GUATEMALA VILLAGES OF THE 16TH CENTURY

Dan Stanislawski

                                                                                                Archive General de Indias, Seville. Aud. de Guatemala, leg. 128[64-6-1], 413 ff.

Tecayluca

su Mag^t

                    En la ciudad de Sant Salvador de la provincia de Guatemala

                        a veynte e ocho dias del mes de Novyenbre de myll e

                        quinientos y quarenta e ocho anos por los señores presidente

                        e oidores del audiencia e chancilleria rreal de su magestad

                        que en la dicha ciudad rreside fue tasado el pueblo de tecoyluca

                        que es en los termynos de la dicha cibdad que esta en cabeça de su

                        magestad mandose a los naturales del dicho pueblo que hagan en

                        cada un año dos simenteras de mahiz una en ynvierno

                        e otra en verano y en la del ynvierno syembren doze

                                hanegas y en la del verano ocho hanegas y lo benefi

                        cien cojan y encierren en el dicho pueblo e sienbren

                        diez hanegas de algodon e delo que dello se cogie

                        re e se les diere den cada año ciento e cinquenta

                         naguas e dozientos toldillos blancos e cient

                         guypiles e seis mantas grandes de pared pin

                         tadas del tamaño y manera que las acostumbran

                         dar e seis savanas blancas e que sean como

                    las acostumbran dar e sesanta arrobas de pescado

                        e veynte e cinco hanegas de sal e quinze hanegas

                        de frisoles e quinze cargas de agi e seis arrobas

                        de cera linpia e diez cantaros de myel e veynte

                        arrovas de vino e veynte de vinagre no an de dar

                        otra cosa ny se les a de llevar a los dichos Yndios

                        por ninguna via que sea ni comuten ninguna cosa

                  de un tribute en otro so la pena contenida

                      en las leyes e ordenanças por su magestad fechas para la

                      buena govemacion de las yndias el licendado Cerrato

                     el licenciado Pedro Rramirez el licenciado rrogel

The Spanish province of San Salvador in 1548   

The impression one gets in visiting twentieth century San Salvador is that of businesslike order, confirming the remark that they are "The Swiss of Central America". In the city of San Salvador--wonder of wonders—buses run on schedule. One has the impression of efficiency in going to a consular office of El Salvador in the United States, where information is made available quickly, as are good maps.

The editor and publisher of El Salvador News Gazette recently stated that "those who have worked with Salvadorans whether it is here (i.e. in El Salvador) or in the United States know that this is a country of merchants, not peasants. The first thing Salvadorans do if they're able to save a little extra money is to start a small business".

That commercial bent of modern El Salvador has roots that run through millenia of time and involve distant territories, particularly Mexico.

When the conquering Spaniards arrived, in the early sixteenth century, long lines of trade extended out of Tenochtitlan, the Aztec capital in central Mexico. They were not the invention of Aztec traders. Origins were remote: going back to the Toltecs in Tula, half a millenium earlier who established connections between central Mexico, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica (Diehl, Lornas, Wynn........'74;, p. 187); and previously, a similar organization probably existed to facilitate trade between Teotihuacan of central Mexico, before its fall in the seventh century, and Kaminaljuyu in Guatemala (Diehl., '83, p. 114). Even earlier, Mexicans of the plateau traded with Izapa near the Pacific coast of Chiapas; and ultimately with the Olmec of the Gulf.

The Olmecs

These people whose culture took form in the southern part of Vera Cruz and in part of Tabasco, may have been the aboriginal ancestors of Mexico/Central America trade. Some time after 1200 B.C., and continuing for almost a millenium, their trade network reached northwest into Oaxaca, Morelos, the plateau of Central Mexico (Coe, '86, p;. 72) and beyond to the present state of Guerrero; and toward the southeast to Chalchuapa in present El Salvador and beyond to Costa Rica (Sheets, '84, p. 86; Morley, Brainerd and Sharer, '83, p. 64).

The Olmec political organization and trade disappeared in the early fifth century, B.C. as mysteriously (to us) as it had begun more than half a millenium earlier (Coe, '86, p. 75), but the pattern of its trade routes was remembered at the local centers that had been involved. Exchanges were continued among them and to some degree with the more distant markets that had been known by the Olmecs.

Izapa

One such center, Izapa, whose inhabitants may have spoken the language of the Olmecs (its art style was clearly derived from them) is now a zone of remains in the low, hilly country about twenty miles from the Pacific shore of present Chiapas near the Guatemala border. Early settlement there may have been made at the beginning of the first millenium B.C., but the full development took place between 300 B.C. and A.D. 150. Its traders made contacts along the Pacific coast of Guatemala and up into the highlands near present Guatemala City; and at least one extension to the Vera Cruz coast (Coe, '86, pp. 55-5, Coe, '87, p. 51).

Kaminaljuya

Another important center was Kaminaljuyu, whose ruins lie at the edge of modern Guatemala City. Its early trade contacts may have been with the Olmecs who procured obsidian from Central America—probably from the site of El Chayal, not far from Kaminaljuyu (Sharer, '84, pp. 64-5, 71).

A simple settlement had been made at the location near the beginning of the first millenium B. C.; and its craftsmen were making articles for trade (Coe, '87, pp. 37, 40).

In the two centuries before the beginning of the Christian era the simple village of Kaminaljuyu had grown to become an important city with a sophisticated culture including large-scale sculpture, and pyramids. At least some of its citizens were literate. Its trade, and economic influence probably spread over much of the Guatemalan highlands; and its population numbers may have reached 50,000 (Borhegyi, '65, p. 64).

Decline followed in secceeding centuries until by A.D. 250 it was a settlement of negligible importance (Coe, '87, pp. 54-60), a condition that lasted until a revivification came about through inter-regional trade contacts, spurred by its connection with Teotihuacan on the Mexican plateau after about A.D. 400. At that time its quiet village life was changed by migrants from Mexico (Weaver, '72, pp. 148-49), a migration that was primarily religious and commercial (Borheghi, '65, p. 39).

By about A. D. 400, it again had become a great city, thriving on its trade connections involving the greater city of Teotihuacan where—it should be noted—one of the tutelary dieties was the God who later served the Pochteca traders. Representatives of that God at Teotihuacan suggest that institutionalized trade, which would have included it trading partners, had already been established.

At that time Kaminaljuyu's economic relations extended not only to the plateau of Mexico, but to Tikal and other cities in the Peten region near the base of the Yucatan peninsula (Coe, '87, pp. 64, 73-79). That commerce was active until the early seventh century when Teotihuacan—and apparently the network of exchange—was interrupted.

The Chorotegans

Other early Mexicans to enter Central America were the Chorotegans who settled in Nicaragua. One fact bears directly upon the time of their arrival in Central America: they had no cacao groves. "Not one tree" wrote Oviedo (Bk 42, ch. 4, 1976, p. 362). That being the case, they passed along the Pacific coast before the advent of the people who probably brought cacao from the Gulf coast in the last half of the first Christian millenium, the Cotzumalhuapans (Morley, Brainerd and Sharer, '83, pp. 117, 177; Coe, '87, pp. 84-88; Parsons, BILBAO, Vol. 2, 1969, pp. 149-50, 157, 160-61).

Cotzumalhuapa

The Cotzumalhuapans came from an undetermined part of Mexico at an unknown time according to one author (Coe, '87, pp. 84-88), who added that their art style and pottery indicated "latter Early Classic", which would be after the middle of A.D. first millenium. They may have originated in the state of Puebla or in western Mexico (Miles, '65, p. 284). Another author suggests that the date of their arrival in Guatemala may have been A. D. 600-900 and that their culture, with its distinctive sculptures is to be traced ultimately to Teotihuacan on the plateau of Mexico (Thompson '48, p. 50). Others, agreeing with the dates, suggest that there may be a relation with the expansion of the Gulf Coast Chontal Maya (Morley et al, '83, pp. 117, 177).

Many regions were tributary to Teotihuacan and they are shown to be sources of characteristics exibited in Cotzumalhuapa sculpture, including a cacao pod in "deified anthropomorphized manner" (Parsons, 1969, pp. 149-50, 157, 160-61; Coe, '87, p. 88). Deification suggests long previous association and importance..

