Bureaucratic conquest, bureaucratic culture: Town and office in Chiapas, 1780--1832
Description
This dissertation examines the formation of the State of Chiapas from its creation as an intendancy within the Kingdom of Guatemala in the 1780s to after its incorporation into the Republic of Mexico. It focuses on municipal office and municipal administration, integral features of Bourbon reform on the provincial level and key components of state government after 1824. A hierarchy of municipalities provided the foundation for the Intendancy, with the intendant acting as the focal point for fiscal and political administration. The regionalization of Chiapas was facilitated by the revival of the ayuntamiento of Ciudad Real and the introduction of a provincial treasury. Intendancy reform was ambiguous since there was considerable jurisdictional overlap between venal and salaried offices. Instead of quashing the socio-political pretensions of the local merchant-hacendado elites of the ayuntamiento, the Bourbons enhanced their power by including them in provincial civil and ecclesiastical administration. The traditional attitudes towards hierarchy, status and legitimacy of elites from Ciudad Real explains why they opted to separate from Guatemala and join Mexico after Independence Traditional attitudes towards officeholding were maintained in rural Chiapas despite efforts to rationalize jurisdictions and municipal administration. Subdelegates viewed their offices as property and engaged in corrupt practices associated with pre-reform government. Rural Spanish officials and Native American magistrates appropriated traditional Habsburg political rituals to define their power, status, and legitimacy. After the abolition of republicas de indios in 1821, ladinos and Spaniards tried to gain control over municipal offices and the economic resources of rural communities The introduction of constitutional ayuntamientos following Independence acted as a challenge to the power of elites of the capital city who wished to assert control over the entire region. The motivation for holding office continued to be guided by self-interest and traditional attitudes towards hierarchy, status and legitimacy that were central to municipal and political rivalries in the 1820s. The self-perception and activities of local political bosses were similar to pre-Independence Spanish officials, and they were increasingly involved in the power struggles that plagued Chiapas, a process that led to civil war in Chiapas in the 1830s