How an encomienda ended: the modes of extinction, the favour of the reversion, and the refusal to widen forfeiture beyond the cases the law expresses
Libro III capítulo XXIX of the Política Indiana asks how encomiendas end. It lists the modes — death, the lives spent, absence, renunciation, profession in religion, delict, ill-treatment of the Indians — quotes a cédula of 1552 sending them straight back to the crown, reports Acosta's two lives as the first pact settled with the conquistadores, and then refuses to widen forfeiture past the cases the law expresses.
Why this wins its question: Accounts of the encomienda's end are usually demographic and legislative: the population fell, the New Laws bit, the two lives ran out. What is almost never printed in English is the lawyer's version — the actual doctrine of extinction that a judge of the Audiencia of Lima wrote down for the Council of the Indies, with its list of eleven modes in a single sentence, its cédula of 1552 quoted in its own words, and Acosta's description of the two lives as a pact settled between the kings and the conquistadores rather than a favour. The object carries the two places where that doctrine is not simply pro-treasury: the sentence at §5 that makes the grant favourable as a reward and odious as a charge, so that the duty towards the Indians is construed strictly against the holder; and the refusal at §8 to extend forfeiture beyond the cases the law expresses, followed by a worked example — profession rather than entry into religion, with the children kept in their remaining lives because no fault of theirs is involved. Against that it sets the counterweight on the same pages: the reversion is favoured in law, a forfeited grant is "abierto ipso jure" and may be occupied by the lord's own authority, and Francisco de Alfaro won a standing exception for lèse-majesté at Charcas in 1599. And it says plainly what the pages do not carry: no numbers, no cases beyond that one, and nothing at all about what became of the Indians of a vacated encomienda.
Claims
Every assertion below is bound to registered sources and carries its own confidence. Weight them; do not treat the page as uniformly authoritative.
The chapter states its own subject in its heading, and the heading is three questions rather than one. Libro III, capítulo XXIX of Juan de Solórzano Pereira's Política Indiana is headed "COMO SE ACABAN, Y RESUELVEN las Encomiendas? Y si el Rey las puede quitar sin causa, ò con ella, en comun, ò en particular? Y si quando restituye la quitada, ò pérdida, se ha de tener, y juzgar por nueva, ò antigua?" Its printed SUMARIO runs to fifty-one numbered heads, the first thirty-six in the right column of page 397 and the rest at the head of page 398. This entry is scoped to the first of the three questions and to §§1-12 of the body; the revocation question at §§13-37 and the procedural and restitution questions at §§38-51 are separate entries and nothing here rests on them.
The chapter opens on an organic figure and uses it to say what it is about to do. At §1 "Casi todas las cosas corporales por fuerza oculta de su naturaleza tienen su nacimiento, crecimiento, y acabamiento", as a jurisconsult says accommodating the example of man to the peculium, Menchaca to successions and Antonio Mornacio to censos, "y Yo lo acomodo à las Encomiendas: pues haviendo dicho su nacimiento, è introducion, y despues el progresso, y crecimiento, que por las leyes de la succession, y otras Cedulas Reales han ido teniendo, me hállo aora obligado à tratar de los modos, y causas, por donde suelen extinguirse, y acabarse, y devolverse à la Corona Real, de donde salieron."
The list of the ways an encomienda ended is given in one sentence and it is longer than the usual account of the institution allows. At §2 they come in substance to be "por la muerte de los possedores, acabadas las vidas, porque se suelen conceder, ò por renunciacion, ausencia, entrada en Religion, pluralidad, ò incompatibilidad con otras Encomiendas, delitos, que induzgan, ò merezcan privacion, transgression de las leyes, y cargas, que se han mandado guardar en ellas, malos tratamientos, excessos, y abusos en los Indios Encomendados, y otros qualesquier modos, que de hecho, ò de Derecho inducen vacacion", of which the author says he has already treated in capítulo VI of the same book and successively in those from the XVII onwards, and refers the reader who wants them in more detail to the feudists on the loss or resolution of feudos and to the writers of his own kingdom on mayorazgos, "y con poca diferencia acomodarlo à nuestras Encomiendas."
