Zohran Mamdani’s election as New York City’s next mayor has captured attention across the country. At just thirty-four, he represents a new wave of leadership. He is the city’s first Muslim mayor, the first mayor of South Asian heritage, and the first New York mayor born on the African continent.
For many longtime New Yorkers, his victory reflects a city that continues to evolve and broaden its definition of representation.
But just as excitement builds for his January 2026 inauguration, an unexpected historical twist has surfaced. Is Mamdani officially the 111th mayor—as originally stated—or could he actually be the 112th?
The answer lies in a long-overlooked detail dating back to the 1600s.
The Archival Discovery That Sparked the Debate
Mayor numbers may seem like small ceremonial labels, but in a city as old and storied as New York, they help mark eras of leadership and shape the way history is recorded.
Historian Paul Hortenstine recently uncovered a discrepancy while researching early colonial documents. His findings pointed to a forgotten detail about Matthias Nicolls, long listed as New York’s sixth mayor.
Nicolls served in 1672—and again in 1675.
Two non-consecutive terms.
Two separate administrations.
According to modern numbering practices used for offices like the U.S. presidency, each non-consecutive term should be counted separately. But in the 1600s, the recordkeepers didn’t do that. They counted Nicolls once, not twice.
That small oversight created a ripple effect: every mayor after him has technically been shifted by one number.
Hortenstine shared his findings with the mayor-elect’s team, noting that the original mistake almost certainly came from inconsistent documentation centuries ago—not intentional error.
A Clue from the Past That Was Ignored
Interestingly, this issue isn’t entirely new.
In 1989, historian Peter R. Christoph published similar concerns about a missing mayoral number in New York’s early records. His findings were noted but never formally addressed.
Historical corrections often take time—sometimes generations—especially when the issue doesn’t impact governance.
Now, with the spotlight on a groundbreaking new mayor, the error has resurfaced at the perfect moment for reconsideration.
What This Means for Mamdani’s Role
Whether Mamdani becomes officially recognized as the 111th or 112th mayor, his responsibilities remain identical.
The numbering does not affect city operations, authority, or constitutional procedures.
This is purely ceremonial—an effort to ensure historical accuracy.
Still, for a leader who already represents several “firsts,” becoming the 112th mayor would add another unique footnote to his place in New York’s long mayoral lineage.
Why Accuracy Matters in a City With Deep Roots
New York is a city shaped by its history—colonial beginnings, waves of immigration, economic upheavals, and political reform. Residents who lived through decades of change understand how important it is to preserve the city’s story with precision.
Correcting the numbering would not change the past. But it would honor it.
Small archival details like this remind us that history is not a fixed object. It evolves, and each generation has a chance to help refine it.
Will the City Make the Change?
No official decision has been announced.
If city leaders choose to correct the sequence, they would need to:
- Review the archival evidence
- Update digital and printed records
- Adjust ceremonial references going forward
It would be a symbolic update, not a political one. But symbolic traditions matter in a city with centuries of recorded leadership.
A New Era With an Unexpected Twist
As January approaches, Zohran Mamdani prepares to step into office with strong public interest and historic significance. His story reflects New York’s resilience, diversity, and continued push for broader representation.
This centuries-old archival surprise doesn’t change his role—but it does add a memorable detail to his arrival. It’s a reminder that even in a city constantly moving toward the future, the past still has stories to tell.
Whatever number Mamdani ultimately receives, one thing is certain:
He is entering office as a groundbreaking leader, ready to guide New York City into its next chapter—accompanied by a fascinating footnote from the archives.
