“Entre acuerdos y discordias. La Pragmática
Sanción para evitar el abuso de contraer matrimonios desiguales en la
provincia de Buenos Aires”.*
Antonio Fuentes-Barragán[1]
Departamento de Historia de América
Universidad de Sevilla
Reception:
24/05/2015
Evaluation:
16/06/2015
Approval:
27/10/2015
Research
and Innovation Article.
Resumen
Este artículo aborda las
repercusiones producidas por la aplicación de las sucesivas versiones de la Real
Pragmática de Matrimonios en el
Virreinato del Río de la Plata y, más concretamente, en la provincia de Buenos
Aires, desde su primera proclamación americana en 1778 hasta los albores de la
emancipación. Se va a analizar tanto la actuación de los padres, apoyados por
la Corona para decidir sobre el devenir matrimonial de sus hijos, como la
reacción de éstos, quienes vieron limitadas sus libertades y tuvieron que
contravenir a sus progenitores para poder ser responsables de sus propias
vidas. Tras el análisis de
documentación procedente de diversos archivos históricos argentinos se obtienen
relevantes variables historiográficas para conocer mejor una realidad
apasionante de prejuicios, intereses familiares y sentimientos individuales que
transcurrió en el período tardocolonial.
Palabras clave: matrimonio, patria potestad, desigualdad,
mestizaje, juicios de disenso.
“Between
agreements and disagreements. Use of the Pragmatic Sanction to avoid the
indecency of forming unequal marriages in the province of Buenos Aires”
Abstract
This article deals with the repercussions produced
by the implementation of the consecutive versions of the “Real Pragmática de Matrimonios” [Royal
Pragmatic on Marriages] in the Vice-royalty of Río de la Plata and, more
specifically, in the Province of Buenos Aires, since its first American
proclamation in 1778 until the beginnings of emancipation. We will analyze both
the role of parents, supported by the Crown, in deciding the matrimonial fate
of their children; as well as the reaction of the latter, who saw their rights
as limited and had to disobey their parents in order to become responsible for
their own lives. After analyzing documents from various kinds of Argentinian
historical archives, relevant historiographical variables are obtained. These sources
are relevant because they help us to explore a fascinating reality of prejudices,
family interests and individual feelings in the late colonial period.
Key
words: Marriage, parental authority, inequality, racial
mixing, juicios de disenso (lawsuits by guardians contesting the right of
children to marry)
“Entre accords et dissensions. La Pragmatique pour éviter des mariages
inégaux dans la province de Buenos-Aires”
Résumé
Cet article porte sur les
conséquences de l’application des versions successives de la Pragmatique Royale
de Mariages dans le Vice-royauté du Río de la Plata
et, notamment, dans la province de Buenos-Aires, depuis sa première
proclamation en 1778 et jusqu’au début de l’indépendance. Nous analyserons les
agissements des pères de famille, soutenus par la Couronne pour décider le
destin conjugal de leurs fils, ainsi que la réaction de ceux-ci, qui ont vu
restreintes leurs libertés et qui ont dû s’opposer à leurs parents pour assumer
pleinement leurs propres vies. L’examen de documents provenant de différentes
archives historiques argentines, nous autorise à nous servir des variables
historiographiques significatives permettant de mieux connaître une réalité
passionnante constituée de préjugés, intérêts familiaux et sentiments
individuels vécus dans la période coloniale tardive.
Mots clés: Mariage, puissance paternelle, inégalité, métissage, procès de
désistement.
1. Introduction
The proclamation by the King
Carlos III of the Pragmatic Sanction to
avoid the indecency of forming unequal marriages[2] in 1776 had a clear
intention, to end the social disorders in the private lives of his vassals.
Granting parents the right
to decide on the matrimonial choice of their offspring until they reached an
excessive age, meant giving them a powerful weapon to exercise, with more force
than before, control over their home. This reinforcement of parental authority
was aimed at approaching the model that the Holy Family offered to a society
that, despite the Enlightenment, would remain Catholic, traditional and of the Old
Regime.
The marriage contracted with the candidate approved by
the parents of both young people was the only alternative, and to make it so he
caused an arduous struggle in Spain. But in America it was different and even
more complex, not only was it necessary to demonstrate equality between the
contracting parties, as far as socioeconomic conditions were concerned, but there
was also added the ethnic element of the future spouses. Possibly the intention
of the monarch was to end the practice of racial mixing. Nevertheless, in the
Indies and, more specifically, in the Río de la Plata, the area covered by this
study, interethnic unions - even sacramentalized ones-
continued to be carried out. Parents fiercely opposed the unequal marriage of
their children. These, in turn, had in the Pragmatic Sanction a barrier to
cross but also an element to resort to in order to defend themselves against
unfair decisions.
In the case of the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata,
some historians have studied the Pragmatic Sanction and, especially, the lawsuits
that arose from it. Among the most outstanding, we can mention Nelly R. Porro, who at the end of the 70s published several works on
the subject, addressing the entire vice regal area. Although today these could
be framed in a positivist context because of the need to collect innumerable
data, it is certain that in this historiographical conjuncture of a traditional
nature, to dedicate oneself to this subject was per se to take a very brave and innovative step. Also, a vice regal
analysis was realized years later by Carlos A. Mayo, but with a more modern
vision. So much so that he devoted much of his research to the feelings of the
protagonists who suffered such arduous trials, through their personal letters.
Noemí del Carmen Bistué and Cecilia Marigliano, on
the other hand, made interesting contributions for the examination of these
legal figures from a specific area, Mendoza, both in the colonial as well as
the national periods. It is necessary to emphasize this last aspect, as the
authors helped to explain the many similarities and few differences that, at
least as far as marriage policy, the different governments applied. Meanwhile,
Ana Teresa Fanchín did the same with San Juan de la Frontera and Monica Ghirardi with
Cordoba, both showing great mastery in the analysis, not only of each lawsuit brought
before the authorities, but of their significance in the home and on the
integrity of so many family sagas.
Some of the files that alluded to Buenos Aires and its
province were approached by authors like Ricardo Cicerchia,
Susan Socolow and Guillermo O. Quinteros,
who also have been able to contextualize the disagreements from a social
perspective, emphasizing the interaction of the individuals with the community
and the impact of the Pragmatic Sanction. Lastly, Viviana Kluger's
contributions should be mentioned, since they help to understand, from a
historical-legal perspective, the paternal-filial conflicts arising in this
context.
It may seem, therefore, that these are sources revisited
by the authors on numerous occasions, but their wealth is so great that a new
look at them, more than thirty years after the first observations, contributes
an endless number of worthwhile nuances to be shown. Applying methodologies
from Social History, Philosophy and Microhistory to the matrimonial lawsuits,
and through the constant interchange of qualitative and quantitative sources,
an innovative vision of these legal figures is obtained that allows us to put
them in relation with historiographic elements, such as that of longue durée or
life trajectories and with complex
long-range phenomena such as social-racial mixing or population whitening
strategies.
