As Zohran Mamdani prepares to take over as mayor of New York City, a new detail has emerged that rewrites a small yet significant piece of history: he will be the 112th mayor, not the 111th as initially thought. This information comes from the Gothamist, which shed light on a historian's discovery of a counting discrepancy in the city's lineage of mayors. The overlooked second, non-consecutive term of 17th-century Mayor Matthias Nicolls has caused a ripple effect, pushing forward the numbering of every mayor that followed.
Mamdani referenced a tweet by the city's Department of Records, which seemingly confirmed the correction in the official count, soaring his count by one. "Well, I thought I was going to be the 111th. I think the City's Department of Records tweeted out in fact that I will be the 112th, and I am excited to be whichever mayor it is," Mamdani said, according to Gothamist. It's still unclear how this revision will be officially implemented, but such a historical adjustment involves more than just amending a number—it reshapes our grasp on the city's intricate narrative of governance.
Further digging by city Department of Records researcher Michael Lorenzini has given credence to the change. Exploring the depths of city archives, Lorenzini confirmed the miscount and detailed its origins in a blog post. According to the New York Post, the blunder dates back to the brief return of Dutch control over New York in 1673, which was then an English colony. The absence of a formal "Mayor of New York" during this period led to the omission of Nicolls' second term when the English reclaimed the colony.
Lorenzini also pointed out, that other mayoral figures like the Dutch "Burgomasters" or those serving as "acting mayors" have historically been excluded from the official tally. If these roles were considered, the count would make Mamdani potentially the 133rd, not the 112th chief executive. "The initial question was, should Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani be counted as the 111th or 112th? But the answer has proven far more complex," Lorenzini outlined in the blog post, as noted by the New York Post.
The importance of establishing an accurate count is emphasized by Ken Cobb, assistant commissioner for the Department of Records and Information Services. He comments on the selective nature of the historical mayor count, which traditionally has not included the Dutch Burgomasters or other pre-consolidation mayors from surrounding regions before the Greater City of New York's establishment in 1898. "Given the complex history of the City's leadership, there should be a full accounting and an official number established that takes all of these factors into account," Cobb said in a statement obtained by the New York Post.
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}