No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Of Signatures and Status: Andrés Sánchez Gallque and Contemporary Painters in Early Colonial Quito
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 April 2015
Extract
The 1599 portrait Don Francisco de Arobe and His Sons, Pedro and Domingo by Andean artist Andres Sanchez Gallque (Figure 1) is one of the most frequently cited and reproduced paintings in the modern literature on colonial South America. The painting has been extensively praised, parsed, and interpreted by twentieth- and twenty-first-century authors, and heralded as the first signed South American portrait. “Remarkable” is the adjective most frequently employed to describe this work: modern authors express surprise and delight not only with the persuasive illusionistic power of the painting, the mesmerizing appearance of its subjects, and the artist's impressive mastery of the genre, but with the fact that the artist chose to sign and date his work, including a specific reference to his Andean identity.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Academy of American Franciscan History 2014
References
This study owes much to the generous support of the following institutions: John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, National Humanities Center (based in North Carolina), American Philosophical Society, and the College of William and Mary. The author also gratefully acknowledges the important assistance and contributions of Hernán L. Navarrete, Ximena Carcelén, Tom Cummins, Nancy Deffebach, Andrés Gutiérrez Usillos, Dana Leibsohn, and the two anonymous reviewers of The Americas, as well as the Museo de América, Madrid, and the Museo Colonial Charcas, Sucre. The photos in Figures 6 through 16 are by Hernán L. Navarrete. Unless otherwise noted, all translations are by the author.
1. The most substantive analyses of Sánchez Gallque’s 1599 painting are found in Cummins, Tom “Three Gentlemen from Esmeraldas: A Portrait Fit for a King,” in Slave Portraiture in the Atlantic World, Lugo-Ortiz, Agnes and Rosenthal, Angela, eds., (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013), chapt. 4;Google Scholar Ortiz, and Rosenthal, “Don Francisco de Arobe and His Sons Pedro and Domingo,” in The Arts in Latin America, 1492–1820, Rishel, Joseph J. and Stratton, Suzanne, orgs. (Philadelphia: Philadelphia Museum of Art and Yale University Press, 2006), p. 418;Google Scholar and Usillos, AndrésGutiérrez “Nuevas aportaciones en torno al lienzo titulado ‘Los mulatos de Esmeraldas.’ Estudio técnico, radiográfico e histórico,” Anales del Museo de América 20 (2012), pp. 7–64.Google Scholar For detailed investigations of the painting’s patronage and historical context, see especially Szászdi, Adam “El trasfondo de un cuadro: ‘Los Mulatos de Esmeraldas’ de Andrés Sánchez Gallque,” Cuadernos Prehispánicos 12 (1986–87), pp. 93–142;Google Scholar Lane, Kris Quito 1599: City and Colony in Transition (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2002), pp. 22–51;Google Scholar Phelan, John Leddy The Kingdom ofQtiito in the Seventeenth Century: Bureaucratic Politics in the Spanish Empire (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1967), pp. 7–10;Google Scholar Cummins, “Three Gentlemen”; and Rappaport, Joanne and Cummins, Tom Beyond the Lettered City: Indigenous Literacies in the Andes (Durham: Duke University Press, 2012), pp. 36–39.Google Scholar
2. The descriptor “remarkable” appears in Lane, Qtiito 1599, p. xii; Cummins, “Three Gentlemen,” p. 140;Google Scholar Cummins, “Don Francisco de Arobe,” p. 418;Google Scholar Cummins, “The Mulatto Gentlemen of Esmeraldas, Ecuador,” in Colonial Spanish America, a Documentary History, Mills, Kenneth and Taylor, William B., eds. (Wilmington, Del.: Scholarly Resources, 1998), p. 147;Google Scholar Stratton-Pruitt, Suzanne The Virgin, Saints, and Angels: South American Paintings 1600–1825 from the Thoma Collection (Milan: Skira, 2006), p. 83;Google Scholar and Bretos, Miguel Retratos: 2,000 Tears of Latin American Portraits (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2004), p. 34.Google Scholar
3. In the scholarly literature, the painter’s second surname is alternately spelled “Galque” and “Gal-Ique.” The artist routinely signed his surname as “Gallque” on notarial documents, so this form is employed in the present study.