Carrying out an exhaustive follow-up on the bibliography that addresses
the limits of love in the area of Rio de la Plata, and after interpreting
practically all the lawsuits of this type that refer to Buenos Aires and its
province during the vice regal period, it is legitimate to ask about the
usefulness of these sources, that is, to what extent they allow the historian
to approach the historical reality of the period in which they were issued.
Nelly R. Porro understood the
study of these marital lawsuits as “[…] a way of accessing the moral guidelines
and social prejudices in the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la Plata"[3], that is to say, the
perfect door to access the content of the rumors that were aired in the Buenos
Aires gossip-shops as well as the intimate and silent sensibilities of those
affected by them. This statement could be supplemented by the opinion of Verena Stolcke, who points out
that they serve to construct a model of the relationship between social
inequality and sexual values, because they reveal the classification criteria
in force[4], those applied by the community
in the consideration of their neighbors, or which is
the same, how much was an Old Regime society willing to compromise before
excluding or pointing to individuals who tried to transgress the static rules
imposed. Ricardo Cicerchia opens a greater focus of
attention on the same documentation, so that for him,
The lawsuits show an
accepted margin of dispute over patriarchal power, the recognition of female
voices as subjects of law, and a certain social heterogeneity in the occupation
of institutional spaces, in this case that of the judicial sphere. A theatre
capable of triggering devices of confrontation and negotiation of an important
territory of social
conflict[5].
Disobedient life, which runs outside the normal channels,
continues to attract more interest than everyday life. However, sometimes, as
in the case of some lawsuits, fortunately, both realities complement each
other. In the words of Guillermo O. Quinteros,
through the interpretation of this resource, "a segment of the history of
people's lives before the suit can be rebuilt, although not always, and in many
cases this continues while the file is substantiated, especially when the
resolution of the same is prolonged over time[6]." The historian
depends, based on the specific objective of his research, to expand or not the
personal and family universe of the protagonists of each lawsuit, going to
complementary documentation such as population registers, parish registers or notarial
protocols, to mention a few.
From this qualitative immersion in the application of the
Pragmatic on Marriages in the
province of Buenos Aires through the lawsuits, we try to obtain a clearer profile
of the paternal figure - which oscillated between the model admired in the
home, worthy of being followed, and who imposed order -of the children-with
their doubts and certainties, going both from fear to defiance as well as from
disobedience to repentance-and, finally, of the society that surrounded and
enveloped them, integrated or excluded, depending on their actions.
2. The Pragamtic Sanction:
reaches and repercussions
To contextualize the promulgation of the Pragmatic, it is
necessary to understand that "in Hispano-American colonial society, the
family would be considered the backbone of the whole social framework, and a
vital element in the dynamics of the hegemonic social networks[7]." The marital union of
individuals constituted, in turn, the obligatory requirement to form good
families and give them meaning. It is necessary to clarify that in order to
marry the presence of the love was not required, because the marriage did not
even suppose "a private contract between individuals but rather an
alliance of groups, above all in those social sectors where such events implied
a transference of patrimony[8]."
This reality, which had been so since the beginning of
the conquest of the New World and which, in the opinion of the king and his
ministers, was to remain unchanged, was continually challenged by the
inadequate customs of many subjects of the Crown, who jeopardized the honor of the best lineages, the moral integrity of the
humblest, and even the salvation of the whole community. It is understood,
therefore, that the interest of the metropolitan authorities to impose the
marriage sacrament and the steel bridle of family hierarchy to be managed only
by the almighty pater familias.
The hectic development of the private life of these
American neighbors makes it necessary to delve into the nature of their sexual encounters
as well as their institutionalization, since they constituted the element that
generated the greatest violations of the norm. The drafting of the Pragmatic was therefore fully
justified and contextualized, among other reasons, because when the time came
to choose a spouse, the paternal voice was disregarded, which "caused serious
offenses against God, our Lord, discord in families, scandals and other grave
moral and political problems[9]." This was detrimental
to the good order of the state and to the wellbeing of the Church and, of
course, ended up undermining the authority of the head of the family, since
these marriages were "opposed to the honor, respect and
obedience that children should give to their parents in matters of so much
gravity and importance[10]."
With the Pragmatic, therefore, a further step was taken
to resolve such deviations, since, as the parents disagreed with the carrying
out of said marriages before God and with canonical sanction, they were vested
with the necessary power to redirect de
jure the filial will in relation to the choice of the future consort, thus
provoking that
[…] for some young people from Rio de la Plata of the
late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, to decide for themselves, while
still being the good children their parents would have wanted them to be, seems
to have been an arduous task, that would begin within the four walls of the
home and that would end, if things did not turn out as planned, in the courts[11].
The intention of the legislators was to raise so much age
limit of the future contracting parties, at which they would have been able to
choose for themselves with whom to share the rest of their existence, that they
had to get married before reaching it. It would have been too late - mainly for
women - to take part in the reproductive cycle. The freedom of decision of the
male children could be reached at the age of twenty-five and, in the case of
females, at twenty-three. However, even though it was not mandatory to follow
the paternal opinion as from these ages, it was essential to accept the advice
of the elders and to thank them for their advice.
In the vast transoceanic domains, the importance of
choosing the right spouse was habitually emphasized, not treating their
institutions as something fortuitous but rather meditated. In the words of the French Americanist
Frédérique Langue,
The
social control promoted by the Bourbon reforms in the political and the social
(...) has the value of response (...) to an urban growth that runs along with
an increasingly sensitive presence to the promiscuous crowd of browns,
mestizos, commoners, poor, beggars and other rebels who nourish the social
imaginary of the time and the fear of disorder […][12].
In
this reality lay the fear of the authorities of inequality, alluded to on
countless occasions in the documentation of the time. The late Hispano-American
colonial period witnessed a latent tension between the different social groups,
in which the rungs were shortened and could be ascended with relative ease,
with the consequent discomfort of the most privileged, wishing to continue to
maintain socio-economic supremacy and, without room for doubt, a marked ethnic
differentiation.
The
institutions could not understand at what point, or why, the imaginary lines
which had so vehemently marked the clear division of society into republics, so
that the new legislation sought to remedy such a stupendous failure. At this
juncture came the promulgation of the Royal Writ of Gracias al Sacar (a means by which subjects could buy ‘whiteness’
from their king) and of the Pragmatic Sanction of Marriage itself, with the lawsuits as an integral part of it,
"to avoid the confusion of castas (a term for people of mixed race) to the
detriment of the white elites (…),
but whose users were, in a paradoxical way and in practice, those accomplished mestizos, concerned about their lineage,
whiteness and honor[13].”
The
continual attempts of a part of the population to ascend the social ladder and
achieve ‘whiteness’ had taken place from the beginning of the American
enterprise, but it was in the eighteenth century-precisely the time when it was
most combatted against - when powerful legal elements were granted to some individuals
who were waiting anxiously to solve their irregular or simply unwanted
situation[14].
