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