4. The figures wear both European and Andean articles of clothing, including indigenous style tunics (uncus) and mantles (not the standard Spanish cape) worn over European buttoned shirts with ruffled sleeves and Spanish cuellos de lechuguilla (ruffled collars). Francisco and Domingo hold European-style hats. Százdi notes that the materials of their clothing figure among the expenses incurred by Barrio de Sepúlveda, which included Chinese silks, damasks, and taffetas, as well as colored silks from Mexico. Szászdi, “El trasfondo,” p. 136.Google Scholar Gutiérrez Usillos cites a 1606 document that mentions the “camisetas de tamanese y flecadas y mantas” that were given to the Arobes in Quito; documents the gold facial ornaments and shell necklaces as characteristic of the native people of Esmeraldas; and reiterates Cabello de Balboa’s 1583 assertion that the metallurgy for producing lances with iron tips was introduced to the region by Africans. Usillos, Gutiérrez “Nuevas aportaciones,” pp. 29–35.Google Scholar
5. Szászdi, “El trasfondo”; Medina, Charles Beatty “El retrato de los cimarrones de Esmeraldas,” in Ecuador-España: historia y perspectivas, María Elena Porras and Pedro Calvo-Sotelo, coords. (Quito: Embajada de España en el Ecuador, Archivo Histórico del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, 2001), pp. 18–21;Google Scholar Lane, Qtiito 1599, pp. 22–51;Google Scholar Cummins, “Three Gentlemen.” The success of the mission was short-lived, for by 1605 many communities in Esmeraldas had rebelled and rejected Spanish rule. Conflicts continued throughout the first decades of the seventeenth century. See Gutiérrez Usillos, “Nuevas aportaciones,” p. 22; and Medina, Charles Beatty “Caught between Rivals: The Spanish-African Competition for Captive Indian Labor in the Region of Esmeraldas during the Late Sixteenth and Early Seventeenth Centuries,” The Americas 63:1 (2006), pp. 125–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. “el anillo que faltaba de la cadena histórica del arte quiteño … fundador nato del arte ecuatoriano”; “un gran artista ignorado que merece la inmortalidad.” Navarro, Artes plásticas ecuatorianas (Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1945), pp. 164,166;Google Scholar Navarro, “Un pintor quiteño, un cuadro admirable del siglo XVI en el Museo Arqueológico Nacional, Madrid,” Archivos (1929), p. 449.Google Scholar
7. Navarro, “Un pintor quiteño.”
8. “Pero, ¡quien era Sánchez Gallque? Era tal vez de la familia de Juan Sánchez de Xerex Bohorquez … hijo del español Juan Sánchez de Xerex uno de los primeros conquistadores y de los primeros y ricos vecinos de Quito.” Navarro, La pintura en el Ecuador del XVI al XIX (Quito: Dinediciones, 1991), p. 34.Google Scholar
9. The discussion of Andean literacy in this study owes much to the research and thoughtful analyses of Rappaport and Cummins in Beyond the Lettered City.
10. Vargas, José Maria Arte colonial de Ecuador: siglos XVI–XVIII (Quito: Salvat Editores Ecuatoriana, 1985), pp. 144–146;Google Scholar Cummins, Tom “Retrato de los mulatos de Esmeraldas; don Francisco de la Robe y sus hijos Pedro y Domingo,” in Los siglos de oro en los virreinatos de América, 1550–1700 (Madrid: Museo de América, 1999), p. 172;Google Scholar Bargellini, Clara “Painting in Colonial Latin America,” in The Arts in Latin America, 1492–1820, Rishel, and Stratton, p. 324;Google Scholar Lepage, Andrea “El arte de la conversion. Modelos educativos del Colegio de San Andrés de Quito,” Procesos: Revista Ecuatoriana de Historia 25:1 (2007), pp. 45–77.Google Scholar
11. Lepage, “El arte de la conversión,” p. 56.Google Scholar
12. Ibid., p. 68; Moreno, Agustín Fray Jodoco Rique y Fray Pedro de Gocial: apóstoles y maestros franciscanos de Qtiito (Quito: Abya Yala, 1998), pp. 291–292.Google Scholar
13. Vargas, José María Nuestra Señora del Rosario en el Ecuador (Quito: Artes Gráficas SEÑAL, 1983), pp. 46–53;Google Scholar Vargas, El arte ecuatoriano (Quito: Editorial Santo Domingo, 1963), p. 33;Google Scholar Navarro, La pintura en el Ecuador, p. 33;Google Scholar Webster, Susan Verdi “Art, Identity and the Construction of the Church of Santo Domingo in Quito,” Hispanic Research Journal 10:5 (2009), pp. 419–423;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Webster, “Ethnicity, Gender, and Visual Culture in the Confraternity of the Rosary in Colonial Quito,” in Brotherhood and Boundaries/Frater-nità e barriere, Pastore, Stefania, Prosperi, Adriano and Terpstra, Nicholas, eds. (Pisa: Scuola Normale Superiore, 2011), pp. 392–393.Google Scholar
14. Vargas, El arte ecuatoriano, p. 33.Google Scholar
15. Vargas, José Maria Patrimonio artístico ecuatoriano (Quito: Editorial Santo Domingo, 1972), pp. 61–72;Google Scholar Navarro, La pintura en el Ecuador, p. 33.Google Scholar