These early Nahua migrations were primarily commercial and although the migrants brought their religion with them, apparently they were not insistent about it. If not pacific they at least preferred trade to trouble. It is to be noted that the builders of El Baul (near Cotzumalhuapa), like their Maya contemporaries, did not consider the question of defense in choosing their settlement sites (Thompson '48, p. 51), an indication that relations with their neighbors were amicable.

They settled, in most cases, in or near the rich cotton-and cacao-bearing areas which they managed to control, or even monopolize for trade (Borhegi, '65, p. 39).

Another author rejects a direct Teotihuiacan connection, and adds that "there are surer connections with the Gulf Coast plain where there is a similar concentration upon the ball game, death, human sacrifice, and the cultivation of cacao" (Coe, '87, pp. 84-88).

Izalcos

Additional Mexicans came into Central America and settled in the area of Los Izalcos in the southwest of present El Salvador, which had become an important producer of cacao by the time of the Spanish conquest. It had not been part of the native province of Cuzcatlan (present western El Salvador), and it did not become part of the Spanish province of San Salvador (essentially the native province of Cuzcatlan (See Fowler, '89, pp 155, 224-25). It was taken into the Spanish province of Santiago de Guatemala. Judging by its language, the people had settled the area before the advent of the Nicarao in Nicaragua (Lehmann, 1920, Vol. 2, pp. 990-91), perhaps by an eastward expansion of Cotzumalhuapa culture at about A.D. 900 (Fowler, '89, p. 40).

The question is then raised as to when cacao, originally from South America and presumably domesticated on the the Caribbean coast of Central America, was brought to the Pacific coast. Was it introduced there by the Cotzumalhuapans and taken farther by the Izalcoans?

The Nicarao

And did the Nicarao, coming from Mexico toward the end of the first Christian millenium, take it farther? Oviedo states unequivocably that the Nicarao brought cacao to Nicaragua where they monopolized its planting (Bk. 42, Ch. 4,1976, p. 362).

The centuries of time separating their migrations explain the considerable distinction between Mexican groups. Evidence of that fact can be seen in the disparate structures of the Chorotegans and the Nicarao. Chorotegan life was simpler, less rigorously controlled than that of the Nicarao, whose society included an aristocracy: chiefs and nobles living in elaborate enclaves (Stone, 1966, p. 215). To support such an élite there was an efficient collection of tribute. Little like it was any part of Chorotegan life (Stanislawski, '83, pp. 53, 60, and tables).

By the end of the first A.D. millenium, much of the Pacific coast area was occupied by Nahua speakers (Morley et al '83, p. 177). In general they held the best lands of the southern lowlands of Guatemala and of the upper Motagua valley (Thomplkson, '48, p. 12). The same apparently could be said with regard to the area of present western El Salvador, which they recognized as desirable land.

The Pipiles

Many different Mexican groups were called "Pipiles" by the Spanish chroniclers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Borhegyi '65, p, 38; Baron Castro, 1978, p. 99). This somewhat pejorative name meaning "children" in Nahuatl was originally given to the Cuzcatleco (Salvadoran) natives by the Mexicans who came with Pedro de Alvarado because, although the Cuscatleco speech was comprehensible, it sounded childish to them (Barón Castro, 1978, p. 38).

The language sounded childish to those Mexicans who came with Alvarado in the early sixteenth century, because it was a mixture, and partly archaic. "The problem of the Pipiles", the so-called "enigmatic people" (Coe '87, p. 84) may be resolved by recognizing that, although they all spoke a Mexican tongue, they represented groups from different Mexican areas who arrived at different times through almost a millenium; each group with its own idiosyncracies of speech.

Probably the Pokoman Maya and the Nahua Pipil populations were intermixed in El Salvador and southeast Guatemala in pre-conquest times, and the Pokoman maintained linguistic superiority in Guatemala, while the language of the Pipil became dominant in El Salvador. However, each of the areas included zones and settlements of the other's speech. Pokoman remnants remained in towns of western El Salvador. Probably the middle Motagua valley was bilingual with greater Mexican proportions being added by auxiliaries of conquest times who had chosen to remain there. Mexican traders were the basis of several settlements in southeastern Guatemala, including Escuintla (Escuintepeque), where the population still spoke their language in the seventeenth century (Vazquez de Espinosa, par. 92, pp. 632-33).

The dominance of the Pipiles in the Spanish province of San Salvador--that is, the area west of the Lempa River in present El Salvador—may have been a result of friendly trade with the Xinca. Those natives, of the upper coastplain and piedmont of present southeast Guatemla were among the most ancient inhabitants of Central America, being there long before Mexicans arrived (Termer, 1926, p. 38; Lehmann,.....p. 1021; Stone, 1948, p. 189; Thompson, 1948, p. 10); and their antiquity may be further indicated by the fact that their language does not belong to any known linguistic group (Mason, 1950, p. 174 ).

When Alvarado and the Spaniards first came to Central America, the Xinca were dominant in the area extending east of Escuintla to the Paz River, the present border between Guatemala and El Salvador (Lehmann, Vol. 2, p. 729).

Their presence may have been important in the maintenance of the Pipiles in the territory of present El Salvador. The two peoples had probably lived and traded peacefully through centuries; and the Xinca were one of the few groups in Central America that used poisoned weapons which were a threat to the Mexicans and Mayas who did not (Lehmann, Vol 2, p. 278).

The wound that eventuated in a shortening of Alvarado's leg (Mackie, p. 17) may have been that of a poisoned arrow. Gomera reported poisoned weapons for the region of Acajutla (Gomera, 1965, p. 319). It was there that Alvarado received his wound. Poisoned weapons may have allowed the Xinca (and perhaps the Lenca, farther east) to withstand to some extent, and at least to mitigate, the effects of the Spanish conquest.

If the Mexican traders, the so-called Pipiles, lived amicably with the Xinca and Lenca, and such seems to have been the case, they were given an important degree of protection in their province of Cuzcatlan.

The Pipil legacy can be seen in twentieth century El Salvador, west of the Lempa River. Before the disruption of warfare of the 1980s, it was an efficiently organized commercial unit, heir to the millenial traders/farmers out of Mexico whose mercantile activities took them along the Pacific coast of Central America, and whose agricultural inheritance gave them cognizance of the land potential.

Towns of the 1548 Report Considered in Alphabetical Order:

APOCOPA/#53/60 tributaries, Under Cristoval Ceron

Barón Castro (1978, p. 603), and Fowler ('89, pp. 153-54) equate Apocopa with present Apopa, north of San Salvador.

Gálvez in 1740 (1936, p. 30) referred to Santa.Catarina Apocopa, with 113 Indian tributaries and 56 mulatos or ladinos in a militia (formed jointly with the town of Nejapa) to guard the coasts.

In 1532, it was one of few settlements reported to have pottery makers (Marroquin, p. 221; and Fowler, loc. cit.) suggests that the activity possibly goes back to the Late Postclassic period of time; but its tributaries were not listed as paying pottery in 1548. Perhaps their production was included in that paid by Tonacatapeque, not far away.

ARCATAO/ #72/200, under Miguel Diaz

A Lenca settlement (Fowler, '89, p. 177) in North Cabañas, near the Honduras border, at 500 meters elevation.

In 1548 the town paid relatively large tributes, including 600 lbs of cotton planted, 50 pairs of cutaras, and 80 of alpargatas; also it furnished the services of four herders.

In 1532 Miguel Diaz held a share (150 tributaries) of the coastplain town of Xalocinagua. Also he held a town which he called Xuzclan, with 280 tributaries, He described it as being "in Chontal", and "at war" (Marroquin, 1968,pp. 214-15). By 1548 he had relinquished his portion of Xalocinagua and held only Arcatao, which was in the area formerly "at war". Did the town called "Xuzclan" in 1532 become "Arcatao" after peace was established?

In 1740 Gálvez described it as being in a rocky land, hot and unhealthy (p. 29).

There may be some reason to believe that the location has been changed again. In 1989 a travel writer visited it by going for eight hours from the nearest town along a path through dense forests to the location four miles from the Honduras border. His description of the territory does not suggest an area that could pay the tributes listed in 1548.

ATEMPAMAÇAGU A / #42/30, under Francisco Cabeças.

Present Masahuat, on the upper Lempa River, southeast of Lake Güija.

Fowler identifies it as being "a Late Postclassic Pipil site" , which would date it in a period earlier than a.d. 1500 (1989, p. 252; also see Morley, Brainerd, and Sharer, 1983, p. 150)).

