Andrés González de Barcia and the Creation of the Colonial Spanish American Library 9781442670846

Citation preview

A N D R É S G ON Z Á L E Z D E B A R C I A A N D T H E C R E AT I O N O F T HE CO LO N IA L S PA NI S H A M ER IC A N L IBR A RY

This page intentionally left blank

JONATHAN EARL CARLYON

Andrés González de Barcia and the Creation of the Colonial Spanish American Library

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PRESS Toronto Buffalo London

www.utppublishing.com © University of Toronto Press Incorporated 2005 Toronto Buffalo London Printed in Canada ISBN-13: 978-0-8020-3845-6 ISBN-10: 0-8020-3845-X

Printed on acid-free paper

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Carlyon, Jonathan Earl Andrés González de Barcia and the creation of the colonial Spanish American library / Jonathan Earl Carlyon. (Studies in book and print culture) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8020-3845-X 1. Barcía Carballido y Zúñiga, Andrés Gonzáles de, 1673–1743. 2. Barcía Carballido y Zúñiga, Andrés Gonzáles de, 1673–1743 – Bibliography. 3. Spain – Colonies – America – Bibliography – Methodology. 4. America – Discovery and exploration – Spanish – Bibliography – Methodology. 5. Bibliography – Spain – History – 18th century. I. Title. II. Series. Z2682.5.C37 2005

016.970016

C2005-904131-5

University of Toronto Press acknowledges the financial assistance to its publishing program of the Canada Council for the Arts and the Ontario Arts Council. University of Toronto Press acknowledges the financial support for its publishing activities of the Government of Canada through the Book Publishing Industry Development Program (BPIDP).

To my wife, Sylvie, and our daughters, Zoe and Ana, my parents, Martha and Earl, and my brother, Matt

This page intentionally left blank

Contents

acknowledgments Introduction

ix

3

1 Andrés González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship on the Historiography of the Indies 18 2 The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before: Seventeenth-Century Conceptualizations of the Bibliographical Mission: Antonio de León Pinelo and Nicolás Antonio 52 3 The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After: Bibliography as a Reflection of Andrés González de Barcia’s Intellectual Project for New World Scholarship 87 4 Andrés González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library and His Edition of Gregorio García’s Origen de los Indios 118 5 The Index as a Scholarly and Political Tool in the Americanist Editions of Andrés González de Barcia 165 Appendix: Complete Bibliography of González de Barcia’s Americanist Editions (1720–1743) 201 Notes

207

Works Cited Index

239

223

This page intentionally left blank

Acknowledgments

There are numerous individuals to whom I owe a debt of gratitude. Luis Eyzaguirre showed great concern for my intellectual future and for the well-being of my family. I will always attempt to emulate his immense spirit of character. Que descanse en paz. David Herzberger offered unending encouragement to me for which I will always be thankful. I thank Karen Spalding for sharing with me her love of history. Miguel Gomes exemplifies a passion for literature and writing; he is a true friend. To Nelson Orringer, I will always hold dear the independent study, summer seminar on Federico García Lorca. Richard Brown and the University of Connecticut Humanities Institute provided much support and stimulation, for which I am very thankful. I am fortunate now to have many wonderful colleagues at Colorado State University, all of whom are champions of furthering scholarship in the humanities. Ruth Hill and Ana Rueda offered me much encouragement and support during the final stages of my work. I wish to thank Jill McConkey for her assistance throughout the editorial process. Finally, I wish to offer my most heartfelt words of thanks to Professor Rolena Adorno. I will always admire her genius, her complete dedication to scholarly excellence, her total devotion to her many students, and her enduring kindness to me and to my family. The opportunity to study with her and to train under her direction will forever stand as the defining moment of my intellectual career. A shorter, adapted version of chapter 3 was published in Dieciocho: Hispanic Enlightenment 28.1 (2005). My thanks to the editor-in-chief, Prof. David Gies, for his permission to republish here.

This page intentionally left blank

A N D R É S G ON Z Á L E Z D E B A R C I A A N D T H E C R E AT I O N O F T HE CO LO N IA L S PA NI S H A M ER IC A N L IBR A RY

This page intentionally left blank

Introduction

Europa, en repetidos elogios acredita la vtilidad de esta Bibliotheca, porque ostenta à el Sabio conocimiento de tantos Eruditos desvelados, tan estraños discursos, que aùn los mas versados en Libros, dudaràn si estaban escritos. Europe, in repeated songs of praise, pays tribute to the usefulness of this Bibliotheca, because it provides the Wiseman with knowledge of so many dedicated erudite scholars, of discourses so unique that even the most learned man of letters will doubt as to whether they had been written. (González de Barcia, in the dedication to King Felipe V to the 1737 Barcia edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome)

The pursuit of the origins of knowledge, the search for documents that could ideally provide the solid foundations needed to find and verify the truth, characterized the scholarship of eighteenth-century Europe. While scholars of preceding centuries desired to discover lost texts, those of the Enlightenment were interested in ordering, sifting, developing, and clarifying these works (Cassirer vi). Scientific investigation ruled. With the 1681 publication of De Re Diplomatica Libri the French Benedictine writer Jean Mabillon set out the ground rules for critical historical scholarship. Also, the 1687 publication of Sir Isaac Newton’s Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica awoke Europe to the practice of grounding knowledge in critical investigation (Mestre ‘Historiografía’ 816). Indeed, as Jonathan Israel has noted, ‘no major cultural transformation in Europe, since the fall of the Roman Empire, displayed anything comparable to the impressive cohesion of European

4 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

intellectual culture in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth century’ (Radical Enlightenment vi). However, for many scholars considering Spain’s contribution to this intellectual history, the period from Pedro Calderón de la Barca’s death in 1681 until the beginning of King Charles III’s reign in 1759 marks a lacuna that, except for the works of Benito Jerónimo Feijóo (1676–1764), is often avoided completely. Paul Hazard, in his classic study The European Mind, 1680–1715, states the standard perception of this interim period: ‘By this time Spain had ceased to live in the present. The last thirty years of the seventeenth century, and, for the matter of that, the first thirty of the eighteenth, were with her wellnigh completely barren. Never before, throughout her whole intellectual history, says Ortega y Gasset, had her heart beat so feebly' (55–6). Within this mindset, Spain becomes an intellectual wasteland, not worthy or even demanding of scholarly observation. However, although the attention of some may jump from the decadence of King Charles II’s reign (1665–1700) to the absolutism that characterized the reign of King Charles III (1759–88), the decades that separated these two kings were marked by both a change in dynastic monarchies, from the Habsburgs to the Bourbons, as well as a major reorientation in scholarly pursuits. Hispanist scholars, for example, who have investigated the Spanish eighteenth century with a more discerning eye, quickly learned that in Spain one of the seeds of the Enlightenment (Ilustración) was also planted in 1687, by Juan de Cabriada. In his landmark work Carta filosófica, médico-chymica (Madrid, 1687), Cabriada denounced what to him was the shameful fact that his countrymen, ‘as if they were Indians,’ were the last to receive word of the new information that was already disseminated throughout Europe: ‘Que es lastimosa y aun vergonzosa cosa que, como si fuéramos indios, hayamos de ser los últimos en recibir las noticias y luces públicas que ya están esparcidas por Europa’ (‘For it is a sorry and even embarrassing thing that, as if we were Indians, we should be the last to receive the notices and public lights that are already scattered across Europe’; quoted in López Piñero ‘La Carta’ 214). This often-repeated quote marks an obligatory point of departure for the study of Spain’s early Enlightenment, a period that I define, following Pedro Álvarez de Miranda, as dating from 1680 until 1760 (Palabras e ideas).1 Indeed, while students of the European Enlightenment look to England, France, and the Low Countries as the privileged sites of this nascent culture, Cabriada reminds us that scholars in

Introduction 5

Spain did create academies, libraries, and literary journals with which to introduce new ideas into the peninsula. Even a cursory review of Spanish history during the first half of the eighteenth century reveals the fact that this period constituted a seminal moment in the solidification of Spain’s intellectual foundations. For example, the Royal Library (today the Biblioteca nacional) was founded in 1711 by the first Bourbon king of Spain, Philip V; between 1726 and 1739 the Spanish Royal Academy, itself established in 1713, published its monumental Diccionario de autoridades; also, the Spanish Royal Academy of History was formally recognized in 1738. Moreover, with the groundwork of these first decades in place, the second half of the eighteenth century saw the foundation of the Archive of the Indies at Seville in 1785 by Charles III and, between 1783 and 1788, the release of the updated edition of Nicolás Antonio’s historic Bibliotheca Hispana, one of Spain’s most important works of bibliographical scholarship. With only this small sample of the cultural production of this century in evidence, we see that the Spanish eighteenth century, by any standard of analysis, constitutes one of Spain’s most dynamic intellectual moments. Moreover, far from being at the periphery of the European intellectual world of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, Spain’s cultural production during this period closely imitated and, as we will see, in some cases anticipated that of other European countries. Among the intellectuals whose activity helped to define Spanish scholarship of the eighteenth century, the work of Andrés González de Barcia Carballido y Zúñiga (1673–1743) stands out as a major contribution to the development of Spanish bibliography. By assembling and editing a collection of the authors of Spanish exploration and conquest in the New World, González de Barcia completed one of the most ambitious publication campaigns on the Americas of his time. Moreover, his project is viewed today as having provided much of the foundation for the modern study of colonial Spanish American letters (Guerra Guerra 106–7). By no means a figure on the sidelines of this intellectual activity, therefore, González de Barcia constitutes one of the privileged focal points for any study of the scholarly and intellectual production in eighteenth-century Spain. Andrés González de Barcia was born in 1673 in Galicia, Spain (Couceiro Freifomil 184; Rey Soto 80). Although little is known about his early life, he apparently moved at a young age to Madrid. Indeed, his earliest biographer, Joseph Antonio Álvarez de Baena, indicated that

6 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

González de Barcia was a ‘natural de Madrid’ (‘native of Madrid’) (106). Nonetheless, beginning in 1706, and continuing until his death in 1743, González de Barcia served King Philip V at Madrid in a variety of commissions and duties. These included Superintendent of the Royal Manor, High Judge of Royal Rents and Goods, Governer of the Hall of Mayors of Court and Country, and, most impressively, as a member occupying a seat on the elite Council of Castile (Álvarez de Baena 107). Throughout his career he was held in high esteem for his position as member of these royal councils. For example, in the 1732 publication of Antonio de Solís’s famous Historia de la conquista de Mexico (Madrid, 1684), the book merchant Juan Gómez Bot, who funded the edition, dedicated the work to ‘el muy ilustre señor don Andres Gonzalez de Barcia, Carbadillo [sic], Zúñiga, Raudana, &c. del Consejo de su Mag[estad] en el Real de Castilla, y de la Real Junta de Estrangeros, y del Tabaco, &c’ (‘the most illustrious señor don Andres González de Barcia, Carbadillo, Zúñiga, Raudana, &c. of the Council of his Majesty in the Royal [Council] of Castile, and of the Royal Board of Foreigners and of Tobacco, &c.’; Solís ‘Title pages’). In addition to these government duties, however, González de Barcia was also a member of the elite tertulia organized around the Marquis of Villena, Juan Manuel Fernández Pacheco, that would evolve in 1713 into the Real Academia Española and publish the first Diccionario de Autoridades in 1726 (Lazarro y Carreter 19–21). In his youth González de Barcia wrote poetry and penned many theatrical comedies, some of which were published alongside those of Pedro Calderón de la Barca, Lope de Vega, and other giants of Spain’s Golden Age (Aguilar Bibliografía 279).2 Moreover, before his death he worked tirelessly on his emendations to Nicolás Antonio’s Bibliotheca Hispana, creating a two-volume manuscript, written in Latin, in which he compiled the works of many authors and provided an abundance of marginal notes. Indeed, much of the manuscript was brought into the famous second edition published between 1783 and 1788 (Cebrián Nicolás Antonio 10). As we can discern from this brief biography, González de Barcia played an important role (both directly and indirectly) in many of the major cultural events that define eighteenth-century Spain.3 However, although a man of prodigious literary and scholarly output in his time, González de Barcia is best known today for his retrieval and re-publication of many of the now canonical writings on the colonial Spanish American world, many of which had not been published since the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. Begin-

Introduction 7

ning in the 1720s, he embarked on a new intellectual activity as editor of a large selection of the Chronicles of the Indies. He collected widely, locating texts in Spanish, Latin, French, Italian, and other languages (Álvarez de Baena 107). By his death, at the age of seventy, González de Barcia had edited the works of more than twenty-five authors and compiled one of the most important personal libraries of his generation (de Andrés 814). My book is an effort to write an intellectual history of these developments. I show how Andrés González de Barcia created what we might call the first comprehensive ‘colonial Spanish American library.’ I elucidate how he, following two major traditions in humanist scholarship, undertook this project. First, he edited rare and out-of-print texts and manuscripts that spanned the period from Columbus’s voyages through the conquest of Mexico, Peru, and Rio de la Plata. Second, he edited and greatly expanded the famous catalogue on the Indies, Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental i Occidental, nautica i Geografica, first published in 1629 by Antonio de León Pinelo, the eighth Royal Chronicler of the Indies (Carbia 205). A man of such importance obviously deserves critical attention. However, there has been no book on the life or work of Andrés González de Barcia. There exist only a handful of essays that treat his work; most other references are cursory at best.4 It is essential, therefore, to examine this aspect of his life’s work in order to understand the nature and importance of his contribution to bibliographic scholarship and book history in eighteenth-century Spain. Indeed, I intend to illustrate how the work being done in the field of the History of the Book holds tremendous promise for Hispanism. Finally, I hope to focus attention on the influence that González de Barcia’s editorial work has had in shaping the way we study colonial Latin America today. Beginning in the seventeenth century, the role of the humanist moved from the discovery and editing of classical Latin texts to the cataloguing of manuscripts and editions (Pfeiffer 132ff.) The confluence of these distinct humanist activities in the work of one eighteenth-century intellectual made González de Barcia a pre-eminent figure of his day. Indeed, among his peers he was known as the ‘Mecenas’ and the ‘non plus ultra’ of the early Enlightenment scholars in Madrid (Barros Arana 105). Today, his work has earned him the right to be called the ‘first Americanist’ (Aznar 298). If Renaissance humanism was devoted to the study, translation, edition, and imitation of Latin texts, and if the study, translation, edition, and imitation of Greek texts defined the

8 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Hellenist, then Americanism, in this instance, can be defined as the study, translation, editing, and imitation of the writings of Spanish exploration and settlement in the Americas. Although he never used the term to characterize his editorial activities, my use of it here allows us to categorize the scholarly work on the New World carried out by Andrés González de Barcia.5 González de Barcia translated exploration and discovery accounts from many languages, edited those texts as his work progressed, and wrote a few studies of his own that emulated the chronicle tradition.6 His desire to edit chronicles that dealt with the origins of the Indians helped codify the group of works that would define how future scholars approached colonial Latin American letters. Finally, the breadth of his interests, covering themes as diverse as Alonso de Ercilla’s epic poem on Spanish exploits in Chile, La Araucana, and González de Barcia’s own essay on colonial Spanish Florida, Ensayo cronológico para la historia de la Florida, attests to his understanding of the object of his study as related to what scholars of AngloAmericanist studies might refer to as ‘the Americas.’ Indeed, scholars of colonial Florida continue to cite González de Barcia’s Ensayo cronológico in consideration of the invaluable sources it offers, many of which are no longer available for consultation (Chatelain 102).7 To appreciate the intellectual world in which González de Barcia created this influential library, we can be reminded of the multiple meanings of ‘biblioteca’ (‘library’) in eighteenth-century Spain. As defined by the 1726 Diccionario de Autoridades – a dictionary that, as we have seen, González de Barcia himself helped to create – ‘biblioteca’ connoted: (1) the physical location where books and manuscripts were maintained; (2) the collection of books themselves used for research; and (3) the bibliographical catalogue used to orient all scholars’ intellectual pursuits.8 What I refer to as González de Barcia’s Americanist creation – his construction of the ‘Barcia Library’ – comprised these dimensions of scholarship, all of which served in his attempt to redefine Spanish colonialism by producing a selection of books that would constitute a major part of the authoritative canon for New World historiography. González de Barcia used his scholarship to influence the way the European Enlightenment community conceptualized Spain and its ultramarine dependencies. Having dimmed throughout the seventeenth century, the image of an imperial Habsburg Spain faded completely when Charles II failed to produce an heir. After the War of Succession (1700–15), scholars in Spain working under the new Bour-

Introduction 9

bon monarchy of Philip V sought to revitalize the Spanish image through the publication of those works that they considered best represented their literary history. In the case of González de Barcia, his carefully chosen critical editions of the Chronicles of the Indies attempted to discredit what is today referred to as Spain’s ‘Black Legend,’ or the negative interpretation of the discovery, exploration, and conquest of the Indies by Spain (cf. Juderías). As Jorge Cañizares-Esguerra writes: ‘Barcia’s editorial campaign was part of a larger effort in both official and private circles to reacquaint both national and foreign audiences with the Spanish scholarship of the long sixteenth century, a century that many assumed best reflected the intellectual accomplishments of Spain’ (155). For example, the work most associated with the negative version of Spanish colonialism in the New World was Fray Bartolomé de las Casas’s treatise, Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias (1552). In this piece, Las Casas reviewed the numerous atrocities commited by Spaniards against the indigenous people of the New World. Of course, González de Barcia avoided the works of Las Casas. In their place, he highlighted works such as those by El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega (1539– 1616), the half-Indian, half-Spanish mestizo historian from Perú. As González de Barcia hoped to adduce with this editorial selection, El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega’s scholarship offered testimony in support of the assertion that Spanish dominion in the Indies had produced positive results. Moreover, with such works as his Ensayo cronológico, González de Barcia responded in part to the intentional redrawing of borders on English, French, and Dutch maps that falsely attributed to other nations territories controlled by Spain (Capel xxia; CañizaresEsguerra 158). Putting Americanist scholarship at the service of European politics, therefore, González de Barcia published some of the most prominent Spanish writings on the exploration and conquest of the New World in order to respond to the political disadvantage that characterized Spain’s status vis-à-vis other European states.9 Understanding ‘Biblioteca’ as a concept with the complementary implications of bibliographic repertory and scholarly library, I will focus on González de Barcia’s efforts in assembling and editing this selected group of works, as well as his preparation of a comprehensive reference tool, the Epítome, with which to further the study of the Spanish ultramarine world. Regarding this latter understanding of ‘Biblioteca’ as bibliographical repertory, we are reminded of the importance of bibliography during

10 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

the eighteenth century and, consequently, of that of González de Barcia’s preparation of the León Pinelo text by taking note of the reactions of two Hispanic-American bibliographers of that period who dealt with León Pinelo’s classic work. One example can be found in Juan José de Eguiara y Erguren’s comments in ‘Prologue IX’ of his Bibliotheca Mexicana. As Antony Higgins argued, Eguiara y Erguren (1696– 1763) utilized his bibliography in order to articulate a differentiated position of criollo subjectivity whose ‘coordinates can no longer be situated solely within the matrix of Spanish cultural authority’ (xiii). If one pursues Higgins’s suggestion, one example of this repositioning, as it relates to León Pinelo’s Epítome, can be found in Eguiara y Erguren’s prolonged critique of Manual Martí, one of Spain’s most renowned thinkers (Mestre Manuel Martí). As the Creole bibliographer wrote: ‘Alphabetum augustinianum et Epitomen Pinelianam aliasque collectiones iam pridem vulgates, quae cum codices mexicanos multos obiciant legentibus, numquam ab eo libatas fuisse sunt argumento’ (‘The Alphabetum augustinianum, the Pinelo Epítome, and other wellknown collections, which offer many Mexican books to the readers, are in themselves evidence that they had not been consulted by him’; (Eguiara y Erguren 111a). Eguiara y Erguren noted that Martí could have learned more about Mexican writers if he had actually read the books whose titles were gathered in León Pinelo’s Epítome, among other collections. Conversely, in the introduction to his Bibliotheca Americana (1807), the Ecuadorian bibliographer Antonio de Alcedo (1735–1812) offered a strong rebuke of the bibliographical catalogue, stating that González de Barcia’s edition was ‘tan lleno de errores en los nombres y apellidos de los autores, en los títulos de las obras y en los años y lugares que se imprimieron, que ... no merece el titulo que tiene’ (‘so full of errors in the names and last names of the authors, in the titles of the works and in the years and places of publication that ... it does not deserve the title it has’; 5). Alcedo, of course, offered his work in part as a corrective to these perceived deficits. However, that the Epítome was cited and challenged by scholars throughout the American continent offers the strongest testament to its importance to the study of literary history in the Hispanic world. Moreover, we see that González de Barcia’s early work on the Epítome was characteristic of the profound interest in bibliographical studies that would characterize the eighteenth century in Europe and in America. While the bibliographical catalogue constitutes one component of the Barcia Library, my use of the term ‘library’ – instead of ‘archive,’ for

Introduction 11

example – highlights another, essential characteristic of the intellectual history I explore. As Roberto González Echevarría reminds us, in the context of Latin American narrative the Archive is, ‘first of all, a repository for the legal documents wherein the origins of Latin American history are contained, as well as a specifically Hispanic institution created at the same time as the New World was being created’ (29). Within this understanding of the Archive, power serves to encrypt knowledge of the origins. The Archive, in fact, enacts an enforced absence: ‘The Archive keeps and hides, it guards the secrets, which is the first law’ (36). In this way, the Archive stands for the process of writing in Latin American novels, which can only be uncovered through the analysis of the novels themselves. Many scholars familiar with these ideas suggest that the concept of the Archive is relevant also to the cultural history of eighteenth-century Spain that I study here. I do not disagree. However, I caution against quickly associating the concept of the archive (as discussed by Foucault, González Echevarría, and Higgins) with my study of the Barcia Library. Working within the cultural milieu of his day, González de Barcia was not interested in encrypting knowledge. He wanted to explicate. In the spirit of the Novatores of his time, about whose culture Pérez-Magallón has written masterfully, González de Barcia sought to challenge myth with historical fact. Far from guarding and hiding information from the view of others, that is, the Barcia Library was in all senses open to the learned public: both to those who frequented his library at Madrid and to those who utilized his editions throughout the larger Republic of Letters. On the most immediate level, therefore, I use the category of the library (a word that in early eighteenth-century Spain was rendered as both biblioteca and librería) because it is the term that González de Barcia himself used when referring to his scholarly creation. While the archive may adequately characterize the second half of the Spanish eighteenth century – symbolized best by the Archive of the Indies at Seville – the first half of this century is defined by the Library – as the examples of the Spanish Royal Library and the Barcia Library suggest. Indeed, González de Barcia held scholarly libraries in high regard. For example, in his dedication to Philip V in his edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome, he offered the following praise for the Royal Library, which had been founded by the King in 1711: ‘colmò V. Mag. los triunfos, que destinò la Omnipotencia à su glorioso Espititu de estableciendo Numerosa, Esquista, i Apreciable, publica Bibliotheca, en su Real Corte’ (‘Your Majesty surpassed the triumphs that the Almighty had destined to

12 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

your glorious Spirit by founding a Voluminous, Exquisite, and Estimable public Library in your Royal Court’; ‘Al Catolico y poderosisimo Monarca’ in León Pinelo [1982] 1:1–2). González de Barcia emphasized the importance of the Royal Library’s ‘public’ accessibility for the promotion of scholarship in Spain. Likewise, he made repeated reference to his own library. In his Ensayo cronológico, for example, he acknowledged that many of the manuscripts and books he cited could be found, ‘en la Libreria del señor Don Andrès Gonçalez de Barcia, de los Consejos de Castilla, y Guerra’ (‘In the Library of Señor don Andrés González de Barcia, of the Councils of Castile and War’; ‘Introducción’ ¶6r). If a scholar wished to consult the texts referenced in the essay, all that was needed was to visit the Barcia Library. Consequently, the implied accessibility of the books, an implication inherent in González de Barcia’s understanding of the library, connotes an openness not inferred by ‘archive.’ While the archive defines a place where knowledge is kept – a vault, so to speak – the library, as I am applying the term here, characterizes the forum where knowledge circulates. I explore this circulation of knowledge (scientia) as it relates to the study of the New World carried out by scholars during the early eighteenth century. Specifically, within this context I address González de Barcia’s role in influencing this intellectual exchange with his scholarly editions. In pursuing this study, however, I quickly learned that to appreciate González de Barcia’s contribution, I had to come to terms with the mode in which this contribution was made. Turning my attention away from the text, therefore, I began to focus on the writing surrounding the text, what Gerard Genette has called the paratext. This writing, however, is not available to the student of González de Barcia’s work at first glance. As the French cultural historian Roger Chartier reminds us, authors do not write books: ‘[N]o text exists outside of the support that enables it to be read; any comprehension of a writing, no matter what kind it is, depends on the forms in which it reaches its readers’ (‘Texts, Printings, Readings’ 161). That González de Barcia understood his job as that of putting text into the form of a book, what Chartier and others call the mise en livre, is attested to by the fact that in his multivolume edition of Antonio de Herrera’s Historia de los hechos de los castellanos (or, Décadas) González de Barcia wrote: ‘sin reparar en gastos, ni ganancias, se han impreso, traiendo Letra de Amsterdam, i Papel de Genova; i no ha sido mucho para vnos Libros tan grandes, que merecen Letras de Oro, en Laminas de Bronce’ (‘without stopping to consider the cost, or profit, they have been printed using Amster-