16. “Tres cosas, escribió, son necesarias para el que quiere tener conocimiento perfecto de un asunto, a saber, el arte, el ejercicio y la imitación. El Arte—o teoría—para enseñar las reglas y orientaciones; el ejercicio para adquirir la habilidad práctica, y la imitación para tener a la vista los modelos. Esto aparece claro en un pintor perito, el cual, para adquirir a perfección en su arte, necesita, en primer lugar, conocer las reglas generales de la pintura y la proporción que debe guardarse en la mezcla de colores, para obtener los apropiados a las imágenes que se quieren pintar; en segundo lugar, el ejercicio, porque si no se lo practica, nunca se llegará a pintar; en tercer lugar, los modelos acabados, en los cuales se pueda advertir la aplicación de las reglas.” Quoted in Vargas, Patrimonio artístico, p. 68.Google Scholar
17. For the lack of guilds of the visual and related arts in colonial Quito, see especially Garzón, Gloria “Situación de los talleres, gremios y artesanos. Quito, siglo XVIII,” in Artes “académicas” y populares del Ecuador, Troya, Alexandra Kennedy, ed. (Quito: Abya Yala, Universidad de Cuenca, Fundación Paul Rivet, 1995), p. 19;Google Scholar Webster, Susan Verdi Qtiito, ciudad de maestros: arquitectos, edificios y urbanismo en el largo siglo XVII (Quito: Abya Yala, 2012), pp. 9–16;Google Scholar and Webster, “Masters of the Trade,” pp. 13–16.Google Scholar The city council was responsible for controlling all official guilds. At its annual January meeting the council named the masters and overseers of each guild, who were charged with regulating the training, quality, prices, and production of its members.
18. Vargas, Patrimonio artistico, p. 68;Google Scholar Rappaport, and Cummins, Beyond the Lettered City, pp. 208–209.Google Scholar The initials on this choir-book illumination, “APB,” have been identified by Vargas and others as the signature of Fray Pedro Bedón. Perhaps this is the case because the friar’s patrilineal surnames were Bedón de Agüero, although it was more common for sons to adopt the surnames of each parent. Pedro Bedón’s mother was Juana Díaz de Pineda. See Vargas, José María Biografía de Fray Pedro Bedón, O.P. (Quito: Editorial Santo Domingo, 1965), pp. 18–20.Google Scholar
19. Navarro, La pintura en el Ecuador, p. 33.Google Scholar Luis Paucar is identified in this document as a saddlemaker (sillero). Diego Tutillo appears in other documents as an embroiderer (bordador). Archivo Nacional de Historia, Quito [hereafter ANH/Q], Notaría 6a, vol. 19, 1612, Diego Rodriguez Docampo, fols. 343v–344v.
20. de Mesa, José and Gisbert, Teresa “The Painter, Mateo Mexía, and His Works in the Convent of San Francisco de Quito,” The Americas 16:4 (1960), p. 387.Google Scholar Pedro Querejazu Leyton reads the date on the inscription as 1609. Leyton, Querejazu “El arte quiteño y ecuatoriano en la Audiencia de Charcas y en Bolivia,” in El arte quiteño más allá de Quito (Quito: FONSAL, 2010), p. 2391.Google Scholar The correct date of 1605 is cited by Mesa, and Gisbert, “The Painter, Mateo Mexía,” p. 387;Google Scholar Navarro, La pintura en el Ecuador, p. 45;Google Scholar and Cummins, “Three Gendemen,” p. 128.Google Scholar Although Sánchez Gallque did not inscribe his first name as a device in this painting, he nonetheless employed a sophisticated form of abbreviation used by scribes and notaries: the “N” in “ANDRES” is removed and replaced by a suspension sign (tilde) indicating the omission (A-DRES).
21. Navarro, La pintura en el Ecuador, p. 35;Google Scholar Leyton, Querejazu “El arte quiteño,” p. 239;Google Scholar Cummins, “Three Gendemen,” pp. 128–129.Google Scholar A number of authors make no mention of the signed 1605 painting in Bolivia, while others treat Sánchez Gallque’s triple portrait as the only known work by the artist. For the latter case, see Bretos, Retratos, p. 115 Google Scholar; and Usillo, Gutiérrez “Nuevas aportaciones,” p. 27.Google Scholar
22. For an illustration of one of these works, see Navarro, La pintura en el Ecuador, figure 12.
23. Ibid., pp. 35–38.
24. Fletcher, John M. and Upton, Christopher A. “The Use of Abbreviated English in Oxford, 1483–1660,” Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society (1988), p. 13.Google Scholar See also, Parkes, M.B. English Cursive Book Hands, 1250–1500 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979), pp. 29–30;Google Scholar Bribiesca Sumano, Maria Elena Texto de paleografia y diplomática (Toluca: Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México, 2002), chapt. 3.Google Scholar
25. Vargas, José Maria “Andrés Sánchez Gallque,” Revista de la Universidad Católica [Ecuador] 4:19 (1978), p. 25.Google Scholar
26. For additional discussion of the contract, see Vargas, “Andrés Sanchez Gallque,” p. 25;Google Scholar Lepage, “El arte de la conversión,” pp. 66–73 Google Scholar; Lane, Qttito 1599, p. 237 n2;Google Scholar and Webster, Qtdto, ciudad de maestros, p. 29.Google Scholar
27. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 3, 1588–1594, Diego Lucio de Mendaño, fols. 317v–318v.