ATEO/ #5/ ?, under Juan de Molina (who also held Opico, #4, a smaller town)

 #12/90, " Antonio de Melara (his only holding).

The two entries represent the division of the payments by one town. By the Marroquin document (1968, pp. 222, 232 ) we are informed that Melara and Johan Diaz divided the payment of tribute equally. Also see Barón Castro, 78, p. 602; Fowler, '89, Table 10.3, p.166). In 1770 Cortés y Larraz mentioned only one town of that name—Pipil-speaking—which had several annex towns at some distance away that were separated from it by mountains. (Vol I, pp. 95-99). ( Ponce mentioned another town, nearby named Atempan-Ateo which does not appear in other records-(Ponce, Vol I, pp. 400-401.)

Payments in 1548 to Melara were somewhat greater than those to Molina, perhaps because Molina also received payments from Opico which made his totals comparable to those of Melara.

Present Ateo, on the Talnique River, a tributary of the Sucio and ultimately of the Lempa, is located at an elevation of 475 meters (1558 feet).

ATEUPA/ #57/35, under Juan Davila.

One of the coastplain towns that no longer exists.

CACALUTLA (AND ÇAPOTLAN)/#31/60, under the minor son of Julian de la Muela.

Cacalutla is present San Julián, about 40 kms. west of San Salvador (Barón Castro, 78, p. 606).

Çapotlan, which is bracketed with Cacalutla, may be, as maintained by Lardé y Larín, present Santa Isabel Ixhuacan (pp. 430-31). Gálvez, in 1740, places Santa Isabel Zapotán in approximately that location (p.24); and Cortés y Larraz, a generation later, mentions Zapotán as being in the curacy of Guaymoco (present Armenia), of the same general area.

Muela held in his encomienda five small towns, all apparently in this same area. All entries included payments of salt; two paid fish. Two entries included instructions about cultivating a recently planted grove of cacao trees. One included a payment of balsam: not surprising, for this was the area of the "balsam coast".

CENÇONTEPEOUE/ #13/200, under Cristobal Salvago

Present Sensuntepeque is located at 650 meters (2133 feet) elevation in the department of Cabañas of northern El Salvador, about fifteen kilometers from the Honduras border. Fowler, ('89, p. 64) considers it to have been a "Lenca penetration". Lardé y Larín agrees that it was a Lenca foundation, but adds that it later came under the influence of the Mexican Pipiles (p. 460), who gave it its Nahuat name.

CHACALINGO/ #16/40. under Francisco Diaz and Lucas Gonçalez

Fowler (p. 172, and see his figure #3) considers it to have been a "late pre-prehistoric Pipil settlemen"t, westnorthwest of Chalatenango.

In 1532 it traded pitch pine, textiles, and maize. By 1548 the Spanish had introduced grazing animals: the town furnished two herders in tribute.

It no longer exists ( Barón Castro (p. 602).

CHALCHUAPA/ #40/ 70. under the minor son of Alonso Martín Granado.

This may be the site of the earliest permanent human settlement in El Salvador—as early as 1200 b.c. (Sheets, '84, p. 86). The Olmecs, early traders, established a settlement there to function as a center for the extraction and elaboration of local materials and as a distribution center in their system of exchange (Willey, 1984, pp. 366-67). Remnant flakes attest to lumps of obsidian being brought there from the Ixtepeque volcano, 40 kilometers away, to be fashioned by local workmen (Hammond, '82, p. 231). It was the southeasternmost trading colony of the Olmecs (Sharer, '84, p. 73).

The site was chosen for several pertinent reasons: it was near sources of fresh water at both the Trapiche springs and Lake Cuscachapa. The broad valley in the center of which it is settled is fertile, with moderate temperatures and with about eighty inches of rainfall annually: all excellent for crops. In addition to these qualities—and perhaps more decisive—it is midway on a trade route between the coast and the obsidian deposits at Ixtepeque (Sheets, 1984, p. 188).

A striking feature representing this early period of Olmec settlement at Chalchuapa is a twenty meter high (sixty-six feet) pyramid, modelled after the one at La Venta, an Olmec site in western Tabasco. The distance between Chalchuapa and La Venta is about 850 kilometers, considerable but not surprising as the Olmecs also traded with the great valley of present Mexico City and beyond with places in the state of Guerrero (Sheets, loc.cit, Soustelle, 1984, p. 84).

This southern area lay along the principal routes between upland Mexico and Central America, an area to become the prime zone of cacao cultivation. Also the Olmecs took such local resources as jadeite and obsidian from the nearby highlands.

After several centuries of contact and dominance, Olmec influence at Chalchuapa began to decline about 400 b.c. With that change came the establishment of an indigenous Salvadoran area development that continued through several centuries. It was there, in that period of time, that the southern Maya civilization may have emerged.(Morley, et al., '83, p. 63). These Mayas took control of both the long-distance trade routes and the critical local resources. Because of such advantages, southern Maya societies became the most prosperous of their day, and established stable political institutions— hereditary theocracies (Morley, et al, '83, pp. 87, 89). In subsequent centuries migrants that were to have important consequences for the region, came from Mexico: Nahuat-speakers (Mexicans) moved into the cotton and cacao-bearing lands, which, some centuries later they managed to control—or even monopolize (Borhegyi, '65, p 39).

During the early Classic period (a.d. 300-600) Nahua-speakers from Teotihuacan (Esperanza phase) moved down the Pacific coast. During the next period others, the "Cotzumalhuapa Pipil" from western Mexico or Puebla followed. (Miles '65, p. 284). These were trading ventures and as Pipiles may have controlled much of the cacao land perhaps as early as that time (Miles, op. cit., p. 282), they probably extended their trade into the cacao lands of present El Salvador, including territory controlled by Chalchuapa.

By about a.d. 500, Chalchuapa had become tributary to a Maya-Chorti kingdom with its capital at Copan in present Guatemala. But ultimately that kingdom lost strength and by about a.d. 900, another Maya group, the Pokomam had become strong in the region (Willey, '84, pp. 366-67; Henderson, '81, p. 71).

Fowler believes that Pipiles (Mexicans) were in control of the Chalchuapa valley in the period 900-1200 (p. 42), but that it was seized by the Pokoman in late pre-conquest times (pp. 48, 55). But Mexican connections continued, as evinced by the green obsidian from Pachuca (north of the valley of Mexico City) that has been found in Early Postclassic levels (Fowler, p. 189).

Subsequent to — or perhaps coincident with — the Pokomam period of dominance, were further incursions of Nahuat-speakers, and much of the Pacific coast, in post-classic times was occupied by Nahuat-speaking Pipiles (Morley, et al, '83, p. 177).

In 1532 Juan de Arevalo, presumably the man whom Jorge de Alvarado (then acting governor in place of his brother Pedro) sent to Honduras as a "leader" (caudillo ) in that conquest, was the encomendero of "Chilchuapa", with 300 tributaries (Marroquin, p. 230). His name does not appear in the tribute list of 1548, and Chalchuapa, #40, is under Martin Granado and credited with only 70 tributaries. The decrease in the number of tributaries is abnormal. One may wonder if Indians had been transferred by the Spanish from there to Ciguateguacan, which, in 1532 reported only 240, and in 1548, 540.

Arevalo reported in 1532 that maize and cotton were abundant, and, in addition to the tributes to him, the tributaries paid for the clothes and subsistence of 100 slaves in the mines — which were elsewhere: he testified that the village itself had no gold or mines.

Lardé y Larín's statement (p. 128) that in 1548 the men of the town spoke Pipil whereas the women spoke Pokomam is not verified by a citation, but it might well be true, if Mexican traders had taken Pokomam wives. Miles and others have pointed to the remnant groups of Mayas, including those at Chalchuapa, among the Pipil settlements (Miles, '57, p. 752).

According to the tribute list of 1548, the town paid 120 xiquipiles of cacao, among its various tributes, an item that was not possible at the elevation of the town (710 meters - 2329 feet). Perhaps it controlled lower lands or the cacao was obtained through trade.

Father Ponce, who passed through in 1586, referred to it as a large settlement. He was struck with the many tree-gourds ("xiquiras ") which they made into cups, vases, bowls and "some of which they decorated curiously and from which they drink their chocolate and other things" (Vol. I, p. 323).

Gálvez in 1740 reported that the majority of inhabitants was Indian, but that a large minority was made up of ladinos, mulatos y meztizos .

