[6] Spanish, clauos; apparently meaning that the natives used in their housebuilding wedges made from the wood of the cocoanut tree as a substitute for iron nails. [↑]
[7] Probably alluding to a document which is preserved in the Archivo de Indias at Sevilla, by Norton y Nicols, dated at Madrid, September 2, 1757; it will be mentioned in the bibliographical section of this series (VOL. LIII). [↑]
[8] The context would imply that sugar is here referred to; but the writer does not mention it again, and seems to have abandoned his attempt to export it. [↑]
[9] Spanish, estas ayudas de, followed by a blank space, doubtless intended to be filled by costas. [↑]
[10] Concepción mentions this stone (Hist. de Philipinas, xii, p. 25), found on a site selected by the Dutch; they had marked “a stone with the letter T, which, as it was interpreted, signified, ‘annexed to Terrenate.’ This same token they had placed in other uninhabited islands in the vicinity. This marked stone was dug up by the sultan of Mindanao, who sent it to the governor of Samboangan, Don Pedro Zacharias. Two Dutch chalupas went to call the Mindanaos to account for this act, intending to obtain satisfaction for it by placing the marked stone in the locality of Silangan, on the mainland of Mindanao; but Radiamura courageously drove back the Dutch who made a landing—who, in retreating, swore to return with adequate forces for that enterprise.” [↑]
[11] There is some confusion or error in these figures, which read, in the MS., “35 = 3.94 @ 2,82:600.” Without them, the totals amount to 80,187,524; subtracting this from the entire total, there remains a balance of 3,424,000, apparently indicating the value of the sugar—save that the total for benzoin is erroneously figured in the MS.; it should be 144,804. The MS. is also uncertain on some of the other totals. [↑]
[12] The writer (or more probably his amanuensis) has made an error in transcribing these sums; “six millions” should read “sixty millions,” and at the end of the paragraph the amount of chocolate should be “one hundred and fifty” instead of “fifteen” millions. The remaining figures are correct. [↑]
[13] “In 1618, according to the testimony of Dr. Marradón, of Marchena, to one hundred cacao-beans must be added a pound and a half of sugar, two onzas of cinnamon, fourteen grains of Mexican pepper, a half-onza of cloves, and two reals’ weight of anise and annotto; and one might add almonds, nuts, and orange-flower water. Years afterward Dr. Colmenero of Ledesma modified this formula, making the paste in the proportion of one hundred cacao-beans, one-half libra of sugar, two granos of pepper, anise, cloves, Alexandrian [i.e., white] roses, logwood, cinnamon, almonds, nuts, and a sufficient quantity of annotto to give it color.”
Until the end of the eighteenth century chocolate was prepared mainly by hand-labor. “In the seventeenth century, the preparation of the chocolate was made by artisans, who received twelve reals and an azumbre [i.e., about half a gallon] of wine for preparing each day the portion of chocolate from sixteen libras of clear cacao. The chocolate, thus prepared and sold under the name of ‘health chocolate,’ often contained special ingredients, chosen on account of the fashion, or of the taste of the consumers; and if in those times great praise was given to the chocolate which contained aromatic essences—vanilla, amber, and orange—certainly not less famous on that account was the chocolate of Madrid with its doradilla [i.e., ceterach], that of Ávila with its pimentón [i.e., a large variety of pepper], and that of Pamplona with its pepper and ginger. Fray Manuel Ordoñez says, referring to the paste which we are considering, that ‘in the past century it was sold only in the apothecary shops, like physicians’ prescriptions, for our cure;’ and from this citation we may infer not only that chocolate was regarded as a special medicine, but that it was considered as a therapeutic agent, worthy of being kept by the pharmacists of the seventeenth century. Later, in the eighteenth century, the preparation of chocolate began to be made by the guild of spice-dealers, its ingredients being reduced to the cacao, cinnamon or vanilla, and sugar; and the custom became somewhat general of adding to the paste some biscuit-dough, in order to make it thicker when it was diluted with water. At the same time when the ‘health chocolate’ was sold in the spice-shops, a medicinal chocolate was prepared in the apothecary shops, in which the principal products of the pharmacopeia entered as ingredients. As the preparation of chocolate had become general in the convents, in attempting to compete with the spice-dealers the friars did not think of making it of better quality; but, in order to sell it more cheaply, they subtracted from cacao and cinnamon what they added in ingredients that were not always harmless for the parishioner’s health. In order that the importance of this adulteration may be estimated, it is sufficient to cite some of the additions most used, as wheat flour, rice flour; ground lentils, peas, beans, and maize; starch, potato starch, and dextrine; olive oil, sweet almond oil, yolk of egg, tallow of veal and mutton; storax, chestnut [flour], gum tragacanth; cinnabar, red oxide of mercury, red lead, carbonate of lime, etc.” The manufacture of chocolate has been conducted almost entirely by machinery during the past century, and has accordingly thrown out the majority of the artisans who made it by hand. (José del Carmenal, cited in Gräfenberg’s Spanisches Lesebuch, Frankfurt, 1899, pp. 7–11.) [↑]
[14] At the end of the atlas volume in Raynal’s Établissemens et commerce des Européens is a tabular “Enumeration of the population of Spain, prepared in 1768 by order of his Lordship Conde de Aranda, president of the Council of Castilla.” The population is given separately for each of the eight archbishoprics (which contain 48 bishoprics, 2 of them “exempt”). The lay population was thus classed: married persons, 1,724,567 men and 1,714,505 women; unmarried (presumably including children), 2,809,069 boys and 2,911,858 girls; total, 9,159,999. Add the number of the clergy (both regular and secular), which was 147,805, and the entire population numbered 9,307,804. Two curious discrepancies may be noted: the number of married men is greater than that of the married women by 10,062, and the girls exceed the boys by 102,789 (this latter an excess of about 3⅔ per cent). The only region in which the number of married men is practically the same as that of married women is the archdiocese of Valencia, and the only one where the same thing is true of the boys and girls is the archdiocese of Zaragoza. The greatest discrepancy in the numbers of both these classes is found in the archdiocese of Burgos, where there were 197,064 married men, and only 185,997 married women; and it had 330,428 girls and only 310,545 boys. Highly significant is the enumeration of the privileged classes, of whom in the total population there were 846,657, thus classified: those enjoying royal privileges, 89,393; in the department of finances, 27,577; in that of the Crusade, 4,248; in that of the Inquisition, 2,645; in the nobility, 722,794. It is to be observed that three-fourths of all the privileged class are found in the archdiocese of Burgos and the two exempt bishoprics—in the former, 324,661; in the latter, 306,378. Not less interesting are the statistics of the ecclesiastical estate. In the 16,427 cities and villages were 18,106 parishes, which were served by 15,641 curas. There were 2,004 monasteries, containing 55,453 religious; and 1,026 convents with 26,465 nuns. All these religious orders employed also 8,552 persons as procurators and treasurers, and with the orders were affiliated 26,294 laymen. In the service of the churches were 25,248 laymen; and besides the curas there were 50,246 chaplains and beneficed priests. The total of all these items is 147,805, the number above given. [↑]