28. “todo el oro y colores y todo lo demás materiales que fueren menester.” ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 3, 1588–1594, Diego Lucio de Mendaño, fol. 318r.
29. Ibid., fols. 317v–318r.
30. Lepage, “El arte de la conversión,” pp. 66–73.Google Scholar
31. “El d[ic]ho andres sanchez a de poner carpinteros y oficiales.” For the topic of maestros de obra, sec Webster, Susan Verdi “Vantage Points: Andeans and Europeans in the Construction of Colonial Quito,” Colonial Latin American Review 20:3 (2011), pp. 303–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32. Lepage, “El arte de la conversión,” p. 66.Google Scholar
33. ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 10, 1601, Diego Rodriguez Docampo, n.p.
34. Navarro, La pintura en el Ecuador, p. 35.Google Scholar
35. In 1601, the same year as the lost contract with Sánchez Gallque, the confraternity commissioned a sculpture of the Ecce Homo from the Spanish or creole artist Antonio Fernández. ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 10, 1601, Diego Rodriguez Docampo, fols. 558r–559r. In 1606, the confraternity signed a contract with the Andean sculptor Juan del Castillo “yndio oficial pintor y entallador” to create processional sculptures representing Christ Crowned with Thorns and the figures of his tormentors (sayones). ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 15, 1605–06, Diego Rodriguez Docampo, fols. 38v–39r.
36. “una ymagen y hechura de n[uest]ra s[eño]ra de los rreyes donde esta s[an]t josef y los tres Rreyes magos y un ángel y un buey y un asno y un camello de pincel al olio de muy buenos y bibos colores de una y tres quartas de alto.” ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 53, 1608, Alonso López Merino, fol. 248v.
37. “pintado por un indio muy diestro en este arte.” Jouanen, José Historia de la Compañía de Jesús en la Antigua Provincia de Qttito, 1570–1774, vol. 1 (Quito: Editorial Ecuatoriana, 1941), p. 72.Google Scholar
38. Jouanen does not cite his source for this information; however, this section of his text draws on Rodriguez’s, Manuel El Marañon y Amazonas (Madrid, 1684)Google Scholar and unspecified seventeenth-century documents from the Jesuit archives.
39. When the Jesuits were expelled from Quito in 1767, their possessions were distributed among numerous churches in the city and throughout the lands administered by the audiencia.
40. The category “ladino” was neither fixed nor neutral, although bilingualism was a principal feature. As Rappaport and Cummins and others have observed, “ladino was a slippery classification” that could include mestizos and others, and could also possess negative connotations. Beyond the Lettered City, pp. 39–44. See also Adorno, Rolena “Images of Indios Ladinos in Early Colonial Peru,” in Transatlantic Encounters: Europeans and Andeans in the Sixteenth Century, Andrien, Kenneth J. and Adorno, Rolena, eds. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), pp. 232–270.Google Scholar
41. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 147, 1633, Gerónimo de Heredia, fols. 166r–168v; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 160, 1638, Diego Baptista, fols. 346r–347r.
42. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 147, 1633, Gerónimo de Heredia, fol. 166r; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 160, 1638, Diego Baptista, fols. 346r–347r. A 1633 document, in which Sánchez Gallque’s widow, Barbara Sactichug, and her two sons, don Francisco Sánchez and Matheo Galquin, sold one caballeria of land in Zám-biza, specifies their identities, familial relationship, and honorific titles, as well as their title to the land. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 147, 1633, Gerónimo de Heredia, fol. 166r. A 1638 document records that Sánchez Gallque’s widow and her son Francisco signed a promissory note to repay an indigenous woman, Beatriz Cusichimbo, the sum of 30 patacones, and again specifies their identities, titles, and familial relationship. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 160, 1638, Diego Baptista, fol. 346r.
43. ANH/Q, Notaría 5a, vol. 5, 1617–18, Gerónimo de Castro, fols. 242v–243v; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 112, 1625–1626, Diego Baptista, fol. 126v. The reference to Bernabé Simon’s property in San Roque appears in a 1625 document concerning the sale of another plot of land in the parish by Marcos de la Cruz “cacique principal de la parroquia de san roque.” ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 112,1625–1626, Diego Baptista, fol. 126v.
44. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 107, 1624, Gerónimo de Heredia, fols. 775r–776v; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 147, 1633, Gerónimo de Heredia, fol. 166r.