But it was not only these legal provisions that were responsible for improving the
ethnic considerations of some members of the community, but also
[…] racial mixing, which has a recurring place within
marriage and much more often outside it, is the best caste dissolving agent,
the most effective means of allowing ones’ descendants to carry out the
ambition of crossing the colored barrier
and being incorporated into a higher social stratum[15].
In the face of
the obstinate attempts of social control that had been tried to be applied for
centuries in order to preserve the ethnic separation between the Spaniards and
the rest, the citizen response had been the absolute opposite. As a general
rule, and perhaps depending on the degrees of social pressure and mobility,
although white and native women used to practice more inbreeding, those who
belonged to the casta population - individuals of mixed
ancestry and, above all, black people – opted for begetting their offspring
outside the lines of their own birth, most likely with the desire to achieve a
little prosperity, within the sacrificed existence they would have to endure
for the sole reason of proceeding from a "delinquent beginning[16]."
Regarding
a population in permanent contact, it is surprising that the Pragmatic Sanction
was not concerned with all its members, the white elite being the main and
almost single objective, since it was mainly its members who were subject to
the decision of their direct superiors or, on the contrary, they were to be
held accountable to the civil authority, while the natives were only advised to
comply with the law and, finally, to the castas, who were exempt from it.
Considering previous legislation concerned with the matter, such as the Laws of
the Indies, the question had varied a great deal, for in that legal corpus the
marriage bonds of natives and Negroes had been alluded to disparately, and
while " for the former provided a controlled freedom in nuptial matters,
it was recommended for the population of color to maintain ethnic inbreeding[17].”
It
is legitimate to consider if the purpose of the Crown had not been similar in
both codes, simply modifying to the receiver of the same. In the first corpus,
almost blindly legislating in the face of new situations, it was attempted to
control those less known, the native population - neophytes who resembled the
Spaniards although they did not enjoy their privileges - and, on the other
hand, the black population – mere inanimate objects, which did not even enjoy
the status of human beings. However, experience taught the Bourbons that the
main discordant role of the American adventure was being played by the
Spaniards and their descendants, the creoles,
who both inside and outside marriage, and for many different reasons, had
shared their intimacy with people considered of inferior quality.
In
one way or another, the results would have been the same according to the
idealistic parameters prevailing in the illustrated environment. By placing in
the hands of the parents the power to approve the sacramental unions of their
descendants and granting the vice regal authorities the ability to settle disputes
that may arise, in their minds the question was settled. It was not necessary
to prohibit anything to the non-white population, since the affair was being
attacked when appealing to the Spanish subjects, supposedly the most faithful
and ordered. Once again, candor characterized the Bourbon law which, in a short
time, if not from the outset, was surpassed.
It
seems that they awoke from that royal innocence in 1803, almost thirty years
after the first promulgation of the Pragmatic Sanction, when a sanction was
again issued, taking the name of the Royal Decree on Marriages of Children of
Family, and in which a series of transcendental issues were insisted upon, such
as the inclusion of natives and blacks within the parameters of the same
legislation as well as the possibility of parents to deny their children the
possibility of marrying a particular candidate without any cause , among other
modifications. Two years later, in 1805, the hardening of this code reached its
highest levels, since all interethnic marriage was forbidden until prior
authorization had been obtained from the audiencia (high court) or the
viceroy himself.
As
to whether the vassals, both on the peninsula and in the American territory,
fulfilled the multiple versions of the Pragmatic Sanction, there is an enormous
historiographical debate, since it is always difficult to calculate the
repercussions of what is dictated[18].
At least for Buenos Aires, the capital of the Viceroyalty of the Rio de la
Plata, there is no doubt that there was a clear decline in inter-ethnic
marriages after 1778, going from 23.4% to 10.1%. For the same period, however,
there was an increase in illegitimate children, from 19% to 32% of the births
in the 1780s, which demonstrated more of a formal rather than real acceptance of
the law throughout the whole period[19].
Ana
Teresa Fanchín, who also documented for San Juan de
la Frontera the increase in illegitimate births after the implementation of the
Pragmatic Sanction, intended to make clear that it was not an idyllic situation
nor easy to assume on the part of the families involved, as
[…] although the registers of vital records reveal a
high percentage of children conceived out of wedlock, a large proportion of whom
are mestizos, this does not imply that these behaviors are publicly admitted.
In fact, most of the time, these creatures were assimilated to the family group
as children of unknown parents, as foundlings or as orphans, but the signs that
confirmed the existence of consanguinity ties were kept secret in the majority
of cases. What concerns us to know is how the inhabitants of a city far from
the hegemonic centers would react to the application of measures tending to
deepen the differences according to the skin color. Even more given that very
few could display purity of blood[20].
3. Family conflicts regarding marriage: the lawsuits
In the marriage market, in
any period and place, personal qualities, family prestige and economic
interests have been valued in the search for advantageous connections. Expressions that described marriages as good or
bad referred to the success or failure in the negotiation of what
each spouse contributed[21].
This
assertion helps us to understand that which was legislated in the Pragmatic on
Marriages did not come from nothing, but rather was inherited from a previous
context, in which these motivations were passed on by the society to its
descendants. To the socio-economic conditions that the selected spouse had to
fulfill, their ethnic base was added. The words of Verena
Stolcke help to visualize this problem,
the hostility to mixed marriages in the colonies even before 1805
demonstrates that, far from being an imposition, the laws on interracial
marriage in the metropolis, all they did was provide a legal framework for
existing racial attitudes[22].
It
is therefore evident that those families who occupied a privileged place in the
society- of Buenos Aires, its province and any other territory-did not wish to
lose it under any circumstances and, on the other hand, those which did not
enjoy such privilege, longed to procure it without delay. It generated a dense atmosphere
of interests and entangled cronyism, in which for the youngest - if they acted of
their own accord - there were more chances of failure than success.
This delicate situation produced lawsuits which came
about when
[…] when a child - depending on his age - attempted to
marry and ask for and obtain the consent or advice of his father, and he denies
it, considering, in general terms, that it is an unequal union and therefore
will cause the disturbance of the good
order of the state and continued discords and prejudices; the son is
obliged to file a summary appeal before the ordinary court, to obtain the
supplementary license from the royal judge[23].
This legal figure implied for those responsible
for the minors a true breach of their authority, because they would never before
have imagined having to deal with their personal affairs outside their home and
with the mediation of the civil authority. For the families involved, however,
it was the only tool available to them if they sought to interfere with a
marriage that was against their wishes. The first of these claims is
paradoxical if, as already mentioned, the Pragmatic on Marriages was
promulgated, among other reasons, with the purpose of strengthening parental
authority. If, as was just defended, parents were limited in their ability to
act and lead their own families, there is something discordant in this
combination.