Introduction

13

dam font and Geneva Paper; and it is the least one can do for such important Books, which deserve Letters of Gold, on Sheets of Bronze’; ‘El Impresor’ in Herrera [1730] 1:*r). González de Barcia’s concern for the form in which his editions reached the reader obviously played a central role in his intellectual agenda. However, one cannot simply enter a library today, request one of González de Barcia’s editions, and discern immediately the complete paratextual component of his mise en livre. The paratext created and ‘put into the book’ by González de Barcia as editor refers to that added or emended information found in his editions that serves to distinguish them from the original text written by the authors whose works González de Barcia published. These materials, like any paratextual apparatus ‘surround (the text) and prolong it, precisely in order to present it, in the usual sense of this verb, but also in its strongest meaning: to make it present, to assure its presence in the world, its “reception” and its consumption’ (Genette ‘Introduction to the Paratext’ 261). The paratext created by González de Barcia served to mediate and present great works of Spanish history to a republic of scholars very interested in these matters. Printing his writings and commentaries in the margins and spaces around the text, he sought to underline what he considered to be the truth regarding colonial Spain. By supplying his editions with marginal notes, prefatory writings, and scholarly indices, among many other scholia, González de Barcia attempted to create for the reader what he, that is, González de Barcia, considered to be the ideal scholarly and bibliographic setting for the contemplation and study of New World history. Consequently, it is appropriate to look to the margins of González de Barcia’s scholarly editions as a space where his mental life was documented. However, if, as I argue, his genius manifested itself in this bibliographical web of reference established at the periphery of the text, this paratextual network is not something that is visually apparent without much critical, scholarly preparation. For example, in conducting the research for my book, I visited the Beinecke Library at Yale University, the Houghton Library at Harvard University, and the John Carter Brown Library at Brown University, as well as many other libraries which housed editions by González de Barcia. As a result of these travels, I reviewed numerous original copies of his Americanist publications. It was not, however, until I obtained the facsimile edition of León Pinelo’s Epitome, prepared by Horacio Capel, that I was truly able to begin to discern and explicate

14 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

González de Barcia’s work. The first step in my preparation of this study, therefore, was to do a side-by-side analysis of the González de Barcia edition and the earlier edition on which his was based. By reviewing the original 1629 Epítome, for example, and keeping my facsimile edition of the 1737–8 Barcia edition in clear view, I was able to underline all the original entries from the former that were reproduced in the Barcia edition (something I would never have done or have been able to do using the second edition originals). Thereafter, I could read any page of the facsimile edition and see, simultaneously, both the 1629 León Pinelo entries (highlighted) and the 1737–8 González de Barcia additions. Moreover, although González de Barcia placed square brackets around his supplemental text in his 1729 edition of Gregorio de García’s Origen de los Indios, it was not until I compared the marginal notes from the second edition with those from the first that I was able to appreciate fully the immense augmentation performed on the text by González de Barcia. Again, a copy of Franklin Pease’s facsimile edition permitted me to mark up the text, highlighting García’s marginal notes and thereby revealing those added by González de Barcia. In this way, my use of facsimiles was crucial in that I was able to create my own ‘critical editions’ of the texts which I could use to study González de Barcia’s paratext.10 This essential preliminary work allowed me to study González de Barcia’s scholarly agenda with precision and focus. As I soon realized, no longer part of the great historical production of the first two hundred years of exploration and conquest of the Indies, González de Barcia’s work consisted of an attempt to provide the historiography of this initial period with the order and clarity needed to confer upon it an authoritative status. If this had largely gone unnoticed until now, I hoped to reveal that this oversight was due to a failure to appreciate the extent of González de Barcia’s editorial paratext. Therefore, in this book I attempt to return our attention to his prefatory writings, marginal notes, intercalated commentary, and detailed indices in order to demonstrate that by creating the colonial Spanish American library, by producing these critical, scholarly editions of many of the New World historical texts still used today, Andrés González de Barcia prepared the foundations for much of the modern study of Colonial Latin America. In order to explicate this thesis and to explore González de Barcia’s editorial agenda, I have divided my book into five chapters. In my first chapter I will introduce the fluid cultural world that characterized the politics of letters in early Enlightenment Spain. Specifically, I look at

Introduction

15

the earliest Americanist publications González de Barcia produced in order to focus on his use of pseudonyms. Throughout his life, González de Barcia published his work anonymously, using false attributions, or employing pseudonyms. By highlighting the authorial function inherent in his paratext, I reveal how he provided politically critical commentary from within the arena of the scholarly conventions expected by the intellectuals of the Republic of Letters. In chapter 2 I perform the first part of a two-chapter, in-depth case study of Antonio de León Pinelo’s bibliographical masterpiece, Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental i Occidental, Nautica i Geografica (Madrid, 1629; Madrid, 1737–8). In undertaking this study, I offer a review of what we might call León Pinelo’s ‘before’ and González de Barcia’s ‘after’ (which I will study in chapter 3). As we will see, León Pinelo utilized his bibliography in order to prove his merit as an erudite member of the Spanish court. While serving a scholarly aim, León Pinelo’s catalogue allows us to appreciate the political considerations inherent in the compilation of any bibliographical work. I will conclude the chapter with an analysis of Nicolás Antonio’s Bibliotheca Hispana (Rome, 1672). Similar to León Pinelo’s, Antonio’s bibliography served as a forum in which to catalogue the ‘monuments’ of Spain’s literary inheritance. Antonio used his catalogue to make evident to scholars in Spain and abroad the importance of the intellectual contribution of the ‘heroes’ of Spanish literary history. By reviewing the precursors to González de Barcia’s edition of the Epítome, focusing on the bibliographical repertories compiled by Antonio de León Pinelo and Nicolás Antonio during the seventeenth century, I will establish the seventeenth-century bibliographical backdrop to the 1737–8 second edition of the Epítome. In chapter 3, therefore, I will continue my two-part case study of León Pinelo’s 1629 bibliography by analysing the alterations carried out by González de Barcia in his 1737–8 edition of the Epítome. By studying González de Barcia’s ‘after,’ that is, the additions and supplements that he made to the original text, we will see how he utilized León Pinelo’s bibliography as a means through which to articulate his scholarly agenda for New World studies while advertising or marketing his scholarly editions as the essential starting point for this area of research. By illuminating the process through which González de Barcia effected his mise en livre I will show how his updated and emended edition of León Pinelo’s work responded to the discrete political realities relevant to González de Barcia’s time. If, for example, scholars

16 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

from diverse parts of Europe were producing multiple editions of Las Casas’s Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias – the book most commonly associated with the promotion of the Spanish Black Legend – González de Barcia would use his edition of the Epítome in order to cast doubt on the value of these works, thus reiterating his belief that new sources were needed with which to evaluate the Spanish involvement in the Indies. In this sense, we will see that while León Pinelo used bibliography as a tool for political self-advancement, González de Barcia, for whom this was not an issue, used his edition of the Epítome for intellectual advancement, that is, for the diffusion of his ideas, scholarship, and scholarly editions within the community of scholars he labelled ‘la Republica de las Letras’ (‘Proemio a esta segunda Impresion’ in León Pinelo [1982] 1:¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶v). In Chapter 4 I present the other half of González de Barcia’s scholarly work: his creation of what I designate the ‘Barcia Library.’ If in chapters 2 and 3 we examined the library as bibliographical catalogue (bibliotheca), in this chapter I will explore the other definitions for the word in an attempt to highlight the fact that González de Barcia’s creation of the library consisted also of a space, similar to that of a museum, where scholarship occurred. Also, González de Barcia conceived of and created a collection or library of texts used for study. In designing this multifaceted Americanist library, he hoped to provide scholars throughout Europe with what he considered to be the ideal setting for the proper study of the history of the New World. The space of the library, therefore, would include the editions needed for study as well as the bibliographical catalogue with which to further these investigations. Of equal importance, however, González de Barcia used the pages of the books he edited to provide the foundation upon which to assemble the bibliographical references adduced in his commentary. These references reflected his vision of the ideal book collections for the libraries of any scholar interested in the New World studies. This chapter addresses how González de Barcia attempted to define these components of the library while also providing guidelines for how the library might best be ordered and utilized. Throughout this chapter, finally, I will elucidate the fact that González de Barcia’s genius revealed itself in the creation of the book. As such, I am interested in his library as much as in his views. I will focus attention on the paratextual apparatus that permitted González de Barcia to articulate these positions. As we will see, González de Barcia’s importance and originality are manifested best in the creation of the Barcia Library.

Introduction

17

Finally, in my concluding chapter I analyse the role of the scholarly indices González de Barcia included in the majority of the republications he produced. Of the more than two dozen scholarly editions he created, nearly all included indices. By highlighting the importance of scholarly indices within the broader panorama of the humanist scholarly traditions resonant in Renaissance and Enlightenment Europe, I further demonstrate González de Barcia’s fundamental goal of creating critical scholarly editions of exacting quality for use by all scholars. As we will see in this chapter, his placement of the index in its standard location at the end of a book did not connote a subordinate exegetical position. For González de Barcia, the index had the potential to define the topics of scholarly interest. Indeed, in the Barcia Library the index led scholarship by providing readers with what one Enlightenment journal that reviewed González de Barcia’s index to the Herrera edition termed une lecture déjà fait or pre-reading (‘Lettre au sujet des editions’ in Mémoires de Trévoux [June 1730] 1091). By indexing, for example, Hernán Cortés’s valour instead of alleged Spanish cowardice in the face of Indigenous cunning (as one competing index writer preferred), González de Barcia revealed that by offering this pre-reading, he was attempting once again to provide the reader with pointed political commentary from within the conventions of scholarly excellence. Throughout the book, I have presented the quotations in their original form with one exception. I have substituted all uses of the long s (´ ) with the modern s. Also, except for titles of books and manuscripts, and unless otherwise noted, I have provided the translations for all quoted material. Finally, I have equipped this study with a brief appendix in which I provide the full titles to González de Barcia’s Americanist editions.

1 Andrés González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship on the Historiography of the Indies

Y bien sè yo, que aunque aora no se proclame esta Historia, por ser de el tiempo presente, se proclamarà el Author en el futuro. I well know that although this History does not proclaim it now, on account of it being about present times, it will proclaim the Author in the future. (Pedro Yañez de Avilés, ‘Censura’ to the Ensayo cronológico [1723])

When Andrés González de Barcia published his edition of El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega’s Comentarios Reales de los Incas (Lisbon, 1609) in 1723, the scholar, using a pseudonym, added a prologue intended to address matters relating to the study of the New World. González de Barcia devoted the first half of the essay, entitled ‘Prologo a esta segunda edicion, de don Gabriel de Cardenas’ (‘Prologue to this second edition, by don Gabriel de Cardenas’), to Father Honorius Philoponus’s claim, made in his work Nova Typis Transacta Navigatio (1621), that Christopher Columbus landed in Peru only two years after his discovery of the Indies. As González de Barcia explained, Philoponus wrote that, after landing at Darien, Columbus crossed into the Pacific and reached the Peruvian coast around 1494 (in Garcilaso [1723b] *v–*2r). Moreover, that same year, Columbus, travelling with Father Peter Boil, arrived at Cajamarca, Peru, and met the Inca Prince Atahualpa, whom Philoponus identified as the Inca King. At this meeting Father Boil extended an offer of greetings to Atahualpa in the form of the Holy Bible. Not appreciating the implications of this gift, however, Atahualpa abruptly discarded it, thus inciting the Spaniards’ rage. As Philoponus himself wrote: ‘librum in terram vt rem inutilem è manibus projecit’ (‘As if

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 19

some useless thing, (the King) thrust the book from his hands to the ground’; (74).1 González de Barcia identified with ease the anachronism that invalidated Philoponus’s account. Philoponus had transposed into his work Atahualpa’s act of defiance, thirty years before the event actually occurred. In 1532, when this event actually took place, with Francisco Pizarro as Atahualpa’s antagonist, Pizarro used it as the pretext with which he sought to excuse his slaughter of Atahualpa’s men.2 However, González de Barcia pointed out that Philoponus attributed Pizarro’s 1532 offensive to a desire to seek revenge for the injustice done to Columbus and Boil thirty-plus years earlier (in Garcilaso [1723b] *2r). So ludicrous was this account, however, that González de Barcia felt obliged to conclude that the venerable Philoponus had not read the authors whom he had cited nor used the original editions. Consequently, González de Barcia reviewed the reasons that had led Philoponus to confuse the ‘Acciones, Tiempos y Heroes’ of this famous episode in Spanish colonial history: Confiesa [Philoponus] no aver visto, sino citado, à Pedro Martir de Angleria, fol. 63. Vsa de Oviedo, traducido en Italiano, y de Gomara en Francès, por Fumeè: à este le cita para cosas distintas, de lo que intenta autoriçar con èl: ... Lo qual no està en el Original Español ... Lo que deja, sin duda, aver sido influjo ageno adoptado por error proprio. (In Garcilaso [1723b] **2r) [Philoponus] confesses to having not seen, except in citation, Pedro Martir de Angleria, fol. 63. He uses an Italian translation of Oviedo, and Fumée’s French translation of Gomara, citing the latter as an authority for matters differing from those for which he had written ... None of which is in the Original Spanish ... Without a doubt, this resulted in his own error being due to having adopted outside influences.

González de Barcia argued that Philoponus’s use of inaccurate editions and poor translations explained the flaws in his scholarship. Philoponus lived far from Spain, which limited his access to the authoritative texts written in Spanish. Indeed, as González de Barcia lamented, ‘aun en España es trabajoso apurar la Verdad en estas Historias’ (‘even in Spain it is taxing to verify the Truth in these Histories’; in Garcilaso [1723b] **2r). In an attempt to confront this obstacle to scholarship, González de Barcia undertook an editorial project that would result in

20 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

the creation of editions of what he considered to be some of Spain’s most important Chronicles of the Indies. González de Barcia emulated the work of Renaissance editors of classical Latin manuscripts who, as Kenney points out, attempted ‘to undo the damage that had been inflicted in the period between the ninth century and the Renaissance’ (4). Kenney stresses that the advent of the printing press in the 1460s arrested the process by which scribal conjectures altered medieval manuscripts. However, even with the printing press, the first two centuries of non-Spanish publications on the history of the New World, so González de Barcia argued, did great harm to the historical study of these regions, of their indigenous inhabitants, and, especially, of the Spanish actions in these newly discovered lands. His review of Philoponus’s errors counted as only one among many examples. As Arcadio Guerra Guerra pointed out, González de Barcia produced his scholarship and editorial projects during a transitional moment in the study of the New World (106). No longer part of the great historical production of the first two hundred years of exploration and conquest of the Indies, González de Barcia’s work consisted of an attempt to provide the historiography of this initial period with the order and clarity needed to confer upon it an authoritative status. By creating scholarly editions of many of these chronicles, González de Barcia prepared the foundation for much of the modern study of Colonial Latin America. As Guerra Guerra stated, in addition to Juan Baptista Muñoz (the Royal Cosmographer of Spain in 1779) and Martín Fernández de Navarrete (Spanish hydrographer and author of the famous history of Spanish explorations to the Indies by sea [1825]), González de Barcia’s work forms part of ‘the triangular stone’ upon whose foundation rests what modern scholars have constructed of the ‘re indiana,’ that is, the historical and literary scholarship facilitated and, in many cases, made possible by the groundwork laid by these three scholars (106–7).3 However, even within this select group, González de Barcia’s scholarship proved seminal. For example, when preparing his Historia del Nuevo Mundo (1793), Muñoz himself procured copies of González de Barcia’s chronicle editions. In a letter dated 9 July 1784, J.A. Mayans – brother of Gregorio Mayans (1699–1781), the famous intellectual and bibliophile of the Spanish Enlightenment – responded to Muñoz regarding the contents of his brother Gregorio’s personal library:

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 21 En la Librería Mayansiana están: El Ensayo de la Historia de la Florida de Cárdenas, o Barcia. – Piedrahita del Nuevo Reino de Granada. Cieza, parte 1ª., de 53. Pizarro Varones Ilustres. – Torquemada. – Bibliotheca de Barcia. – Álvarez, Preste Juan en portugués i en castellano. – Oviedo. – Navarrete de la China. – Xerex, Secretario de Pizarro. – Boturini. – Comentarios de Álvar Núñez truncados. – Herrera. – El Inca Garcilaso. Dígame Vm. qué libro echa Vm. menos para su obra, que quizá me desprenderé de él. (In Mayans Epistolario 17:395) In the Mayansian Library, there are: The Ensayo de la Historia de la Florida, by Cárdenas, or Barcia – Piedrahita on the New Kingdon of Granada. Cieza, part 1 of 53. Pizarro Varrones Ilustres. – Torquemada. – Bibliotheca de Barcia. – Álvarez, Preste John in Portuguese and in Castilian. – Oviedo. – Navarrete on China. – Xerex, Pizarro’s Secretary. – Boturini. – Comentarios by Alvar Núñez excerpts. – Herrera. – El Inca Gacilaso. Tell me which book you lack for your work and perhaps I will relinquish myself of it.

In the midst of writing his history,4 Muñoz received an offer of two works specifically attributed to González de Barcia: the Ensayo cronológico and the Epítome de la Bibliotheca Oriental i Occidental, Náutica i Geográfica. Moreover, Mayans mentioned other historians whose chronicles González de Barcia had edited: Juan de Torquemada, Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo, Álvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca, Antonio de Herrera, and El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega. These works represented only a portion of González de Barcia’s complete editorial production. The scale of this project as well as its geographical emphasis on the Indies provides evidence with which to substantiate the value of González de Barcia’s output. If, however, by the end of the century González de Barcia’s name was associated with many of these editions held in the Mayansian library and others, during his time in earlyeighteenth-century Madrid, González de Barcia made no official mention of his involvement with these publications. Obviously, the issue of naming and of names is at the heart of González de Barcia’s editorial project. The confusion of the names of Spanish heroes of conquest and exploration, the errors unwittingly committed and exemplified by Philoponus, symbolized what González de Barcia perceived as irreverence for Hispanic scholarship on the Indies. As an editor and bibliographer himself, these matters of reference greatly concerned González de Barcia. In his view, a sign of

22 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

the lack of bibliographical concern could be found in the use of the name America to refer to the lands that Columbus called las Indias. The name ‘America’ was first used by Martin Waldseemüller in his introduction to his 1507 printing of Ptolemy’s Cosmography (Broc 24). As Waldseemüller stated, considering that Amerigo Vespucci was the first to identify these territories as new, it was proper to name this fourth part of the world ‘Land of Americus, that is, America’ (quoted in Broc 24). However, González de Barcia wrote that the use of the name America was one of countless ‘vulgaridades originadas de ignorantes’ (‘vulgarities originated by the ignorant’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1:573). Consequently, all scholarship dedicated to the Indies needed, before all other issues, to utilize the correct name for the object under study.5 González de Barcia expected his intellectual peers to publish wellresearched scholarship. He believed, however, that the final product of study depended on the sources used during the investigation. In the present chapter, I will focus on the first phase of González de Barcia’s scholarship on the New World. This phase covers the eight-year period from 1722 to 1730. During this period González de Barcia made editions of six chronicles originally published between 1601 and 1617. Of equal importance, however, this period also marked his initiation as an author of historical essays. These writings, as mentioned above, were published as supplements in his chronicle editions. As a result, this chapter addresses the denotative problematic involved in distinguishing González de Barcia, the author, from González de Barcia, the editor.6 As I will suggest, understanding González de Barcia’s role as a commentator of his editions begins to resolve this problematic.7 1 Scholarship for the Monarchy of Spain and for the Republic of Letters In the dedication to Philip V in González de Barcia’s 1723 edition of El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega’s Comentarios Reales, the publisher, Nicolás Rodríguez Franco, explained the importance to the Spanish monarchy of González de Barcia’s editorial mission. Of all the royal titles held by the King, Rodríguez Franco stated that el maior, y mas elegante Titulo, es la Proteccion de los Heroes, que con sus Haçañas dieron Vida, à tan Grande Historia, conservando para sì la

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 23 Gloriosa Luz de la Inmortalidad, à la Real sombra de V. M. (‘Al Catolico y Poderosisimo Monarca’ in Garcilaso [1723b]) the greatest, and most elegant Title is the Protection of the Heroes, who with their Deeds gave Life to such a Great History, conserving for themselves the Glorious Light of Immortality, in the Royal shadow of your Excellency.

Indeed, of the six editions published before 1730, five were dedicated to King Philip V and one to his second wife, Queen Isabel Farnesio. Moreover, the Ensayo cronológico, which González de Barcia added to his edition of El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega’s La Florida del Inca, was dedicated to the king’s son, Luis I. However, as Geronimo Pardo, the royal censor to González de Barcia’s edition of Antonio de Herrera’s Décadas, made clear, the scholarly value of these works was equally high. Pardo acknowledged that the histories now edited by González de Barcia had in Spain always been quite rare. Consequently, with this and other editions, González de Barcia performed a great scholarly service: enriquece, como ha hecho otras veces, las Librerias de los Hombres Doctos, con Ediciones de Autores, que à causa de los pocos exemplares que en su principio tiraron, ò por los muchos, que por sus raras noticias han pasado à estrañas Provincias, ià no se hallaban. (In Herrera [1730] 1:¶7r) he enriches, as he has done at other times, the Libraries of Learned Men with Editions by Authors that were no longer to be found, due to the few copies that were first printed or for the many that on account of their singular contents have ended up in foreign Provinces.

Pardo emphasized the enriching assistance that González de Barcia provided his colleagues by editing these works. These six editions would serve as authoritative sources that scholars of the Republic of Letters could use when working on the history of the Indies. González de Barcia, however, did more than produce new editions. In order to ensure that his readers could appreciate his whole project as a corpus of interdependent or interrelated members, he drew connections between them in the marginal notes and scholarly essays that he added to the editions themselves. For example, in his 1737–8 edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental i Occidental, Náutica i

24 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Geográfica (Madrid, 1629), González de Barcia offered bibliographical references intended to guide those individuals who failed to discern ‘la injusticia de llamar America, à las (tierras) que su Descubridor llamò Indias’ (‘the injustice of calling America [those lands] that their discoverer called the Indies’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1:574). Among the works offered to refute the use of this name, González de Barcia advised readers to review Antonio de Herrera’s Decadas, the prologue of the Origen de los Indios, and the introduction to the Ensayo cronológico (573). As editor of both Herrera’s Decadas and García’s Origen, and as author of the Ensayo, which, as stated above, was itself a work added to his edition of La Florida del Inca, González de Barcia clearly promoted his editions as among those belonging to the canon of authoritative works on the history on the New World. However, he did not provide scholars with exact replicas of the original publications. González de Barcia produced new ‘scholarly’ or ‘critical’ editions that reflected his understanding of his area of expertise. By calling them ‘scholarly editions,’ I attempt to bring attention to the fact that, in the preparation of each work, González de Barcia assembled much, if not all, of the scholarship included in the updated preliminary pages; also, he made textual emendations and additions to the body of the works; finally, he organized the compilation of the indices with which the editions concluded. As a result, his editorial work consisted of a complete redressing of the original texts with information and scholarly apparatuses that he himself added, as the words ‘enmendada’ (‘emended’) and ‘añadida’ (‘added’) in the updated titles attempted to indicate. Consequently, these editions reveal González de Barcia’s work as an author who added his original scholarship to the works under his direction. Ironically, however, by providing references to his scholarly endeavours and editorial productions as a refutation of the use of the name America, the ‘Americanist’ Andrés González de Barcia placed his readers at the centre of another name-related issue: that of González de Barcia himself as an anonymous and pseudonymous contributor to these works. 2 The Publisher Nicolás Rodríguez Franco and Andrés González de Barcia’s Mise en Livre González de Barcia did not act alone in the production of the chronicle editions in which his scholarly views were included. Indeed, on the

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 25

most basic level, his desire to put into book form the historical texts in his possession and the scholarly writings he had authored, to perform, that is, the mise en livre that characterizes all book design, required that he collaborate with a publisher. Roger Chartier has emphasized the fact that authors do not write books: ‘[N]o text exists outside of the support that enables it to be read; any comprehension of a writing, no matter what kind it is, depends on the forms in which it reaches its readers’ (‘Texts, Printings, Readings’ 161). For his part, the seventeenth-century Spanish writer Cristóbal Suárez de Figueroa (1571– 1644) offered similar praise for the publishers of his day. In his work Plaza Universal de todas la ciencias, Suárez de Figueroa wrote: Si los libros de san Geronimo, son verdaderos efigies, y eternas representaciones de los ingenios de sus dueños, deuen dar grandissimas gracias sus autores à los que procuraron con su industria mediante las Estampas, tener viuas sus memorias, y manifestar à todo el mundo la excelencia de su entendimiento, mostrado en las obras que escriuieron. Y en esta parte viene à ser el Arte de Imprimir ilustre y clara; porque ella sola desencentra los tesoros de erudicion, que sin su cuydado se hallàran sepultados en perpetuas tinieblas. (377r) If the books of Saint Geronimus are true effigies, and eternal representations of the genius of their owners, their authors should give the greatest thanks to those who, with their toil at the press, made sure to keep their memories alive, and to manifest to the entire world the excellence of their knowledge, shown in the works that they wrote. And in this way the Art of Printing becomes illustrious and famous; because only it brings out the treasures of erudition, which without its care would find themselves entombed in perpetual darkness.

