernantes del Perú. Cartas y papeles, siglo XVI. Madrid: Imprenta de
Juan Pueyo.
Lira González, Andrés. 1972. El amparo colonial y el juicio de amparo mexicano. Mexico City:
Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Lovett, A. W. 1973. A cardinal’s papers: The rise of Mateo Vázquez de Leca. English Historical
Review 88 (347): 1–261.
——— 1977. Philip II and Mateo Vázquez de Leca: The government of Spain (1572–1592). Geneva:
Librairie Droz.
Llaguno, José. 1962. La personalidad jurídica del indio y el III Concilio Provincial Mexicano (1585).
Mexico City: Editorial Porrúa.
Manzano Manzano, Juan. 1967. Las leyes y costumbres indígenas en el orden de prelación de
fuentes del derecho indiano. Revista del Instituto de Historia del Derecho Ricardo Levene 18:
65–71.
———. 1970. La visita de Ovando al Real Consejo de las Indias y el código ovandino. In El Consejo
de Indias en el siglo XVI, ed. Demetrio Ramos, 111–23. Valladolid: Universidad de Valladolid.
Martínez Millán, José. 1989. Las élites de poder en tempos de Felipe II (1539–1572). Hispania 49:
111–49.
———, ed. 1992. Instituciones y élites de poder en la monarquía hispana durante el siglo XVI.
Madrid: Ediciones de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.
———, ed. 1994. La corte de Felipe II. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
Mazín Gómez, Óscar. 2007. Gestores de la Real Justicia: procuradores y agentes de las catedrales his-
panas nuevas en la Corte de Madrid. Mexico City: El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios
Históricos.
Michon, Cédric, ed. 2012. Conseils et conseillers dans l’Europe de la Renaissance, v. 1450–v. 1550.
Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
Mignolo, Walter D. 1987. El mandato y la ofrenda. La Descripción de la provincia y ciudad de
Tlaxcala de Diego Muñoz Camargo y las Relaciones de Indias. Nueva Revista de Filología
Hispánica 35 (2): 451–84.
Mora, Alfonso María. 1944. La conquista española juzgada jurídica y sociológicamente. Fuentes
históricas de legislación social indígena. Buenos Aires: Editorial Americalee.
Munford, Jeremy. 2009. Aristocracy on the auction block: Race, lords, and the perpetuity contro-
versy of sixteenth-century Peru. In Imperial Subjects, eds. Andrew B. Fischer and Matthew D.
O’Hara, 39–60. Durham: Duke University Press.
Muñoz Lacueva, Jaime F., and Caroline Cunill. 2010. Intereses transatlánticos en la explotación del
alumbre de Meztitlán (1535–1548). Revista de Estudios de Historia Novohispana 43: 19–50.
 COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN REVIEW 523

O’Phelan Godoy, Scarlett, and Carmen Salazar Soler, eds. 2005. Passeurs, mediadores culturales y
agentes de la primera globalización en el Mundo Ibérico, siglos XVI–XIX. Lima: Instituto Riva-
Agüero.
Owensby, Brian P. 2008. Empire of law and Indian justice in colonial Mexico. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
———. 2011. Pacto entre rey lejano y súbditos indígenas. Justicia, legalidad y política en Nueva
España, siglo XVII. Historia Mexicana 61 (1): 59–106.
Parker, Geoffrey. 1998. The grand strategy of Philip II. New Haven: Yale University Press.
———. 2001. The world is not enough: The imperial vision of Philip II of Spain. Waco, Tx: Markham.
Poloni-Simard, Jacques. 2005. Los indios ante la justicia. El pleito como parte de la consolidación de
la sociedad colonial. In Máscara, tretas y rodeos, ed. Bernard Lavallé, 177–88. Lima: IFEA,
Instituto Riva-Agüero, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú.
Ponce Leiva, Pilar, ed. 1991. Relaciones histórico-geográficas de la Audiencia de Quito, siglos XVI–
XIX. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas.
Poole, Stafford. 2011. Juan de Ovando. Governing the Spanish Empire in the reign of Philip II.
Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Puente Brunke, José de la. 2005. Notas sobre la Audiencia de Lima y la protección de los naturales
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