By
analyzing both the legislation and the bibliography on the subject, the duality
can be intuited. On the one hand, the reinforcement of paternal dominance is
evident, since it was clearly legislated in their favor and they were granted,
by law, privileges to decide with those that did not previously count, that is
to say, the custom was codified to make the predominance of the pater familias clear and written. But beyond the paternal relevance, and following the
dictates of enlightened politicians, what should prevail was the Crown. All the
Bourbon measures had the same intention, that the regal and institutional power
increased, even interfering in the most embarrassing matters of the private
life of the subjects[24].
The
solution to the problem was, therefore, to give the parents greater powers than
those previously held so as to bring order to a chaotic community, but not more
than necessary, with which was avoided, in the first place, arbitrariness in
the treatment of their children and, secondly, the possibility of eclipsing the
royal authority, the sole adjudicator of the omnipotent power.
It
is interesting to reflect on the statement of Guillermo O. Quinteros,
in which the author shuffles both realities,
[…] the royal legislation made it possible to settle
disputes arising out of the marriage of young children in another way than with
the usual authoritarian, discretionary and arbitrary procedures to which the
parents resorted. In this sense, far from generating conflict, the laws
emanating from the Spanish metropolis came to place very specific limits on the
actions of parents as well as those of children. Thereafter, there were rules
to which the parties must submit; norms that prohibit - admittedly - but also
allow, permit. The files of the suit substantiated before the justice during
the whole period are final proof of this[25].
Regardless
of on who fell the greatest benefits of the Pragmatic on Marriages and, by
extension, of the lawsuits, it is of greater interest to make an effort to
delve into the analysis of this last element, fundamentally through its
casuistry - in what circumstances could it arise and what could it lead to on a
family level - making an approach to it through concrete applications.
It
is necessary to start from the very essence of the suit, or what is
the same, of the paternal-filial litigation generated regarding a choice of an
unsuitable spouse for those who should authorize it. The adult opposition had
to be based, as it was stipulated, on a series of reasoned principles among
which the inequality between the contracting parties had to be manifested.
These differences could be very varied, ranging from social, economic or ethnic
dissimilarities, among the most common ones, to reasons that alluded to the
illegitimate birth of individuals, to their distant origin, to the performance
of a vile trade or to their age, among many others.
It is particularly
highlighted in the Pragmatic Sanction that the lawsuit regarding the filial
decision was supposed to be supported by just causes, for which the disparity between
those who wished to marry had to be demonstrated and that it gravely offended
the honor of the lineage or imperilled the state. Otherwise,
the authorities would declare it as irrational and, therefore, dismiss the
paternal refusal.
The judicial
contest shows us a family concerned about ‘what people will say’, which strives
to circumscribe the conflict within the boundaries of the home and avoid the
disclosure of disputes. And so, a father will maintain that allowing the
transcendence of paternal-filial quarrels would imply disclosing the lack of
education and upbringing of family members and perhaps even the prostitution of
its members, causing major scandals. The same father will conclude by saying
that sometimes it is preferable to shut up excesses to avoid greater evils. The
members of this Rio de la Plata unit feel that the misconduct of one harms the
whole family and that the ventilation in court of those same excesses damages
all its parts[26].
The progenitors of the most
adventurous and disobedient young people of the province of Buenos Aires lived
at the end of the colonial period, including the Hon. Mr. Don Domingo Constanzo, Assistant Major of Militia of the Party of the Cañada de Morón and, at that
time, father of Doña Maria Constanzo, who was
abducted by the young Pedro José Martínez in September, 1786[27].
The Argentine historian Monica Ghirardi
defines the abduction of the bride as "another form of resistance coming from
the fait accompli[28]." In fact, this
dramatic situation used to be reached when the spouses tired of appealing to
the parents, opting for the most radical route, which obviously happened
outside the courts. Other times, however, they did so a priori, barely consulting the paternal opinion, perhaps because
they were sure of what the response would be.
Some of these experiences occurred in the reported
episode. After the aforementioned kidnapping of the young Doña Maria, her
father, Don Domingo, hurried to the justice of Buenos Aires, travelling from
his place of residence several leagues away. He wanted to make clear in his
statement the intentionality with which Pedro José Martínez had committed the
crime, because in his words there was no place for confusion, since when the
young man expressed the desire to marry his daughter "[…] he was entirely disillusioned and repulsed[29][…]”.
He had several reasons for refusing this union, but among
the most important he pointed out two, perhaps the most alluded in the lawsuits, the suitor's lack of
fortune-he could not even maintain his small family, composed only of his mother-
and the difference in quality between the two young people.
The first step of the young man was correct, to formally
request permission to marry, and even the second, to go before the parish
priest of the Morón territorial division to obtain
his protection, more regarding the verbal opposition of his potential
father-in-law and after the writings were sent by him to the Vicar and Vicar-General
so that he would not allow the sacramental union, Pedro José went from words to
deeds and, helped by his brother, kidnapped the woman he loved.
Two parallel factors to break down arise in the little
story of the Martinez and Constanzo families, as well
as those of many others at the Hispano-American level. On the one hand, the
ecclesiastical action, and on the other, the deserved punishment for the crime
of kidnapping and the consequences that this could have on the tainted honor of a virgin. In the course of action of the priest
who supported the forbidden love of two young people, beyond their gentleness
and understanding, the repeated disobedience of the Pragmatic Sanction on
Marriages by many members of the lower clergy can be appreciated, an irregularity
not committed by the Vicar-General, who granted approval to the pretensions of
the humiliated father and admonished his subordinate.
As for punishment for abduction, it was not always
requested by the parents, for even if the captor were condemned, the dishonor to the maid had already been committed. With
regard to this question, Verena Stolcke
asserts that if some parents had opposed their daughter's liaison, and she was
abducted to force them to accept the loss of their honor,
they would give in, allowing marriage repair errors, if the social distance
between the spouses did not seem too great. If this were the case, they would
proceed to recover the daughter to the family home and blame the person
responsible for the abduction[30]. It seems, by the attitude shown by Don Domingo Constanzo,
that the latter option would apply to his case.
When it came to bringing up defects from the opposite
side, the protagonists of these episodes always became professionals in defamation,
echoing the rumors circulating about the incipient public opinion, but also investigating
their lives and contributing all the negative elements that could pass through
their imagination. Don Domingo's main intention was undoubtedly to distort the
pretender's genealogy, an ideal attitude in a society full of prejudices that
still valued the past of individuals more than their own abilities. For this,
he alluded to the mother of the rejected as son-in-law, Escolástica
Amaya, who was the daughter of Miguel Amaya, an aboriginal from Santiago.
Faced with this affirmation, we return to the Pragmatic and
to the probabilities of success or failure of the petition, for among the
rational causes to formulate a lawsuit, it was not found that the other party was a descendant of natives, among
other things, because those of that ethnicity - not like blacks and those who
were born of them - had to be taken as equals to the Spaniards. Even so, this
was the difference of quality put forward by Don Domingo.
But an allegation, although depending on who presented it,
with weight, was
never sufficient, so that they would also refer to the poverty of the candidate
- because he did not even own a horse despite devoting himself to the tasks of
the field - as well as his moral defects, among which they emphasized a
libertine and licentious life with a tendency to idleness. Of course, this could
be tolerated if compared with someone of low stature, but being an individual
of his distinction, it was inadmissible.
