Regional Conflict and Demographic Patterns on the Jesuit Missions among the Guaraní in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries 9004366148, 9789004366145

Table of contents :
Regional Conflict and Demographic Patterns on the Jesuit Missions among the Guaraní in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries
Copyright
Contents
General Series Editor's Preface
Acknowledgments
List of Figures, Illustrations, Tables and Maps
1 Introduction
2 Profile of a Demographic Crisis: 1733-1740
3 Regional Conflict and the Militarization of the Jesuit Missions
4 Demographic Patterns on the Missions
5 Conclusions
Appendix 1: The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions discussed in Chapter 4
Selected Bibliography
Index

Citation preview

Regional Conflict and Demographic Patterns on the Jesuit Missions among the Guaraní in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries

European Expansion and Indigenous Response Editor-in-Chief George Bryan Souza (University of Texas, San Antonio) Editorial Board Cátia Antunes (Leiden University) João Paulo Oliveira e Costa (cham, Universidade Nova de Lisboa) Frank Dutra (University of California, Santa Barbara) Kris Lane (Tulane University) Pedro Machado (Indiana University, Bloomington) Ghulam A. Nadri (Georgia State University) Malyn Newitt (King’s College, London) Michael Pearson (University of New South Wales) Ryuto Shimada (The University of Tokyo)

volume 31

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/euro

Regional Conflict and Demographic Patterns on the Jesuit Missions among the Guaraní in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries By

Robert H. Jackson

leiden | boston

Cover illustration: The “Triumph of Death” depicted in a mural in the upper cloister in the sixteenth century doctrina Santa María de los Reyes Magos Huatlatlauca (Puebla, Mexico)(Photograph in the collection of the author). The Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available online at http://catalog.loc.gov lc record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2018048905

Typeface for the Latin, Greek, and Cyrillic scripts: “Brill”. See and download: brill.com/brill-typeface. ISSN 1873-8974 ISBN 978-90-04-36614-5 (hardback) ISBN 978-90-04-39054-6 (e-book) Copyright 2019 by Koninklijke Brill nv, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill nv incorporates the imprints Brill, Brill Hes & De Graaf, Brill Nijhoff, Brill Rodopi, Brill Sense, Hotei Publishing, mentis Verlag, Verlag Ferdinand Schöningh and Wilhelm Fink Verlag. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill nv provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, ma 01923, usa. Fees are subject to change. This book is printed on acid-free paper and produced in a sustainable manner.

Contents General Series Editor’s Preface  vii George Bryan Souza Acknowledgements  xii List of Figures, Illustrations, Tables and Maps  xv 1 Introduction  1 2 Profile of a Demographic Crisis: 1733–1740  17 3 Regional Conflict and the Militarization of the Jesuit Missions  33 4 Demographic Patterns on the Missions  67 5 Conclusions  135 Appendix 1: The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions discussed in Chapter 4  139 Selected Bibliography  161 Index  171

General Series Editor’s Preface Over the past half millennium, from circa 1450 until the last third or so of the twentieth century, much of the world’s history has been influenced in great part by one general dynamic and complex historical process known as European expansion. Defined as the opening up, unfolding, or increasing the extent, number, volume, or scope of the space, size, or participants belonging to a certain people or group, location, or geographical region, Europe’s expansion initially emerged and emanated physically, intellectually, and politically from southern Europe—specifically from the Iberian peninsula—during the fifteenth c­ entury, expanding rapidly from that locus to include, first, all of Europe’s maritime and, later, most of its continental states and peoples. Most commonly associated with events described as the discovery of America and of a passage to the East Indies (Asia) by rounding the Cape of Good Hope (­ Africa) during the early modern and modern periods, European expansion and encounters with the rest of the world multiplied and morphed into several ancillary historical processes, including colonization, imperialism, capitalism, and globalization, encompassing themes, among others, relating to contacts and, to quote the EURO series’ original mission statement, “connections and exchanges; peoples, ideas and products, especially through the medium of trading companies; the exchange of religions and traditions; the transfer of technologies; and the development of new forms of political, social and economic policy, as well as identity formation.” Because of its intrinsic importance, extensive research has been performed and much has been written about the entire period of European expansion. With the first volume published in 2009, Brill launched the European Expansion and Indigenous Response book series at the initiative of well-known scholar and respected historian, Glenn J. Ames, who, prior to his untimely passing, was the founding editor and guided the first seven volumes of the series to publication. George Bryan Souza, who was one of the early members of the series’ editorial board, was appointed the series’ second General Editor. The series’ founding objectives are to focus on publications “that understand and deal with the process of European expansion, interchange and connectivity in a global context in the early modern and modern period” and to “provide a forum for a variety of types of scholarly work with a wider disciplinary approach that moves beyond the traditional isolated and nation bound historiographical emphases of this field, encouraging whenever possible non-European perspectives…that seek to understand this indigenous transformative process and period in autonomous as well as inter-related cultural, economic, social, and ideological terms.”

viii

General Series Editor’s Preface

The history of European expansion is a challenging field in which interest is likely to grow, in spite of, or perhaps because of, its polemical nature. Controversy has centered on tropes conceived and written in the past by Europeans, primarily concerning their early reflections and claims regarding the transcendental historical nature of this process and its emergence and importance in the creation of an early modern global economy and society. One of the most persistent objections is that the field has been “Eurocentric.” This complaint arises because of the difficulty in introducing and balancing different historical perspectives, when one of the actors in the process is to some degree neither European nor Europeanized—a conundrum alluded to in the African proverb: “Until the lion tells his tale, the hunt will always glorify the hunter.” Another, and perhaps even more important and growing historiographical issue, is that with the re-emergence of historical millennial societies (China and India, for example) and the emergence of other non-Western European societies successfully competing politically, economically, and intellectually on the global scene vis-à-vis Europe, the seminal nature of European expansion is being subjected to greater scrutiny, debate, and comparison with other historical alternatives. Despite, or perhaps because of, these new directions and stimulating sources of existing and emerging lines of dispute regarding the history of European expansion, Souza and the editorial board of the series will continue with the original objectives and mission statement of the series and vigorously “… seek out studies that employ diverse forms of analysis from all scholarly disciplines, including anthropology, archaeology, art history, history (including the history of science), linguistics, literature, music, philosophy, and religious studies.” In addition, we shall seek to stimulate, locate, incorporate, and publish the most important and exciting scholarship in the field. Towards that purpose, I am pleased to introduce volume 31 of Brill’s EURO series, entitled: Demographics of Conflict. In it, Robert H. Jackson, a senior scholar, who has already contributed two volumes in this series, (volume 16: Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival among the Sedentary Populations on the Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803, and volume 12: Conflict and Conversion in Sixteenth Century Central Mexico: The Augustinian War on and Beyond the Chichimeca Frontier), has produced a slender but compelling piece of work on the Jesuit missions among the Guaraní in the 17th and 18th Centuries. In this volume, he has returned to an examination of conflict and its impact on demographic patterns of indigenous peoples that confronted European power. This volume is meticulously researched and beautifully illustrated; it is an informed examination of this topic with respect to the relevant secondary literature and it offers a fluent and provocative analysis.

General Series Editor’s Preface

ix

Experts on this topic suggest that Jackson has produced some substantial findings on the Paraguay missions and their demographic calamities in the 18th century that are comparable to similar but better-known disasters of ­several centuries earlier. By utilizing eyewitness Jesuit accounts, he has reliably documented these events with those that occurred so much earlier. Furthermore, he has introduced and documented the epidemiological background for all parties that were involved in the contacts as a result of the conflicts of the 18th century. Demographics of Conflict finds that in the context of the history of European expansion and the diverse populations with whom the Guaraní interacted that the inherited immunities of those peoples were utterly devastated by disease when it took place in the context of war. George Bryan Souza

Map 1A

A contemporary map showing the location of the Jesuit missions. Plano corográfico de los reconocimientos pertenecientes a la demarcación del Art. 8o. del Trato. Preliminar de Límites de 11 de octe. de 1777 practicados por las segundas subdivisiones española y portuguesa en orden a desatar los dudas suscitadas entre sus respectivos comisarios. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., call number G5202.P3 178- .P5. In the public domain.

Map 1B Detail of the map showing the l­ ocation of the Jesuit missions.

Acknowledgments and Some Initial Thoughts Firstly, a note of explanation regarding the cover illustration to this study, which  is a mural from an Augustinian doctrina located in Puebla, Mexico, that depicts a common fifteenth century European iconographic theme “The Triumph of Death.” The “Triumph of Death” and the “Dance of Death” were themes following the Black Death bubonic plague outbreak of the mid-­ fourteenth century. The mural found in the upper cloister of the Augustinian mission at Huatlatlauca is a rare example of this representation found in Span­ ish America in the sixteenth century that was also a period of epidemics and demographic decline. It is also appropriate for a discussion of demographic patterns and catastrophic epidemic mortality. The second is a page of the 1764 census of the Jesuit missions that documents the distribution of the popu­ lation of the seven missions from east of the Uruguay River relocated to the other missions following the implementation of the Treaty of Madrid (1750). In recent decades some historians have extolled the virtues of what they refer to as “theory” in explaining the past. I have not embraced this trend because “theory” as applied to historical studies does not accomplish what it claims to do. The brilliance of Albert Einstein’s publications in the early twentieth century or those of Stephen Hawking was that they predicted physical phenomenon in the universe that was then proven through observation. On the other hand, I would suggest that “theory” does not and cannot predict human behavior. No “theory” can predict what I will eat for breakfast next Monday or what I will write in the first sentence of the conclusions to this study. It is the role of the historian to explain and interpret past events, not merely to narrate them. It is also to draw connections between apparently unrelated events. In this task what some identify as “theory” is very useful. I prefer to use the term paradigm, since the reality is that historian’s deal with events that have already occurred and there is nothing to predict. It is not a question of what will happen, but rather why it happened and why it is important to know. In this regard the idea or ideas used to interpret past events should also reflect realities that historical actors could understand, and not the musings and angst of early twenty first century scholars that reflect different values, and not the values of people who lived in the past. A case in point of what I mean is the well known 1997 study written by Steve Stern titled The secret history of gender: Women, men, and power in late colonial Mexico.1 Stern attributed motivations to late colonial Mexican historical actors in concepts that the actors would not 1 Charlotte: University of North Carolina Press.

Acknowledgments and Some Initial Thoughts

xiii

have recognized or most likely understood using the “theory” that was in vogue among some historians at that time. This study deals with conflict and the effects of conflict on the Jesuit missions among the Guaraní in the seventeenth to early nineteenth century. Chapter four discusses demographic patterns, and conflict. This was seen, for example, in the 1730s when there was regional conflict and the mobilization of thousands of Guaraní militiamen. More than 80,000 Guaraní died in the space of seven years. “Theory” could not have predicted with absolute certainty that contagion would spread to the missions, although it could be hypothesized based on paradigms of the demographics of early modern populations. One is that in populations that were too small to maintain a chain of endemic infection, an epidemic outbreak would occur about once a generation when there was a large enough groups of highly susceptible hosts that had not been previously exposed. However, a “theory” could not have predicted that smallpox in the years 1738–1740 would spread to some missions, but not others. Moreover, as I argued in a previous study,2 the hypothesis of the effects of so-called “virgin soil” epidemics in explaining post-conquest indigenous demographic patterns in the Americas does not hold up when tested against data from the Jesuit missions among the Guaraní. The concepts used to analyze historic demographic patterns are highly specialized, but are also significant. The interpretation presented in chapter 2 and chapter 4 relates to issues that I have studied for more than a decade, and particularly the multiple crises of the 1730s. The discussion here is based on my previous publications that are fully documented in the main text of this study. However, I have incorporated new important data such as censuses from 1735, 1737, and 1738 that gives a more complete picture of six years that proved to be among the most difficult for the Guaraní during the colonial period. I have previously compared epidemic mortality and demographics on other missions on the frontiers of Spanish America, and chapter 4 includes one new comparison with missions in Baja California. The Guaraní populations and demographic patterns were very dif­ ferent from those of the Baja California missions, but there was one point of similarity. The crises of the 1730s and particularly the smallpox epidemic at the end of the decade were related to one factor, which was the movement of large numbers of people that facilitated the spread of contagion. This explains the high catastrophic mortality in some missions that reached levels hypothesized

2 Robert H. Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival among the Sedentary Populations on the Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context (Leiden: Brill, 2015).

xiv

Acknowledgments and Some Initial Thoughts

for so-called “virgin soil” epidemics. The comparison made with the Baja Cali­ fornia missions also documented a period of the movement of relatively large numbers of people as royal officials used the Peninsula as a route to get to the new colony in California. I have many debts of gratitude in concluding this intellectual journey to understand the experiences of indigenous peoples brought to live on Spanish frontier missions that I started more than three decades ago. Two mentors or perhaps more correctly tormentors framed my development as a historian many years ago. They were David Sweet at the University of California, Santa Cruz and Murdo MacLeod who at that time taught at the University of Arizona. Over the years I have researched different subjects, but have continued my interest in missions to the point where this is my last word on the subject and it is up to others to continue exploring the subject. I announced this as the “End of a Journey” in my last study Frontiers of Evangelization, but I still had this one last study to complete. It is time to move on to other considerations such as photography and my love of the many wonders that Mexico offers. I have been fortunate to have been able to interact with interesting and informed colleagues over the years. At the top of the list are Susan Deeds, Erick Langer, Gregory Maddox, and Bob McCaa. I also owe a debt of gratitude to the late Don Tulio Halperin Donghi, who directed my doctoral dissertation at the University of California, Berkeley. He helped me select the topic of my dissertation that dealt with another indigenous frontier in Cochabamba, Bolivia, and the freedom to develop. There is a bit of Cochabamba in this study. Finally, my greatest debt is to my thanks to my wife Laura Diez de Sollano Montes de Oca. She has and continues to put up with my wanderlust and the time I have dedicated to research and writing. I was fortunate to have her accompany me in 2016 on a trip to Argentina where we visited a number of mission sites in Misiones, Argentina, saw the natural wonder of Iguaçu, and the cultural experience of tango in Boca, Buenos Aires where we also met the talented tango musician Pablo Gomez. The conclusion of this journey would not have been possible without her. Robert H. Jackson, Mexico City, Mexico

Figures, Illustrations, Tables and Maps Figures 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

The Population of Santa María la Mayor Mission  76 The Population of San Ignacio Guazú Mission  99 The Population of La Fe Mission  101 The Population of Loreto Mission  104 The Population of Candelaria Mission  105 The Population of Santa Ana Mission  108 The Population of La Cruz Mission  110 The Population of San Miguel Mission  112 The Population of San Luis Gonzaga Mission  116 The Population of Jesús María de los Guenoas Mission  119 The Population of San Francisco de Borja Mission  119 The Population of Santo Ángel Custodio Mission  121

Illustrations 1 A page from a 1667 census of the Jesuit missions  14 2 The 1724 Census of the Jesuit missions  15 3 A page from the 1764 census that summarized smallpox deaths on the missions  16 4 The Fortalesa of Santa Tereza  54 5 The ruins of San Carlos mission  60 6 The ruins of San Carlos mission  61 7 The 1792 diagram of Los Santos Mártires mission  64 8 The ruins of the mission church at Los Santos Mártires mission  64 9 The Ruins of Guaraní housing  65 10 A c. 1750 diagram of San Miguel mission  70 11 A c. 1750 diagram of San Juan Bautista mission  71 12 The Dominican doctrina Santo Domingo Tecpatán (Chiapas, Mexico)  73 13 The ruins of Santa María la Mayor Mission  77 14 A remaining structure from San Ignacio Guazú. It was housing for Guaraní families  98 15 A remaining structure from La Fe mission. It was housing for ­Guaraní families  101 16 The ruins of the church at Loreto mission  103 17 The Ruins of Candelaria Mission  105

xvi

Figures, Illustrations, Tables and Maps

18 The ruins of the church at Santa Ana Mission  108 19 A wall from the Jesuit complex at La Cruz  110 20 The ruins of the church at San Miguel Mission  114 21 A 1784 diagram of the San Luis Gonzaga building complex  116

Tables 1 Catastrophic Mortality in 1733  25 2 Mortality in 1735  25 3 The Chronology of 1737–1740 Smallpox Epidemic  26 4 Catastrophic Mortality in 1737–1740  27 5 Baptisms and Burials Recorded in 1733, 1735–1740  29 6 Baptisms and Burials recorded in 1741, 1744–1750  31 7 Marriages Recorded at the Missions, 1728–1741  32 8 Guaraní Mission Militia Mobilized for Campaigns against Colonia do ­Sacramento, 1680 and 1761  65 9 Dominican Doctrinas in Guatemala and Chiapas in 1611  125 10 Dominican Doctrinas in Chiapas and Tabasco  126 11 Population of the Paraguay Missions and the 1718–1719 Smallpox Epidemic  129 12 Baptisms and Burials recorded in 1763–1765  130 13 Livestock reported at Los Santos Mártires Mission  132 14 Livestock slaughtered and lost at Los Santos Mártires Mission in 1790  132 15 Population of the Baja California Missions in 1744 and total baptisms from date of foundation to 1744  133 16 The Population of San Francisco Xavier and Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe Mis­ sions, in selected years  133 17 Crude Birth and Death Rates on Selected Baja California Missions, 1769, 1772, 1781–1782  134

Maps 1A A contemporary map showing the location of the Jesuit missions  x 1B Detail of the map showing the location of the Jesuit missions  xi 2 A 1737 map of Colonia do Sacramento  45 3 A 1777 Spanish map showing the changes to Colonia do Sacramento and its defenses  46 4 A contemporary map showing Lake Merim, the disputed borderlands, and the mouth of Laguna de los Patos  55

Figures, Illustrations, Tables and Maps

xvii

5 The Spanish Fort of Santa Tecla built in 1773  55 6 A contemporary map showing the defenses constructed at the mouth of La­ guna de los Patos  56 7 Detail of the map showing the fortifications  57 8 A contemporary map showing the interior of Laguna de los Patos  58 9 Detail of the map showing the fortifications and settlement  59 10 An 1818 diagram of San Carlos mission destroyed during an 1818 battle with Luso-Brazilian invaders  62

Chapter 1

Introduction In the five centuries following the first sustained contact between the Old and New worlds in 1492, the native populations of the Americas experienced extreme demographic changes that included, in some instances, rapid population decline. What factors shaped post- contact demographic patterns among the indigenous populations of the Americas? Highly contagious crowd disease such as smallpox and measles was one. A second was ecological crises leading to food shortages and famine. Physical abuse and exploitation by European colonizers certainly was another. Conflict was a fourth, and it generally does not receive adequate scholarly attention. Conflict began with European wars of conquest such as in Mexico in the sixteenth century. The early modern period and particularly the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries was a period of prolonged conflict in Europe. The Protestant Reformation initiated a destructive cycle of wars over which brand of Christianity people embraced that only concluded with the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 that ended the Thirty Years War (1618–1648). Nation building conflicted with regional and national aspirations as in the case of the Dutch revolt against Spanish Hapsburg rule, or the Portuguese reassertion of independence in 1640 following 80 years of Spanish Hapsburg governance. Europeans also fought a series of wars to reestablish an elusive balance of power, which was an abstract concept rulers and diplomats could claim to recognize but not define. Conflict was also related to climatic conditions that caused ecological crisis, and marauding armies spread infectious disease that killed many people and generally more than died on the battlefield.1 1 On conflict and crisis see Geoffrey Parker, Global crisis: war, climate change and catastrophe in the seventeenth century (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013); Thomas Munck, Seventeenth century Europe: State, conflict and the social order in Europe 1598–1700 (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1990); Gerald Soliday, A community in conflict: Frankfurt society in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries (Hanover, N.H.: Published for Brandeis University Press by the University Press of New England, 1974); Michael Howard, War in European history. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009). For a discussion of the demographics of war see, for example, Myron P. Gutmann, “Putting crises in perspective. The impact of war on civilian populations in the seventeenth century,” Annales de démographie historique, (1977), 101–128; Nico Voigtländer, and Hans-Joachim Voth, “The three horsemen of riches: Plague, war, and urbanization in early modern Europe,” Review of Economic Studies 80:2 (2012), 774–811; John Theibault, “The Demography of the Thirty Years War Re-revisited: Günther Franz and his Critics,” German History 15:1 (1997), 1–21; Markus Cerman, “Bohemia after the thirty years’

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���9 | doi:10.1163/9789004390546_002

2

Chapter 1

Conflict in this period often spilled over into European colonial territories in the Americas, Africa, and Asia. Certain areas in the Americas, for example, became focal points of conflict. The Caribbean Basin was one. Spanish colonial commerce passed through the region, and the flotas (convoys of merchant ships) became the target of Spain’s European rivals and the buccaneers, a conglomeration of people of different nationalities that engaged in piracy.2 Spain responded to the threat to its commerce by building massive stone fortifications to protect its ports, a strategy that proved flawed when the British simultaneously occupied Havana and Manila in 1762 during the Seven Years War (1755–1763).3 A failed British assault on Cartagena in 1748 had temporarily reaffirmed Spanish confidence in this defensive strategy, but it was disease rather than Spanish defenses that defeated the British attack.4 The Spanish defeat in the Seven Years War, however, resulted in a military reorganization in Spanish America, and the creation of the first standing armies that had to be

war: some theses on population structure, marriage and family,” Journal of Family History 19: 2 (1994), 149–175; Roger Cooter, “Of war and epidemics: Unnatural couplings, problematic conceptions,” Social History of Medicine 16: 2 (2003), 283–302; John C. Caldwell, “Social upheaval and fertility decline,” Journal of family history 29:4 (2004):, 382–406. 2 Roland Hussey, “Spanish reaction to foreign aggression in the Caribbean to about 1680,” The Hispanic American Historical Review 9 (1929), 286–302; Stephan Palmié, and Francisco A. Scarano, eds, The Caribbean: a history of the region and its peoples (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013); Frank Moya Pons, History of the Caribbean: plantations, trade, and war in the Atlantic world (Princeton: Markus Wiener Publishers, 2007); John L. Anderson, “Piracy and world history: An economic perspective on maritime predation,” Journal of World History (1995), 175–199; Kris E Lane, and Robert M. Levine, Pillaging the Empire: Piracy in the Americas, 1500–1750 (London: Routledge, 2015); Richard B. Sheridan, “The Plantation Revolution and the Industrial Revolution, 1625–1775,” Caribbean Studies 9:3 (1969), 5–25. 3 Paul E. Hoffman, The Spanish Crown and the Defense of the Caribbean, 1535–1585: Precedent, Patrimonialism, and Royal Parsimony (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1999); Carlos Marichal, and Matilde Souto Mantecón. “Silver and Situados: New Spain and the ­financing of the Spanish Empire in the Caribbean in the eighteenth century,” The Hispanic American Historical Review 74:4 (1994), 587–613; Alejandro de Quesada, Spanish colonial fortifications in North America 1565–1822 (Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2010); John Robert McNeill, “Mosquito Empires: Ecology and War in the Greater Caribbean, 1620–1914,” Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 36:71 (2011), 290–292; David Greentree, A Far-Flung Gamble-Havana 1762 (Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2010); Nicholas Tracy; Manila ransomed: The British assault on Manila in the seven years war (Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1995). 4 Carl E. Swanson, “American Privateering and Imperial Warfare, 1739–1748,” The William and Mary Quarterly: A Magazine of Early American History 42:3 (1985), 357–382; Charles E Nowell, “The Defense of Cartagena,” The Hispanic American Historical Review 42:4 (1962), 477–501; Julian De Zulueta, “Health and military factors in Vernon’s failure at Cartagena,” The Mariner’s Mirror 78: 2 (1992), 127–141.

Introduction

3

funded. The military reorganization was a key element of the so-called Bourbon Reforms in Spanish America after 1762.5 Colonial territorial expansion was a second cause of conflict in the Americas, and conflict over land and boundaries in the Rio de la Plata region provides the conceptual framework for this study. The Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) between Castile and Portugal established spheres of influence and space for colonization that proved to be poorly defined and open to different interpretation in South America by the two signatories, and particularly in the Rio de la Plata borderlands.6 The Rio de la Plata was a Spanish colonial backwater when compared to Mexico and the Andean Highlands with its mineral wealth, and Spain dedicated few resources to its development and through inertia left much of the territory it claimed unoccupied. Luso-Brazilian colonists, on the other hand, aggressively expanded into what Spain claimed as its sphere of influence but had failed to occupy, and redefined colonial boundaries. This expansion came into conflict with Jesuit missions among the Guaraní, resulted in the destruction of missions, and gave rise to a unique military-political organization on the missions. This prolonged regional conflict in the disputed Rio de la Plata borderlands and its effects on demographic patterns on the Jesuit missions provides the conceptual framework for this study. In a 2015 study I examined demographic patterns on the Jesuit Paraguay and Chiquitos missions located in lowland South America in the context of a hypothesis regarding post-contact patterns among the indigenous populations in the Americas.7 It posited a re-evaluation of the model of so-called “virgin soil” epidemics. These were the first epidemics following sustained contact between 5 Leon G. Campbell, The military and society in colonial Peru, 1750–1810, (Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1978); Christon Archer, The Army in Bourbon Mexico, 1760– 1810 (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1977); Allan J. Kuethe, Military Reform and Society in New Granada, 1773–1808 (Gainesville: University Presses of Florida, 1978); Allan J. Kuethe, and Kenneth J. Andrien, The Spanish Atlantic World in the Eighteenth Century: War and the Bourbon Reforms, 1713–1796 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014); Jacques A. Barbier, Reform and politics in Bourbon Chile, 1755–1796 (Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 1980). 6 H. Vander Linden, “Alexander vi and the Demarcation of the Maritime and Colonial Domains of Spain and Portugal 1493–1494,” The American Historical Review 22:1 (1916), 1–20; James McCourt, “Treaty of Tordesillas1494.” Queensland History Journal 21:2 (2010), 88–102. 7 Robert H. Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival among the Sedentary Populations on the Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015). Alfred Crosby was one of the first scholars to discuss this aspect of post-contact demographic patterns. See his article “Virgin soil epidemics as a factor in the aboriginal depopulation in America,” The William and Mary Quarterly: A Magazine of Early American History 33:2 (1976), 289–299.

4

Chapter 1

the Old and New Worlds that killed large percentages of populations. The critique presented documented instances on the Jesuit missions among the Guaraní similar to levels posited for the first “virgin soil” outbreaks, and this some 200 years following initial contact. Comparison with other contemporary mission populations showed that levels of catastrophic epidemic mortality and demographic patterns on the Paraguay missions were unique. In a 2017 study I evaluated one aspect of demographic patterns and mission development laid out in the 2015 monograph that compared missions among sedentary and non-sedentary populations, including differences in demographic patterns.8 The study compared the Chiquitos and Sierra Gorda missions, although it also included some demographic data from the Paraguay missions for further comparison. It evaluated and found demographic differences between sedentary and non-sedentary groups, as initially discussed in the 2015 study. One example was a difference in the age and gender structures. This current study examines in more detail another point of analysis touched upon in the 2015 study, the effect of conflict on demographic patterns. I discussed this point in relation to a severe smallpox epidemic that spread through the missions in 1763 to 1765, and also in the context of the crises of the 1730s. Here it becomes the main conceptual point of analysis to help explain the unique demographic patterns documented for the Paraguay missions. It examines demographic patterns on the Jesuit missions among the Guaraní as set against the backdrop of nearly two centuries of regional conflict and the militarization of the missions. The stunning defeat at the hands of the British in 1762 forced Spain to create armies in the Americas for the first time, which meant that prior to that time the colonial populations mobilized as militia had provided the “cannon fodder” for the conflicts in the Rio de la Plata, and this responsibility fell heaviest on the Guaraní residents of the missions. Royal officials had come to depend heavily on the mission militia to provide the manpower for military campaigns. Scholars have examined the creation of the mission militia and the militarization of the Jesuit missions.9 8 Robert H. Jackson, Frontiers of Evangelization: Indians in the Sierra Gorda and Chiquitos­ Missions (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2017). 9 On the mission militia see, for example, Paulo Cesar, and Emir Reitano, coordinators, Hombres, poder y conflicto: Estudios sobre la frontera colonial sudamericana y su crisis (La Plata: Universidad Nacional de La Plata, 2015); Mercedes Avellaneda, “Orígenes de la alianza jesuita-guaraní y su consolidación en el siglo xvii,” Memoria Americana 8 (1999), 173–200; Mercedes Avellaneda, “El ejército guaraní en las reducciones jesuitas del Paraguay,” História Unisinos 9:1 (2005), 19–34; Mercedes Avellaneda, and Lia Quarleri, “Las milicias guaraníes en el Paraguay y Río de la Plata: alcances y limitaciones (1649–1756),” Estudos Ibero-Americanos 33:1 (2007), 109–132; Mercedes Avellaneda, Guaraníes, criollos y jesuitas: Luchas de poder en las Revoluciones Comuneras del Paraguay Siglos xvii y xviii, (Asunción: Editorial Tiempo de Historia, 2014); Lia Quarteri, “Gobierno y liderazgo ­jesuítico-guaraní en tiempos de guerra

Introduction

5

The formalization of the military structure on the missions and the long history of conflict against the common enemy contributed to a unique process of ethnogenesis, the creation of a new identity based on the alliance with the Jesuits against the Portuguese and linked to the mission community of residence.10

10

(1752–1756),” Revista de Indias 68:243 (2008), 89–114; Kazuhisa Takeda, “Cambio y continuidad del liderazgo indígena en el cacicazgo y en la milicia de las misiones jesuíticas: análisis cualitativo de las listas de indios guaraníes/Transition and continuity of the indigenous leadership in the kinship organization and in the militia of the jesuit missions: qualitative analysis of the name lists of guaraní indians,” Tellus 12:23 (2012), 59–79; Kazuhisa Takeda, “Las milicias guaraníes en las misiones jesuíticas del Río de la Plata: un ejemplo de la transferencia organizativa y tácticas militares de España a su territorio de ultramar en la primera época moderna,” Revista de Historia Social y de las Mentalidades 20:2 (2016), 33–72; Kazuhisa Takeda, “Organización social de las misiones guaraníes: relación entre la parcialidad y la milicia,” Trabalho apresentado em: xiii Jornadas Internacionais sobre as Missões Jesuíticas: fronteiras e identidades: povos indígenas e missões religiosas (Dourados: Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados, 2015),” História ­Unisinos 15:2 (2011), 281–293. For a discussion of militias in a later period see Bárbara Caletti Garciadiego, “Milicias y Guaraníes en Yapeyú: La defensa de la” Frontera del Uruguay” en los albores del siglo xix,” Prohistoria 23 (2015), 47–70; Eduardo Neumann, “Fronteira e identidade: confrontos luso-guarani na Banda Oriental 1680–1757,” Revista Complutense de Historia de América 26 (2000), 73–92; María Luisa Salinas, and Pedro Miguel Omar Svriz Wucherer, “Liderazgo guaraní en tiempos de paz y de guerra. Los caciques en las reducciones franciscanas y jesuíticas, siglos xvii y xviii,” Revista de Historia Militar 55:110 (2011), 113–152. Guillermo Wilde, “Territorio y Etnogénesis misional en el Paraguay del siglo xviii.” Fronteiras: Revista de História 11:19 (2009), 83–106, hypothesized a process of ethnogenesis on the missions. Also see his study Religión y poder en las misiones de guaraníes (Buenos Aires: Sb editorial, 2009); and “Jesuit Missions and the Guarani Ethnogenesis: Political Interactions, Indigenous Actors, and Regional Networks on the Southern Frontier of the Iberian Empires,” in Frank Zephyr, ed., Big Water: The Making of the Borderlands Between Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 2018), 54–80. Also see Shawn Michael Austin, “Beyond the Missions: Ethnogenesis in Colonial Paraguay, 1556–1700,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of New Mexico, 2014. There is an extensive literature ethnogenesis. For examples related to colonial missions see Jaqueline Peterson, “Ethnogenesis: Settlement and Growth of a ‘New People,’” American Indian Culture and Research Journal 6:2 (1982), 23–64; Kirstin C. Erickson, “They will come from the other side of the sea”: Prophecy, Ethnogenesis, and Agency in Yaqui Narrative,” Journal of American folklore 116:462 (2003), 465–482; Josh M. McDaniel, “History and the Duality of Power in Community-based Forestry in Southeast Bolivia,”Development and Change 34:2 (2003), 339–356; Susan M. Deeds, “Pushing the borders of Latin American mission history,” Latin American Research Review 39:2 (2004), 211–220; Jonathan D. Hill, Long Term Patterns of Ethnogenesis in Indigenous Amazonia (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2013); Mariah Wade, “Colonial Missions in the North American Southwest: Social Memory and Ethnogenesis,” cecs-Publicações/eBooks (2013), 253–265; Mary-Elizabeth Reeve, “Amazonian Quichua in the western Amazon regional interaction sphere,” Tipití: Journal of the Society for the Anthropology of Lowland South America 12:11 (2014), 14–27, among others. One controversial interpretation of ethnogenesis related to missions regards the group identified today as the “Chumash,” efforts to gain Federal recognition as an Indian tribe,

6

Chapter 1

The strength of the process of the forging of a new identity can be seen in the Guaraní response to the Treaty of Madrid (1750) that attempted to establish boundaries between Spanish and Portuguese territory in South America and transferred the seven missions located east of the Uruguay River to Portuguese authority. The Jesuit- Guaraní alliance withstood the crises of the 1730s, but ruptured when Spain proposed giving their homes to their enemy. The Guaraní leaders of the seven eastern missions framed their resistance to the treaty in terms of protecting their communities, and in the give and take between the Guaraní, Jesuit missionaries, and royal officials the Guaraní made it clear that they did not want to relocate to new homes. This process of ethnogenesis forged in conflict provides a second conceptual framework to this study. The Rio de la Plata region was not the only Spanish frontier in conflict, but the circumstances that led to the creation of the military structure on the Guaraní missions was. Royal officials adopted different military policies on the frontiers of New Spain (Mexico). The first frontier conflicts were the Mixtón War in Nueva Galicia (1540–1542) and the ChichimecaWar (1550–1600). Both conflicts established a pattern of the use of indigenous warriors, but in a supporting role to Spanish soldiers.11 The long Chichimeca conflict also set the pattern for military defense on the northern frontier. Royal officials established presidios or small forts staffed by small garrisons of full-time soldiers.12 As the Spanish expanded the frontier northward royal officials increased the number of presidios. In this military system the subject native populations played only and creative geneology through a sleight of hand that has people of Spanish-Mexican ancestry claiming to be “Chumash.” On this see Brian D. Haley, and Larry R. Wilcoxon. “Anthropology and the making of Chumash tradition,” Current anthropology 38:5 (1997), 761–794; Jon McVey Erlandson, “The making of Chumash tradition: Replies to Haley and Wilcoxon,” Current anthropology 39:4 (1998): 477–510; Brian D. Haley, and R. Larry Wilcoxon, “Reply [to Erlandson et al., The making of Chumash tradition].” Current Anthropology 39:4 (1998): 501–508; Brian D. Haley, and Larry R. Wilcoxon, “How Spaniards became Chumash and other tales of ethnogenesis,” American Anthropologist 107:3 (2005), 432–445; Brian D. Haley, “Tribal synthesis or ethnogenesis? Campbell’s interpretation of Haley and Wilcoxon,” The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 13:1 (2007), 219–222. In this case a Mexican-American veteran of World War ii, for example, created a new identity for himself as the traditional religious leader Semo who claimed to have been born in a cave. 11 On the early frontier wars see Ida Altman, The War for Mexico’s West: Indians and Spaniards in New Galicia, 1524–1550 (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2010). On the Chichimeca conflict, see Philip Wayne Powell, Soldiers, Indians & Silver: North America’s First Frontier War (Tempe: Center for Latin American Studies, Arizona State University, 1952); Philip Wayne Powell, Mexico’s Miguel Caldera: the taming of America’s first frontier, 1548–1597 (Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1977). 12 Powell, Soldiers, Indians & Silver; Max L Moorhead, The presidio: bastion of the Spanish borderlands (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991).

Introduction

7

a support role as auxiliaries, and the Spanish did not provide firearms to the auxiliaries mobilized for war. Rather, the auxiliaries used their own weapons such as lances and bows and arrows.13 Native auxiliaries on the north Mexican frontier had a similar role as did the Tupí warriors the Luso-Brazilians mobilized in the 1620s and 1630s for the raids on the Jesuit missions. Another important difference was that the most serious threat to the Spanish came from hostile indigenous groups such as the peoples collectively known as the Apache and the Comanche that became very effective equestrian warriors that raided Spanish settlements. These groups were similar, for example, to the Abipones of the Chaco frontier in the Rio de la Plata region that also became effective equestrian warriors and raided Spanish settlements. The training and equipment of the presidio soldiers was sufficient to deal with hostile indigenous groups, but was not on a level to face trained European soldiers or rival colonists armed with firearms. Within the Jesuit jurisdiction of the Paraguay Province that extended to the eastern tropical lowlands of what today is Bolivia, the Guaraní missions were the only establishments that had a formal military organization. The Chiquitos mission communities, for example, were also located close to Portuguese settlements in Mato Grosso, and the Jesuits relocated mission communities in response to the potential Luso-Brazilian threat.14 However, Luso-Brazilians did not attempt to systematically destroy Jesuit missions as they did in Guairá and Tape, and the Black Robes did not create a military organization. This present study builds upon earlier contributions and offers new perspectives on how the unique circumstance of conflict in the Rio de la Plata region framed and shaped the demographic development of the Guaraní mission communities. Chapter 2 provides a profile of the series of mortality crises in the 1730s that resulted in the deaths of more than 80,000 Guaraní in seven years. Despite the level of catastrophic mortality during the crises, the Guaraní-Jesuit alliance and sense of identity based on the mission community of residence did not rupture. The chapter documents mortality patterns using documents not available for the 2015 study, and particularly the 1738 general census that recorded the numbers of deaths as well as other key dates such as 1735 and 1737. Chapter 3 discusses regional conflict in the disputed Rio de la Plata borderlands. It first outlines an example of the first conflict with Luso-Brazilians in the 1620s and 1630s. The Jesuits established missions in the Tape region of what today is Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. The missions existed for a short period 13

On the use of auxiliaries see Oakah L. Jones, Pueblo Warriors & Spanish Conquest (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1966). 14 Jackson, Frontiers of Evangelization, 54.

8

Chapter 1

of time until forced to relocate because of an attack by Luso-Brazilians in 1636–1637. Tape was the second group of Jesuit missions the Luso-Brazilians attacked. In response to the raid the Jesuits organized a military structure of a mission militia that decisively defeated the Luso-Brazilians in the battle of Mbororé in 1641. The Jesuits retained and institutionalized this military organization, and armed the Guaraní with firearms that proved decisive in Mbororé which was an action that royal officials did not allow elsewhere. How intense was the conflict in the disputed Rio de la Plata borderlands? The second section of Chapter 3 describes several episodes in the long conflict, and the participation of the mission militia in the campaigns. They include the campaigns to occupy Colonia do Sacramento, the conflict over Rio Grande do Sul in the 1760s and 1770s which was also related to the debacle of the Treaty of Madrid (1750), and two episodes that directly changed the history of the Jesuit missions. The first was the Luso-Brazilian campaign organized by the governor of Rio Grande do Sul that occupied the seven missions located east of the Uruguay River and permanently incorporated this territory into Brazil. The second was the 1817–1818 Luso-Brazilian invasion and Paraguayan invasions of the mission territory located between the Paraná and Uruguay Rivers. This occurred during the tumultuous years of the independence movement in the Rio de la Plata region, and was one of a series of conflicts over the boundaries of the newly emerging countries that did not end until 1830. The invading armies sacked, damaged, or destroyed most of the mission building complexes in the region, leaving the former missions largely in ruin. Archaeological excavations of the site of Los Santos Mártires mission uncovered evidence of the burning of the mission church by Luso-Brazilian forces. Chapter 4 analyzes demographic patterns and the effects of regional conflict on the mission populations beyond the number of militiamen killed in battle or who died from disease in encampments. It first considers the organization and urban plan of the Jesuit missions in a comparative fashion. The Jesuits created new communities from whole cloth, and congregated thousands of Guaraní on the new communities. They lived in small nucleated villages, and this urban plan facilitated the spread of contagion. Missionaries in other regions, on the other hand, did not do so. Rather, the indigenous populations continued to live in their communities in a more dispersed settlement p ­ attern that the missionaries visited periodically. It then discusses demographic patterns as related to conflict and what I call “population” politics, and offers detailed case studies of epidemics and individual missions that demonstrate the effects of epidemics or, to the contrary, alternative demographic patterns. A discussion of individual missions goes back to my critique of the 2004 article of Massimo Livi Bacci and Ernesto Maeder, whose analysis focused on the combined figures for all 30 missions without considering individual differences that more

Introduction

9

fully explain demographic patterns.15 These case studies further highlight the demographic consequences of regional conflict and militarization of the missions. 1

An Overview to the Missions

The Spanish and Portuguese encountered clan based agriculturalists that practiced shifting swidden agriculture and nomadic hunters and gatherers in the lowland region of South America that encompasses what today are parts of Argentina, southern Brazil, Uruguay, and Paraguay. This was a part of the region the Jesuits named the Province of Paraguay. The native groups inhabiting the region did not live in stratified and hierarchical states, so the Spanish devised other modes of colonization and exploitation. At the same time Jesuit social engineering in the missions sought to convert them to a fully sedentary way of life. The Portuguese enslaved natives, whereas the Spanish used the encomienda to organize what amounted to forced labor. It was also a contested frontier, as the Spanish and Portuguese struggled during several centuries for control of land and native labor, even during the period of the union of the Crowns (1580–1640). The Franciscans were the first to attempt to evangelize the different native groups living in the region. The Jesuits (the Society of Jesus) entered the region in 1607, establishing the missionary Province of Paraguay in 1607. The initiative came from Jesuits stationed on the Jesuit College at Cordoba, and two years later the missionaries established the first mission at San Ignacio Guazú, located in what today is southern Paraguay. The initial thrust of their evangelization campaign were the groups collectively known as the Guaraní that lived in a territory that stretched from southern Brazil, to Uruguay, parts of northern Argentina, and Paraguay. The Jesuit strategy was to establish missions among populations not held in encomienda, and as far from Spanish settlement as possible. San Ignacio Guazú was a community partially held in encomienda, but the other missions established among the Guaraní were not. Over the next two decades the Black Robes expanded to Guairá (Modern Paraná State, B ­ razil), Tape (modern Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil), Itatín (northern Paraguay), and what became the core territory located between the Paraná and U ­ ruguay Rivers. Between 1610 and 1632, the Jesuits established and administered 15 15

Massimo Livi-Bacci, and Ernesto J. Maeder, “The Missions of Paraguay: the demography of an Experiment,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 35:2 (2004), 185–224; Robert H. ­Jackson, “The population and vital rates of the Jesuit Missions of Paraguay, 1700–1767,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 38:3 (2008), 401–431.

10

Chapter 1

missions in Guairá: San Ignacio Miní (1610), Nuestra Señora de Loreto (1610), San Francisco Xavier (1624), San José (1625), Nuestra Señora de Encarnación (1625), Santa María (1626), San Pablo del Inaí (1627), San Antonio (1627), Los Ángeles (1627), San Pablo (1627), Nuestra Señora de Guananas (1627/1628), Santo Tomás (1628), Emida de Nuestra Señora de Copacabana (1628), and Jesús María (1628). The bandeirantes destroyed this group of missions in 1632 (for a discussion of the Tape missions see Chapter 3 below).16 As discussed in more detail below in Chapter 3, raids by slave traders from Sao Paulo known as bandeirantes forced the Jesuits to abandon Guairá and Tape in the 1630s, and after that the Jesuits focused their evangelization campaign on the region between the Paraná and Uruguay Rivers. In the late seventeenth century the Jesuits established new missions east of the Uruguay River in what today is modern Rio Grande do Sul, as a part of the geopolitics of ­control over the disputed borderlands in the Rio de la Plata region. In 1680, the Portuguese established Colonia do Sacramento in what today is Uruguay. The Jesuit expansion east of the Uruguay River served to assert Spanish territorial claims, and to geographically isolate the Portuguese settlement. By the early eighteenth century the missions among the Guaraní numbered 30, and in 1732 had a total population of more than 140,000.17 The Jesuits did establish new missions in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth century, but by relocating Guaraní from existing missions. This occurred, for example, in the Case of Santa Rosa de Lima mission. The Jesuits established the mission in 1698 at a site close to San Ignacio Guazú in what today is southern Paraguay, with natives originally from the Itatín region northeast of Asunción who resided at Nuestra Señora la Fe mission.18 The population of Santa Rosa grew robustly in the first three decades of the eighteenth century due to high birth rates, and the vital rates were typical of the Paraguay missions that were high fertility and high mortality populations. Death rates were high, but in non-epidemic years birth rates were higher. In 1702, four years following the establishment of the mission, 2,879 natives lived at Santa Rosa, and this number increased to 6,093 in 1731, making Santa Rosa one of the most populous of the Paraguay missions.