(siglo XVII). In Passeurs, mediadores, eds. Scarlett O’Phelan Godoy and Carmen Salazar Soler,
231–48. Lima: Instituto Riva-Agüero.
Puente Luna, José Carlos de la. 2006. What’s in a name: An Indian trickster travels the Spanish colo-
nial world. M.A. thesis. Texas Christian University. <http://etd.tcu.edu/etdfiles/avilable/etd-
0501200>.
———. 2014. The many tongues of the king: Indigenous language interpreters and the making of the
Spanish Empire. Colonial Latin American Review 23 (2): 143–70.
Quijada, Mónica, and Jesús Bustamante, eds. 2002. Élites intelectuales y modelos colectivos. Mundos
ibéricos, siglos XVI–XVII. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas.
Ramos, Gabriela, and Yanna Yannakakis, eds. 2014. Indigenous intellectuals: Knowledge, power, and
colonial culture in Mexico and the Andes. Durham: Duke University Press.
Rappaport, Joanne, and Thomas Cummins. 1998. Between images and writing: The ritual of the
king’s Quillca. Colonial Latin American Review 7 (1): 7–27.
Riba García, Carlos, ed. 1959. Correspondencia privada de Felipe II con su secretario Mateo Vázquez,
1567–1591. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas.
Real Díaz, José Joaquín. 1991. Estudio diplomático del documento indiano. Madrid: Dirección de
Archivo Estatales.
Román Gutiérrez, José, and Enrique Martínez Ruiz, eds. 2002. Felipe II y el oficio de rey: la fragua de
un imperio. Madrid: Sociedad Estatal para la Conmemoración de los Centenarios de Felipe II y
Carlos V.
Ruigómez Gómez, Carmen. 1988. Una política indigenista de los Habsburgo: el Protector de Indios
en el Perú. Madrid: Ediciones de Cultura Hispánica.
Ruiz Medrano, Ethelia. 1991. Gobierno y sociedad en Nueva España: segunda Audiencia y Antonio
de Mendoza. Mexico City: Gobierno del Estado de Michoacán, El Colegio de Michoacán.
———. 2002. Poder e Iglesia en Nueva España. La disputa del diezmo. In Felipe II y el oficio de rey,
eds. José Román Gutiérrez and Enrique Martínez Ruiz, 835–87. Madrid: Sociedad Estatal para la
Conmemoración de los Centenarios de Felipe II y Carlos V.
———. 2010. Mexico’s indigenous communities. Their lands and histories, 1500–2010. Boulder:
University Press of Colorado.
Ruiz Medrano, Ethelia, and Susan Kellogg, eds. 2010. Negotiation within domination. New Spain’s
Indian pueblos confront the Spanish state. Boulder: University Press of Colorado.
Sánchez Bella, Ismael. 1987. Dos estudios sobre el Código de Ovando. Pamplona: Ediciones
Universidad de Navarra.
Schäfer, Ernst. 2003. El Consejo Real y Supremo de las Indias. Madrid: Marcial Pons Historia.
Schroeder, Susan, ed. 2011. The conquest all over again. Nahuas and Zapotecs thinking, writing, and
painting Spanish colonialism. Brighton: Sussex Academic Press.
 524 C. CUNILL

Solano, Francisco de, and Pilar Ponce Leiva, eds. 1988. Cuestionarios para la formación de las rela-
ciones geográficas de Indias, siglos XVI–XIX. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones
Científicas.
Stern, Steve J. 1982. Peru’s Indian people and the challenge of Spanish conquest: Huamanga to 1640.
Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Strecker, Matthias, and Jorge Artiega. 1978. La ‘Relación de Algunas Costumbres (1582)’ de Gaspar
Antonio Chi. Estudios de Historia Novohispana 6: 89–107.
Traslosheros, Jorge E., and Ana de Zaballa Beascoechea, eds. 2010. Los indios ante los foros de jus-
ticia religiosa en la Hispanoamérica virreinal. Mexico City: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de
México, Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia.
Yannakakis, Yanna P. 2008. The art of being in-between: Native intermediaries, Indian identity, and
local rule in colonial Oaxaca. Durham: Duke University Press.
———. 2013. Indigenous people and legal culture in Spanish America. History Compass 11 (4): 931–
47.
———. 2014. Making law intelligible: Networks of translation in mid-colonial Oaxaca. In Indigenous
intellectuals, eds. Gabriela Ramos and Yanna Yannakakis, 79–106. Durham: Duke University
Press.
Downloaded by [Tulane University] at 13:04 20 May 2016

Zaballa Beascoechea, Ana de, ed. 2011. Los indios, el derecho canónico y la justicia eclesiástica en la
América virreinal. Madrid: Iberoamericana, Vervuert.
Zavala, Silvio. 1946. Sobre la política lingüística del imperio español en América. Cuadernos
Americanos 27/28: 159–65.
Zorita, Alonso de. 1999. Relación de la Nueva España [1585]. Eds. Ethelia Ruiz Medrano and José
Mariano Leyva. 2 vols. Mexico City: Consejo Nacional para la Cultura y las Artes, Colección Cien
de México.

View publication stats