It should be noted that an ‘impresor de libros’ did not mean, as it does today, merely ‘printer.’ Cristobal Suárez de Figueroa’s description of the work of an ‘impresor’ reveals that this profession entailed entrepreneurial and intellectual dimensions that we attribute to the role of publisher. For much of the second decade of the eighteenth century, the publisher who aided González de Barcia in his editorial and authorial productions was Nicolás Rodríguez Franco (or Francos). It is important to identify Nicolás Rodríguez Franco, as much as such an identification is possible. Considering his job as a publisher, this identification correctly begins on the title pages to those works he

26 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

printed. In the González de Barcia editions of this first phase, five of the six title pages indicated Rodríguez Franco’s involvement (i.e., ‘En Madrid: Nicolás Rodríguez Franco’). More importantly, however, the royal warrants and licences granted to these six works, as well as to the Ensayo cronológico, all acknowledged the printing responsibility of Rodríguez Franco. The editions of El Inca Garcilaso’s Historia del Perú, La Florida del Inca, and Comentarios Reales, and of Torquemada’s Monarquía Indiana, for example, all received royal permission on 27 January 1721 to be printed: Por quanto por parte de Vos, Nicolàs Rodriguez Franco, Impresor de Libros, en mi Corte, se me ha representado teniades, que imprimir siete Libros. Uno, intitutlado: Obras Lyricas de Don Francisco Antonio de Bances Candamo. Otro, intitulado: Historia de la Florida. Otros dos, en Folio: Comentarios Reales, Historia del Perù; todos tres escritos por el Inca Garcilaso de la Vega. Y otros tres, de à Folio: Monarquia de Indias, escrita por el P. Fr. Juan de Torquemada ... Por lo qual os concedo licencia. (‘El Rey’ Garcilaso [1723a]) Insomuch as You, Nicolas Rodríguez Franco, Publisher of Books in my Court, have informed me that you have seven books to print: One, entitled, Lyrical Works of Don Francisco Antonio de Bances Candamo; another, entitled, History of La Florida; another two, in folio, Royal Commentaries, History of Peru (all three written by El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega); and another three, in folio, Monarquia Indiana, written by Father Fray Juan de Torquemada ... For which I grant you licence.

In addition to the lyrical poems of Bances Candamo (in which González de Barcia also played a key role),8 this warrant, dated 1721, granted Rodríguez Franco the permission to publish the works of El Inca Garcilaso, which González de Barcia considered to be his first group of chronicle editions,9 as well Juan de Torquemada’s threevolume chronicle. Furthermore, the 1729 edition of Gregorio García’s Origen de los Indios, although ultimately printed by Francisco Martínez Abad, was granted originally to Rodríguez Franco. In the ‘Suma del Privilegio,’ the secretary to King Philip V, Miguel Fernández Munilla, wrote: Certifico, que por Real Cedula de su Magestad (Dios le guarde) su fecha veinte i cinco de Febrero de mil setecientos i veinte i cinco ..., se concediò Licencia, i Privilegio à Nicolàs Rodriguez Franco, Impresor de Libros en

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 27 esta Corte, para imprimir, reimprimir, i vender, por tiempo de diez Años, diferentes Libros, i entre ellos el que se intitula: Origen de los Indios (con las Notas, i Adiciones) cuio Autor fue el P. Presentado Fr. Gregorio Garcia. (In García [1981] ¶2v) I certify that by Royal Warrant of his Majesty (May God save him) on the date of 25 February, seventeen hundred and twenty five ..., License and Privilege have been given to Nicolás Rodríguez Franco, Publisher of Books in this Court, to print over a period of ten Years, different books, and among them the one that is entitled: Origin of the Indians (with Notes and Additions). Whose author was the Father Candidate Fray Gregorio García.

As indicated in the text, the privilege, awarded on 25 February 1725, gave Rodríguez Franco authority to print, reprint, and, sell Gregorio García’s work, ‘among others.’ Finally, although the printing of Antonio de Herrera’s Decadas was ultimately shared by Rodríguez Franco and Martínez Abad, the ‘Suma del Privilegio’ included in the Herrera edition named Rodríguez Franco as the individual to whom the royal privilege to print the Decadas was awarded: Tiene Privilegio Nicolàs Rodríguez Franco, para imprimir las Decadas de Antonio de Herrera, Coronista Maior de su Magestad, i de las Indias, i Descripcion de ellas, con algunas Notas, i Adiciones, concedido en 3. de Diciembre de 1722. por tiempo de diez Años, para que en ellos ninguno pueda imprimirlas, con diferentes penas. (In Herrera [1730] 1:¶7v) Nicolás Rodríguez Franco has the Privilege to print the Decadas of Antonio de Herrera, Principal Chronicler of his Majesty and of the Indies, and their Description, with some Notes and Additions, granted on 3 December 1722, for a period of ten Years, so that during that period no other person may print them, under different penalties.

Although by 1727 Rodríguez Franco no longer appears to be the actual publisher of some of these editions, between 1721 and 1725 he was granted all the privileges to the González de Barcia editions belonging to this first phase. As a result, his collaboration forms a key characteristic of the publications included in this earliest period of González de Barcia’s editorial project.

28 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Unfortunately, little is known of Rodríguez Franco outside the references to him found on the title pages of the works he printed. However, in addition to the chronicles he printed for González de Barcia, Rodríguez Franco also printed the following works: 1 Anon. Repuesta de un inglés desinteresado a un Wigh transportado, sobre el combate naval de la flota de España con el Ayudante Vinchs ... Madrid: Nicolás Rodríguez Franco, 1718. (Listed in Aguilar Piñal Bibliografía 9:711) 2 Lambriche, Fray Ignacio. Oración fúnebre en las dolorosas y expresivas exequias ... Madrid: Nicolás Rodríguez Franco, 1718. (Listed in Aguilar Piñal Bibliografía 5:29) 3 Gutierrez Davila, Julian. Vida y virtudes de el Siervo de Dios el Venerable Padre D. Domingo Pérez de Barcia . . . Madrid: Nicolás Rodríguez Franco, 1720. (Listed in Aguilar Piñal Bibliografía 4:396–7; consulted at Yale, Beinecke Lib., call number: Mexico CT kb23 720g) 4 Francisco Antonio Bances Candamo; Pablo Yáñez de Avilés; Julián del Río Marin. Obras Lyricas. Madrid: A costa de Nicolàs Rodriguez Franco, Impresor de Libros, hallaráse en su caso ..., 1720.10 5 Anon. Relacion del auto particular de fe, que celebrò el Santo Oficio de la Inquisicion de la ciudad, y reyno de Granada, el dia 30. de noviembre de este presente año de 1721 ... Madrid: Por Nicolás Rodríguez Francos, impressor de libros: Se hallará ... en casa de Isidro Joseph Serrete, librero ..., 1721. (Consulted at Harvard, Houghton Lib., call number: *CC In 24s 721r) 6 Anon. Relacion del auto particular de fe, que celebró el Santo oficio de la Inquisicion, de esta ciudad, y reynado de Sevilla, domingo 14. de diziembre de este present año de 1721 ... Madrid: por Nicolás Rodríguez Francos, impresor de libros, 1721 (Consulted at Harvard, Houghton Lib., call number: *CC In 24s 721r2) 7 Martí y Zaragoza, Manuel. Apasterosis sive in astrum conversio. Elegia D. Emmanuele Matino Decano Alonensi auctore. Mantuae, 1722.11 8 Cevallos, Luis Ignacio. Dispertador del alma religiosa. Madrid: Nicolás Rodríguez Franco, 1723. (Listed in Aguilar Piñal Bibliografía 2:400) 9 Fajardo Monroy, Juan Isidro. Memorias para la Historia de Don Felipe III, Rey de España. Recogidas por Don Juan Yáñez. Madrid: Imp. de N. Rodríguez Franco, 1723. (Listed in Aguilar Piñal Bibliografía 3:252; consulted at Dodd Center, University of Connecticut, call number: B690)

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 29

The variety of these works attests to the renown Nicolás Rodríguez Franco enjoyed in the publishing world of early-eighteenth-century Madrid. Without a doubt an incomplete compilation, these nine works, the six histories mentioned above, and González de Barcia’s Ensayo (sixteen works in all) reveal the variety of commissions Rodríguez Franco received. From the six-page auto de fe to the thousand-plus-page Décadas, Rodríguez Franco’s output intimates the respect he commanded in his day. González de Barcia’s selection of Rodríguez Franco suggests that he desired the best publisher available for the production of his editions of the Histories of the New World.12 The historian Gil Fernández attests to Rodríguez Franco’s fame and ability, noting that in the second decade of the eighteenth century, Nicolás Rodríguez Franco was the sole exception to the insults that Dean Martí directed at Spanish printers (551). As Manuel Martí, from whom Gil Fernández quoted, himself wrote: Desseo saver si el impressor de las epístolas es Nicolás Rodríguez Francos, que fue el [impressor] de la Apaterosis; porque si es él, tenemos el carácter griego con acentos y espíritus sobre las vocales, y grandísima abundancia de nexos. (In Mayans Epistolario 3:335) I wish to know if the printer of the epistles is Nicolás Rodríguez Francos, who was the [printer] for the Apasterosis. Because if it is he, we have the Greek character with accents and breaths over the vowels, and a very great abundance of nexuses.

Coming from one of the most respected scholars of his generation (Mestre Humanismo y crítica histórica 15ff.), Martí’s testimony provides ample proof of Rodríguez Franco’s renown. However, the fact that neither Martí nor González de Barcia completed their respective projects with this publisher suggests that by the end of the 1720s Rodríguez Franco no longer worked in this capacity. Rodríguez Franco’s capability as a publisher and printer was well known among the highest scholarly circles of early-eighteenth-century Spain. For González de Barcia, however, there appears to have been a second reason for the choice of Rodríguez Franco. The coordination of talent between González de Barcia, the scholar, and Rodríguez Franco, the publisher, might have coincided with a proximity in residence. As Gregorio de Andrés notes, González de Barcia died at his home on

30 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

calle Ancha de San Bernardo, in the northwest section of Madrid (814– 15). Indeed, Janine Fayard indicates that during the first half of the eighteenth century the wealthy González de Barcia lived in this upperclass section of the Spanish capital (Los miembros 414). Rodríguez Franco, for his part, indicated on the title pages of the González de Barcia editions he published that interested individuals could purchase copies of the works at his, that is, Rodríguez Franco’s, house ‘en la Calle de el Poço.’13 To this day there exists a ‘Calle Pozo’ in Madrid, between the streets of La Victoria and De la Cruz (Cabezas 380). During the eighteenth century this area was considered the theatre district (Kany 291). This location could have suited González de Barcia, who published three of his own theatrical comedies in 1704. However, as Manuel Isidoro Sánchez pointed out in his hand-sized guide book, entitled Madrid en la mano and published in 1763, at this time in Madrid there were two streets called Calle Pozo: ‘Del Pozo, à la Victoria. Otra, à la Ancha de San Bernardo, frente del Rosario’ (‘Pozo, near la Victoria. Another, near Ancha de San Bernardo’; 35). As we have seen, González de Barcia himself lived on ‘la Ancha de San Bernardo.’ This second location, therefore, would have provided González de Barcia with easy access to Rodríguez Franco’s shop. More evidence is needed to establish the true location of Rodríguez Franco’s operation. However, the collaboration between scholar and publisher is a key aspect in understanding the editorial mission envisioned and executed by Andrés González de Barcia. In this sense, the identification of the street name provided on the title pages offers greater credence to the partnership between González de Barcia and Rodríguez Franco. 3 González de Barcia’s Scholarship and the Use of the Pseudonym However, if collaboration existed between scholar and publisher, no one in González de Barcia’s circle doubted which of the two individuals made the editorial decisions. Writing forty years after González de Barcia’s death, J.A. Mayans remembered González de Barcia’s scholarly and editorial passion for the Indies: D. Andrés de Barcia reimprimió muchos Historiadores de Indias y publicó otros escritos, ya en su nombre, ya en el de D. Gabriel de Cárdenas i Cano, aviendo sido uno de los hombres más estudiosos i laboriosos que ha tenido el siglo. Aún yendo en coche por las calles iva leyendo. Con este

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 31 último nombre publicó un Ensayo de la Historia de la Florida, en el cual, y las demás obras suyas, verá Vmd. una lectura pasmosa, y para el conocimiento de la América muy útiles noticias. (Quoted in Mayans Epistolario 17:54) Don Andrés de Barcia reprinted many Historians of the Indies and published other writings, at times using his name and at other times using that of Don Gabriel de Cárdenas i Cano. He was one of the most studious men that this century has seen. Even travelling by coach through the streets he would be reading. Under this second name, he published an Essay on the History of La Florida, in which, as in his other works, you will see a stunning breadth of reading, and for the knowledge of America very useful information.

J.A. Mayans’s praise of González de Barcia acknowledged the scholar’s fame among the earliest generations of Spanish intellectuals after his death. One of the most studious and hard-working intellectuals of his day, so the story went, González de Barcia was also a devoted reader. Even while travelling by carriage, with the jostle of the horses and the bumps of the road to distract him, González de Barcia commanded his powers of concentration. Consequently, this letter reveals that forty years after his death, González de Barcia had attained a status placing him among the luminaries of eighteenth-century Spanish scholars. However, during his lifetime, González de Barcia’s dual role as scholar in the Republic of Letters and as a Councilor of Castile in the Monarchy of Spain limited his ability and desire to take formal credit for his intellectual work. Regarding his use of anonymity and of pseudonyms, one of the reviewers from the Mémoires de Trévoux wrote: ‘Sans doute un Magistrat de ce poids, & de ce Caractére n’aura pas donné sous son nom une Edition, qui ne l’emporte pas de beaucoup sur les précedentes’ (‘Without a doubt a Magistrate of his weight and Character, for whom precedents do not concern him in the least, will not have provided an Edition under his name’; ‘Lettre au sujet des editions’ in Mémoires de Trévoux, June 1730, 1088). If, posthumously, his name was used by those wishing to praise his scholarship, during his life he chose to avoid directly associating his name with his scholarly projects. As early as 1693, at the age of twenty, González de Barcia, an aspiring writer of comedic plays, used a variety of pseudonyms when publish-

32 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

ing his original theatrical works. In his comedy La Comedia nueva y famosa de los peligros de Amar, for example, González de Barcia indicated that the work was written by ‘don Jacome de Cardenas, bachiller en teología, por la Universidad de Alcalá de Hernares. Empezóse á 7 de septiembre de 1693’ (‘don Jacome de Cardenas, bachelor in Theology, at the University of Alcalá de Hernares’; quoted in Barrera y Leirado 177). This work, with minor adjustments, was published in 1704 in a collection entitled Comedias nuevas, parte quarenta y ocho, escogidas de los mejores ingenios de España. In this 1704 publication, González de Barcia used the anagram García Aznar Velez. At other times, however, González de Barcia published under the name ‘don Ibon’ (Aguilar Bibliografía 279; Barrera y Leirado 176–7). As Barrera y Leirado suggested, González de Barcia’s anagram was probably deciphered and, as a result, he began to use a new one, which better concealed his identity (176). However, using the pseudonym, slightly modified from its 1693 manifestation, of Gabriel de Cárdenas z. Cano, González de Barcia published his first additions to the editions of the Chronicles of the Indies. For example, González de Barcia’s Ensayo cronológico indicated the author on the title page: ‘Escrito por Don Gabriel de Cardenas Z Cano’ (‘Written by Don Gabriel de Cardenas Z Cano’; González de Barcia [1723]). Of note, the Ensayo cronológico marked González de Barcia’s first major contribution as an author of the history of the Indies. As the censor to this work, Fr. Pablo Yáñez de Avilés, wrote: De Orden de V. A. he leìdo este Ensaio Cronologico à la Historia de la Florida, dividido en Decadas, y distinguido en Annales, compuesto por Don Gabrièl de Cardenas, digno de maior Fama que su nombre, aun por sola la composicion de este Libro. Es el Tito-Livio de las Indias, aun en la narracion por Decadas, y es el Lucio-Floro de sus mismas Decadas, en el Epitome de sus narraciones. (González de Barcia [1723]) By order of Your Highness I have read this Chronological Essay to the History of La Florida, divided in Decades, and grouped in Annales, composed by Don Gabriel de Cardenas, worthy of greater Fame than his name, if only for the composition of this Book. He is the Titus-Livius of the Indies, just for the narration by Decades, and he is the Lucius-Florus of his own decades, in the Epitome of his narrations.

Yáñez de Avilés compared Gabriel de Cárdenas’s use of decades as a narrative device in his history to that of the Roman historian Livy, in

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 33

his Ab urbe condita. Moreover, Yáñez de Avilés noted that the prefatory summaries Gabriel de Cárdenas placed before each decade performed a task similar to that done by Lucius Annaeus Florus, who wrote the epitome to Livy’s work, Iuli Flori Epitomae de Tito Livio Bellorvm Omnivm Annorvm DCC Libri II. Consequently, Yáñez de Avilés recognized Cárdenas as a major historian of his day. However, although Cárdenas’s name was cited, the scholarly circle in Madrid knew that González de Barcia had produced this essay. Indeed, Yáñez de Áviles’s admission that Cárdenas ‘deserved more fame’ than his name allowed gave the reader a subtle indication that the author’s name hid more than it revealed. In González de Barcia’s edition of El Inca Garcilaso’s La Florida del Inca, Yáñez de Avilés again commented on the scholarly merits of Gabriel de Cárdenas: ‘El Proemio, que es nuevo, y del Erudito Don Gabriel de Cardenas, es propriamente Proemio; esto es Camino (segun la voz Griega Oimon, de que se deriva)’ (‘The Prologue, which is new, and by the Erudite Don Gabriel de Cardenas, is truly a Prologue; that is, a Path [according to the Greek Oimon, from which it derives]’; in Garcilaso [1723a]). Moreover, after acknowledging the preface’s author as Cárdenas, Yáñez de Avilés acknowledged his extensive editorial contribution: De este Proemio, como del Copiosisimo Indice de todas las Obras de nuestro Inca, dirè lo que dijo Casiodoro de el de Posidio, de las Obras de San Agustin ... Pues Proemio, è Indice, es probante Historia de estas Historas, en la que la brevedad concisa, y clara vale por las Narraciones absolutas, y numerosas. (In Garcilaso [1723a]) Regarding this Prologue, as well as the very Copious Index to all the Works of our Inca, I will say what Casiodorus said about that done by Posidius for the Works of Saint Augustine ... The prologue, like the Index, is a convincing History of these Histories, in which clear and concise brevity equals absolute and numerous Narrations.

Although referring only to the three editions of El Inca Garcilaso’s works produced by González de Barcia, Yáñez de Avilés nevertheless identified Gabriel de Cárdenas as the writer of the preface as well as the compiler of the indices for ‘our Inca.’ González de Barcia exhibited his intellectual powers in the creation of the indices that concluded his editions. However, as an author, his

34 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

scholarly writings also displayed his erudition. The Ensayo cronológico, for example, was a major contribution to the study of early colonial Florida. The essay continues today to serve as a primary source for scholars of the southeast region of colonial North America.14 As Verne E. Chatelain wrote: ‘Barcia’s work is of the most important of the earlier general histories of Florida; and while it is inaccurate in certain respects, it nevertheless has considerable value because of the use of certain sources no longer available in any form’ (102). However, not all twentieth-century historians have regarded González de Barcia with as much respect. Anthony Kerrigan, the translator and editor of the English version of the Chronological Essay, wrote: ‘As for Barcia himself, his life is little remembered, and there seems little reason to summon up an impression of him, personally, at all’ (xxii). Kerrigan’s ignorance of eighteenth-century Spanish history prevented him from appreciating the importance of González de Barcia. However, as we have seen, González de Barcia was highly regarded and very well known in his day. The thinly veiled use of the pseudonym, moreover, reminds the readers of González de Barcia’s scholarly works that he understood the transparency of this convention. The use of the pseudonym, for example, did not help González de Barcia avoid criticism at home in his day. In his 1725 review of the Ensayo cronológico, Luis de Salazar launched a fierce, if poorly aimed, critique of González de Barcia’s work while at the same time verifying his role as the author of the essay.15 Salazar’s Crisis del Ensayo a la Historia de la Florida was published at Alcalá de Henares in 1725. Using the pseudonym Joseph de Salazar, the author provided biographical details about the individual whose work he condemned: Luego que oi el titulo del Libro, hice memoria de que pocos dias antes me avia dicho vn amigo, le avia regalado vno de los Academicos de la Real Academica Española, la nueva impresion de las Obras del Inca en tres tomos, juntos con otro, que era el quarto, escrito por èl, de la Historia de la Florida, y que avia recatado su nombre. (6) Upon hearing the title of the Book, I recalled that only a few days before a friend had told me that one of the Academicians of the Spanish Royal Academy had given him the new, three-volume printing of the Works of the Inca, along with another, which was the fourth, written by him, on the History of La Florida, and that he had disguised his name.

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 35

Salazar indicated that this person was a member of the Spanish Royal Academy. In addition, although he did not name the party responsible for these new publications, Salazar questioned the academician’s decision to use an anagram, ‘formada tan contra las reglas que deben observarse’ (‘formed in such opposition to the rules that should be observed’; 6). Salazar suggested other possibilities, such as Don Gonçal Zanedres de Ricaba, or Don Zacarias Garçon de Belden (6). Both the spelling of these anagrams as well as the fact that González de Barcia was a founding member of the Real Academia Española readily show that Salazar identified Andrés González de Barcia as the author of the Ensayo cronológico and that he burlesqued González de Barcia’s use of such transparent identity-hiding devices. Salazar did not hide his displeasure for the scholarly work that González de Barcia had produced. However, Salazar stated that his decision to publish the polemical critique was due to the fact that González de Barcia planned to release a new edition of the Monarquia Indiana: pero aviendo sabido trae Vm. [Gabriel de Cárdenas, that is, González de Barcia] entremanos la Monarquia Indiana, que con tanto ingenio, y reflexion escriviò el Padre Fr. Juan de Torquemada, se teme no salga de ellas [i.e., las manos de González de Barcia] sin algun borron de la tosca broscha, con que creyendo Vm. avivar el hermoso campo de la Historia, le obscure. (4, my emphasis) but having learned that you bring in hand the Monarquia Indiana, that Father Fray Juan de Torquemada wrote with such insight and reflection, one fears that it may not leave [your hands] without some blotch from a rough brushstroke, with which believing you are enlivening the handsome field of History, you are obscuring it.

Although not evident from the title of the new prologue to the Torquemada edition, Salazar named González de Barcia as the editor who would soon take his coarse painter’s brush to the Monarquía Indiana. Not all scholars today, however, have granted González de Barcia his important role in this publication of the Monarquía Indiana. When preparing the third edition of Torquemada’s chronicle, for example, the historian Miguel de León-Portilla identified the publisher Nicolás Rodríguez Franco as the pertinent individual who released at Madrid

36 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

the second Torquemada edition (in Torquemada [1975–83] 7:561). The fact that León-Portilla named Rodríguez Franco, and not González de Barcia, suggests the need to explore more fully the importance of González de Barcia’s intellectual role in the production of this new ‘library of the Indies.’ As I will argue, his name subsumes this role. The use of González de Barcia’s name to designate authorship of any of the scholarly work included in his editions offers the first steps toward an accurate appreciation of how his name functions in these productions. González de Barcia’s name describes his complete editorial collection, as both an editor and an author. As Michel Foucault has said: ‘Obviously not a pure and simple reference, the proper name (and the author’s name as well) has other than indicative functions. It is more than a gesture, a finger pointed at someone; it is, to a certain extent, the equivalent of a description’ (‘What Is an Author’ 121). González de Barcia’s use of pseudonyms and anonymity made this reference even more complex. However, the singular relationship, addressed by Foucault, ‘that holds between an author and a text, the manner in which a text apparently points to this figure who is outside and precedes it’ (115), exists as well between the author-editor González de Barcia and the numerous chronicles he edited. The name ‘González de Barcia’ functions as a classificatory sign, indicating the totality of textual productions included in the González de Barcia editions. This is less apparent when focusing on a single edition out of González de Barcia’s complete editorial project. However, by looking for the ‘real’ editor of the second edition of the Monarquía Indiana, the editors of the third edition missed the importance of understanding the functionality of González de Barcia’s name as it relates to his editorial and authorial work.16 4 Monarquía Indiana and the Articulation of the Editorial Mission Although not completed until 1725, the royal warrant included in the 1723 publication of La Florida del Inca (quoted above) announced that the Monarquía Indiana was already in preparation for its first re-publication since the 1615 first edition was published at Seville. The new Torquemada edition included a six-page introduction with thirty-six marginal notes. Although no name was given for the author of this piece, the preface was titled ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion de la Monarquia Indiana. El Impresor, al Lector’ (‘Prologue to this second printing of the Monarquia Indiana. The Publisher to the Reader’). Both the ‘Suma del

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 37

Privilegio’ and the title page identified Nicolás Rodríguez Franco as the publisher of this edition. However, although Rodríguez Franco signed his name to dedications included in González de Barcia’s other editions, this preface provided no proper name of any person. One legal name, however, was mentioned. The second paragraph to the Proemio provided background information on the genesis of the second edition: El beneficio General de todos, me obligò à entrar en el empeño de bolverla à imprimir, haviendo hallado casualmente el Original, que sirviò à la Edicion primera, en la Libreria del Señor Don Andrès Gonçalez de Barcia, de los Consejos Supremos de Castilla, y Guerra, que me le fiò para este efecto. (In Torquemada [1725] 1:*r) The General benefit of all obliged me to take on the trouble of returning it to print, having found by chance the Original that served for the first Edition in the Library of Señor Don Andrés González de Barcia, of the Supreme Councils of Castile and of War, who entrusted it to me for this purpose.