16 17 18

Claudia Parrellada, “El Paraná Español: Ciudades y misiones jesuíticas en Guaira,” in Missoes: Conquistando almas e territorios (Curitiba: Governo do Paraná, 2009), 133–134. For a useful overview to the Jesuit missions among the Guarani see Barbara Ganson, The Guaraní under Spanish rule in the Rio de la Plata (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2005). Ernesto Maeder, Una Aproximación a las Misiones guaraníticas (Buenos Aires: Universidad Católica Argentina, 1996), 50.

Introduction

11

Following the establishment by the Portuguese of Colonia do Sacramento in what today is modern Uruguay in 1680, the Jesuits transferred several existing missions and established new communities in the region east of the Uruguay River, to assert Spanish claims to the disputed borderland in the Banda Oriental (modern Uruguay).19 The Jesuits relocated San Nicolás and San Miguel missions east of the river, elevated San Francisco de Borja to the status of an independent mission, and established four new missions: San Luis Gonzaga, San Lorenzo Mártir, San Juan Bautista, and Santo Ángel Custodio with populations from existing missions. 2

A Note on Terminology and Archival Sources

In this study I use the term mortality crisis and catastrophic mortality. The first term is conventionally defined as mortality three times normal mortality rates in a given population. In the case of the Jesuit missions this could be a death rate in excess of 100 per thousand population or higher. The term catastrophic mortality indicates extremely high mortality. For example, the “Black Death” pandemic of the mid-fourteenth century caused catastrophic mortality in ­Europe. For the purposes of this study I define catastrophic mortality as a death rate in excess of 250 per thousand population, or a quarter or more of a given population. The documents used in this study are housed in a number of archives in South America and Europe. The most important are the Archivo General de la Nación, Buenos Aires, Argentina, which also administers the Biblioteca Nacional. The second most important is the Coleção De Angelis in the Biblioteca Nacional in Rio de Janeiro. The Italian soldier, statesman, and scholar Pedro de Angelis (1784–1859) collected more than a thousand documents during a long residence in Buenos Aires and deposited them in the Biblioteca Nacional. Both archives contain mission censuses, cartas anuas which were narrative reports prepared by the Jesuit missionaries for their superiors, and other reports and correspondence. The Biblioteca Nacional published a selection of documents related to the conflict in the disputed borderlands in a useful multi-volume collection that has also been digitalized. 19

On the expansion of the Paraguay mission frontier into the Banda Oriental after 1680 see Robert H. Jackson, “Patrones demográficos de una frontera en conflicto: Las siete misiones orientales de la provincia jesuítica de Paraguay, 1680–1830,” unpublished paper presented at the Seminário Internacional: Indígenas, Misionários e Espanhois o Parana no Contexto da Bacia do Prata, Seculos xvl e XVll, Paraná, October 15–17, 2008.

12

Chapter 1

Royal officials sent many documents related to the American territories to Spain, and many are housed in the Archivo General de Indias located in Sevilla, Spain. For the purposes of this study the most important is the 1705 Burges report that summarized the population history of the mission and also contains a 1702 census also found in the Biblioteca Nacional in Rio de Janeiro. The Archivum Romannum Societatis Iesu, located in Vatican City is a second important European archive and contains documents sent to the Jesuit leadership in Rome. The collection also includes the cartas anuas, other reports and letters, as well as census that originally were appended to the cartas anuas. Some of the censuses, such as a 1691 and 1710 population count, are not found in other repositories. The Jesuits prepared three types of censuses. The most useful type is the detailed tribute census that generally categorized the population by family group and cacicazgo (the jurisdiction of the clan chiefs), and estimated ages. The missionaries at each mission prepared annual censuses that summarized population information as well as the number of sacraments administered including baptisms, marriages, burials, and communions. Most have been lost, but the Coleção De Angelis contains a run for Yapeyú mission in the 1720s to 1740s, and the run includes years for which general censuses have not survived. Jesuit officials in the Paraguay Province took the information from these censuses to prepare general censuses in Latin and Spanish. The Latin versions generally only summarized population information, whereas the Spanish versions are more useful and have figures on the number of sacraments administered. In the absence of sacramental registers of baptisms, marriages, and burials, I have used the summaries in the general censuses to reconstruct the vital rates of the mission populations. As already noted, I have included updated tables of the vital rates of the missions as an appendix to this study. Some scholars believe that the publication of a series of population figures represents the analysis of demographic data.20 This is not the case. A series of population figures show upward or downward trends, but not the dynamic of change. To accomplish this one must calculate vital rates to show the dynamic of change over time and document the age and gender structure of populations. In one review of the 2015 monograph Shawn Michael Austin claimed 20

See, for example, Julia Sarreal, The Guaraní and Their Missions: A Socioeconomic History (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2014). Sarreal presents a table on page 142 that records the populations of the missions, and calculated the percentage difference between the population counts. The author did not use censuses to calculate the vital rates of the mission populations.

Introduction

13

that I had not made use of seventeenth century censuses in the analysis of mission population trends.21 This inaccurate statement also demonstrated a lack of understanding of the study of demographics. Not all Jesuit mission censuses contained information that can be used to calculate the vital rates. A 1667 census, for example, noted the number of families and total population, but not the numbers of baptisms and burials recorded which can be used to calculate vital rates (see Illustration 1). The 1691 census was one of the first to record more complete information useful in a more complete analysis of vital rates and demographic trends, and by the 1720s the Jesuits standardized the information on the more complete census format as in the 1724 document (see Illustration 2). Some censuses also recorded additional useful information, such as the 1764 and 1765 counts that noted the total number of smallpox deaths on the missions (see Illustration 3). 3

Archival Sources

Archivo General de la Nación, Buenos Aires, Argentina – agn Archivo General de las Indias, Sevilla, Spain – agi Archivum Romannum Societatis Iesu, Vatican City – arsi Biblioteca Nacional, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil – BN Coleção De Angelis, Biblioteca Nacional, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil – CA

21

Shawn Michael Austin, “Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among the Sedentary Populations on the Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context, written by Robert H. Jackson,” Journal of Jesuit Studies 3:1 (2016), 102–104. Also see the response to this review: Robert H. Jackson, “Response to Shawn Austin’s Review of Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among the Sedentary Populations on the Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context,” Journal of Jesuit Studies 4:2 (2017), 371–376.

14

Chapter 1

Illustration 1 A page from a 1667 census of the Jesuit missions. It recorded the number of families and total population. agn.

15

Introduction

Illustration 2

The 1724 census of the Jesuit missions. agn.

16

Chapter 1

Illustration 3 A page from the 1764 census that summarized smallpox deaths on the missions. agn.

Chapter 2

Profile of a Demographic Crisis: 1733–1740 In 1731 and 1732, the populations of the Jesuit missions continued to grow, and totaled more than 141,000. It had been fourteen years since the last severe smallpox epidemic in 1718–1719. However, conditions were ripe for a series of severe mortality crises. Rapid population growth since the last epidemic also meant that there were a large number of potentially susceptible people on the missions, and in particular children born since the last outbreak who had not been previously exposed to contagion. Moreover, political and military problems remained unresolved. Paraguay colonists continued to defy royal authority, and the political crisis that began in the early 1720s festered. Moreover, the Portuguese continued to take advantage of Spanish inertia to expand in the disputed borderlands, as is outlined in the following chapter. Severe mortality crises occurred between 1733 and 1740, and combined famine and epidemics that reduced the size of the populations of the Jesuit missions from a recorded high of 141,182 in 1732 to 73,910 at the end of 1740. A combination of factors contributed to the heavy population losses. One was the mobilization of Guaraní militiamen for service in Buenos Aires, the Banda Oriental (Uruguay), and on the Tebicuary River to confront the ongoing political crisis in Asunción known as the Comunero Rebellion.1 The second was the high population densities of the mission communities and the large number of children and young adults born since the last major epidemic in 1718. The third was drought and famine conditions that contributed to large scale flight from the missions as people left in search of food and to escape disease. People in movement spread disease. This can be seen in two ways during the crisis of the 1730s. The first was the posting of Spanish troops and mission militia on the Tebicuary River for months at a time. The heaviest mortality during the lethal 1733 epidemic was in the missions located closest to the encampment, and the residents of these missions most likely came into contact with the unhealthy environment of the encampment when they delivered supplies and then carried contagion back to the missions. The Jesuits reported a total of 18,773 burials in 1733, and a net loss in population of some 13,000. Deaths at San Ignacio Guazú totaled 1,192 (crude death rate of 324.7 per thousand population), 2,618 at La Fe (crude death rate of 307.4 per thousand population), and 2,263 at Santa Rosa (crude death rate of 459.2 per thousand population). 1 Avellaneda, Guaraníes, criollos y jesuitas, 224–226.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���9 | doi:10.1163/9789004390546_003

18

Chapter 2

The population of these three missions dropped from 15,803 in 1731 to 8,292 at the end of 1733. Mortality was lighter at the other missions located further away from the military encampment. At Ytapúa located on the Paraná River, for example, the Jesuits reportedly buried 811 (crude death rate of 115.9 per thousand population) (see Table 1).2 The ecological crises and famine conditions resulted in the flight of Guarani from the Paraguay missions. In 1735 the Jesuits reported that 8,022 Guarani had fled the missions, including a group that created a community on the edge of mission territory that was politically, socially, and spatially organized along the lines of the mission communities they had abandoned (see Table 2).3 The cartas anuas contain graphic details of the scope of the crises that began with a drought that started at the end of 1733 and lasted until March of the following year, and was exacerbated by an epidemic outbreak.4 The same document reported a continuation of the crisis in 1735 and 1736. It noted that: In 1735, year in which there was more hunger than the previous and considerable flight by [male] Indians and [female] Indians to the jungle and distant fields. They went with the unreduced [uncongregated-non-Christian] Indians and with the [C]harrúas dedicated to the carnal trade and to increase the number of women [they] killed their husbands. The more knowledgeable retreated to Iberá Lake where they were reduced [congregated] by those who were more capable, they performed some ceremonies and took the post ofparish [priest] and married others with their license. To support themselves they made hostile raids on the city of Corrientes and the Spanish cattle ranches [estancias]. In this year there were 8,022 people who had disappeared that constitute 1,354 families not counting the deaths of 2,637 adults and 3,407 children [párvulos]. Many of those dispersed [fugitives] died on the roads or in fights among themselves or for other reasons.5 [In 1736] Troops of 80 to 100 Indians not counting the children [párvulos] and the women that followed them, vagabonded in the ranches [estancias] attacking the cattle guards. Entire troops of thieves flooded the public roads running over travelers [and] robbing them of everything they had and in cases of resistance finishing them off. The cultivator had to fight true battles against them to defend their plantings, cattle, and very lives, and [had to] put themselves under arms, being able to defeat the assaulters with death. Others were defeated by the tigers [jaguars], 2 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, Appendix 1, Appendix 4. 3 Ibid., 62. 4 Avellaneda, Guaraníes, criollos y jesuitas, 228–229. 5 Quoted in Ibid., 230.

Profile of a Demographic Crisis: 1733–1740

19

the rest from pure hunger…Others that retreated to the mountains perished from smallpox as did others who sought refuge in Santa Fe and Corrientes and Asunción. Outside of the villages [pueblos] true bands of refugees were found in the farms, in the missions, and in the nearby fields the dead [who died] of hunger and the cold and [were] halfway eaten by dogs… Every day some of the reductions [missions] sent out workers to search around the village [pueblo] and in the month of August they returned with cadavers or a lucky one still alive, naked from the loss of speech and they seemed to be not aware of anything. Others hid in the jungles or went with the pagans [infieles].6 Deaths in 1734 reached 16,222, but reflected a distinct pattern. Some 10,132 adults and 6,090 párvulos or young children under the age of ten died. Deaths in 1735 totaled 6,044, and more young children died than did adults. The Jesuits reportedly baptized 4,520, and the total population of the missions dropped by 1,524. In 1736, the Jesuits recorded 5,004 baptisms as against 7,787 deaths and a net decline in numbers of -2,723. 7 Mortality was particularly high at Loreto in 1736 where a total of 1,321 died (a crude death rate of 308.1 per thousand population). The crisis of 1733–1735 forced the Jesuits to prepare a new tribute count that was completed in 1735. The tribute censuses recorded the population by cacicazgo and family, but also tribute categories such as reservado, or individuals exempt from paying pay tribute. The tribute categories need to be carefully separated from the strictly demographic information. The censuses reported the absence of 2,620 male tributaries, but because of the narrow scope of the enumerations they did not record the absence of women and children. The individual censuses contain summaries, but it is more useful to extract more complete data from the complete texts of the counts. The tribute census for Los Santos Mártires mission reported the absence of seven tributaries who had gone to the Spanish settlements (“tierras de Españoles”). The census for Santos Cosme y Damián summarized the time that fugitives had been absent. One tributary had been absent for four years, nine for three years, nine for two years, 21 for one year, and eight fled the mission in 1735. In other words there were instances of flight from the mission community prior to the crisis.8 The largest number of fugitives was from two groups of missions. The first were 6 Quoted in Ibid., 231. 7 Rafael Carbonell de Massy, S.J., Estrategias de desarrollo rural en los pueblos guaraníes (1609–1767) (Barcelona: Antoni Bosch Editor, 1992), 377. 8 Francisco María Raspart, Los Santos Mártires del Japón, August 15, 1735, “Padrón de los tributarios de esta Reducción de los Santos Mártires del Uruguay,” agn, Sala 9–17–3–6; ­Ventura Suárez, los Santos Cosme y Damián, August 16, 1735, “Padrón del Pueblo de S. Cosme y Damián que se hizo este presente año de 1735,” agn, Sala 9–17–3–6.

20

Chapter 2

from the missions located east of the Uruguay River, and from Santa María la Mayor located close to the west bank of the river. A total of 160 tributaries reportedly were absent from Santa María la Mayor, 327 from San Nicolás, 166 from San Luis Gonzaga, 262 from San Lorenzo, and 153 from Santo Ángel Custodio. The second was the group of missions located in what today is southeastern Paraguay, and were closest to the zone where the mobilized mission militia was posted and also the fugitive community on Iberá Lake. It is possible that some of the fugitives were militiamen who had been mobilized and then fled. The largest number of fugitives was 333 from San Ignacio Guazú, 291 from Nuestra Señora de Fe, 141 from Trinidad, and 120 from Ytapúa. The ecological and mortality crises of the 1730s disrupted the mission communal economy. The Jesuits used communal production to pay the tribute obligations of the Guaraní residents of the missions, and this was related to the Jesuit policy of establishing missions among Guaraní not encumbered by obligations to the holders of private encomiendas. During periods of ecological crisis as in the 1730s and again in the 1750s during the uprising in the eastern missions the Jesuits were unable to meet the complete tribute payments. In the years 1728–1734 the Jesuits paid 66.701 pesos per year into the Buenos Aires treasury, this dropped to 28,420 in 1734–1736, 28,649 from 1736 to 1739, 28,443 in the years 1739–1742, and 18,880 in 1742–1744. In 1735, the midst of the crisis royal officials directed the Jesuits to prepare a new tribute census. Tribute p ­ ayments increased to 79,992 in the years 1744–1749.9 The uprising in the eastern missions of the mid-1750s undermined the ability of the Jesuits to pay tribute. Payments dropped to 12,081 pesos in 1758, 14,381 in 1761, and only recovered to 57,524 in 1766. Finally, the Jesuit expulsion also disrupted tribute payments. It dropped to a mere 560 in 1769 and 6,911 in 1770, but recovered again to 44,000 in 1772.10 The graphic descriptions of the famine of the mid-1730s do not contain one important detail that is the distribution of food to the mission residents or the Jesuit policy of supplying food to the Guaraní. One interpretation suggests that the Jesuits fostered the economic dependence of the mission residents, who came to rely on food from communal production.11 If indeed the Jesuits maintained the mission residents, the famine crisis would have compelled the missionaries to find temporary solutions to feed the mission populations. 9

Robert H. Jackson, Missions and the frontiers of Spanish America: A Comparative Study of the Impact of Environmental, Economic, Political, and Socio-Cultural Variations on the Missions in the Rio de la Plata Region and on the Northern Frontier of New Spain. (Scottsdale: Pentacle Press, 2005), 148–149. 10 Ibid., 161. 11 Sarreal, The Guaraní and Their Missions.

Profile of a Demographic Crisis: 1733–1740

21

However, this does not appear in the carta anua. Rather, individual and groups of Guaraní left the mission to search for food when their own crops failed. The last epidemic during the decade was identified as a smallpox outbreak that spread to the missions at the end of 1737 from Buenos Aires and other urban centers in the region (see Table 3).12 Elevated mortality at several missions indicates that the contagion broke out at the end of 1737. In three years (1738–1740) the Jesuits reportedly buried 35,104 people, and the population experienced a net decline of -22,575 (see Table 5). The smallpox outbreak was more generalized and lasted for a longer period of time. However, not all of the missions experienced catastrophic mortality. One example is Yapeyú discussed in more detail below. Three missions evidenced elevated mortality in 1737 during the warmer summer months. The location of the missions suggests that smallpox spread from Asunción. The death rate at Ytapúa was 104.1 per thousand population in 1737, but the epidemic continued into 1738 and perhaps and perhaps flared up again at the beginning of 1739. The total number of burials in the three years was 2,405, and the death rate 530.1. The crude death rates at Jesús and Trinidad were 184.2 and 154.1 per thousand population respectively (see Table 4). The epidemic spread to more missions during 1738. The crude death rate was greater than 500 per thousand population at two missions, greater than 400 per thousand population at another two missions, and greater than 300 at two others (see Table 4). However, smallpox broke out at several missions in 1738, most likely during the warmer summer months at the end of the year, and continued into 1739. Burials, for example, totaled 1,116 at San Nicolás in 1738, and another 1,675 in 1739. The crude death rate calculated for both years was 817.3 per thousand population. More than 80 percent of the population died. Burials at Santa María la Mayor were 1,442 in the two years, and the crude death rate 629.4 per thousand population. Crude birth rates also dropped at the two missions. It was a rate of 10.7 per thousand population at San Nicolás and 9.7 at Santa María la Mayor. Pregnant women died or had miscarriages (see Table 4). Smallpox spread eastward to more missions in 1739, and particularly to the missions east of the Uruguay River which were among the most populous. Three missions experienced crude death rates greater than 500 per thousand population. The contagion reached San Juan Bautista at the end of 1739, and continued into 1740. A total of 2,776 Guaraní died over two years, or a crude 12

There was heavy mortality at several missions in 1737 that indicates that smallpox broke out there at the end of the year. The crude death rate (cdr) was 104.5 per thousand population at Ytapúa, 184.2 at Jesus, and 154.1 at Trinidad. The epidemic continued at Ytapúa into 1738. Catalogo de la Numeración Annual de las Doctrinas del Rio Paraná/del Rio Uruguay, Año de 1737, CA.

22

Chapter 2

death rate of 553.9 per thousand population. The contagion reached Los Santos Mártires Mission at the end of 1738 and continued into 1739. Altogether 870 died or a crude death rate of 254.8 per thousand population (see Table 4). The mission population was 3,415 at the end of 1737, and dropped to 2,777 two years later at the end of 1739. The mortality crises of the 1730s and especially the smallpox epidemic exacted a heavy mortality on the Guaraní. More than 80,000 died during the crises, and many fled the missions. In the years 1733 and 1735–1740 the Jesuits recorded a total of 34,763 baptisms and 75,269 burials, or a net decline of -40,506 (see Table 5). Another 16,222 reportedly died in 1734.13 However, the populations rebounded or recovered. In the years 1741 and 1744–1750, the Jesuits recorded a total of 49,652 baptisms and 34,654 burials, or a net growth of 14,998 (see Table 6). One important factor that many scholars such as Henry Dobyns have ignored when discussing early epidemic mortality in the Americas was the recovery or “rebound” of populations following catastrophic epidemic m ­ ortality, a phenomenon described in studies of European historical demography.14 This was the formation of new families following epidemics, and increased birth rates. This can be seen at Santa Rosa and Ytapúa in 1733. In 1728, Santa Rosa had a population of 6,064, and the Jesuits recorded 50 marriages. Marriages in 1733 totaled 57 in a rapidly declining population, and could have been higher were it not for the pattern of higher mortality among females resulting from ­immunological responses to maladies such as smallpox and measles. The potential pool of brides was greatly reduced. The data from Ytapúa is clearer: marriages there totaled 32 in 1724 and 65 in 1728, but then jumped to 138 in the aftermath of the 1733 epidemic. The same occurred during and following the 1738–1740 smallpox epidemic as seen in increased numbers of marriages at some missions. Candelaria was a case in point. In 1737, the Jesuits recorded 39 marriages, and this number jumped to 179 in 1738 after smallpox killed more than 1,500 people and reduced the size of the population (see Table 7). Robust birth rates in the 1740s and up to the point of the crisis of the Treaty of Madrid and the Guaraní uprising contributed to population growth. The mission populations significantly declined in numbers following the mortality crises of the 1730s. San Lorenzo was an extreme example of the level of population collapse. The population of the mission totaled 6,420 in 1731 and 13 Jackson, Frontiers of Evangelization, 192. 14 Henry F. Dobyns, “An appraisal of techniques with a new hemispheric estimate,” Current Anthropology 7:4 (1966), 395–416; Henry F. Dobyns, Their number become thinned: Native American population dynamics in eastern North America (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1983).

Profile of a Demographic Crisis: 1733–1740

23

6,513 in 1732, but then dropped to 974 at the end of 1739. San Nicolás is a second example of extreme population loss during the decade. The population of the mission was 7,751 at the end of 1732, and declined to 1,772 at the end of 1739. The population of Los Santos Mártires, on the other hand, did not experience the same level of decline. The population was 3,874 in 1731 and 3,935 in the following year, and dropped to 2,777 at the end of 1739. Santa María la Mayor also experienced catastrophic population collapse during the 1730s. Its population was 3,902 in 1731, and dropped to 711 at the end of 1739. The mission populations recovered and grew in the 1740s and 1750s with robust birth rates. The population of San Lorenzo increased to 2,321 in 1755, the year before the crisis of the Guaraní uprising in response to the implementation of the provisions of the Treaty of Madrid (1750). That of Los Santos Mártires grew to 3,099 in 1763 on the eve of the next major smallpox epidemic. Table 6 summarizes total baptisms and burials in the years 1741 and 1744–1750, and shows growth in all of the missions with the exception of Santiago which sustained heavy mortality during a 1748–1749 measles epidemic. The mission populations, however, did not recover to 1732 levels, before the onset of crisis in the 1750s.15 Not all of the missions experienced catastrophic mortality or population losses during the 1730s, and particularly during the smallpox outbreak. The evidence demonstrates that the contagion did not spread to several missions, including San Miguel, Santo Ángel Custodio, and particularly Yapeyú. All three were relatively geographically isolated when compared to the other missions, which enabled the Jesuits stationed there to implement more effective quarantine measures. The same occurred during the next smallpox outbreak in 1763– 1765. The numbers speak for themselves. Baptisms in 1738 and 1739 at San Miguel and Santo Ángel Custodio, respectively, totaled 522 and 459 as against 266 and 409 burials. While the populations of neighboring missions declined, those of San Miguel and Santo Ángel Custodio grew. Yapeyú is a particularly interesting case. It was located on the west bank of the Uruguay River at some distance from neighboring missions. Smallpox killed hundreds there during the 1718–1719 epidemic, but the mission experienced robust population growth during the 1720s and 1730s that was only slowed during the 1732–1733 epidemic that killed 1,209 (a crude death rate of 181.6 over two years). In the years 1723 to 1740 the Jesuits baptized 7,145 and recorded 4,522 burials, or an excess of 2,623 baptisms over burials. The population grew from 4,352 reported in 1723 to 5,687 in 1740.16 15 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, Appendix 1, 186–198. 16 Robert H. Jackson, “La población y tasas vitales de las misiones jesuíticas de los Guaraní (Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay),” ihs Antiguos Jesuitas en Iberoamérica 5:2 (Julio-Diciembre, 2017), 100–165.

24

Chapter 2

Different factors explain mortality patterns during epidemics. An important one was the age and gender structure of a population, and particularly the number of susceptible hosts or those born since the previous outbreak. The gender structure was also important because of the immunological response of females to maladies such as smallpox and measles resulted in higher mortality. This can be seen, for example, in the case of Santos Mártires. Mortality during the 1733 and 1739 outbreaks was high, but did not reach catastrophic levels. Deaths totaled 491 (a crude death rate of 124.5 per thousand population) and 545 in 1739 (a crude death rate of 184.2 per thousand population). For example, a large number of young children died in 1733, a total of 337 or 69 percent of all deaths. Significantly, the mission population did not evidence a gender imbalance at the end of the crises of the 1730s. 1 Conclusions The Jesuit missions experienced several periods of severe crisis during the long history of Jesuit tenure. That of the period 1733–1740 was one of the most severe crises. Chapter 4 examines demographic patterns in more detail, and ­places this crisis into context. It does show the relationship between conflict and demographic crisis, and highlights the unique conditions on the missions and escalating political-military conflict that help explain the catastrophic mortality levels that in some cases matched what has been hypothesized for so-called “virgin soil” epidemics.

25

Profile of a Demographic Crisis: 1733–1740 Table 1

Catastrophic Mortality in 1733

Mission

Population Baptisms 1732

Guazú La Fe Sta Rosa Santiago Ytapúa Trinidad Jesús

3671 6605 5458 3759 6907 2947 2529

116 146 110 121 207 115 136

Burials

cbr

cdr

1192 2618 2263 207 381 243 280

31.6 22.1 20.2 33.8 31.8 39.0 53.8

324.7 396.4 414.6 57.8 58.5 82.5 110.7

Source: Robert H. Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among The Sedentary Populations On The Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015), 213–215, 217–220; Robert H. Jackson, “La población y tasas vitales de las misiones jesuíticas de los Guaraní (Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay),” ihs Antiguos Jesuitas en Iberoamérica 5:2 (Julio-Diciembre, 2017), 100–165.

Table 2

Mortality in 1735

Mission Loreto S Ignacio Corpus Candelaria SS Cosme

Population Baptisms 1733 6077 3959 4005 3134 2145

106 84 69 170 85

Burials

cbr

cdr

565 504 421 194 122

22.4* 26.2* 32.1* 54.3* 42.0*

119.1* 176.1* 195.8* 62.0* 60.3*

Source: Robert H. Jackson, “La población y tasas vitales de las misiones jesuíticas de los Guaraní (Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay),” ihs Antiguos Jesuitas en Iberoamérica 5:2 (JulioDiciembre, 2017), 100–165; Catalogo de la Numeración Annual de las Doctrinas del Rio Paraná/del Rio Uruguay, Año de 1735, CA.

26 Table 3

Chapter 2 The Chronology of 1737–1740 Smallpox Epidemic

Population Mission Guazú Nra. Sra. La Fe Santa Rosa Santiago Ytapúa

1737 1773 2644 1721 3846 4430

1738 1846 2701 1828 3955 2690

1739 1964 2903 1916 4081 2591

Candelaria Stos. Cosme Santa Ana Loreto San Ignacio Corpus Jesús Trinidad San José San Carlos Apóstoles Concepción

3039 1351 3985 2099 1927 2453 1888 1995 3302 3202 3859 6402

1511 1225 4343 2234 1934 1975 1902 1975 1392 2377 1315 4234

1502 1236 4397 1756 1849 2667 1962 2149 1338 1239 1341 1669

La Mayor sfx Mártires

2291 3000 3415

2262 1876 3230

711 1710 2777

San Nicolás

6324

5071

1772

San Luis

4718

4237

1978

San Lorenzo

4869

4814

974

San Miguel San Juan

4378 5224

4522 5012

4741 4949

Sto Ángel Sto Tomé

4888 2714

4921 2041

5163 1699

S.F. Borja

3430

2998

3244

Smallpox No No No No Yes (1737–1739) Yes (1738) Yes (1739) No Yes?(1739) Yes (1739) Yes (1738) Yes Yes Yes (1738) Yes (1738) Yes (1738) Yes (1738–1739) Yes (1739) Yes (1738) Yes (1738–1739) Yes (1738–1739) Yes (1738–1739) Yes (1738–1739) No Yes (1739–1740) Yes (1739) Yes (1738–1739) Yes (1738)

27

Profile of a Demographic Crisis: 1733–1740

Population La Cruz

4444

3853

2167

Yapeyú

4862

5410

5713

Yes (1738–1739) No

Source: Robert H. Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among The Sedentary Populations On The Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–-1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015), 69, 190; Robert H. Jackson, “La población y tasas vitales de las misiones jesuíticas de los Guaraní (Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay),” IHS Antiguos Jesuitas en Iberoamérica 5:2 (Julio-Diciembre, 2017), 100–165; Catalogo de la Numeración Annual de las Doctrinas del Rio Paraná/del Rio Uruguay, 1737, 1738, CA. Table 4

Catastrophic Mortality in 1737–1740

1737 Mission Ytapúa Trinidad Jesús

Population 1736

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

4650 1733 2204

212 70 114

484 267 406

45.6 40.4 51.7

104.1 154.1 184.2

1738 Mission Ytapúa Cadelaria SS Cosme Loreto San Ignacio San José San Carlos Apóstoles Concepción Mártires

Population 1737

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

4430 3039 1351 2099 1927 3302 3202 3859 6402 3415

228 103 98 131 124 156 104 99 186 183

1719 1532 319 917 172 1874 820 2262 2168 325

51.5 33.2 72.5 62.4 64.4 47.2 32.5 25.7 29.1 53.6

388.0 494.4 236.1 436.9 73.8 567.5 256.1 586.2 338.6 95.2

28

Chapter 2

Table 4

Catastrophic Mortality in 1737–1740 (Cont)

1738 Mission La Mayor San Xavier S Nicolás La Cruz La Mayor Sto Tomé

Population 1737

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

2291 3000 6324 4444 3905 3593

110 203 263 205 110 91

163 1418 1116 629 163 505

48.0 67.7 41.6 46,1 48.0 33.5

71.1 472.7 176.5 141.5 71.1 186.1

1739 Mission Ytapúa S Ignacio La Mayor Mártires La Cruz Sto Tomé S Nicolás San Luis S Lorenzo San Juan

Population 1738

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

2690 1934 2262 3230 3853 2041 5071 4327 4814 5012

140 113 22 132 65 62 92 82 160 70

262 228 1279 545 1605 471 1675 2396 2681 376

52.0 58.4 9.7 40.9 16.9 30.4 10.7 20.3 33.2 14.0

97.4 117.9 565.4 184.2 416.6 230.8 336.8 565.1 557.0 75.0

1740 Mission San Juan

Population 1739

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

5151

71

2400

14.1

485.0

29

Profile of a Demographic Crisis: 1733–1740

Two Year Death Rates at Selected Missions Mission

Two Years of Mortality

Burials 2 Years

cdr

Population 1739/1740

Ytapúa San Ignacio La Mayor Mártires Sto Tomé La Cruz S Nicolás San Juan

1738–1739 1738–1739 1738–1739 1738–1739 1738–1739 1738–1739 1738–1739 1739–1740

1981 400 1442 870 976 2234 2791 2776

447.2 207.6 629.4 254.8 359.6 502.7 817.3 553.9

2591 1849 711 2777 1699 2167 1978 2171

Source: Catalogo de la Numeración Annual de las Doctrinas del Rio Paraná/del Rio Uruguay. Año de 1738. CA; Robert H. Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among The Sedentary Populations On The Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015), 213–215, 217–220; Robert H. Jackson, “La población y tasas vitales de las misiones jesuíticas de los Guaraní (Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay),” ihs Antiguos Jesuitas en Iberoamérica 5:2 (Julio-Diciembre, 2017), 100–165

Table 5

Baptisms and Burials Recorded in 1733, 1735–1740

Population in Mission Guazú Ytapúa La Fe Santaigo Stos Cosme Sta Rosa Jesús Trinidad Candelaria Sta Ana Loreto S.I. Miní

1731 3195 6548 6515 3524 2306 6093 2436 3569 3317 4527 7048 4356

1732 3671 6510 6605 3579 2509 5458 2529 2947 3277 4584 6907 4608

Total Baptisms 806 1286 1161 1175 456 967 810 692 938 1311 1008 860

Burials 1673 3576 4518 792 1027 2787 1071 1216 2405 1320 4015 1900

Net −867 −2290 −3357 383 −571 −1820 −261 −524 −1467 −9 −3007 −1040

30 Table 5

Chapter 2 Baptisms and Burials Recorded in 1733, 1735–1740 (cont.)

Population in Corpus San José Apósotoles Concepcion Sta María Stos Mártires sfx San Carlos Sto Tomé La Cruz Yapeyúa San Miguel San Nicolás S.F. Borja San Luis San Lorenzo sjb Sto ángel Total

4400 3720 5185 5848 3902 3874 3813 3388 3545 4573 5666 4904 7690 3629 6149 6420 4503 4601 139,244

4465 3769 5319 5965 3905 3935 3955 3369 3593 4746 5704 4859 7751 3679 6182 6513 5274 5085 141,252

Total 980 956 933 1286 638 1222 966 805 701 1670 3098 1540 1704 1264 1345 1245 1501 1439 34,763

1664 2872 3094 3356 2357 2083 2605 1653 1540 3967 2172 1194 5058 1085 4493 4434 3889 1453 75,269

−684 −1916 −2161 −2070 −1719 −861 −1639 −848 −839 −2297 926 346 −3354 179 −3148 −3189 −2388 −14 −40,506

a Yapeyu 1733–1740. Source: Robert H. Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among The Sedentary Populations On The Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015), Appendix 4; Robert H. Jackson, “La población y tasas vitales de las misiones jesuíticas de los Guaraní (Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay),” ihs Antiguos Jesuitas en Iberoamérica 5:2 (JulioDiciembre, 2017), 100–165.

31

Profile of a Demographic Crisis: 1733–1740 Table 6

Baptisms and Burials recorded in 1741, 1744–1750

Mission Guazú Ytapúa La Fe Santaigo Stos Cosme Sta Rosa Jesús Trinidad Candelaria Sta Ana Loreto S.I. Miní Corpus San José Apósotoles Concepcion Sta María Stos Mártires sfx San Carlos Sto Tomé La Cruz Yapeyúa San Miguel San Nicolás S.F. Borja San Luis San Lorenzo sjb Sto ángel Total

Population 1740

Baptisms

Burials

Net

2018 2179 3086 4128 1209 1973 1836 2268 1441 4533 2346 1933 2808 1390 1494 1944 819 2829 1789 1140 1892 2163 5687 4740 2194 3291 2308 1173 2171 5228 74.005

1348 1896 2580 1838 878 1431 968 1133 1254 2315 1749 1290 2166 979 956 1094 1131 1571 1019 888 1466 1521 4533 2860 2392 1585 1793 1056 1698 2264 49,652

1193 1287 1381 2185 506 1035 818 1110 930 1457 893 966 1099 467 450 794 690 1280 876 692 785 1191 2807 2136 1595 1253 1005 538 1430 1805 34,654

155 609 1199 -347 372 396 150 23 324 858 856 324 1067 512 506 300 441 291 143 196 681 330 1726 724 797 332 788 518 268 459 14,998

a Yapeyu 1741–1750. Source: Robert H. Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among The Sedentary Populations On The Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015), Appendix 4; Robert H. Jackson, “La población y tasas vitales de las misiones jesuíticas de los Guaraní (Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay),” ihs Antiguos Jesuitas en Iberoamérica 5:2 (Julio-Diciembre, 2017), 100–165.

32

Chapter 2

Table 7

Mission Guazú La Fe Sta Rosa Santiago Ytapúa Candelaria SS Cosme Sta Ana Loreto S Ignacio Corpus Trinidad Jesús San José San Carlos Apóstoles Concepción Mártires La Mayor San Xavier S Nicolás San Luis S Lorenzo San Juan Sto Ángel S Tomé San Borja La Cruz Yapeyú Mission Yapeyú

Marriages Recorded at the Missions, 1728–1741

1728

1729

65 94 50 52 65 21 65 54 59 10 18 44 26 29 37 92 74 39 35 45 102 90 53 42 42 33 90 41 85 1730 130

29 62 20 41 84 27 10 34 52 42 24 61 22 37 29 118 52 39 44 51 109 61 50 68 21 53 7 25 44 1732 86

1731

1733

1735

1736

1737

1738

1739

1740

1741

42 3 37 122 45 30 44 57 62 40 35 59 58 138 113 42 43 27 16 24 28 30 36 59 31 263 66 59 46 28 38 52 13 77 105 50 20 58 27 37 51 18 80 48 39 72 115 41 49 81 77 62 93 92 50 104 41 71 16 30 142 179 19 124 161 44 122 155 70 – 130 56 55 90 58 63 50 24 40 57 14 105 69 24 81 114 51 1734 1742 1743 35 70 115

12 76 36 34 37 36 25 39 45 71 30 20 20 24 15 42 31 46 43 0 37 86 60 82 88 24 33 47 55

67 65 64 34 108 39 12 69 143 56 109 74 102 6 16 63 69 56 38 74 53 98 88 71 118 10 33 39 45

33 62 26 57 211 179 32 58 181 60 94 73 71 165 30 82 138 61 31 18 13 60 50 81 73 21 31 24 108

25 46 49 72 37 28 61 42 53 63 42 70 91 114 99 12 175 154 60 153 229 166 122 70 83 43 51 188 59

29 37 88 83 95 43 31 58 51 21 70 248 48 32 54 45 21 40 65 51 124 163 92 259 165 111 60 84 61

17 64 32 67 78 38 46 81 83 51 47 66 24 30 32 43 19 53 20 73 58 80 32 86 104 39 26 72 102

Source: Robert H. Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among The Sedentary Populations On The Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015), 207–208; Catalogo de la Numeración Annual de las Doctrinas del Rio Paraná/ del Rio Uruguay, 1728, 1729, 1731, 1735, 1737, 1738, CA.

Chapter 3

Regional Conflict and the Militarization of the Jesuit Missions As noted above, in 1609 the Jesuits established their first mission in the Paraguay Province named San Ignacio Guazú. Over the next two decades they expanded the number of missions into areas not subject to encomienda including Guairá, Itatín, Iguaçu, and Tape. In 1628, for example, the Jesuits Roque González, Alonso Rodríguez, and Juan del Castillo established the mission that eventually became known as Los Santos Mártires del Japón in the ­Guaraní community known as Caaró located in Tape (modern Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil). The doctrina remained there for eight years until relocated in the face of a bandierante raid in 1636–1637 that left four missions destroyed and the surviving Guaraní relocated west of the UruguayRiver. Los Santos Mártires del Japón occupied a site close to the modern location of Santa María la Mayor on the west bank of the Uruguay River.1 The Jesuits relocated the mission again in 1704 to a site at the top of a nearby mountain that can best be described as defensive and the Jesuits most likely chose the new site as a place of refuge in case of attack during a period of war with Portugal.2 Another example is Los Santos Cosme y Damián mission that was also typical of the Paraguay missions on the Tape frontier. The Black Robes established the mission in 1634 at a site known as Ibití mire.3 In 1636, the mission had a population of 1,200 families and some 6,000 people.4 Raids launched by bandeirantes from 1636 to 1640 forced the relocation of the Tape missions. The Jesuits abandoned Santos Cosme y Damián in May of 1638, and some 2,500 Guaraní joined the exodus. However, not all reached the new site of the mission on the Paraná River approximately five kilometers from Candelaria.5 In 1647, nine years following the relocation, the population of the mission was 1,075, much lower than it had been in Tape. The Jesuits relocated the mission three more times, and the last move was in 1760 to a site in what today is southern Paraguay. 1 Graciela de Kuna, personal communication, September 5, 2017. 2 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 93. 3 Rafael Carbonell de Masy, S.J., Teresa Blumers and Norberto Levinton, La reducción jesuítica de Santos Cosme y Damián: Su historia, su economía y su arquitectura, 1633–1797 (Asunción: Markografik, 2003), 30. 4 Ibid., 45. 5 Ibid., 82.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���9 | doi:10.1163/9789004390546_004

34

Chapter 3

This chapter examines regional conflict and the militarization of the Jesuit missions in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. It first considers the destruction of the Tape missions, and the creation of a military and political organization on the missions. It first examines the destruction of the Tape missions which forced the Jesuits to retreat in the face of Paulista raids, but that also led to the creation of a unique military-political structure on the missions that existed even after the Jesuit expulsion in 1767. The Paulista attacks on the Jesuit missions of the 1620s and 1630s profoundly shaped the development of the mission communities. This is followed by a summary of Luso-Spanish conflict in the disputed borderlands in the eighteenth century, and early nineteenth century conflict that resulted in the destruction of many of the missions, and particularly during an 1817–1818 Luso-Brazilian invasion. 1

The Destruction of the Tape Missions 1636–1637 and the Battle of Mbororé (1641)

In December of 1636, Antonio Rapôso Tabares led a bandeira of some 140 Paulistas and 1,500 Tupí warriors against the Jesuit missions in Tape. Rapôso Tabares had previously led attacks in the 1620s on the Jesuit missions and S­ panish settlements in Guairá that resulted in the abandonment of the thirteen ­missions located there, and the first Jesuit retreat.6 According to one Spanish estimate the Paulistas enslaved more than 150,000 Christian and non-Christian Guaraní in Guairá.7 In 1632, the Jesuits further retreated when they abandoned Acaray and Iguaçu missions in the face of the Paulista threat.8 On December 2, 1636, the Paulista-Tupí force attacked Jesús María, the mission located closest to the frontier as it existed at that time. The Jesuit missionaries and many Guaraní took refuge in the mission church, but the Paulistas 6 No author, No date [c. 1640], “Estado de las reducciones del Paraná y Uruguay y el fruto que por los religiosos de la Compañía de Jesús han conseguido sus avitadores,” in Jaime Cortesão, Jesuitas y Bandeirantes no Tape (1613–1641) (Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca Nacional, 1969), 192. For conflict on Brazilian frontiers in a later period see Hal Langfur, “The Return of the Bandeira: Economic Calamity, Historical Memory, and Armed Expeditions to the Sertao in Minas Gerais, 1750–1808,”The Americas 61:3 (2005), 429–461; Hal Langfur, The forbidden lands: colonial identity, frontier violence, and the persistence of Brazil’s eastern Indians, 1750–1830 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2006). 7 No author, no date, “Copia del Informe sobre la justificación con que los indios de las reducciones del Paraná y Uruguay usan para su defensa de armas de fuego,” in Ibid., 316. 8 Pedro Romero, S.J., May 16, 1632, “Estado General de las Doctrinas del Paraná y Uruguay, in Ibid., 47–48.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

35

set fire to the straw roof which forced the Jesuits to surrender.9 The Paulistas attacked and destroyed three other missions. They were San Cristóbal, Santa Ana, and la Natividad. The Jesuits raised a force of 1,500 Guaraní warriors to defend the missions and confront the Paulistas, but they also decided to evacuate the other missions to new sites west of the Uruguay River. They relocated Candelaria, Los Santos Mártires, San Carlos, Apóstoles, and Santos Cosme y Damián, among other missions.10 One Spanish source estimated that the Paulistas enslaved more than 40,000 Christian and non-Christian Guaraní during the invasion of Tape.11 The destruction of the Guairá and Tape missions occurred, ironically, when the same Hapsburg monarch Philip iv (1621–1665) ruled both Spain and Portugal. This was the period of the Iberian Union (1580–1640), and ended in 1640 with a nationalistic uprising known as the “Guerra da Restauração” that reasserted Portuguese independence. In the same year Spanish royal officials ­debated the provision of firearms to the Guaraní living on the missions to defend themselves from further Paulista attacks.12 The Spanish generally did not provide firearms to indigenous peoples because they feared that their subjects might turn around and use them on the Spanish themselves. The decision to throw caution to the wind and allow the Guaraní to bear firearms, however, proved to be critical for the future development of the Spanish in the Rio de la Plata region and also gave immediate results. In 1641, perhaps emboldened by the successful reassertion of Portuguese independence and the facile conquest of Guairá and Tape, a new bandeira left São Paulo to attack the surviving Uruguay missions. The Jesuits mobilized a force of 2,000 Guaraní to confront the Paulistas, including some armed with firearms. The three day battle of Mbororé (March 9–11, 1641) was fought on the Uruguay River near la Asunción del Acaraguá mission (La Cruz), which had been relocated downriver and served as the center of operations during the battle, and also on land. On the third day of the battle the Paulistas sent a letter asking for a truce, but the Guaraní military leaders destroyed the ­letter, and instead pursued their enemy. The Guaraní decisively defeated the Paulistas, and killed most of the Portuguese and Tupí.13 The victory at Mbororé 9

Diego de Boroa, S.J., Corpus Christi, March 4, 1637, in ibid, 142–148; Diego de Boroa, S.J., Santa Fe, April 10, 1637, “De la entrada de los de S. Pablo en las Red[ucion]es del Uruguay,” in Ibid., 153–161. 10 Ibid., 146, 158, 217,219, 223–224. 11 “Copia del Informe,” in Ibid. 12 Ibid. 13 Claudio Ruyer, S.J., San Nicolás, April 6, 1641, “Relacion de la Guerra q[ue] tubieron los Yndios contra los Portugueses de Brasil,” in Ibid., 345–354.