In 1780 Cortés y Larraz reported that although one half of the inhabitants were ladinos, there were not more because the Indians owned the land and would not permit ladinos to build houses without permit — which, apparently, they were chary of giving (Vol. I, pp. 231 ff) .

CHICONGUA with Tepeçontle/ #457140, under Alonso Morcillo

Relatively high tributes were paid, including cotton (400 lbs. planted) and fish (208 lbs).

Chicongua is not now known; Tepeçontle might refer to either of the present Tepezontes (San Migual or San Juan), which are south of Lake Ilopango. Being listed together implies contiguity; Chicongua and Tepeçontle may have merged.

CHICONGUEZA/ #81/56, under Juan de Tovar.

Present Nueva Concepcion in southern Chalatenango department, at about 300 meters (984 feet) elevation. At the time of the conquest it was a Chorti settlement (Fowler, p. 64)

CHULTEUPAN/ #27/20. under Salvago

Present Chiltiupan at 680 meters (2231 feet), on the southern slope in La Libertad department. In 1548 it paid 1500 lbs. of salt, and 12 chickens. Gálvez, in 1740 (p.25) wrote that it produced a little balsam, maize, chickens, cacao, and cotton.

CHINAMECA/ #58/240, under Bartolomé Garcia

Modern San Francisco Chinameca, south of Lake Ilopango.

CICACALCO/ #76/140, under Manuel Hernandez.

Barón Castro (p. 604) records it as extinct. Browning (p. 305) believes it to represent present Caluco, east of Sonsonate. Its position and tributes would not suggest any dispute with the latter conclusion.

CIGUATEOACAN/ #70/540, under Antonio Docampo

This was the largest town recorded in the San Salvador province (present Santa Ana) and was part of the largest encomienda. Its tributes were relatively low in proportion to its population except for its payment of cacao— 350 xiquipiles, the highest of the province. Docampo also held town #70, whose tributaries were obligated to work his cacao grove. In addition to those payments, he acquired twenty five xiquipiles of cacao in exchange for the services of four servants and 300 lbs. of wheat that were to be planted.

The elevation of the town is about 640 meters (2100 feet), which is near or beyond that absolute limit for the tree; with rainfall only slightly more than sixty inches per year, and with more than five months of drought, it is not a promising site for cacao. While it is true that Ponce mentioned cacao trees in a canyon outside of the town (Vol. 1, pp. 321 ff), production sufficient for the tribute was unlikely (see Bergman, '69, p. 93). The encomendero , Docampo, probably held lowland territory as an annex to the town.

CIGUATEPEOUE/ #15/200, under Francisco Diaz and Lucas Gonçalez

Tributes were relatively high, especially that of toldillos, more than twice the average payment. Barón Castro (78, pp 62, 605 n.6) reports its being listed an an hacienda by Gutierrez y Ulloa, as a remnant of a pre-Columbian settlement, east of San Vicente, long gone; and now, he wrote , the remnant is gone.

CINACANTEPEQUE. See Colçumea

CINACANTLAN / #84 / 86, Under Sancho de Figueroa

Lardé y Larin (pp. 200-201) wrote of the prehistoric settlement of Tzinacantan, north of Jayaque, in the canton of Las Flores, where the archaeology indicates a splendid past. Browning (#29 on his map) identifies it with modern village of Las Flores. On the 1973 map that town is in the coastal highlands at about 3300 feet elevation: hardly possible for planting of cacao; or for taking salt, and fish. It could, of course, have controlled territory downslope. Baron Castro (1978, p. 604) wrote that the town of Cinacantlan no longer exists; Fowler (p. 166) agrees.

Marroquin, 1532, lists Çuacanclan as being divided between Figueroa (p. 210), "one half with 90 casas" and Cr. de Hierros (p.227), "one half with 75 casas".

In the section dealing with Figueroa (p. 210), the place is described as being near the sea, in rough country. It paid fish, salt, chickens, a little cacao, and sometimes some textiles ("rropa blanca"). The cacao was in well-watered valleys.

In the section considering the holding of Hierros (p. 227), it was described a hot, rough country. It paid salt, fish, "y cuasco" ( cacao?), some textiles (rropa), chickens, honey, wax and other supplies. Cacao was paid (but the text is unclear: the cacao may refer to the town of Tequepa, also held by the encomedero).

On p. 210, the country is described as "todo peñoles y entre los quales algunos vallezillos de mucha agua donde tienen sus cacaotales."

According to Fowler (1989, p. 166) "The exact location of the extinct settlement of Zinacantlan (or Zinacantan)—the easternmost cacao producer of San Salvador—is unknown, but evidence from the Relación Marroquin suggests that it was situated in the eastern extreme of the Balsam Coast, west of San Juan Talpa, in the vicinity of La Libertad". He locates it there on his figure #5.

C1TALA/ #83/160, under Gaspar de Cepeda

On the upper Lempa River, due north of San Salvador, against the Honduras border, at an elevation of 715 meters (2346 feet). That it was required to pay wheat in tribute (600 lbs. to be planted) may have been more optimistic than realistic, although nearby highlands perhaps made it promising. Gálvez testified that it was cold country (p. 30); and their pine forests were the source of the pitch, which had been the case in 1548 when forty jugs were paid in tribute. That no cotton was to be planted nor toldillos to be paid was reasonable in view of its elevation and temperatures, a deficiency that was made up by another of Cepeda's holdings, the town of Naoçalco, a lowland settlement, which planted a large amount of cotton and paid an inordinately high number of toldillos, the highest number by a considerable amount paid by any town in the province. Citalá's nearness to Honduras explains its payment of liquidambar the only town outside of Honduras that did so. Lardé y Larin's contention that the Maya-Chorti were inhabitants of the town is confirmed by the Bishop Cortés y Larraz in 1770 (Vol I, p. 210).

Citalá may have been an ancient trading center, otherwise why would Cepeda, an important conqueror have taken it in 1532 and continued to hold it in 1548. At least it had become one by 1548. Its payment of pitch must have been for Cepeda to sell to seacoast boatmakers. The Indians must have exchanged additional pitch for the extraordinary amount of fish that they were obliged to pay him in tribute, which could hardly have come from stream-fishing.

 COATEPEQUE / #41 / 30, under the minor son of Alonso Martín Granado.

Present Coatepeque, about eight kilometers southeast of Santa Ana,was reported by Father Ponce in 1586 as being a town of Pipiles (Vol I, p. 324). The tribute of 300 lbs. of planted wheat may have been possible at its elevation of 840 meters (2756 feet), but, as in other cases, the hope may have been greater than the result.

COLÇUMEA AND CINACANTEPEOUE / #32/40. under the minor son of Julian de la Muela.

Both towns are now extinct (Barón Castro, p.602). That they were on the south slope of the coastal mountains is indicated by the tribute payments of balsam, salt, and fish, and that their encomendero required labor in his cacao grove.

COYO/ #49/60, under Cristoval de Campos. This part had been held by Gines Muñoz in 1532. Presumably he died and his share was taken by Campos.

COYO/ #61/108, the part under Garcia de Alfaro in 1548, as it was in 1532.

For each of the above-listed entries it is stated that the respective encomenderos held one half; yet the numbers of tributaries assigned to each are not equal. In this case, as in many others, the total payments made to each encomendero were apparently calculated not in view of an exact division of the total payment but by keeping in mind the total number of tributaries in the respective encomiendas. That of Campos contained only one other town: Tonala with ten tributaries, which paid only two items: fish and salt; whereas Alfaro held three towns with a total of 295 tributaries who paid large tributes, including labor in his cacao grove (which must have been somewhat downslope from either of the present "coyos").

It is tempting to associate these two entries with present Sacacoyo and Tepecoyo, not far from each other, west of San Salvador; but the text of the tribute list is ambiguous. It reads, regarding #49, "the half of the pueblo that is in the limits and jurisdiction of the city of San Salvador", which implies that one half was in another jurisdiction; but no entry of the name Coyo is to be found in the tribute lists of any other province. For the Coyo numbered 61 in some other cases the products of two adjacent, or nearby, towns were considered in total and divided between encomenderos. It may have been so with these two settlements.