So far, the protagonist of the events has been the father
of Doña Maria, who had come before the authority to denounce the kidnapping of
his daughter and was strongly opposed to the possibility of a marriage bond
with her that had caused him such grievance. But the young man, who had not
come out well from his action because he was arrested and imprisoned, also had
something to say. Even from prison, taking advantage of being in proceedings
with the justice, it was the perfect time to counter the imposed lawsuit and
fight to fulfill his longing. It was up to him to prove the quality of his birth, for
which he would insist that he came from a Spanish family, and that despite his
humble socioeconomic situation he worked enough to support his mother - an old
weaver and widow - and his brothers. All this he did, however, only through
distinguished witnesses, but without providing documentary evidence, because in
order to obtain this it was necessary to invest time and resources, which he
lacked.
But if something characterized this lawsuit, it was its slowness, which was
so much so that it was necessary to stop the case[31], declaring null all
progress made by the justice until that time. This situation, which left the
process almost in the same state as if it had not begun, caused some
uncertainty in those affected by the prohibition of marriage. Nevertheless, the
young people took advantage of this uncertainty to go to the only institution
that could help them, the Church, and to request the marriage again. On the
afternoon of December 1, 1786, almost three months after the beginning of the
process and using the facilities of the Royal Prison of Buenos Aires, Pedro
Jose Martinez and Doña Maria Constanzo were united in
holy matrimony by the ecclesiastical deputy, with the approval of the viceroy.
Such a policy of faits accomplis assisted, as expected, the response of the
main person affected, Don Domingo Constanzo. The same
judge who had stopped the case and, later, processed the license for the
marriage, again gave the dissenter a period of nine days to reveal his
feelings. They were days of the continuous traffic of witnesses, neighbors of the Cañada de Morón, on the part of the affected, many of whom did not
support him, for which they were invalidated and new ones were requested. The
accused did the same with his closest friends, and his version was unanimously endorsed,
arguing that he was treated like a peon[32], but was the legitimate son
of Spaniards, even granting his parents the title of don.
The long case concludes by referring to the many
irregularities that occurred in the course of the same, from its interruption
to its resumption, with the marriage in the middle, until the last resolution
which declared the lawsuit to be irrational. The prosecutor expressed himself
four months after the wedding ceremony, stating that the mayor had not been
able to carry out the lawsuit proceedings, since he had also trusted in the
wrong adviser and was therefore urged to replace him and to fix many blunders.
At first glance, the lawsuit had been resolved, since
Pedro Jose Martinez and Doña Maria Constanzo had
taken the sacrament of marriage before the Church, with institutional approval,
and the suit had been declared irrational. However, it is not known, as there
was no further documentation on the case, if Don Domingo Constanzo,
the disobeyed father, would have had the strength to continue appealing or, if
perhaps, the authorities heard the prosecution's voice and acted again to dispatch
the situation definitively. Although it was doubtful that this was so, because
except for the infractions committed, in fact and in law, after an abduction and
a marriage, the subject seemed more than settled.
A decade later, Matías
Palacios, a man from Cordoba, living in Buenos Aires, wanted to marry Maria de
las Nieves, a slave in the Estancia de la Calera[33], owned by the School of
Orphan Girls of Buenos Aires[34]. In this case the suitor
did not meet the opposition of his parents - since they had died – nor that of
his possible father-in-law to his wish to marry, but rather that of his older
brother, Pedro Ignacio Palacios, who resorted to the territorial division de las Víboras in the Banda Oriental, because there,
arrangements for marriage were being made, in order to get in touch with the
priest of the place and to prevent it. His intention was to reveal the enormous
inequality between the contracting parties, which in itself would prevent the
marriage. Pedro Ignacio could not accept the blessing of the union of a member
of his Spanish family with a brown or mulatto woman and, worse still, one under
the regime of slavery.
In this context, it is necessary to emphasize the
response that the younger of them gave to his brother and legal guardian,
"[...] under the pretext that we were unequal, when it is true that
although my mother was Spanish, my father was a mulatto and, therefore, there
is no disparity of lineage of said marriage treaty[35]." An atypical and
surprising episode was occurring in which an individual consciously harmed
himself and, by extension, all the members of his lineage, for one purpose, to
marry the person he had chosen.
This reaction is even more disconcerting for what it
implied, for if one of his ancestors had truly been a mulatto, and yet his
family had managed to break through the barrier of color,
all being recognized as Spaniards, the young man was responsible for disrupting,
with a hasty testimony, the tortuous process of whitening initiated by his
parents and that had already obtained its fruits. In the case that his dark
ancestry was only a strategic invention to put himself on a level with his
fiancé, he was doing his relatives a disservice by sowing a doubt that would not
be without cost. But on rare occasions, like the one before us, some characters
were willing to become black. This was narrated by Carlos Mayo,
the young
lovers, in their eagerness to defend their partner, will not hesitate to
delegitimize the social pretensions of their parents, publicly exposing in
court the stains that darkened their own lineage, the secret family confessions
that ended up lowering the status of their own relatives[36].
The unthinking attitude of
the suitor led to the displacement of his older brother from the Banda Oriental
to Buenos Aires, where the case was being tried. In his speech against the
nuptials, he was disbelieving of the behavior of his charge,
who had tried to deceive him by marrying in secret, "[...] believing
perhaps that my poor situation as a farm laborer
would make me give up my regular endeavour[37]." He emphasized in
this way the divergence between his daily life, of mere subsistence, and his
good lineage, marked by two surnames which he himself alluded to with pride,
since both the Palacios and the Rivarolas were always
held and reputed as whites[38]. As an irrefutable proof of
the whiteness of his family, in addition to the opinion of the witnesses, he contributed
as a fact the membership of many of his relatives to the priestly order, a
dignity that could not have been received with stains of origin.
The expected response from the lover would have been a
reply, documented or supported by the testimonies of third parties, which
showed the hidden part of his ancestry, in order to be on a level with his fiancée
and to be able to walk together to the altar. However, this did not happen, for
the young Matias Palacios backed down on his aspiration of marrying her and
withdrew what had been said, breaking his word to his brown slave. His statements were as follows,
[…] “I maturely meditated as regards this matter
with the seriousness that it deserves. I intended to leave aside the passion
that had influenced my explained attempts. From this deep consideration has
resulted my disenchantment and, what is more, I have envisioned the horror of a
union completely different from my birth and none at all, corresponding to my
unarguable Spanish condition. I thought I had the right to renounce it in
exchange for the satisfaction of my desires. In virtue of this, I confess my
mistake and I loathe the thought of marrying the before mentioned serf[39]”
Once the passion
had died out, after reflecting upon what his life would be like by sharing it
with a slave, and the consequences that his acts would bring upon his descendants,
which would have been serfs by their mother’s inheritance, he decided to slow
down and abandon the trial started against his brother only 30 days before. His
comfortable position and, mainly, the cruelty and indifference of his words,
may cause some apathy towards this character. However, from our position as
historians, we must remember the complexity of the period studied and, above
all, the narrow environment in which the different actors developed.