36

Chapter 3

was possible because the Jesuits had made hundreds of firearms available to the Guaraní, and in the aftermath of the battle institutionalized the m ­ ission militia. A 1647 report reported the number of firearms the missions had  at that time, a total of 609 distributed among most of the missions: Candelaria-28; Santos Cosme y Damián-28; Santa Ana-22; San Carlos-39; San José-35; Ytapúa-44; Loreto-29; San Ignacio Miní -32; Corpus Christi-40; Concepción-48; San Miguel-37; Los Santos Mártires-22; Apóstoles-25; San Nicolás-30; San Francisco Xavier-32; Santa María la Mayor-29; Santo Tomé-27; and Yapeyú-23. The mission received another 150 in 1649 per a royal decree of September 20, 1649.14 The Jesuits included an armory in the mission urban plan where the weapons for the militia were stored. Royal officials periodically inspected the armory and enumerated the number and type of weapons. A 1716 inspection of Santa Rosa de Lima mission was typical. The weapons available included 23 shotguns, ball and powder, lances, bows and arrows, and battle clubs among others.15 Royal officials came to depend on the mission militia for regional defense and war against the Portuguese, rebellious colonists in Paraguay, and hostile indigenous groups. The following section discusses the participation of the mission militia in regional conflict, and the consequences of that participation for the missions that included the demographic consequences. The military organization in the missions was an important and historically unique element of the political structure of the missions. The Jesuits also instituted a system of shared governance on the Paraguay missions that resembled the system of self-governance of the autonomous pueblos de indios in central Mexico and the Andean region. The missionaries and royal officials recognized the status of the traditional clan chiefs that they identified by the term cacique, and organized the mission populations socially and politically by cacicazgos, the jurisdiction of the cacique. The caciques enjoyed special privileges such as exemptions from tribute and the use of special symbols of status. When the Jesuits on the Paraguay missions registered the baptism of newborn children, they identified the cacicazgo the parents belonged to. This practice continued as late as the 1840s in some ex-mission communities, such as Santa Rosa. The 14 15

“Relación simple de las armas de fuego q[ue] hallo en las Reducciones del Paraná y Uruguay el Gov[ernad]or D[on} Jacinto de Laris,” in Helio Vianna, ed., Jesuitas E Bandeirantes No Uruguay (1611–1758) (Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca Nacional, 1970), 437–439. Carlos Page, La reducción jesuítica de Santa Rosa y su Capilla de Loreto (Asunción del Paraguay: Fotosíntesis editora, 2015), 11. The inspection report noted that: “Se visitó la casa almacén de armas donde las que hay en el, están con toda orden y custodia y son las siguientes: veintitrés escopetas, tres partes de pistolas, doce bayonetas, treinta y dos lanzas con sus hierros de mojarras y recatones, ochocientos diez arcos, 2.050 hondas, ciento cincuenta macanas de madera, quince espadas, cuatro alfanjes, cuatro alabardas, doce tambores, tres clarines, ciento cincuenta celadas, seiscientas balas y la pólvora necesaria.”

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

37

cacicazgos on the Paraguay missions were generally organized on the basis of descent from clan chiefs who settled on the missions. This is not to say that there were exceptions where groups were differentiated from the general population. One example is on Corpus Christi mission, where Guananas clans settled as separate cacicazgos.16 Similarly, when the Jesuits transferred population from San Francisco Xavier to Yapeyú around 1720, the new residents continued to be organized in cacicazgos distinct from those indigenous to Yapeyú.17 The Jesuits also introduced the Iberian municipal form of government based on the town council or cabildo. In a recent study Julia Sarreal argued that the caciques on the Paraguay missions retained their status, but not their political authority as other community members held positions on the cabildo. Sarreal characterized the caciques as placeholders who maintained status as petty indigenous nobility, but did not exercise effective political authority on the cabildos. Moreover, Sarreal argued that rules of primogeniture undermined their political position, although the author does not adequately explain the relationship between rules of inheritance and the exercise of political power.18 What is clear is that there was a difference in the political organization on the Paraguay missions. The Paraguay missions were organized for war, and maintained a military structure that paralleled the political structure. In the mission political structure there were political offices and militia offices.19 The parallel military structure was also an innovation that replaced one traditional role of the clan chiefs as both political and military leader. The cabildos exercised real authority, and the Paraguay missions were among the few examples of frontier missions that approached the ideal of autonomous self-government as in the pueblos de indios in the Andean Highlands and central Mexico. Missions on other frontiers did not develop similar levels of shared governance, even though some civil officials insisted on e­ lections for mission government positions.20 Charles Gibson documented a similar loss in 16 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 101–102. 17 Ibid., 17. 18 Julia Sarreal, “Caciques as Placeholders in the Guarani Missions of Eighteenth-Century Paraguay,” Colonial Latin American Review 23:2 (2014), 224–251. 19 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 53–58. 20 Sean McEnroe suggests that effective co-governance existed on the northern frontier of Mexico, along with a military structure. However, the author documents the cabildos established by Tlaxcalan colonies established on the northern frontier. The Tlaxcalan colonies enjoyed special privileges granted by the Crown in 1591 when the first 400 Tlaxcalan families were sent to colonize beyond the sedentary frontier, and their system of self-­governance was based on the central Mexican pueblos de indios. Missionaries on the northern frontier did not grant native peoples congregated on the missions the same ­political autonomy. See Sean F. McEnroe, “A Sleeping Army: The Military Origins of I­nterethnic Civic Structures on Mexico’s Colonial Frontier.” Ethnohistory 59:1 (2012),

38

Chapter 3

political authority by the central Mexican indigenous nobility.21 One important factor was demographic, or more precisely the extinction of some lineages during periods of heavy epidemic mortality. Sarreal documented instances of lineal descent over several generations at two missions, but a more meaningful analysis would have examined the family history of more cacique families over a longer period of time, and at missions that experienced catastrophic epidemic mortality, such as Candelaria in 1738, San Lorenzo Mártir in 1739, or Santa Rosa in 1764. Sarreal based her analysis on tribute censuses prepared in 1735, and in 1759 at Corpus Christi and Santa Ana. The Jesuits prepared the 1735 tribute census in the midst of severe mortality crises, a combination of epidemics and famine conditions that decimated the mission populations.22 However, mortality differed between missions. Corpus Christi and Santa Ana lost population during the epidemics, but not on the scale of others such as those mentioned above. In 1715, the Governor of Paraguay Juan Gregorio Bazan de Pedraza visited the Paraguay missions to prepare detailed tribute censuses, and to report on conditions on the missions. His reports included details on social control in the missions and levels of military preparation. The Jesuits assigned cabildo officials responsibility for punishing violations of mission social norms. The m ­ ission complexes contained a jail stocked with shackles and stocks for prisoners.23 The armories had muskets and pistols with shot and gunpowder, lances, clubs with stone heads, swords, pikes, and bows and arrows. The natives had a government structure organized around the cabildo, but, as already noted, a separate military hierarchy.24 The separate military hierarchy existed throughout the period of Jesuit tenure on the missions, and into the early nineteenth century following the Jesuit expulsion in 1767. A series of documents prepared in 1804, for example, listed the holders of the military positions on the missions, as well as other posts in the mission economy. The report for Los Santos Mártires reported a total of 39 military posts that ranged from the “Field Marshall”

21 22 23 24

1­ 09–139. The Spanish also mobilized residents of missions on the north Mexican frontier for military service, but a formal military structure did not exist on the north Mexican mission communities. For a study of the use of native auxiliaries see Jones,. Pueblo Warriors. Charles Gibson, The Aztecs under Spanish rule: A history of the Indians of the Valley of Mexico, 1519–1810. (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1964), 166–193. Sarreal, “Caciques as Placeholders.” Pablo Pastells, S.J., Historia de la Compañía de Jesús en la Provincia del Paraguay. 9 vols. (Madrid: self-published, 1912), vol. 6, 48. Ibid., vol. 6, 12–22, 24–26, 48–49.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

39

to corporals.25 At the time the mission had a population of 609 reported at the end of 1803. 2

Regional Conflict in the Eighteenth Century

Regional conflict between Spain and Portugal in the disputed borderlands of the Banda Oriental (Uruguay) and Rio Grande do Sul had significant consequences for the Jesuit missions. The Rio de la Plata region had a small Spanish settler population, and the Jesuit missions had the largest number of people and contributed the bulk of the “cannon fodder” for many of the seventeenth and eighteenth century conflicts, as well as labor for the construction of for­ tifications, and personnel to man frontier guard posts. This section examines the participation of the Guaraní mission militia in three phases of eighteenth century conflict with the Luso-Brazilians. The first deals with the Spanish ­efforts to occupy Colonia do Sacramento, a Portuguese outpost founded in 1680 in the Banda Oriental. The Portuguese established the outpost to trade with the Spanish, but also to occupy territory the Spanish may have claimed but had not occupied. The Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) had roughly defined spheres of influence or possible colonial interest, but Luso-Brazilian frontiersmen expanded the boundaries of Brazil in the face of Spanish inaction in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The Spanish and Portuguese monarchs finally decided to define boundaries based on the concept of uti possidetis or effective occupation.26 The Treaty of Madrid (1750) failed to achieve its goal, and led to Guaraní resistance to the transfer of the seven missions located east of the Uruguay River to Portugal in exchange for Colonia do Sacramento. Spain and Portugal 25 26

Los Santos Mártires del Japón, January 1, 1804, “Relasion de los Empleos Militares y demas oficios para el Govierno economic deste Pueblo de los Santos Martires para el presente año de 1804,” agn, Sala 9–18–3–3. Andres Aguirre, “Conflictos interétnicos en frontera sur Hispano-Portuguesa. El caso de Rio Grande de San Pedro durante la ocupación española de 1763–1777,” Tefros 12:1 (2014), 6–25. For an overview to colonial Brazil see Charles Boxer, The golden age of Brazil, 1695– 1750: growing pains of a colonial society. (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1962); Dauril Alden, Royal government in colonial Brazil: with special reference to the administration of the Marquis of Lavradio, Viceroy, 1769–1779 (Berkeleey and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1968); Leslie Bethell, ed,. Colonial Brazil (Cambridge: University Press, 1984); Stuart B. Schwartz, “Colonial Brazil, c. 1580-c. 1750: plantations and peripheries,” The Cambridge History of Latin America 2 (1984), 423–500. On the expansión of Brazilian frontiers see Lewis Tambs, “Brazil’s Expanding Frontiers,” The Americas 23:2 (2004), 165–179.

40

Chapter 3

annulled the treaty in 1761, and the result was sixteen years of war, both undeclared and declared, as both sides tried to occupy as much territory as possible before the drafting of a new treaty. Colonia do Sacramento and Rio Grande do Sul were the prizes. The long conflict defined colonial boundaries for a generation. The next round occurred in 1801 during the general European conflict that followed the French Revolution and the rise to power of Napoleon Bonaparte. In that year the governor of Rio Grande do Sur lead a small militia force that occupied the seven eastern former Jesuit missions, and did not return them despite the terms of a negotiated agreement between the two countries. In the following decade there was another scramble for territory following the beginnings of the independence movement in the Rio de la Plata region as the emerging countries sought to define boundaries as they separated from Spain. LusoBrazilian and Paraguayan invasions of the mission territory left the mission complexes damaged or destroyed and thousands of Guaraní dead or prisoner in the hands of the invaders. The conflict lasted some two decades until about 1830, and proved disastrous for the Guaraní residents of the ex-missions. 3

The Conflict for Colonia do Sacramento

The Portuguese established Colonia do Sacramento across the Rio de la Plata from Buenos Aires in 1680.27 The Jesuit expansion east of the Rio Uruguay ­after 1680 was a response to the Portuguese expansion, and served to reassert Spanish territorial claims to Tape. The missions also supplied militia on four separate occasions in support of Spanish military operations against the Portuguese outpost. The first was in 1680, and nearly 3,000 Guaraní participated in the Spanish assault that ended with the capture of the outpost. However, Spain returned Colonia do Sacramento to Portugal in the following year. In addition to the mission militia the Spanish force consisted of 60 colonists from Santa Fe, 80 from Corrientes, and 120 from Buenos Aires. The Spanish force took Colonia 27

Felipe de Haedo, Buenos Aires, December 7, 1777, “Ynforme de la descripcion de la Colônia del Sacramento y Puertos dei Rio de la Plata, situados ai Norte y Sur de Buenos Ayres,” in Jaime Cortesão, introduction and notes, Tratado do Madri A Conquista do Sete Povos (1750–1802) (Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca Nacional, 1969), 71–74; On the background see Fabrício Pereira Prado, “Colônia do Sacramento: a situação na fronteira platina no século xviii,” Horizontes antropológicos 9:19 (2003), 79–104; Paulo César Possamai,”O recrutamento militar na América Portuguesa: o esforço conjunto para a defesa da Colônia do Sacramento (1735–1737),” Revista de História 151 (2004), 151–180; Paulo César Possamai, “A fundação da Colônia do Sacramento,”Mneme-Revista de Humanidades 5:12 (2010).

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

41

do Sacramento by an assault that left 29 Guaraní dead and three wounded two Charrúa dead, five Spanish dead and 13 wounded, and 112 Portuguese dead, and the surviving Portuguese taken prisoner including two Jesuits and one Franciscan. The Spanish also seized the Portuguese cannons, balls, and gunpowder.28 The next attack on Colonia do Sacramento occurred in 1704–1705 d­ uring the War of Spanish Succession (1701–1713). European conflict framed Spanish-­ Portuguese conflict in the disputed borderlands, and shifting European  alliances resulted in ironies of wartime alliances. For example, in 1698 the governor of Buenos Aires mobilized 2,000 mission militiamen to help defend the city against a possible French attack during the War of the League of ­Augsburg (1689–1697).29 Spain under a Hapsburg monarch was a member of the Grand Alliance that sought to stop French expansionism. Four years later, with a French Bourbon monarch on the Spanish throne, Spain was allied to France, and Portugal to England. The Spanish took Colonia do Sacramento again in a siege that began at the end of 1704. The Spanish force consisted again of companies from Santa Fe, Corrientes, Buenos Aires, and 4,000 Guaraní mission militiamen. The siege lasted for four months, and in March of 1705 the Portuguese evacuated the outpost. The 1715 treaty that ended the conflict between Spain and Portugal returned Colonia do Sacramento to Portugal. A Portuguese strategy prior to the siege failed to prevent the Spanish occupation of the outpost, but heightened tensions in the region. They got Charrúa, Yaros, and Mobohanes, groups that lived in the Banda Oriental, to attack the missions in 1702 in an effort to keep the mission militia occupied.30 Tensions continued in the years following the conclusion of the War of Spanish Succession, and one cause was a conflict over the exploitation of herds of feral cattle located in what was called the vaquería del mar in the Banda O ­ riental. The Jesuits in the missions had used the feral herds to replenish the mission

28

29 30

“Relación de lo sucedido en la expulsión de los Portugueses, q se poblaron en frente de las Yslas de S.” Gavricl con ánimo de invadir las Prov.” del Rio de la Plata, Paraguay etc. desde 25 de Nov.' de 1679 asta 9 de Ag.” de 80,” in Cortesão, Tratado do Madri, 26–37; Pablo Hernández, S.J., Organización social de las doctrinas guaraníes de la Compañía de Jesús, 2 vols (Barcelona: Gustavo Gili, 1913), ii: 48–54. Carbonell de Massy. Estrategias de desarrollo rural, 353–361. On the 1702 conflict stirred up by the Portuguesesee Copia del memorial presentado a S. M. por ]os P. Juan Baptista de Zea y Mateo Sanchez Superiores de la Comp. del Paraná y Uruguay representando ei estado de todas las Reducciones, la puntualidad con q han cumplido con los ministérios de Cura. fecha en el Uruaguay a 6 de Maio de 1702, in Jaime Cortesão, Tratado de Madri: antecedentes-Colonia do Sacramento (1669–1749), (Rio de ­Janeiro: Biblioteca Nacional, 1954), 114–148; Hernández, Organización social de las doctrinas, ii: 54–67.

42

Chapter 3

herds, but the Portuguese from Colonia do Sacramento began to also take animals. As early as 1716 the Jesuits attempted to assert legal rights to the feral animals to justify military intervention. In December of 1718 400 mission militiamen participated in a campaign to clear the Portuguese out of the vaquería. Marcos de Villodas, S.J. reported that on December 30, 1718, a group of Guaraní had encountered 36 Portuguese near the San Juan River in the Banda Oriental processing hides.31 In a second document the Jesuit reported that the Guarani and a group of Spanish soldiers had found a ranching operation organized by the governor of Colonia do Sacrmento.32 The Jesuits sent another 200 mission militia in 1721 to repeat the operation in the vaquería. In June of 1724, Buenos Aires governor Bruno de |Zavala reported that the Portuguese had begun to fortify Montevideo. The governor mobilized a force of 4,000 mission militia that successfully dislodged the Portuguese, and established a Spanish outpost. The militia remained there for 14 months, and then returned to the missions in groups of 400. In November of 1729, Bruno de Zavala reported that he had burned 80 hides that the Portuguese had processed, and seized 600 horses. Finally, in April of 1733 the Spanish discovered evidence of the Portuguese were preparing dried salted beef, fat, and tallow for export to Brazil.33 31 32 33

Dcclaracion de quanto a sucedido en la tropa q baqueava a cargo de Ju.” de S. Martin en la Sierras del ybititi o cercanía de el, in Cortesão, Colonia do Sacramento (1669–1749),170–175. Copia dei Informe dei H.” Marcos de Yillodas ai S.' D.” Bruno Maurício de Zabala Gov.” del Rio de la Plata por el ' da cuenta de lo q ha pasado con los Portugueses de la Colônia dei Sacramento, fecha a 2 de febrero de 1719, in Ibid., 176–179. Joseph Patiño.San Yldefonso, October 8, 1733 [Royal order to attack Colonia do Sacramento], in Ibid., 244–252; Bernardo Nusdorffer, Candelaria, December 2, 1735, [report on the provision of mission militia and labor for service to the Crown] in Ibid.,301–328. The original description of the Montevideo operation reads as follows: “1724 — Ytt. Por orden dei dho S.' Gov.” D.” Bruno de Zavala se alistaron quatro mil índios Tapes para echar â los Portugueses de Montevideo, âdonde querian poblar; y comenzaron â marchar los quatro mil, pêro come los Portugueses, oyendo venían índios, trataron de dexar su intento, por orden dei mismo S.r Gov.r volvieron dos mil dei camino en ei qual estos gastaron un mes de ida y vuelta, y fueron los otros dos mil no mas con sus armas, cavallos, y bastimentos hasta Montevideo para trabajar un fuerte, como lo hicieron, y esta ai presente, trayendo con sus cavallos y Mulas la fagina y sustento de todos ellos, la lefia para su uso de distancia de seis léguas con mucha incommodidad. Gastaron estos dos mill Yndios un ano y dos meses de ida, estada y vuelta. A estos no se les dio mas que ei Tabaco y Yerva. Fue la perdida de cavallos y mulas muy considerable; fueron despues destos quatrocientos Y despues otra rerr.uda de otros quatrocientos dellos; volvieron luego por orden dei S.r D. Bruno la mitad; â estos sucedió otra remuda de otros docientos de suerte que duro hasta ei afio mill setecientos veinte y nueve remudandose siempre los Yndios. Y a estas ultimas remudas se les diò ai fin del ano seis baras de ropa y no mas. De esta fortaleza dize ei S.r Gov.r en su informe â su mag.'1 sin ponderacion si no tuviera los Yndios (de las Doctrinas) era imposible proseguir ei trabajo empezado para ei resguardo y defensa de Montevideo.”

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

43

Regional conflict during the 1730s contributed significantly to mortality crises that resulted in the deaths of more than 80,000 Guaraní. In 1732–1733, royal officials sent 6,000 mission militiamen to the Tebicuary River in response to the ongoing Comunero uprising in Paraguay. Earlier, in 1724, Buenos Aires governor Bruno de Zavala had mobilized 3,000 mission militia for an attack on Paraguay, but the rebels instead attacked the militia force and killed 300.34 In 1733 contagion spread to the missions from the military encampment on the Tebicuary. The contagion killed 6,073 on San Ignacio Guazú, Nuestra Señora la Fe, and Santa Rosa, the missions located closest to the encampment. In 1735, drought and famine conditions affected the missions while thousands of men were off serving in the militia. From September of 1734 to January of 1735, Bruno de Zavala mobilized another 12,000 militia for service on the ­Tebicuary. At a time of crises the missions had to supply the militia.35 Royal officials mobilized 34

35

Bernardo Nusdorffer, Candelaria, December 2, 1735, [report on the provision of mission militia and labor for service to the Crown] in Ibid., 313–314. The original description of the Montevideo operation reads as follows: “1724 — Ytt. El mismo afio por orden dei Ex.n'° S.’ Virrey de estos Reynos fue â entregarse del Govierno del Paraguay D.” Balthas.’ Garcia Ros. Llevo por orden de su Exc.a mas de três mil Yndios armados con sus cavallos y â su costa en tiempo q el S.r D.r D. Joseph de Antequera resistiendo â dha entrada acometió con los del Paraguay con traycion â los Yndios, los mas desarmados y teniendo los Cavallos En otra parte: era ei dia veinte y cinco de Agosto, Fiesta de S. Luis, qdo estaban los mas sin armas, divertidos en un regozijo militar, honrando ei dia de cumplir anos su Rey D. Luis Primero, q Dios aya. Perecieron en esta refriega y se ahogaron en ei rio Tebiquary como trecientos por todos. Perdieronse tambien en esta desgraciada accion mas de três mil animales entre Cavallos y Mulas con muchas armas q todo llevaron los Paraguayos. Despues desto se alistaron otros quatro mil Yndios, que ya iban caminando, pêro por la repentina retirada de los del Paraguay â sus tierras, muchos de ellos no passaron el Parana y Uruguay.” For the 1732 posting Nusdorffer (Ibid., 314–315) wrote: “1732 — Ytt. Dicho ano de mil set.'” treinta y dos para defender los pueblos de la invacion de los Comuneros del Paraguay, con la qual amenazaban y para q haciendose duenos dei Pântano Neêmbucu, no se imposibilitase en todo la Composicion de aquella Prov.;’ estuvieron manteniendose a su costa con armas y Cavallos como seis mil Yndios sobre ei rio Tibiquari, ocho meses. Y después en S. Ant.ü algo mas apartado dei Tibiquari se mantubieron por orden de su Gov.r ei S.r Virrey de Lima â Esperar ai S.r Oydor Mirones y despues ai Gov.’ Ruy ioba y aun despues de su muerte se mantuvieron hasta ei febrero de mil Set.”s y treinta y quatro mas de tres mil Yndios, diez y seis meses enteros. Perdieronse en estos dos anos dos mil quinientas Cabezas entre Cavallos y mulas. Gastaron las Doctrinas en Espado de estos dos anos setenta y ocho mil Ochocientos y cinquenta pesos en sustentar a dhos Ynd.’ en Campana.” On the uprising in Paraguay see Avellaneda, Guaraníes, criollos y jesuitas. Bernardo Nusdorffer, Candelaria, December 2, 1735, [report on the provision of mission militia and labor for service to the Crown] in Ibid., 315. The original description reads as follows: “1734 — Ytt. A! fin del ano de mil Set.” treinta y quatro y princípios dei de Setec.1’”1 treinta y cinco fueron pedidos doze mil Yndios armados por ei S.r D. Bruno para la pacificacion del Paraguay; los seis mil para el Tibiquari y los otros seis mil para todo frangente.

44

Chapter 3

4,000 militia and 1,500 Spaniards for another attack on Colonia do Sacramento that failed.36 There were two more Spanish attacks on Colonia do Sacramento, but the mission militia participated only in the 1762 siege that occurred in the last stages of the Seven Years War (1755–1763). Buenos Aires governor Pedro de Cevallos mobilized some 3,000 militia for the successful siege in 1762. The mobilized militia returned to the missions in the following year. Cevallos retook the outpost again in 1777 with a force sent from Spain. This time the Spanish demolished the citadel of Colonia do Sacramento and sank ships in the harbor to render it unusable.37 Maps 2 and 3 prepared in 1737 and 1777 respectively document the changes in Colonia do Sacramento and particularly the disappearance by 1777 of fortifications that existed in the late 1730s. Table 8 summarizes the number of mission militia mobilized for the 1680 and 1762 sieges of Colonia do Sacramento. The size of the contingents from the individual missions was a function of the size of the mission populations. The more populous missions contributed larger contingents. In 1680, for example, the Jesuits stationed on San Carlos contributed 235 militiamen, and in 1682 the mission had a population of 4,420. Santa Ana, on the other hand, with a population of 1,415, sent only 85 men. Similarly, Santa Ana had a population of Salieron de sus Pueblos los seis mil para ei Tibiquari aunq seiscientos de estos se volvieron de las Cercanias dei Campo de Tebiquari sin llegar alia por orden del Ex.°’” S.r D. Bruno por no juzgar ya necessário mayor numero dei que avia, caminando muchos cien léguas; perdieron mas de dos mil Cavallos y Mulas por una peste q les die por las Extraordinary y continuas lluvias. Estuvieron fuera de sus Casas quasi siete meses; murieron veinte y dos Ynd.s por enferm.1’”’” y trabajos de los cammos y lluvias; Aííadese que en esta Expedicion quasi todo lo que executaban los soldados del Presidio q traxo su Exc.a de B.8 Ayres se executaba con los cavallos de los Yndios porque aunque ei S.r D.' Bruno traxo Caballada dei Rey, no pudieron servir, por averla traido de muy lexos y por caminos maios y averse enflaquecido con el passo de los rios crecidos. Gastaron los Pueblos en esta sola funcion treinta y siete mil novecientos y quarenta un pesos y dos reales como consta de las cuentas. Conviene a saver: diez y siete mil ciento y treinta y dos pesos en los avios, catorze mil quinientas y treinta y tres pesos en mantenerlos todo el tipo, que estuvieron en Campana, y seis mil docientos y setenta y seis pesos y dos reales por las perdidas de cavallos, Mulas. Armas y municiones, q hubo.” 36 Ibid., 316. The original reads as follows: “1735 — Ytt. El mismo ano de mil setec.’”” treinta y cinco apenas se avia acabado y aun no se avia dei todo concluído la Campana de Tebiquari, qdo ei S.’ Gov.r de B.” Ayres D. Miguel de Salzedo pidio três mil Yndios armados para las cercanias de S. Ju.”. Salieron por Agosto â cumplir este orden no obstante la suma miséria q padecen los pueblos por la hambrc y falta de Cavallos q es tanta, q los mas fueron â pie para servir ai Rey su Senor con puntualidad Y aora salen otros mil q de nuevo a pedido dho S.r Gov/ p.” q juntos con los três mil primeros pongan sitio a la Colônia de los Portugueses.” Also see Hernández, Organización social de las doctrinas, ii: 54–57. 37 Hernández, Organización social de las doctrinas, ii: 63–65.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

Map 2

45

A 1737 map of Colonia do Sacramento. Planta da Nova Colonia do Sacramento, tirada no anno de 1737. Biblioteca Digital Luso-Brasileira, Biblioteca Nacional, Rio de Janeiro (https://bdlb.bn.gov.br/). In the public domain.

5,926 in 1760, and sent 1,050 men in 1762. Santos Cosme y Damián, on the other hand, had a population of 1,540 and sent only 100 men. The eastern missions sent only token numbers in 1762 since the populations of these missions were still dispersed following the relocation of the residents of the missions in the aftermath of the Treaty of Madrid and the suppression of the Guaraní uprising. San Juan Bautista sent 29, San Lorenzo 32, and San Nicolás 87. The Jesuits were able to mobilize 490 from San Miguel (see Table 8). 4

The Conflict for Rio Grande do Sul

As already noted, Spain based its claims in the disputed borderlands of the Banda Oriental and Rio Grande do Sul on the Treaty of Tordesillas. However, the larger Rio de la Plata region was a marginal frontier until the end of the eighteenth century and the so-called Bourbon Reforms that liberalized trade within the Spanish Empire. Prior to the reforms, Spain dedicated few ­resources

46

Chapter 3

Map 3

A 1777 Spanish map showing the changes to Colonia do Sacramento and its defenses. Planta da Praça da Colonia do Sacramento no Rio da Prata, tomada pelos Espanhoes em 1777. Biblioteca Digital Luso-Brasileira, Biblioteca Nacional, Rio de Janeiro (https://bdlb.bn.gov.br/). In the public domain.

to its development since it offered little potential resources or revenue in­ return. The Luso-Brazilians, on the other hand, took advantage of Spanish inertia to expand southward into the region. The first instance was the foundation of Colonia do Sacramento discussed above. Seven years earlier, in 1673, the Portuguese established an outpost on Santa Catarina Island, and a second o­ utpost named Laguna in 1688 located on what today is the border between Santa ­Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul. In 1733, they settled Vlamaõ in what today is northern Rio Grande do Sul.38 In 1736 the governor of Rio de Janeiro José de Silva Paes organized an expedition to relieve the Spanish siege of C ­ olonia do Sacramento, attempt to occupy Montevideo, and established a military ­presence in Rio Grande do Sul. In February of 1737 the expedition that ­consisted of a force of 260 soldiers established an outpost at what today 38

Claudio Moreira Bento, A guerra de de restauraçaõ do Rio Grande do Sul (1774–1776) (Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca do Exército Editora, 1996), 11–12.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

47

is the city of Rio Grande named Jesús-María-José, and the Villa de Rio Grande do Saõ Pedro. They established two other forts they named Saõ Miguel and Santanana.39 In 1750, Spain and Portugal ratified the Treaty of Madrid that attempted to define the boundaries of Brazil and Spanish territory in the Rio de la Plata ­region. The reigning Spanish monarch Fernando vi (1746–1759) was married to the Portuguese princess Infanta Barbara, and implemented foreign policy initiatives more favorable to Portugal. The treaty contained provisions to adjust boundaries, and recognized the Portuguese occupation of Rio Grande do Sul. The Portuguese surrendered Colonia do Sacramento in exchange for setting the boundary on the Uruguay River, and transferred the seven eastern missions and many of the mission estancias. A secret provision of the treaty stipulated a joint Spanish-Portuguese military action if the Guaraní resisted the transfer of jurisdiction, which they did do. The treaty also contained provisions for other territorial changes. Spain transferred the Moxos mission Santa Rosa to Portugal, and in turn Portugal transferred San Cristóbal in Marañon to Spain.40 The effort to implement the treaty resulted in the rupture of the GuaraníJesuit-Spanish alliance, and in particular demonstrates what the Guaraní were willing to put up with in the alliance.41 A few years earlier, during the decade of the 1730s, the Guaraní and the alliance survived a severe crisis. More than 80,000 died over seven years from epidemics and famine caused by crop failure. Mortality during a particularly severe smallpox outbreak between 1738 and 1740 reached more than 50 percent at some missions. Moreover, the mobilization of thousands of mission militiamen for different campaigns and the ­supply of the militia caused further suffering. Many Guaraní fled the missions in an attempt to escape contagion or in search of food.42 The Treaty of Madrid, on the other hand, envisioned changes that the Guaraní were unwilling to accept, even when invoked in the name of the King. The reaction of the Guaraní can be compared to anther frontier uprising, that of the indigenous groups in New Mexico the Spanish collectively identified as the Pueblos. The New Mexico communities experienced considerable stress during the 1660s and particularly the 1670s. Hostile indigenous groups 39 40

Ibid., 12–13; Aguirre, “Conflictos interétnicos en frontera sur Hispano-Portuguesa,” 12. Felipe de Hacedo, Buenos Aires, January 18, 1778, “Ynforme de la descripcion de la Colônia del Sacramento y Puertos dei Rio de la Plata, situados ai Norte y Sur de Buenos Ayres p.r D.” Felipe de Haedo,” in Cortesão, Tratado do Madri, 73. 41 Also see Lia Quarteri, Rebelión y guerra en las fronteras del Plata: guaraníes, jesuitas e imperios coloniales (Buenos Aires: Fondo De Cultura Economica, 2009). 42 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 67–71; Jackson, Frontiers of Evangelization, 100–108.

48

Chapter 3

raided the Pueblo communities, and there were periods of crop failure and famine. However, mortality did not reach the levels as in the Guaraní missions in the 1730s. The Christian gods had obviously failed, and the leaders of the uprising sought a return to the old gods that had provided for the Pueblo peoples for centuries. The 1680 uprising successfully cleared New Mexico of the ­Spaniards who had exploited the Pueblo peoples, and of the Franciscan missionaries who had collaborated with the Spanish colonists. The Pueblos retained their independence for 16 years before the Spanish returned and asserted control again, but did so implementing a different system.43 The Guaraní-Jesuit alliance forged in the common interest of the conflict with the Paulistas in the seventeenth century withstood the stresses of the crises of the 1730s, and proved to be much stronger than the relationship between the Franciscan missionaries and the Pueblo peoples of New Mexico based as it was on a more exploitative system and no common interest that retained the loyalty of the Pueblo ­peoples. The plan to transfer the seven eastern missions to the hated Portuguese, on the other hand, ruptured the alliance. Guaraní mission cabildos wrote to the King expressing their dismay at the decision to transfer their communities to their enemies the Portuguese. The Jesuit missionary Bernardo Nusdorffer also wrote a detailed account of events related to the relocation of the seven missions and Guaraní resistance in the years 1750 to 1755.44 Nusdorffer reported the efforts to find new sites for the seven missions, and the initial willingness of some Guaraní to relocate in 1750. Residents of several missions including Candelaria investigated possible sites.45 However, there was growing resistance to the move in the seven missions and other missions as well. A delegation from San Nicolás visited one proposed site located between Trinidad and Ytapúa, but rejected the site. Nusdorffer reported that the Guaraní leaders responded that: 43

44

45

A useful collection of translated documents regarding the 1680 uprising is Charles Wilson Hackett, ed, Revolt of the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico and Otermin’s attempted ­reconquest, 1680–1682 (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1942). Recent studies include Matthew Liebmann, “The innovative materiality of revitalization movements: Lessons from the Pueblo Revolt of 1680,” American anthropologist 110:3 (2008), 360–372; A.L. Knaut, The Pueblo revolt of 1680: conquest and resistance in seventeenth-century New Mexico (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2015). Bernardo Nusdorffer, “Relacion de todo lo sucedido en estas Doctrinas en orden a las mudanzas de los 7 Pueblos del Uruguai desde S. Borja hasta S. Miguel inclusive, que por ei tratado Real, y linea divisória de los limites entre las dos Coronas, o se avian de entregar a los Portugueses, o se avian de mudar a oiros parajes. Setembro de 1750 a fins de 1755,” in Cortesão, Tratado do Madri, 139–299. Ibid., 143–148, 153–154.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

49

…they didn’t need these lands [and] that they had the lands of their grandparents that they had always occupied and that were good, and they have their Church, good, and town made with their sweat over many years that they would not leave because Father Raphael Genestar, who they loved a great deal, is buried there, and they would not leave on any account.46 The Guaraní at San Miguel also rejected the relocation, and reportedly wrote a text that Nusdorffer annotated: …they could not believe that this was the King’s wish, that their lands would be given to the Portuguese, that they were his loyal vassals, and could not believe that they would be punished for no crime, those that had conquered Colonia twice, and as if he wanted them to be willing to serve him again in its conquest, and it was not credible that he wanted to take their lands and 100 years of work…47 Nusdorffer also summarized the Guaraní responses to the King in the f­ ollowing terms: …they would not on any account give their lands to the Portuguese, nor relocate to other sites so that the Portuguese could enjoy these lands that are theirs. If his Lord wanted to come with his weapons let him come [because] up to now they had been tranquil without having bothered or having done any harm to any of those cities, nor to Spain. They were and are loyal vassals of the King of Spain and will be [and] that D[on] Felipe V Father of D[on] Fern [an] do and the previous Kings have had them [the Guaraní] under their protection and they have possessed and had these lands since [the time] of the grandparents, the flood and after [becoming]

46

47

Ibid., 153. The original reads “…q no necessitaban de tales tierras, q ellos tenian tierras de sus avuelos en q estuvieron siempre y estaban bien, y q tenian su Yglesia, y buena, y pueblo hecho con el sudor suyo de muchos anos, y q no lo avian de dexar por estar enterrado en esta ei Padre Raphael Genestar, que los ha querido tanto, y no le dexarian de ningun modo. Ibid., 190. The original reads: “…q ellos no podian creer q esto era voluntad dei Rey, q sus tierras se entregasen â los Portugueses, q ellos eran sus fieles vasallos; y q no podian creer q los queria castigar sin delito, q ellos le avian entregado dos vezes conquistada la Colónia, y si queria se animarian â servirle otra vez en su conquista, y q no les era creible q les queria quitar sus tierras y ei trabajo de mas de 100 anos,

50

Chapter 3

Christians more than 130 years [and] they could not believe that this was the order of their King.48 The tone of the responses shows that the Guaraní redefined their identity in a process of ethnogenesis, as they forged a new identity in the missions based on their community of residence.49 Moreover, the Guaraní felt betrayed by the King they had served loyally on numerous occasions, as in the campaigns against Colonia do Sacramento. They were not willing to sacrifice their communities to the Portuguese. In 1753 and 1754 the situation worsened in the seven missions located east of the Uruguay River and the other missions as well, and there was also evidence of growing hostility towards the Jesuits themselves. The Guaraní encountered Luso-Brazilians rustling livestock from the mission estancias and killed them. On the other hand, they took a group of three Spaniards, four blacks, and nine non-Christian natives as prisoners. The growing hostility made some Jesuits feel threatened as in the case of Felix Orbina, S.J. who was stationed on Los Santos Mártires mission. In December of 1753 he fled the mission, and was later assigned to Candelaria.50 Nusdorffer reported that Guaraní in the missions located west of the Uruguay River also circulated documents urging the mission residents to rise up against the Spanish.51 The first confrontation occurred in February of 1753 when a group of armed Guaraní led by the cacique Sepé Tiarayú refused to grant the boundary commission passage to the territory of the missions beyond Santa Tecla. In April of 1754, a force of 400 Guaraní from San Luis, San Miguel, and San Lorenzo assembled on the Guacacay River to attack the Portuguese. At about the same time armed Guaraní left several of the missions west of the Uruguay River to participate in the resistance: 100 from Los Santos Mártires, 200 from Concepción, 126 from Santo Tomé, 100 from La Cruz, and 500 from Yapeyú.52 A force of Guaraní from 48

Ibid., 206. The original reads: que de ningun modo se entregarian a los Portugueses ni tam poço se mudarian à otros parajes p.” que los portugueses Gozasen de estas tierras que eran suyas. Si su Senor/queria venir con sus armas que viniese que ellos hasta haora avian estado quietos sin haber molestado, ni hecho dano alguno à ninguna de estas ciudades, ni à Espanol, fueron y son fieles vasallos dei Rey de Espana y q lo son y seran q D.” Felipe V, Padre de D.” Fern.do y los Reyes sus antecesores los havia mantenido hasta aora devajo de su protection y ellos avian poseido y tenido desde sus avuelos desde ei dilubio y despues de Christianos mas q 130 ã. estas tierras q ellos no podian creer que esta era orden de su Rey…” 49 As already noted Wilde, “Territorio y Etnogénesis misional en el Paraguay del siglo xviii” hypothesized a process of ethnogenesis on the missions. 50 Cortesão, Tratado do Madri, 196, 208, 219, 238–241, 243. 51 Ibid., 242. 52 Ibid., 243.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

51

Yapeyú and Santo Tomé confronted the Spanish army, and 120 Guaraní died and 48 were taken prisoner including their cacique Paracatu.53 In October of the same year a force of 2,000 Guaraní and 200 non-Christian allies confronted the advancing Portuguese force.54 The Luso-Spanish force and the boundary commission withdrew, a decision that Nusdorffer did not understand. The ­Portuguese force reportedly numbered 1,150.55 However, the decision may have been related to a problem of desertion from the Spanish army. For example, a quarter of the force of 200 from Corrientes deserted.56 The Spanish and Portuguese reorganized and invaded the mission territory again in 1755. On February 10, 1756, a combined force of 3,000 Spanish and Portuguese soldiers fought the Guaraní at the battle of Caibaté. It resulted in the death of 1,511 Guarani, while the Europeans suffered only 4 deaths. In the aftermath of the defeat of the Guaraní militia the Luso-Spanish force occupied the seven missions, and the Guaraní were forced to relocate to the missions west of the Uruguay River.57 What was the cost of the suppression of Guarani resistance? The Spanish government spent 1,490,689 pesos between 1754 and 1758 on the boundary ­commission and the suppression of resistance. There was damage to buildings in the mission complexes during the military occupation, and mission property was fair game and particularly the herds of mission cattle. As noted above, there were instances of rustling of cattle from the mission estancias during the period of Guarani resistance, and the Spanish and Portuguese armies took animals at will. For example, the number of cattle belonging to San Lorenzo mission dropped from 40,000 prior to the resistance to 4,557 reported in 1768 at the time of the expulsion of the Jesuits. The economies of the seven eastern missions did not recover after the Spanish reoccupied the missions in the early 1760s.58 Spain and Portugal agreed to annul the Treaty of Madrid in 1761, and Spain recovered the seven eastern missions and returned Colonia do Sacramento. In the same year Spain entered the conflict known as the Seven Years War (1755–1763) as an ally of France, and resumed the conflict with Portugal. For its part Portugal established new military outposts in the Banda Oriental in 1762

53 54

Ibid., 273–274. Felix Bécker, “La guerra guaranítica desde una nueva perspectiva: historia, ficción e historiografía,” Boletín americanista 32 (1982), 7–37; Lia Quarleri, “Gobierno y liderazgo jesuítico-guaraní en tiempos de guerra (1752–1756),” Revista de Indias 68:243 (2008), 89–114. 55 In Cortesão, Tratado do Madri, 277. 56 Ibid., 243. 57 On the detials of the relocation of the Guarani from the seven eastern missions see Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 72–78. 58 Jackson, Missions and the Frontiers, 262, 379.