45. AHN/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 11, 1602, Diego Rodríguez Docampo, fols. 480r–481v.
46. “que lindan por una parte con tierras de dona mencia mi hermana y quebrada en medio con tierras de miraflores y con otras mías.” Ibid., fol. 480r.
47. ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 11, 1602, Diego Rodríguez Docampo, fols. 482r–483r.
48. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 53, 1608, Alonso López Merino, fols. 593v–594r.
49. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 160, 1638, Diego Baptista, fols. 346r–347r. Pesos and patacones were the silver coins of highest value during the colonial period, and were equivalent in weight and value. Each could be divided into eight (or more rarely nine) reales. See Viteri, Tamara Estupiñan Diccionario básico del comercio colonial quiteño (Quito: Ediciones del Banco Central del Ecuador, 1997), p. 262.Google Scholar
50. “biuda muger que fuy de andres Sanchez Gallque pintor difunto.” ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 163, 1639, Diego Baptista, fols. 198r–200v. Barbara Sacticho’s relative, the painter Cristóbal Chumbiñaupa, lived in a tile-roofed house on an extensive property that adjoined the plaza of the Recoleta de San Diego in the parish of San Roque. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 186, 1647, Diego Baptista, fols. 170r–170v. Cristobal’s father, the Andean painter Gerónimo Chumbiñaupa, acquired the house, garden, and a substantial piece of this property in 1632 and 1633, paying the impressive price of 400 pesos for the house alone. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 142, 1632, Gerónimo de Heredia, fols. 401r–402v; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 147, 1633, Gerónimo de Heredia, fols. 468r–470v. Their house and landholdings indicate that the Chumbiñaupas made quite a good living from their profession. It is possible that the painter “Cristóbal Ñaupa” cited by Vargas as a member of the Cofradía del Rosario de los Naturales is the same painter who appears in these documents as “Cristóbal Chumbiñaupa.” Vargas, El arte ecuatoriano, p. 33.Google Scholar
51. Sánchez Gallque’s genealogy is unknown, and his distinctive second surname appears nowhere else in the notarial record; however, one potentially related surname warrants further investigation. In 1631, doña Ana Tucto and don Antonio Silquigua declared themselves before a notary to be the legitímate children and heirs of don Mateo Yupanqui and doña María Gualquín. ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 40, 1631, Juan Martinez Gaseo, fols. 122r–123r. Because their mother’s surname is so close to that of Sánchez Gallque’s second surname and to that of his son, Mateo Galquin (whose first name also suggests a link to Yupanqui), one wonders whether the painter may have been related to the prestigious Yupanqui family. The Mateo Yupanqui referred to in this contract is the grandson of the famed sixteenth-century native lord Mateo Yupanqui, the brother of Atahualpa. See Soriano, Waldemar Espinoza “La vida pública de un príncipe Inca residente en Quito, siglos XV y XVI,” Boletín del Instituto Francés de Estudios Andinos 7:3/4 (1978), pp. 1–31;Google Scholar and Guevara, Hugo Burgos El Guarnan, el Puma y el Amaru: formación estructural del gobierno indígena en Ecuador (Quito: Abya Yala, 1995), p. 244.Google Scholar Such an illustrious familial association might further clarify Sánchez Gallque’s status in the community and the location of his residence and properties adjacent to those of Atahualpa’s descendants.
52. “la portada de piedras labradas que tengo y esta armada En las casas que fueron de don Francisco auqui mi abuelo que me pertenezeen por donaçion que me hizo doña beatriz ango mi abuela.” ANH/Q, Notaría 5a, vol. 3, 1609, Gerónimo Pérez de Castro, fols. 473v—475r. For a more extensive discussion of this contract, see Webster, “Vantage Points,” pp. 314–315;Google Scholar and Webster, Qjtito, ciudad de maestros, pp. 50–51.Google Scholar
53. “andres sa[nche]z pintor y don marcos y don fran[cis]co morocho y Francisco lisana y joan bazquez yndios parroquianos della d[ic]ha parroquia.” ANH/Q, Notaría 5a, vol. 3, 1609, Gerónimo Pérez de Castro, fol. 474r.
54. Webster, Quito, ciudad de maestros, pp. 76–77.Google Scholar
55. Navarro, La pintura en el Ecuador, p. 33.Google Scholar
56. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 173, 1643, Diego Bautista, fol. 108r. On March 14, 1643, Miguel de Fletes sold a plot of land in San Roque to Beatriz Sánchez (one wonders whether she was related to Sánchez Gallque), which was bounded by that of “los herederos de andres sa[nche]z pintor i de juan bazquez i de don marcos.” ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 173,1643, Diego Bautista, fol. 108r. This document, in conjunction with others, makes it clear that the land owned by “don marcos,” who was undoubtedly Marcos de la Cruz, cacique principal of San Roque, bordered the properties owned by the heirs of Sánchez Gallque and Bernabé Simón.