A royal order of 1552 is quoted in its own words, and what it says is that the Indians go back to the crown and not to anybody else. At §3 Juan Matienzo is said to discourse well on the causes or modes of the extinction and resolution of encomiendas, and many cédulas are to be found in the second volume of the printed ones from page 200, "y especialmente una dada en Madrid à 5. de Abril del año de 1552, que refiriendo en particular las que déxo dichas, concluye, que por qualquier de ellos vuelve luego la Encomienda à la Corona Real, por estas palabras: Si aquel, ò aquella muriere, ò los dexare, ò por algun caso los perdiere, han de tornar los dichos Indios luego à nuestra Corona Real."
The two lives are described as a bargain, and the description is attributed to a Jesuit who had argued about the Indies for thirty years. At §4 "mirando à esto dice el Padre Joseph de Acosta, que este fue como el primer pacto, y ley, que se puso, y assentó entre nuestros Reyes, y los Conquistadores de las Indias, que ellos, y un successor gozassen de los tributos de los Indios, que se les daban en administracion: y que acabadas estas dos vidas, pudiesse el Rey volverlos à encomendar à otros, ò hacer de ellos lo que quisiesse." The grant is presented as a term settled between two parties rather than as a unilateral concession, and the crown's freedom at the end of it is stated as part of the same bargain.
The rule of construction the chapter then states cuts both ways, and the sentence in which it does so is the sharpest thing in this stretch. At §5 encomiendas, insofar as they look to the remuneration of services, are to be held favourable; "todavia, en quanto piden, que los Encomenderos cumplan, lo que deben en servicio de el Rey, y bien de los Indios; y si no lo hicieren, sean privados de ellas, son vistas contener un odio puesto en razon, ò por mejor decir, un favor, y equidad muy digna de practicarse, qual es, la que consiste, y se considera en castigar ingratos, que abusan de los beneficios recibidos, y no cumplen lo pactado, y jurado", as Ripa and Rosenthal note in similar terms of feudos. A rule that is read generously towards the grantee when it rewards him is read strictly against him when it binds him to the Indians.
The return of the grant to the crown is itself treated as a thing the law favours, and a forfeiture for delict is not even called a vacancy. At §6 "y assimismo ayuda à esto la naturaleza, que llaman de la Reversion, quiero decir, de haver de volver estas Encomiendas, quando se acaban, ò pierden à la Corona Real: la qual tambien se tiene siempre en Derecho por favorable." At §7 "si un Feudo se acabó por delito, ò defecto de la linea, y llamados à él, no se tiene tanto por vacante, como por abierto ipso jure para el Señor directo de él, à quien se devuelve, consolidandose el dominio útil con el directo, y atrayendo à sí la possession civil à la natural, la qual el Señor puede ocupar luego por su propia autoridad, por ser visto, que con esta condicion, animo, è intencion se hizo desde su principio la investidura."
Having stated a doctrine that favours the treasury the chapter immediately limits it, and the limit is a rule of penal construction. At §8 "Pero no por esto es mi intento decir, que facilmente nos atrevamos à introducir perdimiento, ò privacion de Feudos, ò Encomiendas: porque esto no se puede hacer, sino en los casos expressados por Derecho, excepto si la culpa fuere mayor, ò igual à las expressadas: de manera, que se puede tener por comprehendida en la razon, y disposicion de la ley, como lo enseñaron bien Isernia, y otros, dando por razon, que donde la pena no se halla bastantemente expressada por ella, alli entra el arbitrio del Juez, que la estiende de unos casos à otros", which Nevizano and Menochio resolve at length and, speaking of the privation of benefices, Nicolao García.
The same restrictive instinct decides the one mode the chapter examines in detail. At §9, although entry into religion is one of the causes by which feudos and encomiendas are usually lost, it is not sufficiently expressed in law whether this is to be understood of the mere entry or whether profession is required; "tienen todos por mas seguro, que lo restrinjamos à la profession, supuesto, que mientras esta no se hace, no es visto tenerse uno por verdadero Frayle, ò Monge, ni el Derecho Canónico le quita los Beneficios, aunque para otros efectos suelen los Novicios gozar del nombre, y privilegios de los Religiosos." At §10 the same is held the truer and commoner opinion in feudos by Gregorio López, Tapia, Menochio and Rosenthal against the contrary opinion of Andreas de Isernia, the reason given being that the novice must be left "la facultad, que el Derecho le concede, de poderla dexar antes de professar, y recobrar todos sus bienes, y hacienda."