52

Chapter 3

at sites south of Lake Merim (see Map 4) named Santa Tereza and Saõ Miguel (see Illustration 4).59 As already noted above, a Spanish force that included mission militia took Colonia do Sacramento in 1763. In the same year Buenos Aires Governor Pedro de Cevallos invaded Rio Grande do Sul. The Spanish first occupied the Portuguese forts Santa Tereza and Saõ Miguel, and on April 24, 1763 occupied Rio Grande do Saõ Pedro. Spain returned Colonia do Sacramento at the end of the conflict under the terms of the Treaty of Paris (1763), but refused to return Rio Grande do Sul based on its claims from the Treaty of Tordesillas.60 An undeclared war continued in Rio Grande do Sul off and on for another fourteen years until the signing of the Treaty of San Ildefonso in 1777. On the night of May 28–29, 1766, the Portuguese attacked but failed to take Rio Grande do Saõ Pedro. They did, however, occupy Saõ José do Norte, and the north shore of Laguna de los Patos including the unnamed peninsula that separates Laguna de los Patos from the Atlantic Ocean. Portugal apologized to Spain for the attack during a period of peace, but also retained and fortified the positions they had taken.61 For the next decade Spanish and Portuguese forces faced each other on opposite banks of and the entrance to Laguna de los Patos (see Maps 6–9). In 1773 the Spanish government ordered Buenos Aires Governor Juan José de Vértiz to lead a force into Rio Grande do Sul to stop cattle rustling by the Portuguese. Vértiz established a small fort he named Santa Tecla located at the crossroads of several important trails (see Map 5). However, Luso-Brazilian forces defeated his army at the battle of Tabalingal on January 10, 1774.62 Over the next two years both Spain and Portugal engaged in convoluted diplomacy and negotiations.63 At the same time Portugal covertly sent forces to Brazil to reoccupy Rio Grande do Sul. In the early hours of April 1, 1776, the Portuguese forces that numbered some 4,300 launched a surprise attack on the Spanish positions in Laguna de los Patos, first attacking the batteries on and near the mouth of Laguna de los Patos. Spanish forced numbered some 1,500. By the end of the day the Portuguese were victorious. Several days earlier, on March 24, 1776, Santa Tecla fell to the Portuguese after a siege that lasted 27

59 60 61 62 63

Aguirre, “Conflictos,” 13; Moreira Bento, A guerra, 15. Aguirre, “Conflictos,” 13–14; Moreira Bento, A guerra, 16. Aguirre, “Conflictos,” 15–16; Moreira Bento, A guerra, 17. Moreira Bento, A guerra, 18. On the international context of the conflicto in Rio Grande do Sul see Dauril Alden,”The undeclared war of 1773–1777: climax of Luso-Spanish Platine rivalry,” The Hispanic American Historical Review 41:1 (1961), 55–74.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

53

days. The Spanish forces in Rio Grande do Sul retreated to Santa Tereza in the Banda Oriental.64 Following the fall of Rio Grande do Sul the Spanish government sent a force of 116 ships and more than 19,000 men commanded by Pedro de Cevallos to end the conflict in the disputed borderlands. Cevallos had three objectives. They were to occupy the Island of Santa Catarina, reconquer Rio Grande do Sul, and to occupy Colonia do Sacramento. Cevallos was successful in the first objective. The Spanish force attacked Santa Catarina, and the Portuguese garrison of 2,900 offered little resistance and abandoned the Island. Cevallos next planned to invade Rio Grande do Sul, but a strong storm at sea forced him to temporarily abandon his plans and he instead attacked Colonia do S­ acramento. The ­outpost capitulated on June 4. He next began making plans for the invasion of Rio Grande do Sul, but news arrived of the signing of the Treaty of San Ildefonso on October 1, before he was able to launch an attack. Under the terms of the treaty Spain and Portugal divided the disputed borderlands. Portugal retained Santa Catarina and coastal Rio Grande do Sul, and Spain the Banda Oriental and the territory of the seven eastern missions.65 5

The Luso-Brazilian Conquest of the Seven Eastern Missions in 1801

In 1801, Spain and Portugal were at war again. The governor of Rio Grande do Sul led a local force that occupied the seven eastern missions. The peace treaty that ended the conflict in the same year stipulated that the pre-war boundaries be restored. However, the Portuguese refused to return the territory of the ­seven eastern missions, and permanently incorporated the region into Brazil.66 However, there appear to have been few changes in the administration of the ex-missions. For example, Spanish priests continued to staff the ex-­missions.67 Moreover, the civil administration of the ex-missions may have been similar, and there is evidence of the persistence of the Guaraní militia

64

No Author, Buenos Aires, May 1776 [Anonymous Account of the fall of Rio Grande do Sul, in Cortesão, Tratado do Madri, 373–379. 65 Alden, “The undeclared war of 1773–1777,” 67–73. 66 Hernández, Organización social de las doctrinas, ii: 245–247. 67 This conclusion is based on the analysis of a baptismal and burial register for San Francisco de Borja Baptismal and burial entries continued to be registered in Spanish, and were signed by priests with Spanish surnames. See San Francisco de Borja baptismal and burial registers, Diocese of Uruguaina, Uruguaina, Brazil.

54

Chapter 3

Illustration 4 The Fortalesa of Santa Tereza. Wikimedia commons: reproduced by permission of Kleidas. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the gnu Free Documentation License. It is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International, 3.0 Unported, 2.5 Generic, 2.0 Genericand 1.0 Generic license.

under P ­ ortuguese rule. An 1816 diagram of San Francisco de Borja recorded barracks for the Portuguese and Guaraní regiments.68 A contemporary report detailed the conquest of the seven missions, and the Spanish military failure in response to the Luso-Brazilian invasion.69 The report noted the lack of military preparation, and particularly in terms of training and the provision of munitions. Local Spanish officials mobilized a poorly equipped and trained militia force of 136 sent to defend San Miguel mission. Few of the militiamen had experience in the use of firearms. The Luso-­Brazilian force overwhelmed the Spanish militia, and initially signed a capitulation that allowed the Spanish to evacuate San Miguel. However, the 68 69

Kelli Bisonhim, “Em busca da estrutura sócio-espacial da redução de San Francisco de Borja:a sobrevivência do patrimônio arqueológico.” Master’s Thesis, Pontifica Universidades Católica Do Rio Grande do Sul, 2011, 59. No Author to Viceroy Joaquín del Pino, Pueblo de Santa Maria La Mayor. Deptember 26, 1802, in Cortesão, Tratado do Madri, 458–469.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

55

Map 4

A contemporary map showing Lake Merim, the disputed borderlands, and the mouth of Laguna de los Patos. Plano topografico que comprende la parte septentrional de la Laguna de Merin con las vertientes que bajan a ella de la cuchilla general, el sangradero de la misma laguna, el arroyo de Fahin, el Piratini y la boca del Rio Grande de Sn. Pedro. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., call number G5622.M5 178- .V2. Portuguese expansion in this region was one cause of conflict. In the public domain.

Map 5

The Spanish Fort of Santa Tecla built in 1773. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C. In the public domain.

56

Map 6

Chapter 3

A contemporary map showing the defenses constructed at the mouth of Laguna de los Patos. Plano de la entrada del Rio Grande situao. en 32 grados de latitud meridional y en 320 gs. 57 ms. de longitud segun el meridiano de Thenerife con sus canales y sondas segun oy. se considera. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., call number G5622.P3 1767 .G6. In the public domain.

Luso-Brazilians later took the militiamen captive, and confiscated their weapons and baggage. Local Spanish officials failed to maintain an effective militia system, and were outclassed by the Luso-Brazilians from Rio Grande do Sul. Moreover, the Spanish were impotent in the face of the failure of the Portuguese to return the territory following the conclusion of peace in 1801. 6

The Destruction of the Missions, 1817–1818

Regional conflict resumed after 1810 with the beginning of the independence movement in the Rio de la Plata region. The parties in the conflict scrambled to seize territory and in the process destroyed many of the mission complexes. The territory between the Paraná and Uruguay Rivers was the prize. In 1817 and 1818, Luso-Brazilian forces under the command of Francisco das Chagas

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

Map 7

57

Detail of the map showing the fortifications.

Santos invaded the mission territory, as well as the Banda Oriental where they occupied Montevideo on January 20, 1817. The forces of Chagas Santos occupied the former Jesuit mission of La Cruz that he then used as a base of operations, and sacked and damaged nine of the former missions including Yapeyú, Santo Tomé, Los Santos Mártires, Apóstoles, and San Carlos, Santa María la Mayor, San José, Concepción, and San Francisco Xavier. On July 2, 1817, Chagas Santos attacked Apóstoles that was defended by 800 Guaraní militia, but was repulsed. In April of 1818, a battle raged at San Carlos that left the former mission complex largely in ruins, while many of the residents took refuge in the church. Map 10 is a contemporary diagram of the San Carlos complex at the time of its destruction, and Illustrations 5 and 6 show the ruins that remain at the site today. In addition to the physical damage to the former mission communities, the invaders reportedly killed 3,190 Guaraní and took 360 captive.70 The Paraguayans lead by Dr. Gaspar Francia took advantage of the chaos of the Luso-Brazilian invasion to also attack the region between the Paraná River and Uruguay River in an attempt to 70 Hernández, Organización social de las doctrinas, ii: 249–255.

58

Map 8

Chapter 3

A contemporary map showing the interior of Laguna de los Patos. Plano del Rio Grande llamado Sn. Pedro situado en la latitud del S. de 23 gs. mas en la costta septemtrional del Cauo de Sa. Maria, nuebamte. emmedado en el año de 71 y 72 en los que se descubrio la barra del S. la que es bastantemte. ancha y tiene agua suficientte para embs. que calen 10″ o 12″ pies. Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., call number G5622.P3 1777 .B3. In the public domain.

assert its control over the territory. The Paraguayans sacked and damaged five former missions. They were San Ignacio Miní, Candelaria, Loreto, Santa Ana, and Corpus Christi. The conflict left the former mission complexes damaged or in ruined condition.71 The Paraguayan and Luso-Brazilian invaders, however, failed to assert sovereignty over the disputed territory.72 7

The Destruction of Los Santos Mártires Mission

Archaeological excavations conducted in 2002 provided information regarding the destruction of the mission church that most likely occurred during the 71

For a discussion of the architectural remains of the Jesuit missions see Jackson, Pames, Jonaces, and Franciscans, Appendix 2, 160–215. 72 Ibid.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

Map 9

59

Detail of the map showing the fortifications and settlement.

Luso-Brazilian invasion of 1817–1818. A stratigraphic profile cut to a depth of 1.34 meters in the church provided the following details: 1) a level of collapsed bricks and roof tiles; 2) an area of concentrated charred wood and burned tacuara reed used as roofing, and forged nails found on top of the pavement of floor tiles; 3) the pavement of floor tiles. The church roof consisted of wooden beams covered with tacuara reed, and in turn covered by roof tiles. The charred wood and tacuara reed shows that fire destroyed the roof during the series of Luso-Portuguese invasion of 1817–1818. Luso-Brazilian forces also sacked several other mission communities such as San Ignacio Miní, Loreto, Santa Ana, and Corpus Christi during the 1817 and 1818 invasions, and a three day pitched battle at San Carlos in early April of 1818 that pitted the LusoBrazilians against the local militia resulted in the destruction of the complex there.73 The building materials in the church included 1) unburned adobe brick; 2) a brick wall;  3) a wall of edged sandstone blocks that formed half of the wall. The inclusion of unburned adobe brick explains why the church ruin was covered by a layer of soil in which vegetation grew. Once the roof 73 Jackson, Missions and Frontiers of Spanish America, 383.

60

Chapter 3

collapsed heavy rains converted the adobe brick into a layer of mud that was quickly covered by vegetation.74 The Jesuits had directed the construction of an extensive building complex described in inventories and depicted in several contemporary diagrams. A  1785 inventory enumerated the main elements of the complex built during the Jesuit period.75 The church was a monumental three nave structure that measured 116 x 47 varas (97.4 x 39.5 meters). Adjoining the church was the colegio and bell tower described in detail in the 1786 diagram. Other religious structures included four chapels “with the images of the pueblo” (con los imagenes del pueblo). Surrounding the main square on three sides there were 29 rows of buildings with small apartments for the Guaraní population, and latrines for their use. The 1792 diagram also depicts the artificial platform created to accommodate the buildings of the mission complex. As the mission population declined and dispersed and as the civil administrators allocated

Illustration 5 The ruins of San Carlos mission. Photograph in the collection of the author.

74 75

Victoria Brizzo, “Un análisis de las manifestaciones del poder en la reducción jesuítica “Los Santos Mártires del Japón (Siglo xviii),” tesis de grado, Escuela de Antropología, Universidad Nacional de Rosario, 2003, 84–89. Juan Antonio Fernández, Mártires, December 31, 1785, “Testimonio del Ynbentario…en 31 de Diciembre de 1785,” agn, Sala 9–18–7–3.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

61

Illustration 6 The ruins of San Carlos mission. Photograph in the collection of the author.

more labor to income generation, maintenance was given less priority and buildings deteriorated. The Guaraní housing units were probably the first to deteriorate, as shown in the 1792 mission diagram (see Illustrations 7–9). There was a smaller number of housing units than at the time of the Jesuit expulsion. The 1785 inventory reported that the number was down to 26 rows. The LusoBrazilian attack finished the destruction of the mission complex.76 8 Conclusions The conflict over the disputed borderlands had a considerable effect on the Guaraní missions. Thousands of Guaraní served in the militia in campaigns 76

The description of the diagram reads: “Plano y descripción del pueblo de mártires, departamento de concepción de las misiones guaraníticas. Año 1792. Hállase este pueblo situado sobre la cumbre de un cerro montañoso y escabroso y esta cercado de fincas, cuyo algodonales han sido puestos y adelantados por aplicación y diligencia de d. ­Andrés Estrada, actual administrador. Que es fecho en dicho pueblo a 29 de febrero de 1792. ­Sánchez.” (“This village is situated on the top of a mountainous and rugged hill and is surrounded by farms, whose cotton fields have been laid and advanced by the application and diligence of D. Andrés Estrada, current administrator, which is done in said town on February 29 of 1792. Sanchez).

62

Chapter 3

Map 10 An 1818 diagram of San Carlos mission destroyed during an 1818 battle with LusoBrazilian invaders. San Carlos, pueblo destruido en las misiones. Biblioteca Digital Luso-Brasileira, Biblioteca Nacional, Rio de Janeiro (https://bdlb.bn.gov.br/). In the public domain.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

63

against the Portuguese, and particularly against Colonia do Sacramento. Some died in their role as “cannon fodder.” There were also indirect consequences. Armies on the move carried disease, and epidemics in the missions in the 1730s and 1760s that followed mobilizations and troop movements killed thousands of Guaraní. The missions supplied the mobilized militia, and during the famine of the mid-1730s the supply of mobilized militiamen caused privation on the missions. Many left the missions in search of food. The conflict also had economic consequences for the missions. One of the prizes was the large number of cattle on the mission estancias and wild herds that roamed across the districts known as vaquerías and that numbered around a million head in the middle eighteenth century.77 The Guaraní mission residents were the losers in the final resolution of boundaries in 1777 that confirmed Portuguese control over one of the vaquerías. Three periods of extreme crisis on the Jesuit missions were related  to regional conflict. The first was the bandeirante assault on the Jesuit missions in Guairá, Tape, and Itatín. The second was the famine and epidemics of the 1730s that killed more than 80,000 Guaraní, which was also related to regional conflict. The third was the Guaraní resistance to the Treaty of Madrid that transferred the seven eastern missions to the Portuguese, and ended with some 29,000 Guaraní being relocated to the missions west of the Uruguay River. The Treaty attempted to define boundaries between Spanish and Portuguese dominions in South America, but was also the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back, so to speak. The decision by the Spanish Crown to give the seven mission communities to Portugal went too far as the Guaraní were concerned, and resulted in the rupture of the Spanish-Jesuit-Guaraní alliance that had survived the earlier periods of crisis. It also represented a process of ethnogenesis as the Guaraní couched their resistance in terms of the protection of their communities that now was the basis for their identity. Some 2,000 Guaraní died in the resistance, although their resistance also contributed to the decision to annul the Treaty in 1761. The next chapter relates demographic patterns to conflict. The French Revolution (1789), the rise to power of Napoleon Bonaparte, and the beginning of independence movements in Spanish America following the French invasion of Spain in 1808 also had a direct effect on the Guaraní living on the ex-missions. The governor of Rio Grande do Sul occupied the seven eastern missions in 1801 during a period of warfare between Spain and Portugal, and the Portuguese retained the territory in violation of the treaty terms that stipulated the return of territory. Luso-Brazilian and Paraguayan invasions of 77

Alden, “The undeclared war of 1773–1777,” 56.

64

Illustration 7

Chapter 3

The 1792 diagram of Los Santos Mártires mission.

Illustration 8 The ruins of the mission church at Los Santos Mártires mission. Photograph in the collection of the author.

Regional Conflict & Militarization of the Jesuit Missions

65

Illustration 9 The Ruins of Guaraní housing at Los Santos Mártires mission. Photograph in the collection of the author.

the territory between the Paraná and Uruguay Rivers in 1817 and 1818 resulted in the loss of life, the captivity of hundreds of Guaraní, and the destruction of the building complexes at a number of the ex-missions, ­including Los S­ antos Mártires mission. The conflict brought an end to a number of ex-mission communities. Table 8

Guaraní Mission Militia Mobilized for Campaigns against Colonia do Sacramento, 1680 and 1761

Population in: Mission Ytapúa Candelaria Santa Ana San Ignacio Miní Loreto San Carlos San José

Mission Militia Mobilized:

1682 3288 1868 1415 3051

1760 2644 5296 2986

1680 190 200 85 150

2772 4420 2272

4591 2304 2421

155 235 90

1761 600 1050 250(?) 854 300(?) 310

66 Table 8

Chapter 3 Guaraní Mission Militia Mobilized for Campaigns against Colonia do Sacramento, 1680 and 1761 (cont.)

Population in: San Miguel Mártires Sta María la Mayor San Francisco Xavier Concepción San Nicolás Santo Tomé La Cruz Yapeyú San Juan San Francisco de Borja Santa Rosa San Luis San Lorenzo Santo Ángel Santos Cosme Corpus Christi Apóstoles Jesús Trinidad

Mission Militia Mobilized:

3740 1980 5171

5057

235 80 235

490

3029

1939

160

100

7014 3548 5243 2251 2477

2996 4321 3485

275 275 275 150 150

400(?) 87 400

7765 4050 3773 3197 4139 1818 4091 1540 4698 2757 2195 2566

300 29 250(?) 642 30 32 30(?) 100 700 300(?) ? ?

Source: Kazuhisa Takeda, “Las milicias Guaraníes en las misiones jesuíticas del Rio de la Plata: Un ejemplo de la transferencia organizativa y tácticas militares militares de España a su territorio de Ultramar en la primera época moderna,” Revista de Historia Social y de las Mentalidades 20:2 (2016), 33–72; Kazuhisa Takeda, “Cambio y continuidad del liderazgo y en la milicia de las misiones jesuíticas: Análisis cualitativo de las listas de indios Guaraníes,” Tellus 12:23 (juliodiciembre, 2012), 59–79; Robert H. Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among the Sedentary Populations on the Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context. (Leiden: Brill, 2015), 187, 193–194.

Chapter 4

Demographic Patterns on the Missions This chapter examines demographic patterns on the Jesuit missions and links these patterns to regional conflict. Epidemics spread through the missions about once a generation through contacts with neighboring communities, both overland but particularly along the river highways. Epidemics occurred when there were enough potentially susceptible hosts to sustain the chain of infection, since the mission populations were not large enough to maintain contagion in an endemic form. Regional conflict, the mobilization of the mission militia, and the movement of armies facilitated the spread of contagion, and in some instances intensified the effects of epidemics as seen in the example of the mortality crises of the 1730s discussed in Chapter 2. Mortality during the 1733 epidemic was heaviest at the missions located closest to the military encampment on the Tebicuary River. Smallpox spread to most of the missions during the 1738 to 1740 outbreak. It also offers two comparisons of demographic patterns on missions on the northern frontier of New Spain (Mexico) established among non-sedentary natives in Baja California and on the Texas Gulf Coast. This chapter first examines the mission urban plan in a comparative context.1 Unlike missions in other parts of Spanish America, the Jesuits congregated the entire population on communities they created from whole cloth. The Jesuit mission urban plan is compared to sixteenth century missions in Chiapas, Mexico, where Dominicans did not attempt to modify existing settlement patterns. This is followed by the discussion of three outbreaks. The first was a 1718– 1719 smallpox epidemic that occurred during a lull in the conflict between Spain and Portugal. The second was another smallpox outbreak in 1763 to 1765 that can be directly connected to conflict, the mobilization and movement of armies, as well as the consequences of the 1750 Treaty of Madrid already discussed in Chapter 3. The Spanish relocated the bulk of the population from the seven eastern missions ceded to Portugal to the communities west of the Uruguay River. The addition of hundreds of new residents created conditions of overcrowding in the already highly nucleated mission communities. 1 I discussed this issue in Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 85.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���9 | doi:10.1163/9789004390546_005

68

Chapter 4

The third is another smallpox outbreak in 1797 to 1798, following the ­Jesuit expulsion and during the period of civil administration that attempted to ­implement a new system based on the Bourbon reform imperative to make the missions cover the costs of administrative. It was also a period during which reform-minded and increasingly anti-clerical royal officials questioned the continued reliance on frontier missions as an anachronism from an earlier period that actually retarded the integration of indigenous populations into colonial society. This outbreak occurred during another lull in the regional conflict, and evidenced a different pattern from the 1738–1740 and 1763–1765 epidemics. The civil administrators complied with the Bourbon imperative to try to make the missions cover the costs of administration, and looked for ways to produce income through production for regional markets. This also meant greater contact with the larger region which facilitated the spread of contagion. The civil administrators also prepared fewer censuses of the mission populations, so there is less information on epidemic mortality, but there is more complete information for the 1797–1798 outbreak. This section also discusses post-­expulsion epidemics. This is followed by a comparative analysis of epidemics on the Baja California missions. This section shows the demographic consequences of the increased movement of peoples through mission communities. In this case it was not a consequence of conflict, but rather of the organization of the colonization of Alta California. The Jesuits who administered the missions prior to their expulsion had managed to limit contacts with Sinaloa and Sonora on the mainland, which had buffered somewhat the effects of epidemics. The colonization of Alta California and the movement of personnel to the new colony facilitated the spread of contagion that devastated the mission populations. The final section of the chapter presents detailed case studies of demographic patterns on individual missions. These case studies document the variations in patterns between individual missions, instances of communities that escaped the effects of individual epidemics, and the dynamic of rebound or recovery following catastrophic mortality. 1

The Jesuit Mission Urban Plan

Documenting the urban plan of the Jesuit missions helps explain demographic patterns, and particularly high mortality during epidemics and the general ineffectiveness of measures taken to blunt the effects of contagion as d­ uring

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

69

the 1738–1740 smallpox epidemic. Large numbers of people lived crowded in small apartments in a compact village, and this urban plan facilitated the spread of contagion. The Jesuits commonly practiced quarantine. They removed the sick and those exposed from the general population to temporary plague hospitals. A second important element, particularly during the early phase of expansion to Itatín, Guairá, and Tape, was the danger of attack by Paulistas. The early mission sites such as those in Guairá contained defensive elements. For example, the Jesuits placed San Ignacio mission between two rivers for defense. Archaeological excavations documented the mission urban plan that included a defensive wall that surrounded the complex. This was an element absent in later mission complexes.2 The Jesuits later relocated San Ignacio Miní to a site on the Paraná River following its destruction by bandeirante attacks. Two c. 1750 diagrams depict the fully developed mission complexes at San Miguel and San Juan Bautista located east of the Uruguay River (see Illustrations 10–11). The plaza was the space at the center of the complex, and the different architectural elements on its four sides. The monumental baroquestyle church dominated the complex. Adjoining the church was the colegio. Housing for the mission residents flanked the three sides of the plaza. The fact of thousands of people living together in a compact community was a factor in the spread of contagion, but it also facilitated social control and the mobilization of labor. This marked a difference between the politics of the Jesuit ­missions compared to the sixteenth century central Mexican and Andean ­doctrinas. The Jesuits congregated the entire population on the mission community, whereas in central Mexico and particularly the Andean region the missionaries did not, and administered other communities as visitas.3 The design of the mission complexes also took into consideration the need for defense, and this was particularly the case on the missions located closest to Portuguese territory. Norberto Levinton has suggested that the monumental churches at San Miguel, Trinidad, and Jesús de Tavarangue were constructed of stone on a large scale so that they could be used as a place of refuge and for defense in case of a Luso-Brazilian attack.4 2 Igor Chmyz, “Pesquisas arqueológicas nas reduções jesuíticas do Paraná,” Revista do Círculo de Estudos Bandeirantes. Curitiba 15 (2001), 39–58. 3 For the Andean region see Max Donoso Saint, et al, Iglesias de la antigua ruta de la plata (Santiago: LarrainVial, 2011). 4 Rafael Carbonell de Masy and Norberto Levinton, “Un Pueblo Llamado Jesús,” unpublished paper.

70

Chapter 4

Illustration 10 A c. 1750 diagram of San Miguel mission. . “Missió[n] de S. Mig[ue]l.” BN, amm 41 76/98. Sección Iconográfica arc 24-3-6. Biblioteca Nacional, Rio de Janeiro. Reproduced from Luiz Antônio Bolcato Custódio, “Ordenamientos urbanos y arquitectónicos en el sistema reduccional jesuítico Guaraní de la Paracuaria: Entre su normativa y su realización, PhD Thesis, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 2010, 211. Reproduced by permission of the author

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

71

Illustration 11 A c. 1750 diagram of San Juan Bautista mission. Pueblo de San Juan que e uno de los del Uruguay que se intentan entregar a Portugal. Biblioteca Nacional de Francia - Publication: [SF]: [s.n] 1756. bnf, GeC2769. Reproduced from Luiz Antônio Bolcato Custódio, “Ordenamientos urbanos y arquitectónicos en el sistema reduccional jesuítico Guaraní de la Paracuaria: Entre su normativa y su realización, PhD Thesis, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 2010, 220. Reproduced by permission of the author

Earlier missionaries in central Mexico and the Andean region did not attempt to congregate the entire indigenous populations on one community. The Jesuit congregation of Juli in what today in Peru was one precursor to the urban organization of later missions in the Rio de la Plata.5 The ­Dominican m ­ issions in sixteenth century Chiapas adopted a different organizational scheme dictated, 5 See, for example, Marie Helmar, “Juli, un experimento misionero de los jesuitas en el altiplano andino (siglo xvi).” Boletin ira 12 (1983), 191–216; Alexandre Coello de la Rosa, “La doctrina de Juli a debate (1575–1585),” Revista de estudios extremeños 63:2 (2007), 951–989; Ramón G ­ utiérrez, “Propuestas urbanísticas de los sistemas misionales de los jesuitas,” In Sandra Negro Tua, and Manuel María Marzal, eds., Un reino en la frontera: las misiones jesuitas en la América colonial (Quito: Abya Yala, 2000), 173–183; Armando Nieto Velez, S.J., “Jesuitas en el mundo andino: las reducciones de Juli,” Revista Peruana de Historia Eclesiástica 2 (1994), 129–144; Ximena Malaga Sabogal, “Juli, la Roma de América: memoria, construcción y ­percepciones del pasado jesuita en un pueblo del altiplano,” Thesis for the licenciatura, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, 2011; Pablo Ruiz Martínez-Cañavate, “Ciudad y territorio en las misiones jesuíticas de indios guaraníes,” La Compañía de Jesús y las artes. Nuevas perspectivas de investigación (Zaragoza: Universidad de

72

Chapter 4

in part, by limitations in the number of missionary personnel, and a dispersed settlement pattern. In 1526, the first group of Dominicans arrived in Mexico and established a convent in Mexico City. The Dominicans staffed doctrinas in the Valley of Mexico, Morelos, and several communities in Puebla, but their most important missions were in the south in Oaxaca, Chiapas and neighboring parts of Tabasco, and Guatemala. Different ethnic groups inhabited the area of Chiapas and highland Tabasco in the sixteenth century. The O’depüt (Zoques) were culturally and linguistically related to the Mixes and Popolucas, and inhabited parts of Oaxaca, Chiapas, and Tabasco. There were also Maya groups that included the Chol, Tojolabal, Quiché, Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Mam, Lacandón, Chuj, and Q’anjob’al. The Tzotzil, for example, occupied the area around Ciudad Real (modern San Cristobal de las Casas) including San Juan Chamula and Zinacantán. The Dominicans arrived in Chiapas in 1545 with Bartolomé de las Casas, the first bishop of Chiapas. Up to that point secular clergy had had the main responsibility for the evangelization of the indigenous population. In 1551, the Dominicans organized the Province of San Vicente Ferrer which included their missions in Chiapas and Guatemala. In their writings and reports the missionaries provided small details that can be analyzed and interpreted to better understand the dynamic of the organization of the evangelization campaigns, and their limitations. Such is the case for the Chiapas and Guatemala doctrinas. In one of his chronicles Antonio de Remesal summarized information on the Guatemala and Chiapas missions that included the number of missionaries and lay brothers stationed on each of the doctrinas, and the names of the subject communities or visitas. What does this information show? For one it shows that the Dominicans used a different strategy in Chiapas when compared to the Jesuit missions in the Rio de la Plata region. They did not attempt to congregate the entire indigenous population on one community, and the dispersed settlement pattern, and particularly in mountainous areas, may have buffered the effects of epidemics. The Dominicans also assigned more missionaries to other areas, such as Oaxaca that was a more important missionary frontier in the late sixteenth century. The Dominicans established 25 doctrinas in Oaxaca from the 1530s to the 1580s, and stationed from two to six missionaries on each mission.6 The Dominicans established only six doctrinas in Chiapas and six in Guatemala, and within the Province of San Vicente Ferrer they also assigned more Zaragoza, 2014), 259–278; Pablo Ruiz Martínez Cañavate, “Reducciones jesuíticas del Paraguay: territorio y urbanismo,” PhD diss., Universidad de Granada, 2017. 6 Robert H. Jackson, Visualizing the Miraculous, Visualizing the Sacred: Evangelization and the “Cultural War” in Sixteenth Century Mexico. (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014), 61–66.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

73

missionaries to Guatemala (see Table 9), such as the doctrina at Cobán. In 1611, there were 63 Dominicans and 19 lay brothers in Guatemala as compared to 43 and seven in Chiapas. Moreover, the Dominican headquarters in Guatemala, Santo Domingo Guatemala, counted more personnel than Santo Domingo in Ciudad Real, 34 missionaries as against 20. Some 35–40 Dominicans resided in the headquarters in Antequera (Oaxaca City) in the 1580s.7 With the smaller number of doctrinas in Chiapas, the Dominican missionaries assigned to each mission had to visit many other communities administered as visitas. The six missionaries stationed on Chiapa, for example, administered six visitas. Travelling to visit these communities was not as difficult in comparative terms, because the mission at Chiapa and the visita communities are located in a broad valley. The nine missionaries stationed on Tecpatán, on the other hand, administered 24 O’depüt communities as visitas scattered across a rugged mountainous district (see Table 10 and Illustration 12). The bottom line is that leaders of the missionary orders made conscious decisions as to how to assign limited missionary personnel, and this was an important factor in determining missionary strategy, organization, and urban plan.

Illustration 12 The Dominican doctrina Santo Domingo Tecpatán (Chiapas, Mexico). Photograph in the collection of the author

7 Ibid., 61.

74 2

Chapter 4

Seventeenth Century Demographic Patterns

Demographic patterns in the seventeenth century were different from those of the eighteenth, and particularly in the period following the initial establishment of the missions and the bandeirante raids of the 1620s and 1630s. The Jesuits created mission communities and congregated thousands of natives, both adults and children. The missions had open populations, which meant that the populations expanded through natural reproduction but also from the settlement of non-Christians. The Jesuits baptized both adults and children. A handful of reports prepared in October of 1648 reported on the total number of baptisms and burials on selected missions from the date of foundation to the point of the drafting of the reports. The numbers came from the sacramental registers of baptisms and burials.8 The practice was to number each individual entry in the sacramental registers, but it was not rare for there to be errors in the sequence. The numbers most likely are not completely accurate. The report on San Carlos mission noted a total of 3,615 baptisms of adults and 3,503 infants, and 4,158 burials. The report on Candelaria noted that the record covered the period 1628 to 1648. In these years the Jesuits baptized 2,883 adults and 2,828 infants, and noted 3, 767 burials: 2,480 burials of adults and 1,287 of infants. At the time of the report Santos Cosme mission was joined to Candelaria, but records were kept separately for the two. The Jesuits noted 1,965 baptisms of adults as against 2,403 of infants, and 2,185 burials. The final example is of Santa Ana. The report noted that the Jesuits had performed 2,138 baptisms of adults and 2,332 of infants, and 1,668 burials. As the missions matured the populations became largely closed p ­ opulations, which meant that there were not significant numbers of non-Christians resettled on the missions, and growth occurred mostly through natural ­reproduction. However, the Jesuits did periodically settle small numbers of non-Christians at the end of the seventeenth century and the early e­ ighteenth. The 1691 and 1702 censuses, for example, contained a column for baptisms of adults, and the ­Jesuits reported small numbers of baptisms of adults at several missions.9 In 1691, the Jesuits reported the baptism of seven adults at C ­ andelaria, 11 at Jesús, and ten at Jesús María de los Guenoas. There was a larger number in 1702 with two at Ytapúa, four at Jesús, one at San José, three at Santa Ana, ten at Loreto, seven at San Ignacio Miní, and 46 at Corpus Christi. Corpus Christi was on 8 The reports are found in CA. 9 Annua Numeracion de los Indios del Parana y Uruguay que están a cargo de Comp[añí]a de iesus hecha al fin del año de 1691, arsi; Numero de las Doctrinas, Familias, Almas, Baptismos, y Ministros del Parana/Uruguay del año de 1702, agi.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

75

the frontier, and the Jesuits settled small numbers of Guañanas that lived to the north in the territory between the Paraná River and Uruguay River. A detailed 1759 tribute census reported 112 Guañanas that had been resettled on the mission in 1724, 1730, and 1754. They were organized politically into separate cacicazgos, but there was intermarriage with the Guaraní population of the mission.10 3

Population Politics on the Jesuit Missions

One element of Jesuit policy is what we can call “population politics.” This was the relocation of populations for different purposes including for geopolitical considerations in the disputed Rio de la Plata Borderlands related to the ongoing conflict between Spain and Portugal. As already discussed above, one was to establish new mission communities by transferring population from existing missions. This was done, for example, to expand the mission frontier east of the Uruguay River beginning at the 1680s. The Jesuits relocated San Miguel and San Nicolás to sites east of the river, elevated San Francisco de Borja to the status of an independent mission, and transferred population to establish San Luis Gonzaga, San Lorenzo Mártir, San Juan Bautista, and Santo ángel Custodio missions.11 A second purpose of “population politics” was to increase the population of missions that had experienced heavy mortality and particularly epidemic ­mortality. This most likely motivated the decision to relocate population to Santa María la Mayor in 1745. The mission community had experienced heavy population losses during the mortality crisis of the 1730s. In 1732, the numbers stood at 3,905 but then dropped to 711 in 1739 or a net decline of nearly 3,200 over seven years. A total of 1,279 alone died in 1739 during the smallpox outbreak of that year. The population did not show signs of recovery over the next several years. In 1744, it was only 993 living in 267 families. This number must have been below the threshold that the Jesuits believed necessary for a viable mission community. During 1745, the Jesuits transferred some 900 people and 225 families to the mission, a figure calculated as the difference in the numbers reported at the end of 1745 less 28 marriages recorded ­during the year. I have also adjusted the crude birth and death rates for 1745 to reflect the population transfer. The adjusted crude death rate per thousand p ­ opulation is 82.0 per thousand population, and a crude death rate of 36.7 per thousand 10 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 101–102. 11 Ibid., 18, 112.

76

Chapter 4 6000 5000

Population

4000 3000 2000 1000

1643 1648 1653 1658 1663 1668 1673 1678 1683 1688 1693 1698 1703 1708 1713 1718 1723 1728 1733 1738 1743 1748 1753 1758 1763 1768 1773 1778 1783 1788 1793 1798

0 Year Figure 1

The Population of Santa María la Mayor Mission.

­population.12 Figure 1 shows the population of Santa María la Mayor over time and the relocation of natives to the mission. 4

Catastrophic Epidemic Mortality

Several conceptual points need to be made regarding epidemics among indigenous groups in the Americas. The first is that diseases such as smallpox must be transmitted from an ill individual to a healthy person, and this most commonly occurred when someone sneezed. Disease did not spread across the land like a miasmic cloud, but rather when groups of people came into contact with other people who were already infected. Geography was a key factor in the propagation of contagion. A contemporary map prepared in conjunction with the establishing boundaries following the ratification of the Treaty of San Ildefonso (1777) shows the location of the Paraguay missions, as well as the river highways that connection the region such as the Paraná and Uruguay Rivers. The rivers facilitated regional trade, but also the spread of contagion carried in the bodies of sick individuals who traveled on the craft that plied the rivers. Epidemics did not spread as easily to geographically isolated populations, such as the natives congregated on the Chiquitos missions of eastern Bolivia or the 12

This is a new analysis based on data from Ibid, Appendix 4, 229, Appendix 3, 208.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

77

Illustration 13 The ruins of Santa María la Mayor Mission. Photograph in the collection of the author

Pames and Jonaces populations in the Sierra Gorda prior to the establishment of the Franciscan missions in 1744 and the systematic campaign to congregate the natives on the new missions.13 Contagion also spread easily when large numbers of people lived in close proximity to each other, as in the Guaraní housing on the Paraguay missions. Contemporary diagrams of San Miguel and San Juan Bautista missions document the spatially compact housing (see Illustrations 10–11). At the time of the preparation of the diagrams in the early 1750s San Miguel had a population of 7,047 (1752), San Juan Bautista of 3,707 (1752), all living in close proximity to each other. A second point regards the relationship between epidemics and ecological crises such as famine. Lessons can be learned from recent historic famines to understand past incidences of food shortages. Did food shortages debilitate famine victims to the point that their immunological systems weakened and they became more susceptible did disease, or are there other i­nterpretations to explain the relationship between famine and epidemics? In a recent study of famine in Darfur in Sudan, Alex de Waal argued that the connection was that people in movement looking for food spread disease and intensified 13

On the patterns of epidemic mortality on the Chiquitos missions see Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 81–82; and on the Chiquitos and Sierra Gorda missions see Jackson, Frontiers of Evangelization, Chapter 3.

78

Chapter 4

­epidemics14. A second related issue is the movement of armies on campaign that posed two different public health issues. The first was the problem of the spreading of disease as soldiers were on the move. The second was the lack of hygiene in army encampments in the early modern period. As discussed in Chapter 2, the severe mortality crises of the 1730s contained both of these elements. That is the movement and encampment of soldiers on campaign, and famine that led to many Guaraní abandoning the missions in search of food. Quarantine was one measure the Jesuits practiced during epidemics, but quarantine failed in periods when people were in movement. Catastrophic epidemics occurred about once a generation when the number of previously exposed individuals children born since the previous outbreak reached a threshold to support a chain of ­infection. The Guaraní populations were too small to support smallpox and measles in endemic forms, and the maladies spread to the missions from other communities along the rivers used for rapid transportation and communications. Not all epidemics occurred during periods of ecological crisis or conflict, as in the case of a smallpox outbreak that killed thousands in 1718–1719. In some cases mortality reached more than 30 or 40 percent of the population in 1719, but not the levels documented for some missions during the catastrophic 1738– 1740 epidemic (see Table 11). The Jesuits did not standardize the type of census information they reported until the 1720s. However, earlier censuses provide information that can be used to calculate the range of crude birth and death rates, and population shifts caused by epidemic mortality. Moreover, there are references to global mortality rates. An example is a 1705 report that noted that in 1695 “16,000 died in them [the missions] from measles.”15 The documentation for the 1718–1719 smallpox outbreak is limited. It occurred 23 years after the 1695 measles epidemic during a period of rapid population growth. The 1718–1719 smallpox epidemic began in Buenos Aires, Asunción, and Santa Fe, and then spread to the missions. Some 5,000 reportedly died in Buenos Aires.16 The epidemic spread to the missions most likely via river traffic. Yapeyú, which was the southernmost mission, appears to have been one of the first missions where the epidemic broke out. In 1718, Pedro Fajardo, the bishop of Buenos Aires v­ isited the missions, and confirmed thousands of Guaraní. He was at Y ­ apeyú from 14 15 16

Alex de Waal of famine conditions in Darfur in the Sudan: Famine that Kills: Darfur, Sudan (Oxford:Oxford University Press on Demand, 2005). No Author, No Place, No Date, Francisco Burges de la Compañía de Jesús, Procurador de la Provincia de Paraguay,” agi, Charcas 381. Carbonell de Masy, Blumers, and Levinton, La reducción jesuítica de Santos Cosme y Damián, 136.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

79

June 18–22, and reported that the epidemic had already spread to the ­mission. Fajardo also reported that smallpox had broken out at nearby Santo Tomé, San José which he visited in mid-September, Santos Cosme y Damián which he also visited in mid-September, Trinidad, and Ytapúa. Fajardo specifically noted that Santa Ana and San Luis Gonzaga were free of the contagion.17 Fajardo concluded his visitation in early October of 1718, and smallpox had not yet spread to most of the missions at that point. The contagion later spread to other missions as evidenced by the decline reported in the mission censuses, and the epidemic continued into 1719 and is documented in the general census of that year. The total population of the 30 Paraguay missions was 121,168 at the end of 1717, and dropped to 104,074 in 1719, a decline of some 14 percent. The populations of individual missions experienced higher rates of decline. The percentage difference between the populations in 1717 and 1720 showed examples of heavy mortality, and twelve missions experienced a decline of 19 percent or more. Of these, Fajardo noted that smallpox had already broken-out at three. The greatest declines were at Guazú and Santiago, at 51 percent. The population of the first dropped from 5,651 in 1717 to 2,738 in 1720 and of the latter from 4,387 in 1717 to 2,135 in 1720. La Cruz and Santo Tomé experienced declines of 44 percent. The numbers at La Cruz dropped from 5,481 in 1717 to 3,069 in 1720 and of Santo Tomé from 4,768 to 2,659. The Jesuits merged the populations of two missions following the epidemic. They were San Francisco de Borja and Jesús María de los Guenoas. The Guenoas were a clan of Charrúa, an ethnic group that lived in Tape (Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil). The Jesuits established Jesús María de los Guenoas around 1682 at a site on the east bank of the Uruguay River close to San Francisco de Borja.18 The Jesuits continued to list Jesús María de los Guenoas as an independent mission as late as 1719. The highest recorded population was 357 in 1714. In 1717 the Black Robes enumerated 283, and this number dropped to 238 in 1719 following the epidemic (see Appendix 1). The 1720 census showed the populations of San Francisco de Borja and Jesús María together, and the 1724 census only recorded San Francisco de Borja.19

17 18 19

Razón de la visita que hizo el ilustrísimo y reverendísimo Señor don Fray Pedro Fajardo, Obispo de Buenos Aires, el ano de 1718, in Pastells, Historia de la Compañía de Jesús, Vol. 6: 172–177. Arlindo Rubert, Historia da Igreja no Rio Grande do Sul (Porto Alegre: edipucrs, 1998). Annua Reductionum Anni 1717, agn, Sala 9–6-9–6; Annua Reductionum Anni, 1720, agn, Sala 9–6-9–6; Annua Enumeratio Doctrinarum 1724, agn, Sala 9–6-9–6.