The instructions for the tributaries of town #61 present a problem: the Indians were obligated to clean and cultivate the cacao grove that the encomendero had planted in the village. As both towns seem to be at too great an elevation for cacao, a grove would probably have been a hazardous venture; but in view of the early attempts to grow wheat at elevations ill-suited to it, the optimism of the encomendero may have prevailed; or the authority of the towns may have covered lands downslope.

Barón Castro (p. 603) believes that both of the towns of the tribute list are now gone. He may be right, but that does not account for the present towns that include the suffix in their names.

COYULTITAN . See Oloquilta.

CUXUTEPEQUE / #64 / 400. under the minor sons of Hernan Perez.

Present Cojutepeque northeast of Lake Ilopango which Fowler identifies as a Pipil center (p. 46).

In 1548 it was part of the second largest encomienda in San Salvador, under the minor sons of Hernan Perez. It paid very large tributes. Fowler calls attention to the fact that it paid the highest tribute in maize planted (p. 157), and second to only one in the payment of beans (p. 159); and then it was important for making mats (petates ). (If it continued that skill, it was not noted in 1548).

Sixteen years earlier—in 1532—the town had been divided between three encomenderos : Rodrigo Diaz, Pedro de Puella, and Sancho de Figueroa (Marroquin, pp. 209-10).The first two no longer appeared in 1548; and Figueroa's share was included with those of Diaz and Puella to be put under the Perez boys. Figueroa, however was compensated by the grant of two other towns.

In 1532 the encomenderos reported that the town traded in chili, maize, beans, fish from the lake; and although there was but little cotton, the Indians made toldillos, and striped mantas for the walls (Marroquin report, pp. 209-10).

The report is clear, from the testimony of the three encomenderos that in 1532 there was little cotton, yet on the tribute list the second highest payment of planted cotton was required. Either the intervening sixteen years had seen a great expansion of cotton planting, or the natives in 1548 had to go to cotton country to plant the crop.

CUZCATAN/ #69/160. under Pedro Nuñez de Guzman, who had, in 1529 held a half interest in Cuzcatlán (Kramer et al, '90, p. 12).

CUZCATAN/ #80/170, under Juan Vazquez de Coronado.

In 1532, "Cuzcaclán" was divided between Antonio de Bermudez with 330 tributaries, and Pedro Nuñez de Guzman with 400; but each part was described as being one half. The name of Antonio de Bermudez does not appear on the 1548 list: his part of this town had been allotted to Juan Vazquez de Coronado.

The two entries of 1548 represent, with minor exceptions, an equal division of tributes between Vazquez de Coronado and Nunez de Guzman.

The Indian town of that name was not in the location of present Cuzcatlan Antiguo, but at La Bermuda about 30 kilometers away where the Spaniards first established themselves, but later — in 1541 or 1542 — moved to the present site (Termer, 1954 - mimeograph, p. 9), which is now part of San Salvador. (In Ponce's time it was one league away: Vol I, p.400.)

ÇACATECOLUCA/ #8/400, under Juan de Medina (his sole holding).

Present Zacatecoluca, an important city located at 190 meters (623 feet) elevation, southeast of San Salvador.

In 1548, its tributes were among the largest paid to any encomendero; but no cacao, a situation soon remedied. García de Palacio (1576) wrote that just prior to that date, cacao had been developed to the extent that the Nonualcos (of which this town was a part: see Cortés y Larraz, Vol I, p. 137) rivalled "the Izalcos", the area in present southwest El Salvador which had been appropriated by the Santiago encomenderos because of its wealth in cacao (García de Palacio, 1881, p. 33)

ÇAPOTLAN - See Cacalutla

ÇOQUITLAN/#55/7, under Juan Davila

A minor town in a small encomienda. The town, now extinct, (Baron Castro, p. 603) was, presumably, on the lowland: its only payments were of salt and fish.

ÇOYAPANGO/ #75/90, under Antonio Docampo

Ponce (Vol. I, p. 398) reported Tzoyapango as being a Pipil town near Xilopango (now Soyapango is part of the eastern outskirts of San Salvador city). Both it and Xilopango were part of the large encomienda of Docampo.

GILOVASCO/ #20/220, under Lope Pardo

Present Ilobasco is about 20 kilometers Northeast of Lake Ilopango.

GUACOTIQUE / #29/170, under Mancio de Ferreras.

Present Guacotecti (Barón Castro, p. 602), just west of Sensuntepeque in Cabañas department. Probably of Lenca origin (Lardé y Larin, p. 177). Fowler (p. 64) believes that it could have been a Postclassic penetration by the Lenca), which later came under Pipil influence.

GUALÇAPA/ #24/40, under Gaspar de Cepeda, one of the important encomenderos of San Salvador jurisdiction.

Its site is now unidentified. It is tempting to suggest modern Guazapa, but that seems unlikely. Cepeda's other towns were in the north; and a small appendage of no particular importance at some distance away seems improbable.

GUEYMOCO/ #19/220, under Antonio de Figueroa (which he had held in 1532).

A town established by Mexicans (Pipil settlement, according to Fowler, p-177)

Present Armenia, at 565 meters (1850 feet) elevation.

It was a prosperous town, located in a productive area that paid considerable tributes to its encomendero. Pineda, in the third quarter of the sixteenth century, described it as being in a "hot and healthful" area where the agriculture included many things; and the Spaniards had cacao groves, the harvest which they took to "the Izalcos" to be sold. Also the profits from balsam were large (pp. 454-55). In 1576 Palacio wrote of its great balsam trees: up to fifty-five feet tall. (It would seem that the Spaniards had taken over these balsam trees: the Indians of Gueymoco were not listed as paying that product in tribute). Garcia de Palacio also attested to the prosperity of the town (1881, p. 28)

GUYCILTEFEQUE/ #78 /14, under Juan de Tovar

Barón Castro (1974, p. 604) identifies it with present Huisiltepeque, in the department of Cuscatlán, northeast of San Salvador, on the Michapa River.

LANGUI/#52/75. under Mari Ruana

Its tributes were normal for the number of tributaries.

Barón Castro identifies it as a pueblo, now extinct, that was in the jurisdiction of Metapan in northern Salvador (p. 603, n.27 on p. 607).

Browning locates it at the northeast of Lake Güija.

Fowler locates it north of Lake Güija on his fig. #3; on p. 149 he refers to a Langue in Honduras, which, on a modern map is east of Morazan.

THE MAÇAGUAS

The word for deer in Nahuat is mazat. Fuentes y Guzman gives the etymology of Maçagua as deriving from a Nahua term meaning "the deer that flees" (Tomo II, p. 78, 1933). Thompson noted the importance of the animal to the religion of the people in the region ('48, pp. 9, 14), which is confirmed by the number of times its name is given to towns. Maçagua appears four times on the 1548 tribute list for the province of San Salvador: numbers 36, 39, 43, and 51. (It also appears twice on the tribute list of Santiago de Guatemala). The three syllables appear again in number of 42 of the San Salvador list in the name Atempamaçagua, and in number 43, Comaçagua.

Number 36 of San Salvador included two small towns: Maçagua and Uxaca, referring to settlements near Lake Güija. (Browning's numbers 42 and 43, map no. 3. Also see his page 493; Barón Castro, page 603 and note 17 indicates the same area, writing that the ancient names were Huixaca-Mazahua.)

Number 42, Atempamaçagua, is present Masahuat, southeast of Lake Güija (Barõn Castro, p. 603; Browning's #45, map 3; Cortés y Larraz, Vol. 1, p. 223, referred to Atecpam-Mazagua, four leagues from its cabecera, Texistepeque; Gálvez, in 1740, reported it to be near Metapan: p. 24; Fowler '89, fig. 5 shows it as "Atempa": his number 3).

In the Marroquin report of 1532 (p. 211), Martin de Lora held Comaçagua, described as having 250 houses, in rugged territory with many ravines, two leagues from the sea (which describes the position of present Comasagua). The encomendero reported that he wasn't sure of the extent of land included in the municipality.

As the elevation of the village was too great for a successful cacao plantation, the phrase "in the village" obviously meant "within the municipality" the extent of which was unknown to the encomendero . It must have included territory downslope; and that the plantation was not immediate to the village is indicated by the fact that official instruction included the injunction that the workers, when cultivating the grove, were to be fed meat, bread, and chilate by the encomendero : i.e. they were not close enough to their houses to be fed at home.

In 1740, Gàlvez (p. 25) reported that the town enjoyed healthy but somewhat cold temperatures. Cacao was not listed as being among its products.

