Zohran Mamdani’s emergence as New York City’s next mayor has come with an unexpected historical footnote: uncertainty over whether he should be called the city’s 111th or 112th mayor.
Early media coverage widely referred to Mamdani as the 111th mayor, reflecting the long-accepted but rarely scrutinized official count used by City Hall and historians for decades.
As attention grew around his election, however, researchers and archivists began to revisit the centuries-old records underlying that number, raising questions about whether the traditional count is fully accurate.
The issue centers on Matthias Nicolls, an English colonial official who served as mayor in the 1670s. Nicolls held two non-consecutive terms, but only one of those terms appears in most official mayoral tallies. In modern practice, non-consecutive terms are usually counted separately, but there is no universally agreed-upon standard for applying that rule retroactively to 17th-century colonial governance. The omission likely stems from fragmentary records, shifting colonial control, and later historians’ interpretations, rather than a deliberate decision at the time. Because of this ambiguity, every mayor after Nicolls may have been misnumbered — if the revised interpretation is accepted.
READ: Zohran Mamdani elected New York’s first Indian American, Muslim mayor (
As a result, Mamdani would technically be New York City’s 112th mayor under the corrected historical count, though many institutions and references still use the traditional numbering. It remains unclear whether the city will formally update its official records or continue using the established count for continuity.
While the discrepancy has no impact on Mamdani’s legal authority or responsibilities, it highlights how historical interpretation, not just factual discovery, shapes civic memory. The episode underscores that even well-established historical “facts” can remain open to revision when old records are reexamined through a modern lens.
READ: ‘He’s got the pulse of people’: A friend reflects on Zohran Mamdani’s rise (
Mamdani had a hilarious response to this supposed snafu, the newly-elected mayor of New York City took to X and posted: “Honored to be sworn in soon as New York City’s 1̶1̶1̶t̶h̶ 112th mayor, marking the beginning of a new era for the city that puts working New Yorkers front and center.”
The episode serves as a reminder that history is not a fixed ledger but a living record shaped by interpretation, context, and the limits of documentation. What appears at first glance to be a trivial numbering dispute reveals how institutional narratives can shift over time — and how easily small assumptions can harden into accepted fact. The renewed attention prompted by Mamdani’s election shows the power of contemporary moments to reopen historical conversations that might otherwise remain uncertain or debated.