If indeed written by Rodríguez Franco, ‘el impresor,’ this paragraph reminded the reader that the two intellectuals were on familiar and friendly terms. As George Ticknor stated, this address of the printer appeared to indicate that González de Barcia’s only role in this edition was to entrust the original manuscript to Rodríguez Franco (in Whitnet 375). However, even if one reads the preface as literally (if also as carefully) as Ticknor, González de Barcia’s involvement should not be minimized. The preface writer indicated that González de Barcia provided him the original manuscript with the specific intention that it be reprinted. Even if Rodríguez Franco wrote this preface, the coordination of purpose for the use of the Torquemada manuscript clearly indicated the association between printer and scholar. It was, then, some type of collaboration that went beyond simply ‘handing over the manuscript.’ However, the extent to which the duo shared in editorial decisions remains to be discerned. In his paper on the accusation of plagiarism made against Fray (Brother) Juan de Torquemada, included in volume seven of León-Portilla’s edition of the Monarquía Indiana, Jorge Gurría Lacroix argues that Rodríguez Franco, not González de Barcia, was the author of the prologue. Indeed, Gurría Lacroix stated that Rodríguez Franco had a profound knowledge of the Torquemada chronicle, as

38 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

was evident from the prologue (in Torquemada [1973–80] 7:60). The writer of the preface did evince great knowledge of the chronicles of Indies. However, the fact that Rodríguez Franco was known for his excellence as a printer and not for his knowledge of the Indies should alert the reader of the second edition to the ambiguity of the identity of the author of the preface. Indeed, the scholar known for his great knowledge of the historiography of the Indies, as we have seen, was González de Barcia. In the 1729 edition of Gregorio García’s Origen de los Indios, González de Barcia displayed this erudition by citing extensively from the second edition of the Monarquía Indiana. At one point, González de Barcia specifically referred to the Torquemada preface about which the question of authorship has been raised. When discussing the similarities between Mexican Indians and the Israelites, González de Barcia indicated the following in a marginal note: ‘Haec omnia translata sunt in Proemio ad Lect. T. 1. Joan. à Torqueam. editionis 1724’ (‘This has all been conveyed in the Preface to the Reader. Volume 1 Juan de Torquemada, 1724 Edition’; in García [1981] 100, left margin). In the marginal notes included in his edition of the Origen de los Indios, González de Barcia displayed his profound knowledge of the second edition of the Monarquía Indiana. The preface to the 1725 second edition of the Monarquía Indiana also made manifest the amount of knowledge needed to realize this second edition. The writer of the preface showed that he was a careful reader of historical chronicles: Luego que empeçè la impresion, por el original, hallè, que en la primera Impresion [1615] huvo mas omisiones, y errores, que los que son regulares en todas ... faltavan en ella algunos parrafos: estaban equivocadas, y desmentidos muchos Nombres: en el Cuerpo de la Historia, y en las margenes, eran innumerables las faltas: procurè suplir vnas, y añadir otras, como facilmente se reconocerà, comparando esta Edicion, con aquella. (Torquemada [1725] 1:*v) After I began the printing, following the original, I discovered that there were more omissions and errors in the first Printing than those that are normal in all ... [S]ome paragraphs were missing; many names were wrong and refuted; in the Body of the History, and in the margins, the mistakes were innumerable. I tried to fix some and touch up others, as one will easily recognize comparing this Edition with that one.

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 39

If, as the title stated, the writer of this preface was truly the ‘impresor,’ this person did much more than prepare the manuscript for the printing press. He made a detailed comparison of the first and second editions, emended paragraphs, corrected names, and even verified the marginal notes. The involvement of the ‘impresor’ in the production of the Torquemada edition was profound. To cite another example, although the 1615 edition of the Monarquía Indiana included short subject indices, in the Proemio the ‘impresor’ of the second edition took credit for the 71page subject index added to the end of the first volume; that of 56 pages added to volume 2; and that of 42 pages added to volume 3: Todos estos inconvenientes ha hallanado mi solicitud, con el deseo de servirte, procurando restituir à su primer explendor Obra tan deseada, y manifestar la suma erudicion, que contiene en los puntuales, y bien trabajados Indices con que la he adornado. (In Torquemada [1725] 1:*3v) My care has overcome all these inconveniences, with the desire to serve you, trying to restore to its first splendor such a coveted Work, and to manifest the total erudition that it has, in the precise and very elaborate Indices with which I have adorned it.

As noted above, Gabriel de Cárdenas (i.e., González de Barcia) received credit for the indices found in the editions of the works of El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega. Consequently, the use here of the firstperson singular (‘he adornado’) demands identification. Taken as an individual work, that is, not one that was published as part of a larger editorial project, the identification of this individual could proceed through the working of a syllogism: The title page and rights of privilege (‘suma del privilegio’) name Rodríguez Franco as the printer; the ‘impresor’ of the prologue was listed as its writer; therefore, Rodríguez Franco wrote the piece. However, this conclusion also forces the reader to accept the idea that Rodríguez Franco assembled the editorial work included in the second edition, something which González de Barcia’s peers knew was false. Indeed, both González de Barcia’s critics (e.g., Luis de Salazar) and his most supportive allies (e.g., Yáñez de Avilés) knew that he was responsible for the editions of the chronicles printed in the 1720s and produced throughout his life. If Rodríguez Franco received the royal privilege, if he signed his name to some dedications, and, finally, if correctly or

40 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

incorrectly he can be inferred as author to at least one preface, this did not change the fact that the party credited for both the intellectual acumen and the editorial imperative animating these editions was Andrés González de Barcia. However, González de Barcia’s use of pseudonyms, vague attributions, or anonymity requires that students and readers of his chronicle editions emphasize the descriptive capacity of the name ‘Andrés González de Barcia.’ In this sense, the author, the editor, the printer, and those individuals who wrote approvals and censures for the editions all pertain to the description invoked by the name González de Barcia. On the one hand, ‘González de Barcia’ functions as the name of the editor who organized the material included in the new editions. On the other hand, ‘González de Barcia’ functions as the name of the author who added his own scholarship to these new editions. As Roger Chartier writes: ‘The author-function, inscribed in the books themselves, ordering all attempts to establish textual classification commanding the rules for the publication of texts, is henceforth at the centre of all questions linking the study of the production, forms, and readers of texts’ (The Order 59). Similarly, what I will call the editor-function, which in Barcia’s case is also a function of authorship, is central to any appreciation of González de Barcia’s scholarship. Independent of who took or received credit for the information written, ‘González de Barcia,’ in name and in person, provided the coherence of message discerned throughout the edited chronicles. Consequently, the articulation of the editorial mission voiced in the printer’s preface to the Monarquía Indiana edition can be used to elucidate the entire González de Barcia editorial project. Although attributed to the printer, the piece pertains to the functionality of the name ‘González de Barcia.’ Presented as a response to the charges of plagiarism made against Torquemada, this prologue provides guidelines for conceptualizing the principles at work in González de Barcia’s design of his complete editorial mission. The first step in the writing of history, that which according to González de Barcia has defined all historians, consists of adding to previous texts those items which did not receive sufficient attention: el Padre Torquemada hiço lo mismo, que hasta aora han hecho todos los que han escrito Historias mas, ò menos prolijamente, segun su genio, que es unir al asumpto, que toman à su cargo, lo que vaga, esparcido ò tratado,

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 41 sin la majestad, ò reflexion que corresponde al objeto en otros Autores. (In Torquemada [1725] 1:*2v) Father Torquemada did the same that until now all who have written Histories have done more or less tediously according to their temperament, which is to bring to the subject at their charge those things which are lacking, communicated or discussed without the majesty or reflection that correspond to the object in other Authors.

However, the historical writer plays a further role in the composition of historical works. The writer also must emend those items that were not presented correctly: ‘assi hiço el Autor (Torquemada), que no solo recogiò de todos; pero como prudente Pintor que copia, disimulò diestramente las imperfecciones del original, sin fingir figuras nuevas, ni introducir ideas por casos’ (‘this is what the Author did: not only did he excerpt from everyone, but like a prudent painter who copies, he deftly masked the imperfections of the original, without feigning new figures or introducing ideas as facts’; Torquemada [1725] 1:*2v). In what could have a been a response to Luis de Salazar’s statement that González de Barcia took a ‘coarse brush’ (‘tosca broscha’) to his historical editions, the Torquemada preface made clear that the author of any work of history needed to act as a ‘prudent painter’ who emends the blemishes (‘imperfecciones’) of certain passages. However, as Torquemada did, González de Barcia reminds the reader that all historians must cite the authorities utilized in the composition of their histories. For his part, Torquemada is shown to have utilized many sources: ‘Y de todos, haviendolos reconocido, deduce lo que importa a la hermosura, fundamento, y verdad de su asumpto, citandoles, y dandoles el honor, y alabanza, que cada uno merece’ (‘And from all, having surveyed them, he deduces that which is important for the beauty, foundation, and truth of the subject, citing them and giving them the honour and praise that they deserve’; Torquemada [1725] 1:*2v). The bibliographical onus inherent in the citation of sources allows historians to honour the work upon which their new histories have been written (‘citar y dar el honor’). Be they authoritative works from classical antiquity or modern histories, González de Barcia acknowledges that all historians utilize the scholarship of others. In this respect, the fact that a historian might also avail himself of other scholars’ works did not lessen his relevance to the editor of the 1725 Torquemada edition:

42 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library Pero no por esto me atrevere a diminuirle, ni disputarle la gloria, que le resulta de sus desvelos, ni a dejar de usar de èl, quando se me ofreciere, segun mi juicio, y necesidad; porque qualquier Obra que aprehenda mi memoria, o alcance mi entendimiento, puedo hacerla mia; y mudando el estilo, o el methodo, saldrà nueva, o renovada. (In Torquemada [1725] 1:*2v). But I will not on this account venture to diminish him, nor to question the glory he has earned from his efforts, nor will I stop using his work when I feel, according to my judgment and need, it is relevant: because I can make my own any Work that captures my memory or comes to mind; and changing the style or the method it will come out new or renewed.

González de Barcia argued that all works are available for use in future histories. The author need only call the work to mind to be able to utilize it and make it his own (‘puedo hacerla mia’). The work is rendered new when the elements that constitute it are reoriented. Finally, the mise en livre permits a bibliographical awareness that, in turn, allows knowledge to advance. These four aspects of González de Barcia’s editorial mission – (1) adding material that is lacking; (2) emending imperfections; (3) citing sources; and (4) creating new scholarship – can be discerned throughout the historical chronicles he edited and authored. Considering this methodology, however, in the process of realizing his editorial project, González de Barcia inevitably blurred the distinction between author and editor. His edition of Gregorio García’s Origen de los Indios provides one of the best examples of this process. By adding to García, emending his imperfections and citing both his original and González de Barcia’s new sources, González de Barcia in fact created a new work: that is, he made his (‘hacerla mia’) a historical work that was previously the sole product of Gregorio García. 5 González de Barcia as Author and Editor of the Origen de los Indios (con las Notas, i Adiciones) González de Barcia used his editions as the medium through which he could realize his desire to publish his Americanist scholarship. These scholarly additions were often announced in the updated titles and usually bore the pseudonym Gabriel de Cárdenas. As stated above, González de Barcia used this pseudonym in the prologue to his 1723

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 43

edition of El Inca Garcilaso’s Comentarios Reales de los Incas. In that same year, González de Barcia used the Cardenas z. Cano pseudonym when publishing the Ensayo cronológico, his first book-length ‘addition.’ Although used today as a discrete historical work, the Ensayo cronológico in fact constituted a supplement to González de Barcia’s edition of La Florida del Inca, as the title page to this edition indicated: ‘La Florida del Inca ... Van enmendadas en esta impresion, muchas erratas de la Primera: Y añadida Copiosa Tabla de las Cosas Notables. Y el ensaio cronologico, que contiene, las sucedidas, hasta en el Año de 1722’ (‘La Florida del Inca ... In this printing the errata from the first have been emended, and there has been added a Copious Table of Noteworthy Things and the chronological essay, which contains those which occurred until the Year 1722’; Garcilaso [1723a]). González de Barcia positioned his chronological essay after the La Florida del Inca edition as a discrete volume. For its part, the short piece by ‘Don Gabriel de Cárdenas’ included in the Comentarios reales was located within the preliminary pages of the Barcia second edition. Despite the size and location of the addition, however, both works constitute examples of original scholarship produced by González de Barcia and added to his editorial projects. Not all of González de Barcia’s additions, however, were as easy to locate and identify. González de Barcia also added original scholarship to his edition of Gregorio García’s Origen de los Indios. In his bibliographical entry on García included in the 1737–8 edition of the Epítome, González de Barcia indicated that he had made many textual additions to the Origen: ‘D. Gabriel de Cardenas, le bolviò à imprimir con muchas Adiciones, Indices, i Proemio, 1729. fol.’ (‘Don Gabriel de Cardenas reprinted it with many Additions, Indices, and a Prologue, 1729. fol.’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1:711). Although he did not utilize the Cárdenas pseudonym in the 1729 Gregorio García edition itself, in his edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome, González de Barcia used the pseudonym to indicate his authorship of the additions, indices, and prologue of the Origen de los Indios. However, while his previous essays had a definite location, either preceding or following the original text, the additions to the Origen de los Indios constituted a true incorporation. Referring to his additions, González de Barcia noted: ‘señalamos lo añadido en la Obra entre dos Corchetes [ ] con intencion, de que sino mas perfecto, salga mas abundante este Tratado’ (‘we indicate between two brackets [ ] that which was added to the book with the intention that, if not in a more perfect form, at least this Treatise will be published with more

44 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

abundance of material’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in García [1981] ¶7r). Using square brackets to identify the new information, González de Barcia inserted his text into the body of the original García text. As a result, the placement of the added material obliged any reader of García’s text to become a reader of González de Barcia’s paratext as well. One observes the confluence of authorship to the second edition of Gregorio García’s Origen de los Indios in Lic. D. Benito de Río Cao y Cordido’s 12 April 1729 Fee de Erratas report. After identifying the needed corrections in both the text and the margins, Río Cao y Cordido wrote: ‘He visto este Libro, intitulado: Origen de los Indios, su Autor el R. P. Presentado Fr. Gregorio García, del Orden de Predicadores, i las Adiciones, i sin estas erratas corresponde a su Original’ (I have seen this Book, entitled: Origen de los Indios, its Author the Reverend Father Candidate Fray Gregorio García, of the Order of Preachers, and the Additions, and without these errata it corresponds to its Original’; García [1981] ¶6r). Although Río Cao y Cordido recognized the added text, he did not know how to classify the new work. As a result, although only a single sentence in a book that totals nearly five hundred folio pages, this comment placed the reader in the middle of what we might call González de Barcia’s dialectic of authorship. First, Río Cao y Cordido used the word ‘Book’ (‘Libro’) to describe the text written by Gregorio García and entitled Origen de los Indios. However, when compelled to consider the additions as well as the García text, Río Cao y Cordido failed to acknowledge his act of misnaming. By saying that the corrected book corresponded to the original, Río Cao y Cordido credited García for the combined work of two authors in the second edition. Gregorio García, however, was not the sole author of this work, as the censors of the second edition knew very well. In the ‘Aprobacion de el Doct. D. Marcos Henamorado,’ dated 25 March 1729, the censor discussed the ‘cuidadoso afán del Autor’ (‘careful labour of the Author’; in García [1981] ¶2r), who offered abundant opinions that attempted to explain the origins of the Indians. Enamorado indicated that the Origen de los Indios was written by Gregorio García. However, Enamorado also provided an updated title that reflected with greater accuracy the added text of the second edition: ‘Origen de los Indios, que escriviò el P. Presentado Fr. Gregorio Garcia, del Sagrado Orden de Predicadores, con las Notas, o Comentarios que le ilustran’ (‘Origen de los Indios, written by Father Candidate Fray Gregorio Garcia, of the Sacred Order of Preachers, with the Notes, or Commentaries that illustrate it’; García [1729]

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 45

¶2r). The sense of the original title could not adequately address the immense augmentation performed on the new edition by its editor. By attaching the prepositional phrase ‘con las Notas, o Comentarios’ (‘with the Notes, or Commentaries’), Enamorado broadened the sense of the title. This variation, moreover, provided the basis for a shorthand title used by Miguel Fernández Munilla in the ‘Suma del Privilegio’ of the 1729 edition: Origen de los Indios (con las Notas i Adiciones). This shorthand title – Origen de los Indios (with the Notes and Additions) – better reflects the newness of the book. Enamorado’s alteration of the 1607 title, however, reflected the change González de Barcia already indicated on the title page of the second edition. González de Barcia altered the visual space of the 1607 title page17 of the Origen de los Indios by adding the following text: ‘Segunda Impression. Enmendada, Y Añadida de algunas opiniones, ò cosas notables, en maior prueba de lo que contiene, con Tres Tablas mui puntuales de los Capitulos, de las Materias, y Autores, que las tratan’ (‘Second Printing, Emended and with the Addition of some theories or notable things, in greater evidence of what it contains, with Three very punctual Tables of the Chapters, of the Subjects, and Authors who discuss them’; ‘Title page’ García [1981]). The new information identified the material that differed from the first edition. The second edition, for example, would include three indices (tablas): (1) an alphabetized index of authors cited in the work; (2) a table of contents for the books, chapters, and sections of the work; and (3) an alphabetized subject index. The new 1729 title, however, also announced that the original 1607 work had been emended and that ‘algunas opiniones’ (‘some theories’) had been added. Considering the publishing regulations of Spain, the boldness of González de Barcia’s additions demands recognition. As Hipólito Escolar Sobrino noted, in his book Historia del Libro Español, the prefatory warnings had considerable influence on book design and content because they required that one provide in the opening pages information about the author and the printer (156). Established in 1515 by Pope Leo X at the Fifth Lateran Council, the prefatory warnings put into effect a de facto, self-imposed censorship intended to keep heretical ideas from entering the monarchy (157). An issue as potentially contentious as the origin of the American Indians concerned church and state alike (Grafton Defenders 204ff.). González de Barcia constructed an edition that allowed him to voice his own scholarly views while at the same time presenting the ideas originally published by García.

46 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Most importantly, however, González de Barcia produced an edition that met the requirements of the censors. González de Barcia rose to this challenge by producing a second edition that, as Huddleston remarked (negatively), ‘did not vary from the earlier work in the form or content of the arguments’ (108–9). Huddleston, in fact, viewed this edition as a regressive step in the Spanish scholarship on the subject of the origins of the Indians (109). However, the second edition did meet with the approval of its censors. In his censor’s approval, Marcos Enamorado deemed the book fit for the entire European scholarly public: Estos motivos, i el de que otros, incitados de tan sutiles, i doctas fatigas, le imiten, me persuaden a ser vtilisimo à la Republica de las Letras se repita la Impresion de este Libro con las Adiciones, i ser vno, i otro desvelos mas dignos de alabança, que de censura. (In García [1729] ¶2r) These motives, and in consideration that other scholars, incited by such subtle and learned difficulties, follow his example, persuade me that it will be very useful to the Republic of Letters that this Book be printed again with the Additions, and one and the other are efforts more worthy of praise than of censure.

Both the original text and the added text should be allowed in this new edition of the Origen de los Indios (con las Notas, i Adiciones). Both were worthy of praise; neither offended the censor’s standards. However, although the text was worthy of being printed, the actual author whose work was being sent to the presses remained vaguely defined. Taking González de Barcia’s assertions at face value, CañizaresEsguerra writes: ‘Trusting García’s erudition, Barcia saw fit to add only a few parenthetical notes’ (158). In addition, Huddleston asserts that González de Barcia’s additions increased the 1607 Origen de los Indios ‘by perhaps a quarter’ (10). However, a page-by-page review of both editions shows that the added text is much greater. A review of the sixpage author’s prologue to the reader, written originally by García, allows one to discern the extent of González de Barcia’s additions. The title alone made evident the first alteration. The 1607 preface was entitled ‘Proemio al Lector’ (García [1607]). In the 1729 edition, González de Barcia added the words ‘del Autor.’ Moreover, the 1607 preface had

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 47

four brief marginal notes. The 1729 preface, however, had nearly fifty notes (depending on how one divides the longer notes), ranging in length from three words to several sentences. Most importantly, however, González de Barcia added, between square brackets, his own original text to the 1607 preface. By calculating the amount of text added by González de Barcia, one can discern the extent of the question of authorship that must be addressed. The total possible number of lines of text per page in this folio edition was 120, that is, 60 lines of text per column, with two columns per folio page. By counting the number of lines of text that González de Barcia added in any given section, then dividing that number by the total number lines of text in that section, we can determine the amount that González de Barcia added to any given section. The author’s prologue to the reader, for example, has roughly 488 lines of text. Of these, 44 lines were added by González de Barcia. The result shows that González de Barcia added 9 per cent of the text to this five-page section, not counting the copious marginal notes he also added. Repeating this simple formula for the remaining sections (using rounded figures) shows that González de Barcia added 32 per cent of the text found in Book 1; 18 per cent of that found in Book 2; 7 per cent of that found in Book 3; and, most impressively, 70 per cent of the text found in Book 4; finally, he added 25 per cent of the text found in Book 5. Again, these calculations do not include the abundant, added marginal notes or the indices. All totalled, in a book of roughly 39,360 lines of text, González de Barcia added around 18,597 lines of this total, or nearly 50 per cent of the text in the second edition. As a result, the identification of authorial function again demands clarification. For, indeed, if 50 per cent of the work of the second edition is new, saying simply that Gregorio García wrote the work denies the extent of González de Barcia’s editorial and authorial alterations. In his official approval, Señor D. Geronimo Pardo hinted at this authorial ambiguity: El Libro del Origen de los Indios, que escriviò el P. Presentado Fr. Gregorio Garcia, del Sagrado Orden de Predicadores, con sus Notas, ò Comentarios, que V. A. es servido de remitirme, he leido con la maior atencion, i le hallo tan mejorado en todo, que si fuera menor el aplauso, que el Autor ha merecido al publico, pudiera dudar si era el mismo, pues los singulares adornos de escogida erudicion, de Opiniones nuevas, de probanças, i defensas de las

48 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library Antiguas, con que buelve à vèr publica luz, le acreditan autoriçado, i vniversal en la materia que trata. (Origen [1981] ¶2v) I have read with the greatest of care the Book on the Origin of the Indians, that the Father Candidate Fray Gregorio García, of the Order of Preachers, wrote, with its Notes or Commentaries, that Your Highness is pleased to send me. And I find it so improved in every way, that if the applause that the Author has garnered from the public were any less, one could question whether it was the same: the singular adornments of choice erudition, of new Theories, of confirmations and vindications of the Ancient (theories) with which it returns to the public forum, all serve to accredit his authority and universal knowledge of the material he studies.

By intercalating his own text, González de Barcia challenged the notion of the simple identity of the authorial function. The fact that Pardo spoke about a new edition is attested to by the adverb ‘mejorado’ (‘improved’). Moreover, Pardo challenged the idea of a single authorship by saying that ‘si fuera menor el aplauso, que el Autor ha merecido al publico, pudiera dudar si era el mismo’ (‘if the applause that the Author has garnered from the public were any less, one could question whether it was the same’). Under the guise of the conditional ‘pudiera’ (‘one could’), Pardo forced the question of authorship of the second edition. Indeed, the reader should put into question the notion of authorship in the Origen de los Indios (con las Notas, i Adiciones). Pardo recognized that the new edition had been adorned with new opinions and the defence of the old opinions. As Huddleston writes, during the roughly 120 years between the 1607 and the 1729 editions, the debate on the origins of the native inhabitants of the Indies ‘involved a few of the greatest minds in Europe and became an integral part of such problems as the theological discussion of the universality of the Flood, the readmission of the Jews to England, the legitimacy of European national claims to the Indies, and various scientific and esoteric matters’ (10). One hundred and twenty years later, that is, Pardo was correct to focus on the new information available to the scholar regarding the subject of Indian origins: ‘pues lo que no pudo saber ciento i veinte Años hà, por haverse descubierto despues, lo expresa con tanta claridad, como si huviera descubierto antes’ (‘for those things no-one could know one-hundred-and-twenty Years ago, on account of their having been discovered after, he expresses with such clarity, as if they had been discovered before’; in Origen [1981] ¶2v).18

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 49

Nonetheless, the verb ‘expresa’ takes as its noun the word ‘Autor.’ As a result, Pardo cleverly and clearly made note of this ambiguity of sense in the identification of author for this edition. Clearly as much González de Barcia’s text as it was García’s, the author-function of the second edition of the Origen was a complex designation. As employed in this edition, the author-function was foremost a description of the editorial work created by González de Barcia, a work that utilized the original García text as a platform for further considerations of a complex genealogical question. Conclusion: González de Barcia as Commentator The utilization of Foucault’s theories on author-function or Chartier’s ideas on the mise en livre provides an important analytical tool with which the modern student of González de Barcia’s scholarship may comprehend his mission with greater clarity. However, we begin to recognize the complexity of González de Barcia’s authorial function in his edition of the Origen de los indios (con las Notas, i Adiciones) by returning our focus to the writers of his day. If we do this, González de Barcia’s description of his role as that of a commentator of his editions resolves the problematic created by attempting to separate González de Barcia the author (as he was called by some of his Spanish censors) from González de Barcia the editor (as the editors of the Mémoires de Trévoux referred to him). We can begin to ascertain González de Barcia’s understanding of the role of commentator by reviewing one of the first editions he republished, that of El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega’s Comentarios reales. In the preface to the reader, El Inca Garcilaso himself provided a definition of the commentator that, as we will see, obviously influenced González de Barcia: En el discurso de la historia protestamos la verdad de ella, y que no diremos cosa grande, que no sea autorizándola con los mismos historiadores españoles que la tocaron en parte o en todo: que mi intención no es contradecirles, sino servirles de comento y glosa. (Garcilaso [1723b]) We attest throughout to the truth of the history, and that we will say nothing of importance without authorizing it using the very Spanish historians that dealt with it in part or in whole: for my intention is not to contradict them but to assist them with a commentary or gloss.