Two other Maçaguas—numbers 39 and 51—refer to present San Pedro Masahuat and San Antonio Masahuat respectively, south of Lake Ilopango. The 1532 report of Marroquin seems to be that of one town divided between Francisco Cabeças (p. 216) and Francisco de Leon (pp. 225-26); but probably the products of two towns were grouped together and "more or less" equally divided between the two Spaniards. Each was credited with 170 tributaries "more or less", which was also said to be one half.

In 1548 each of these men was the encomendero of a Maçagua: respectively number 39 under Cabeças, and number 51 under Leon. The tributes were comparable but not equal: Cabeças received a larger share. Each received considerable payments of salt, probably taken from the Estero de Jaltepeque, less than twenty-five kilometers southsoutheast of the towns.

In the 1740 report of Gálvez (p. 26), San Pedro had 100 tributaries and San Antonio 72. If those proportions obtained in 1548, San Pedro was probably in the encomienda of Cabeças and San Antonio in that of Leon.

One other town with this name, Santa Catarina Masahuat, in present southwest El Salvador, has been identified by some scholars as being one of those on the tribute list of San Salvador in 1548. That conclusion seems to be negated by the fact that the town was located well within the boundaries of the area tributary to Santiago. That the town does not appear on the Santiago list probably indicates that it was an "annex" of one of the nearby towns.

METAPA

Two towns of this name appear on the list: #6, under Lope Pardo with 100 tributaries, and #46, under Pedro Ceron with the same number of tributaries. (In 1532 Ceron held two thirds of the town with probably 212 tributaries.) Perhaps the two entries referred to the one town presently northeast of Lake Güija. One author states that at one time there were two towns: Santiago Metapán and San Pedro Metapán, but that a volcanic eruption destroyed Santiago and its inhabitants joined those of San Pedro (Lardé y Larin, '57, p. 242). Barón Castro lists both entries to be identified with present Metapán, suggesting that the tributes of one town were divided between two encomenderos (78, p. 602-03). Browning (his number 39) indicates present Metapán.

Pedro Ceron is said in the document to have been allotted two thirds of the town's (#46) tributaries, but the payments as shown below hardly show that to be the case:

* The question mark after the payment of maize by town #6 is there because the text is unclear, but the probability is that of the figure shown.

MONTEPEQUE - See Tenangos

NAOÇALCO/ #21/280, under Gaspar de Cepeda.

At least three authors equate this town with present Nahuitzalco: Browning (p. 491), Barón Castro (p. 570), and Fowler (pp. 155, 157). After his identification, Barón Castro remarks that it is curious because the town is listed under San Salvador although being in the midst of Santiago towns.

It is more than curious, it is probably impossible. The location in the midst of the Santiago towns would make it a unique example (in 1548) of an encomendero holding towns in two provinces. (Royal instructions in 1535 declared that an encomendero had to live in the province of his encomienda, cited by Orellana, p. 139. In legajo 128 there is but one exception to that rule: Francisco de Montejo the conqueror of Yucatan, in 1549, held towns in the province of Mérida and others in Tabasco.)

In 1586, Father Ponce visited the town of Nahuitzalco, which he described as a small village of Mexican-speakers. He made no suggestion that it had greater former importance and greater size (Vol I, pp. 403-04).

Tributes paid to the encomendero Cepeda by Naoçalco suggest a relatively large town. He was one of the original conquerors with Pedro de Alvarado in Guatemala (Kelly, 1932, p. 233) and, with Jorge de Alvarado, one of the founders of San Salvador, where, in 1528 he was a regidor (Remesal. Vol. 2, p. 271). High tributes were paid to him by the town, e.g., one third more toldillos than the encomenderos receiving the next highest payment.

He was probably rewarded by being given this town in encomienda just after the conquest of San Salvador territory. In 1532 he reported as the encomendero that the houses of the town were so scattered that it was hard to tell how many there were; but probably there were about 450. It was in temperate land but rugged with mountains and canyons; but the yield of maize and cotton were good. He received large tributes; and the town supplied sixty to seventy slaves to the mines about twenty-five leagues away. (Marroquin, p. 223).

Tribute payments in 1548 were high, especially in toldillos. The payment of 1080 was one third higher than paid to any other encomendero in the province.

The equation of it with any modern town is a problem yet to be solved. As was the case with Teculucelo (town #30 on tribute list of 1548), it may have been in present Honduras. Its encomendero, Gaspar de Cepeda also held in his encomienda, the town of Citalá, on the present Honduras border. The slaves to be supplied to were to go to the mines about twenty-five leagues away, which may have meant the mines of Metapa, to which supplies from the town of Teculucelo were also sent.

NEXAPA/ #28/35, under Juan Garcia Matamoros

The town of Nejapa, north of San Salvador, was once located to the west of its present location. An eruption of the Volcano of San Salvador destroyed the early site (Barón Castro, note 12, p. 605). Ponce, who visited the old site in 1586, reported that one had to sleep with feet well covered, for otherwise vampire bats would suck blood without the person knowing it (Vol. I, p. 325).

Gálvez, in the report dated 1740, stated that the site of the village was chosen in 1656, the year in which the volcano of San Salvador erupted and made the earlier pueblo of that name and its area three leagues to the west, a malpais, unsuitable for living (p. 31).

NONUALCO/ #25/260, under Luis Dibues

In modern El Salvador, there are three Nonualcos southeast of San Salvador, all in the area of Zacatecoluca. They may be the product of a mid-thirteenth century migration out of Mexico ( Fowler '89, pp. 47-48).

The Marroquin document of 1532 lists only one Nonualco, which constituted the encomienda of Gomez de Alvarado. He testified that the town probably had about 1,000 houses, in hot and sterile land; its tributaries making payments of very small amounts of maize, chickens, salt, fish, chilis, and textiles of cotton. Its people were very poor; and the town had no others subject to it (p. 205).

Nothing in his testimony suggests any later known Nonualco, but in that early document most encomenderos testified deprecatingly of their holdings, apparently to induce the Crown to make further grants to them as rewards for their conquest. And it is impossible to accept the proposition that such an important conqueror would have accepted a depauperate town with no subsidiary settlements as his reward. It is also possible that he had never seen the place that was shortly after recorded as being important. Pineda in 1557 referred to three good pueblos, close together: San Juan, Santiago Nonualco, and Zacatecoluca, that were called "the Nonualcos"; and referring to Tecoluca, stated that it, too, "was in the Nonualco". He wrote that all were rich towns (p. 455).

On the 1548 tribute list, Nonualco, no. 25, under Luis Dibues, may refer to present San Pedro Nonualco. It is farther upslope than the other Nonualcos (somewhat higher than 500 meters—1640 feet—elevation). The nearby town of Santa Maria Ostuma, that was later identified as being among the "Mexican-speaking Nonualcos" (Cortes y Larraz, Vol. I, p. 137), may have paid a share of its tributes.

The other two Nonualcos, Santiago and San Juan, may have been subsumed under the listing of Zacatecoluca, no. 8, in 1548, whose 400 tributaries made large payments to the encomendero Juan de Medina.

In 1586, Ponce described Santiago Nonualco and Zacatecoluca as "big pueblos". He mentioned San Juan but said nothing about its size (Vol. 1, p. 328).

OLOCINGA/#63/104, under Pedro Nunez de Guzman

Fowler,( p. 15 of his 1985 report); and Barón Castro, (p. 603, note 33) place it in present southern Honduras.

OLOQUILTA and Coyultitan/ #66/300, under Juan de Quintanilla

Present Olocuilta and Cuyultitán, about three kilometers apart, on the south slope, southsouthwest of Lake Ilopango. Olocuilta is at 410 meters (1345 feet) elevation. Cuyultitán is slightly lower.

OPICO/ #4/ 35 est., under Juan de Molina

San Juan Opico, about 25 kilometers northwest of San Salvador, at 500 meters (1640 feet) elevation

PANCHIMALCO/ #3/160 est., under Agustin de Rodas

Now about eighteen kilometers south of San Salvador.

The tribute payments suggest that it was a good-sized town in 1548. Later, Gálvez in 1740 (p. 26) reported that it had 310 families; and Cortés y Larraz in 1770 (Vol. I, p. 112) wrote that there were 500 families. In the early nineteenth century it was reported to be a good-sized Indian town with only a few ladinos (Gutierrez y Ulloa, cited by Lardé y Larin, p. 291).