57. For the place of Miguel de Santiago in the history of colonial painting in Quito, see especially Navarro, La pintura en el Ecuador, pp. 66–97;Google Scholar Vargas, Patrimonio artístico, pp. 113–120;Google Scholar Este-baranz, Ángel Justo Miguel de Santiago en San Agustín de Quito (Quito: FONSAL, 2008);Google Scholar and Estebaranz, Justo “El obrador de Miguel de Santiago en sus primeros años: 1656–1675,” Revista Complutense de Historia de América 36 (2010), pp. 163–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
58. Several volumes in the notarial sequences are missing, and a number are lacking substantial sections. The following discussion is based on a review of all extant volumes between 1580 and 1630.
59. See for example a 1631 contract, in which the Andean parties were assisted “por la lengua e ynter-pretaçion de Lorenco ygnaçio ofiçial pintor ladino en la lengua castellana y del ynga que juro ser la contenida.” ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 40, 1631, Juan Martínez Gaseo, fols. 122r–123r.
60. In his 1582 testament, Don Francisco Atahualpa bequeathed a plot of land beside his residence to the Andean painter Juan Chauca, “adonde tiene sus casas el d[ic]ho yndio.” Archivo Histórico del Banco Central del Ecuador [hereafter AHBCE], JJC .00194, 1580, Gaspar de Aguilar, fols. 1036v–1040v. The Andean painter Juan del Castillo also owned a residence adjacent to the lands of Atahualpa’s heirs. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 58, 1608–09, Diego Lucio de Mendaño and Alvaro Arias, fols. 241v–242v. It is possible that Juan “yndio pintor” is in fact either Juan Chauca or Juan del Castillo, although the names of their neighbors in San Roque, as cited in the documents, do not correspond to those of Juan “yndio pintor.” ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 81, 1615, Alonso López Merino, fol. 499r. The residences of Turocunbi and Domingo “yndio pintor” are not specified in the extant documents, although the former lived in Quito but claimed permanent residence in the nearby community of Saquisili, and the latter’s place of origin is cited as the city of Riobamba. ANHQ, Testamentarias, caja 1, 1588–1627, exp. 10–XII–1614, fol. lv; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 53, 1608, Alonso López Merino, fol. 212r.
61. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 66, 1610, Alonso Dorado Vergara, fols. 1077r–1078r.
62. As Rappaport and Cummins have righdy observed, native signatures on notarial documents can be ambiguous or problematic because the meaning of a signature or the rationale for signing one’s name was not culturally fixed for Andeans. Among their examples are multiple signatures executed by the same hand on a single document, and instances of an individual signing one document and in another case claiming that they did not know how to sign. Rappaport, and Cummins, Beyond the Lettered City, p. 203.Google Scholar In Quito, the majority of Andean painters included in this study signed their names to more than one notarial document in a consistent form, often before different notaries. This regularity strongly suggests that their signatures were not falsified or supplied by others.
63. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 138, 1631–32, Diego Baptista, fols. 204r–204v.
64. Rappaport and Cummins, Beyond the Lettered City, chapt. 3.
65. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 18, 1601, Francisco García Duran, fols. 512r–523v, fols. 533r–533v; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 19, 1601, Francisco García Duran, fols. 545v–548r. Medoro was not present at the signing of these documents; they indicate that he had departed Quito for Lima in 1600.
66. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 43, 1606, Alonso López Merino, fols. 461r–462v, fols. 468r–468v.
67. “procure el meter en el Colegio al d[ic]ho su hijo.” ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 43, 1606, Alonso López Merino, fol. 468r.
68. AHBCE, JJC .00202, 1596–97, Francisco de Corcuera, fol. 32v; ANH/Q, Notaría la, voi. 10, 1598, Francisco García Duran, fols. 782r–783v; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 17, 1601, Alonso López Merino, fols. 421v–422v.
69. See for example ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 27, 1603, Alonso Dorado de Vergara, fols. 1104r–1110r; 1110r#x2013;1110v; 1111r#x2013;llllv; 1111v#x2013;1119v; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 23, 1602–4, Francisco Garcia Durán, fols. 142v–144v; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 35, 1605, Alonso López Merino, fols. 351r–353r; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 60, 1609, Alonso López Merino, fols. 136r–137v; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 60, 1609, Alonso López Merino, fols. 434v–436v; and ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 71, 1611–12, Alonso Dorado de Vergara, fols. 282v–284v.
70. ANH/Q, Sentencias, caja 608, exp. 4, 1620–39, n.p. This document registers the final sentence of a criminal case that was brought by “Mateo Mexia yndio pintor de la una Parte y Miguel y joan alon yndios Hermanos y simón mateos de astudillo de la otra sobre el Hurto que le hicieron.”