Therefore,
it is necessary to state the rationality and irrationality of withdrawal from
marriage, as the groom-to-be abandoned the intention of marriage, the case was
closed and lacked any significance. The doubt raised by Verena Stolcke, “how was
it possible that some white men, to put it in a way, swam against the current
by marrying a woman of color at the expense of social rejection and the
degradation of their parents? [40]”
was left, in this situation, unanswered.
4. Conclusions
This
review of the Pragmatic on Marriages has allowed us to penetrate into the most obscure
aspects of the lives of some inhabitants of the Province of Buenos Aires in the
last years of the viceregal period. Through their
experiences, but without losing sight of the legal framework of the successive
dispositions in which they were set, it has been possible to reconstruct a
tangible and close reality about certain sporadic events that were full of
meaning.
The influence of this legal corpus inherited
from the Bourbon dynasty accessed the most intimate recesses of the households,
transcending the clearly political nature it had, to get imprinted in the
members of the community that came across it. Showing concern for the family in
order to be able, from the law, to pacify and ensure social order was an
intelligent practice that made of such an elevated thing as a pragmatic, a
daily issue in Spain as well as in the colonies of the empire.
Between agreements and disagreements
between parents and children, young anonymous people passed their days, people
like Pedro José Martínez, María Constanzo or Matías Palacios, and others who have not been mentioned here, as
popular and relevant as Mariquita Sánchez de Thompson. They are a mere sample of those who, independently of their social class,
had to first face their parents, or tutors, in general, and, later on, if they were
firm in their public disobedience, they had to face justice.
Negotiation was at hand everywhere. The
elders, abusing their authority, could exert pressure on their descendants by
disinheriting them of all possessions, to setting them apart from the lineage
and the brusque cut of family ties. The young, dependent and fragile in
appearance, made from their weakness their authentic strength of reassurance
and when they remained true to their beliefs, they never gave up until they
became a reality.
The Royal Pragmatic on Marriages that,
loaded with the prejudice of its time, came to prevent the unions between
unequal individuals and, therefore, the greatly feared mix of blood, brought
about such social revolt that destroyed the peace of many families, who exerted
unmeasured pressure on their children through the strengthening of parental
power and the surveillance of the state upon the private life of its vassals. On the other hand, data shows that the
decrease of exogamic marriages brought about an increase in illegitimate
births, which generated an even more serious problem, impossible to solve.
If the code that regulated the freedom
to love in the Spanish domains went in that direction, its legal figure, the lawsuits,
were an invaluable help for those young people who were not in agreement with
their parents’ decision so they could appeal said arbitrary resolutions. This
was a unique opportunity to act within the legal framework at a time that
contributed to the clash of the archaic colonial customs with the rise of
individualism, which gave them a voice, and opened their eyes to an uncertain
future, but surely a happier one.
Documentary sources
Archivo General de la Nación (AGN). Buenos Aires-Argentina. Sala IX,
Secciones Tribunales y Tribunales Administrativos.
Archivo Histórico Provincial de Buenos Aires (AHPBA). La Plata-Argentina.
Real Audiencia y Cámara de Apelación de Buenos Aires.
Bibliography
Bistué, Noemí del Carmen y Marigliano, Cecilia. “Los
disensos matrimoniales en la Mendoza virreinal (1778-1810)”, Revista de Historia del Derecho, núm. 20
(1992): 75-101.
Bistué, Noemí del Carmen y Marigliano, Cecilia. “Los disensos matrimoniales en Mendoza. Época
patria (1810-1869)”, Revista de Historia
del Derecho, núm. 23 (1995): 37-63.
Cicerchia, Ricardo. “Historia de las prácticas, discursos y representaciones
familiares. El espectáculo del disenso en la ciudad secular”, Revista Iberoamericana LXX, núm. 206
(enero-marzo 2004): 37-52.
Fanchín, Ana Teresa. “Entre el prejuicio racial y el interés económico. Un caso
de disenso en San Juan de la Frontera a fines de la colonia” (capítulo VIII). En
Uniones interétnicas en Hispanoamérica.
Fuentes, avances y contenidos de la cuestión: siglos XVII-XIX. Buenos
Aires: Mnemosyne, 2010.
Fernández
Pérez, Paloma. El rostro familiar de la
metrópoli. Redes de parentesco y lazos mercantiles en Cádiz, 1700-1812.
Madrid: Siglo XXI de España, 1997.
Ghirardi, Mónica. Matrimonios
y familias en Córdoba. Prácticas y representaciones. Córdoba: Universidad
Nacional de Córdoba, 2004.
Ghirardi, Mónica. “Experiencias de desigualdad. El
régimen matrimonial homogámico y sus tensiones en
Córdoba en la transición del Orden Monárquico al Republicano” (capítulo II). En
Mestizaje, sangre y matrimonio en
territorios de la actual Argentina y Uruguay, siglos XVII-XX. Buenos Aires:
Dunken, 2008.
Gonzalbo Aizpuru, Pilar. “Afectos e intereses en los matrimonios en la ciudad de
México a fines de la colonia”, Historia
Mexicana LVI, núm. 4. (2007): 1117-1161.
Kluger, Viviana. “Los deberes y derechos paterno-filiales a través de los
juicios de disenso. Virreinato del Río de la Plata (1785-1812)”, Revista de Historia del Derecho, núm. 25
(1997): 365-390.
Kluger, Viviana. “Algunas
particularidades de los pleitos familiares en el Virreinato del Río de la
Plata, 1785-1812”, Revista de Historia
del Derecho, núm. 27 (1999): 219-245.
Konetzke, Richard. Colección de documentos para la historia de la formación social de Hispanoamérica: 1493-1810, vol. III, tomo I. Madrid: CSIC e Instituto Jaime Balmes, 1962.
Langue, Frédérique. “Revoltosos aunque caballeros.
Los umbrales del honor en la Caracas del siglo XVIII” (capítulo III). En Fronteras y sensibilidades en las Américas.
Madrid: Doce Calles, 2011.
Marre,
Diane. “Historia de la familia e historia social. La aplicación de la
Pragmática Sanción de Carlos III: una revisión”, Quaderns de l’Institut Català
d’Antropologia, núm. 10 (1997): 217-249.
Mayo,
Carlos A. Porque la quiero tanto.
Historia del amor en la sociedad rioplatense (1750-1860). Buenos Aires: Biblos, 2004.
Olivero
Guidobono, Sandra. “Ni propietario ni conchabado;
agregado. Fuerza laboral y solidaridad en la familia rural rioplatense: el Pago
de la Costa a mediados del siglo XVIII” (capítulo VIII). En Estampas familiares en Iberoamérica: un
acercamiento desde la antropología y la historia. México D. F.: Centro de
Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en Antropología Social, 2010.