POTONICO/ #18/350. under Juan Garcia Matamoros.

The present town is southsoutheast of the city of Chalatenango. According to Fowler ('89, p. 177) it had been a Lenca town.

PURULAPA. This name is appears twice on the tribute list:

#33/160 tributaries, under Alonço de Oliveros and #34/200 tributaries under Martín de Minarto

The tribute payments were high and proportionate to the number of tributaries in each entry. The payments of chilis were higher than that of any other town; the payment of skirts (naguas ) were, proportionate to the numbers of tributaries, the highest of the province -- and, of any province! The payments of sandals (alpargatas ) also were, proportionate to the number of tributaries, and higher than that of any other town.

The larger town, #34, was probably the one that was later called San Pedro Perulapán, which is now located at about 950 meters (3117 feet) elevation, a few kilometers north of Lake Ilopango. It may have included the tributes from present San Bartolomé Perulapía nearby to the west, which was not shown on the list. Town #33, under Oliveros probably refers to present San Martín.

Gálvez, in 1740 (p.29) gave the number of families in San Pedro Perulapa as 420, those of San Bartolomé Perulapilla, "next to it", as 110, and those of San Martín Perulapa as 302.

Fowler, who assumes it to have been one town in the matter of payments ('89, p. 185) calls it an important redistribution center for nearby villages. The assumption that the products of three neighboring towns were combined and then distributed to the encomenderos in proportion to their respective tributaries is reasonable, but it does not explain the two entries on the tribute list.

QUAUCINAGUA/ #11/70, under Juan Dugarte

Present Cuisnahuat, in the department of Sonsonate.

QUEÇALTEPEQUE

Two towns of this name are listed:

#17/200, under the Crown

#44/48, under Francisco Castellon

The first, #17, with 200 tributaries, under the Crown, would be present Quezaltepeque, northnorthwest of San Salvador, and situated at an elevation of 450 meters (1476 feet). This conclusion differs from that of Barón Castro, who identifies it with present Concepción Quezaltepeque, about five kilometers north of the city of Chalatenango (78, p. 607, n. 21). His indentification is based on its position on the tribute list which is close to that of Chalatenango. But close relation on the list does not necessarily mean geographic propinquity; and the tributes paid suggest that Castellon's town (#44), with fewer tributaries, is the more likely selection for that site:

SEQUECHUSTEPEQUE/ #86/120, under Francisco de Leon

Barón Castro believes it to be extinct (p. 604).

Browning identifies it with present Ayutuxtepeque, on the north fringe of San Salvador (his number 63, on map #3). Gálvez, in 1740 listed San Sebastian Autustepeq, one league northwest of San Salvador as having seventy three tributaries (p.30); and Cortes y Larraz, forty years later, recorded 115 familes in Ayustastepeque, three quarters of a league from San Salvador (Vol I, pp. 100 ff).

By its tributes in 1548 one may judge it to have been a reasonably prosperous town that, without extraordinary circumstances, would have continued to exist: Browning's suggestion seems the preferable one.

SUCHITOTO/ #79 /120, under the minor sons of Hernan Perez

Modern Suchitoto, at 400 meters (1312 feet), in the deparment of Cuzcatlan, near the Lempa River, on one of its small tributaries. Gálvez, in 1740, reported that it was hot and unhealthy (p. 29). Cortés y Larraz, in 1770, reported that it had 51 families and two annexes: Tenancingo and Jucuapa (Jutiapa) (Vol. I, pp. 200 ff). Larde y Larin (p. 485) quotes a tradition to the effect that it was once north of its present location.

TACACHICO/ #60/60, under Marcos de Perea.

Gálvez gave a sombre view of the town in 1740. He described it as such an unhealthy place that children died; the the population consisted of two Indian and three ladino families (p.24). Forty years later, Cortés y Larraz paid it no complements, writing that it was in a bad location; but he credited it with fifteen families (Vol. I, pp. 218-19).

Present San Pablo Tacachico, about twenty three kilometers east of Santa Ana, at an elevation between 300 and 400 meters (984 to 1312 feet). Lardé y Larin (p. 493) quotes an 1869 report of its being "dry and sterile".

In 1532 it was held by the padre Pero Ximenez who said that he was assured that it had seventy four houses, more or less. At that time its payments of chickens, textiles, and maize were small:

One may wonder about the town of the tribute list: #60/60, its tributes per tributary of a long list of items were, all but a minor one, higher than average. In view of the derogatory reports mentioned above, perhaps its encomendero strove for more than he could collect. That would seem to have been the case because in 1554—when Marcos de Perea was no longer the encomendero, payments to the succeeding encomenderos, Diego Quijada and Carlos Bonifaz, listed under Santiago (AGCA, p. 2) were greatly reduced: Maize planted from 500 lbs to 150, Cotton, only as much as needed for the toldillos , which were reduced from 120 to 30; eggs, fish, and sandals (cutaras and alpargatas) were eliminated. Nothing was stated regarding servants and herders.

TECOMATLAN/ #22/46, under Juan Dugarte

A small town on the lowland, probably not now in existence (Barón Castro, p. 602)

TECOYLUCA/#1/400 est. under the Crown

No number of tributaries is shown on the tribute list but from the tributes it was obligated to pay to the Crown, a figure may be estimated by comparing the totals paid to another Crown town in the province, #17, Queçaltepeque. That town, judging by the tributes paid, was perhaps less than one half the size of Tecoyluca: it listed 200 tributaries. A figure of 400 tributaries would probably be a conservative estimate for Tecoyluca.

Such judgement seems to be born out in a comparison of payments with those of the town of Zacatecoluca, with 400 tributaries, under the encomendero Medina. Although the figures are not the same, they are comparable when it is kept in mind that Crown payments were usually low and that allowance should be made for tributes of salt and fish paid by Tecoyluca which were larger than those paid by any other town in the province, except one: Citalá.

The site is just north of the Laguneta el Matazano, on the right bank of the Lempa River, not far north of the Jiquilisco lagoon and not far northwest of the Estero de Jaltepeque, areas long important in salt-making (Andrews,1983, pp. 105-06).

In 1532 (Marroquin, p. 228), Antonio Docampo held "Tecoylata" with 600 tributaries and with no subject towns. It was, he reported, in tierra caliente, and he estimated that it was about four leagues from the sea. Present Tecoluca is located at a little less than 300 meters (under 1,000 feet) elevation, south of San Vicente.

In the period 1536-41 (Kramer, et al, '86, pp. 370-71) the town paid its encomendero, Cristobal de la Cueva, large amounts of tribute, which were reduced sharply by 1548 after it had been taken over by the Crown.

Pineda in 1557 (p. 455), reported that the population was declining.

Ponce, over thirty years later reported it as being a "good pueblo of Pipiles" (Vol. I, p. 395).

However, Gálvez in 1740 remarked that it formerly was called "el Gran Tecoluca", because of the large number of Indians it had had, then he reported that in his time it had but thirty two tributaries.

TECULUCELO/ #30 / 300

Authors differ as to the location of this town: Browning (# 86 on his map), locates it as having been about 3 kilometers northwest of Tecoluca in the lower Lempa River drainage; but indicates no present existence (p. 493); Barón Castro says that it has disappeared and does not try to identify its previous location (p. 602); Kramer, Lovell, and Lutz (note #78, p. 389-390) state that the pueblo has disappeared without trace. Fowler expresses doubt as to its location (fig. 3, p. 63).

Although it appears in the 1548 tribute list under San Salvador, there are reasons to believe that it was north of the present boundaries of El Salvador, in Honduras: Montejo, writing to the King in 1539 about the towns of Honduras, refers to one near the boundary called Teculucalo (DII, Vol. 24, p. 267); Newsom refers to a "Telulucelo" in the general area of Gracias a Dios, Honduras (Newsom, '81, p. 220); At the time of the conquest, the southwest part of Honduras was an area of "Pipil activity" (Strong, 1948, p. 71).

The payment of liquidambar bespeaks Honduras: the only other payments of that product made in the provinces listed in legajo 128 were made by ten towns listed under Comayagua, Honduras.