80 5

Chapter 4

The 1763–1765 Epidemic

This was the last serious outbreak before the Jesuit expulsion, and had a direct connection to ongoing regional conflict. As already discussed in Chapter 3 the 1750 Treaty of Madrid attempted to delineate boundaries in South America and transferred seven of the Jesuit mission communities to Portuguese jurisdiction. Spanish royal officials relocated the bulk of the Guaraní population to missions located west of the Uruguay River after a joint Spanish-Portuguese military force suppressed resistance to the territorial transfer, which also created conditions of overcrowding. However, the Jesuits continued to enumerate the populations of the seven missions separately from the populations of the host missions, and retained this distinction in the censuses prepared in the late 1750s and as late as 1766. Following the failure of its implementation Spain and Portugal agreed to abrogate the treaty, and Spain resumed the ­conflict in the last stages of the Seven Years War (1755–1763) and even after the conclusion of peace. Royal officials mobilized mission militia for an assault on ­Colonia do Sacramento, and used the missions as a base of operations for an invasion of Rio Grande do Sul. Spanish soldiers carried smallpox to the mission communities.20 Smallpox first broke out at the end of 1763, and continued in 1764 and 1765. Table 12 summarizes baptisms and burials on the missions, and the communities that suffered the highest mortality during the outbreak. These included Santa Rosa that experienced a net decline of 1,595 from a population of 3,294 reported in 1762, Loreto with a net decline of 2,034 from a population of 4,708 in 1762, and Los Santos Mártires with a net decline of 1,452 from the 1762 population of 3,225 (see Table 12). At the time of the epidemic 442 refugees from the seven eastern missions still resided on Loreto mission, and 782 at Los Santos Mártires.21 Loreto experienced heavy mortality during the crises of the 1730s, and dropped from 7,048 in 1731 to 1,756 in 1739. However, the population more than doubled over the next two decades which meant that the population had a large number of potentially susceptible hosts. Santa Rosa experienced catastrophic mortality during the 1733 epidemic (a crude death rate of 414.6 per thousand population) and in 1736 (a crude death rate of 189.3 per thousand population), but was spared the effects of the 1738–1740 smallpox outbreak. Measles killed 249 in 1748 (a crude death rate of 195.8 per thousand population). The numbers stood at 1,671 at the end of 1736, but grew to 3,294 in 1762 on the eve of the epidemic. Again there were a large percentage of potentially

20 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 72–79. 21 Ibid., 75–76.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

81

susceptible hosts. The situation of Los Santos Mártires was equally complicated. The population of the mission dropped from 3,874 in 1731 to 2,777 in 1739, and the heaviest mortality was during 1733 and 1738–1739. The population experienced moderate growth during the 1740s and 1750s, and was 3,099 in 1763 in addition to the refugees from the eastern missions. Altogether the Jesuits recorded 14,886 baptisms and 27,093 burials in the years 1763–1765, and a net difference of -12,207. The mission populations began to recover in the aftermath of the epidemic. One example of this was the formation of new families as seen in increased numbers of marriages. This occurred at Santa Rosa in 1765. Marriages totaled 31 in 1763, and this number increased to 70 in 1764 and 238 in 1765 when the mission population was 1,934. Similarly, the Jesuits recorded 303 marriages at Loreto in 1765 after it had been reduced to 2, 395. Marriages at Los Santos Mártires ­totaled 193 in the same year.22 The Jesuit expulsion in 1767 and the establishment of a civil administration on the missions modified demographic patterns. 6

The 1797–1798 Smallpox Epidemic

The expulsion of the Jesuits resulted in the creation of a civil ­administration predicated on the assumption that the mission residents were to pay the costs of administration. The residents were to generate income to cover the costs of administration. This policy responded to the Bourbon Reforms initiative to streamline the costs of administration and produce income to help cover the costs of the military reform in the Americas initiated following the military disaster in 1762. The costs included the salaries of the civil administrators and of the priests that replaced the Jesuits. It also generated considerable paperwork required to document the costs of administration. Information from this documentary record provides considerable detail regarding what might be called the “official” mission economy which was a new colonial construct imposed in the context of the Bourbon reforms of the late eighteenth century with an imperative to make the civil administration as self-sufficient as possible. The implementation of new policies increased contacts between the missions and surrounding non-indigenous communities, which ­facilitated the spread of contagion and framed demographic patterns. The increase in economic a­ ctivity in the region also contributed to an exodus from the ­missions of mostly men and older boys who sought to work and live outside of the missions.23 22 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 209–210. 23 On the post-expulsion Diaspora from the missions see Robert H. Jackson, “The Post-­Jesuit Expulsion Population of the Paraguay Missions, 1768–1803,” Colonial Latin American

82

Chapter 4

The record of efforts to produce income to cover costs on Los Santos Mártires mission was typical, and is analyzed here. The civil administrators of Los Santos Mártires sought to find products to sell to generate income. The implementation of the so-called “comercio libre,” or freer trade within the Spanish trading system, created new opportunities for the Rio de la Plata region. One such opportunity was the export of hides and tallow from Buenos Aires to Spain. Hide exports totaled 177,656 in the years 1768 to 1771, and increased to 1,258,008 in the years 1777 to 1784.24 Yapeyú was a major producer of hides, and civil administrators had the mission herds culled for hides and tallow. The large scale slaughter of cattle was reflected in drops in the number of animals reported in mission inventories.25 The same occurred at a number of the California missions in the early nineteenth century with the development of trade in hides and tallow with foreign merchant ships that resulted in the culling of cattle herds.26 Other sources of income included yerba mate, raw cotton, cotton and wool textiles, and tobacco. There were different specializations in production between the mission communities, and this group of missions and particularly San Miguel earned income from its herds of cattle and this was the most important source of income. Other missions earned more from sales of yerba mate and textiles. Inventories prepared at the direction of the civil administrators of Los Santos Mártires mission recorded the numbers of livestock that belonged to the mission (see Table 13). The number of cattle fluctuated, but did not evidence declines on the same scale, for example, as at Yapeyú where the civil ­administrators ordered the large scale slaughter of cattle for hides and the production of tallow. That is not to say that the civil administrators of Los Santos Mártires did not have cattle hides cured. An 1804 document listed the skilled jobs at the mission and of the individuals who held the title of “maestro” ­(master). That is the person that directed that particular activity. There was a “maestro curtidor” (master curer) responsible for the curing of ­Historical Review 16:4 (Fall 2007), 429–458; Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, Chapter 6. 24 Jackson, Missions and the Frontiers, 155. 25 Sarreal, The Guaraní and their missions, 210; Norberto Levinton documented the development of the Yapeyú estancias. See “Las estancias de Nuestra Señora de los Reyes de Yapeyú: tenencia de la tierra por uso cotidiano, acuerdo interétnico y derecho natural (Misiones jesuíticas del Paraguay)” Revista complutense de historia de América 31 (2005): 33–51. 26 Robert H. Jackson and Edward Castillo, Indians, Franciscans and Spanish Colonization: The Impact of the Mission System on California Indians (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1995), 26.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

83

cattle hides.27 A 1795 account recorded several entries with quantities of hides. One was for 3,523 hides taken from cattle slaughtered over time for the consumption of beef and another 651 hides from other sources for a total of 4,174. The same account recorded the use of 2,363 hides to cover expenses, 920 hides used to pay a debt, 320 to pay for goods for the community, 11 for employees, and for other uses. Altogether, the civil administrator used 4,136 of the hides in administrative costs, which left 48.28 At the same time the civil administrators replenished the mission herds. One transaction in 1770 involved the purchase of 1,000 head of cattle from Yapeyú paid for with yerba mate.29 The civil administrators of Los Santos Mártires maintained detailed accounts regarding the mission herds, including the slaughter of animals for meat and losses from death and of animals that were lost, and of animals used to cover expenses. A 1790 accounting was typical.30 The document s­ ummarized monthly slaughter of cattle for meat and the death and loss of animals (see Table 14). The individual entries provided more details. A June 30 entry noted “Sheep, one dead” and “Sheep, three lost.” An August 10 entry noted “Oxen, two dead,” and two days later, on August 12, “Sheep, two for expenses.” A September 29 entry reported “Steers, fifteen that remained in the Estancia of Santa María for expenses of the one hundred and ninety five that were taken from San Gerónimo to San Juan.” Most of the cattle ended up as meat rations “for the colegio,” in other words the priest assigned to the mission and the civil administrators and their families, for the sick, and in some instances for “the school.” A final entry dated September 28 noted: “Steers, ten for the colegio [in] rations, [for the] sick, and the rest for the feast of S[a]n Miguel.” Following the Jesuit expulsion the record shows that the bulk of the Guaraní population did not receive meat rations from the communal herds they tended. Archaeological evidence from several of the eastern missions including San Lorenzo, San Miguel, San Nicolás, and San Juan Bautista has provided evidence of beef consumption 27 28

29 30

José Manuel de Lazcadón and Eduardo Soldán, Los Santos Mártires, January 1, 1804, “Relacion de los Empleos Militares y Demas Empleos para el Gobierno exmisiones de este Pueblo de los Santos Martires para el presente Año de 1804,” agn, Sala 9–18-3–3. “Cuentas que yo Don Agustin de Noriagaray, Adm[inistrad]or del Pueblo de los Santos Mártires del Japón uno de los del Departamiento de Concepción rindo...comprendidos desde 10 de Nov[iembr]e de 1794 en que me recibi de ellas hasta 23 de Agosto de 1796, con manifestación de los Libros y Documentos que las comprenden,” agn, Sala 9–18-7–3. Juan Matheo Martínez, Los Santos Mártires, August 8, 1771, “Diario de la Admin[istraci]on de este Pueblo,” agn, Sala 9–17-4–4. “Libro de Consumos de todas la Especie de Animales que ha saquado el Procurador de este Pueblo de Martires con arreglo a los mandado por el Señor Then[ien]te Gov[ernad] or del Departamento D[o]n Gonzalo dee Doblas…,” agn, Sala 9–17-9–3.

84

Chapter 4

by the Guaraní.31 These were missions that had large herds of cattle. Excavations of housing units uncovered beef bones with cutting marks. Depending on the numbers of cattle, the Jesuits would have distributed beef rations to the mission residents so that the Guaraní would not have to hunt. Archaeological excavations at Los Santos Mártires did not include the housing units. The civil administrators of Los Santos Mártires also looked for a cash crop or cash crops to produce additional income to cover the costs of administration. A 1769 accounting in the year following the Jesuit expulsion recorded the amount of different crops planted, both food and cash crops. In July, the administrator reported the planting of 400 yerba mate trees. This was followed in October by the planting of 2,002 tobacco plants and sugar cane.32 This apparent experimentation may not have given the desired results, and the civil administrators instead opted for another cash crop which was cotton. Post-Jesuit expulsion mission inventories reported a significant expansion in the number of cotton plants. The 1768 inventory identified the lands assigned to cotton by the term retazas, meaning small parcels. The 1785 inventory reported a large increase in the number of cotton plants, a total of 585,000 produced on two algodonales a term that implies larger parcels of land. This reflected the height of cotton production at Los Santos Mártires. A later inventory prepared in 1801 reported a drop in the number of plants to 136,505.33 By this time the regional market may have become saturated as other ex missions also produced large quantities of cotton and textiles. In 1791 and 1792, for example, San Juan Bautista produced 32.8 and 18.7 tons of cotton and in 1790 produced 20,266 ¼ varas or 17,023.65 meters of cotton cloth.34 The civil administrators of Los Santos Mártires organized a type of “putting out” system for the production of textiles made from both cotton and wool. The same 1804 document listed a master weaver (Maestro Tejidor) who would have been responsible for overseeing the production of cotton and wool textiles and yarn or thread.35 A 1790 accounting, for example, recorded the distribution of cotton and wool to weavers, and the production of textiles. The accounting contains different categories of information such as the amount of wool and yarn given to the weavers (Partidas de Lana repartidas Para las ilanzas 31

Arno Alvarez Kern, Arqueologia Historica Missionero (Porto Alegre: edipucrs, 1998), 95–114; Brizo, “Un análisis de las manifestaciones de los espacios de poder en la reducción jesuítica “Los Santos Mártires del Japón” (Siglo xviii);” Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 46. 32 Juan Matheo Martínez, “Diario de la Admin[istraci]on de este Pueblo.” 33 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 27–29. 34 Ibid., 29, note 48. 35 Jose Manuel de Lazcadón and Eduardo Soldán, “Relacion de los Empleos…”

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

85

de este Pueblo), the distribution of cotton (Partidas de Algadon destinadas para las ilanzas de este Pueblo en last areas que se andar repartir a las chinas), or figures on production (Lienzos Fabricados con el Ylo dado a los Texedores como consta en este Diario) that reported three grades of textiles classified as crude, middle grade, and fine.36 The document provides clues as to the organization of production, but not the total amount produced. One partial accounting recorded the distribution of 403 arrobas, 11 libras (lbs), 6 onzas (ounces) (4,659.3 kilos) of cotton. A second partial accounting noted the distribution of 139 arrobas, 11 libras, 3 onzas (1,622.9 kilos) of crude (grueso) cloth, and 9 arrobas, 10 libras, 11 onzas (127 kilos) of middle grade (mediano) cloth. Cloth received totaled 142 arrobas, 17 libras (1,670.4 kilos) of crude grade cloth, 10 arrobas, 19 libras, 15 onzas (158.9 kilos) of middle grade cloth, and 7 onzas (.96 kilo) of fine grade cloth. Individual entries recorded the distribution of small and larger quantities of cotton and wool, and the delivery of finished cloth. One entry reported the delivery of a length of cloth that measured 106 and half varas (89 meters), and a second that measured 255 and half varas (214 meters). A more detailed accounting from 1794 provided a global figure for cotton. The civil administrators bought 512 arrobas, 21 lbs, 8 ounces (5,935.3 kilos) of cotton, had 851 arrobas, 1 lb., 11 ounces from the harvest warehoused, and received another 267 arrobas, 6 lbs. Altogether there was a supply of 1,627 arrobas, 16 lbs. of cotton (18,745.7 kilos), of which 1,145 arrobas, 6 lbs., 2 ounces (13,183.7 kilos) was in the hands of the weavers to be woven into cloth.37 The civil administrators also distributed crude cloth to the mission residents for their own clothing needs in line with the late eighteenth century royal initiative to impose European clothing standards on indigenous peoples, and maintained separate records that noted the amount distributed to each head of household. Several examples were typical. On September 18, 1794, the administrator had 177 varas (148 meters) of cloth distributed to 44 people in different quantities that most likely depended on family size. Five people received five varas of cloth, 35 people received four varas of cloth, and four people three varas of cloth. A second entry recorded a more extensive distribution of cloth on August 21, 1794, and also shows the spatial distribution of the Guaraní population. Seventy-seven people at the “large” estancia of San Gerónimo received 426 varas (356 meters) of cloth in quantities that ranged from 10 to 36 37

“Diario de los Telares…[1790],” agn, Sala 9–18-7–3. “Cuentas que yo Don Agustin de Noriagaray, Adm[inistrad]or del Pueblo de los Santos Mártires del Japón uno de los del Departamiento de Concepción rindo...comprendidos desde 10 de Nov[iembr]e de 1794 en que me recibi de ellas hasta 23 de Agosto de 1796, con manifestación de los Libros y Documentos que las comprenden,” agn, Sala 9–18-7–3.

86

Chapter 4

five varas. Sixty-five residents of the estancia of Santa María received 350 varas (293 meters) of cloth in lots of six to one varas.38 While the civil administrators prepared detailed account records of the efforts to generate income, they were not as careful as the Jesuits about counting the mission populations. The documentation for demographic patterns and the effects of epidemics is limited because the civil administrators prepared fewer censuses. A severe smallpox epidemic killed more than half of the population of Yapeyú mission in 1770–1772. Mortality during this outbreak reached catastrophic levels comparable to levels during the 1738–1740 smallpox epidemic, and as is discussed below the epidemic proved to be catastrophic because few people died there during the 1763–1765 outbreak and hence there was a larger number of highly susceptible people and an apparent lack of attention to preventive measures by the civil administrators. Although the epidemic occurred following the Jesuit expulsion, it was more closely connected to demographic patterns at the end of the Jesuit tenure. The epidemic also occurred during the ongoing conflict with the Luso-Brazilians.39 Sarreal documented the deaths of 697 at La Fe during an outbreak in 1777 to 1778.40 The crude death rate during the epidemic was in the range of 491 per thousand population. The catastrophic mortality there was related to patterns during the previous smallpox outbreak during the Jesuit tenure on the mission. Smallpox deaths at La Fe during the 1763–1765 smallpox epidemic totaled 755 or a crude death rate of 160.1 per thousand population, which was low when compared to mortality at other missions such as Loreto and Santa Rosa (see Appendix 1). There were a large number of highly susceptible people on the mission, and the epidemic occurred during the last stages of the campaigns against Colonia do Sacramento and Rio Grande do Sul and troop movements most likely facilitated the spread of contagion. Mortality at other missions was also lower. The estimated crude death rate at Corpus Christi, for example, was 63.7 per thousand population in 1777.41 Sarreal also documented morbidity and mortality levels on the missions located east of the Uruguay River during a 1785–1786 smallpox epidemic. Royal officials reported relatively complete information. Some 3,762 contracted the illness and 916 died, which was about a quarter of those infected.42 A detailed report on the outbreak at Apóstoles mission reported relatively low morbidity 38

“Quaderno de Repartos con los Naturales de este Pueb[l]o de Mártires desde 1 de Agosto de 1793…,” agn, Sala 9–17-9–3. 39 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 78–81. 40 Sarreal, The Guarani and Their Missions, 144. 41 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 162. 42 Sarreal, The Guarani and Their Missions, 145.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

87

and mortality levels, and the measures taken to combat the contagion. The civil administrator had a temporary plague hospital built at some distance from the mission to isolate the sick and those who had been exposed. The report also detailed the horrific conditions in the hospital erected in a matter of days. Two and sometimes three individuals shared a bed, and the warm temperatures must have made internment there unbearable.43 The most complete record of a post-expulsion epidemic is for a 1797–1798 smallpox outbreak. A record exists for 25 of the thirty missions, and mortality levels were lower when compared to the catastrophic 1738–1740 epidemic. The highest death rates were at Concepción (a crude death rate of 155.1 per thousand population), San José (a crude death rate of 163.8 per thousand population), Yapeyú (a crude death rate of 172.3 per thousand population), Santo Tomé (a crude death rate of 162.1 per thousand population), and La Cruz (a crude death rate of 146.9 per thousand population). All of these missions were located on or near the Uruguay River, suggesting that the contagion spread with river traffic.44 A fragmentary set of baptisms and burials for San Francisco de Borja mission in the years 1804–1811 document an epidemic at the end of 1809 and first months of 1810, the warmer spring and summer months. The population suffered a net decline of 115 in 1809, but then recovered. The population experienced a growth of 355 (excess of births over deaths) in the years 1804 to 1808. In 1809 there were 262 deaths as against 147 births, and a net decline of 115. Even though the epidemic continued in early 1810, the number of births on the year was greater than the number of deaths, and the population experienced a net growth of 57. The same occurred in 1811, and there was a net growth of 63.45 The 1809–1810 epidemic did not reach catastrophic levels, and the population rebounded or recovered. The establishment of civil administration and the greater stress on the participation of the missions in regional markets modified the dynamic of epidemics. During the Jesuit tenure epidemics had occurred about once a ­generation or about every 20 years. In the thirty years following the expulsion there was an epidemic about every ten years. The greater frequency also meant that, on balance, the post-expulsion outbreaks generally did not cause catastrophic mortality on the scale of the 1738–1740 epidemic since there were fewer highly susceptible people in the mission populations.

43 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 59–61. 44 Ibid., 164–165. 45 Ibid., 166.

88 7

Chapter 4

Epidemic Mortality on the Baja California Missions

Comparisons can be made with patterns of catastrophic epidemics among sedentary and non-sedentary indigenous populations brought to live on ­missions on other frontiers. The discussion here focuses on the Jesuit missions of Baja California that were populations of nomadic hunter-gatherers that generally lived in a dispersed settlement pattern because of the limitations to ­agriculture on the missions. Demographic patterns on the Baja California missions were very different from those on the Paraguay missions, and the Baja California mission populations proved to be fragile. That meant that they generally did not recover following major epidemic outbreaks. After a number of failed Spanish attempts at colonization in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the Jesuits assumed responsibility for establishing missions in Baja California in 1697, but at their own expense. This also allowed the Jesuits to control the selection of non-missionary personnel that came into the Peninsula and contacts with Sinaloa and Sonora on the mainland. In the first decades of the eighteenth century and as the Jesuits expanded the number of missions and disease decimated the mission populations. A series of individual reports drafted in 1744 provided a reckoning of sorts of population decline. The reports recorded the total number of baptisms registered from the date of the founding of the missions to the point of the report and the population. The Jesuits had recorded 14,830 baptisms at the eight missions for which reports exist and the population totaled 4,222, indicating a decline in the population in the range of 72 percent (see Table 15). As already noted the mission populations lived in a dispersed settlement pattern with the majority residing in settlements the Jesuits called rancherias were they fended for themselves, and came to the mission community periodically to receive catechism. Typical was the population of Guadalupe mission founded in 1720. A 1726 reported recorded a population of 1,707 that lived in 32 rancherias, that is an average of 53 per rancheria or about the size of a band of related families. With the establishment of San Ignacio mission in 1728 the Jesuits transferred the population of 20 rancherias to the new mission.46 The record also shows that the populations of several missions stabilized and experienced growth following several decades of decline. Examples are San Francisco Xavier (founded 1699) and Guadalupe. A 1762 report on San Francisco Xavier noted that the Jesuits baptized 448 and recorded 357 burials between 1745 and the drafting of the report, and a net increase in population of 91. The population grew from 352 in 1744 to 380 in 1755, 448 in 1762, and 482 46 Jackson, Indian Population Decline, 36.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

89

in 1768. Population of Guadalupe mission also grew during the same period. It totaled 701 in 1744, dropped to 472 in 1755, and then increased to 524 in 1762 and 544 in 1768 (see Table 16). Two initiatives implemented by José de Gálvez following the Jesuit expulsion accelerated the cycle of demographic collapse on the Peninsula missions. The first was the shifting of population between missions to increase the labor available at missions with greater agricultural potential.47 This was an effort to make the missions as self-sufficient as possible in line with the Bourbon initiative to make colonial administration cost-effective, and was similar in intent to the policies of the civil administration on the Paraguay missions. Gálvez had people transferred from San Francisco Xavier to Loreto and San José del Cabo and from Guadalupe to La Purísima and Comondú. The second was the colonization of Alta California in 1769 which required the movement of more people from the mainland through the Peninsula that resulted in the spread of contagion. Epidemics occurred with the movement of personnel through the Peninsula. One contemporary account, for example, noted that a group of colonists bound for Alta California from the mainland to establish Los Angeles carried smallpox into the Peninsula in 1781.48 Dominican missionary Luis Sales, O.P. commented on the spread of smallpox through the Peninsula. He noted that: . . . there entered the port of Loreto a bark which brought families from Sonora, infected with the smallpox. Through the Commandant’s lack of ­precaution they went into the town and immediately it [the smallpox] spread like lightning through all the missions.49 Records from several of the Baja California missions indicate that mortality reached catastrophic levels during epidemics in 1769, 1772, and 1781–1782. At the same time a contemporary account reported that during the 1781–1782 smallpox outbreak Dominican missionaries at San Ignacio, San Francisco de Borja, and San Fernando practiced inoculation by variolation, the introduction of pus from a pustule of a smallpox victim into the body of a healthy ­individual, 47

48 49

Robert H. Jackson, “The Guaycuros, Jesuit and Franciscan Missionaries, and José de Gálvez: The Failure of Spanish Policy in Baja California,” Memoria Americana (2004), 221–233; Robbert H. Jackson, “Demographic patterns in the missions of central Baja California,” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 6:1 (1984), 91–112. Robert H. Jackson, “The 1781–1782 Smallpox Epidemic in Baja California,” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 3:1 (1981), 138–143. Luis Sales, O.P., Observations On California, 1772–1790. Edited and translated by Charles N. Rudkin (Los Angeles: Dawson’s Bookshop, 1956), 60.

90

Chapter 4

and reduced death rates. Doctors in Mexico City first used the procedure in 1779 in San Hipólito hospital located outside of the city.50 Luis Sales described the use of inoculation at one of the Peninsula missions: A missionary father [Juan Crisostomo Gomez, O.P.] tried inoculating them for the smallpox, since he was going to be left without Indians, and he had such good success that hardly more than three or four died. This was at the mission of San Ignacio and I was present.51 Measles spread through the missions in 1769. The Franciscans at Comondú ­recorded 160 deaths during the year. This was a crude death rate of 484.9 per thousand population, and the crude death rate at Mulegé reached 269.4 per thousand population. Mortality was lower at Santa Gertrudis and San Francisco de Borja missions, a crude death rate of 130.2 and 124.4 per thousand population respectively. Mortality in 1772 was higher on the missions in the northern part of the Peninsula. The crude death rate at Comondú and Mulegé respectively was 148.2 and 72.2 per thousand population, whereas it was 325.1 and 302.9 at Santa Gertrudis and San Francisco de Borja (see Table 17). Smallpox killed hundreds on the missions in 1781 and 1782. A total of 296 died at Santa Gertrudis from smallpox, 59 at Comondú, and 58 at Mulegé. I have estimated the population of selected missions in 1780, and used this to calculate the crude birth and death rates. The crude birth rate was low at Mulegé, Comondú, and la Purísima Concepción as a consequence of smallpox, and death rates high. In contrast birth rates at San Ignacio, San Francisco de Borja, and San Fernando did not evidence a similar drop in birth rates. Mortality reached catastrophic levels at several missions including la Purísima C ­ oncepción (a crude death rate of of 460.1), Santa Gertrudis (a crude death rate of of 422.9), Mulegé (a crude death rate of of 362.5), and Comondú (a crude death rate of of 361.9) (see Table 17). This was close to the highest death rates during the 1738–1740 epidemic on the Paraguay missions. The populations of the Paraguay mission “rebounded” or recovered following epidemics, whereas the populations of the Baja California missions did not. There was a pattern of chronically high infant and child mortality in non-­epidemic years, and the populations continued to decline. A family reconstruction of Mulegé mission tracked the life history of 143 children born to 75 women between 1771 and 1835. Fifty percent of the children died before age one, another 33 percent died between ages one and five, and 11 percent between 50 Jackson, “The 1781–1782 Smallpox Epidemic in Baja California.” 51 Sales, Observations on California, 61.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

91

ages five and ten. Only six percent lived beyond age ten. One factor contributing to the low survival rate of infants and children was the spread of syphilis among the population. The age and gender structure of the ­populations of the two groups of missions was also different. Women and girls constituted the majority on most of the Jesuit Paraguay missions, even following severe mortality crises such as those of the 1730s. The populations of the Baja California missions evidenced a growing gender imbalance with fewer women and girls.52 A second was a better survival rate of young children on the Jesuit Paraguay missions when compared to the Baja California missions. Children and adolescents under about the age of 15 constituted a large percentage of the Paraguay mission populations. Children on the Baja California missions, on the other hand, died at alarming rates in epidemic and non-epidemic years, and a an imbalance manifested itself. In an extreme example of the imbalance children under the age of about age nine constituted a mere five percent of the population of Comondú mission in 1796 and 1798.53 The non-sedentary indigenous population of Baja California experienced severe demographic collapse in the century following the establishment of the first Jesuit mission in 1697. 8

Demographic Patterns on the Texas Gulf Coast: Rosario Mission

This chapter has documented demographic patterns on missions characterized by different settlement patterns. The second comparative case study is of Franciscan missions on the Texas Gulf Coast among non-sedentary groups collectively known as the Karankawas. The Franciscans failed to congregate the natives, and the demographic patterns were in ways similar to patterns on the Jesuit Chaco missions. The bands collectively called the Karankawas occupied a territory on the Texas Gulf Coast from the area of Lavaca Bay to Galveston Bay. The Karankawas were hunters and gatherers and practiced a  well-established pattern of seasonal transhumance to exploit different food resources, and occupied permanent village sites. In the fall and winter the Karankawas bands exploited estuarine food sources that coincided with the availability of certain fish including redfish and black drum. The fall-winter camps tended to be larger. In the spring the Karankawas moved to smaller camps along rivers and creeks in the coastal prairie environment. They supported themselves by hunting game and collecting wild plant foods. 52 Jackson, Indian Population Decline, 111. 53 Ibid., 112.

92

Chapter 4

The Karankawas were the masters of their environment, and knew the coastal geography well. The Franciscans often expressed dismay at the inability of the Spanish military to track runaway Karankawas neophytes down, but the Spanish did not know the coastal geography well and often did not have boats.54 Demographic patterns at Rosario mission were more complex, because of the inability of the Franciscans to induce the Karankawas to permanently settle in the missions. Historically, the Karankawas bands practiced a pattern of seasonal migration between permanent village sites along the coast and coastal prairie. Many Karankawas settled at Rosario mission (established in 1754), located outside of their traditional territory, on a seasonal basis, but then left. Franciscan Missionary Gaspar de Solis captured a sense of the frustration of the Franciscans over their inability to permanently congregate the Karankawas, but also their lack of understanding of Karankawas culture as well as the cultural chauvinism of the Franciscans: The Indians with whom this mission was founded are the Coxanes, Guapites, Carancaguases and Coopanes. At present, however, there are but few of this last mentioned tribe, for most of them are living out in the woods or along the banks of some of the many rivers that abound in these parts, or have joined some other friendly tribe along the seacoast, about thirteen or fourteen leagues east of this mission. The padre is willing to assist them in all their wants and sufferings, but, in spite of this, all of these Indians, who are savage, indolent and lazy, and who are so greedy and gluttonous that they devour meat that is parboiled, almost raw and dripping in blood, prefer to suffer hunger, nakedness and the inclemencies of the weather provided they be left free to live indolent in the wilds or along the seashore, where they give themselves over to all kinds of excesses, especially to lust, theft and dancing. The task of converting and of inducing the Indians to live at the mission has been a difficult one, and some of those who had been living there have fled back again to the hills, to the river-banks or to the seashore. Still another reason [for flight from the mission] is because the military ­officers neglect to bring [recaptured fugitives] into the town or to inflict punishment upon those that run away, and because they neglect to pursue them and bring them back. Whenever they do bring back any of the fugitives they fail to administer

54

Robert Ricklis, The Karankawa Indians of Texas: An Ecologuical Study of Cultural Tradition and Change (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1996), 70–71, 101, 118.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

93

to them any punishment that might serve as a check and that might instill into them the fear of fleeing from the mission.55 The population of Rosario mission fluctuated from year to year, but also on a seasonal basis. One example of seasonal variation can be seen in 1796, when the population fluctuated between 148 in October and 97 only two months later in December. In June of the following year the numbers were up to 254.56 Karankawas often came to and left the mission at will, and may have incorporated Rosario into their seasonal round of transhumance. The surviving baptismal register from Refugio mission established in 1793 shows baptized Indians being absent from the mission for months or even a year or more, and then bringing young children for baptisms when they perhaps had little option other than returning to the mission during periods of food scarcity or raids by other indigenous groups such as Lipan Apaches or Comanches.57 Most documented instances of Karankawas bands moving to the missions were in the spring, especially in the months of March, April, and May. This was the time when the Karankawas moved into the interior, and the missions simply became another source of food.58 Beyond the surviving censuses, there is little data on demographic patterns at Rosario. Solis did summarize the number of baptisms and burials recorded between 1754 and 1768: a total of 137 baptisms from 1754 to 1758, another 63 in the years 1758 to 1768, and 110 burials from 1754 to 1768.59 These figures suggest heavy mortality rates. Later censuses from the 1790s contain some rough information on age and gender structure.60 Children under age nine, called parvulos by the Spanish, made up between a quarter and a third of the population of Rosario mission, and the sex ratio was fairly balanced in most years. One exception was in 1796 and 1797, when it appears that fewer men were at the mission, and may have left women and children behind while off hunting or engaged in other activities. The censuses had recorded the number of children 55

Margaret Kenney Kress, and Mattie Austin Hatcher, trans. and eds., “Diary of a visit of inspection of the Texas missions made by Fray Gaspar Jose de Solis in the year 1767–68,” The Southwestern Historical Quarterly 35:1 (1931), 28–76. 56 Robert H. Jackson, “Congregation and Population Change in the Mission Communities of Northern New Spain: Cases From the Californias and Texas,” New Mexico Historical Review 69:2 (April, 1994), 163–183. 57 Ibid., 178. 58 Ricklis, Karankawa Indians of Texas 163–167. 59 Ibid., 173. 60 Kathleen Gilmore, “The Indians of Mission Rosario,” in David Orr and Daniel Crozier, eds., The Scope of Historical Archaeology: Essays in Honor of John L. Cotter (Philadelphia: Temple University, 1984), 163–191.

94

Chapter 4

per family, and the Karankawas living at Rosario tended to have small families with only one or two children. This can be interpreted as a manifestation of a cultural pattern of having smaller families, and/or also the effect of high mortality among children. The Franciscans did not come close to congregating most Karankawas, and many bands continued to resist the Spanish presence. In 1793, the Franciscans established Refugio mission closer to Karankawas territory, and neophytes from Rosario opted to move to the new mission in 1797. In 1805, Fr. Huerta moved with the surviving Indians to Refugio, and in 1807 the two missions were formally combined. The Karankawas more willingly settled at Refugio mission established in their own traditional territory in 1793.61 9

Responses to Epidemic Outbreaks

The missionaries who left written records generally did not record responses to epidemic outbreaks, although there are several exceptions that provide indications of the horrors that contagion produced among the natives and what we can call the human side of demographics based on numbers crunching. One can judge native responses on the basis of observed behavior, such as flight in the face of epidemic outbreaks which was one of the most common responses. One of the earliest mentions of flight in the Paraguay missions was in a 1618 report on Ytapúa mission. The report noted that an epidemic broke out in conjunction with a famine, conditions similar to the later crises of the 1730s discussed in Chapter 2. Many Guarani left in search of food, and also to escape contagion. In their flight from the missions the Guarani also facilitated the spread of contagion. Moreover, non-Christians, particularly traditional religious leaders, used the outbreaks of epidemics to challenge the Jesuit missionaries. The Jesuits generally baptized those on the point of death. The rite of baptism became identified with causing death, and became potent propaganda used against the Black Robes.62 This occurred on mission frontiers from Canada to South America. A Dominican missionary named Luis Sales, O.P., stationed on San Vicente mission (established in 1780) in Baja California wrote a particularly graphic description of responses to contagion during the 1781–1782 smallpox outbreak there. Sales noted that:

61 Ricklis, Karankawa Indians of Texas 153. 62 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 63.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

95

I can say from what I myself have experienced that many dead were to be seen in the fields. If one went into the caves he saw the dying . . . At that time 1 myself went out into the neighboring fields, the barrancas and caves to care for those who belonged to this mission of San Vicente . . . At a place called San Jacinto I found six dead adults in a cave and by their sides five boys and three girls dying, of hunger rather than of the smallpox. . .1 believe that more Indians died of starvation than of sickness. . . The heathen Indians crowded in the caves, when they noticed any infected with the disease, fled to another cave and abandoned those unfortunates, and the former, who were sometimes already infected, spread it to others. . . Some threw themselves into the sea, others scorched themselves with firebrands, and the poor little children, abandoned beside the dead, died without help. . .63 On May 8, 1782, Sales recorded the burials of six adults, two boys, and a girl away from the mission. These were probably were he unfortunates he had found at San Jacinto.64 Disease treatment was rudimentary, and in the case of the Paraguay missions the Jesuits quarantined the sick and those that had been exposed to contagion. One can only imagine what the Guarani thought of the plague ­hospitals, which, in many instances only became a place to die. One detailed report of a 1786 smallpox outbreak at San José and Apóstoles missions described the creation of temporary plague hospitals, and the measures taken to isolate the sick.65 At Apóstoles the civil administrator and the doctor assigned to combat the smallpox outbreak selected a site outside of the mission for the temporary hospital built in four days that consisted of two structures: one for the sick, and the second for those recovering from the malady. The site had water, and was close to the cemetery. The doctor had 178 people transferred to the hospital, including one individual who reportedly was seriously ill. The report also noted that the family members of two individuals “had them hidden in the [mission] Village.”66 The report recorded conditions in the temporary plague hospital in rather graphic terms. It was low and narrow. The conditions described in the hospital by one official present coupled with the horror caused by the malady make it 63 Sales, Observations On California, 1772–1790, 168–169. 64 San Vicente Ferrer Burial Register, Saint Albert’s College, Oakland, California. 65 Expediente so[br]e la epidemia de Viruelas que acometió a los Pueblos de S[an] Joseph y Apóstoles, agn, Sala 9–8-3–52 (Hereinafter cited as eev). 66 Ibid.

96

Chapter 4

easy to understand why family members hid the sick. The walls were described as being: …of cane [caña], in it there are three rows of beds and in most two sick [people] in each one, that with the heat and sweating of so many smallpox [ridden] bodies it is insupportable on entering there.67 Given the rudimentary medical treatment and conditions described in the hospital, it is a wonder that so few died during the outbreak. It is difficult today to imagine the horror and dread of the outbreak of highly contagious and lethal, painful, and disfiguring diseases such as smallpox and measles that killed large percentages of the populations of communities in relatively short periods of time. Moreover, individuals who survived saw loved ones, spouses, children, parents, and siblings, die. Survivors had to pick up the pieces, and in many instances form new families or in the case of children find adults to care for them. Today in the modern world we have no comparative point of reference to understand the horrors of and effects on people of catastrophic epidemics. The most recent Ebola outbreak in Africa received considerable attention in the world press, but mortality rates were small when compared to smallpox and measles mortality on the missions. The same can be said of the Zika virus, which is now receiving considerable attention. How can we explain the resilience of the natives living on the Paraguay missions in the face of what at times was very high mortality caused by frightening and disfiguring diseases? By way of a hypothesis I suggest that one key may have been the nature of social and political organization on the Paraguay missions, which was different from missions on other frontiers such as California administered by the Franciscans from the Apostolic College of San Fernando. The Jesuits and royal officials left the clan system fairly intact on the Paraguay missions, and instituted a system of shared governance. The clan chiefs retained status on the missions. Moreover, the natives living on the missions developed a sense of collective identity as residents of the missions, an identity that was re-enforced in the case of the Paraguay missions by the military organization and the hierarchy of political and military positions. This can be seen, for example, in the responses to the Treaty of Madrid (1750) discussed above. The indigenous leaders resisted the transfer of the missions in rhetoric that showed their identity with the communities that they had developed over several generations. The Jesuit mission program was less disruptive of the social-political organization of the clan based societies of lowland South 67 Ibid.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

97

America.68 The Franciscans stationed on the California missions, on the other hand, imposed severe measures of social control including the use of corporal punishment. They had earlier developed this approach to social control on the Sierra Gorda and Baja California missions after 1768 when they replaced the Jesuits. Their approach generated resistance on the part of the natives congregated on the missions, including flight. The Franciscans did not create a system of shared governance, and implemented a more authoritarian regime that attempted to impose stringent measures of social control on the indigenous populations.69 10

Demographic Patterns on Selected Missions

The following section presents detailed case studies of demographic patterns on selected missions that highlight the relationship between conflict in the disputed Rio de la Plata borderlands and mortality crises on the missions. The case studies include four of the seven eastern missions most affected by the Treaty of Madrid, and document the consequences of the Diaspora of the 1750s and 1760s. The case studies also demonstrate the variations in demographic patterns between missions, and are based on data in Appendix 1 of this study and tables in this chapter. The first is of San Ignacio Guazú which was the first mission the Jesuits established in 1609. 11

Demographic Patterns on San Ignacio Guazú Mission (1609)

The Jesuits established San Ignacio Guazú in 1609 at a site in what today is southern Paraguay. It was the first mission established in the recently organized Paraguay Province, and was different from the other missions the Black Robes founded. The Jesuits established the majority of the missions among populations not already subject to the Spanish and not held in encomiendas, and generally at some distance from Spanish settlements. This meant that the populations on the missions were not subject to what the Jesuits considered to be the corrupting influence of Spanish settlers, but it also left the missions vulnerable to Luso-Brazilian raids as in the 1620s and 1630s. San Ignacio Guazú 68 69

I suggested this “kinder and gentler” form of mission organization in a previous study. See Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 58. On the Franciscan social control on the California missions see Jackson and Castillo, Indians, Franciscans, and Spanish Colonization.

98

Chapter 4

was the one exception to this policy, and a part of the mission population was held in encomienda.70 The population of San Ignacio Guazú grew during the seventeenth century, although periodic epidemics temporarily stalled the growth. The population was 998 in 1643, and grew to 3,095 in 1691 (see Figure 2). The 1718–1719 epidemic was the first serious outbreak in the eighteenth century, and mortality reached catastrophic levels in 1719. The Jesuits recorded 1,734 burials (an estimated crude death rate of 348.9 per thousand population). The population of the mission declined by more than 2,000 from 5,651 reported in 1717 to 3,403 reported at the end of 1719 and 2,738 in 1720 (see Appendix 1). The population grew over the following decade, and totaled 3,671 in 1732. As already discussed in Chapter 2, the 1733 epidemic exacted the heaviest mortality at San Ignacio Guazú and other mission communities located in what today is southern Paraguay. These were the missions located closest to the militia camp on the Tebicuary River, and Guaraní most likely brought contagion back to the missions when returning from delivering supplies to the mission militia. The Jesuits reported 1,192 deaths in 1733 (a crude death rate of

Illustration 14 A remaining structure from San Ignacio Guazú. It was housing for Guaraní families. Photograph in the collection of the author 70

Maria Laura Salinas, and Pedro M. Omar Svriz Wucherer, “San Ignacio Guazú: encomiendas y Jesuitas en el marco de una reducción. Siglos xvii y xviii,” Unpublished paper, 2012.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

99

6000 5000

Population

4000 3000 2000 1000

1643 1648 1653 1658 1663 1668 1673 1678 1683 1688 1693 1698 1703 1708 1713 1718 1723 1728 1733 1738 1743 1748 1753 1758 1763 1768 1773 1778 1783 1788 1793 1798

0 Year

Figure 2 The Population of San Ignacio Guazú Mission.

324.7 per thousand population) at San Ignacio Guazú, and this was the heaviest and the only catastrophic mortality on the mission during the decade. The Jesuits recorded a mere three marriages during the year as a consequence of the epidemic. The numbers dropped to 1,266 at the end of the year, and slowly recovered during the rest of the decade. Altogether, the Jesuits baptized 806 and recorded 1,673 burials in the years 1733, 1735–1740, and the population experienced a net decline of 867. The mission population recovered slowly in the three decades following the catastrophic mortality of 1733. In the years 1741 and 1744 to 1750, the Jesuits recorded 1,348 baptisms and 1,193 burials on the mission, and a net increase of 155. San Ignacio Guazú remained a high fertility and high mortality population, and the numbers grew to 2,264 in 1762 on the eve of the next mortality crisis which was the smallpox epidemic of 1763–1765. San Ignacio Guazú hosted 962 refugees from San Miguel mission in 1759 relocated following the implementation of the Treaty of Madrid, and did not suffer catastrophic mortality as did other missions such as Loreto and Santa Rosa. The heaviest mortality actually was in 1766 after the epidemic had run its course in the other missions. The Jesuits buried 229 (a crude death rate of 115.3 per thousand population). In the years 1763 to 1765, which was the period of heaviest smallpox mortality, the Jesuits baptized 375 and buried 375. There was a net decline of 120 in 1766, and the population dropped from 1,985 at the end of 1765 to 1,909 at the end of 1766. The Guaraní Diaspora that occurred in the missions following the J­esuit ­expulsion and epidemics reduced the population of San Ignacio Guazú.

100

Chapter 4

Some complete families including the families of caciques left the missions, but by the last years of the eighteenth century the more common pattern was for adolescent boys and men of working age to be absent.71 It was 1,655 in 1772 and dropped to 667 30 years later in 1803. Many left the missions to work in opportunities created with economic expansion in the larger region, such as in the preparation of hides and tallow for export. 12

Demographic Patterns on Nuestra Señora la Fe/Santa María de Fe

The earliest recorded population for La Fe was in 1691, when 5,116 natives lived on the mission. The Jesuits relocated a part of the population in 1696 to establish Santa Rosa mission, and the numbers dropped to 2,939 in 1702. Over the next three decades the numbers grew with robust birth rates. Unlike San Ignacio Guazú, the population of La Fe did not suffer heavy mortality during the 1718–1719 smallpox epidemic. The Jesuits recorded 256 burials (an estimated crude death rate of 53.1 per thousand population), and the population increased from 4,404 reported in 1717 to 4,868 two years later, and 5,553 in 1720 (see Figure 3). The numbers continued to grow in the 1720s, and totaled 6,605 in 1732, making it one of the most populous of the missions. The light mortality during the 1718–1719 outbreak and the rapid population growth made the mission population highly susceptible to catastrophic mortality, since there were a large number of highly susceptible people not previously exposed to contagion. Thousands died on the mission during the mortality crises of the 1730s. As already noted in Chapter 2, contagion most likely spread to the missions located in what today is southern Paraguay from the militia camp on the Tebicuary River. The Jesuits reported 2,678 burials on La Fe (a crude death rate of 396.4 per thousand population), and the population dropped to 4,251 at the end of the year, and to 2,492 in 1735 suggesting that heavy mortality continued in 1734. As also occurred at San Ignacio Guazú, the 1733–1734 epidemic culled the population, and the mission did not suffer catastrophic mortality during the 1738–1740 epidemic (see Appendix 1). The population began to recover in the mid-1730s, although there was a decline in numbers to 2,044 in 1737 related to famine conditions. In the years 1733 and 1735–1740, the Jesuits recorded 1,161 baptisms and buried 4,518, and the population totaled 3,086 at the end of 1740. The population continued to grow in the 1740s and 1750s. In the years 1741 and 1744–1750, for example, the Jesuits 71

For a more detailed discussion of post-expulsion demographic patterns see Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, Chapter 6.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

101

Illustration 15 A remaining structure from La Fe mission. It was housing for Guaraní families. Photograph in the collection of the author

8000 7000 6000 Population

5000 4000 3000 2000 1000

17 0 17 2 06 17 10 17 14 17 18 17 22 17 2 17 6 3 17 0 34 17 3 17 8 42 17 4 17 6 5 17 0 54 17 5 17 8 62 17 6 17 6 7 17 0 74 17 7 17 8 82 17 8 17 6 9 17 0 94 17 9 18 8 02

0 Year

Figure 3 The Population of La Fe Mission.