The family of a holder who took vows was protected, and the protection is stated as a principle about fault. At §11 "Y aun es de advertir, que tampoco se pierde por la profession, si el que la hace tiene hijos, ò herederos legitimos, de los llamados por la ley al Feudo, ò à la Encomienda: porque entonces passará à ellos en las vidas, que faltaren por correr, sin que el hecho del padre les perjudique, aunque el Feudo sea nuevo, y adquirido por él", as Julio Claro and Rosenthal resolve after many others, on the ground that on finishing his profession the man is held for dead. The reason given is that it would not be just that this act of vacancy, "en que no se puede considerar culpa alguna, del que le hizo, excluyera los hijos, ù otros llamados: pues aun no se excluyen por la privacion, y confiscacion, que se hace por delitos, quando los Feudos son de pacto, y providencia, como nuestras Encomiendas."
One exception to that protection is recorded, it is dated and placed, and the man who obtained it is named. At §12 "en terminos de nuestras Encomiendas, el docto, y digno de toda estima, y veneracion D. Francisco de Alfaro, à cuyas memorias debo particulares obligaciones, el qual limita esto, si el crimen fuesse de lessa Magestad, y dice, que assi lo obtuvo en la Real Audiencia de los Charcas, siendo alli Fiscal el año de 1599, por decir, que si este crimen en Feudos, y en otros bienes se tiene por exceptuado, para que induzca privacion de ellos ipso jure desde el dia, en que se executó", per the common opinion attested with a great copy of texts by Julio Claro, Rosenthal, Deciano and Cabalo, "con mucha mas razon se debe practicar lo mismo en las Encomiendas, supuesto, que assi la primera concession, como la succession de ellas, procede en todo de la gracia, y liberalidad Real, y se funda en remuneracion de meritos, y servicios, de que en sí, y en sus hijos, y descendientes, y aun tambien en la succession, que à falta de ellos se da à la muger, se hace indigno, el que comete semejante delito." The author adds that in the matter of the wife there is something to note by reason of difference, "que para que no la perjudique el crimen de su marido, considera bien Rosenthal."
Two short passages inside this range are the 1736 editor's and not the author's, and they are the only places where the printed Recopilación is brought to bear. An asterisked paragraph after §3 cites "L. 2. y 6. in fin. y l. 7. 14. y 15. tit. 11. lib. 6. Recop." for the reversion; a second, after §9, digests two more: that the ayudas de costa assigned to the children and wives of descubridores are to be paid, when the holders are seculars, to their sons even if clerics and to their daughters and wives even if religious, for their lives (ley 19, título 11, libro 6), and that if in New Spain a grant of entretenimiento in the Caxa Real had been made to a descubridor, on his death it is divided among his children and, if there are none, given to his wife (ley 18 of the same título). Per the convention this corpus settled for this impression, the asterisked paragraphs are the work of the 1736 editor and are not Solórzano's text; the leyes they cite were not opened in any printing of the Recopilación, and this claim carries a lower confidence for that reason.
What this entry establishes and what it does not. It establishes what a seventeenth-century judge of the Audiencia of Lima, writing the standard treatise on the government of the Indies, set down as the modes by which an encomienda ended and returned to the crown; that a cédula of Madrid of 5 April 1552 is quoted there as sending the Indians back to the crown on the holder's death, renunciation or loss; that the two lives were described by Joseph de Acosta as the first pact settled between the kings and the conquistadores; that the reversion was held favourable in law while forfeiture was not to be extended beyond the cases the law expresses; that profession rather than entry into religion was fixed as the moment of loss and that the children of a professed holder kept the lives still to run; and that Francisco de Alfaro obtained a contrary limitation for lèse-majesté in the Real Audiencia de los Charcas in 1599. It establishes nothing about how often any of this was applied: not one case, count or account appears in these paragraphs apart from the Charcas ruling, and none of the cédulas or leyes cited was opened in its own register. It establishes nothing about what the Indians of a vacated encomienda then owed or to whom they then answered; that question is not on these pages and is not asserted here in either direction. And the doctrine is the author's own, argued by a crown judge who elsewhere in the same chapter argues against the crown's power to revoke, not a record of practice.