50 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

El Inca Garcilaso utilized the category of commentator to describe his function in the history he wrote. His job did not involve refuting the authors who had written before him. El Inca Garcilaso intended only to provide additional information that fell outside of the purview of these authorities. To further understand the category of the comentador, moreover, we can be reminded of Christóval Suárez de Figueroa’s definition provided in his work Plaza universal de todas las ciencias, to which I have already referred. In his chapter on the commentators of sacred writing and other books (‘de la Sagrada Escritura, y otros libros’), Suárez de Figueroa wrote: los que en general hazen el oficio de Comentadores, o Expositores, deuen guardarse sumamente, no tocar en la letra de los autores, no adulterar los textos, no passar por mayor por su verdadera intencio[n], no hazer que digan lo q[ue] jamas tuuieron en el pensamiento; ... porque huyendo estos estremos viciosos, haran muchas vezes sobre vn texto de plomo, vn comento de oro. (104v–105r) those who ordinarily work as Commentators or Expositors should take extreme care not to change the authors’ words, not to taint the texts, not to overlook their true intention, not to say what they never had in mind; ... because by avoiding these extreme transgressions, many times they will provide a text of lead with a comment of gold.

Suárez de Figueroa indicated that the commentator could make the dullest work shine provided he did not fall victim to the various vices inherent in the practice of adding commentary. Among other things, the commentator should not alter the words of the original author. Moreover, the commentator should never modify the argument under discussion. Finally, the commentator should abstain from vilifying the author on whom he is commenting. Under these guidelines, the practice of providing commentary for either biblical texts or any other book allowed the commentator to prepare the reader in such a way that the latter could fully appreciate the complexity of the work at hand. For his part, in the prologue to the second edition of the Origen de los Indios (con las Notas, i Adiciones), González de Barcia appeared to follow the lead of both El Inca Garcilaso and Suárez de Figueroa. As we saw earlier, González de Barcia wrote that his bracketed additions did not contradict García’s original writings: ‘nada mudamos, ni contradeci-

González de Barcia as Commentator in the First Phase of His Scholarship 51

mos en lo que declaramos, ò añadimos: señalamos lo añadido en la Obra entre dos Corchetes [ ]’ (‘we neither alter nor contradict with what we argue or add: we indicate between two brackets [ ] that which was added’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in García [1981] ¶7r). By using square brackets to indicate the new material, González de Barcia claimed to alter nothing that García originally presented. As a result, although he worked as an author and an editor, when producing the second edition of Gregorio García’s treatise González de Barcia acted in the role of the commentator, which he thoroughly understood and clearly defined. By locating the authorial function realized by González de Barcia within the more historically appropriate category of ‘commentator,’ we can begin to respond to Yáñez de Avilés’s proclamation regarding the identity of the author of the Ensayo cronológico, which served as the epigraph to this chapter. Yáñez de Avilés wrote: ‘Y bien sè yo, que aunque aora no se proclame esta Historia, por ser de el tiempo presente, se proclamarà el Author en el futuro’ (‘And I well know that although this History does not proclaim it now, on account of it being about present times, it will proclaim the Author in the future’; González de Barcia [1723]). As we have seen, only the consideration of González de Barcia’s entire editorial project reveals the identification of this ‘author.’ González de Barcia’s manipulation of his identity through the use of pseudonyms, anonymity, and false attributions provided him the scholarly space within which he could execute his intellectual work while fulfilling his duties as a government official. This plurality of voices, however, obliges the reader to consider the identity of the writer whose work Yáñez de Avilés deemed worthy of praise. As I have suggested, defining González de Barcia’s role as a commentator of the editions he produced alleviates the need to identity his voice in its manifestation as either ‘editor’ or ‘author.’ Like El Inca Garcilaso, González de Barcia did not intend to contradict the historians whose works he re-published; he desired only to provide appropriate commentary and gloss. In realizing the role of the comentador, González de Barcia provided a service to scholars on the New World that continues to influence scholarship to this day.

2 The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before: Seventeenth-Century Conceptualizations of the Bibliographical Mission: Antonio de León Pinelo and Nicolás Antonio

Notitia librorum est dimidium studiorum Half of studying is being aware of the books (Caspar Thurman, quoted by Harrisse, v)

From the sixteenth until the early eighteenth centuries, bibliography and bibliographers played essential roles in the production of scholarship. Louise Noëlle Malclès, the twentieth-century French historian of early-modern bibliography, characterizes the work of the bibliographers of this period as that of seeking out, transcribing, and classifying printed documents ‘in order to construct tools for intellectual work which are called bibliographic lists, or bibliographies’ (8). In this sense, Malclès deftly shows that, being more than facile compilers of the works of other scholars, bibliographers of the Renaissance and Enlightenment periods constituted authentic historians of thought and culture (13). Within this context, Malclès correctly indicates that in the field of literary history, the work of bibliographers in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries came very close to being criticism in its own right (2). Thus, to study the development of bibliography throughout the early modern period, one is obliged to work in an interdisciplinary realm, combining, among others, the fields of philology, history, and critical theory. As Malclès suggests, carrying out a study of this type ‘would be as long and painstakingly exact as it would be exciting and revealing’ (2). As we will see, the bibliographical catalogue published by Antonio de León Pinelo in 1629 and republished by Andrés Gon-

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

53

zález de Barcia in 1737–8 offers an excellent case study with which to demonstrate the accuracy of Malclès’s suggestion. However, to embark upon such a case study properly we must first review the expections placed on bibliography as it was understood during this period. The first aspect to note is that bibliography as an art has not retained the respect it once received from scholars of the Renaissance and Enlightenment. Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, bibliography as a scientific endeavour became the accepted pursuit of researchers interested in textual scholarship. While this so-called scientific bibliography ‘uses detailed study in order to discover evidence regarding the facts of authorship, publication, and derivation of text’ (Clapp 721b), the earlier, non-scientific (or systematic) bibliography ‘depends upon much more general studies in order to produce systematic lists of books’ (ibid.). In his fundamental study of modern bibliography, Philip Gaskell articulates the accepted goals of modern bibliography: ‘[T]he chief purpose of bibliography is to serve the production and distribution of accurate texts. Book lists can be useful, the study of early book production is a contribution to history, but bibliography’s overriding responsibility must be to determine a text in its most accurate form’ (1). Bibliographers today continue to criticize the old-style systematic bibliography for its lack of methodic rigour, characterized by the ‘lists’ to whose compiling these early bibliographers devoted their time and energy. To modern bibliographers, systematic bibliography is a ‘mere prostitution’ of the true science; its practitioners ‘drudges who are in danger of becoming a “race of Robots”’ (Besterman 1n1). However, before computer databases, and before card catalogues, scholars utilized these bibliographical repertories to orient their investigations.1 As we will begin to discern in this initial chapter of the two-part case study on the León Pinelo Epítome, bibliographers of the seventeenth to the early eighteenth centuries played essential roles in the production of scholarship. Although they are written off today as drudges, no serious scholar can question that these early bibliographers considered their work to be essential to any intellectual pursuit. Nonetheless, scholars today often allow this negative bias to serve as a pretext with which to forgo the analysis of these early bibliographers’ work, to avoid looking into the events and exigencies that influenced these driven individuals. In what follows, I will attempt to make an initial contribution to this area of research. My goal throughout this case

54 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

study will be to ascertain the theoretical principles guiding the scholarship that went into the two editions of the Epítome (Madrid, 1629 and Madrid, 1737–8). In Antonio de León Pinelo’s Epítome de la Biblioteca (1629), for example, I will focus on the creation of the bibliographical compilation as a tool with which León Pinelo hoped to secure political advantage. Done at the behest of the Duke of Medina de las Torres, the son-in-law of King Philip IV’s favourite, Count Duke Gaspar de Olivars, León Pinelo’s bibliography did not represent for him the type of scholarship he desired to pursue. Nonetheless, we will see that he undertook the work in order to promote what he considered to be his unique scholarly capabilities in the hopes of obtaining even more important future commissions. In my study of Nicolás Antonio’s Bibliotheca Hispana (1672), I will highlight the role that national bibliography played in allowing Antonio to confront what he saw as Spain’s political decline. By reminding Spanish scholars of the great men of their history, Antonio attempted to reclaim some of Spain’s lost honour. Focusing on Antonio’s comments relating to authors who wrote about the New World, we will observe his awareness of the political value of the Bibliotheca Hispana, an overtly scholarly work. By studying the work of León Pinelo and Nicolás Antonio, I intend to provide a perspective with which to compare the editorial and bibliographical work carried out by Andrés González de Barcia on the Epítome more than a century later. In the chapter 3, the second part of this two-part case study, I will analyse González de Barcia’s edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome (1737–8). As we will see, González de Barcia utilized both León Pinelo’s title and organizational scheme. However, his additions to the second edition profoundly altered the implications of the bibliographical references compiled therein. Writing more than one hundred years after León Pinelo, González de Barcia lived in a completely different social, intellectual, and political reality. As it did with both León Pinelo and Nicolás Antonio, this reality influenced González de Barcia’s scholarship and affected his mission for the new edition of the bibliography. For example, while León Pinelo used his bibliographical catalogue as a tool for political self-advancement, González de Barcia, for whom such advancement was not at issue, followed Nicolás Antonio’s model and used his edition of the Epítome for intellectual advancement, that is, for the diffusion of his ideas, scholarship, and scholarly editions within the community of scholars González de Barcia labelled ‘la Republica de las Letras’ (‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in León Pinelo

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

55

[1982] 1:¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶v). Finally, throughout this case study a repeated observation of each bibliographer’s engagement with the works and life of Fray Bartolomé de las Casas (1484–1566) will serve to highlight both the commonalities and the differences in the bibliographical missions of each scholar. 1 Antonio de León Pinelo’s Bibliographical Mission After only seven years in Madrid, the capital of an empire that since 1580 held dominion over territories around the world, an ambitious scholar from Peru named Antonio de León Pinelo (1590 or 1591 to 1660) was asked to write an account of the books on the Indies. When he completed his Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental i Occidental, Nautica i Geografica in 1629, León Pinelo presented to the men of the court of Philip IV and the Count Duke of Olivares’s regime a bibliographical repertory that would earn him fame as the first bibliographer of the Indies. León Pinelo was born in either Lisbon or Valladolid to converso parents.2 In 1595 the Inquisition in Lisbon accused León Pinelo’s grandfather of being a Judaizer and had him burned alive (Sánchez 213). However, despite his Jewish ancestry and with the help of a compassionate hermit in Valladolid, León Pinelo obtained the necessary royal permission to leave Spain and immigrated to the New World (214). Arriving in Río de la Plata in February 1605, León Pinelo lived in Córdoba del Tucumán, studied at the University of San Marcos in Lima, and, in consideration of his degrees in canon and civil law, worked as the legal consultant to the mayor of Potosí. Legal work, in fact, defined León Pinelo’s life. With his degrees earned at San Marcos in 1619, the study of the law offered León Pinelo a way both to develop his intellectual interests and to further his political desires. Indeed, in 1621 León Pinelo obtained permission to return to Spain in order to continue his most cherished work on the legal codes of the New World, La Recopilación de las Leyes de las Indias (Lohmann Villena ‘Estudio preliminar’ xxviii–xxxv). Unlike González de Barcia, for whom bibliography and literary interests in general were of primary importance, in the years leading to the official assignment to compose his bibliographical account León Pinelo had little to do with the art of bibliography. Indeed, if González de Barcia was known for his immense collection of books and manuscripts held at his library, León Pinelo in fact complained in one of his

56 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

early manuscripts of having ‘la corta librería de un forastero’ (‘the meagre library of a foreigner’; El Gran Canciller 5). Still, during his first years at court, León Pinelo’s predominant concern consisted of establishing himself as an authority on the legal historiography of the New World. In one of his first essays, he indicated to the Real Consejo de las Indias his desire to choose (elegir), ‘un asunto, en qué lograr el trabajo de mis estudios: y en qué asegurar el premio de lo que en él trabajase’ (‘a subject with which to consummate the pursuit of my studies, and with which to secure the reward available to those who pursue it’; Discurso sobre la importancia 139). León Pinelo coveted political power and saw the examination and elucidation of legal issues related to the Indies as his passageway into the world of the administrative elite in Madrid. Work on the compilation of the legal codes of the New World would allow him to achieve his goals. Writing to the Consejo de las Indias, he stated: Supuesto pues que esta Recopilacion se ha de hacer en el Consejo ... no será mucho atrevimiento ofrecerme por ayudante suyo, pues demás de que mi profesión me habilita, juntamente con la asistencia y noticia que tengo de las Indias y sus materias (requisito necesario para este ministerio, como adelante mostraré) ofrezco por junto lo que el ayudante más diligente pudiera dar por menudo que es toda la obra acabada, con la perfección que le puede dar un particular. (León Pinelo [1629] 147–8) Considering, then, that this Recompilation has to be done at the Council ... it will not be too bold to offer myself as an assistant. For in addition to the fact that my profession qualifies me, together with the time and knowledge that I have of the Indies and its affairs (a necessary requisite for this office, as I will later demonstrate), I offer as a whole what the most diligent assistant could only give in part: namely, the entire work, finished, with the refinement that a personal assistant can give to it.

To establish his credentials as an authority on New World legal issues León Pinelo emphasized his diligence at work and his intimate knowledge of America. Only someone as meticulous as he, so León Pinelo argued, could carry out such an important commission. Indeed, he suggested that he could immediately offer a completed version of the study. Although León Pinelo ultimately failed to realize this desire, his diligence did provide some recompense. In the Tesoro de la Lengua Castellana o Española (1611), Covarrubias reminded readers of the Spanish

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

57

saying, ‘la diligencia es madre de la buena ventura’ (‘diligence is the mother of good fortune’; 472b). As we will see, during his early years at court, León Pinelo proved the accuracy of this proverb on numerous occasions. León Pinelo’s arrival in Madrid coincided with Philip III’s death in 1621. With the subsequent rise in power of Philip IV’s new minister, Gaspar de Guzmán, the Count Duke of Olivares (1587–1645), men of letters and intellectuals throughout the monarchy flooded the men of the new regime with letters of obeisance (Elliot 190). For example, not even one week after Philip III’s death, Francisco de Quevedo switched political sides and sent his manuscript of Política de Dios to the Count Duke (ibid.). Antonio de León Pinelo also sent a manuscript to Olivares in the years before 1625 called El Gran Canciller de las Indias. The work dealt with the historical and legal foundations related to the position, of the same name, to which the Count Duke had been appointed. In addition to the practical legal and historical knowledge he evinced in this scholarly work, León Pinelo constructed an ancillary argument designed to further his goal of securing political power. This argument consisted of defining his research as pertaining to what he called ‘las verdaderas letras humanas de las Indias’ (‘the true humanist writings on the Indies’; Gran Canciller 59), which he formulated as an extension of the humanist historiography carried out by contemporary scholars. In the fourth chapter of the first section of El Gran Canciller, entitled ‘De lo que se requiere para tratar del Gran Canciller de las Indias’ (‘On the requirements for discussing the High Chancellor of the Indies’), León Pinelo established what he considered to be the criteria for writing on Americanist themes. He acknowledged that on the historical origins of chancellors in general, the historian must use ‘(l)as Letras humanas i las historias de España’ (‘humanist writings and histories of Spain’; Gran Canciller 37). By ‘letras humanas’ he meant the classical Latin historical texts – for example, Livy, Pliny, or Tacitus – that formed the core of any Renaissance humanist’s educational program. However, when a historian writes on the specific office of High Chancellor of the Indies, León Pinelo revealed, es forçoso entrar en otro estudio, entender otras materias: i al fin tratar de un Nuevo Mundo, que es mi profession i principal intento. Para esto no se requieren ni son necessarias Las que strictamente [sic] Llamamos Letras humanas (digo strictamente porque el mejor humanista no se halla obligado a estender sus estudios a Las materias de Indias), mas de en quanto

58 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library adornan i cultivan el ingenio, facilitando el metodo i perficionándole para bien decir, no para bien resolver, porque no son medio por donde efectivamente se consiga. (Gran Canciller 37) one is obliged to embark on another study, to have knowledge of other issues, and, in the end, to deal with the New World, which is my field and principal objective. To do this, those writings that we strictly call Humanist (I say strictly because even the best humanist is not obliged to broaden his studies to those of the Indies) are not required nor are they necessary, except inasmuch as they embellish and cultivate one’s intellect, facilitating and perfecting method so as to argue well; but not to resolve [issues] well, because they do not provide the means through which this may effectively be accomplished.

The authoritative texts from antiquity said nothing about the New World. This, therefore, limited their value to the historian of the Indies. If one wished to obtain a profound understanding of the history and politics of these territories, this Renaissance humanism added little. For resolving issues related to the history and government of the Indies the historian needed something more. Antonio de León Pinelo clarified the additional requirements (‘calidades’)3 for the historian of the Indies. Adding to those put forward by Luis Cabrera de Córdoba, in De historia para entenderla y escribirla (1611), León Pinelo provided four unique requirements that each historian of the Indies must meet in order to comprehend and elucidate his subject with greater security and authority (Gran Canciller 41). First, the historian of the New World must have spent time there: ‘Es la primera calidad del que escriviere de las Indias aver estado en ellas, que aun que en todas es imposible, el que estuvo en unas Provincias entiende mas facilmente Las materias de otras’ (‘The first requirement for he who would write about the Indies is to have been there. For while it is impossible to have been in all Provinces, he who has been in some understands with greater ease the matters of others’; Gran Canciller 41). Although the scholar need not have visited all the territories, a firsthand knowledge of some allowed him to distinguish fact from fiction in the reports on the Indies. The second characteristic required that the historian of the New World complete his research in the metropolis: ‘La segunda calidad es que assista en La Corte, que como es Patria comun, es tambien escuela donde todo se perficiona’ (‘The second requirement is to be present at Court. For, since it is everyone’s Mother

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

59

country, it is also a school where all is refined’; Gran Canciller 41). León Pinelo recognized the importance of source material. The New World historian would clarify facts by utilizing the major archives at the capital. However, the order of the first two ‘calidades’ is important: even if a scholar had unlimited access to the archives at court, without having lived in the New World he would be unable to assess their value with accuracy. Indeed, León Pinelo pointed out the error in believing, as Antonio de Herrera had asserted, that it was not necessary to have travelled to the Indies to write their history (Gran Canciller 40). León Pinelo rebuked this view by recalling that while Tacitus had written histories of the Middle East and of Africa without having actually been there, he could do so because of the numerous, truthful reports of many authors. However, historians of the Indies in fact wrote about a part of the world for which ancient authorities could offer little assistance since so little was known (ibid.). Therefore, only by spending time in these new provinces, previously and in many ways still unknown, could historians ascertain which sources to trust and which to discard as fabulous. The third requirement for the New World historian dealt with navigation and paid special attention to the art of cosmography: La tercera calidad es el saber Cosmografía, que si para todos Los historiadores es necessaria, como dicen Costa i Cabrera, mucho mas para Los de Indias, que han de tratar de tan Largas navegaciones, tan nuevos climas i mares, costas tan extendidas, islas, golfos, canales, estrechos i archipiélagos, en que es imposible hablar bien quien no huviere navegado i fuere Cosmógrafo. (Gran Canciller 42) The third requirement is to know Cosmography. For if it is necessary for all Historians, as Costa and Cabrera say, it is even more so for those who study the Indies: who have to study Long voyages, such new climates and seas, coastlines of great extension, islands, gulfs, and narrow canals and archipelagoes, about which it is impossible for one to speak properly who has not navegated and is not a Cosmographer.

The knowledge of the earth and the heavens enabled the historian of the Indies to attest to the geographical conditions of the New World with certainty. In fact, cosmography is of such importance to León Pinelo that he felt justified in making another thinly veiled criticism of Antonio de Herrera’s lack of such knowledge (Gran Canciller 42).4

60 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Finally, León Pinelo stated that ‘[l]a quarta i ultima calidad es el saber Letras humanas, que pongo por ultimo Lugar, por Lo que he dicho arriba’ (‘the fourth and last requirement is to know humanist Writings. I put this last in consideration of what I said earlier’; Gran Canciller 43). The knowledge of Renaissance humanistic studies had a limited importance for León Pinelo. While he understood that no formal history could be written without consideration of the canonical historical texts, recourse to the ‘letras humanas’ of Renaissance tradition remained a secondary concern. Having defined the four additional, essential requirements of the historian of the New World, León Pinelo wasted no time informing the Count Duke of Olivares just where he could find such an intellectual: Diez i ocho años estuve en Las Indias, navegue sus mares, atravesse mucho de sus Provincias sin cargos i con ellos, haziendo notas i juntando papeles i advertencias, poniendo estudio muy particular en entender sus materias ... : i a la noticia que io tenia, he juntado La adquisicion en esta Corte con La vista de todos Los papeles del Real Consejo de Las Indias, con cuia orden i aprobacion me ocupo en la obra mas importante que se ha escrito de aquellos Reynos, como adelante diré. (Gran Canciller 43–4) I was in the Indies for eighteen years. I travelled her seas and crossed many of her Provinces both with commissions and without. I went taking notes and gathering papers and notices, giving special attention to understanding her matters ... And to the information I gathered, I have added the findings in this Court of all the documents of the Royal Council of the Indies, with whose ordering and approving I am busying myself in the most important work that has been written about those Kingdoms, as I will say later.

León Pinelo, of course, met all the requirements that the historian of the Indies should have: he had lived for eighteen years in the Indies (quality number 1), where he navigated the waters of the New World and wrote unpublished histories of its geography (quality number 3). Also, since coming to Madrid, he had conducted archival research for the Real Consejo de las Indias in Madrid (quality number 2). Finally, his labour on the legal codes of the New World, ‘la obra mas importante que se ha escrito de aquellos Reynos’ (‘the most important work that has been written about those Kingdoms’), intimated his required

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

61

humanist education (quality number 4). In one brief chapter, therefore, León Pinelo provided what we might consider his modus operandi and his raison d’être for scholarly studies on the New World: The true scholar of the Indies diligently searches for the most authoritative information. This historian visits the lands, reads the texts, considers the facts, and rejects the fictions. León Pinelo was such a historian. To promote himself to the de facto most powerful man in the Spanish court, second only to the king, León Pinelo argued that the true historian of the Indies is he who, by his dedication to work, finds the truth not told by the humanist scholars. Like Quevedo, León Pinelo had sent his manuscript to Olivares hoping to prove his value to the Count Duke and find a place for himself in the new regime. However, while Quevedo’s Política de Dios was published in 1626, León Pinelo’s manuscript, like many other of his studies, would never see the printing press in his lifetime. Nonetheless, proving that diligence is indeed the mother of good fortune, the success of León Pinelo’s self-promotion became evident by 1629. Not even ten years after he arrived in Madrid, León Pinelo received a promise (‘expectativa’) to be a future Relator in the Consejo de las Indias; he had acquired enough financial stability to marry doña María de Ugarte y Grimaldo, a distant relative; and he had written and seen published two books: the Tratado de Confirmaciones Reales, in 1630, and the work that has made him famous as the first Americanist bibliographer, the Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental i Occidental, Nautica i Geografica, published at Madrid by Juan González in 1629 (Lohmann Villena ‘Estudio preliminar’ xliii; Alberto Sanchez 218). 2 León Pinelo and the 1629 Epítome de la Biblioteca Although only two pages in length, the dedication that León Pinelo wrote to the Duke of Medina de las Torres attests to the complex concerns that León Pinelo needed to address and overcome in order to realize the bibliographical mission he conceptualized for the Epítome. In the opening lines of the dedication León Pinelo clarified the origin and purpose of the project: Quando V. Ex. se sirvió de mandarme escrivir una memorial de libros de Indias, para añadir noticia histórica, à ciencia politica de aquel Nuevo Mundo, no me pareciò, que obedecia reconocido, si no estudiava em-

62 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library peñado; ni que satisfazia al concepto de tan especial favor, si no excedia los limites de la possibilidad. (León Pinelo [1629] **3r) When Your Excellency saw fit to request that I write an account of the books on the Indies, so as to provide a historical framework for the political knowledge of that New World, it did not seem to me that I could rightly comply if I did not dutifully study. Nor did it seem to me that I could live up to the spirit of such a kind request if I did not exceed the limits of the possible.