102

Chapter 4

noted 2,580 baptisms as against 1,381 burials, and a net increase of 1,199. The population increased with robust birth rates to 4,901 in 1763. La Fe hosted only a small number of refugees relocated from the seven eastern missions following the implementation of the Treaty of Madrid and the suppression of Guaraní resistance. There were 69 refugees there in 1759. The smallpox epidemic that spread through the missions with the mobilization of mission militiamen and the movement of Spanish troops to Rio Grande do Sul killed hundreds at La Fe, but not on a catastrophic level as in 1733. The Jesuits recorded 755 deaths in 1765 (a crude death rate of 160.1 per thousand population). During the three years of the epidemic, 1763–1765, the Jesuits recorded 682 baptisms on La Fe and 1,202 burials, and a net decline of 520. The numbers dropped to 3,913 at the end of 1766. The Jesuits also recorded an increased number of marriages following the epidemic. There were 199 marriages in 1765, up from 72 recorded in 1764 and 101 in 1763. As noted above, the relatively light mortality during 1765 left the population susceptible to the next smallpox outbreak that occurred in 1777–1778 following the Jesuits expulsion. Some 691 died at the mission (a crude death rate of some 491 per thousand population)). The epidemic occurred during the last stages of the Spanish campaign against the Portuguese in Colonia do Sacramento and Rio Grande do Sul. 13

Demographic Patterns on Nuestra Señora de Loreto Mission (1610)

The Jesuits established Loreto mission in Guaíra in 1610, and evacuated the Guaraní population in the 1620s in the face of bandeirante raids on the missions. The Jesuits relocated the mission to a site close to the Paraná River in what today is Misiones, Argentina. The population grew during the course of the seventeenth century and first decades of the eighteenth century. It was 1,476 in 1643, grew to 3,620 in 1691, and 5,526 in 1717. Mortality at Loreto was low during the 1718–1719 smallpox epidemic, and the population grew to 5,665 in 1719 and 5,617 in 1720. The numbers continued to grow in the 1720s, and totaled 7,048 in 1731. The population grew as a result of robust birth rates, but the low mortality during the last epidemic also meant that there were a large number of highly susceptible people in the 1730s (see Figure 4). In the years 1733 and 1735–1740, the Jesuits reported 1,008 baptisms as against 4,015 burials, and a net decline of 3,007. The mission population experienced heavy mortality in 1733, 1735, and 1736, and catastrophic mortality in 1738. The Jesuits reported 986 burials in 1733 (a crude death rate of 142.8 per thousand population). The number of marriages increased in 1733 as Guaraní formed new families in the wake of the epidemic. There were 263 marriages, up from

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

103

31 in 1731. The Jesuits recorded 565 and 1,321 burials respectively in 1735 and 1736 (an estimated crude death rate of 119.1 and a crude death rate of 229.2 per thousand population respectively). The population dropped to 1,937 at the end of 1736, and in 1737 the Jesuits recorded 143 marriages with the formation of new families. Smallpox broke out at Loreto in 1738, and the Jesuits buried 917 Guaraní from a greatly reduced population (a crude death rate of 436.9 per thousand population), but the Black Robes also performed 181 marriages as Guaraní formed new families in the wake of the epidemic. The population was 1,933 in 1740 after experiencing a decline by some 5,000 during the decade. The population recovered and grew during the 1740s and 1750s. In the years 1741 and 1744–1750, the Jesuits recorded 1,749 baptisms and 893 burials, and a net increase in population of 856. The population grew to 3,399 in 1750. Measles killed few if any during a 1748–1749 outbreak. The numbers continued to grow in the 1750s. The population was 4,398 in 1759. In that year 1,015 refugees from San Juan Bautista and Santo ángel Custodio missions also lived on the mission, but the refugees gradually returned to the mission communities east of the Uruguay River following the abrogation of the Treaty of Madrid. A total of 614 remained in 1763 and 443 in 1764.72 Rapid population growth also made the population susceptible to the next smallpox epidemic that broke out in 1763.

Illustration 16 The ruins of the church at Loreto mission. Photograph in the collection of the author 72

Ibid., 75.

104

Chapter 4

8000 7000

Population

6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 1643 1648 1653 1658 1663 1668 1673 1678 1683 1688 1693 1698 1703 1708 1713 1718 1723 1728 1733 1738 1743 1748 1753 1758 1763 1768 1773 1778 1783 1788 1793 1798

0

Year

Figure 4 The Population of Loreto Mission.

14

Demographic Patterns on Candelaria Mission (1626)

The Jesuits established Candelaria mission in 1626 at a site east of the Uruguay River in what today is Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. The mission operated at this site until 1637, when the Jesuits evacuated the mission residents to a new site in the face of bandeirante raids. They re-established the mission at a site on the east bank of the Paraná River, which was also the definitive site of the mission community. In the aftermath of the bandeirante raids of the 1620s and 1630s, the Jesuits relocated the bulk of the missions to the same region between the Paraná and Uruguay Rivers. In 1643, there were ten missions located on and close to the Paraná River in the Paraná District with a total population of 16,011. They were Candelaria, Santos Cosme y Damián, San Ignacio Guazú , Ytapúa, Santa Ana, Loreto, San Ignacio Yaveviry (Miní), San Carlos, San José, and Corpus Christi. In the same year there were ten missions located along the western bank of the Uruguay River in the Uruguay District with a population of 19,982. They were Concepción, San Miguel, Santa María la Mayor, Apóstoles, Los Santos Mártires, San Nicolás, San Francisco Xavier, La Asunción (La Cruz), Santo Tomé, and Yapeyú. The last two missions, Santiago and La Fe, had a population of 3,500 in 1643 relocated from the Itatin missions that had been located in what today is northern Paraguay. The Jesuits relocated Santos Cosme in 1638 to a site very close to Candelaria, and from the 1660s until 1720 administered it as a part of Candelaria, although they enumerated the populations of the two separately. The same was done with San Nicolás which was also merged with

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

105

4000 3500

Population

3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 1643 1648 1653 1658 1663 1668 1673 1678 1683 1688 1693 1698 1703 1708 1713 1718 1723 1728 1733 1738 1743 1748 1753 1758 1763 1768 1773 1778 1783 1788 1793 1798

0 Year Figure 5 The Population of Candelaria Mission.

Illustration 17 The Ruins of Candelaria Mission. Photograph in the collection of the author

Apóstoles in the 1660s, until relocated to a site east of the Uruguay River in the 1680s.73 73

Carbonell de Massy, Blumers, and Levinton, La reducción jesuítica de Santos Cosme y Damián, 85, 93, 114.

106

Chapter 4

The population of Candelaria mission grew slowly during the last decades of the seventeenth century, which growth was interrupted periodically by epidemics and subsistence crisis. One such crisis occurred in the 1640s, and the population of Candelaria experienced a net decline of 413 between 1643 and 1647, and that of Santos Cosme a decline of 1,025. In 1657, Candelaria counted a population of 1,471 divided in 20 cacicazgos. This number increased to 2,596 in 1702 and 3,275 in 1717, the year before a lethal smallpox outbreak. The mission experienced a net decline in population from the 1717 figure to 2,641 in 1719. Santos Cosme did not experience such a large net decline. The population was 2,033 in 1717 and 1,851 in 1719.74 In 1720, the Jesuits relocated Santos Cosme to a new site about five kilometers from Candelaria, and administratively separated the two missions. In the 1720s and early 1730s, Candelaria experienced robust population growth. One factor was the large percentage of women in relation to the total population which was as high as 57 percent in 1736. The population grew from 2,506 in 1720 to 3,317 in 1731, on the eve of the mortality crises of the 1730s (see Figure 5). The 1733 outbreak caused only light mortality at Candelaria with a crude death rate of 61.6 and a net decline in population of 50 (see Appendix 1). The heaviest mortality at Candelaria was in 1738, with a total of 1,532 deaths recorded (1,163 adults and 365 párvulos and a cdr of 494.4 per thousand population), and was a significant increase in the numbers of deaths from the 124 reported in the previous year. In contrast deaths at Santos Cosme totaled only 318 (220 adults and 98 párvulos and a cdr of 236.1 per thousand population) in 1738.75 The population of Candelaria dropped from 3,039 reported at the end of 1737 to 1,511 at the end of 1738. In the years 1733 and 1735 to 1740 the Jesuits baptized 938 and recorded 2,405 burials, and a net decline of -1,467. The population of Candelaria recovered slowly in the aftermath of the mortality crises of the 1730s with the formation of new families following the crises and robust birth rates. In 1738, for example, the Jesuits recorded 179 marriages at Candelaria, which was up from 38 in the previous year, 36 in 1736, and 27 in 1735. In the years 1741 and 1744–1750, the Jesuits noted 1,254 baptisms and 930 burials, and a net growth of 324. The population grew to 2,266 in 1754, 2,817 in 1764, and 3,064 in 1767 on the eve of the Jesuit expulsion from the missions (see Appendix 1). Mortality at Candelaria was relatively low during the lethal 1763–1765 smallpox outbreak. The Jesuits recorded only one smallpox death at the mission in 1765.76 In 1763 to 1765, the Jesuits baptized 545 and buried 406 at Candelaria, and a net growth of 139. 74 Ibid., 92, 111, 130. 75 Ibid., 145. 76 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 79.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

107

The population of Candelaria dropped in the decades following the Jesuit expulsion as a consequence of outmigration and epidemics. The population was 3,077 in the first post-expulsion census prepared in 1772, 1,513 in 1783, 1,565 in 1799, 1,400 in 1803, and 1,240 in 1807.77 The largest part of the population decline resulted from out-migration. A smallpox epidemic in 1798 claimed the lives of 100 Guaraní at Candelaria (a moderate crude death rate of 68.0 per thousand population).78 A detailed 1801 census of tributaries documented the scale of out-migration from Candelaria mission. The population of the mission was divided between 29 cacicazgos, but the census also reported that six of the caciques themselves were fugitives. The census reported that 1,354 Guaraní still lived at the mission, but that 624 were absent.79 15

Demographic Patterns on Santa Ana Mission (1633)

The Jesuits established Santa Ana mission in Tape in 1633, and relocated it to a new site close to Loreto mission in 1637 following the bandeirante attack. Although located close to Loreto, the population of Santa Ana manifested distinct demographic patterns. The population grew slowly during the seventeenth century following its relocation. The numbers totaled 850 in 1643, and increased to 1,415 in 1682, 1,758 in 1691, and 1,883 in 1707 (see Appendix 1). The mission experienced light mortality during the 1718–1719 smallpox epidemic, and continued to grow during the 1720s. It totaled 4,584 in 1732 (see Figure 6). The population of Santa Ana suffered mortality during the crises of the 1730s, but not on the scale of other missions. In the years 1733, 1735–1740, the Jesuits recorded 1,311 baptisms and 1,320 burials, and a net loss in population of nine. The heaviest mortality was in 1733. In that year the Jesuits buried 484 (a crude death rate of 185.0 per thousand population). Deaths in 1736 totaled 325 respectively (a crude death rate of 76.0 per thousand population). Mortality during the rest of the crisis years was low. The population was 4,584 in 1732 and

77

The population figure from 1807 comes from a summary of a tribute census prepared by Francisco Martinez Lobato, Candelaria, April 1, 1807, Estado General que manifiesta el Numero de Personas de todas clases y Tributarios que eccisten en los ocho Pueblos de la comprehension de este Departamento de Candelaria según los Padrones formados en la Revisita Practicada por su Subdeleegado el S[eñ]or D[o]n Francisco Martinez Lobato a principios del año de 1807, Archivo Nacional, Asunción, Paraguay. The population of the other exmissions was: Santa Ana 1,340; Loreto 1,130; San Ignacio Miní 910; Corpus 2,270; Jes ú s 1,039; Trinidad 937; Ytapúa 2,109. 78 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival , 165. 79 Ibid., 50.

108

Chapter 4

7000 6000

Population

5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 1643 1648 1653 1658 1663 1668 1673 1678 1683 1688 1693 1698 1703 1708 1713 1718 1723 1728 1733 1738 1743 1748 1753 1758 1763 1768 1773 1778 1783 1788 1793 1798

0 Year Figure 6 The Population of Santa Ana Mission.

Illustration 18 The ruins of the church at Santa Ana Mission. Photograph in the collection of the author

4,533 in 1740. The population continued to grow in the 1740s and 1750s as seen in a sample of baptism and burials in the years 1741 and 1744–1750. The Jesuits recorded 2,315 baptisms as against 1,457 burials, and a net growth of 858. The numbers stood at 4,814 at the end of 1750, and 5,954 in 1759.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

109

A 1759 tribute census that divided the population by families provides a detailed snapshot of the structure of the mission population at one point in time. The Guaraní had large families as measured in the distribution of the population by family size. The census enumerated 1,243 families. A total of 350 couples (28.2 percent) had no children, and another 509 one or two children (41 percent). Another 384 (30.9 percent) had between three and six children. This was a result of high birth rates and rates generally higher than death rates. There were 131 widows and eight widowers. This reflected the social reality of the greater ease of men to remarry following the loss of a spouse. There were a roughly equal number of orphan boys and girls, 128 as against 121.80 The mortality crisis of the 1760s did not reach catastrophic levels at Santa Ana. The Jesuits recorded 487 burials in 1762 (a crude death rate of 86.9 per thousand population), and 262 in 1763 (a crude death rate of 50.1 per thousand population) in both years there were more burials than baptisms. Another 331 died in 1764 (a crude death rate of 80.9 per thousand population), which was much lower than at nearby |Loreto mission. There was one instance of an increased number of marriages at Santa Ana. This was 124 in 1762 following more than 400 deaths recorded on the mission. In the years 1762–1765, the black Robes noted 1,172 baptisms and 1,246 burials, and a net loss in population of 74. The population was down to 4,001 at the end of 1764 and 4,161 in 1765. The population recovered following the epidemic, and increased to 4,334 in 1767. The population of Santa Ana declined following the Jesuit expulsion. It totaled 5,645 in 1772, but then dropped in the 1780s and 1790s. It was 1,454 in 1793, 1,464 in 1802, and 1,310 in 1803 (see Appendix 1). 16

Demographic Patterns on La Cruz Mission (1628)

The Jesuits established La Cruz in 1628 at a site on the Uruguay River, and relocated the mission in 1641 at the time of the battle of Mbororé. The population roughly doubled in the half century between 1643 and 1691. It was some 1,300 in 1643 and grew to 2,915 in 1691. The population continued to grow at the beginning of the eighteenth century up to the 1718–1719 smallpox outbreak. It was 5,481 in 1717, and dropped to 3,193 in 1719 and 3,069 in 1720. Smallpox spread to the mission in 1718, and killed around 2,000 people. The population of La Cruz recovered and grew following the epidemic, and totaled 4,746 in 1732 and 5, 374 in 1733. The crises of the 1730s reduced the mission population again. In the years 1733 and 1735–1740, baptisms totaled 1,670 80

Padron del Pueblo de Sta Ana, 1759, agn, Sala 9–17-3–6.

110

Chapter 4 6000 5000

Population

4000 3000 2000 1000

1643 1648 1653 1658 1663 1668 1673 1678 1683 1688 1693 1698 1703 1708 1713 1718 1723 1728 1733 1738 1743 1748 1753 1758 1763 1768 1773 1778 1783 1788 1793 1798

0

Year

Figure 7 The Population of La Cruz Mission.

Illustration 19 A wall from the Jesuit complex at La Cruz. Little remains of the mission. Photograph in the collection of the author

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

111

as against 3,967 burials, and a net decline of 2,297. The Jesuits recorded 863 burials in 1733 (a crude death rate of 181.8 per thousand population), and the population was down to 4,369 on 1735. The population grew again in 1736 and 1737, and was 4,444 at the end of 1737. Smallpox spread to the mission at the end of 1738, and continued into 1739. The Jesuits buried 629 in the first year of the outbreak (a crude death rate of 141.5 per thousand population), and the population dropped to 3,853 at the end of the year. There were another 1,605 burials in 1739 (a crude death rate of 416.6 per thousand population). Altogether the Jesuits recorded 2,234 burials as against 270 baptisms, and a net decline of 1,964. The population was down to 2,167 at the end of 1739 (see Figure 7). The population recovered following the epidemic. In 1739 the Jesuits recorded 188 marriages at La Cruz, up from 47 in 1736, 37 in 1737, and 24 in 1738. The formation of new families contributed to increased birth rates and population growth. In the years 1741 and 1744–1750, for example, the Jesuits baptized 1,521 and buried 1,191, a net increase of 330. The population increased to 3,541 in 1763 and 3,566 in 1764. Smallpox broke out at La Cruz in 1765, and in that year the Jesuits recorded 712 burials (a crude death rate of 199.6 per thousand population). The net loss in population was 539, and the numbers dropped to 3,197 in 1765 and 2,546 in 1766. The population recovered following the epidemic. The number of marriages totaled 119 in 1765 up from 29 in 1763 and 58 in 1764 indicating the formation of new families. The population increased to 3,243 in 1767, the year of the Jesuit expulsion. As already discussed, the expulsion and creation of a civil administration changed the dynamic of demographic patterns on the missions. The population of La Cruz grew to 3,402 in 1772 and 3,746 in 1783, but then declined in the following decade with the outmigration of Guaraní and epidemics. Smallpox spread to the mission again in 1797 and 552 died on the year (an estimated crude death rate of 146.9 per thousand population). The population was 3,331 at the end of 1797, and increased to 3,458 in 1799 and 3,542 in 1802. 17

Demographic Patterns on San Miguel Mission (1632)

The Jesuits established San Miguel in 1632 in Tape, and relocated the mission to a site west of the Uruguay River following the bandeirante raid of 1636–1637. The population of the mission was 1,860 in 1643, and grew during the course of the next 50 years, and totaled 4,592 in 1694. The Jesuits relocated the mission to its current site east of the Uruguay River following the Portuguese establishment of Colonia do Sacramento, and transferred a part of the population to

112

Chapter 4

establish San Juan Bautista in 1698. The numbers were down to 1,885 in 1698, and San Juan Bautista had a population of 2,832 (see Appendix 1). The population of the mission grew over the next 30 years. Few died there during the 1718–1719 smallpox epidemic. The crude death rate in 1719 was an estimated 27.4 per thousand population, and the population increased from 2,909 in 1717 to 3,401 in 1719 and 3,598 in 1720 (see Figure 8). The population of San Miguel was 4,904 in 1731 and 4,859 in 1732 before the mortality crises of the 1730s. Unlike neighboring missions such as San Nicolás, San Lorenzo, and San Juan Bautista, the population of San Miguel did not suffer catastrophic mortality during the decade. During the years 1733 and 1735– 1740, the Jesuits baptized 1,540 and buried 1,194, and a net increase of 346. At San Nicolás, San Lorenzo, and San Juan Bautista, on the other hand, the populations suffered net losses of 3,354, 3,189, and 2,388 respectively. Burials during the smallpox epidemic at San Nicolás, for example, totaled 1,116 in 1738 (crude death rate of 176.5 per thousand population) and 1,708 in 1739 (a crude death rate of 336.8 per thousand population. The heaviest mortality at San Miguel during the crises was in 1733. In that year the Jesuits recorded 536 burials (a crude death rate of 110.3 per thousand population). Death rates were low during the rest of the decade, and the population reportedly was 4,740 in 1740. The populations of San Nicolás, San Lorenzo, and San Juan Bautista dropped to 2,194, 1,173, and 2,171 respectively in the same year down from figures of 7,751, 6,513, and 5,274 in 1732.

8000 7000

Population

6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 1643 1648 1653 1658 1663 1668 1673 1678 1683 1688 1693 1698 1703 1708 1713 1718 1723 1728 1733 1738 1743 1748 1753 1758 1763 1768 1773 1778 1783 1788 1793 1798

0 Year Figure 8 The Population of San Miguel Mission.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

113

The population of San Miguel continued to grow during the 1740s and early 1750s up to the point of the crisis following the implementation of the Treaty of Madrid in 1750. In the years 1741 and 1744–1750, the Jesuits baptized 2,860 and buried 2,136, a net increase of 724. The population increased from 4,974 in 1741 to 6,888 in 1750, and 7,047 in 1752. The implementation of the treaty and the resistance by the inhabitants of the seven eastern missions resulted in the dispersion of the mission populations. The censuses prepared between 1756 and 1766 recorded the forced Diaspora. The 1756 census reported 1,036 still at the mission. By 1759, the population of San Miguel had been resettled to other missions, and the Guaraní ended up living on 14 other missions and one group that numbered 2,288 had sought refuge on one of the mission estancias in 1759.81 The same occurred in the case of San Nicolás. A group of 1,548 reportedly fled to the estancia of Ybicuy in June of 1757 and were also there in 1759.82 The Spanish recovered the territory of the seven eastern missions following the abrogation of the Treaty of Madrid, and the Guaraní populations gradually returned to the missions. In 1763, 2,705 were already at San Miguel.83 The 1763–1765 smallpox outbreak killed a relatively small number of people when compared to mortality at other missions, and particularly Loreto and Santa Rosa. As already discussed in Chapter 3, the epidemic occurred during the mobilization of the mission militia and Spanish troop movements against Colonia do Sacramento and Rio Grande do Sul, as well as the resettlement on the missions of the refugees that had been relocated following the Treaty of Madrid. In the three years the Jesuits baptized 516 at San Miguel and recorded 962 burials, and a net decline of 446. Mortality was heaviest in 1764, and the Jesuits recorded 549 burials (a crude death rate of 171.5). The mission population dropped from 4,038 in 1762 to 2,726 at the end of 1764, but then recovered in the following years. It was 3,164 in 1767 at the time of the Jesuit expulsion. San Miguel was the scene of a battle in 1801 during the Luso-Brazilian conquest of the territory of the seven eastern missions, and after 1801 it was under Portuguese rule. The numbers dropped following the Jesuit expulsion. It was down to 2,334 in 1793, 1,885 in 1797, and further dropped to 1,738 three years later in 1799. The last Spanish census in 1801 recorded a population of 1,664 (see Appendix 1). 81 82

Ibid., 73. Catalogo de la numeracion annual de los Yndios Nicolasistas del año 1759, que se juntaron en su Estancia deste Ybicuy por junio de 1757, CA. 83 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 73.

114

Illustration 20 The ruins of the church at San Miguel Mission. Photograph in the collection of the author

Chapter 4

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

18

115

Demographic Patterns on San Luis Gonzaga Mission (1687)

The next case study presented here is of San Luis Gonzaga established in 1687 at a site east of the Uruguay River as a part of the geopolitical initiative to counter the establishment of Colonia do Sacramento. The population totaled 2,925 in 1690, and grew over the next several decades. It was 5,326 in 1717, 5,929 in 1719, dropped to 4,324 in 1720, 6,149 in 1731, and 6,182 in 1732 (see Appendix 1). Growth resulted primarily from robust birth rates, but it also meant that there were a large number of potentially susceptible people a generation later in the 1730s. Death rates were high at San Luis Gonzaga in 1733, and reached catastrophic levels in 1739 during the smallpox epidemic. The Jesuits buried 936 in 1733 (a cdr of 151.4 per thousand population). The population dropped to 5,619 at the end of the year, and continued to decline to 4,445 in 1736 and 4,327 in 1738. Smallpox broke out at the mission in 1739, and the Jesuits buried 2,445 on the year (a crude death of of 565.1 per thousand population). A total of nearly 57 percent of the population died during the year. The population dropped to 1,998 at the end of 1739. Altogether 4,493 died in the years 1733, 1735–1740 as against 1,345 baptisms, or a net difference of -3,148. This was one of the highest levels among the missions. Despite catastrophic mortality the population of the mission proved to be resilient. There were an increased number of marriages in 1739 and 1740, and higher than levels in non-crisis years. It was 166 and 163 respectively. The formation of new families contributed to robust birth rates and population growth in the 1740s and early 1750s. Baptisms in the years 1741 and 1744–1750 totaled 1,793 as against 1,005 burials, and a net difference of 788. The population increased to 3,507 in 1750, and further grew to 3,969 reported in 1754 (see Figure 9). Following the suppression of the resistance to the Treaty of Madrid the Spanish relocated the population of San Luis Gonzaga to several missions west of the Uruguay River, and particularly to Jesús de Tavarangue and Trinidad in what today is Paraguay and San José and San Carlos in what is now Argentina. In 1759, for example, there were 478 at Jesús, 684 at Trinidad, 1,395 at San José, and 1,394 at San Carlos. San José and San Carlos had suffered catastrophic mortality during the 1730s, and their populations were still relatively low (2,085 and 1,864 in 1753). The Jesuits relocated the population to the mission site over several years following the abrogation of the Treaty of Madrid, and the return of the territory of the seven eastern missions to Spain. However, as late as 1766 534 and 598 respectively still resided at Jesús and Trinidad, and 2,194 were back settled on the mission site.84 84

Ibid., 74.

116

Chapter 4

Illustration 21 A 1784 diagram of the San Luis Gonzaga building complex. BN. Reproduced from Luiz Antônio Bolcato Custódio, “Ordenamientos urbanos y arquitectónicos en el sistema reduccional jesuítico Guaraní de la Paracuaria: Entre su normativa y su realización,” PhD Thesis, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 2010. Little remains of the mission complex. Reproduced by permission of the author 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000

1643 1648 1653 1658 1663 1668 1673 1678 1683 1688 1693 1698 1703 1708 1713 1718 1723 1728 1733 1738 1743 1748 1753 1758 1763 1768 1773 1778 1783 1788 1793 1798

0

Figure 9 The Population of San Luis Gonzaga Mission.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

117

Smallpox spread to San Luis Gonzaga in 1764 in the wake of Spanish troop movements in the region. In 1763, 1,565 Guaraní were back at the San Luis Gonzaga mission site, 538 at Jesús, 538 at Trinidad, 325 at San José, and 694 at San Carlos. The 1764 census report on smallpox mortality recorded 420 smallpox deaths at San Luis Gonzaga. Total burials in 1763 were 245 burials at San Luis Gonzaga (a cdr of 57.5 per thousand population, and 653 in 1764 (a cdr of 176.2 per thousand population). The four missions that still had large numbers of people from San Luis Gonzaga San José suffered the largest number of smallpox deaths in 1764, a total of 398 smallpox deaths and 557 on the year (a cdr of 234.1 per thousand population). None of the Guarani from San Luis Gonzaga were at San José in 1765 and either relocated back to the mission site or died. In the years 1763–1765, the Jesuits baptized 369 from San Luis Gonzaga and buried 1,017, or a net difference of -648. The population of San Luis Gonzaga experienced some decline in the period following the Jesuit expulsion in 1767 and the implementation of civil administration. It was 3,420 in 1772, 3,312 in 1793, and 2,571 in 1797 following a smallpox epidemic. The limited evidence shows that death rates were higher than or close to birth rates in non-epidemic years as in 1793 when the crude death rate was 57.7 and the crude birth rate was 53.2 (see Appendix 1). As discussed in a previous chapter, Luso-Brazilian forces occupied San Luis Gonzaga and the other eastern missions in 1801 and permanently incorporated the region into Brazil. A tribute census prepared months before the invasion recorded a population of 2,776. 19

San Francisco de Borja (1687)

The Jesuits established San Francisco de Borja in 1687 at a site on the east bank of the Uruguay River opposite Santo Tomé mission. It had been a visita, and the Jesuits elevated the community to the status of an independent mission. The Black Robes established Jesús María de los Guenoas at a site close to San Francisco de Borja. The Guenoas were a Charrúa clan that periodically raided the Jesuit missions. The Black Robes hoped to congregate and convert them to a sedentary life-style. The Jesuits staffed Jesús María for thirty years, and then merged its population with that of San Francisco de Borja following the severe 1718–1719 smallpox epidemic. A 1732 document summarized the number of baptisms recorded at San Francisco de Borja from the date of its foundation through 1732.85 The ­summary 85

Relación de los Bautismos del Pueblo de San Francisco de Borja, desde el año de su fundación en 1687 hasta el presente año de 1732, CA.

118

Chapter 4

records baptisms of adults in the first two decades following the establishment of the mission, and again in the 1720s and 1730s following the merger of the population of Jesús María de los Guenoas. This pattern suggests the the Jesuits baptized Guenoas at both missions, but Jesús María was exclusively a community of Guenoas. The population of Jesús María fluctuated, which suggests that Guenoas settled on the mission, but then left. The pattern of ups and downs in the population was similar to the Jesuit Chaco missions also established among non-sedentary indigenous groups, and reflected the failure of the Black Robes to convince the natives to abandon their traditional way of life and particularly the social norms that defined gender roles between men and women.86 The calculation of the vital rates (see Appendix 1) also shows that the Jesuits continued to congregate and baptize non-Christians, and the number are inflated and do not reflect birth rates. The population of the mission was 334 in 1690, and grew to 357 in 1714. It stood at 283 in 1717 and 238 in 1719 following the smallpox epidemic. The 1720 census showed Jesús María merged with San Francisco de Borja, and the 1724 census did not record Jesús María at all. It no longer existed as an independent mission (see Figure 10). The population of San Francisco de Borja grew from 2,396 recorded in 1690 to 3,757 in 1717. The population experienced a net decline of some 1,000 from smallpox in 1718–1719. The numbers dropped to 2,673 in 1719. It was at this point that the Jesuits merged the two missions, and directed efforts to congregate Guenoas from San Francisco de Borja. The population was 2,861 in 1720 following the merger, and continued to grow during the following decade. It totaled 3,769 in 1732 (see Appendix 1) (see Figure 11). The population of San Francisco de Borja did not suffer catastrophic mortality during the crises of the 1730s, and actually was one of the missions that experienced population growth during the decade. The highest recorded mortality was a cdr of 97.6 per thousand population in 1733, and in the years 1733, 1735–1740 the Jesuits recorded 1,264 baptisms as against 1,085 burials, a net difference of 179. The numbers fluctuated during the decade, and stood at 3,291 in 1740. The population of the mission grew in the 1740s and early 1750s. In the years 1741, 1744–1750, the Black Robes baptized 1,585 and recorded 1,253 burials, a net difference of 332. The mission population was 3,430 in 1741 and grew to 4,081 in 1746, and was 3,232 in 1753 on the eve of the transfer of the territory of the seven missions to Portugal under the terms of the Treaty of Madrid. 86

For demographic patterns on the Jesuit Chaco missions see Robert H. Jackson, “La población y tasas vitales de las otras misiones jesuíticas de la Provincia de Paraguay y Moxos,” ihs Antiguos Jesuitas en Iberoamérica 6:1 (Enero-Junio, 2018), 104–118.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

119

400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 1643 1648 1653 1658 1663 1668 1673 1678 1683 1688 1693 1698 1703 1708 1713 1718 1723 1728 1733 1738 1743 1748 1753 1758 1763 1768 1773 1778 1783 1788 1793 1798

0

Figure 10 The Population of Jesús María de los Guenoas Mission. 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 1643 1648 1653 1658 1663 1668 1673 1678 1683 1688 1693 1698 1703 1708 1713 1718 1723 1728 1733 1738 1743 1748 1753 1758 1763 1768 1773 1778 1783 1788 1793 1798

0 Figure 11 The Population of San Francisco de Borja Mission.

The Jesuits relocated the bulk of the population of San Francisco de Borja across the Uruguay River to Santo Tomé. There was an historical connection between the two communities, and the population of Santo Tomé had experienced heavy mortality during the 1730s. From a high of 3,593 recorded in 1732 the numbers dropped to 1,699 in 1739. The population of Santo Tomé recovered and grew to 2,499 in 1753, but still had not recovered to pre-crisis levels and

120

Chapter 4

there was space to accommodate the refugees from San Francisco de Borja. In 1756, 1,641 had relocated to Santo Tomé, and this number increased to 3,721 in 1759. However, the population reoccupied the mission site fairly quickly following the abrogation of the Treaty of Madrid. By the end of 1763 those at Santo Tomé had returned. By the end of the following year 253 who had been settled on six missions located in what today is southern Paraguay had also returned.87 Smallpox broke out at San Francisco de Borja during the summer of 1764– 1765. The Jesuits recorded 341 burials in 1764 (a cdr of 131.1 per thousand population), and 378 burials in 1765 (a cdr of 130.7 per thousand population). In the years 1763–1765 the Jesuits recorded 451 baptisms as against 889 burials, and a net difference of -438. The mission population dropped to 2,546 recorded in 1766 (see Appendix 1). Mortality was relatively light when compared to other missions, and was consistent with the pattern documented during the crises of the 1730s that did not cause catastrophic mortality. It is possible that the Jesuits stationed on the mission were able to isolate the population from the neighboring missions through a more effective quarantine given its location east of the broad Uruguay River. The population of the mission fluctuated in the years following the Jesuit expulsion primarily as a result of out-migration. It was 2,131 in 1772, 2,403 in 1797, and 2,413 in 1801 on the eve of the Luso-Brazilian conquest of the t­ erritory of the seven eastern missions. A register of baptisms and burials exist for San Francisco de Borja for the early years of the nineteenth century. As noted above, Spanish surname priests continued to administer the ex-mission, and recorded entries in the register in Spanish and not in Portuguese. An epidemic in 1809–1810 killed several hundred at San Francisco de Borja, but overall the population continued to grow and rebounded following the outbreak of the unidentified contagion (see Appendix 1).88 20

Santo Ángel Custodio (1706)

The final case study is of Santo Ángel Custodio mission established in 1706 during the War of Spanish Succession (1701–1713). As already noted in Chapter 3, Spain and Portugal were on opposite sides of a grand coalition of European powers during this conflict. It was one of two missions established during the war to shore-up exposed frontiers. The other was Trinidad established in the 87 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 73–74. 88 Ibid., 166.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

121

6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000

1643 1648 1653 1658 1663 1668 1673 1678 1683 1688 1693 1698 1703 1708 1713 1718 1723 1728 1733 1738 1743 1748 1753 1758 1763 1768 1773 1778 1783 1788 1793 1798

0

Figure 12 The Population of Santo Ángel Custodio Mission.

same year in what today is southern Paraguay. It was the easternmost of the Jesuit missions, and thus the most exposed to potential Luso-Brazilian attack. A document similar to that for San Francisco de Borja summarized baptisms recorded at the misssion from 1706 to January of 1733, and contrary to the pattern documented for San Francisco de Borja there were few baptisms of adults: one in 1717, and Five in 1718.89 The Jesuits stationed there baptized few nonChristians, and it was a closed population. The population experienced growth in the years following the foundation of the mission, and no instances of catastrophic mortality on the scale documented for neighboring missions. In 1707, the population was 2,879, and the numbers grew over the following decade. It was 3,239 in 1717 the year before the lethal 1718–1719 smallpox outbreak. Mortality during the epidemic appears to have been low at Santo Ángel Custodio. The crude death rate in 1719 was 24.0 per thousand population, and the population increased to 3,470 at the end of 1719 (see Appendix 1). The population continued to grow during the 1720s, and as already noted above did not experience catastrophic mortality in the 1730s unlike several neighboring missions. The population was 5,085 in 1732. Burials exceeded baptisms in 1733 (336 or a crude death rate of 66.1 per thousand population), 1735 (185 or a crude death rate of 40.0 per thousand population), and in 1736 89

Relación de los Yndios bautizados en el Pueblo de S[an]to Angel de la Guardia desde 12 de Ag[ost]o de 1706 hasta 18 de En[er]o de 1733, CA.

122

Chapter 4

(219 or a crude death rate of 48.7 per thousand population). In 1739 during the ­smallpox epidemic baptisms totaled 258 as against 256 burials, and the crude death rate was 52.4 per thousand population. In the years 1733, 1735–1740, the Jesuits baptized 1,439 as against 1,453 burials at Santo Ángel Custodio, a net difference of -14. The population was 5,228 at the end of 1740 (see Figure 12). The population of Santo Ángel Custodio continued to grow during the 1740s and early 1750s. Measles broke out at the mission during the Summer of 1748– 1749. The Jesuits recorded 183 burials in 1748 (a crude death rate of 36.9 per thousand population), and 358 in 1749 (a crude death rate of 70.1 per thousand population). During the years 1741, 1744–1750, the Jesuits recorded 2,264 baptisms as against 1,805 burials, a net difference of 459. The population was 5,142 in 1750 and 5,421 in 1754 at the point of resistance to the Treaty of Madrid. The population recorded for the mission during the period of the Diaspora following the implementation of the Treaty of Madrid fluctuated. It was 2,531 in 1756, 4,095 in 1759, 3,863 in 1762, and 3,603 in 1763. The Jesuits relocated most of the inhabitants of Santo Ángel Custodio to missions located on the West bank of the Uruguay River including Los Santos Mártires, Concepción, and San Francisco Xavier, mission communities that had suffered catastrophic mortality during the crises of the 1730s. In 1759, there were 1,114 refugees at Los Santos Mártires, 675 were at Concepción, and 1,914 at San Francisco Xavier. The population returned slowly to Santo Ángel Custodio following the abrogation of the Treaty of Madrid in 1761, and as of 1766 only 1,509 reportedly were at the mission site.90 Smallpox spread through the missions in 1764–1765 while hundreds of refugees from Santo Ángel Custodio were still at other missions. A total of 188 reportedly died at Concepción in 1764 (a crude death rate of 349.4 per thousand population calculated based on the number of refugees there at the end of 1763), and 149 at Los Santos Mártires in the same year (a crude death rate of 196.1 per thousand population). In the second year of the epidemic another 560 from Santo Ángel Custodio died at various other missions.91 Relatively few died at Santo Ángel Custodio during the mortality crises of the 1730s which can be attributed to the geographic isolation of the mission that perhaps enabled the Jesuits to implement more effective quarantine measures. It is tempting to hypothesize that the presence of the refugees at other missions with a history of catastrophic epidemic mortality instead of at the Santo Ángel Custodio misssion site exposed the Guaraní from the mission to higher mortality rates. This was a direct consequence of the relocation of the mission ­population

90 Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival, 75. 91 Ibid., 79.

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

123

f­ ollowing the implementation of the Treaty of Madrid. The fact that the Guaraní from Santo Ángel Custodio had been largely spared from catastrophic mortality during the 1738–1740 smallpox epidemic also meant that much of the population was particularly susceptible to contagion. The population of Santo Ángel Custodio reportedly was 2,473 at the end of 1765, and 2,362 in 1767 the year of the Jesuit expulsion (see Appendix 1). The population of Santo Ángel Custodio did not fully recover in the years following the Jesuit expulsion from the effects of the Diaspora and the lethal 1764–1765 smallpox epidemic. The first post-expulsion census prepared in 1772 by the civil administrators reported a population of 2,039, and this further dropped to 1,448 in 1793, and 782 in 1799. The last tribute census prepared in 1801 months before the Luso-Brazilian invasion noted a population of 1,092 (see Appendix 1). 21 Conclusions The Guaraní populations of the Jesuit missions were high mortality and high fertility populations. That is that Guaraní women had many children and the missions had robust birth rates, but also high death rates. However, in most non-crisis years there were more births than deaths and the populations grew. With robust birth rates there were large numbers of children and adolescents who had not been exposed to contagion, and thus were susceptible when epidemics spread to the missions from surrounding communities, which occurred about once a generation or roughly every 20 years or so. Children constituted a relatively large percentage of the population, and females were the majority. This was the general demographic pattern on the Jesuit missions among the Guaraní.92 Several factors created conditions that could result in epidemics that produced catastrophic mortality. One was the ease of communications on the Uruguay and Paraná Rivers, and the second was the concentration of large numbers of people in spatially compact communities on the missions and the Jesuit policy of congregating all Guaraní on the missions. It was easy for sick people to travel on rivers, and when contagion broke out on the missions it could spread rapidly among the population living in small apartments in numerous multi-apartment structures. Geographic isolation could buffer populations from epidemics, as in the case of the Chiquitos missions located in what today is eastern Bolivia.93 92 93

See Ibid., Chapter 4. Ibid., 81–82.

124

Chapter 4

Epidemic mortality varied from mission to mission, and it is necessary to examine a variety of factors such as the age and gender structure of the population or the experience of previous epidemics. However, it is also important to document the larger context of a given epidemic, and it is in this that the importance of conflict figures in. The mobilization of thousands of mission militiamen, the movement of soldiers on campaign and of groups taking supplies to the militia posted to the Tebicuary River, and famine that also resulted in the movement of people looking for food created the conditions for catastrophic mortality at so many of the missions during the smallpox outbreak of 1738–1740. Mortality reached catastrophic levels during the 1733 epidemic at several of the missions located in what today is southern Paraguay, but the effects were localized to those missions located closest to the militia camp. The combination of factors contributed to the more generalized epidemic that lasted for parts of three years. More than 80,000 Guaraní died in seven years. The structure of the populations of individual missions was an important factor in mortality patterns during the 1763–1765 smallpox epidemic that reached catastrophic levels at a number of missions that had been spared heavy mortality during the previous smallpox outbreak, and particularly Loreto and Santa Rosa. The movement of soldiers on campaign and mobilizations of mission militia facilitated the spread of contagion, and the presence of refugees from the seven eastern missions and the gradual resettlement of these missions were complicating factors. Los Santos Mártires mission, for example, hosted hundreds of refugees at a site located at the top of a mountain in a relatively small and cramped complex. This also contributed to catastrophic mortality at Los Santos Mártires mission. The comparison with mortality on the Baja California missions documents instances of catastrophic epidemic mortality in similar circumstances, namely the movement of people that facilitated the spread of contagion. A series of epidemics between 1769 and 1782 killed hundreds living on the missions, and occurred as new personnel came to the Peninsula from the mainland, and as personnel transited the Peninsula to arrive on the Alta California frontier first opened in 1769. This was a changed demographic dynamic and a reversal of patterns from the last years of the Jesuit tenure on the Peninsula missions. The populations of several missions rebounded or recovered following some three decades of decline, but this trend abruptly ended with the Jesuits expulsion and the implementation of reforms of the missions. One difference, however, was that the Baja California mission populations did not recover following the series of epidemics, whereas the populations of the Guaraní missions did. The account of the 1781–1782 smallpox epidemic on the Baja California missions raises one point that can be used as the basis of one hypothesis to further

125

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

explain variations in mortality and demographic patterns between missions. During the epidemic three Dominican missionaries used inoculation by variolation to reduce mortality on their missions, whereas the majority of Dominican missionaries did not. This raises a question of the agency of individual Jesuit missionaries in the measures they implemented in response to epidemic outbreaks. One strategy was to have temporary plague hospitals built to isolate the ill and those exposed. A second was to attempt to isolate mission communities from outside contact. The evidence of variations in mortality between mission communities such as in the cases of Loreto and Santa Ana located a short distance from each other also suggests the possibility that some missionaries took decisive steps to limit mortality, while others may not have. Some may have believed it futile to take measures to combat epidemics sent by God.

Table 9

Dominican Doctrinas in Guatemala and Chiapas in 1611

Doctrina

# Visitas

# Missionaries/Lay Brothers

34 12 12 18 4 0

33/19 7/0 8/0 6/1 7/0 2/0

20 6 10 21 9 8

11/3 8/3 4/0 9/1 5/0 6/0

Guatemala Sto Domingo de Guatemala San Salvador Zacapula Sto Domingo de Cobán Zonsonate Oscocotán Chiapas Sto Domingo (Ciudad Real) Sto Domingo Chiapa San Vicente Copanguastla Sto Domingo Tecpatán Sto Domingo Comitán San Jacinto Ocosingo

Source: Antonio de Remesal, Historia General De Las Indias Ocidentales, Y Particular De La Governacion de Chiapa, y Guatemala. Escrivese juntamente los principios de la Religion de Nuestro Glorioso Padre Santo Domingo, y de las demas Religiones, 2 vols. (Guatemala: Guatemala City, 1932), ii: 610–612

126 Table 10

Chapter 4 Dominican Doctrinas in Chiapas and Tabasco

Doctrina

Date Founded Visitas

Missionaries 1617

Chiapas Santo Domingo Chiapa

1545

San Marcos Tuxtla

8 missionaries and 3 lay brothers

Santo Domingo (Ciudad Real)

1546

Suchiapa Puchutla Alcalá Chiapilla Ostuta San Juan Chamula

San Vicente Copanguastla

1555

Santo Tomás Oxchuc San Agustín Teopicsa San Dionisio Totolapa Santo Domingo Zinacatán Asmatenango Aguactenango Uiztlan Teutepeq Tenezapa Mixtontiq Santa Catalina San Andrés San Pedro y San Pablo Yztacozoté Santiago Uistlán Santa Marta Tenezcatlán Yztapa San Lucas San Dionisio Totolapa Asunción Zoyatítán 4 missionaries

11 missionaries and 3 lay brothers

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

Santo Domingo Tecpatán

1564

127

Chalchitlán Pynula San Bartolomé de los Llanos Santa Cruz Socoltenango Zacualpa Custepeques Comitlán Yztapa Teculutla Citalá Cachula (Quechula) 9 missionaries and 1 lay brother Concepción Chapultenango Chichoacintepeq Pantepeq Coapilla Ocotepeq Tapalapa Ozumacintla San Miguel Copainalá San Bernardo Tapitula and Zautlán Comistaguacán Magdalena Coalpatán Iztacomitán San Agustín Tapalapa Xitolol Manahé Zunuapa Santa Catalina Zayula Mixapa San Pablo Xitoltepeq Aneán Comeapa

128 Table 10

Chapter 4 Dominican Doctrinas in Chiapas and Tabasco (cont.)

