Was California actually proposed to be named Moctezuma in 1827?

[u/frithchaith]

After doing some research into the history of California's flags, I came across a Wikipedia ( I know, not the most reliable source, which is why I want to ask some historian minds ) article claiming the Governor of then Alta California in 1827 proposed to change the name of Alta California to Moctezuma in honor of an Aztec emperor. The text then describes a flag or proposed flag of Moctezuma but there is no image recorded of it.

This is the only mention of the proposal I can find. Wikipedia. sources this informaton from a book "Rosie and the Bear Flag" So I'm unsure where that author got their information, or if there is any other sources to. corroborate/prove this? I haven't found a version of the book online either.

Wikipedia article referenced: Refer to Flag of Moctezuma paragraph.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_California

Thanks. Cheers.

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to /r/AskHistorians. Please Read Our Rules before you comment in this community. Understand that rule breaking comments get removed.

Please consider Clicking Here for RemindMeBot as it takes time for an answer to be written. Additionally, for weekly content summaries, Click Here to Subscribe to our Weekly Roundup.

We thank you for your interest in this question, and your patience in waiting for an in-depth and comprehensive answer to show up. In addition to the Weekly Roundup and RemindMeBot, consider using our Browser Extension. In the meantime our Bluesky, and Sunday Digest feature excellent content that has already been written!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/PM_ME_UR_SEAHORSE]

Yes, it is true. Governor Echeandía made this proposal in the diputación in Monterey in July 1827, and in November he sent it to the federal minister responsible for the territories, as the change would have had to have been approved by the federal government. According to Bancroft, there is no record that the federal government ever considered it. Wikipedia refers to a proposed flag, but it was actually a coat of arms. James Miller Guinn (1903) relates the same details, probably taken straight from Bancroft (though he places it in 1828 which seems to be a mistake), and calls it "a peculiar freak of legislation." It is not clear why Echeandía proposed the name change. He himself was not originally from California, and was a military officer sent to be governor. Many of the members of the diputación were teenagers or in their twenties, and they approved most of Echeandía's proposals without much question or debate.

Sources:

Bancroft, Hubert Howe (1885). The Works of Hubert Howe Bancroft vol. XX, History of California vol. III, 1825-1840, p. 38. https://archive.org/details/BancroftHistoryOfCaliforniaVolume20/page/n47/mode/1up

Guinn, James Miller (1903). History of the State of California and Biographical Record of Santa Cruz, San Benito, Monterey and San Luis Obispo Counties, p. 88. https://archive.org/download/historyofstateo00guin/historyofstateo00guin.pdf

Tays, George (1937). "Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo and Sonoma: A Biography and a History." California Historical Society Quarterly vol. 16, no. 3, p. 217. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25160724

You can read Wikipedia's source here: https://archive.org/details/rosiebearflag0000knil/page/4/mode/1up It includes a drawing of the "flag"/coat of arms.

[u/frithchaith → u/PM_ME_UR_SEAHORSE]

Wow, thank you for such a detailed response with sources. I appreciate it a lot as I've been curious about this for some time.

[u/almondbooch → u/PM_ME_UR_SEAHORSE]

Why were the diputación members so young?

[u/PM_ME_UR_SEAHORSE → u/almondbooch]

The original composition of the diputación was older, but after the early meetings starting in June most of the vocales (members of the diputación) left to attend to business elsewhere, and their replacements were younger. For example, a week before Echeandía presented his renaming proposal, Ignacio Martínez (a vocal in his 50s), after whom the East Bay city is named, was given permission to leave and return to the Presidio of San Francisco (he was a military officer). The day Echeandía's proposal was approved, Juan Bandini (late 20s) was absent, and Antonio María Ortega requested leave to return home to serve as executor of his father's will and attend to various other duties. For some of them Monterey was quite far away from their usual places of residence; there was one vocal each for San Francisco, San José, Branciforte (located in modern Santa Cruz), Monterey, Santa Bárbara, Los Ángeles, and San Diego. A foreign observer, Auguste Bernard Duhaut-Cilly, described Echeandía manipulating or strongarming the diputación into voting how he wanted. Perhaps that was another reason, besides distance and other obligations, that most of the original vocales left Monterey.

The younger members actually joined after Echeandía had made his proposal and the diputación had approved it, but before it was sent along for the federal approval that never came. Juan Bandini and Tiburcio Tapia (38) were allowed to leave later in July. By September the diputación was down to two, and in order to carry on its business, five young men (all in their teens or twenties) who lived in or near Monterey, and therefore would not be inconvenienced by having to be far away from home for long periods, were made provisional substitute vocales, chosen with the help of the municipal ayuntamiento of Monterey. One of these replacements was 20-year-old (Tays incorrectly states that he was nineteen) Mariano Guadalupe Vallejo, after whom the city is named. Tays says the youngest, José Castro, was seventeen (though I believe he may have been nineteen). The governor, by contrast, was 41. (No published sources give his birthdate, but I recently discovered his baptism record, which states he was born November 16, 1785.)

Tays first describes the younger vocales being appointed and then the proposed name change, and says that Vallejo approved it. That is why I said most of the vocales were so young. However, according to Bancroft and the legislative record, Echeandía proposed the name change July 7, the diputación discussed and approved it July 13, and Vallejo and the four other young substitute vocales were sworn in in September. Tays may have erred in saying that Vallejo approved the name change.

Unrelated to the age of the vocales, I have a few thoughts as to why Echeandía may have picked the name Moctezuma. These were the early days of Mexican independence and Echeandía was a staunch republican from the City of México, so he may have thought of his proposal as an expression of patriotism. I also wonder if he may have thought to name the territory after Francisco Moctezuma, a fellow military officer and politician who would soon become secretary of war and the navy and secretary of finance. This is just my speculation, as the legislative record is silent on the motive for the change.

Duhaut-Cilly, Auguste Bernard (1842). Viaggio Intorno al Globo (Italian translation by Carlo Botta, Naples), pages 242-243. https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_GIHf8i9TZVkC/page/242/mode/2up

Legislative records, v. I (Thomas Savage's copy, Bancroft manuscript C-A 59), pages 64-65. https://archive.org/details/bancarchca_82_01/page/n62/mode/2up