71. For Mexía as a native of Riobamba, see Acuña, Rocío Pazmiño “La configuración urbana de la Villa de Villar Don Pardo: Riobamba en la época colonial,” in La antigua Riobamba: historia oculta de una ciudad colonial, Rosemarie Terán Najas, ed. (Riobamba, Ecuador: Municipio de Riobamba, 2000), p. 66.Google Scholar For Mexía and his wife as natives of Puembo, see ANH/Q, Notaría 4a, vol. 8, 1652, Antonio de Verzossa, fols. 2r–3v.
72. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 88, 1617–18, Alonso Dorado de Vergara, fols. 304r–305v, 574r–575r.
73. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 160, 1638, Diego Baptista, fols. 428r–432r; ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 163, 1639, Diego Baptista, fols. 222r–223v; ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 63, 1662–63, Diego Rodríguez de Mediavilla, fol. 38v.
74. Acuña, Pazmiño “La configuración urbana,” pp. 66–67.Google Scholar Mexía’s later professional success is demonstrated by his commission as “maestro pintor” in 1630 to create 12 large paintings for the main altar of the Augustinian monastery in Riobamba, for which he must have received substantial remuneration.
75. With the exception noted above, each of the artists discussed in this section signed multiple notarial documents over the years, and the form of their respective signatures is consistent throughout. For the issue of ambiguous or falsified signatures on Andean notarial documents, see especially Rappaport, and Cummins, Beyond the Lettered City, pp. 202–208;Google Scholar and Burns, Kathryn, Into the Archive: Writing and Power in Colonial Peru (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2010), pp. 74–82, 91–92, and 116–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Notarial documents are not without their potentially slippery features; however, as Rappaport, and Cummins, have observed, in comparison to other documents, “[c]ontracts are the form of documentation least susceptible to generic manipulation, given their brevity and highly formulaic character.” Beyond the Lettered City, p. 128.Google Scholar
76. See for example the 1595 prices of paintings acquired from a local merchant, which included a canvas painting of Saint Michael at six pesos, and two smaller paintings depicting the Virgin and Mary Magdalen that cost one and one-half pesos apiece. AHBCE, JJC .00200, 1595, Francisco García Durán, fols. 493v-500v. A list of goods belonging to the merchant Martin Durana, which were sold at local auction in 1601, included numerous imported and locally produced paintings, whose values ranged between two and twenty pesos. A ripped tablecloth (sobremesa rota) brought the sum of three pesos, the same amount commanded by two panel paintings depicting saints. ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 10, 1601, Diego Rodriguez Docampo, fols. 450r–474v.
77. Juan del Castillo was commissioned “de hazer para la d[ic]ha cofradía un christo Coronado con los sayones del paso todo en sesenta rreales … la quai hechura darà acauada para el domingo de rramos de este presente ano.” ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 15, 1605–06, Diego Rodríguez Docampo, fols. 38v–39r. The amount of “sixty reales” was later corrected in the document to read “sixty patacones,” a much more realistic value for the works. Juan del Castillo inscribed his elegant signature at the end of the contract.
78. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 60, 1609, Alonso López Merino, fols. 364v–365r.
79. “treinta mil panes de oro … para el dorado de los galeones de su mag[esta]d.” ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 19, 1612, Diego Rodríguez Docampo, fot. 213v.
80. ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 29, 1620, Diego Rodríguez Docampo, fols. 552r–555r; Webster, “Masters of the Trade,” p. 20;Google Scholar Webster, Qjiito, ciudad de maestros, pp. 24–27.Google Scholar
81. “hacer el rretablo de la yglesia nueba de Señor san p[edr]o mártir de la orden de predicadores que tome el frontispicio de el a la traça y modelo del puesto y dibujado en un pergamyno firmado de mi nonbre y del rreb[erend]o padre maestro fray pf edr]o bedon prior prouinçial del prouincia y del padre presentado frai manuel de quero prior del d[ic]ho conbento … y lo he de hazer a la traza y modelo que tiene en el pergamyno de todo lo que fuere labor de madera y los sinco santos de bulto esepto lo que a de ser de pincel todo bien fecho y acabado y puesto y plantado dándome p[ar]a ello la madera y clabaçon y cola y todo lo necesario yo no he de poner sino la manufactura y pagar los offiçiales que me ayudaren por rrazon de que por ellos me a de dar y pagar myll p[eso]s.” ANH/Q, Notaría 6a, vol. 29, 1620, Diego Rodríguez Docampo, fols. 552r–552v.
82. The main altarpiece was dismantled in the late nineteenth century, the result of a radical and tragic demolition and renovation of the apse undertaken by Italian members of the Dominican order.
83. “El retablo es superior, que ocupa todo el lienzo con muchos Santos de su Orden.” Docampo, Diego Rodríguez “Descripción y relación del estado eclesiástico del obispado de San Francisco de Quito [1650],” in Relaciones histérico-geográficas de la Audiencia de Quito (Siglo XVI-XIX), Leiva, Pilar Ponce, ed. (Quito: MARKA and Abya Yala, 1994), vol. 2, p. 258.Google Scholar
84. As a point of comparison, the gilder Marcos Velazquez was paid 350 patacones in 1624 to gild and paint the main altarpiece of the Franciscan church. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 105, 1623–24, Juan Garcia Rubio, fols. 176v–177r.