Doctrina Santo Domingo Comitán

San Jacinto Ocosingo

Date Founded Visitas

c. 1600

Solis San Pedro 5 missionaries Chicomocelo San José Conetla Coapa Comalapa Zapalutla Aquespala Yzquintenango Utatlán Yayaquitla Santiago Escuintenango Presentación 6 missionaries Cancuuc Ocotitán Xuxuicapa Chítostuta Santo Domingo Chilón Xitalhá Natividad Guaquitepec Santiago Yagalum San Nicolás Tenango Ocotenango

c. 1578

Amatán

1579

Tabasco Santo Domingo Oxolotán

Missionaries 1617

Ixtapangagjoya Solosuchiapa Puxcatán Tapijulpa

129

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

Tecomagiaca Tacotalpa Teapa Source: Antonio de Remesal, Historia General De Las Indias Ocidentales, Y Particular De La Governacion de Chiapa, y Guatemala. Escrivese juntamente los principios de la Religion de Nuestro Glorioso Padre Santo Domingo, y de las demas Religiones, 2 vols. (Guatemala: Guatemala City, 1932), ii: 610–612; Peter Gerhard, The Southeast Frontier of New Spain (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1993), 41, 157. Table 11

Population of the Paraguay Missions and the 1718–1719 Smallpox Epidemic

1717

Mission

1718- Fajardo Report

Population

Families

Families

Guazú La Fe S. Rosa Santiago Ytapúa Candelaria S. Cosme S. Ana Loreto S.I. Miní Corpus Trinidad Jesús S. Carlos S. José Apóstoles

5651 4404 5389 4387 5871 3275 2033 3032 5526 3040 2816 2925 1527 3596 3510 3996

1377 1110 1523 890 1287 785 499 688 1402 649 678 737 326 744 740 1184

1500 900 1000 900 1200b 600 600b 700 1600 NA 700 700b 350 844 800b 1200

No No No No Yes No Yes No No NA No Yes No No Yes No

Concepción Mártires La Mayor S. Javier S. Nicolás S. Luis S. Lorenzo

4186 3265 3134 5600 6993 5326 4905

996 787 825 1271 1584 1924 1109

900 700 700 1400 1800 900 1090

No No No No No No No

1719

Smallpox Population

Catastrophic Mortality in 1719 Burials

cdr

3403 4868 4320 1790 4972 2641 1851 3104 5665 2300 3151 1891 1640 2710 2776 4019

1734

348.9a

321 1519

72.8a 483.3a

828

177.0a

3457 3276 3158 5352 5729 4532 4880

272

78.0a

389

70.9a

130

Chapter 4

Table 11

Population of the Paraguay Missions and the 1718–1719 Smallpox Epidemic

1717

Mission

1718- Fajardo Report

Population

Families

Families

2909 3472 3239 4768 3757 5481 2873

742 873 795 1131 843 1229 611

890 800 700 1020b 800 1200 600

S. Miguel S. Juan Sto. Ángel Sto.Tomé S. Borja La Cruz Yapeyú

1719

Catastrophic Mortality in 1719

Smallpox Population No No No Yes No No Yes

Burials

cdr

3401 3722 3470 2694 2673 3193 1871

a Estimated. b Number of families before the smallpox epidemic. Source: Annua Reductionum Anni 1717, agn, Sala 9-6-9-6; Catalogo de la Numeración Annual de las Doctrinas del Rio Paraná/del Rio Uruguay, 1719, ca; Razon de la visita que hizo el ilustrisimo y reverendisimo Senor don Fray Pedro Fajardo, Obispo de Buenos Aires, el ano de 1718, in Pablo Pastells, Historia de la Compañía de Jesús en la Provincia del Paraguay. 9 vols. (Madrid: self-published, 1912), 6: 172–177; Robert H. Jackson, “La población y tasas vitales de las misiones jesuíticas de Guaranies (Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay),” ihs. Antiguos jesuitas en Iberoamérica 5:2 (julio-diciembre 2017), 100–165.

Table 12

Baptisms and Burials recorded in 1763–1765

Mission Guazú Ytapúa La Fe Santaigo Stos Cosme Sta Rosa Jesús Trinidad Candelaria

Population 1762 2264 4351 4829 3532 1535 3294 2134 2588 2724

Baptisms 375 823 682 349 408 458 312 343 545

Burials 375 632 1202 841 648 2053 342 598 406

Net 0 191 −520 −492 −240 −1595 −30 −255 139

131

Demographic Patterns on the Missions

Sta Ana Loreto S.I. Miní Corpus San José Apósotoles Concepcion Sta María Stos Máartires sfx San Carlos Sto Tomé La Cruz Yapeyú# San Miguel San Nicolás S.F. Borja San Luis San Lorenzo sjb Sto ángel Total

5231 4708 3222 5149 2399 2780 3192 2554 3225 1834 2400 3427 3044 7470 4038 4429 2714 4259 1782 4017 3863 102,988

787 644 530 862 288 273 309 198 423 336 393 292 656 1524 516 620 451 369 177 573 370 14,886

759 2678 446 1107 516 907 975 1100 1875 384 385 843 918 1066 962 951 889 1017 552 767 899 27,093

28 −2034 84 −245 −228 −634 −666 −902 −1452 −48 8 −551 −262 458 −446 −331 −438 −648 −375 −194 529 −12,207

Source: Robert H. Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among The Sedentary Populations On The Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context (Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015), Appendix 4; Robert H. Jackson, “La población y tasas vitales de las misiones jesuíticas de los Guaraní (Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay),” ihs Antiguos Jesuitas en Iberoamérica 5:2 (Julio-Diciembre, 2017), 100–165.

132 Table 13

Chapter 4 Livestock reported at Los Santos Mártires Mission

Year

Cattle

1768 1785 1786 1797 1798 1801

8,977 10,615 9,974 9,895 9,966 10,119

Oxen 1,779 729 85 480 487 467

Sheep

Horses

Burros

Mules

10.760 1,218 224 138 96 42

1,653 2,706 5,977 6,247 6,754 4,850

191 137 57 109 96 84

310 408 ? 10 18 75

Source: Robert H. Jackson, Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among the Sedentary Populations on the Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context (Leiden:Brill, 2015), 170–171, note 18.

Table 14

Livestock slaughtered and lost at Los Santos Mártires Mission in 1790

Month

Cattle

April–May June July August September October November December

244 199 183 174 214 328 211 169

Oxen 2 0 3 7 5 0 8 3

Sheep 17 14 18 18 18 27 18 9

Horses

Mules

0 0 1 0 5 1 3 5

2 0 0 6 1 2 0 0

Source: “Libro de consumes de todas la especie de animales que ha saquado [sic] el Procurador de este Pueblo de Mártires con arrgelo a lo mandado por el Senor Then[ien]te Gov[ernad]or del Departamento D[o]n Gonzalo de Doblas…,” agn, 9–17-9–3.

133

Demographic Patterns on the Missions Table 15

Population of the Baja California Missions in 1744 and total baptisms from date of foundation to 1744

Mission Loreto San Francisco Xavier Mulegé Comondú La Purísima Guadalupe Santiago San Ignacio

Year Founded

Baptisms to 1744

Population in 1744

1697 1699

1,199 1,726

150 352

1705 1708 1718 1720 1721 1728

1,358 1,563 1,890 2,599 1,749 2,746

326 513 535 701 440 1,196

Source: Robert H. Jackson, Indian population decline: the missions of northwestern New Spain, 1687–1840 (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1994), 58.

Table 16

The Population of San Francisco Xavier and Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe Missions, in selected years

San Francisco Xavier Baptisms Burials 1699–1761 1745–62 Year Population 1744 1755 1762 1768 1771 1773 1774 1782

352 380 448 482 212 279 275 169

2,174

357

Guadalupe Year 1744 1755 1762 1768 1771 1773 1774 1782

Population 701 472 524 544 140 176 105

Baptisms Reported 1720–1744

2,599

Source: Robert H. Jackson, “Demographic patterns in the missions of central Baja California,” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 6:1 (1984), 91–112.

134 Table 17

Mission Mulegé Comondú Purísima S Ignacio S Gert. SF Borja

Chapter 4 Crude Birth and Death Rates on Selected Baja California Missions, 1769, 1772, 1781–1782

Population In 1768

1769 cbr cdr

Population In 1771

1772 cbr cdr

245 330

– 269.4 94.0 484.9

180 216

83.3 72.2 78.7 148.2

1,360 1,640

37.5 130.2 62.8 124.4

1,138 1,479

30.8 325.1 22.3 302.9

Population In 1780a

160a 163a 160a 300a 700a 700a

1781/1782 cbr

cdr

6.3a 6.7a 12.3a 90.0a 55.7a 75.7a

362.5a 361.9a 460.1a 270.0a 422.9a 125.7a

Total Smallpox Deaths on selected Missions Mission

Year(s)

Mulegé Comondú Santa Gertrudis

1782 1781 1781–1782

Total smallpox deaths reported 58 59 296

a Estimated. Source: Robert H. Jackson,. “The 1781–1782 Smallpox Epidemic in Baja California,” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 3:1 (1981), 138–143; Robert H. Jackson, “Epidemic ­Disease and Population Decline in the Baja California Missions, 1697–1834,” Southern Calififornia Quarterly 63:4 (1981), 308–346; Robert H. Jackson, “Demographic patterns in the missions of central Baja California,” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 6:1 (1984), 91–112.

Chapter 5

Conclusions In the spring and summer of 1738 smallpox spread to San Nicolás which was one of the seven missions located east of the Uruguay River. The mission had already experienced elevated but not catastrophic mortality of around ten percent of the population in 1733 and 1736, but at the same time the population had begun to rebound or recover. Altogether the Jesuits buried 2,791 Guaraní (a crude death rate of 817.3 per thousand population) in 1738 and 1739. The Guaraní populations, however, proved to be resilient, and recovered following catastrophic mortality. Marriages in 1739 and 1740 at San Nicolás reportedly totaled 229 and 124 respectively, up from 53 in the non-crisis year 1737. The population of San Nicolás was down to 1,772 at the end of 1739, but then grew to 4,863 in 1754. The 1756 census, however, reported a greatly reduced population of 416, but then this number was up again to 4,429 in 1762. This was not an example of what sometimes has been called “fuzzy math,” but rather was a consequence of efforts to implement the Treaty of Madrid (1750) and Guaraní resistance to the plan to transfer their homes to the Portuguese and the relocation of the populations of the seven eastern missions to other communities west of the Uruguay River. Moreover, both episodes in the demographic history of San Nicolás were caused by the effect of regional conflict on the demographic patterns of the mission communities. The Jesuit- Guaraní alliance forged in the conflict in the 1620s and 1630s against the bandeirante raids against the missions in Guaíra and Tape withstood the multiple crises of the 1730s, but fractured when the Jesuits supported royal orders to relocate the residents of the seven eastern missions. Conflict occurred on other mission frontiers in Spanish America, but what was unique on the Jesuit missions among the Guaraní was the formal militarization that included the distribution of firearms which was a practice the Spanish did not follow on other frontiers, the frequent mobilizations of the mission militia to participate in regional conflict, and the demographic consequences of conflict on the mission communities. Armies in the early modern period carried and spread disease, and the mobilization and movement of the mission militia and other Spanish forces precipitated demographic crisis on the missions. The death of more than 80,000 Guaraní in the seven years between 1733 and 1740 was a direct consequence of ongoing regional conflict, and the diversion of food to the mobilized mission militia exacerbated famine conditions. The mobilization of thousands of militiamen also drew manpower away from the missions. The demographic effects of conflict on the missions © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���9 | doi:10.1163/9789004390546_006

136

Chapter 5

were far greater than were Guaraní deaths in battle. In the period 1733 and 17351740 San Nicolás was one of five missions that suffered a net loss in population of more than 3,000, five other missions suffered a loss of more than 2,000, and six missions a loss of more than 1,000. Several factors in addition to the consequences of conflict contributed to catastrophic mortality on the missions. One was the ease of movement on the river highways. It was easier for contagion to spread in the bodies of people traveling by boat than overland on foot or riding horses. A second was the Jesuit strategy of congregating the entire Guaraní population on the missions, unlike on other mission frontiers. A third was the urban plan that had thousands of people living in nucleated communities in rows of long multi-apartment structures in tight quarters. The age and gender structures of the populations also played roles in mortality patterns when contagion spread to a community, as well as the recovery of populations following epidemics. Mission populations on other frontiers, such as in Baja California, proved to be demographically fragile, and did not recover the effects of epidemics. Conflict defined in some ways the Jesuit missions among the Guaraní. The three worst crises during the history of the missions were a consequence of regional conflict with Luso-Brazilians. The first was the bandeirante raids of the 1620s and 1630s on the missions of Guaíra and Tape that forced the abandonment of these missions. The second was the series of mortality crises in the 1730s that occurred during the mobilization of thousands of mission militiamen. The third was the failed effort to implement the Treaty of Madrid, and the resumption of conflict in the 1760s. This resulted in Guaraní resistance, a Diaspora from the seven eastern missions following the suppression of resistance that disrupted the missions and a lethal smallpox epidemic in 1763–1765. A process of ethnogenesis occurred as the Guaraní defined their identity as residents of a given mission. This was a process that did not occur on many missions on other frontiers, and was a function of the militarization of the missions and the defense of their communities against the Portuguese and on ­occasion against hostile indigenous groups. The strength of this sense of identity can be seen in the response to fiasco of the Treaty of Madrid that attempted to define the boundaries between Spanish and Portuguese territory in South America. The Guaraní residents of the seven eastern missions defined their resistance to the transfer of the mission to the Portuguese in terms of the defense of their communities. The fracture in the Jesuit- Guaraní alliance can also be seen in expressions of hostility towards the Jesuits who collaborated with the Crown by attempting to relocate the residents of the seven missions. Conflict also defined the demise of the Jesuit missions among the Guaraní. On other frontiers, such as northern Mexico, the demise of the majority of the missions resulted from demographic collapse and by the stroke of the pen as

Conclusions

137

anti-clerical liberal politicians passed legislation in 1833 for the final secularization of missions in places such as California. Many of the Jesuit mission communities among the Guaraní ended violently in renewed regional conflict over boundaries and territory. The post-expulsion civil administrators dedicated considerable time and energy to promote activities to generate income to comply with the royal mandate to make the mission communities cover the costs of administration, but neglected military preparations. This can be seen, for example, in the military collapse in 1801 that resulted in the facile occupation of the mission territory east of the Uruguay River by the governor of Rio Grande do Sul, and the permanent incorporation of the mission territory into Brazil. Many of the mission communities located in the territory between the Uruguay and Paraná Rivers (modern Misiones, Argentina) suffered a violent death in the twenty years of conflict initiated by the political crisis of 1810 and the beginning of the independence movements in what would become ­Argentina and Paraguay. Luso-Brazilian and Paraguayan invasions of this territory in 1817 and 1818 left many of the missions in ruins, hundreds of Guaraní dead, and thousands led into captivity. The last act of the drama was in 1830 when the Uruguayan leader Fructuoso Rivera attacked and sacked the seven missions located east of the Uruguay River, and took thousands captive who were taken back to Uruguay where they established a new refugee community. The missions located in what today is southern Paraguay went the way of missions on other frontiers through government action, and not conflict. New non- Guaraní communities developed on many of the ex-mission sites in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and in some instances gradually demolished and reused building materials from the mission complexes. The fast-growing tropical rainforest encroached on and damaged the ruins of other mission complexes. In the process of the resettlement of the mission territory the Guaraní have survived as a distinct ethnic group that often live on the margins of the new towns founded on the ruins of the mission communities.

Appendix 1

The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions discussed in Chapter 41 In my 2015 study Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival Among The Sedentary Populations On The Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context I published tables of the population and the vital rates of the Guaraní missions. Over the last two years I have continued collecting data from missions censuses found in the Archivo General de la Nación in Buenos Aires and the Biblioteca Nacional in Rio de Janeiro, and have updated the tables for the ten missions discussed in Chapter 4. The Population of San Ignacio Guazú mission

Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1643 1647 1650 1657 1664 1667 1671 1676 1682 1691 1702 1707

998 1150 1417 1327 1705 1940 2150 2326 2741 3095 3700 4250

1716 1717 1719 1720 1724 1728 1729 1731 1732 1733 1735 1736

5511 5651 3403 2738 3343 3368 3674 3195 3671 1266 1631 1576

1741 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1752 1753 1754

2152 2276 2231 2238 2226 2247 2167 2257 2278 2254 2399 2477

Year Population 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1772 1783 1784 1785

2323 2263 2264 2233 2139 1985 1909 1926 1655 800 896 867

1 In updating the tables in this appendix I have employed the following sources: “Anua numerazion de los Indios del Parana y Uruguay que estan a cargo de la Comp[añí]a de iesus hecho a fin del año de 1691,” arsi, Paraq. 12; “Annua Reductionum Anni 1717, agn; “Annua Reducthionum Ani de 1732. Fluminis Paranensis/Fluminis Uruguayensis,” agn, BN; “Annua Enumeratio Reductionum Fluminis Paranensis/Fluminis Uruguayensis Anni 1743,” arsi, Paraq. 12; “Annua Enumeratio Reductionum Fluminis Paranensis/Fluminis Uruguayensis Anni 1755,” agn; “Catalogo de la Numeración Annual de las Doctrinas del Rio Paraná/del Rio Uruguay,” 1728, 1729, 1731, 1735, 1737, 1738, CA; Censuses of individual missions: 1797agn, Sala 9–18-6–5; 1798 agn, Sala 9–18-2–4; 1799 agn, Sala 9–18-2–5; 1802 agn, Sala 9–18-2–5; 1803 agn, Sala 9–18-3–3; 1808, BN.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���9 | doi:10.1163/9789004390546_007

140

Appendix 1

The Population of San Ignacio Guazú mission (cont.)

Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1708 1710 1714 1715

4515 4464 5330 5330

1737 1738 1739 1740

1773 1846 1964 2018

1755 1757 1757 1759

2440 2420 2420 2332

Year Population 1793 1801 1802 1803

1354 712 891 667

The Population and Vital Rates of San Ignacio Guazú

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1691 1702 1707 1708 1719 1724 1728 1729 1731 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1753 1754

3095 3700 4250 4515 3403 3343 3368 3674 3195 1266 1631 1576 1773 1846 1964 2018 2152 2231 2238 2226 2247 2167 2257 2278 2399 2477

803 1105 1082 1103 765 610 729 745 813 308 367 350 406 438 454 481 487 476 508 508 505 485 485 488 525 558

224 353 322 339 167 214 275 300 245 116 77 95 106 144 134 134 227 141 163 170 151 163 157 176 160 155

104 200 184 167 1734 116 227 163 191 1192 62 90 56 89 73 111 109 164 162 152 157 155 152 142 99 106

75.5a 99.5a 78.3a 79.8 33.6a 65.9a 82.8a 90.7 78.0a 31.6 47.7a 58.3 67.3 81.2 72.6 68.2 112.5 62.0 73.1 76.0 67.8 72.5 72.5 78.2 71.1 64.6

35.0a 56.4a 44.8a 39.3 348.9a 35.8a 68.4a 48.4 60.8a 324.7 38.4a 55.2 35.5 50.2 37.6 56.5 54.0 72.1 72.6 67.9 70.5 69.0 70.1 63.1 43.9 44.2

3.9 3.7 3.9 3.9 4.5 5.5 4.6 4.9 3.9 4.1 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.2 4.3 4.2 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.4

141

The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1756 1759 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1793 1802 1803

2472 2332 2264 2233 2139 1985 1909 1926 1354 891 667

557 513 492 478 432 403 405 425 376 N/A 174

159 97 120 109 123 143 109 132 86 29 39

96 157 84 152 109 124 229 82 89 39 86

64.2 40.6a 53.0 48.2 55.1 66.9 54.9 69.2 63.4a 50.7 43.8

38.8 65.6a 62.7 62.7 48.8 58.0 115.3 43.0 65.6a 54.8 96.5

4.4 4.6 4.7 4.7 5.0 4.9 4.7 4.5 3.6 N/A 3.8

a Estimated. b afs – Average Family Size.

The Population of Nuestra Senora la Fe mission

Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1691 1702 1707 1708 1710 1714 1715 1716 1717 1719 1720 1724 1728 1729 1731 1732

5116 2939 3497 3215 3718 4351 4727 4481 4404 4868 5553 5463 6713 6958 6515 6605

1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750

4251 2492 2595 2044 2701 2903 3086 3298 3500 3593 3796 4183 4084 4240 4296 4350

1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1772

4568 4550 4741 4881 4853 4713 4792 4758 4335 4829 4901 4716 3945 3913 3954 2294

1783 1784 1785 1793 1801 1802 1803

723 N/A 1062 885 1233 1113 1049

142

Appendix 1

The Population and Vital Rates of Nuestra Señora la Fe

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1691 1702 1707 1708 1719 1724 1728 1729 1731 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1753 1754 1756 1759 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1793

5116 2939 3497 3215 4868 5463 6713 6958 6515 4251 2492 2595 2044 2701 2903 3086 3298 3593 3796 4183 4084 4240 4296 4350 4550 4741 4853 4792 4829 4901 4716 3945 3913 3954 885

1114 681 811 849 1104 1208 1404 1438 1493 843 466 525 605 686 732 782 842 920 974 994 972 960 959 949 901 917 928 872 879 880 838 690 710 716 245

318 239 201 248 303 401 418 444 422 110 114 122 50 228 287 250 339 264 353 342 340 307 310 325 274 310 320 233 241 268 219 195 154 188 67

120 90 83 162 256 257 283 231 267 2678 115 71 100 130 144 119 126 161 142 174 224 249 166 139 145 185 200 168 191 267 180 755 229 120 31

64.7a 85.7a 59.5a 70.9 62.9a 75.4a 63.6a 65.8a 66.4a 16.7 45.2a 49.0 19.3 86.2 106.3 86.1 109.9 75.4 98.2 90.1 81.3 75.2 73.1 75.7 60.0 68.1 67.5 47.3a 55.9 55.5 44.7 41.4 39.0 48.0 78.9a

24.4a 32.3a 24.6a 46.3 53.1 48.3a 43.0a 34.3a 42.0a 396.4 46.1a 28.5 38.5 49.2 53.3 41.0 40.8 46.0 39.5 45.3 53.6 61.0 32.8 32.4 31.7 40.7 42.2 35.5a 44.1 55.3 36.7 160.1 58.0 30.7 36.5a

4.6 4.3 4.3 3.8 4.4 4.5 4.8 4.8 4.4 5.0 5.4 4.9 3.4 3.9 4.0 4.0 3.9 3.9 3.9 4.2 4.2 4.5 4.5 4.6 5.1 5.2 5.2 5.5 5.5 5.6 5.6 5.7 5.5 5.5 3.6

143

The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1802 1803

1113 1049

N/A 307

92 72

61 59

74.6 64.7

49.5 53.0

N/A 3.4

a Estimated. b afs – Average Family Size. The Population of Loreto mission

Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1643 1647 1650 1657 1664 1667 1671 1676 1682 1691 1702 1707 1708 1710 1714 1715

1476 1700 1717 1900 2095 2089 2366 2358 2772 3620 4060 4393 4569 4769 5161 5543

1716 1717 1719 1720 1724 1728 1729 1731 1732 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740

5426 5526 5665 5617 6113 6854 6933 7048 6907 6077 4284 1937 2099 2234 1756 2246

1741 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1759

2422 2583 2789 2855 2946 3028 3195 3276 3398 3585 3732 3754 3859 4023 4157 4398

Year Population 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1772 1777 1785 1793 1798 1799 1802 1803

4591 4669 4708 4659 4537 2395 2425 2462 2492 1451 1457 1261 1376 1329 1046 1067

The Population and Vital Rates of Loreto

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1691 1702 1707 1708 1719

3620 4060 4393 4569 5665

870 1048 1092 1146 1376

260 321 292 332 287

63 224 215 194 114

75.9a 81.0a 67.7a 75.6 52.3a

18.4a 56.5a 49.8a 44.2 20.8a

4.2 3.9 4.0 4.0 4.1

144

Appendix 1

The Population and Vital Rates of Loreto (cont.)

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1724 1728 1729 1731 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1753 1754 1756 1759 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1777 1793 1798 1799 1802 1803

6113 6854 6933 7048 6077 4284 1937 2099 2234 1756 2246 2422 2789 2855 2946 3028 3195 3276 3398 3732 3754 4023 4398 4708 4659 4537 2395 2425 2462 1451 1261 1276 1223 1046 1067

1543 1629 1574 1546 1484 968 549 612 486 486 560 635 703 738 745 777 804 798 799 807 819 853 1235 969 980 988 544 561 625 344 268 261 247

380 413 463 413 263 106 129 94 131 122 163 209 246 195 207 192 275 208 217 252 224 216 234 245 232 214 198 131 162 56 71 71 46 48 65

165 221 342 262 986 565 1321 104 917 67 55 114 122 103 111 110 91 146 96 88 95 115 208 202 306 264 2108 68 104 127 54 97 73 49 45

64.4a 62.0a 67.6 59.9a 38.1 22.1a 23.4 48.5 62.4 54.6 92.8 93.1 92.9 69.9 75.2 65.2 90.8 65.1 66.2 70.3 60.0 56.0 53.5a 52.5 49.3 46.5 43.6 54.7 66.8 36.8a 57.1a 54.5a 36.1 41.2 62.1

28.0a 33.2a 49.9 38.0a 142.8 119.1a 239.2 53.7 436.9 54.6 31.3 50.8 47.2 36.9 38.9 37.3 30.1 45.7 29.3 24.6 25.5 29.8 47.6a 43.3 65.0 56.7 464.6 28.4 42.9 83.4a 43.4a 74.5a 57.2 42.1 43.2

4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.1 4.4 3.5 3.4 4.6 3.6 4.0 3.8 4.0 3.9 4.0 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.3 4.6 4.6 4.7 3.6 4.9 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.3 3.9 4.2 4.7 4.9 5.0

a Estimated. b afs – Average Family Size.

227

4.7

The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions

145

The Population of Candelaria mission

Year 1643 1647 1650 1657 1664 1667 1671 1676 1682 1691 1702 1707 1708 1710 1714 1715

Population 1490 1077 2016a 1471 2441a 2363a 2100 1991 1868 2508 2596 2354 2325 2849 3111 3178

Year

Population

Year

Population

1716 1717 1719 1720 1724 1728 1729 1731 1732 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740

3276 3275 2641 2596 2863 3294 3284 3317 3277 3134 3107 3049 3039 1518 1503 1441

1741 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1759

1639 1683 1764 1814 1881 1933 2017 2031 2083 2202 2253 2266 2338 2409 2428 2585

a Includes the population of Santos Cosme mission.

The Population of Candelaria Department in 1807

Mission Candelaria Santa Ana Loreto San Ignacio Miní Corpus Christi la Santísima Trinidad Jesús de Tavarangué Ytapúa

Population 1,240 1,345 1,130 915 2,270 1,039 937 2,109

Year Population 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1772 1783 1785 1793 1798 1799 1802 1803

2644 2687 2724 2723 2817 2879 2927 3064 3077 1513 1490 1490 1433 1365 1334 1400

146

Appendix 1

The Population and Vital Rates of Candelaria

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1691 1702 1707 1708 1719 1724 1728 1729 1731 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1753 1754 1756 1759 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1793 1798

2508 2596 2354 2325 2641 2863 3294 3284 3317 3134 3107 3049 3039 1518 1503 1441 1639 1764 1814 1881 1933 2017 2031 2083 2253 2266 2409 2585 2724 2723 2817 2879 2927 3064 1490 1433

663 622 682 695 520 626 651 655 693 702 649 611 631 333 352 382 410 482 503 523 528 549 529 539 541 560 595 613 647 661 668 682 709 754 370 339

229c 199 170 242 223 213 205 184 235 196 170 136 122 103 146 65 71 91 153 198 178 181 201 181 200 173 128 155 174 156 174 215 162 222 102 62

125 114 141 170 94 143 118 133 151 246 194 150 124 1532 79 80 98 97 95 129 111 103 213 84 94 86 101 144 126 138 147 121 120 130 91 100

87.7a 79.3a 72.1a 101.5 88.8a 76.3a 63.9a 55.9 72.7a 60.7 54.3a 43.8 40.0 33.2 96.6 43.3 49.3 54.1 86.7 109.2 94.6 93.6 99.7 89.1 90.8 76.8 54.8 60.2a 64.8 57.3 63.9 76.3 56.3 75.9 69.0a 42.2a

47.9a 5.4a 60.7a 71.3 37.4a 1.2a 36.8a 40.4 46.7a 76.3 62.0a 48.3 40.7 494.4 52.3 53.2 68.0 57.6 53.9 71.1 59.0 53.3 105.6 41.4 42.7 38.2 43.2 56.0a 46.9 50.7 54.0 43.0 41.7 44.4 61.5a 68.0a

3.8 4.2 3.5 3.4 5.1 4.6 5.1 5.0 4.8 4.5 4.8 5.0 4.8 4.6 4.3 3.8 4.0 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.1 4.1 4.0 4.1

147

The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

1799 1802 1803

1365 1334 1400

331

64 78 73

297

Burials 76 65 67

cbr

cdr

afsb

44.7 58.1 54.7

53.0 48.4 50.2

4.1 4.7

a Estimated. b afs – Average Family Size. c And seven baptismss of adults. The Population of Santa Ana mission

Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1643 1647 1650 1657 1664 1667 1671 1676 1682 1691 1702 1707 1708 1710 1714 1715

850 779 822 1024 1316 1300 1318 1352 1415 1758 3100 1883 2444 2514 2800 2631

1716 1717 1719 1720 1724 1728 1729 1731 1732 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740

2961 3032 3104 3117 3600 3788 4266 4527 4584 3916 4278 4055 3985 4343 4397 4533

1741 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1759

4505 4632 4331 4214 4386 4458 4787 4778 4814 4622 4780 4944 5071 5040 5166 5954

Year Population 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1772 1784 1785 1793 1798 1799 1802 1803

5926 5606 5231 4091 4001 4161 4193 4334 5645 1753 1747 1454 1307 1329 1464 1310

The Population and Vital Rates of Santa Ana

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1691 1702 1707 1708

1758 3100 1883 2444

444 542 562 565

114 142 140 146

56 77 89 95

67.1a 65.3a 85.3a 86.8

32.9a 30.9a 48.6a 56.5

4.0 4.3 3.4 4.3

148

Appendix 1

The Population and Vital Rates of Santa Ana (cont.)

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

1719 1724 1728 1729 1731 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1753 1754 1756 1759 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1793 1798 1799 1802 1803

3104 3600 3788 4266 4527 3916 4278 4055 3985 4343 4397 4533 4505 4331 4214 4386 4458 4787 4778 4814 4780 4944 5040 5954 5231 4091 4001 4161 4193 4334 1454 1307 1286 1464 1310

707 832 930 940 981 891 921 816 878 890 922 975 1031 1181 993 1018 1035 1090 1094 1099 1119 1182 1194 1362 1311 989 992 986 1053 1131 347 302 304 N/A 365

195 242 260 240 245 90 163 138 139 274 264 243 336 320 241 300 276 308 291 253 303 308 324 382 385 228 243 316 244 345 106 86 71 73 89

154 1–7 116 145 125 484 110 325 83 94 109 115 259 125 106 186 130 129 344 178 141 144 181 285 487 262 331 166 235 143 123 110 76 60 81

63.7a 69.8a 71.4a 63.4 55.6a 19.6 38.6a 32.3 34.3 68.8 60.8 55.3 74.1 69.1 55.7 71.2 62.9 69.1 60.8 53.0 65.6 64.4 63.9 65.7a 68.7 43.6 59.4 79.0 68.6 82.3 72.1a 64.6a 54.3 56.5 60.8

a Estimated. b afs – Average Family Size.

cdr

afsb

50.3a 4.4 30.9a 4.3 31.8a 4.1 38.3 4.5 28.4a 4.6 185.0 4.4 26.0a 4.6 76.0 5.0 20.5 4.5 23.6 4.9 28.6 4.8 26.2 4.7 57.1 4.4 27.0 3.7 21.5 4.2 44.1 4.3 29.6 4.3 28.7 4.4 71.9 4.4 37.3 4.4 30.5 4.3 30.1 4.2 35.7 4.2 49.0a 4.4 86.9 4.0 50.1 4.1 80.9 4.0 41.5 4.2 56.5 4.0 34.1 3.8 83.6a 4.2 82.5a 4.3 58.2 4.2 46.4 N/A 55.3 3.6

149

The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions The Population of La Cruz mission

Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1643 1647 1650 1657 1664 1667 1671 1676 1682 1691 1702 1707 1708 1710 1711 1714

1300 1472 N/A 1514 N/A N/A N/A 2212 2251 2915 3851 4159 4139 4729 4755 4824

1715 1716 1717 1719 1720 1724 1728 1729 1731 1732 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739

4912 5275 5481 3193 3069 3615 4057 4114 4573 4746 5374 4369 4304 4444 3853 2167

1740 1741 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757

2163 2314 2445 2540 2656 2755 2589 2575 2410 2434 2625 2430 2573 3123 2982 3148

Year Population 1759 1760 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1772 1783 1793 1797 1799 1801 1802 1803

3239 3342 3044 3541 3566 3197 2546 3243 3402 3746 3871 3331 3165 3238 3458 3542

The Population and Vital Rates of La Cruz

Year 1691 1702 1707 1708 1719 1724 1728 1729 1731 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738

Population 2915 3851 4159 4139 3193 3615 4057 4114 4573 5374 4369 4304 4444 3853

Families 688 865 849 878 603 691 912 904 1022 1053 995 940 919 632

Baptisms 161 279 260 243 114 284 344 323 435 261 322 320 306 205

Burials 115 138 368 217 108 147 204 212 113 863 206 206 272 629

cbr

cdr

afsb

56.1a 75.2a 60.9a 58.4 35.8a 81.7 87.8a 79.6 102.3a 55.0 75.7a 73.2 71.1 46.1

40.1a 37.2a 86.2a 52.2 33.9a 42.3a 52.1a 52.3 26.6a 181.8 48.4a 47.2 63.2 141.5

4.2 4.5 4.9 4.7 5.3 3.4 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.1 4.4 4.6 4.8 6.1

150

Appendix 1

The Population and Vital Rates of La Cruz (cont.)

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

1739 1740 1741 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1753 1754 1756 1759 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1793 1797 1799 1802

2167 2163 2314 2540 2656 2755 2589 2575 2410 2434 2430 2573 2982 3239 3044 3541 3566 3197 2546 3243 3871 3331 3458 3542

420 472 538 578 567 585 601 615 612 650 662 680 708 739 764 760 777 663 692 724 1053 882 N/A 841

65 191 128 193 175 221 180 189 199 236 204 227 240 211 201 195 288 173 194 174 322 242 251 215

1605 186 86 81 111 115 103 112 454 129 113 133 287 138 122 93 113 712 170 61 294 532 168 153

cbr 16.9 88.1 59.2 79.0 68.9 83.2 65.3 73.0 77.3 97.9 77.7 93.4 113.0 66.7a 67.8a 64.1 81.3 48.5 60.7 68.3 83.8a 66.8a 77.5 60.6

cdr

afsb

416.6 5.2 85.8 4.6 39.8 4.3 33.1 4.4 43.7 4.7 43.3 4.7 37.4 4.3 43.3 4.2 176.3 3.9 53.5 3.8 43.1 3.7 54.7 3.8 135.2 4.2 43.6a 4.4 41.2a 4.0 30.6 4.7 47.7 4.8 199.6 4.8 53.2 3.7 24.0 4.5 76.5a 3.7 146.9a 3.8 51.9 N/A 44.3 4.2

a Estimated. b afs – Average Family Size. The Population of San Miguel mission

Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1643 1647 1657 1667 1676

1860 1165 2101 N/A 3830

1715 1716 1717 1719 1720

2823 2876 2909 3401 3598

1741 1743 1744 1745 1746

4974 5436 6611 6675 6852

Year Population 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765

4534 4038 3202 2726 2864

151

The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1682 1690 1691 1694 1698 1702 1705 1707 1708 1710 1711 1714

3740 4195 4269 4592 1885 2197 3107 3100 3188 3081 3254 2972

1724 1728 1729 1731 1732 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740

3972 4569 4710 4904 4859 4466 4073 4156 4378 4522 4741 4740

1747 1748 1749 1750 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1759 1760

6765 6898 6695 6888 7047 6229 6450 6460 1036 2972 4995 5057

Year Population 1766 1767 1772 1783 1784 1793 1797 1798 1799 1801

3011 3164 2118 1973 1973 2334 1850 1772 1738 1664

The Population and Vital Rates of San Miguel

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1690 1691 1694 1698 1702 1705 1707 1708 1719 1724 1728 1729 1731 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740

4195 4269 4592 1885 2197 3107 3100 3188 3401 3972 4569 4710 4904 4466 4073 4156 4378 4522 4741 4740

1057 1100 1290 630 636 695 715 726 835 890 980 993 993 986 940 930 994 1042 1081 1122

165 247 138 138 197 192 145 208 188 246 231 256 252 146 184 213 226 304 216 251

141 85 206 118 135 99 130 116 91 64 110 128 131 536 75 130 91 120 146 96

39.6a 58.9 29.6a 74.0a 92.3a 63.7a 47.0a 67.1 56.9a 64.9a 51.9a 56.0 52.7a 30.1 46.4a 53.0 54.4 69.4 47.8 52.9

33.8a 20.3 44.2a 63.3a 63.2a 32.8a 42.1a 37.4 27.5a 16.9a 24.7a 28.0 27.4a 110.3 18.5a 32.4 21.9 27.4 32.3 20.3

4.0 3.9 3.6 3.0 4.5 4.5 3.9 4.4 4.1 4.5 4.7 4.7 4.9 4.1 4.3 4.5 4.4 4.3 4.4 4.2

152

Appendix 1

The Population and Vital Rates of San Miguel (cont.)

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1741 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1753 1754 1756 1759 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1793 1797 1798 1799

4974 6611 6675 6852 6765 6898 6695 6888 6229 6450 1036 4995 4038 3202 2726 2864 3011 3164 2334 1855 1772 1738

1166 1308 1314 1335 1343 1360 1353 1368 1472 1471 267 1025 1029 820 644 732 716 799 585 404 380 382

300 367 336 344 315 345 431 422 391 291 N/A 234 294 136 195 185 158 164 118 29 27 26

122 190 267 200 246 222 657 232 227 325 N/A 310 218 259 549 154 105 120 78 92 97 65

63.3 67.5 50.8 52.0 46.0 51.0 62.5 63.0 55.5 46.7 N/A 46.2a 64.8 33.7 60.9 67.9 35.2 54.5 51.4a 15.2a 14.6 14.7

25.7 35.0 40.4 30.3 35.9 32.8 95.2 34.7 32.2 52.2 N/A 61.1a 48.1 64.1 171.5 56.5 36.7 39.9 34.0a 48.0a 52.3 36.7

4.3 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.0 5.1 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.4 3.9 4.9 3.9 3.9 4.2 3.9 4.2 4.0 4.0 4.6 4.7 4.6

a Estimated. b afs – Average Family Size. The Population of San Luis Gonzaga Mission

Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1690 1691 1694 1698 1702

2922 3019 3280 3582 3473

1738 1739 1740 1741 1743

4718 4327 1998 2308 2722

1765 1766 1767 1772 1783

3432 3177 3535 3420 3500

153

The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1705 1707 1708 1710 1711 1714 1715 1716 1717 1719 1720 1724 1728 1729 1731 1732 1733 1735 1736

3935 3997 4422 4194 3339 3588 3830 4283 5326 4532 4324 5045 5821 5984 6149 6182 5619 4689 4445

1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764

2868 2968 3096 3275 3371 3354 3507 3476 3783 3967 4121 3828 3802 4069 4139 4313 4259 3705 3575

1784 1793 1797 1798 1799 1801

3500 3312 2571 2790 2473 2776

The Population and Vital Rates of San Luis Gonzaga

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1690 1691 1694 1698 1702 1705 1707 1708 1719 1724 1728

2922 3019 3280 3582 3473 3935 3997 4422 4532 5045 5821

840 900 886 920 943 998 1017 1014 1043 1144 1273

165 245 221 200 269 223 263 377 315 339 363

126 87 167 102 174 123 118 150 192 177 257

58.2a 83.9 68.5a 57.4a 70.6a 58.2a 68.3a 94.3 71.4a 69.4a 63.5a

44.5a 29.8 51.8a 29.3a 51.5a 32.1a 30.6a 37.5 43.6a 36.2a 45.0a

3.5 3.4 3.7 3.9 3.7 3.9 3.9 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.6

154

Appendix 1

The Population and Vital Rates of San Luis Gonzaga (cont.)

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

1729 1731 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1753 1754 1756 1759 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1793 1797 1798 1799

5984 6149 5619 4689 4445 4718 4327 1998 2308 2432 2868 2968 3096 3275 3371 3354 3507 3783 3967 3828 4069 4259 3705 3575 3432 3177 3535 3312 2571 2790 2473

1340 1335 1326 1010 899 909 909 393 504 570 695 738 744 771 800 812 830 844 821 701 819 859 838 817 585 843 809 701 667 688 608

382 389 267 145 189 208 276 88 172 162 200 206 240 246 200 263 276 260 273 36 165 174 151 88 130 114 137 177 294 132 138

219 217 936 267 301 190 223 2445 71 64 74 142 98 91 114 305 117 228 142 N/A 125 110 245 653 119 118 192 192 180 105 121

a Estimated. b afs – Average Family Size.

cbr 65.6 65.1a 43.2 30.1a 35.6 46.8 58.5 20.3 87.0 70.2 73.5 71.8 80.9 79.5 61.1 78.0 82.3 69.4 72.2 8.7 49.7a 40.3 35.5 23.8 36.8 33.2 40.8 53.2a 119.7a 51.3 49.5

cdr

afsb

37.6 36.3a 151.4 55.5a 56.7 42.8 47.3 565.1 36.0 27.7 27.2 49.5 33.0 29.4 34.8 90.5 34.9 60.9 37.5 N/A 30.8a 25.5 57.5 176.2 33.3 34.4 57.2 57.7a 73.3a 40.8 43.4

4.5 4.6 4.2 4.6 5.1 5.2 4.8 5.1 4.6 4.3 4.1 4.0 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.1 4.2 4.5 4.8 5.5 5.0 5.0 4.4 5.8 3.8 3.8 4.1 4.7 3.9 4.1 4.1

155

The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions The Population of San Francisco de Borja Mission

Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1690 1691 1694 1698 1702 1705 1707 1708 1710 1711 1714 1715 1716 1717 1719 1720 1724 1728 1729 1731 1732 1733 1735 1736

2396 2735 2888 2688 2600 2572 2814 2897 3021 3081 3391 3514 3757 2673 2864 3391 2906 3366 3297 3629 3679 3658 3277 3358

1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763

3430 2998 3244 3291 3430 3871 3814 3924 4081 3233 3493 3541 3435 3487 3232 2841 3018 1668 1934 3911 3773 2957 2714 2602

1764 1765 1766 1767 1772 1783 1784 1793 1797 1798 1799 1801

2714 2602 2714 2602 2131 2906 2712 2154 2403 2267 2284 2413

The Population and Vital Rates of San Francisco de Borja

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1690 1691 1692 1694

2396 2735 – 2888

658 667 – 701

188 252 257 224

137 114 – 142

80.2a 105.2 107.3 79.8a

58.4a 47.6 – 50.6a

3.6 3.6 – 4.1

156

Appendix 1

The Population and Vital Rates of San Francisco de Borja (cont.)