Judging by the tributes it paid later to its encomenderos it must have been important at the time of the conquest, yet it does not appear in the 1532 report of Marroquin on San Salvador, which suggests that it was under another provincial authority; and the record of payments in 1536-41 indicate a town of some size with considerable production, a sufficient reason for its acquisition by Cristoval de la Cueva, an important conqueror who had campaigned in various parts of Central America (Cerezeda, pp. 160-191), whose encomienda also included Utatlan in Guatemala, and Tecoyluca under San Salvador.

In the list of tributes paid to Cristobal de la Cueva, in 1536-41 (Kramer, et al, 1986, p. 370) directions were given regarding delivery of maize and labor to the mines of Metapa (present Metapán, El Salvador, near the Honduran border) and maize to Gracias a Dios, Honduras. Wheat was to be delivered to Gracias, and Alax (a mining area, some miles from Gracias: Sherman, p. 100). Specifications were made regarding servants and maize in San Salvador "when the encomendero was present", a statement that suggests only occasional presence in that area.

At that formative period of time—one of negligible controls—this man, with his bona fides, could have claimed towns in three separated areas. The limit of his demands for tribute were largely a matter of his own decision as to a feasible burden. As shown on the 1536-41 list, his demands were extortionate. The Cerrato reforms of 1548 reduced them: some items were eliminated and others reduced from one third to one half; and in the matter of labor, much of it was eliminated.

In the expropriation by the Crown of both Tecoyluca and Teculucelo, prior to 1548, bureaucratic confusion may have been the reason for the latter being listed along with Tecoyluca under San Salvador.

Shown below is the list of payments made to Cueva and payments to the Crown in 1548. They show the reduction of payments under the Cerrato reforms (keeping in mind, however, that payments to the King were lower than those paid to encomenderos and that there had been some decrease in population in the intervening years):

TENANGOS Y MONTEPEQUE/#59/70. Barón Castro places the towns in Cuzcatlan. Browning does not list them.

TEPEAGUA

#50/143, Under Juan Davila

#77/52 , Under Juan de Tovar

There is a small village named Tepeagua, northeast of the port of La Libertad, on the lower coastplain which both Browning and Barón Castro believe to be the one of the tribute list, divided between two encomenderos; but there may be reasons to believe that the town of the 1548 list was another. Lardé y Larin suggests that the town was Jutiapa which he says is called Tepeahua in Nahuat, and which was then located in the position of present Azacualpa, a few kilometers southwest of Chalatenango (p. 218).

Lardé's suggestion is attractive for several reasons: many of the tributes paid would be unlikely from the lowland site, e.g. beans, chilis, fruit. Honey was mostly an upland product. Mats (petates) were paid in town #77. The four other towns under San Salvador that paid them were all in the north and not far from Chalatenango. No cacao is listed; nor is there any statement about planting cacao or trading in it, as was the case with several lowland towns. If, as seems reasonable, the two entries referred to one town divided between two encomenderos, the total payment was large for an otherwise unremarkable hamlet on the lower coastplain.

Fowler's suggestion (pp. 64, 155) that the town was a Pipil settlement, north of the Lempa River in 1532 (citing the Marroquin document, p. 219) is reasonable.

TEPECONTLE

The name appears in two entries: #26/80 tributaries and, with Chicongua, #45/140 tributaries: these refer to present San Juan and San Miguel Tepezontes, southeast and south respectively of Lake Ilopango. (Barón Castro, pp. 570, 574 - #13 and note 11, does not try to distinguish between the two towns to associate them respectively with the towns of the tribute list). Gálvez, in 1740, (p. 28) gives the number of tributaries in San Juan Tepesontes as thirty-eight, and those of San Miguel as seventy-six. Thirty years later, Cortés y Larraz (Vol I, pp. 130 ff) gave the numbers as 54 and 117 respectively.

He described them as all being Nahuat-speakers.

TEQUEÇAQUANCO

In 1532, only two towns were listed with approximately this name: Tequeçajuango, with 140 tributaries, and Tequeçaquango, with 150. No other similar name was listed. In view of the similarity of the tributary numbers, it is here assumed that in 1532 there was a grouping of tributes (including the third town of the name shown in 1548 because it seems unlikely that in a period of congregation rather than establishment of new towns, a third would have been founded). The tributes were divided between two encomenderos : Pero Gomez and Benito Mendez, neither of whose names appears in 1548.

On the tribute list of 1548 the name appears three times: #47, #67, and #68. These three entries refer to towns now within a few kilometers of each other: Santiago Texacuangos, west of Lake Ilopango, Santo Tomás, not far southsouthwest of it, and San Marcos, in the south of the city of San Salvador.

One author states that the name was related to that of the tribe of Pipiles that established the settlements (Lardé y Larin, '57. pp. 443-44).

The bishop Cortés y Larraz reported in 1770 that the "maternal language" was Mexican. (Vol I, pp. 118 ff).

The respective tributes paid by the three towns in 1548 are:

As was the case in 1532, the tributes of three towns were combined but divided unequally among three encomenderos. Such a conclusion seems reasonable when one considers the encomiendas held by each man: town #47 was under Alonso Velasco de Córdoba whose only holding it was. The other two encomenderos, Hernan Perez (his sons), and Martin de Lora both held other towns. If such a combination and division— giving a somewhat larger proportion of tributes to a small holder— were the case it would not be unique.

TEQUECHONCHONGO/ #62/135, under Garcia de Alfaro

Now San Miguel de Mercedes, just south of the city of Chalatenango. (Baron Castro, p. 603 and note #32 on p. 607; Larde y Larin pp. 385-86).

TEQUECISEPEQUE/ #23/80, under Pedro Ceron

Present Texistepeque, located almost equidistant from Lake Güija and the city of Santa Ana, in a basin that Cortés y Larraz described as "hot and melancholy" (Vol I, pp. 222 ff). The tributes paid by its Indians were in keeping with the location except for six xiquipiles of cacao, for which the natives probably had to exchange some of their own products.

TEOUEPA. is a name entered twice on the tribute list

#35/80, under Francisco de Castelon

#56/20, under Juan Davila

Probably one town whose tributes were divided unequally:

Probably present San Juan Talpa, on the coastplain southsoutheast of San Salvador city. Ponce arrived at a "small pueblo named Tacpan", a Pipil town, before he arrived at the now-extinct town of Xalotzinagua and following along the coast with a view of the ocean for three leagues, and passing the Xiboa (Jiboa) River, came to Santiago Nonualco (Vol. I, p. 327-28).

TERLINQUETEPEQUE/#10/50, under Luis Hernandez

Three authors believe it to have been the present Talnique (Browning, his number 32 on map #3; Lardé y Larin, '57, pp. 495-96; Fowler, '89, p. 183) Barón Castro believes it to have disappeared (78, p. 602).

TEUTEPEGUA E XICALAPA/#37/40. under the sons of Gabriel de Oviedo

Present Teotepeque in the department of La Libertad, located at about 500 meters (1640 feet) on the south slope of the mountains facing the Pacific Ocean. Jicalapa is downslope from it. The location is in the area then called the Balsam mountains; and the Indians paid a yearly tribute of six jugs of balsam.

TEXUTLA/#65/80, under Bartolomé Bermudez

Present Tejutla, northwest of the city of Chalatenango, between 300-400 meters elevation (984-1312 feet) in the northern department of Chalatenango (Barón Castro, p. 604).

TONACATEPEQUE / #73/220. under Antonio Docampo

Present Tonacatepeque is just north of the city of San Salvador, as it probably was in the mid-sixteenth century. However, Lehmann (1920, p.997) reports that it was founded by migrants from Ocotepeque, fleeing from an epidemic of "lepra". That could not be leprosy which doesn't appear in epidemic form; but the term also has been used for outbreaks on the skin, psoriasis. Perhaps there is a suggestion of an outbreak of smallpox; but if that had been the case one would expect such reports from other, neighboring settlements.

TONALA/ #48/10, under Cristov al de Campos

Present Tonalá is near the Chiquihuat River on the coastplain, east of Acajutla.

In 1548 it paid only salt and fish.

UXACA/ #36/42 (listed with Maçagua), under the sons of Gabriel de Oviedo.

Browing places it on the east shore of Lake Güija. Barón Castro identifies it with Belén-Güijat, in the canton of Metapan, department of Santa Ana (pp. 603-06). The name does not appear on the 1973 map of El Salvador.

XALATENANGO/ #14/120, under Cristobal Salvago

Present Chalatenango

XALOCINAGUA

This name appears in the three 1548 entries shown below