The Viceroy's Subjects: New Granada Under the First Viceroyalty
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chapter 6 The Viceroy’s Subjects: New Granada under the First Viceroyalty Within the territories that formed the viceroyalty of New Granada, reactions to its creation were mainly of two kinds. Those provinces located within the region’s periphery were predominantly apathetic, showing a veiled opposi- tion to their inclusion within the new administrative demarcation, depending mainly upon how much “status” and autonomy they perceived to have lost and how viceregal intervention affected their inhabitants personally. The province of Caracas, for instance, had been under the jurisdiction of the audiencia of Santa Domingo, which its inhabitants had used as an excuse to engage in a profitable cacao trade with Hispaniola. Finding no equivalent demand for their products in Santa Fe,1 several voices had pressed for the province’s restitution to the jurisdiction of the Caribbean tribunal from early on. More central prov- inces, by contrast, almost universally welcomed the creation of the viceroyalty. Elites in both Cartagena and Santa Fe stood to benefit from the increased sta- tus (and wealth) that the presence of a viceregal court brought with it. Here, only those individuals personally affected negatively by the viceroy’s actions and decisions seem to have complained about viceregal rule. These provinces, rather than seeking to release themselves from viceregal oversight, sought to gain control of the viceregal institution for themselves. When the crown finally suppressed the viceroyalty, several members of Villalonga’s entourage remained in New Granada, well ingrained into Santafereño elites. Not surpris- ingly, perhaps, requests for the viceroyalty to be reestablished reached Spain from Santa Fe throughout the decade and a half that separated the suppression of the first viceroyalty and the creation of the second one in 1739. However, as this chapter argues, the voices raised from New Granada, both in favor and against the continued existence of the viceroyalty di not always meet with the desired end. The controversy between Santa Fe and Cartagena de Indias over the location of the viceregal capital was really a struggle over who should reap the economic and political benefits derived from hosting a viceregal court. Neither city wanted the viceroyalty suppressed. However, as suggested in the previous chapter, the Council of the Indies used their 1 AGI, Santa Fe, 286, N.28i, extract of Antonio Álvarez de Abreu to Antonio de Cobián y Valdez, Caracas, October 3, 1718. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi ��.��63/9789004308794_008 The Viceroy’s Subjects 173 disagreement as an excuse to persuade the king to revoke another of Alberoni’s reforms. The Spanish American reactions to the creation and suppression of the viceroyalty analyzed in this chapter show that elites in the region were quick to understand and try to take advantage of the changes introduced from Madrid. Moreover, they show that opposition to the viceroyalty from within its territory was limited and tepid at best, thus offering further reasons to attribute its suppression to changing political influences in Madrid rather than to fac- tors stemming from the first experience of viceregal rule in the region. 6.1 Peripheral Antipathy: Quiteño Politics and Jorge de Villalonga As shown in the previous chapter, having received his appointment as first vice- roy of New Granada whilst serving as cabo principal of the Peruvian armies and governor of the fortress of Callao, Jorge de Villalonga decided to travel by sea from Lima to Guayaquil, the main port in the province of Quito. From there he continued the journey to the newly created viceregal capital over land. During the early stages of his journey to Santa Fe, Villalonga devoted a lot of attention to affairs in Quito. The viceroy stayed in that city for nearly a month, despite the apparently lukewarm welcome offered to him by its inhabitants, who probably resented the recent loss of their audiencia and came to resent even more the viceroy’s efforts to regularize royal finances in the region.2 Quito had received news of the suppression of its audiencia in October 1718 and the city council had proceeded immediately to observe the usual formalities involved in receiving a real cédula of particular importance. On October 28, before the public reading of the real cédula that created the viceroyalty, the whole coun- cil, riding upon horseback, surrounded by its macebearers and preceded by the city’s militias, paraded through the main streets of the city. On the night of the ceremony all inhabitants were ordered to illuminate their houses over- night, the city’s churches tolled their bells and there was a fireworks display 2 In more than a dozen separate letters, the viceroy called the crown’s attention towards the many problems involving tax collection in Quito. He went as far as urging the dispatch of a visitador to remedy the many frauds committed against the royal treasury in that kingdom. See the summaries of Villalonga’s letters numbers 21–23, 25–35, 37–38, 61, and 62 to the king in AGI, Santa Fe, 374. On Quito’s not overtly enthusiastic reception of the new viceroy, see Sergio Elías Ortiz, Nuevo Reino de Granada. Real Audiencia y Presidentes. Tomo 4 [sic for 3]. Presidentes de Capa y Espada (1654–1719), Historia Extensa de Colombia, Volumen III (Bogotá: Academia Colombiana de Historia, 1966), p. 350; Villalonga himself, however, stated that for his official entry into Quito the city had celebrated for three days with bullfights, comedies and banquets. AGI, Santa Fe, 286, N.7, Villalonga to king, Santa Fe, May 28, 1720, ff. 109r–110v..