85. “nuebe lienços de una bara poco mas de altura en que han de yr quatro hechuras de la santísima trinidad y cinco exçehomos con pilatos buenos.” ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 98, 1621, Gerónimo de Heredia, fols. 320r–320v. Mexía paid the notary four reales for producing the document.
86. In early colonial Quito, pesos and patacones were interchangeable in value, and each could be divided into eight or nine reales; thus, the 20 reales per painting received by Mexía was a very low price indeed.
87. The inscription on the painting reads “Mateo Mexia fecit 1615,” and the form and style of the script is identical to the painter’s signatures on documents. For a discussion of the painting, see especially Mesa, and Gisbert, “The Painter, Mateo Mexia,” pp. 388–391;Google Scholar Vargas, Patrimonio artistico, pp. 31–32;Google Scholar Navarro, La pintura en el Ecuador, p. 59;Google Scholar Stratton, Suzanne, ed., The Art of Painting in Colonial Quito / El arte de la pintura en Quito colonial (Philadelphia: Saint Joseph’s University Press, 2012), pp. 30–33;Google Scholar and Acuña, Pazmiño “La configuración urbana,” pp. 66–67.Google Scholar
88. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 104, 1623, Alonso López Merino, fols. 228r–228v.
89. Apostolado series often included images of Jesus, the Virgin Mary, and others, in addition to the 12 apostles. For the theme in Quito, see Redondo Cantera, Maria José and Carcelén, Ximena “Fortuna pictórica del Apostolado de Juan Antonio Salvador Carmona,” Boletín del Seminario de Estudios de Arte 75 (2009), pp. 235–246;Google Scholar and Carcelén, Ximena, dir., El apostolado en el esplendor barroco (Quito: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador, 2001).Google Scholar
90. “diez y seis liensos de ymagines de los apostóles cada lienso de a bara y al oleo costeando por ellos de todos los colores y liensos.” ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 104, 1623, Alonso López Merino, fol. 228r.
91. The guarantor, a painter named Juan Fonte, was necessary because the patron agreed to provide a down payment of 37 patacones so that Sánchez could purchase the materials required for the job. Fonte guaranteed that this money would be repaid if the works were not completed.
92. ANH/Q, Notaría La, vol. 117, 1626, Gerónimo de Heredia, fols. 842r–842v; Webster, “La presencia indígena,” p. 41.Google Scholar
93. “dos lienços grandes que se le an de entregar clauados en sus marcos y en un lienço a de pintar el nasçimiento de nuestro señor Jesuchristo y en el otro la adoración de los tres reyes magos conforme a las estampas que se le dieren por el d[ic]ho andres farfan … en las cuales d[ic]has dos hechuras a de poner todas las figuras que tengan las d[ic]has estampas y buenas colores y las an de dar y entregar acabadas y bien hechas y a contento dentro de tres meses … para que se pongan en el altar mayor de la d[ic]ha yglessia cathedral.” ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 117, 1626, Gerónimo de Heredia, fols. 842r–842v.
94. Two large paintings depicting the Adoration of the Shepherds (an anonymous early nineteenth-century copy after Murillo) and the Adoration of the Magi (signed by Bernardo Rodriguez in 1801) hang today in the nave of the cathedral as continuing testimony to those earlier devotions.
95. See for example Estebaranz, Justo “El obrador,” pp. 164, 172;Google Scholar and Estebaranz, Justo Miguel de Santiago, pp. 77–78.Google Scholar
96. ANH/Q, Notaría la, vol. 169, 1640–42, Juan de Peralta, fols. 549v–550v, 552r–553r; Estebaranz, Justo Miguel de Santiago, p. 78.Google Scholar
97. For the painting’s afterlife, see especially the documentation provided by Usillos, Gutiérrez “Nuevas aportaciones,” pp. 48–58.Google Scholar
98. “en particular Enbio a V[uest]ra rreal persona los retratos del capitan don francisco de arobe y don pedro y don domingo sus hijos mulatos principales de las d[ic]has esmeraldas con una breue relación deste subçesso por pareçerme que su mag[esta]d gustaría ver una cosa tan nueua y extra ordinaria y de unos barbaros que hasta agora an sido invencibles.” Juan del Barrio de Sepúlveda sobre varios asuntos, April 12, 1599, Archivo General de Indias, Quito 9, fol. Ir, R.2, Ν.15.
99. More common were donor portraits, their individual identities subordinated to a larger devotional image. The only extant independent portraits from this early period are death portraits, such as the 1621 canvas depicting Pedro Bedón in the Monastery of Santo Domingo.