León Pinelo received a direct request from the Count Duke of Olivares’s son-in-law, the Duke of Medina de las Torres, to write a bibliographical account of the books of the Indies. However, although he had written a bibliography related to his primary interest in the legal codes, Libros Reales de Govierno (1627), León Pinelo was not a bibliographer by design. As noted, he came to Madrid to pursue his work on the Recopilación de las Leyes de las Indias. From 1623, when he began assisting Rodrigo de Aguiar y Acuña at the Real Consejo, until 1636, when he submitted the final draft to Juan de Solórzano Pereira, León Pinelo worked with immense assiduity on that cardinal undertaking (Lohmann Villena ‘Estudio preliminar’ l). The Epítome drew León Pinelo further away from this goal and kept him from finishing other related projects. As his brother, Juan Rodríguez de León, wrote in the ‘Discurso Apologético’ to the Epítome: ‘I en tanto que ocupado en Real obra de la Recopilacion de leyes de las Indias, de que es ayudante discipulo, retarda el Autor las demas [obras suyas]’ (‘And while he is busy with the Royal work of the Recompilation of the laws of the Indies, of which he is a subordinate assistant, the Author delays his other works’) (León Pinelo [1629] ¶8r–v). Although León Pinelo would have preferred to dedicate his time to other projects, he was in no position to turn down a formal request. He made his reputation by diligently serving the court. Having promoted himself as an expert in New World historiography León Pinelo probably knew that he could strengthen his position among the political elite in Madrid by producing a bibliographical work that surpassed all expectations (‘excedia los limites de la possibilidad’). Considering the theme of the bibliography, it is a credit to León Pinelo’s success at promoting himself that he received the mandate. Apparently, however, the man who had written volumes on the law,

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

63

dedicated hours to the editing of his legal compilation, and written over two hundred pages on the office of High Chancellor of the Indies quickly realized that the work he imagined for the bibliography would be impossible to complete. In his dedication to the duke, León Pinelo wrote: ‘I assí determinè dar a las prensas un trabajo, cuyas ideas temia, cuyas execuciones dudava: porque atreviendome a imaginarle, parecio mas que dificil conseguirle’ (‘And for this reason I realized I was sending to the press a work whose ideas I feared and whose findings I questioned. Because by daring myself to imagine it, it seemed more than difficult to achieve it’; León Pinelo [1629] **3r). León Pinelo needed to change course. He decided, therefore, to produce a work that exceeded the limits of a brief account but that would still fall short of the complete work he truly desired to produce. However, the reduced length did not presuppose a limitation in the range of information contained therein: Ya es de V.Ex. este dibuxo, felizmente trabajado, en tanto que, con menos imperfectas noticias, se dilata a mayor conocimiento de los Autores, division de las materias, y censura de los libros. (León Pinelo [1629] **3r) This sketch, happily executed – since with fewer imperfect references, it will expand your knowledge of the Authors, variety of subjects, and critiques of the books – now belongs to Your Excellency.

As a professional scholar of the Indies, León Pinelo produced a sketch (dibujo) that both imparted and revealed much more knowledge than its actual size suggested. Indeed, this twofold consideration characterized León Pinelo’s bibliographical mission in the Epítome. First, he met the duke’s mandate, to add historical background to political studies on the New World, by providing an account of the books of the Indies (i.e., he imparted knowledge). Second, León Pinelo promoted himself as a scholar whose erudition on issues related to the Indies made him an important asset to the Spanish court and its intellectual community (i.e., he revealed his knowledge). To realize the first consideration León Pinelo needed only to address the political realities of his time. To achieve the second, however, the bibliographer had to overcome the political risks inherent in criticizing Spanish scholarship on the Indies without alienating himself from the very erudite courtly community to which he desired to contribute.

64 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

3 Addressing the Politics of León Pinelo’s Epítome In order to meet the challenge to provide a historical perspective on current political events, León Pinelo had to compile a bibliography that dealt with both Spain’s eastern dominions (Ethiopia, India, Asia) and her territories in the New World, including Brazil. Indeed, after King Sebastian of Portugal’s ill-fated expedition to Morocco in 1578, Philip II was formally recognized as King of Portugal in April of 1581 (Lynch, Spain under the Habsburgs 1:322ff.). León Pinelo’s division of the Epítome into four sections, called bibliotecas, recognized this political reality: ‘Sale pues dividida esta nomenclatura, en quatro Bibliotecas subalternas, que son las claves de todo lo que de las Indias se puede escrivir’ (‘This catalogue comes divided in four ancillary Bibliographies, which are the keys to all that can be written about the Indies’; León Pinelo [1629] **5r). The first two bibliographies or bibliotecas, the Oriental and the Occidental, contained the representative historical, ecclesiastical, and political writings related to the geographical areas of Asia and India (the Oriental) as well as the New World or the ‘Indies’ (Occidental). In addition, and considering the importance that León Pinelo attributed to cosmography as the third requirement for the historian of the New World, he added two more catalogues on the navigational and geographical studies related to the Indies: Las [bibliotecas] que se siguen, Nautica i Geografica, [contienen] las materias remotas, si bien tan necessarias i conducibles a la inteligencia de las propias, que son medios forçosos, para leer con ciencia, i escrivir con experiencia de las Indias. (León Pinelo [1629] **5r) Those [bibliographies] that follow, the Nautical and the Geographical, [contain] the secondary topics – if also the most necessary and elucidating for understanding the primary ones. For all are obligatory means for reading knowledgeably and writing learnedly about the Indies.

For León Pinelo, these four divisions represented the totality of areas of study needed to investigate the overseas dominions. To read with knowledge and write with intelligence, the New World scholar combined history with geography to produce the true science of the Indies. As a specialist in the writings of the New World, León Pinelo’s decision to include the Biblioteca Oriental merits attention. He never visited these lands and had to rely exclusively on written accounts and

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

65

secondary sources for his bibliographical entries. Ironically, he had criticized other historians (e.g., Herrera) for something he proceeded now to do.5 A desire to acknowledge the union of Portugal with Castile in 1580 constituted one obvious reason why León Pinelo included the Biblioteca Oriental (Capel xv). While this is definitely a factor, he could have avoided a discussion of the East by focusing on his area of expertise. However, he knew that any account of ‘ciencia política’ (‘political knowledge’) during the so-called Age of Olivares required coming to terms with the conflict between the Dutch and Spanish empires. As Jonathan Israel indicates, from 1598 until 1643 the central political objective of Spain was ‘to disband the Dutch East and West India Companies, force Dutch evacuation of the Indies east and west, break the Dutch stranglehold on the Scheldt, and generally weaken if not destroy the Dutch mercantile system’ (Empires and Entrepots xii). This political reality became even more urgent when Piet Heyn captured the Spanish treasure ship in 1628, thereby inflicting a major loss on the Spanish treasury (Elliot 127). León Pinelo was long aware of the Dutch presence in the Indies. In 1624 he wrote a brief in which he reported on the safe way to conduct the fleets bringing silver from Potosí, so as to guard against robbery by the Dutch pirates who maintained a fastidious presence off the coasts of Chile and Peru at that time (Lohmann ‘Estudio preliminar’ xxxix). Therefore, although there might be a tendency, following Henry Harrisse, to see the Biblioteca Occidental as the ‘only one that interests us’ in the field of Americanist bibliography (xiv), properly understood, the Epítome responds to the immediate concerns of the Spanish empire in conflict with an emerging Dutch power. Consequently, León Pinelo’s analysis of the literature related to the Hispano-Dutch confrontations offers a valuable picture of the bibliographical underpinnings of this intellectual history. Forty-three years after the publication of the Epítome, Nicolás Antonio described the catalogue as a compendium of histories on the Indies in which León Pinelo attempted to isolate the best works by submitting all to the ‘melting pot of reason and truth’ (‘al crisol de la verdad y la razón’; Biblioteca Hispana Nueva [1999] 1:149b).6 The metaphor of the melting pot provides an effective image with which to conceptualize León Pinelo’s political analysis in his bibliography. Moreover, it begins to suggest an explanation to why Andrés González de Barcia sought to publish the work again more that 100 years later. León Pinelo dealt with the texts and manuscripts that provided the intellectual justification for foreign aggression against Spain. In so doing, he extracted the

66 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

fictitious and emotive reasoning from what he considered to be scientific analysis, preserving the latter. For León Pinelo, as it would be for Nicolás Antonio and González de Barcia, no work better represented the urgency of attending to this critical scholarly activity than Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas’s Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias. León Pinelo’s bibliographical references to the works of Bartolomé de las Casas, for example, illustrated this point. The complete series of references on Las Casas ran three pages in length, one of the longest in the Epítome. León Pinelo recognized Las Casas’s importance abroad, ‘por sus escritos, celebrado de los estrangeros’ (‘celebrated among foreigners for his writings’; León Pinelo [1629] 62). However, he did not defend the Bishop of Chiapas. León Pinelo’s bibliography included criticism of the international fame Las Casas had enjoyed on account of his Brevíssima relación. Regarding this title, León Pinelo wrote: ‘por su libertad, es el tratado, que mas apetecen los estrangeros, y por el todas las obras deste Autor’ (‘Because of its liberties, it is the treatise that foreigners most desire; and because of it, [they desire] all the works by this Author’; León Pinelo [1629] 63). León Pinelo saw Las Casas’s passionate defence of the Indians of the New World as too emotional to provide an accurate account of the true situation these indigenous peoples faced under their new rulers. In his view, Las Casas greatly exceeded the objective limits of historical study. Consequently, León Pinelo argued that what he saw as Las Casas’s deviation from fact (‘libertad’), and subsequent movement toward the dramatic, mocked the true civilizing mission of the Spanish crown. In an entry on Las Casas’s work Diez i seis remedios contra la peste que destruye las Indias, León Pinelo brought attention to the legal and political implications of Las Casas’s arguments and provided a corrective: Diez i seis remedios contra la peste, que destruye las Indias. Deste tratado, dize Fr. Ivan de Grijalva, que resultaron las leyes del año 1542. tan odiosas para las Indias: no se imprimio. Sobre el octavo, de los referido remedios, hizo tratado particular, cuyo titulo es muy prolixo. Contradize las Encomiendas de Indios, con veinte fundamentos, a que en mi libro, De confirmaciones Reales, entiendo que satisfago. (León Pinelo [1629] 63, my bold emphasis) Diez i seis remedies contra la peste, que destruye las Indias. On account of this treaty, says Fray Juan de Grijalva, the laws of the year 1542, so loathsome

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

67

for the Indies, were enacted. It was never printed. Regarding the eighth of the aforementioned remedies, he wrote a particular treatise, whose title is quite long. He refutes the Encomienda of Indians with twenty principles, to which in my book, De confirmaciones Reales, I feel I adequately respond.

As a legal scholar, León Pinelo displayed his keen political insight by offering a historical perspective on the influence of Las Casas’s work on legal issues. In addition, as a bibliographer, he availed himself of the opportunity to offer his own scholarly work on legal issues as a refutation of Las Casas’s treatises. From the start, therefore, León Pinelo produced a multifaceted bibliography. It provided the literary background for the historical information on the Indies. Simultaneously, however, it cultivated the idea that León Pinelo’s work pertained to the elite scholarship of this field. Before bringing this latter idea to its conclusion, however, León Pinelo needed to fulfil the former mandate as completely as possible. León Pinelo compiled and commented on the texts that provided the Dutch with the political rationale needed to conduct their incursions into the Spanish overseas dominions. In both the Biblioteca Oriental and Occidental León Pinelo offered detailed references to works related to the Dutch. The following reference from the Biblioteca Oriental illustrates this point: ‘Hvgon Grocio Holandes, Autor condenado, escrivio sin declarar su nombre, el que intituló, Mare liberum, sobre el derecho, que los de su nación pretenden tener para comerciar en la India Oriental’ (‘Hugo Grotius, Dutch, condemned author. Without declaring his name, he wrote the book entitled Mare liberum, about the rights that those of his nation pretend to have for conducting commerce in the East Indies’; León Pinelo [1629] 57–8). This text related the historical roots of the Spanish political dilemma. However, León Pinelo again went beyond his role of bibliographical compiler and offered additional references to counter the arguments made in Grotius’s treatise. He responded to Hugo Grotius’s Freedom of the Seas, or, The Right that belongs to the Dutch to take part in the East Indian Trade by providing the following entry: Doct. F. Serafin de Freytas Portugues, de la Orden de la Merced, Catedratico que fue de Canones en la Vniversidad de Valladolid, que ya jubilado assiste en esta Corte rico de letras y años, respondio al tratado de Hugon

68 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library Grocio doctamente, en el que intitulò, Del justo imperio Asiatico de los Lusitanos. Lat. imp. 1615. 4. (León Pinelo [1629] 58) Doctor Fray Serafin de Freytas, Portuguese, of the Mercedarian Order, Professor emeritus of Canon Law at the University of Valladolid, who, now retired, rich in letters and years, is present at this Court. He responded learnedly to the treatise of Hugo Grotius in one that he entitled, Del justo imperio Asiatico de los Lusitanos. Latin. Printed in 1615. Quarto.

With the precision of a legal scholar, León Pinelo countered all the arguments that attacked Spanish sovereignty. From political information on Dutch exploration to textual information on scholarly works, León Pinelo allowed no bibliographical references into his Epítome that had not received a proper vetting. In addition to commenting on the Dutch, León Pinelo attempted to clarify errors in fact related to the literature on Spain and the Indies committed by writers from abroad. In the Biblioteca Geográfica, for example, León Pinelo discriminated the following: Ivan Botero Benese. Relaciones universales del mundo, con la descripcion, costumbres, armas, fuerças, i govierno de todas sus Provincias i Reynos. En lo general, es obra estimable, por la variedad i copia. En lo particular tiene muchos yerros: i assi en lo que dixo de España se emendò despues. (León Pinelo [1629] 181–2) Giovanni Botero Benese. Historical Accounts of the World, with the description, customs, arms, powers, and government of all its Provinces and Kingdoms. In general, it is an estimable work in consideration of its variety and copiousness. In particular it has many errors: and, specifically, regarding what he said about Spain, he later corrected himself.

León Pinelo read the works and verified the facts. In addition, he proved his authority by making consistent recourse to source citation. Be it Giovanni Bautista Ramusio, cited over fifty times, or Joseph Scaliger, whom he cited twice, León Pinelo used as many authorities as possible in order to elucidate his subject and to realize his mandate. The Epítome, acting as a metaphorical melting pot, had as its aim to dissolve complexity, resolve suspicion, and produce fact. The first part of León Pinelo’s job, therefore, was complete. Writing

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

69

for an empire at war, León Pinelo met the Duke of Medina de las Torres’s mandate by compiling the historical information that the contemporary community of political scholars and administrative leaders needed. However, León Pinelo did not fail to seize the opportunity provided to him by this project to promote his value. He was the first intellectual of the Spanish court to provide a bibliography of the writings that gave accounts of the geography, history, and government of the Indies. Accordingly, he would not allow himself to remain outside of the court’s scholarly and political walls. 4 Bibliography as a Tool for Political Self-Advancement León Pinelo proved that he could accomplish the duke’s request. However, he stated that due to the current state of scholarship on the Indies, he had been unable to realize the construction of his larger bibliography. In the dedication to the duke, he indicated the reason for his inability to complete his imagined Bibliotheca: ‘por no aver en España curiosidad particular, que me advirtiesse, ni hasta aora aficion superior, que me alentase; tan duramente se halla quien pretenda saber cosas de otro mundo’ (‘for there has not been particular curiosity in Spain, which might inform me, nor, until now, a greater interest, which might encourage me; so wanting does he who aspires to know things about another world find himself’; León Pinelo [1629] **3r). His brother Juan Rodríguez de León summarized this position: que como de las Indias solo se apetece plata i oro, estan sus Escritores tan olvidados, como sus historias poco vistas; siendo ocupacion estrangera la que deviera ser natural de España; i assi de nuestras mismas conquistas saben mas las plumas agenas, que las curiosidades propias. (León Pinelo [1629] ¶7r) For since only silver and gold are desired from the Indies, her Historians are as forgotten as her histories are seldom seen – being a foreign occupation that which should be native to Spain. And in this way the writings of others put forward more about our own conquests than the local curiosity does.

León Pinelo’s second consideration for his bibliographical mission dealt with the issue of New World scholarship and presented him with a complex predicament. He had to acknowledge the lack of scholar-

70 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

ship without neglecting to mention the scholars of the court (‘deste corte’), who in fact worked in the field. Indeed, he desired to belong to this select group. Therefore, he accentuated the idea that his work would add to the limited studies already completed. Without a doubt, Antonio de León Pinelo created an important bibliographical work. Lope de Vega praised the Epítome and placed León Pinelo in a league with Johann Tritheim, known as the ‘Father of Bibliography,’ and Joannes Jacobus Frisius. Tritheim’s 1494 Liber de scriptoribus ecclesiasticis set out in chronological order the works of nearly a thousand ecclesiastical writers (Bestermann 8). In addition, Frisius’s Bibliotheca philosophorum of 1583 was Europe’s first subject bibliography on philosophical writings (27). However, Lope wrote that Antonio de León Pinelo deserved even more praise (alabanza) than these illustrious men: que si la merecieron Tritemio, i Iuan Iacobo Frisio, el uno por los Escritores Eclesiasticos, i el otro por los Filosofos, de quien consta universal noticia, assi en las manos de los hombres, como en los archivos de los siglos; mayor se le deve à quien de tan remota i peregrina materia, ha formado tan hermosa perspectiva. (In León Pinelo [1629] *3r) Because if Tritheim and Joannes Jacobus Frisius deserved it, the former for his Ecclesiastical Writers and the latter for the Philosophical, about whom all the world knows, both by word of mouth as well as from centuries’ worth of archives, even more is owed to he who has composed so lovely a perspective of such remote and exotic matters.

Lope’s words echoed León Pinelo’s sentiments. Both indicated the need to transcend traditional humanist letters by incorporating into the scholarly repertory authentic, first-hand materials related to the Spanish overseas domains. The Epítome provided ample justification for such an attitude and manifested León Pinelo’s importance within the community of historians who might already agree with the assertion. Throughout the bibliography Antonio listed his own works among those of his contemporaries. Manuscripts, like El Gran Canciller de las Indias, that León Pinelo had hoped to publish, became entries in his bibliographical catalogue. These self-references advertised his familiarity with New World themes and provided evidence of his expertise on subjects concerning the Indies. He demonstrated to readers his active role in the scholarly world of this literature. For example, among the

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

71

‘Colectores de libros de Indias,’ a group that included Amerigo Vespucci, Giovanni Bautista Ramusio, and Johann de Bry, León Pinelo listed himself: Lic. Antonio de Leon. Quien desde que començò a tener noticia de las primeras letras, se ha ocupado con natural afecto en leer i entender historias i materias de Indias, i ha juntado dellas lo que por esta Biblioteca parece, no puede tenerse por inmerito de poner su nombre, las vezes que sus escritos lo piden, entre los que, si con mas suficiencia, no con menos diligencia, han tratado las materias, de que esta obra se compone. Puedo pues tener lugar entre los Colectores de libros de Indias, no ya por este Epitome, que los contiene abreviados i en suma, sino por la Biblioteca, que mas ampliada, tengo escrita, de cuya maquina, que no es pequeña, he sacado esta muestra. (León Pinelo [1629] 134) Licentiate Antonio de Leon. Who since he began to be aware of the first writings has occupied himself with native zeal in reading and understanding the histories and matters of the Indies. And from this study he has compiled what is found in this Bibliotheca. One cannot consider unwarranted the inclusion of his name in the places where his writings call for it; among which, if with greater presumption, not with lesser diligence, they have dealt with the matters about which this work is composed. As such I can claim a spot among the Collectors of books on the Indies, not truly for this Epitome, which contains them in a condensed and shortened form, but for the much enlarged Bibliotheca that I have written and from whose abundance I have taken this sample.

The shift from third to first person, triumphantly displayed using the verb ‘poder’ (‘Puedo,’ ‘I can’), showed readers that, through his diligence and first-hand knowledge of the history of the Indies, León Pinelo earned the privilege of including himself in the small, elite community of scholars dedicated to the historiography on the Indies. However, within this community he aimed to show that his specialty was the study of the Spanish traditions and statutes pertaining to the Indies. Therefore, León Pinelo focused great attention on those whose authority determined who would be allowed to conduct research on the most important work in that field, the Recopilación de las leyes de las Indias. While working on the bibliography, Rodrigo de Aguiar y Acuña, the commissioner who had supervised the compilation of the ‘laws of the

72 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Indies’ since León Pinelo arrived at the Consejo de Indias, died. At first León Pinelo continued the work on the Recopilación by himself (Manzano Manzano ‘El proceso’ 28b). However, he quickly learned that the new commissioner would be Juan de Solórzano Pereyra – member of the Council of the Indies and, like León Pinelo, a fellow Peruvian. Perhaps as a way to solidify his position with Solórzano Pereyra, León Pinelo dedicated much attention to him in the Epítome. For example, we can begin to discern León Pinelo’s strategy in the author index included in the bibliography, located prominently in the opening pages of the Epítome. In addition to providing the page numbers where references to the author could be found, León Pinelo wrote the following on Solórzano Pereyra: ‘Doct. † Ivan de Solorzano Pererya, que quando este Catalogo se imprimia, fue dignissimamente promovido de la Fiscalia à plaça de Consejero del Supremo de las Indias.67.122’ (‘Doctor † Juan de Solórzano Pererya, who when this Catalogue was at press, was most deservedly promoted from the office of Public prosecutor to the position of Supreme Councilor of the Indies.67.122’; León Pinelo [1629] ****2v). In an index of roughly 1000 authors, León Pinelo provided this type of extended commentary only this once. Moreover, as indicated by the cross symbol († ), which León Pinelo duly explained in the introductory paragraph to his index, Solórzano Perrerya was one of the ‘autores capitales de las materias’ (‘principal authors of the matters’) of the Indies (León Pinelo [1629] ***r). Indeed, he served as one of León Pinelo’s major, local bibliographical sources, along with Lorenzo Ramírez de Prado, the Regent Juan Baptista Valenzuela, and the Count Duke of Olivares himself (Lohmann ‘Fuentes bibliograficas’ 162). However, we discern Solorzano Pereyra’s true importance in the detailed bibliographical references León Pinelo provided to Solórzano’s work. Reading the index and proceeding as instructed to page 67 we find the following comments: Doctor Ivan de Solorzano Pereyra, Fiscal del Supremo Consejo de las Indias, y conocido por sus muchas letras en Salamanca, sacò dicipulos, que oy ocupan los principales tribunales de Castilla; siendo Oydor de Lima, cerrò la materia del titulo de las Indias, con el erudito y docto libro, que aora sacò a luz. Del derecho dellas, i de su justa inquisision, acquisicion i retencion. Lat. imp. 1629. f. I promete segunda parte, en que trate del govierno de las Indias. Tambien imprimio un docto memorial i discurso, De las razones, que ay para que el Real y Supremo Consejo de las

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

73

Indias deva preceder, en los actos publicos, al que llaman de Flandes. imp. 1629. fol. (León Pinelo [1629] 67) Doctor Juan de Solórzano Pereya, Public prosecutor at the Supreme Council of the Indies, and known in Salamanca for his many writings. He has many disciples who today occupy the principal posts at the courts of Castile. He concludes the matters of this chapter on the Indies with the erudite and learned book, written while he was Judge of Lima, that was recently published: On the laws of [the Indies], and on their just inquisition, acquisition, and retention. Latin. Published 1629. Folio. And he promises a second part in which he would deal with the government of the Indies. He also printed a learned memorial and discourse on the reasons there are for allowing the Royal and Supreme Council of the Indies to proceed, in public acts, the [Royal and Supreme Council] of Flanders.

The bibliographical entry sent out a charge of immediacy. Solórzano Pereyra’s disciples work today (‘oy’) in the administrative centres of the court. Moreover, the recent year of publication of Solórzano Pereyra’s works, both from 1629, and the adverb ‘aora’ (‘now’) used to refer to another work in progress, indicated the active role that Solórzano Pereyra continued to play at the seat of the monarchy. One must imagine León Pinelo running to the printer’s shop to update the manuscript with, what for León Pinelo, was essential information. León Pinelo wanted to underscore the fact that he had much in common with Solórzano Pereyra. Like León Pinelo, the wise prosecutor had lived in Lima and worked on the political issues related to the government of the New World. Also, like Solórzano Pereyra, León Pinelo wrote treatises that defended the administrative positions taken by the Spanish crown. León Pinelo used his work to aid the monarchy and thus hoped to establish himself as a member of its community. Solorzan Perreya represented a key figure through whom León Pinelo could gain increased access to this community.7 León Pinelo chose his allies carefully. Although he used his bibliographical masterpiece to recount past achievements, his principal concern was the present. In his entry on the recently deceased Rodrigo de Aguiar y Acuña, this focus was made clear: Lic. D. Rodrigo de Aguiar i Acuña, del Supremo Consejo de las Indias, digno Triboniano de la Recopilacion de leyes dellas ... Luego que entrò en la plaça, que tan dignamente ocupò, se aplicò a esta obra, i la acabàra en

74 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library tiempo menos dilatado, si las ocupaciones del cargo, siempre mayores en los Ministros de tanta capazidad, le huvieran dado lugar. (León Pinelo [1629] 123) Licentiate Don Rodrigo de Aguiar y Acuña, of the Supreme Council of the Indies, dignified Tribonianus of the Recompilation of its laws ... Upon entering the position that he occupied with such dignity, he applied himself to this work. And he would have finished it in less time if the duties related to his commission, always greater in the Ministers of such capacity, had given him the opportunity.

Aguiar y Acuña had the position León Pinelo could only have dreamed of occupying. As a chief member of the Supreme Council, Aguiar y Acuña had at his disposal all the documentation needed to complete the new compilation of the legal statutes. However, he lacked sufficient time to work on the project. Therefore, until Aguiar’s death, he and León Pinelo had made the perfect team for the Recopilación. As Juan Manzano Manzano points out, León Pinelo wanted to complete this work but was unable; Aguiar y Acuña had all the means, but lacked the time (‘El proceso’ 19a). León Pinelo found an avenue into the world of legal scholarship on the Indies by working as an assistant to Aguiar y Acuña. He made it possible for Aguiar y Acuña to complete a work that otherwise would have remained unfinished. However, upon Aguiar’s death, León Pinelo knew that the loss of a Maecenas could occasion unwanted reversals in his political fortunes. His concern was echoed in the commentary on Aguiar’s death: Mas: O dolor! Que estando en [la estampa] esta Biblioteca, adonde con elogios de vivo, ponia; a quien ya celebramos muerto. Passò desta vida a cinco de Octubre, a gozarla en mas superiores estrados, el que parece ia tuuo solo para hazer bien a muchos, mal a ninguno: perdiendo el Consejo el Decano de sus Catones, i las Indias el mas antiguo oraculo de sus materias, cuya venerable memoria reconoceran siempre nuestros escritos, para que viva en ellos por muestra de mi agradecimiento. (León Pinelo [1629] 124–5) But – Oh the Pain! – while this Bibliotheca was at press, where it offered praises to an active man whose death we now celebrate, he left this earth on the fifth of October, to enjoy life on a higher stage; he whom it seems had only the intention to do good for many, and bad for no one. The

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

75

Council loses the Dean of its Catoes, and the most ancient oracle of the matters of the Indies, whose venerable memory our writings will always honour, so that he may live in them as a show of my appreciation.