Porro,
Nelly R. “Los juicios de disenso en el Río de la Plata. Nuevos aportes sobre la
aplicación de la Pragmática de Hijos de Familia”, Separata del Anuario Histórico Jurídico Ecuatoriano,
V (1980): 193-229.
Porro,
Nelly R. “Extrañamientos y depósitos en
los juicios de disenso”, Revista de
Historia del Derecho, núm. 7 (1980): 123-149.
Porro,
Nelly R. “Conflictos sociales y
tensiones familiares en la sociedad virreinal rioplatense a través de los
juicios de disenso”, Apartado del Boletín
del Instituto de Historia Argentina y Americana Dr. Emilio Ravignani,
núm. 26 (1980): 361-392.
Quinteros,
Guillermo O. “Consideraciones en torno al encierro de los novios en los juicios
de disenso. Buenos Aires, 1776-1852”, Trabajos
y Comunicaciones (2ª Época), núms. 26/27 (2000-2001): 127-158.
Quinteros,
Guillermo O. “Los juicios de disenso en
Córdoba y Buenos Aires durante las décadas de 1830-1850. Una aproximación
comparativa” (capítulo IX). En Pensar y
construir los grupos sociales. Estrategias, integración y resistencia. Córdoba y Buenos Aires, siglo XVIII al XX.
Córdoba y La Plata: Centro de Estudios Históricos “Prof. Carlos S. A. Segreti” y Centro de Estudios de Historia Americana
Colonial, 2009.
Quinteros,
Guillermo O. Ser, sentir, actuar, pensar e imaginar en torno
al matrimonio y la familia: Buenos Aires, 1776-1860 [online] (La Plata:
Universidad Nacional de La Plata, 2010), http://www.memoria.fahce.unlp.edu.ar/tesis/te.446/te.446.pdf
Rípodas Ardanaz, Daisy. El matrimonio en Indias: realidad social y regulación jurídica.
Buenos Aires: Fundación para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura, 1977.
Rodulfo Cortés, Santos. El régimen de las Gracias al Sacar en Venezuela durante el periodo
Hispánico, Tomos I y II. Caracas:
Academia Nacional de la Historia, 1978.
Socolow, Susan. “Parejas bien constituidas: la
elección matrimonial en la Argentina Colonial, 1778-1810”, Anuario del IEHS, V (1990): 133-160.
Socolow, Susan. “Cónyuges aceptables: la elección de
consorte en la Argentina Colonial, 1778-1810” (capítulo VI). En Sexualidad y matrimonio en la América
hispánica, siglos XVI-XVIII. México D. F.: Grijalbo, 1991, 229-270. Traducción
de la edición original en inglés, Sexuality and marriage in Colonial Latin America. Nebraska: University
of Nebraska Press, 1989.
Stolcke, Verena. Racismo
y sexualidad en la Cuba colonial. Madrid: Alianza, 1992. Traducción de la
edición original en inglés, Marriage, class and colour in Nineteenth Century Cuba, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974.
Twinam, Ann. Vidas públicas, secretos
privados: género, honor, sexualidad e ilegitimidad en la Hispanoamérica
Colonial. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2009. Traducción de la
edición original en inglés, Public Lives, Private Secrets. Gender, Honor, Sexuality and Illegitimacy in
Colonial Spanish America. Standford: Standford University
Press, 1999.
* This article is a product of the study “The desire to
be White: social mobility and mixing in Colonial Buenos Aires (18th
century),” carried out in the framework of the pre-doctorate scholarship of the
Training Program for University Professors (2011-2015) of the Ministry for
Education within the Department of American History of the Universidad de
Sevilla (Spain).
[1] Bachelor in History
(graduated with honors) and Master’s Degree in American Studies in the
Universidad de Sevilla. Doctor in American history and Honorary Assistant in
the Department of American history in the Universidad de Sevilla. Professor in
the Courses Coordinated with Foreign Universities for the Faculties of
Philology, Geography and History of the Universidad de Sevilla and Researcher
in Training, and Scientific Secretary of the Permanent Seminar on Families and
Social Networks: Ethnicity and Mobility in the Atlantic World, since its
foundation. afuentes@us.es
[2] It is necessary to highlight that this was the name
given to the first version of the Pragmatic, proclaimed in 1776, but it has to
be taken into consideration that throughout the following decades the it
suffered additions and corrections, above all with the intention of approaching
the problems of the American continent more efficiently. The years 1778, 1783,
1787, 1788, 1790, 1792, 1793, 1798, 1803 and 1805 brought modifications and
reiterations to the corpus. The reform applied in 1803 especially stands out,
where the Pragmatic was sanctioned again, reaching its most popular variant, Real Cédula sobre Matrimonios de Hijos de
Familia (Royal Document), with
modifications of greater extent which will be developed throughout the present
text.
[3] Nelly R. Porro, “Conflictos
sociales y tensiones familiares en la sociedad virreinal rioplatense a través
de los juicios de disenso”, Section of the Boletín
del Instituto de Historia Argentina y Americana Dr. Emilio Ravignani, Issue
26 (1980): 361.
[4] Verena Stolcke, Marriage, class and
colour in Nineteenth Century Cuba, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1974.
[5] Ricardo Cicerchia, “Historia
de las prácticas, discursos y representaciones familiares. El espectáculo del
disenso en la ciudad secular”, Revista
Iberoamericana LXX: Issue 206 (Jan-Mar 2004): 50.
[6] Guillermo O. Quinteros, Ser, sentir, actuar, pensar e imaginar en
torno al matrimonio y la familia: Buenos Aires, 1776-1860 [online] (La Plata: Universidad Nacional de
La Plata, 2010), http://www.memoria.fahce.unlp.edu.ar/tesis/te.446/te.446.pdf, 43 (24 April
2015).
[7] Ricardo Cicerchia, “Historia
de las prácticas…”, 37.
[8] Paloma Fernández Pérez, El rostro familiar de la metrópoli. Redes de
parentesco y lazos mercantiles en Cádiz, 1700-1812, Madrid: Siglo XXI de
España, 1997, 125.
[9] Richard Konetzke, Colección de documentos para la historia de la formación social de Hispanoamérica: 1493-1810, vol. III, book I, Madrid: CSIC & Instituto Jaime Balmes,
1962, 46.
[10] Richard Konetzke, Colección de
documentos… 46.
[11] Viviana Kluger, “Los deberes
y derechos paterno-filiales a través de los juicios de disenso. Virreinato del
Río de la Plata (1785-1812)”, Revista de
Historia del Derecho, Issue 25 (1997): 366.
[12] Frédérique Langue,
“Revoltosos aunque caballeros. Los umbrales del honor en la Caracas del siglo
XVIII”, in Fronteras y sensibilidades en
las Américas, Madrid: Doce Calles, 2011, 73.
[13] Frédérique Langue, “Revoltosos aunque caballeros…”, 74-75.