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1698 1702 1703 1705 1707 1708 1711 1712 1715 1716 1717 1719 1720 1721 1724 1725 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750

2688 2600 – 2572 2814 2897 3081 – 3391 3514 3757 2673 2864 – 2906 – 3366 3297 – 3629 3679 3658 3277 3358 3430 2998 3244 3291 3430 3814 3924 4081 3233 3493 3541 3435

695 780 – 755 757 778 771 – 834 835 843 524 548 – 574 – 774 609 – 687 696 675 549 571 577 450 450 570 670 709 728 770 599 633 650 632

208 200 254 209 235 233 190 252 277 262 285 205 168 128 173 203 242 91 238 281 232 147 228 201 216 144 139 189 192 247 205 225 162 143 180 231

138 144 – 144 103 150 – – – – – 92 – – 97 – 191 260 – 128 – 359 90 116 111 192 129 88 103 116 151 134 142 148 328 131

79.5a 78.6a 97.7 83.4a 87.6a 82.8 62.9 87.8 82.2 77.3 81.1 80.1a 62.9 44.7 61.4a 69.9 71.9a 38.5 72.2 80.8a 63.9 40.0 71.1a 56.1 62.5 42.0 46.4 58.3 58.3 63.8 53.8 57.3 39.7 44.7 51.5 65.2

52.7a 56.6a – 57.4a 38.4a 53.3 – – – – – 35.9a – – 34.3a

3.9 3.3 – 3.4 3.7 3.7 4.0 – 4.1 4.2 4.5 5.1 5.2 – 5.1

56.7a 109.9 – 36.8a – 97.6 30.4a 49.1 33.1 56.0 43.2 27.1 31.3 30.0 65.8 34.2 34.8 45.8 93.9 37.0

4.4 5.4 – 5.3 5.3 5.4 6.0 5.9 6.0 6.7 7.2 5.8 5.1 5.4 5.4 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.5 5.5

157

The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

cdr

afsb

1753 1754 1756 1759 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1793 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811

3232 2841 1668 3911 2714 2602 2714 2602 2714 2602 2154 2403 2267 2284

622 522 356 737 598 558 489 548 499 521 649 517 521 499

141 180 72 192 97 121 187 143 134 100 154 173 144 147

136 92 42 113 156 170 341 378 165 69 118 160 136 118 88 97 100 91 68 62 64 69 64 262 75 70

40.4 55.7 23.9 50.1a 32.8 44.6 71.9 49.4 48.6 39.2 72.7a 72.4a 60.0 64.8

39.0 28.5 13.9 29.5a 52.8 62.6 131.1 130.7 59.9 27.1 55.7a 67.0a 56.6 52.1

5.2 5.4 4.7 5.3 4.5 4.7 5.9 5.0 5.7 5.0 3.3 4.7 4.4 4.6

2413

163 109 105 161 144 147 132 133

a Estimated. b afs – Average Family Size. Baptisms of Adults Recorded at San Francisco de Borja, in selected years

Year

Baptisms of Adults

Year

Baptisms of Adults

1687 1688 1689 1690

1 10 46 19

1702 1703 1704 1705

33 30 16 19

158

Appendix 1

Baptisms of Adults Recorded at San Francisco de Borja, in selected years (cont.)

Year

Baptisms of Adults

Year

Baptisms of Adults

1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1696 1697 1698 1699 1701

6 12 25 16 15 5 4 4 8 10

1707 1721 1725 1726 1727 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732

1 1 11 1 22 4 8 29 13 31

Source: Relacion de los Bautismos del Pueblo de San Francisco de Borja desde el año de su fundación en 1687 hasta el presente año de 1732, CA.

The Population and Vital Rates of Jesús María de lós Guenoas

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

Burials

cbr

1690 1694 1698 1702 1705 1708 1714 1715 1716 1717 1719

334 298 200 200 288 303 357 281 300 283 238

74 89 80 79 87 28

51 44 30 32 41 34

38 41 24 29 17 33

158.7a 149.2a 154.6a 162.4a 155.3a 112.6a

51

25

18

108.2a

a Estimated. b afs – Average Family Size.

cdr

afsb

118.4a 4.5 139.0a 3.4 123.7a 2.5 147.2a 2.5 64.4a 3.0 109.3a 10.8

77.9a

4.7

159

The Population and Vital Rates of the Guaraní Missions The Population of Santo Ángel Custodio Mission

Year

Population

Year

Population

Year

Population

1707 1708 1710 1711 1714 1715 1716 1717 1719 1720 1724 1728 1729 1731 1732 1733 1735 1736

2879 3074 2691 2899 3926 3194 3239 3470 3592 2899 4052 4512 4745 4601 5085 4025 4557 4336

1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756

4888 4921 5163 5228 5199 4703 4824 4818 4758 4957 5105 4858 5142 5275 5417 5421 5692 2531

1757 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1772 1783 1784 1785 1793 1797 1798 1799

3368 4095 4071 N/A 3863 3603 3112 2473 3710 2362 2039 1926 1968 N/A 1448 990 984 782

Year Population 1801

1092

The Population and Vital Rates of Santo Ángel Custodio

Year

Population

1707 1708 1711 1712 1714 1715 1716 1717 1719 1720 1721 1724

2879 3074 3088 – 2899 3926 3194 3239 3470 3592 – 4052

Families 737 740 632 – 683 732 765 795 881 911 – 924

Baptisms 181 222 482 218 264 190 232 226 210 246 224 232

Burials 143 138 109 – 207 – 138 – 80 185 – 89

cbr

cdr

afsb

63.7a 77.1 177.5a 37.2 93.0a 66.6 59.1 68.9 62.9a 70.9 62.4 59.4a

50.3a 47.9 40.2a – 71.5a – 35.2 – 24.0a 53.3 – 22.8a

3.9 4.2 4.9 – 4.2 5.4 4.2 4.2 4.0 3.9 – 4.4

160

Appendix 1

The Population and Vital Rates of Santo Ángel Custodio (cont.)

Year

Population

Families

Baptisms

1725 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1753 1754 1756 1759 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1793 1797 1798 1799

– 4512 4745 – 4601 5085 4025 4557 4336 4888 4921 5163 5228 5199 4824 4818 4758 4957 5105 4858 5142 5417 5421 2531 4095 3863 3603 3112 2473 3710 2362 1448 990 984 782

– 915 938 – 1014 1058 1065 945 930 986 986 1102 1268 1138 1150 1099 1133 1142 1134 1122 1166 1180 1134 648 977 945 880 726 593 658 715 341 356 322 282

235 168 262 252 274 226 194 118 201 228 201 258 239 295 293 294 287 323 174 291 307 298 324 20 180 160 137 158 75 142 143 49 53 40 48

a Estimated. b afs – Average Family Size.

Burials

cbr

– 270 138 – 133 – 336 185 219 164 153 256 140 198 189 289 217 218 183 358 153 182 255 161 277 285 258 583 58 78 105 72 68 64 67

58.0 36.4a 58.1 53.1 61.4a 49.1 38.2 25.5a 44.7 52.6 41.1 52.4 46.3 56.4 62.3 60.9 59.6 67.5 35.1 57.0 63.2 56.5 59.8 3.5 42.9a 40.1a 35.5 43.9 24.1 57.4 60.5 33.3a 52.7a 40.4 48.8

cdr

afsb

– – 58.5a 4.4 30.6 5.0 – 29.8a 4.5 – 4.8 66.1 3.8 40.0a 4.8 48.7 4.7 37.8 5.0 31.3 5.0 52.4 4.7 27.1 4.9 37.9 4.6 40.2 4.2 60.0 4.4 45.0 4.2 45.5 4.3 36.9 4.5 70.1 4.3 31.5 4.4 33.6 4.6 47.6 4.8 28.3 3.9 66.1a 4.2 71.5a 4.1 66.8 4.1 163.2 4.3 18.6 4.2 31.5 5.6 44.5 3.3 53.7a 10.0 67.7a 2.8 68.7 3.1 68.1 2.8

Selected Bibliography Archival Sources Archivo General de la Nación, Buenos Aires, Argentina – AGN. Archivo General de las Indias, Sevilla, Spain – AGI. Archivum Romannum Societatis Iesu, Vatican City – ARSI. Biblioteca Nacional, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil- BN. Coleção De Angelis, Biblioteca Nacional, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil – CA.

Published Documents Cortesão, Jaime, Tratado de Madri: antecedentes-Colonia do Sacramento (1669–1749). Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca Nacional, 1954. Cortesão, Jaime, Jesuitas y Bandeirantes no Tape (1613–1641). Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca Nacional, 1969a. Cortesão, Jaime, Tratado do Madri A Conquista do Sete Povos (1750–1802). Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca Nacional, 1969b. de Remesal, Antonio, Historia General De Las Indias Ocidentales, Y Particular De La Governacion de Chiapay Guatemala Escrivese juntamente los principios de la Religion de Nuestro Glorioso Padre Santo Domingo, y de las demas Religiones. 2 volumes. Guatemala: Tipografia Nacional, 1932. de Remesal, Antonio, Historia de la provincia de S. Vicente de Chyapa y Guatemala de la orden de nro. Glorioso Padre Sancto Domingo: escrivense juntamente los principios desta religion de las Yndias Occidentales y lo secular de la Governacion de Guatemala. Madrid: Francisco de Angulo, 1619. Vianna, Helio, Jesuítas e bandeirantes no Uruguai (1611–1758). Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca Nacional, 1951. Ximénez, Francisco, Historia de la Provincia de San Vicente de Chiapa y Guatemala de la Orden de Predicadores. 3 volumes Guatemala: Tipografia Nacional, 1929–1931.

Published Sources Alden, Dauril, Royal government in colonial Brazil: with special reference to the administration of the Marquis of Lavradio, Viceroy, 1769–1779. Berkeleey and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1968.

162

Selected Bibliography

Alden, Dauril, “The undeclared war of 1773–1777: climax of Luso-Spanish Platine rivalry,” The Hispanic American Historical Review 41: 1 (1961), 55–74. Aguirre, Andres, “Conflictos interétnicos en frontera sur Hispano-Portuguesa. El caso de Rio Grande de San Pedro durante la ocupación española de 1763–1777,” Tefros 12: 1 (2014), 6–25. Altman, Ida, The War for Mexico’s West: Indians and Spaniards in Nueva Galicia, 1524– 1550. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2010. Alvarez Kern, Arno, Arqueologia Historica Missionero. Porto Alegre: EDIPUCRS, 1998. Anderson, John L, “Piracy and world history: An economic perspective on maritime predation,” Journal of World History (1995), 175–199. Austin, Shawn Michael, “Beyond the Missions: Ethnogenesis in Colonial Paraguay, 1556–1700,” Ph.D. dissertation, University of New Mexico, 2014. Avellaneda, Mercedes, “Orígenes de la alianza jesuita-guaraní y su consolidación en el siglo XVII,” Memoria Americana 8 (1999), 173–200. Avellaneda, Mercedes, “El ejército guaraní en las reducciones jesuitas del Paraguay,” História Unisinos 9: 1 (2005), 19–34. Avellaneda, Mercedes, Guaraníes, criollos y jesuitas: Luchas de poder en las Revoluciones Comuneras del Paraguay Siglos XVII y XVIII. Asunción: Editorial Tiempo de Historia, 2014. Avellaneda, Mercedes, and Lia Quarleri. “Las milicias guaraníes en el Paraguay y Río de la Plata: alcances y limitaciones (1649–1756),” Estudos Ibero-Americanos 33: 1 (2007), 109–132. Archer, Christon, The Army in Bourbon Mexico, 1760–1810. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1977. Barbier, Jacques, Reform and politics in Bourbon Chile, 1755–1796. Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 1980. Bécker, Felix, “La guerra guaranítica desde una nueva perspectiva: historia, ficción e historiografía,” Boletín americanista 32 (1982), 7–37. Bethell, Leslie, ed, Colonial Brazi. Cambridge: University Press, 1984. Bisonhim, Kelli, “Em busca da estrutura sócio-espacial da redução de San Francisco de Borja: a sobrevivência do patrimônio arqueológico,” Master’s Thesis, Pontifica Universidades Católica Do Rio Grande do Sul, 2011. Bolcato Custódio, Luiz Antônio, “Ordenamientos urbanos y arquitectónicos en el sistema reduccional jesuítico Guaraní de la Paracuaria: Entre su normativa y su realización,” PhD Thesis, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 2010. Boxer, Charles, The golden age of Brazil, 1695–1750: growing pains of a colonial society. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1962. Brizzo, Victoria, “Un análisis de las manifestaciones del poder en la reducción jesuítica ‘Los Santos Mártires del Japón (Siglo XVIII)’,” tesis de grado, Escuela de Antropología, Universidad Nacional de Rosario, 2003.

Selected Bibliography

163

Caldwell, John C. “Social upheaval and fertility decline,” Journal of family history 29: 4 (2004), 382–406. Caletti Garciadiego, Bárbara, “Milicias y Guaraníes en Yapeyú: La defensa de la “Frontera del Uruguay” en los albores del siglo XIX,” Prohistoria 23 (2015), 47–70. Campbell, Leon G, The military and society in colonial Peru, 1750–1810. Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1978. Carbonell de Masy, S.J., Rafael, Estrategias de desarrollo rural en los pueblos guaraníes (1609–1767). Barcelona: Antoni Bosch Editor, 1992. Carbonell de Masy, S.J., Teresa Blumers Rafael and Norberto Levinton, La reducción jesuítica de Santos Cosme y Damián: Su historia, su economía y su arquitectura, 1633– 1797. Asunción: Markografik, 2003. Cerman, Markus, “Bohemia after the thirty years’ war: some theses on population structure, marriage and family,” Journal of Family History 19: 2 (1994), 149–175. Cesar, Paulo, and Emir Reitano, coordinators, Hombres, poder y conflicto: Estudios sobre la frontera colonial sudamericana y su crisis. La Plata: Universidad Nacional de La Plata, 2015. Chmyz, Igor, “Pesquisas arqueológicas nas reduções jesuíticas do Paraná,” Revista do Círculo de Estudos Bandeirantes. Curitiba 15 (2001), 39–58. Coello de la Rosa, Alexandre, “La doctrina de Juli a debate (1575–1585),” Revista de estudios extremeños 63: 2 (2007), 951–989. Cooter, Roger, ‘Of war and epidemics: Unnatural couplings, problematic conceptions,” Social History of Medicine 16: 2 (2003), 283–302. Crosby, Alfred, “Virgin soil epidemics as a factor in the aboriginal depopulation in America,” The William and Mary Quarterly: A Magazine of Early American History 33: 2 (1976), 289–299. Cushner, Nicholas, Lords of the land: sugar, wine, and Jesuit estates of coastal Peru, 1600– 1767. Albany: SUNY Press, 1980. Cushner, Nicholas, Jesuit Ranches and the Agricultural Development of Colonial Argentina, 1650–1767. Albany: SUNY Press, 1982. Deeds, Susan M., “Pushing the borders of Latin American mission history,” Latin American Research Review 39: 2 (2004), 211–220. De Quesada, Alejandro, Spanish colonial fortifications in North America 1565–1822. ­Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2010. De Waal, Alex, Famine that Kills: Darfur, Sudan. Oxford: Oxford University Press on Demand, 2005. De Zulueta, Julian, “Health and military factors in Vernon’s failure at Cartagena,” The Mariner’s Mirror 78: 2 (1992), 127–141. Dobyns, Henry, “An appraisal of techniques with a new hemispheric estimate,” Current Anthropology 7: 4 (1966), 395–416. Dobyns, Henry, Their number become thinned: Native American population dynamics in eastern North America. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1983.

164

Selected Bibliography

Erickson, Kirstin C., “‘They will come from the other side of the sea’: Prophecy, Ethnogenesis, and Agency in Yaqui Narrative,” Journal of American folklore 116: 462 (2003), 465–482. Erlandson, Jon McVey, “The making of Chumash tradition: Replies to Haley and ­Wilcoxon,” Current anthropology 39: 4 (1998), 477–510. Ganson, Barbara, The Guaraní under Spanish rule in the Río de la Plata. Stanford: ­Stanford University Press, 2005. Gibson, Charles, The Aztecs Under Spanish Rule: A History of the Indians of the Valley of Mexico 1519–1810. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1964. Gilmore, Kathleen, “The Indians of Mission Rosario,” in David Orr and Daniel Crozier, eds., The Scope of Historical Archaeology: Essays in Honor of John L. Cotter (Philadelphia: Temple University, 1984), 163–191. Greentree, David, A Far-Flung Gamble-Havana 1762. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2010. Gutiérrez, Ramón, “Propuestas urbanísticas de los sistemas misionales de los jesuitas,” In Sandra Negro Tua, and Manuel María Marzal, eds, Un reino en la frontera: las misiones jesuitas en la América colonial. Quito: Abya Yala, 2000, 173–183. Gutmann, Myron P, “Putting crises in perspective. The impact of war on civilian populations in the seventeenth century,” In Annales de démographie historique (1977), 101–128. Hackett, Charles Wilson, ed., Revolt of the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico and Otermin’s attempted reconquest, 1680–1682. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1942. Haley, Brian D., “Tribal synthesis or ethnogenesis? Campbell’s interpretation of Haley and Wilcoxon,” The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 13: 1 (2007), 219–222. Haley, Brian D., and Larry R. Wilcoxon, “Anthropology and the making of Chumash tradition,” Current anthropology 38: 4 (1997), 761–794. Haley, Brian D., and Larry R. Wilcoxon, “Reply [to Erlandson et al., The making of Chumash tradition],” Current Anthropology 39: 4 (1998), 501–508. Haley, Brian D., and Larry R. Wilcoxon, “How Spaniards became Chumash and other tales of ethnogenesis,” American Anthropologist 107: 3 (2005), 432–445. Helmar, Marie, “Juli, un experimento misionero de los jesuitas en el altiplano andino (siglo XVI),” Boletin IRA 12 (1983), 191–216. Hernández, S.J., Pablo, Organización social de las doctrinas guaraníes de la Compañía de Jesús, 2 vols. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili, 1913. Hill, Jonathan D., Long Term Patterns of Ethnogenesis in Indigenous Amazonia. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2013. Hoffman, Paul E, The Spanish Crown and the Defense of the Caribbean, 1535–1585: Precedent, Patrimonialism, and Royal Parsimony, Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1999. Howard, Michael, War in European history. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Selected Bibliography

165

Hussey, Roland, “Spanish reaction to foreign aggression in the Caribbean to about 1680,” The Hispanic American Historical Review 9: 3 (1929), 286–302. Jackson, Robert H., “The 1781–1782 Smallpox Epidemic in Baja California,” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 3: 1 (1981a), 138–143. Jackson, Robert H., “Epidemic Disease and Population Decline in the Baja California Missions, 1697–1834,” Southern Calififornia Quarterly 63: 4 (1981b), 308–346. Jackson, Robert H., “Demographic patterns in the missions of central Baja California,” Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 6: 1 (1984), 91–112. Jackson, Robert H., Indian Demographic Decline: the Missions of Northwestern New Spain, 1687–1840. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1994a. Jackson, Robert H., Regional Markets and Agrarian Transformation in Bolivia: Cochabamba, 1539–1960. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1994b. Jackson, Robert H., “Congregation and Population Change in the Mission Communities of Northern New Spain: Cases From the Californias and Texas,” New Mexico Historical Review 69: 2 (April, 1994c), 163–183. Jackson, Robert H., “Demographic Patterns in the Jesuit Missions of the Rio de la Plata Region: The Case of Corpus Christi Mission, 1622–1802,” Colonial Latin American Historical Review 13: 4 (Fall 2004a), 337–366. Jackson, Robert H., “Una mirada a los patrones demográficos de las misiones jesuitas de Paraguay,” Fronteras de la Historia 9 (2004b), 129–178. Jackson, Robert H., “The Guaycuros, Jesuit and Franciscan Missionaries, and José de Gálvez: The Failure of Spanish Policy in Baja California,” Memoria Americana: Cuadernos de Ethnohistoria 12 (2004c), 221–233. Jackson, Robert H., Missions and the Frontiers of Spanish America: A Comparative Study of the Impact of Environmental, Economic, Political, and Socio-Cultural Variations on the Missions in the Rio de la Plata Region and on the Northern Frontier of New Spain. Scottsdale: Pentacle Press, 2005. Jackson, Robert H., “The Population and Vital Rates of the Jesuit Missions of Paraguay 1700–1767,” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 28: 3 (winter 2008a), 401–431. Jackson, Robert H., “The Post-Jesuit Expulsion Population of the Paraguay Missions, 1768–1803,” Revista de História Regional 13: 2 (2008b), 134–169. Jackson, Robert H., “Missions on the Frontiers of Spanish America,” Journal of Religious History 33: 3 (September 2009), 328–347. Jackson, Robert H., “Comprendiendo los efectos de las enfermedades del Viejo Mundo en los nativos americanos: la viruela en las Misiones Jesuíticas de Paraguay,” IHS Antiguos Jesuitas en Iberoamérica 2: 2 (2014), 88–133. Jackson, Robert H., Demographic Change and Ethnic Survival among the Sedentary Populations on the Jesuit Mission Frontiers of Spanish South America, 1609–1803: The Formation and Persistence of Mission Communities in a Comparative Context. Leiden: Brill Academic Publishers, 2015.

166

Selected Bibliography

Jackson, Robert H., Pames, Jonaces, and Franciscans in the Sierra Gorda: Mecos and Missionaries. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2017a. Jackson, Robert H., Frontiers of Evangelization: Indians in the Sierra Gorda and Chiquitos Missions. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2017b. Jackson, Robert H., “La población y tasas vitales de las misiones jesuíticas de Guaranies (Argentina, Brasil, Paraguay),” IHS. Antiguos jesuitas en Iberoamérica 5: 2 (juliodiciembre 2017c), 100–165. Jackson, Robert H. and Edward Castillo, Indians, Franciscans, and Spanish Colonization: The Impact of the Mission System on California Indians. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1995. Jones, Oakah, Pueblo Warriors & Spanish Conques. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1966. Knaut, A.L., The Pueblo revolt of 1680: conquest and resistance in seventeenth-century New Mexico. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2015. Kress, Margaret Kenney, and Mattie Austin Hatcher, trans. and eds., “Diary of a visit of inspection of the Texas missions made by Fray Gaspar Jose de Solis in the year 1767–68,” The Southwestern Historical Quarterly 35: 1 (1931), 28–76. Kuethe, Allan, Military Reform and Society in New Granada, 1773–1808. Gainesville: ­University Presses of Florida, 1978. Kuethe, Allan, and Kenneth J. Andrien, The Spanish Atlantic World in the Eighteenth Century: War and the Bourbon Reforms, 1713–1796. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Lane, Kris E, and Robert M. Levine, Pillaging the Empire: Piracy in the Americas, 1500–1750. London: Routledge, 2015. Langer, Erick and Robert H. Jackson, eds., The New Latin American Mission History. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1995. Langfur, Hal, “The Return of the Bandeira: Economic Calamity, Historical Memory, and Armed Expeditions to the Sertao in Minas Gerais, 1750–1808,” The Americas 61: 3 (2005), 429–461. Langfur, Hal, The forbidden lands: colonial identity, frontier violence, and the persistence of Brazil’s eastern Indians, 1750–1830. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2006. Levinton, Norberto, “La significación urbana del pueblo jesuítico de Yapeyú (1627–1817),” in Bartomeu Melía, Historia inacabada futuro incierto. Asunción: Centro de Estudios Paraguayos “Antonio Guasch,” 2002. Levinton, Norberto, “Las estancias de Nuestra Señora de los Reyes de Yapeyú: tenencia de la tierra por uso cotidiano, acuerdo interétnico y derecho natural (Misiones jesuíticas del Paraguay),” Revista complutense de historia de América 31 (2005), 33–51. Liebmann, Matthew, “The innovative materiality of revitalization movements: Lessons from the Pueblo Revolt of 1680,” American anthropologist 110: 3 (2008), 360–372.

Selected Bibliography

167

Linden, H. Vander, “Alexander VI and the Demarcation of the Maritime and Colonial Domains of Spain and Portugal, 1493–1494,” The American Historical Review 22: 1 (1916), 1–20. Maeder, Ernesto, Una Aproximación a las Misiones guaraníticas. Buenos Aires: Universidad Católica Argentina, 1996. Malaga Sabogal, Ximena, “Juli, la Roma de América: memoria, construcción y percepciones del pasado jesuita en un pueblo del altiplano,” Thesis for the licenciatura, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Mención: Antropología, 2011. Marichal, Carlos, and Matilde Souto Mantecón, “Silver and Situados: New Spain and the financing of the Spanish Empire in the Caribbean in the eighteenth century,” The Hispanic American Historical Review 74: 4 (1994), 587–613. Martínez-Cañavate, Pablo Ruiz, “Ciudad y territorio en las misiones jesuíticas de indios guaraníes,” La Compañía de Jesús y las artes. Nuevas perspectivas de investigación. Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza, 2014, 259–278. Martínez-Cañavate, Pablo Ruiz, “Reducciones jesuíticas del Paraguay: territorio y urbanismo,” PhD diss., Universidad de Granada, 2017. Martínez Martín, Carmen, and Rafael Carbonell de Masy, “Análisis comparativo de las «Cartas Anuas» de la provincia jesuítica del Paraguay (1618–1619) con dos documentos previos,” Revista Complutense de História de América 18 (1992), 159–159. McCourt, James, “Treaty of Tordesillas 1494,” Queensland History Journal 21: 2 (2010), 88–102. McDaniel, Josh M., “History and the Duality of Power in Community-based Forestry in Southeast Bolivia,” Development and Change 34: 2 (2003), 339–356. McEnroe, Sean F., “A Sleeping Army: The Military Origins of Interethnic Civic Structures on Mexico’s Colonial Frontier,” Ethnohistory 59: 1 (2012), 109–139. McNeill, John “Mosquito Empires: Ecology and War in the Greater Caribbean, 1620– 1914,” Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 36: 71 (2011), 290–292. Moorhead, Max, The presidio: bastion of the Spanish borderlands. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1991. Moreira Bento, Claudio, A guerra de de restauraçaõ do Rio Grande do Sul (1774–1776). Rio de Janeiro: Biblioteca do Exército Editora, 1996. Moya Pons, Frank, History of the Caribbean: plantations, trade, and war in the Atlantic world. Princeton: Markus Wiener Publishers, 2007. Munck, Thomas, Seventeenth century Europe: State, conflict and the social order in Europe 1598–1700. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1990. Nieto Velez, S.J., Armando, “Jesuitas en el mundo andino: las reducciones de Juli,” Revista Peruana de Historia Eclesiástica 2 (1994), 129–144.

168

Selected Bibliography

Nowell, Charles, “The Defense of Cartagena,” The Hispanic American Historical Review 42: 4 (1962), 477–501. Palmié, Stephan, and Francisco A. Scarano, eds., The Caribbean: a history of the region and its peoples. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013. Page, Carlos, La reducción jesuítica de Santa Rosa y su Capilla de Loreto. Asunción del Paraguay: Fotosíntesis editora, 2015. Parker, Geoffrey, Global crisis: war, climate change and catastrophe in the seventeenth century. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013. Pastells, S.J., Historia de la Compañía de Jesús en la Provincia del Paraguay. 9 vols. ­Madrid: self-published, 1912. Peterson, Jacqueline, “Ethnogenesis: Settlement and Growth of a ‘New People,’” American Indian Culture and Research Journal 6: 2 (1982), 23–64. Possamai, Paulo César, “O recrutamento militar na América Portuguesa: o esforço conjunto para a defesa da Colônia do Sacramento (1735–1737),” Revista de História 151 (2004), 151–180. Possamai, Paulo César, “A fundação da Colônia do Sacramento,” Mneme-Revista de Humanidades 5: 12 (2010). Powell, Philip Wayne, Soldiers, Indians & Silver: North America’s First Frontier War. Tempe: Center for Latin American Studies, Arizona State University, 1952. Powell, Philip Wayne, Mexico’s Miguel Caldera: the taming of America’s first frontier, 1548–1597 Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 1977. Prado, Fabrício Pereira, “Colônia do Sacramento: a situação na fronteira platina no século XVIII,” Horizontes antropológicos 9: 19 (2003), 79–104. Quarteri, Lia, “Gobierno y liderazgo jesuítico-guaraní en tiempos de guerra (1752–1756),” Revista de Indias 68: 243 (2008), 89–114. Quarteri, Lia, Rebelión y guerra en las fronteras del Plata: guaraníes, jesuitas e imperios coloniales. Buenos Aires: Fondo De Cultura Economica, 2009. Reeve, Mary-Elizabeth, “Amazonian Quichua in the western Amazon regional interaction sphere,” Tipití: Journal of the Society for the Anthropology of Lowland South America 12: 11 (2014), 14–27. Ricklis, Robert, The Karankawa Indians of Texas: An Ecologuical Study of Cultural Tradition and Change. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1996. Roller, Heather Flynn, “Colonial collecting expeditions and the pursuit of opportunities in the Amazonian Sertao, c. 1750–1800,” The Americas 66: 4 (2010), 435–467. Roller, Heather Flynn, Amazonian Routes: Indigenous Mobility and Colonial Communities in Northern Brazil. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2014. Rubert, Arlindo, Historia da Igreja no Rio Grande do Sul. Porto Alegre: EDIPUCRS, 1998. Saeger, James, The Chaco Mission Frontier: The Guaycuruan Experience. Tucson: ­University of Arizona Press, 2000.

Selected Bibliography

169

Sales, O.P., Observations On California, 1772–1790. Edited and translated by Charles N. Rudkin. Los Angeles: Dawson’s Bookshop, 1956. Salinas, María Luisa, and Pedro Miguel Omar Svriz Wucherer, “Liderazgo guaraní en tiempos de paz y de guerra. Los caciques en las reducciones franciscanas y jesuíticas, siglos XVII y XVIII,” Revista de Historia Militar 55: 110 (2011), 113–152. Sarreal, Julia, The Guaraní and Their Missions: A Socioeconomic History. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2014a. Sarreal, Julia, “Caciques as Placeholders in the Guarani Missions of Eighteenth-­Century Paraguay,” Colonial Latin American Review 23: 2 (2014b), 224–251. Schwartz, Stuart B. “Colonial Brazil, c. 1580-c. 1750: plantations and peripheries,” The Cambridge History of Latin America 2 (1984), 423–500. Sheridan, Richard B., “The Plantation Revolution and the Industrial Revolution, 1625– 1775,” Caribbean Studies 9: 3 (1969), 5–25. Soliday, Gerald, A community in conflict: Frankfurt society in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. Hanover, N.H., Published for Brandeis University Press by the University Press of New England, 1974. Sustersic, Bozidar Darko, “La presencia americana en el arte jesuítico-guaraní,” in ­Regina Maria AF Gadelha., Missões Guarani: impacto na sociedade contemporânea. Madrid: Univ Pontifica Comillas, 1999, 249–73. Svriz Wucherer, Pedro, “Jesuitas, guaraníes y armas. Milicias Guaraníes frente a los indios del Gran Chaco,” História Unisinos 15: 2 (2011), 281–293. Swanson, Carl, “American Privateering and Imperial Warfare, 1739–1748,” The William and Mary Quarterly: A Magazine of Early American History 42: 3 (1985), 357–382. Takeda, Kazuhisa, “Organización social de las misiones guaraníes: relación entre la parcialidad y la milicia,” Trabalho apresentado em: XIII Jornadas Internacionais sobre as Missões Jesuíticas: fronteiras e identidades: povos indígenas e missões religiosas Dourados: Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados, 2010. Takeda, Kazuhisa, “Cambio y continuidad del liderazgo indígena en el cacicazgo y en la milicia de las misiones jesuíticas: análisis cualitativo de las listas de indios guaraníes/Transition and continuity of the indigenous leadership in the kinship organization and in the militia of the jesuit missions: qualitative analysis of the name lists of guaraní indians.” Tellus 12: 23 (2012), 59–79. Takeda, Kazuhisa, “Las milicias guaraníes en las misiones jesuíticas del Río de la Plata: un ejemplo de la transferencia organizativa y tácticas militares de España a su ­territorio de ultramar en la primera época moderna,” Revista de Historia Social y de las Mentalidades 20: 2 (2016), 33–72. Tambs, Lewis A, “Brazil’s Expanding Frontiers,” The Americas 23: 2 (2004), 165–179. Theibault, John, “The Demography of the Thirty Years War Re-revisited: Günther Franz and his Critics,” German History 15: 1 (1997), 1–21.

170

Selected Bibliography

Tracy, Nicholas, Manila ransomed: The British assault on Manila in the seven years war. Exeter: University of Exeter Press, 1995. Voigtländer, Nico, and Hans-Joachim Voth, “The three horsemen of riches: Plague, war, and urbanization in early modern Europe,” Review of Economic Studies 80: 2 (2012), 774–811. Wade, Mariah, “Colonial Missions in the North American Southwest: Social Memory and Ethnogenesis,” CECS-Publicações/eBooks (2013), 253–265. Wilde. Guillermo, “Territorio y Etnogénesis misional en el Paraguay del siglo XVIII,” Fronteiras: Revista de História 11: 19 (2009a), 83–106 Wilde. Guillermo, Religión y poder en las misiones de guaraníes. Buenos Aires: Editorial Sb, 2009b. Wilde. Guillermo, “Jesuit Missions and the Guarani Ethnogenesis: Political Interactions, Indigenous Actors, and Regional Networks on the Southern Frontier of the Iberian Empires,” in Frank, Zephyr, ed., Big Water: The Making of the Borderlands Between Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 2018, 54–80.

Index Unless otherwise noted the missions listed in the index were in the Jesuit Paraguay Province. 1718–1719 smallpox epidemic 78 1738–1740 epidemic xiv, 78, 87, 90, 100 1817–1818 Luso-Brazilian invasion 8, 34 \“virgin soil\” epidemics xiv, 3, 24 Abipones 7 Alonso Rodríguez 33 Alta California 68, 89, 124 Antequera (Oaxaca City) 73 Antonio de Remesal 72 Antonio Rapôso Tabares 34 Apache 7 Apóstoles Mission 35–36, 57, 86, 95, 104, 105 Argentina 9, 11, 102, 115, 137 Asunción 10, 17, 19, 21, 78, 104, 107 Baja California 67–68, 88–90, 94, 97, 124, 136 Banda Oriental 5, 11, 17, 39, 41, 45, 51, 53, 57 bandeirante 10, 33, 63, 69, 74, 102, 104, 107, 111, 135–136 Bartolomé de las Casas 72 battle of Mbororé 8, 35, 109 battle of Tabalingal 52 Bernardo Nusdorffer 48, 49, 50, 51 Bourbon Reforms 3, 45, 81 Brazil 7, 8, 9, 33, 39, 42, 47, 52–53, 79, 104, 117, 137 Bruno de Zavala 42, 43 Buenos Aires 11, 17, 20–21, 40–44, 52, 78, 82, 139 Caaró 33 cabildo 37–38 cacicazgos 36, 75, 106–107 cacique 36, 38, 50 California missions 82, 88, 91, 97 Candelaria Mission 22, 33, 35–36, 38, 48, 50, 58, 74, 104–107, 145–147 carta anua 11–12, 18, 21 Cartagena 2

Castile 3 Chaco 7, 91, 118 Charrúa 41, 79, 117 Chiapa 73 Chiapas 67, 71–72 Chichimeca War 6 Chiquitos missions 3–4, 7, 76, 123 Chol 72 Chuj 72 Ciudad Real 72–73 Colonia do Sacramento 8, 10–11, 39–42, 44, 46–47, 50–53, 63, 80, 86, 102, 111, 113, 115 Comanches 7, 93 Comondú Mission (Baja California) 89–91 Comunero Rebellion 17, 43 Concepción Mission 36, 50, 57, 87, 104, 122 Corpus Christi Mission 36–38, 58–59, 74, 86, 104, 145 Corrientes 18–19, 40–41, 51 crop failure 47–48 Dominican missions 71 Dominicans 67, 72 Dr. Gaspar Francia 57 drought 17–18, 43 eastern missions 6, 20, 45, 47–48, 51, 53, 63, 67, 80, 83, 97, 102, 113, 115, 117, 120, 124, 135, 136 Emida de Nuestra Señora de Copacabana Mission 10 encomienda 9, 98 Epidemics 67, 76, 89 estancia of Ybicuy 113 estancias 18, 47, 50–51, 63, 113 famine 1, 17–18, 20, 38, 43, 47–48, 63, 77, 94, 100, 124, 135 Felix Orbina 50 flotas 2 Franciscan 41, 48, 77, 91–92

172 Francisco das Chagas Santos 57 French Revolution (1789) 63 Galveston Bay 91 Gaspar de Solis 92 Guadalupe Mission (Baja California) 88–89 Guairá 7, 9, 10, 33–34, 35, 63, 69, 102, 135, 136 Guananas 37 Guañanas 75 Guaraní 3–4, 6–10, 17, 20–23, 33–35, 39–43, 45, 47–50, 53, 57, 60–61, 63, 75, 77–78, 80, 83, 85, 98–99, 102, 107, 109, 111, 113, 117, 122–124, 135–137, 139 Guaraní-Jesuit alliance 7, 48 Guatemala 72 Guenoas 79, 117–118 Guerra da Restauração (1640) 35 Havana 2 Iberá Lake 18, 20 Iguaçu 33–34 Infanta Barbara 47 Itatín 9–10, 33, 63, 69 Jesuit missions 3–4, 7–8, 10–11, 17, 24, 34, 39–40, 63, 67–69, 72, 88, 117, 121, 123, 135–136 Jesuits 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 33–34, 35, 36, 37–38, 41, 44, 50, 51, 60, 67, 68, 69, 74, 75, 78, 79, 80, 81, 84, 86, 88, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 102, 103, 104, 106, 107, 109, 111, 112, 113, 115, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 124, 135, 136 Jesús de Tavarangue Mission 69, 115, 145 Jesús María Mission 10, 34 Jesús María de los Guenoas Mission 74, 79, 117–118, 158 José de Gálvez 89 José de Silva Paes 46 Juan del Castillo 33 Juan Gregorio Bazan de Pedraza 38 Karankawas 91–94 la Asunción del Acaraguá mission (La Cruz) Mission 35 Lacandón 72

Index La Cruz (la Asunción del Acaraguá) Mission 35, 50, 57, 79, 87, 104, 109–111, 149 Laguna 46 Laguna de los Patos 52 Lake Merim 52 La Purísima Concepción Mission (Baja California) 89–90 Lavaca Bay 91 Lipan Apaches 93 Loreto Mission 10, 19, 36, 58–59, 74, 80–81, 86, 99, 102–104, 107, 109, 111, 113, 124–125, 143, 145 Loreto Mission (Baja California) 89 Los Ángeles Mission 10 Los Santos Mártires Mission 8, 19, 22–24, 33, 35–36, 38–39, 50, 57–60, 65, 80–84, 104, 122, 124 Luis Sales 89–90, 94 Luso-Brazilians 7, 39, 46, 50, 56, 59, 86, 136 Manila 2 Marañon 47 Marcos de Villodas 42 mission militia 4, 8, 17, 20, 36, 39–44, 52, 67, 80, 98, 113, 124, 135 Mixes 72 Mixtón War 6 Mobohanes 41 Montevideo 42–43, 57 Morelos 72 Mulegé Mission (Baja California) 90 Napoleon Bonaparte 40, 63 Nuestra Señora de Encarnación Mission 10 Nuestra Señora de/la Fe Mission 10, 17, 20,43, 86, 100–102, 104, 141, 142 Nuestra Señora de Guananas Mission 10 Oaxaca 72 O’depüt 72–73 Paracatu 51 Paraguay missions 4, 10, 18, 33, 36, 37–38, 76, 79, 88–89, 90, 91, 94, 95, 96 Paraná River 18, 33, 57, 69, 75, 102, 104 Paulista 34–35 Pedro de Angelis 11

Index Pedro de Cevallos 44, 52–53 Pedro Fajardo 78 Philip iv (1621–1665) 35 plague hospital 87, 95 Popolucas 72 Portugal 3, 33, 35, 39–41, 47, 51–53, 63, 67, 75, 80, 118, 120 Portuguese 1, 5, 7, 9–11, 17, 35, 39–42, 46–53, 56, 59, 63, 69, 80, 102, 111, 113, 120, 135–136 Province of Paraguay (Jesuit) 9 Province of San Vicente Ferrer (Dominican) 72 Puebla 72 Pueblos 47, 107 reservado 19 Refugio Mission (Texas) 93 Rio de la Plata 3–4, 6–8, 10, 35, 39–40, 45, 47, 56, 71–72, 75, 82, 97 Rio Grande do Sul 7, 8, 9, 10, 33, 39, 40, 45, 47, 52–53, 56, 63, 79, 80, 86, 102, 104, 113, 137 Roque González 33 Rosario Mission (Texas) 92–94 San Antonio Mission 10 San Carlos Mission 35–36, 44, 57, 59, 74, 104, 115, 117 San Francisco de Borja Mission 11, 54, 75, 79, 87, 117–121, 155, 157–158 San Francisco de Borja Mission (Baja California) 89–90 San Francisco Xavier Mission 10, 36–37, 57, 104, 122 San Francisco Xavier Mission (Baja California) 88–89 San Hipólito hospital 90 San Ignacio Mission (Baja California) 88–90 San Ignacio Guazú Mission 9–10, 17, 20, 33, 43,69, 97–100, 104, 139–140 San Ignacio Miní Mission 10, 36, 58–59, 69, 74, 107, 145 San Ignacio Yaveviry (Miní) 104 San José Mission 10, 36, 57, 74, 79, 87, 95, 104, 115, 117 San José del Cabo Mission (Baja California) 89

173 San Juan Bautista Mission 11, 21, 45, 69, 75, 77, 83–84, 103, 112 San Juan Chamula 72 San Juan River 42 San Lorenzo Mission 11, 20, 22,23, 38, 45, 50–51, 75, 83, 112 San Luis Gonzaga Mission 11, 20, 75, 79, 115–117, 152–153 San Miguel Mission 11, 23, 36, 45, 49–50, 54, 69, 75, 77, 82–83, 99, 104, 111–114, 150–151 San Nicolás Mission 11, 20–21, 23, 36, 45, 48, 75, 83, 104, 112–113, 135–136 San Pablo Mission 10 San Pablo del Inaí Mission 10 Santa Ana Mission 35–36, 38, 44, 58–59, 74, 79, 104, 107, 109, 111, 145, 147 Santa Catarina Island 46, 53 Santa Fe 19, 40–41, 78 Santa Gertrudis Mission (Baja California) 90 Santa María la Mayor Mission 20–21, 23, 33, 36, 57, 75, 104 Santa Rosa Mission 10, 17, 22, 36, 38, 43, 47, 80–81, 86, 99–100, 113, 124 Santa Tecla 50, 52 Santa Tereza 52–53 Santo Ángel Custodio Mission 11, 20, 23, 120–123, 159 Santos Cosme y Damián Mission 33, 36, 45, 79, 104 Santo Tomás Mission 10 Santo Tomé Mission 36, 50, 57, 79, 87, 104, 117, 119 Saõ José do Norte 52 Saõ Miguel 47, 52 São Paulo 35 Sepé Tiarayú 50 Seven Years War (1755–1763) 2, 44, 51, 80 Sierra Gorda 4, 77, 97 Sierra Gorda missions 4 Sinaloa 68, 88 smallpox xiv, 1, 4, 13, 17, 19, 21–24, 47, 67–69, 75–76, 78–81, 86–87, 89–90, 94–96, 99–100, 102–103, 106–107, 109, 111–113, 115, 117–118, 120, 121–124, 135–136 Sonora 68, 88–89 Spanish-Jesuit-Guaraní alliance 63

174

Index

Tabasco 72 tacuara reed 59 Tape 7, 9, 10, 33–34, 35, 40, 63, 69, 79, 107, 111, 135, 136 Tebicuary River 17, 43, 67, 98, 100, 124 Tecpatán Mission (Chiapas) 73 Texas Gulf Coast 67, 91 Thirty Years War (1618–1648) 1 Tojolabal 72 Treaty of Madrid (1750) 6, 8, 22–23, 39, 45, 47, 51, 63, 67, 80,96, 97, 99, 102–103, 113, 115, 118, 120, 122–123, 135–136 Treaty of Paris (1763) 52 Treaty of San Ildefonso (1777) 52–53, 76 Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) 3, 39, 45, 52 Treaty of Westphalia (1648) 3, 39, 45, 52 Trinidad Mission 20–21, 48, 69, 79, 115, 117, 120, 145 Tupí 7, 34–35 Tzeltal 72 Tzotzil 72

Uruguay River 10–11, 21, 33, 35, 39, 47, 50–51, 57, 67, 69, 75, 79, 87, 103–104, 111, 115, 119–120, 122, 135, 137 uti possidetis 39

Uruguay 6, 8–9, 11, 20, 23, 35, 40, 50, 56, 63, 65, 75–76, 80, 86, 104, 109, 115, 117, 123, 135, 137, 139

Zinacantán 72

Valley of Mexico 72 vaquería 41 Villa de Rio Grande do Saõ Pedro 47 War of Spanish Succession (1701–1713) 41, 120 War of the League of Augsburg (1689–1697) 41 Yapeyú Mission 12, 21, 23, 36–37, 50, 51, 57, 78, 82, 83, 86–87, 104 Yaros 41 yerba mate 82–84 Ytapúa (Nuestra Señora de Encarnación) Mission 18, 20–22, 36, 48, 74, 79, 94, 104, 107, 145