The heart of the Epítome can be found in the vocative cry ‘O dolor!’ (‘Oh the pain’). León Pinelo took on a bibliographical project mandated by his superiors and, while pursuing it, lost the man who had provided the necessary condition for him to continue his cherished work on the legal codes. The ‘Oracle’ of the Indies had died. However, León Pinelo proceeded to ensure that his desire to achieve political recognition through his life’s work on the Recopilación would not also pass away and into the hands of another assistant. Judging by the praise of colleagues, however, if the Epítome had distanced León Pinelo from his life’s work, it had also given him more recognition as a scholar of the Indies. Indeed, in his poem to León Pinelo, included in the 1629 Epítome, José de Valdivieso called the bibliographer the ‘Oraculo de America no errado’ (‘the unerring Oracle of America’; León Pinelo [1629] **2r). Apparently, a new ‘American Oracle’ was being designated to take over for the recently deceased Aguiar y Acuña. However, León Pinelo still understood the importance of political backing. Accompanying the colophon of the Epítome, the following epigram of Martial might have intimated León Pinelo’s feelings: ‘Sint Mecaenates, non deerunt, Flacce, Marones, Virgiliumque; tibi, vel tua rura dabunt’ (‘Let there be a Maecenases, Flaccus, and we shall want not for Maros: your own countryside will give you a Virgil’ (trans. Shackleton 205; León Pinelo [1629] Colophon). If only given the proper support, the epigram seemed to suggest, the Spanish countryside too would produce its own Americanist historian. León Pinelo wanted to be that historian. He would rewrite New World history by following the methodology of ‘las verdaderas letras humanas de las Indias’ (‘the authentic humanist writings of the Indies’). As he found out, however, despite his diligence, he would remain an assistant to Philip IV’s new commissioner, Juan de Solórzano Pereyra. 5 Bibliographical Triumph and Scholarly Frustration After he finished the Epítome, León Pinelo in fact returned to his work on the Recopilación and, by 1636, finished and submitted the complete version to Solórzano Pereyra for review (Manzano Manzano ‘El proceso’ 35). Much to León Pinelo’s dismay, however, the Recopilación was

76 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

not published in his lifetime. He continued to produce scholarly works, however, publishing Question moral si el Chocolate quebranta el ayuno Eclesiastico in 1636 and Velos Antiguos i modernos en los rostros de las mugeres in 1641. Also, around 1656 León Pinelo completed the manuscript of El Paraiso en el Nuevo Mundo. Raul Porras Barrenechea, in his 1953 introduction to El Paraiso, writes that these three works pertain to a period from 1630 until 1650, when León Pinelo was devoted to the preparation of works that had occupied the majority of his life, a period characterized by a sort of self-exile from reality that was attested to by an apparent indifference to his profession (xviii). Nonetheless, León Pinelo continued to desire a certain level of recognition for his scholarly activities. On at least two occasions between 1630 and his death in 1660 he informed those concerned that his legal work had earned him the praise of his contemporaries. In a report written circa 1641 about the book, treatises, and other works that he had published or written, León Pinelo listed his scholarly publications, making sure to document the writings in which his own work had been utilized or where he himself had received praise. For example, following the reference to his Tratado de Confirmaciones Reales (1630), León Pinelo writes: El señor D. Juan de Solórzano Pereira, en su áurea libro De gobierno Indiarum le alega [i.e., a León Pinelo] en varios capítulos 77 veces, honrando al autor, con que escribe ‘diligenter, diligentissime, recte, optime, praeclare, satis, distencte, melius cauteris,’ llamándole ‘Locuples testis noster Ant. de León’ y otros títulos que de tan docta pluma califican mucho. (Discurso sobre la importancia 76) Señor Don Juan de Solórzano Pereira, in his aureate book De gobierno Indiarum cites him [i.e., León Pinelo] in various chapters 77 times, honouring the author by writing ‘diligenter, diligentissime, recte, optime, praeclare, satis, distencte, melius cauteris,’ calling him ‘Locuples testis noster Ant. De León’ and other titles that from such a learned writer mean much.

Diligence continued to define León Pinelo. However, when commenting on his Epítome, he wrote only: ‘Aléganle algunos modernos’ (‘Some modern writers cite him’; ibid.). He clearly did not consider it as important as his juridical scholarship. This lack of concern for his bibliographical masterpiece is seen in another memorial, written in 1658, just two years before his death, in

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

77

which he again provided an account of the books and treatises that he had published and written. The man who would be known as the first Americanist bibliographer again wrote of the praise that many of his works had received by his contemporaries. However, regarding the bibliographical repertory itself, León Pinelo said only: ‘Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental, y Occidental, Nautica, y Geográfica, en Madrid año de 626, en sesenta pliegos’ (‘Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental, y Occidental, Nautica, y Geográfica, at Madrid in the year 626, in sixty leaves’; Discurso sobre la importancia 80). At the end of his career and on the verge of finally being named Cronista de la Indias, León Pinelo paid scant attention to one of the works for which he is most famous today. The account of books that would inspire later bibliographers to continue compiling textual references on the Indies was not one that León Pinelo considered his life’s work. Still, although León Pinelo would have had it otherwise, one of Spain’s greatest bibliographers, Nicolás Antonio, paid tribute to the diligent labours his predecessor carried out forty years earlier. Indeed, as the editor of the second edition of the Epítome, Andrés González de Barcia, stated: ‘Nuestro Eruditisimo, è incomparable Don Nicolàs Antonio en la Bibliotheca Nueva Española, le traslada casi todo’ (‘Our most Erudite and incomparable Don Nicolás Antonio, in the Bibliotheca Nueva Española, copies him almost completely’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in León Pinelo [1982]). González de Barcia sought to highlight the value of León Pinelo’s bibliography by noting that Nicolás Antonio’s work, although far more ambitious, owed a tremendous debt to León Pinelo’s bibliographical repertory on the Indies. It is to Nicolás Antonio’s famous Bibliotheca Hispana, and his discussion of New World bibliography, that we now turn. 6 Nicolás Antonio’s Bibliographical Mission In his book Radical Enlightenment, Jonathan Israel marks 1650 as the defining moment of this transformation, after which ‘everything, no matter how fundamentally or deeply rooted, was questioned in the light of philosophical reason’ (3). Although scholars in Spain might not have gone so far as Pierre Bayle (1647–1706), who said that ‘la raison est incompatible avec la religion’ (quoted in Israel, 10), many intellectuals from the Iberian peninsula were ready to eschew traditional accounts and search for verifiable sources with which to document their nation’s history. If, as Paul Hazard states, the major motivating

78 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

question for historians of the late seventeenth century was ‘Quid est veritas?’ (34), even Hazard acknowledged the contribution of at least one scholar from ‘feeble’ Spain: ‘How they laboured at their task! And in every country! Henri Meibom devoted himself to German archaeology; Thomas Gale and Thomas Rymer to the study of English documents; Nicolas Antonio to the beginnings of Spain’s literary history’ (49). Even in a country largely forgotten by scholars of the early Enlightenment, Nicolás Antonio (1617–84) receives attention and respect. Nicolás Antonio was born on 31 July 1617 in Seville, the metropolis of Andalucía and the Capital of the Indies (Romero Muñoz 61). In his Bibliotheca Hispana Nova, Nicolás Antonio indicated that his family was originally from Antwerp; however, both Antonio’s father, also called Nicolás Antonio, and his mother, María Nicolás Bernart, were born in Seville (Biblioteca Hispana Nueva [1999] 2:176). As Antonio acknowledged, his family’s political situation greatly improved after the death of Philip III. When Philip IV assumed control of the monarchy, at his side was that ambitious youth from Andalusia, don Gaspar Guzmán, later the Count Duke of Olivares (1587–1645). As the historian Romero Muñoz points out, the Count Duke enjoyed favouring his friends and countrymen (61). One example of this favouritism was the selection of the Seville native Diego de Velázquez as Philip IV’s court painter, a position Velázquez held for thirty-three years. However, Antonio’s father also benefited when in 1626 he was named the administrator of the Royal Admiralty of Andalusia and the Coast of Granada. Although unaware of the significance of his father’s new position, Romero Muñoz notes that thanks to it the family’s financial situation improved greatly and young Nicolás Antonio was able to begin his studies (ibid.). After finishing his initial studies in 1639 at the Colegio de Santo Tomás with the teacher Fray Francisco Giménez, a scholar later praised by Gregorio de Mayans as having a ‘singular ingenio’ (‘unique intellect’; quoted in Antonio Censura i), Antontio left for the University of Salamanca, from which he graduated in 1639 with degrees in canon and civil law (Romero Muñoz 62). After his graduation, Nicolás Antonio began work on a study of a compilation of the Pandects – the contribution to jurisprudence intended for inclusion in the Justinian legal system and compiled by Tibonian (Kelly 439). As Romero Muñoz states, Antonio desired to compile a reference of the names of authors that appear in the Pandects (63). However, after finishing almost one-third of his study, Antonio

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

79

discovered that another scholar had already produced a work on the Pandects. Before his death in 1586, the Archbishop of Tarragona, don Antonio Agustín, had completed a treatise entitled De nominibus propii Pandectarum. Forced to acknowledge that his research had served only to waste energy and time, Antonio decided to use the experience as inspiration for a larger project. He hoped that his bibliographical index would allow other scholars to avoid wasteful use of their time working on projects that had already been completed (‘Al lector’ Bibliotheca Hispana Nueva [1999] 1:x). However, before he could realize this bibliography, Antonio was called upon to serve a very active role in the monarchy. Although he lived in a century of political decline that saw the withering away of Spain’s international power, the years from 1654 until his death in 1684 represented for Nicolás Antonio a period of political consolidation and intellectual growth. Regarding Spain’s decline, John Elliot notes that by 1659 the Duke of Medina de las Torres, son-in-law of the Count Duke of Olivares, began to argue that the divine duty of Philip IV was ‘not to continue attempting to defend what is defenseless’ (134). Indeed, that same year, Cardinal Mazzarino of France and don Luis Méndez de Haro of Spain signed the Treaty of the Pyrenees. In addition to marking the independence of Holland, the treaty also produced the loss of territories surrounding the Pyrenees (Romero Muñoz 68). Coming after the secession of Portugal and the revolt of Catalunia in 1640, this was another in a series of political tragedies that befell Spain during this period. Nonetheless, if the one hundred–plus years from the death of Philip II in 1598 to the death of Charles II in 1700 are known as the period of Spain’s political decline, ‘it is also known as the Golden Age of its arts. In literature, it is the century of Cervantes, of Gongora and Quevedo; in the theatre, of Lope de Vega and Calderón, and Tirso de Molina; and in painting, of El Greco, Ribera, Zurbarán, Velazquez, and Murillo’ (Elliot 266–7). The same may also be said of Nicolás Antonio in the area of bibliography. While the Spanish monarchy declined, Nicolás Antonio experienced many successes. For example, in 1652 his scholarly work De Exilio was granted a licence to be printed, although it was not published until 1659 (Romero Muñoz 65). Also, in 1654 Antonio arrived in Rome as the Agent General for the King, a position he held for eighteen years (ibid.). However, although he worked at this and other positions while in Rome, Antonio never gave up his work on the bibliographical catalogue he wished to complete. As he said to one of his friends: ‘¿Qué es

80 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

el ocio sino sepultura del hombre en la vida?’ (‘What is idleness if not the burial of man during life?’; quoted in Romero Múñoz 79). Indeed, it was this mentality that enabled Antonio to carry out the work needed to organize his massive national bibliography. As I have noted, historians of bibliography characterize the era of the fifteenth through the eighteenth centuries as the period of ‘systematic bibliography.’ Differing from the scientific bibliography of today, this style of bibliography dealt with the enumeration and classification of books according to some permanent, guiding principle (Besterman 1–2). These bibliographies guided the research of scholars. For example, Andreas Schott’s bibliographical work, the Hispaniae bibliotheca of 1607, was the principal source for European historians of Spain until the beginning of the nineteenth century (Fernández Sánchez 33). This began to change, however, when Antonio de León Pinelo published his nearly two-hundred-page bibliographical repertory in 1629. As José Fernández Sánchez argues, in his history of Spanish bibliography, when Nicolás Antonio published the Bibliotheca Hispana in 1672, all the work of his predecessors was made worthless (36). Antonio’s 1672 edition, identified today as the ‘Nova,’ dealt with authors who had written from 1500 until the time of Antonio and provided information for some seven thousand entries (Romero Múñoz 38). Two additional volumes were published posthumously in 1696. This 1696 edition, identified today as the ‘Vetus,’ dealt with those authors who wrote from the earliest times until the end of the fifteenth century. Considering that more than 1500 years of bibliographical history is documented in these four volumes, Fernández Sánchez is correct to identify Antonio’s work as a massive retrospective of Spanish book and print culture (39). In his bibliographical repertory, Nicolás Antonio combined great scholarly intellect with a discerning political vision. As we will see, his commentaries on the historiography of the New World provide ample evidence of his genius. Among its many references to Spain’s national bibliography, the Bibliotheca Hispana Nova included 793 entries on the colonial Spanish Indies (Cordero Medina 7). Apparently overlooking the work of Antonio de León Pinelo, Luis Agustín Cordero, a Peruvian scholar who has studied Nicolás Antonio’s Americanist contributions, writes that Nicolás Antonio and not León Pinelo should be considered the major seventeenth-century Americanist bibliographer (16). However, it might be a bit ironic to qualify Antonio’s devotion to the Indies so strongly. If León Pinelo sought to highlight his travels in the New

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

81

World, when Nicolás Antonio requested a new work assignment he clarified that the job should be ‘dentro de Castilla y no en las Indias, porque como VM. sabe muy bien, ellas no son sino para hombres que quieran ir a sepultarse en el olvido de todo lo virtuoso y precioso de Europa’ (‘within Castile and not in the Indies. Because as you know very well, the Indies are only for men who wish to go bury themselves in the oblivion of all that is virtuous and precious of Europe’; quoted in Romero Muñoz 81). Nonetheless, Antonio recognized the importance of the history of the Spanish conquest of the New World. In his written approval to Antonio de Solís’s Historia de la conquista de Mexico (1684), Antonio explained that ‘una de las materias mas merecedoras de dar assunto à la Historia, es la que comprehende, y describe las vidas, y hechos de los Varones heroycos, que han dado honra à su Nacion’ (‘one of the themes most worthy of being treated by History is that which comprises and describes the lives and deeds of the heroic Men who have given honour to their Nation’; ‘Aprobación’ in Solis [1r]).8 As the Greeks and Romans glorified great historical heroes with medallions and statues, the writing of history also allowed future generations to learn of, and from, the great examples of the past. This use of history, Nicolás Antonio argued, can be found in contemporary Spain. Speaking of Solis’s work, Antonio talked of the verbal ‘statue’ created by Solis in honour of Hernán Cortés: es la [estatua] que aora comparece de nuevo en la Plaza del Mundo, con el titulo de los hechos de Fernando Cortés, y de sus Compañeros en lo principal de aquella Conquista, hasta fundar el Imperio Español en la Capital de Mexico. (‘Aprobación’ in Solís [1v]) it is the [statue] that now appears again in the Plaza of the World, bearing the title of the deeds of Hernán Cortés and of his Companions from the beginning of that Conquest until the founding of the Spanish Empire in the Capital of Mexico.

Although not interested in living in the Indies, Nicolás Antonio was very concerned with spreading the fame of those whom he considered to be the courageous soldiers who fought and died for the benefit of the monarchy of Spain. In this way, the example of Cortés equals that of Alexander, Caesar, Belisarius, ‘y à las de tantos Reyes de nuestra España, que fabricaron, y llegaron à colmo su Monarquía’ (‘and that of so many Kings of our Spain, that created and brought to its summit

82 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

their Monarchy’; ‘Aprobación’ in Solís [1v–2r]). In a time of decline in the political realm of Europe, Antonio reminded his readers, great histories like Solis’s served as a welcome and needed reminder, at home as well as abroad, of Spain’s illustrious past: Servirà à lo menos à nuestro consuelo, à nuestra enseñanza, à nuestro mas honesto divertimiento y darà renovado à las naciones Estangeras, con ventajosissimos aumentos, este Templo del Honor de España. (‘Aprobación’ in Solís [2r]) It will serve at least for our consolation, for our enlightenment, for our most honest entertainment. And it will return to the Foreign nations, restored with the most advantageous augmentations, this Temple of Spanish Honour.

Written less than a year before Antonio’s death, this short prefatory piece on Hernán Cortes’s importance to Spanish history helps one to understand Antonio’s attitude to much of his scholarly work. Antonio used his scholarly writings in order to praise the dignity of Spain’s greatest heroes and, by extension, of Spain’s history of military culture at large. However, whereas his ‘Aprobación’ provided him the opportunity to discuss one Spanish hero, Hernán Cortés, the bibliographical repertory, as Antonio knew, offered a huge arena in which all the notable figures of Spain might stand with pride. The creation of a reference space that would both aid scholars and, more importantly, honour Spain’s glorious past, constituted Antonio’s bibliographical mission. That bibliography could provide this arena was attested by to Juan Rodriguez de León, Antonio de León Pinelo’s brother, in the ‘Discurso apologético’ that accompanied León Pinelo’s 1629 Epítome: ‘Como si fueran indices del poder, tanto los muchos soldados en los campos, como los numerosos libros en las Bibliotecas’ (‘As if they were indices of power, both the many soldiers in the fields and the numerous books in a Library’; León Pinelo [1629] 3v). Books, and, by extension, compilations of books, had the capacity to remind Spain of her great history. Such was the ‘power’ of bibliography. In compiling his momentous Bibliotheca Hispana, Nicolás Antonio would provide a comprehensive picture of the grandeur of Spanish letters that would serve scholars of Spain both in their preparation for research as well as in their appreciation of Spain’s past glories. Spain’s history was rich; and if in the polit-

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

83

ical arena she was in decline, Antonio would manifest her intellectual powers. Even with a figure as controversial as Fray Bartolomé de las Casas, Nicolás Antonio utilized the forum of bibliographical compilation to promote Spanish honour. 7 The Example of Fray Bartolomé de las Casas In this context, the careful review of Bartolomé de Las Casas’s biography and bibliography found in the Bibiotheca Hispana Nova did not diminish the praise Antonio gave to Cortés in the ‘Aprobación’ to Solis’s Historia (cited above). First, reviewing Las Casas’s biography, Antonio wrote that although the future protector of the Indians had received early in life an Encomienda9 of Indians, he soon rejected it, atemorizado por la voz de su conciencia, y porque abrigaba ya en su alma la resolución, que mantuvo sin desmayo hasta su último suspiro, de ayudar a la absoluta libertad de los indios, pues vehementisimamente dolíase de que ésta, a causa de las tales encomiendas y de otros perniciosos métodos de dominio, se viese atropellada cruelmente por el pueblo conquistador. (Biblioteca Hispana Nueva [1999] 1:195) frightened by the voice of his conscience and because he already harboured in his soul the resolution, that he maintained without fail to his last breath, to help bring about the complete freedom of the Indians. For it vehemently hurt him that this [freedom], due to the so-called Encomiendas and other pernicious methods of domination, should see itself cruelly trampled on by the conquering people.

Las Casas, Antonio pointed out, knew that Charles V did not want the actions of a few ‘seres malvados’ to discredit the glory of the Spanish world empire (ibid.). Therefore, the Bishop of Chiapas dedicated himself to bringing to the king’s attention the tragedies of the conquest. Despite these noble intentions, however, Antonio noted that few of Las Casas’s writings escaped censure by the Spanish court. Still, Antonio understood the effects that one of Las Casas’s works, the Brevísima relación de las desctrucción de las Indias, had caused in Europe. Instead of confronting the work directly, however, Antonio suggested a historical context to the accounts of Spanish abuse in the Indies. Following Bernardo Perez del Castillo, Antonio wrote:

84 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library lo pone más de una vez de relieve Bernardo Perez del Castillo ... que muchos actos de los españoles, a quienes fray Bartolomé culpa de desaforada crueldad, no sin abultar en maldad otros que no presenció, pueden paliarse atendiendo a la fuerza de las circumstancias o al derecho bélico. (Biblioteca Hispana Nueva [1999] 1:195–6) Bernardo Perez del Castillo reveals more than once ... that many acts of the Spaniards – whom Fray Bartolomé blames for unbounded cruelty, not without inflating the evil of other [acts] for which he was not present – can be palliated in view of the force of the circumstances or of the laws of war.

Antonio argued that although Las Casas might not have erred in historical fact, his analysis of the events failed to consider the realities of war. Moreover, Antonio stressed that Las Casas had not witnessed all the events with which he condemned the conquest. Providing the reference to Perez del Castillo, Antonio intimated that scholars needed to verify their facts with additional sources. Indeed, what is obviously perceived as evil in one account may, in another, be seen as justifiable. Without overtly crticizing Las Casas’s writings, therefore, Antonio utilized his bibliography to suggest additional readings regarding the Spanish conquest. Antonio maintained this rational and objective response to Las Casas throughout the entire series of references dedicated to the Bishop of Chiapas. For example, regarding his most controversial work, the Brevísima, Antonio’s commentary to the bibliographical entry remained neutral: Brevisima relación de la destrucción de las Indias, que ya hoy puede leerse en latín y en otros idiomas. Al francés fue, en efecto, traducida por Jacobo Migrodde, y publicada en Amberes por Francisco Rapheleng, según lo atestigua Verdier en su Bibliotheca. Trasladóla al italiano Jacobo Castellano, y se editó en Venecia por Marcos Ginammi, 1630, en 4.º También la hemos visto impresa en latín en Holanda, y la edición Alemana, que vio la luz en Heidelberg, data de 1665, en 4.º (Biblioteca Hispana Nueva [1999] 1:196) Brevisima relación de la destrucción de las Indias, which already today can be read in Latin and in other languages. In effect it was translated into

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, Before

85

French by Jacobo Migrodde and published in Antwerp by Francisco Rapheleng, according to what Verdier attested in his Bibliotheca. Jacobo translated it into Castilian and it was edited at Venice by Marcos Ginammi, 1639, in quarto. Also, we have seen it printed in Latin at Holand and in the German edition, which was published in Heidelberg, in the year 1665, in quarto.

Where León Pinelo dedicated much energy to refuting Las Casas’s views on the encomiendo and to criticizing his Brevísima, Antonio focused primarily on bibliographical information. He provided references to the various editions of Las Casas’s works without adding critical commentary on their merit. As a result, without undermining his desire to praise the heroes of Spanish history, he provided a balanced and objective bibliographical entry on one of Spain’s most controversial authors. In so doing, Antonio displayed the idealized methodology that serious scholars would attempt to emulate throughout the eighteenth century. During the eighteenth century, this combination of critical historiography and objective scholarly defence of Spain made of Antonio’s work the model for many Spanish intellectuals. As Cebrián notes, one of the most important scholars of the period, Gregorio de Mayans, admired the work of Nicolás Antonio and considered his Bibliotheca Hispana the greatest bibliographical achievement of past centuries (x). The opening lines of Nicolás Antonio’s study Censura de historias fabulos, published posthumously in 1742 by Mayans, could have served as a rallying call for many of Spain’s early Enlightenment scholars. Antonio declared: ‘Escrivo en defensa de la Verdad, del Honor de nuestra Nacion. El intento es enceder una luz a los ojos de las Naciones Politicas de Europa’ (‘I write in defence of the Truth, of the Honour of our Nation. My intent is to shine a light on the eyes of the Political Nations of Europe’; Censura 1). As Antonio believed (and Mayans hoped to emphasize), scholarship served to ascertain the truth regarding the glories of Spain. Only this truth would defend Spain in the eyes of Europe. Another eighteenth-century scholar who understood the merits of this scholarly position was Andrés González de Barcia (1673–1743). Nicolás Antonio’s ideas influenced González de Barcia’s scholarship his entire life. Having worked closely with Antonio’s nephew, Andrián Konnick, in the Real Academia Española (Cotarelo y Mori 31),

86 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

González de Barcia also collected, organized, and edited material on Antonio’s bibliographical masterpiece, the Bibliotheca hispana. Moreover, when González de Barcia edited León Pinelo’s Epítome, he made many references to Nicolás Antonio’s work. It is to González de Barcia’s 1737–8 edition of León Pinelo’s bibliography, Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental y Occidental, Nautica y Geografica, that we now turn.

