Date published: 1981-01-01
Source: The King?s Coffer (ID83)
Author: Bushnell, Amy (ID32)
Primary doc? 0
Published in:
Race described:
Full text? 1
Online link: #http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00014878/00001#
Content id: 2383
Filename received:
Filename assigned:
1702-01-01 - 1702-12-31

Wages in FL did not rise since 1565, despite inflationedit

In spite of an inflationary cost of living between 1565 and 1702, salaries, wages, and rations allowances did not rise in Florida. The king allowed his officials no payroll initiative. For a while the governor used the bonus fund of 1,500 ducats a year to reward merit and supplement the salaries of lower-echelon officers and soldiers on special assignment, but the crown gradually extended its control over that as well. Out of context, the figure of 400,000 maravedis, which was the annual salary of a proprietor, is meaningless. [Note 31: Treasury official salaries for the Narvaez expedition were set at 130,000 maravedis. By the time of De Soto they were 150,000 (titles to the treasury officials 12/12/1526, 2/15/1527, 4/20/1537, and 10/5/1537)] Table 1 shows the salary plus rations of several positions paid from the situado. Table 1 Yearly Salaries and Rations in St. Augustine in the 17th Century Year Position Salary as Stated Salary without Rations (in ducats) Value of Rations (in ducats) Salary including Rations (in ducats) 1601 Governor 2,000 ducats/yr 2,000 83 2,083 1601 Treasury proprietor 400,000 maravedis/yr 1,067 83 1,150 1646 Sergeant major 515 ducats/yr 515 83 598 1655 Master of construction 500 ducats/yr 500 83 583 1594 Master of the forge 260 ducats/yr 260 83 343 1636 Parish priest 200 ducats/yr 200 83 283 1593 Carpenter 200 ducats/yr 200 83 283 1601 Company captain 200 ducats/yr 200 83 283 1636 Chaplain 150 ducats/yr 150 83 233 1593 Master pilot 12 ducats/mo 144 83 227 1603 Surgeon 10 ducats/mo 120 83 203 1601 Ensign 6 ducats/mo 72 83 155 1630 Overseer of the slaves 1,200 reales/yr and plaza 64 83 147 1693 Sacristan 200 pesos/yr 62 83 145 1601 Sergeant 4 ducats/mo 48 83 131 1601 Officer in charge (cabo) 4 ducats/mo 48 83 131 1641 Friar 115 ducats/yr 115 115a 1601 Infantryman 1,000 maravedis/mo 32 83 115 1676 Indian laborer 1 real/day in trade goods 33 50 83b 1693 Sacristan's sweeping boy 2 lbs. flour/day 36 36c a. Beginning this year, stated supplies were given whose value increased with prices. b. Approximate. Depended upon value of trade goods and maize. c. Varied with the price of flour. The date is that of the earliest known reference after 1565. For comparative purposes, all units of account have been converted to ducats. Rations worth 2.5 reales a day were over and above salary for members of the garrison, among whom the treasury officials, the governor, and the secular priests counted themselves in this case. [Note 32: Pedro Redondo Villegas 4/20/1601; Juan Menendez Marquez II, 1/25/1667] By 1676, at least, a repartimiento Indian received almost exactly the same pay before rations as a soldier. [Note 33: Fr. Alonso del Moral (seen in Council 11/5/1676); Pedro Redondo Villegas 4/20/1601] The soldier, of course, was often issued additional rations for his family, while the Indian got only 2 or 2.5 pounds of maize per day, worth perhaps 1.5 reales—and he might have brought it with him on his back as part of the tribute from his village. [Note 34: Ignacio de Leturiondo (copyist’s date 1707; Ex-Gov. Hita Salazar 5/15/1683, in investigation of the trade goods, 12/7/1680 to 6/28/1683; Gov. Marques Cabrera 12/8/1680, Junta de Guerra summary.] A Franciscan drew his entire 115-ducat stipend in goods and provisions. In 1641 the crown consented to let these items be constant in quantity regardless of price fluctuations. [Note 35: Cedula to the royal officials 11/20/1641] It is ironic that native and friars, both legendarily poor, were the only individuals in town besides the sacristan’s sweeping boy whose incomes could rise with the cost of living. [Note 36: Fiscal of the Council 8/30/1686, comment on Francisco de la Rocha and Juan de Pueyo 4/1/1684] It was acceptable to hold multiple offices. (Bushnell KC)

Cross references

No cross references.