[14] Several authors have so far devoted their efforts to unravelling the
meaning of Gracias al Sacar. See: Santos Rodulfo Cortés, El régimen de las Gracias al Sacar en Venezuela durante el periodo
Hispánico, Tomos I y II, Caracas, Academia Nacional de la Historia,
1978 and, above all, Ann Twinam, Public Lives, Private Secrets. Gender, Honor,
Sexuality and Illegitimacy in Colonial Spanish America.Buenos Aires, Fund
for Economic Culture, 2009, among many
other contributions from the same historian. It should be noted, moreover, that
for several years the author of this article has been working in this
direction, not forgetting the importance of de
jure whitening, but delving into the de
facto, through mechanisms such as marriage or the construction of powerful
family networks, passing unnoticed, with the approval of much of the society
and the scruple of the other, more frequently but without definite sanction of
the Crown.
[15] Daisy Rípodas Ardanaz, El matrimonio en Indias: realidad social y
regulación jurídica, Buenos Aires: Foundation for Education, Science and
Culture, 1977, 33.
[16] “Legitimation of don Melchor and don Agustín Varea y Lazcano, from La
Plata, sons of don Domingo Herboso y Figueroa and doña Gertrudis Varea y
Lazcano” (La Plata), General Archive of Indies (AGI, by its acronym in
Spanish), Charcas, 554, doc. 25, 1791.
[17] Ricardo Cicerchia, “Historia de las prácticas…”, 38.
[18] The approaches are
based on the intensity with which the Pragmatic of Marriages had influence
after its promulgation on the daily life of the subjects and, specifically, on
their most private sphere. Those who, like Susan Socolow, Monica Ghirardi or Ana
Teresa Fanchín, have delved into the parochial registers, detect a marked
graduality in the fulfilment of the norm. With different figures depending on
the idiosyncrasy and the context of the analyzed territory, it is possible to see after 1778 the
reduction of the number of interethnic marriages, as well as the growth of
consensual relations between these same individuals and the birth of their
corresponding illegitimate children.
[19] Susan Socolow, Sexuality and marriage in Colonial Latin
America, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1989.
[20] Ana Teresa Fanchín, “Entre
el prejuicio racial y el interés económico. Un caso de disenso en San Juan de
la Frontera a fines de la colonia” in Uniones
interétnicas en Hispanoamérica. Fuentes, avances y contenidos de la cuestión:
siglos XVII-XIX, Buenos Aires: Mnemosyne, 2010, 221-222.
[21] Pilar Gonzalbo Aizpuru,
“Afectos e intereses en los matrimonios en la ciudad de México a fines de la
colonia”, Historia Mexicana LVI, No.
4. (2007): 1121.
[22] Verena Stolcke, Marriage, class and color… 42.
[23] Nelly R. Porro, “Los juicios de
disenso en el Río de la Plata. Nuevos aportes sobre la aplicación de la
Pragmática de Hijos de Familia”, Offprint of Anuario Histórico Jurídico Ecuatoriano, V (1980): 195-196.
[24] For this dynasty, it was very clear that a strong state had to be
equipped in its territories in order to continue to maintain control,
especially focusing on those further away, where effective dominance was more
vulnerable. Even the Catholic Church had to suffer the continuous examples of
Bourbon regalism. Without going any further, the Pragmatic was one of the major
departures of this institution with the family, as up until now it had been the
only one responsible for settling conjugal matters and, from this promulgation,
they passed to a clear second stage, in that the priests had only the
possibility of respecting the royal judgments and of collaborating in their
implementation.
[25] Guillermo O. Quinteros,
“Consideraciones en torno al encierro de los novios en los juicios de disenso.
Buenos Aires, 1776-1852”, Trabajos y
Comunicaciones (2ª Época), Issues
26/27 (2000-2001): 158.
[26] Viviana Kluger, “Algunas
particularidades de los pleitos familiares en el Virreinato del Río de la
Plata, 1785-1812”, Revista de Historia
del Derecho, Issue 27 (1999): 239.
[27] “On the side of don Domingo Constanzo, against Pedro
José Martínez who intended to marry doña María, daughter of don Domingo and
that was the lawsuit about”, Buenos Aires, 15/09/1786. General Archive of the
Nation (AGN), Room IX, Court Section, 40-06-06, leg. C13, file. 3, 1786.
[28] Mónica Ghirardi, “Experiencias de desigualdad. El régimen matrimonial homogámico y sus
tensiones en Córdoba en la transición del Orden Monárquico al Republicano” in Mestizaje, sangre y matrimonio en
territorios de la actual Argentina y Uruguay, siglos XVII-XX, Buenos Aires:
Dunken, 2008, 46.
[29] “As for Don Domingo Constanzo…”, f. 1, r.
[30] Verena Stolcke, Marriage, class and color…
[31] This matter was
also regulted in the Pragmatic. After the father’s refusal to give consent to
his children’s marriage, the spouses-to-be had 8 days to appeal the decisión,
the resolution of the conflicto could not take longer than 1 month.
[32] The conchabado
was a worker of the colonial Rio de la Plata campaign in direct relation with
the agricultural tasks, that has a conchabo or paper of residence and stay in a
farm or farm to carry out rural works. As such, it is registered in the local enumeration.
This definition appears in Sandra Olivero
Guidobono, “Ni propietario ni conchabado; agregado. Fuerza laboral y solidaridad en la familia rural rioplatense: el Pago de
la Costa a mediados del siglo XVIII”, in Estampas
familiares en Iberoamérica: un acercamiento desde la antropología y la
historia, México: Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en
Antropología Social, 2010, 199.
[33] It is a Jesuit estancia in Uruguayan territory, but
under the jurisdiction of Buenos Aires between 1767, the year of the expulsion
of the Society of Jesus from American lands, and the emancipation of the
colonies. During those years, its administration depended on the Temporalities
Board of Buenos Aires and, later, on the Brotherhood of Holy Charity. The
profits produced from this served for the maintenance of the School of Orphan
Girls of Buenos Aires.
[34] “withdrawal from File of marriage promoted by Matías
Palacios, with his brother Pedro Ignacio Palacios”. AGN, Room IX, Court
Section, 42-02-02, leg. P14, file 9, 1797.
[35] “Case file promoted by Matías Palacios…”, f. 4, r.
[36] Carlos
A. Mayo, Porque la quiero tanto. Historia
del amor en la sociedad rioplatense (1750-1860), Buenos Aires: Biblos,
2004, 42.
[37] “Case file promoted by Matías
Palacios…”, f. 6 v.
[38] Pedro Ignacio was
part of this large group of poor whites
present in the colonies, who, despite not having enough to feed themselves,
clung to their status as such, for that was all they had left. They could not
bequeath their offspring with a better inheritance, and therefore, in the face
of any accusation that would call into question their whiteness, they would be
willing to invest whatever efforts were necessary to bring to the surface a
truth in which they believed blindly.
[39] “Case file promoted by Matías Palacios…”, f. 9 r.
& v.
[40] Verena Stolcke, Marriage, class and color… 106.