Encomienda, Hacienda and Corregimiento in Spanish America: A Structural Analysis

Abstract

OANE OF THE MORE puzzling problems in history of Spanish America is that of relationship between encomienda and hacienda. This question has recently been re-examined in a suggestive article by James Lockhart, who asserts importance of a number of generally unemphasized continuities between two institutions.' As he points out, historians usually assumed until about forty years ago that connection between two institutions was a simple and direct one-that encomienda had essentially evolved into hacienda. This early view of matter subsequently yielded to interpretation of Silvio Zavala and Lesley B. Simpson, who argued that since an encomienda grant in itself conferred no rights to land, there was no juridical connection between two institutions.2 Looking at individual encomiendas and haciendas, however, Lockhart points out that one can easily establish continuity of possession and location in specific cases. Sta-' tistically, these continuities may not be very significant, since number of haciendas in most regions seems to have been considerably greater than number of encomiendas. Nevertheless, most typical situation in any area seems to have been one in which the oldest, stablest, most prestigious, and best-located hacienda would have stemmed from landholdings of original encomendero and his family.3 In any case, regardless of whether there is a direct line of descent, there is no question but that same class of people controlled both institutions. This certainly suggests a relationship, but it does not take us far enough toward defining connection precisely. Lockhart's analysis of similarities between encomienda and hacienda in actual practice-what might be called functional continuities between two institutions-takes us considerably fur-

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 65 citations exist upstream.