3 The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After: Bibliography as a Reflection of Andrés González de Barcia’s Intellectual Project for New World Scholarship

El mal teñido zelo del P. Casas, ha desacreditado en el Mundo la Nacion Española The poorly concealed zeal of Father Casas has descredited the Spanish Nation to the World (González de Barcia’s commentary in the second edition of the Epítome [1982] 1:568)

1 Reading Andrés González de Barcia’s Paratext Released in 1737–8, the second edition of Antonio de León Pinelo’s bibliographical catalogue served as González de Barcia’s last Americanist publication. The culmination of his editorial project on the New World, his work on the Epítome offered readers with more than a new edition of this rare and valuable repertory. In this, as in his other scholarly endeavours, González de Barcia attempted to provide a complete reorientation to the study of New World historiography. As such, his work on León Pinelo’s bibliography did not consist of a faithful reproduction of the first edition. González de Barcia’s editorial organization, that is, the mise en livre that characterizes all book design, consisted of a substantial alteration and augmentation of León Pinelo’s original text. For example, while the 1629 edition consisted of 300 quarto pages in one volume, the 1737–8 publication by González de Barcia was a threevolume, folio edition of about 1300 pages. Such was the enormity of González de Barcia’s contribution that soon after its release many scholars in Spain and abroad began to refer to the new edition as the

88 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

‘Biblioteca de Barcia’ or ‘Barcia’s Bibliography’ (in Mayans Epistolario 17:395). Although González de Barcia made these supplements anonymously, he nonetheless announced the changes on the title page of the second edition by stating that his Epítome was ‘Añadido, y Enmendado Nuevamente’ (‘Newly Added and Emended’; see figure 3.1). Therefore, as we reviewed in chapter 1 regarding Barcia’s edition of the Origen de los Indios, readers of the second Epítome edition confronted the scholarship of two bibliographers. And so, in order to begin to review González de Barcia’s work as a bibliographer and, in turn, show how this work reflected his larger Americanist project, we must distinguish González de Barcia’s contributions from those provided by León Pinelo more than one hundred years earlier. One early example of a missed opportunity in recognizing the discrete bibliographical voices in the second edition of the Epítome can be seen in the work of the famous eighteenth-century Mexican historian Francisco Javier Clavijero. After King Charles III (1759–88) expelled the Jesuits from his territories in 1767, Clavijero, the Mexican, Jesuit historian, now living in Rome, wrote a book on the history of Mexico in which, as he stated, he intended to restore (restituir) ‘a su esplendor la verdad [regarding the history of Mexico] ofuscada por una turba increíble de escritores modernos de la América’ (‘to its splendor the truth, which has been muddied by an incredible mob of modern writers on America’; xx). Clavijero began his Ancient History of Mexico (1780) with a bibliographical essay of his own in which he outlined the work of other historians of ancient Mexico throughout the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries. Among the twenty-nine historians discussed for the sixteenth century, Clavijero wrote an extended entry on the famous bishop of Chiapas, Bartolomé de las Casas. The truth regarding Spain’s glory in the New World, as Clavijero knew, suffered from the seemingly indelible blemish of the Black Legend, that is, the negative interpretation of Spanish conquest and colonization of the New World. The writer most associated with this anti-Hispanic discourse was Bartolomé de las Casas. Clavijero praised Las Casas as a ‘venerable prelate’ of the monarchies of Charles V and Philip II. However, Clavijero recognized that Las Casas’s writings in favour of the Indians had been translated into many languages on account of a hatred for the Spanish (xxviii). Clavijero, therefore, attempted to downplay Las Casas’s position by providing a historical context with which to explain Las Casas’s

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

89

Figure 3.1 ‘Title Page.’ Antonio de León Pinelo, Epitome de la bibliotheca oriental, y occidental, nautica, y geografica. Ed. Andrés González de Barcia. Madrid: Francisco Martínez Abad, 1737–8. Courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library.

90 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

defence of the Indians. In a footnote, Clavijero elucidated this polemical position: El erudito León Pinelo aplica a Las Casas lo que cardinal Baronio dice de San Epifanio: Caeterum cond[o]nandum illi, si (quod aliis sanctissimis atque eruditissimis viris saepe accidisse reperitur) dum ardentiore studio in hostes invehitur, vehementiore impetus in contrariam partem actus, lineam videatur aliquantulum veritatis esse transgressus. (xxix, note 1) The erudite León Pinelo says of Las Casas that which Cardinal Baronius said of Saint Epiphanius [of Salamis]: ‘The other thing we must pardon him for is if he seems to have crossed the boundary of truth just a little bit when he is attacking his adversaries with burning zeal, having been driven in the opposite extreme by a burning impulse (a thing which is found to have happened often to both saintly and learned men).

By quoting Cardinal Baronius (the sixteenth-century ecclesiastical historian from Italy) Clavijero attempted to compare Las Casas’s zeal to that of the renowned fourth-century bishop Saint Epiphanius of Salamis on the Island of Cyprus. In his work the Panaríon (or Medicine Chest), Saint Epiphanius reviewed the eighty heresies that had threatened Christianity up to his time (Saltet 394). Cardinal Baronius implied that, although he was a dedicated scholar and Christian, Saint Epiphanius at times used undocumented evidence when criticizing certain heresies. Likewise, Clavijero used his footnote to suggest that Las Casas’s passionate desire to protest the treatment of the Indians prevented him from carefully researching the entire collection of available sources. Therefore, Clavijero reminded his reader that to suspect Las Casas of desiring to promote an anti-Hispanic legend would be to slander his virtue (xxix). By using the footnote, Clavijero moved to the margins an issue that required delicate handling. It is not irrelevant to focus great attention on Enlightenment footnotes. As Anthony Grafton has shown, during the eighteenth century, the historical footnote had become a high form of literary art (Grafton Footnote 1). However, the reader of Clavijero’s history will not locate the footnoted extract in the 1629 first edition of León Pinelo’s bibliographical catalogue. In the first edition of the Epítome, León Pinelo provided the following entry for Las Casas’s Brevísima: ‘Brevissima relacion de la destruicion de las Indias, por su libertad, es el tratado, que mas apetecen los estrangeros, y por el todas las obras deste Autor. imp.

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

91

1552.4.’ (‘Brevissima relacion de la destruicion de las Indias, on account of its liberties, is the treatise most coveted by foreigners, and because of it, all the rest of the works of this Author. Published 1552. Quarto’; León Pinelo [1629] 63). In the 1629 first edition, León Pinelo made no mention of Cardinal Baronius. In the second edition of 1737–8, however, González de Barcia added the quote cited by Clavijero (in León Pinelo Epítome [1982] 1:568) (see figure 3.2). Although Clavijero used the quote as an example of the need to do careful research in the pursuit of the truth, he did not recognize that his attribution of the quote to León Pinelo was false. However, Clavijero’s attribution to León Pinelo can be explained as a result of a lack of visually discriminating elements with which to distinguish González de Barcia’s added commentary from León Pinelo’s original entry. While the quote obviously came from the second edition, in order to separate González de Barcia’s work from the original text one must begin by reading both editions simultaneously. Comparing both the 1629 (León Pinelo) and the 1737 (Barcia) editions of the Epítome, therefore, one perceives that the form in which González de Barcia chose to present the original 1629 text and his added commentary in the second edition consisted of intercalating the new with the old in one continuous paragraph. As such, by identifying León Pinelo’s original text we can begin to appreciate the extent of Barcia’s contribution. As can be seen in figure 3.2, the original León Pinelo text accounted for less than five lines of the sixty-line column (including the catchword) on page 568. As a result of highlighting León Pinelo’s text, and thus separating it from González de Barcia’s additions, we see that Clavijero’s attribution of this quote to León Pinelo was wrong. However, of greater importance, this error reveals that González de Barcia’s edition of the bibliographical catalogue, written by a Peruvian, edited by a Spaniard, and quoted by a Mexican exiled in Rome, epitomizes the trans-Atlantic reality of Americanist scholarship. That much of this scholarship was carried out in the margins of historical writing (for example, in footnotes and bibliographies), finally, obliges us to consider the presentation of this material, whose polemical intent reflects discrete social realities from León Pinelo’s time to that of González de Barcia. The matters that motivated León Pinelo to compose his bibliography had ceased to define the social-political situation of González de Barcia’s time. Therefore, to appreciate González de Barcia’s contribution, I turn our attention away from the text, per se, so that we may focus on the writing that surrounds the text, what Gerard Genette has called the

92 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Figure 3.2 Entry for the ‘Brevisima Relacion de la Destruicion de las Indias.’ In Antonio de León Pinelo, Epitome de la bibliotheca oriental, y occidental, nautica, y geografica. Ed. Andrés González de Barcia. Madrid: Francisco Martínez Abad, 1737–8. Volume 2, column 568. Courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library. The initial four and a half lines of the entry, indicated here between brackets, belong to the original 1629 edition by Leon Pinelo. The remaining lines of text were added by González de Barcia to this second edition.

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

93

paratext. As we will see in the remainder of this chapter, González de Barcia’s paratextual commentary in the second edition of León Pinelo’s bibliographical catalogue had implications that went far beyond Clavijero’s mistaken attribution. In what follows, I will outline these implications by, first, reviewing the bibliographical mission designed by González de Barcia and, subsequently, defining his method for inscribing his bibliographical commentary around the original León Pinelo text. 2 González de Barcia’s Edition of the Epítome Originally intended for publication in 1725, the second edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome did not reach the publishing office of Francisco Martínez Abad – one of two publishers González de Barcia employed in the production of his Americanist editions – until 1737. However, when the new edition arrived it had grown to proportions far greater than León Pinelo ever intended. As he stated in his prologue to the 1629 edition, his bibliography, as its name emphasized, made no claims to comprehensiveness: ‘Sale a luz este breve Epitome, como primicia de mis largos estudios, i suma de mayor Biblioteca’ (‘This brief Epitome has been published as the first fruits of my extensive studies, and as a summary of the larger Biblioteca’; León Pinelo [1629] **4r). León Pinelo acknowledged that his brief catalogue necessarily excluded much important information. Nonetheless, his short, threehundred-page bibliographical work satisfied the needs of the Spanish court and went on to elucidate the writings of the Indies to the wider European public.1 The same cannot be said for the editor of the second edition, Andrés González de Barcia. One of the reasons González de Barcia gave for publishing a second edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome was the fact that the reported, larger version of León Pinelo’s Biblioteca was never found. As León Pinelo wrote, this larger bibliography, sino a su perfeccion, ha llegado a estado, que mas necesita tiempo, para salir de los confusos quadernos de la primera nota, que estudio para aumentar el tamaño, que en sus borradores tiene. En ellos se ocultàra hasta darle la ultima forma. (León Pinelo [1629] **5) if not to perfection, has arrived at a point where it needs more time before leaving the confused books of its rough notes, which I study in order to

94 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library augment the size of its drafts. It will hide itself in those books until it can be given its final form.

In two reports (memoriales) written in the 1640s and 1650s León Pinelo continued to mention the larger bibliography. For example, in a report written circa 1641 in which León reviewed his books, treatises, and other works, both printed and in manuscript, he included among his manuscripts a work entitled Biblioteca de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales, Náutica y Geográfica, which he reported as ‘acabada, tendrá 100 pliegos’ (‘finished, it has around 100 sheets’; Discurso sobre la importancia 76). Also, in a report of the same nature written in 1658, just two years before his death, he included an additional reference to the Bibliotheca de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales. On this occasion he wrote: ‘tendrá cien pliegos, de que es sacado parte del Epítome’ (‘it has around one hundred sheets, from which the Epítome is taken in part’; 82). León Pinelo seemed to suggest that the larger bibliography existed in manuscript and that it was ready to come out of the ‘confusos quadernos’ that had previously contained it in order to be printed. Whether León Pinelo’s larger catalogue exists or not remains to be discovered. However, in the preface to the second edition of the Epítome, González de Barcia expressed his dismay at the apparent loss of León Pinelo’s larger bibliography: ‘Esta Obra maior, que no falta quien diga haverla acabado, (i en el continuo trabajo del Autor, es verisimil) no han podido descubrir las mas eficaces diligencias’ (‘This larger Work, for which there is no lack of people who will say that he had finished it, [and with the continual work of the Author, it is likely], even the most efficacious diligence has not been able to discover it’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in León Pinelo Epítome [1982] 1:¶¶¶¶¶¶¶r). As late as 1736, González de Barcia lamented his inability to uncover this work. For example, in a personal letter to the Portuguese academician Francisco de Almeida (1702–55) González de Barcia stated: ‘y de las obras de Leon Pinelo que aunque en las partes que se cita afirma estaba escribiendo la Bibliotheca, de que fue Epítome el que imprimio, nunca he podido encontrarle’ (‘and regarding the works of León Pinelo, although in the places where he cites himself he affirms to have been writing the Biblioteca, from which came the Epitome that he published, I have never been able to find it’; in Almeida, 21 Oct. 1736).2 Of all the books and manuscripts in González de Barcia’s personal library, a total that included thousands of printed books and numerous

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

95

manuscripts (de Andrés 815), this important bibliography never formed part of the collection. González de Barcia’s inability to locate this larger bibliography, however, constituted only one of three factors he mentioned in order to explain why he decided to edit the Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental i Occidental, Náutica i Geográfica. Returning our attention to the preface of the second edition, we may observe that González de Barcia further explained the rationale that motivated his bibliographical mission: ‘La perdida de la esperança de [hallar la Bibliotheca mayor de León Pinelo], los pocos exemplares, que permanecen en España, del Epitome, i el genio de el tiempo, instaron à su segunda impresion’ (‘The loss of hope in [finding León Pinelo’s larger Bibliotheca], the few copies that remain in Spain of the Epitome, and the spirit of the times compelled its second printing’; in León Pinelo [1982] ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶r–v). As we have seen, González de Barcia lost hope in finding the original manuscript to León Pinelo’s larger catalogue. The second factor that he claimed compelled him to publish his edition of the Epítome related to the scarcity of copies in Spain of León Pinelo’s bibliographical repertory. If, like González de Barcia’s other scholarly editions, the Epítome were to provide a great service to the intellectuals of Spain interested in studying the history of Spanish colonization of the Indies, a new edition would need to be printed. González de Barcia decided to edit the volume himself and intended to publish it as part of his edition of Antonio de Herrera’s Historia general de los hechos de los castellanos (Madrid, 1601–15), published in five volumes between the years 1725 and 1730. However, due to the new bibliographical information uncovered while preparing the Herrera edition, González de Barcia decided to postpone the Epítome (‘Advertencia al lector’ in Herrera [1730], vol. 1). Twelve years passed before the Epítome finally was printed. During those years, in addition to the Herrera edition, González de Barcia published editions of Torquemada’s Monarchia Indiana (Seville, 1615) in 1725; Gregorio Garcia’s Origen de los Indios (Valencia, 1607) in 1729; and Ercilla y Zuñiga’s La Araucana (Part 1: Madrid, 1569; Part 2: Madrid, 1578; Part 3: Madrid, 1589) in 1733–5, among others. As noted, the 1737–8 Epítome was the last Americanist work to whose re-publication González de Barcia dedicated himself.3 In this way, it offers a unique perspective from which to evaluate his Americanist editorial chronology. González de Barcia’s third reason for editing León Pinelo’s bibliographical repertory dealt with what he called the spirit of the times

96 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

(‘genio de el tiempo’). In the preface cited above, when González de Barcia spoke of this concept he provided a numerical reference to a footnote. This note, written in Latin, sought to clarify this somewhat vague concept: ‘Idem, de aliis agens, dict. cap. 5 §19 in fine, ait: Sed hic Genius est saeculi maiori cum adplausu tales recipiuntur, quam qui ad veram ducunt eruditionem’ (‘Same author, on another matter, same book, chapter 5, section 19, at the end, he said: But this is the Spirit of the age, such [works] are received with greater applause, than those kinds [of works] leading to true knowledge’; (‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in León Pinelo, Epítome [1982] 1: ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶v, note 15). González de Barcia indicated that this quote came from the Introductio in Notitiam Rei Litterariae et vsvm bibliotecarum, written by the Protestant librarian Burkhard Golthelf Struve (1671–1738) and re-published at Jena in 1715. As the historian Jonathan Israel states, Struve’s vision and energy during his years as librarian there (1697–1704), ‘made possible the ambitious restructuring and expansion which transformed Jena’s library into a renowned public collection drawing scholars from across Protestant Europe’ (Radical Enlightenment 130). Although working in Protestant Germany, Struve’s ideas on the art of bibliography influenced the Catholic González de Barcia. The work is cited often in his prologue, and it offers an important clue to González de Barcia’s understanding of the Zeitgeist that influenced his own editorial work. Reviewing the context in which this idea was originally presented in Struve’s study will clarify González de Barcia’s appreciation of its relevance in his edition of the Epítome. González de Barcia excerpted Struve’s remarks from section nineteen of the fifth chapter of the Introductio, entitled ‘On the value of libraries’ (De usu bibliothecarum). Reading this quote in the original context in which Struve presented it, that is, returning our attention to his Introductio (‘chapter 5, section 19, near the end,’ as Barcia indicated), allows us to observe how González de Barcia might have understood these ideas. In this section Struve emphasized that titles often fail to relate adequately the information contained in the work itself: ‘Speciosi saepe sunt spriptores in titulis, rariores in tractandu’ (‘Authors are often brilliant in their titles, however they are rarely so in their treatment of the subject’; 231). Struve noted that some writers dealt carelessly with their material, while others intentionally wander from their theme. In addition, he criticized and provided examples of those works that led students away from true education (231). These unscholarly works, as Struve concluded, were unbefitting the good

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

97

Christian. However, Struve acknowledged the abundance of such works being produced by some of his contemporaries, and, in so doing, presented the idea that would influence González de Barcia: ‘Hi enim Christianum hominen non decent. Sed hic genius est seculi, maiori cum adplausu tales recipiuntur, quam qui ad veram ducunt eruditionem’ (‘However, these works are not suitable to Christian Men. But this is the Spirit of the age, such [works] are received with greater applause, than those kinds [of works] leading to true knowledge’; 234). González de Barcia’s use of Struve’s section on writers of merit clearly indicated that he not only read Struve’s work but valued his ideas and suggestions. González de Barcia too was interested in putting on display true knowledge about Spain. He was aware, however, that all over Europe new titles were being published that could lead astray any serious scholar. In his preface, González de Barcia clarified this point: i cada dia en diversas marcas, en diferentes Ciudades se repiten sumarios Diarios, ò Efemerides, con Titulos especiosos de Reinos, Provincias, Villas Literatas, i aùn de los mismos escritos de Autores, ai Bibliothecas singulares ... i crecerà esta especie de Libros; porque ia se ha hecho ganancia de la curiosidad, con perdida del conocimiento de las Facultades, i Ciencias, empleando el tiempo en Resumenes, ò Titulos de Libros que traen maior daño à los ignorantes, que vtilidad à los Eruditos. (‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in León Pinelo, Epítome [1982] 1: ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶v) And every day in diverse domains and in different Cities Journals, or Periodicals, repeat summaries with specious Titles from Kingdoms, Provinces, Literary Groups, and there are singular Catalogues even of the very writings of Authors ... And this species of Book will continue to grow: because curiosity has already made gains (at the expense of knowledge of the Faculties and Sciences) by spending time writing abstracts or Titles of Books, which do greater damage to the ignorant than service to the Learned.

González de Barcia desired to confront what he considered to be the specious quality of many of the works, published throughout Europe, that served only to add to the confusion and ignorance already damaging the ability of scholars to truly understand the facts regarding Spain’s involvement in the New World. The Epítome, of course, would serve to counter this trend: ‘pero en ninguno [i.e., en nungún libro]

98 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

puede consumirse menos, que en este Epitome’ (‘but in no other [book] can one benefit more than in this Epítome’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in León Pinelo [1982] 1: ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶v). González de Barcia claimed that the treatment of the material in his bibliography was worthy of the most serious intellectuals. He hoped, moreover, that by beginning their research with his catalogue he might profoundly influence the direction their studies would take. 3 Acknowledging Europe’s Debt to Spanish Colonial Historiography Scholars like González de Barcia, we might say, constituted another manifestation of Struve’s Zeitgeist: one that attempted to lead great men to true knowledge. This spirit indeed characterized much of the community of scholars that inhabited the Republic of Letters during the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. These men, like González de Barcia, were concerned with bringing order to the body of knowledge being accumulated during the Renaissance. This job had special implications for Spain. As Antonio Mestre points out, the defence and praise of Spanish history counted as one of the most important pursuits writers could undertake (‘La imagen’ 49). The urgency these Spanish historians must have felt to publish their respective apologias is attested to by the fact that European scholars – at least those in France, England, and Holland – held the intellectual capabilities of Spaniards in low regard. An example included in the Encyclopédie métodique illustrated this point. Questions raised in an article written by Masson de Morvilliers enraged scholars of Spain: ‘Que doit-on à l’Espagne? Et depuis deux siècles, depuis quatre, depuis dix, qu’a’t’elle fait pour l’Europe?’ (‘What do we owe Spain? And in the past two centuries, the past four, the past ten, what has she done for Europe?’; quoted in Mestre ‘La imagen’ 68). By the end of the eighteenth century, Spanish intellectuals such as Juan Pablo Forner (1756– 97), one of Spain’s most brilliant polemicists, responded ardently to this national rebuke. In the early decades of this century, however, Andrés González de Barcia used his re-publication of León Pinelo’s bibliographical catalogue as a venue in which to offer his rebuttal of the claims made by scholars who participated in what he could only consider a climate of anti-intellectualism. González de Barcia attributed this attitude to a lack of truthful information about Spanish history. For example, a repeated point of conten-

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

99

tion consisted of the use of the name America to refer to the lands that Columbus called las Indias. According to González de Barcia, this basic error in designation was commonly accepted by scholars abroad. When discussing this point, he reminded his readers of what he considered to be the duty of every scholar: como si la primera Obra de la Sabiduria, i el Juicio, no fuese patrocinar la verdad, i defenderla, i no governar sus conceptos, por las vulgaridades originadas de ignorantes, ò Malevolos Ladrones de las Glorias agenas. (In León Pinelo [1982] 1:573) As though the first Work of Wisdom and Reason was not that of supporting the truth, and defending it, and not governing its concepts by the vulgarities dreamed up by the ignorant or Malevolent Thieves of the Glories of others.

To consent to the use of the name of America on maps equalled tolerating mediocre standards of scholarship. As such, to utilize this name was to accept a falsity that ‘jamàs serà impertinencia manifestarla, antes serà floxedad consentirla’ (‘it will never be impertinent to reveal; instead, it will be slothful to consent to it’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1:574). González de Barcia would not tolerate what he considered to be slothfulness or laziness ( floxedad) in matters of historical scholarship on Spain. He desired to remind his readers that Spain’s discovery, conquest, and colonization of the Indies constituted a contribution of incomparable historical and economic value to Europe. Likewise, Spanish historiography related to these endeavours deserved canonical pride of place in all academic inquiries. In his edition of the Epítome, González de Barcia emphasized what he saw as the dangers of superficial scholarship to the Republic of Letters: que verdaderamente son indecorosos insultos contra la Republica de las Letras, i que la destruien, en lugar de aumentarla; porque de improperios graciosos, entiende solo el vulgo de los ignorantes, i con ellos se burlan de lo que no entienden, ni procurar entender. (‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in León Pinelo [1982] 1: ¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶v) For these are truly indecorous insults against the Republic of Letters, and they destroy it, instead of augmenting it; because the ignorant masses

100 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library only understand off-handed remarks, and on account of them they make fun of what they do not understand, nor try to understand.

González de Barcia tolerated only those whom he considered to be serious scholars, that is, those individuals willing to ascertain the truth by researching the authentic Spanish texts. In this sense, he conformed to the spirit of other Spanish scholars of the period who, as Antonio Mestre wrote, defended Spain’s cultural inheritance by seeking to recognize the traditional and the modern, praising that which deserved merit and criticizing that which did not (‘La imagen’ 50). González de Barcia belonged to this group of Spanish humanists by editing important historical works that served to defend what he identified as ‘la Nacion Española’ (in León Pinelo [1982] 1:569). With his Americanist editions in general, and with the re-publication of León Pinelo’s Epítome in particular, González de Barcia hoped to make obvious to all scholars in the Republic of Letters that Spain enjoyed a rich and vibrant tradition of colonial historiography. González de Barcia joined other Spanish scholars, including luminaries like Gregorio de Mayans (1699–1781), who edited classic texts from Spain’s Golden Age in order to promote Spanish culture. Indeed, Mestre’s comments about the editions prepared by Mayans aptly apply to those of González de Barcia as well: ‘no deja de soprender el calor y entusiasmo con que lucha por hacer público y dar a conocer, tanto en España como en el extranjero, los que [Mayans] considera valores intelectuales hispanos’ (‘one does not cease to be amazed by the ardour and enthusiasm with which [Mayans] struggled to publicize and make known, both in Spain as well as abroad, those things that he considered to be Hispanic intellectual values’; ‘La imagen’ 59). The principal vehicle for this diffusion was the scholarly edition. As such, these publications took on a very important role in the defence of Spain’s contribution to Europe by presenting to scholars of the Republic of Letters what these Spanish intellectuals considered to be Spain’s authentic cultural glories (ibid.). While Mayans’s biography on Cervantes, Vida de Miguel de Cervantes (1737), inaugurated Cervantes studies for future generations of scholars (Mestre ‘Prólogo’ xcii), González de Barcia, with his numerous Americanist editions, provided the initial foundation for the study of the New World. Consequently, during the eighteenth century Spanish editions meant more to their respective editors than simply improved access to information for their readers. They also conveyed political messages regarding Spain’s cultural his-

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

101

tory. As we will see, González de Barcia’s edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome engaged readers on similar levels. The second edition of the Epítome addressed both political and scholarly concerns. While the preface (i.e., the ‘Proemio a esta segunda impression’) dealt with issues of interest to the scholarly audience, the dedication to Felipe V (i.e., ‘Al catolico y poderosisimo monarca don Felipe V,’ hereafter ‘Al catolico’) displayed González de Barcia’s political agenda at work. The dedication recounted the creation of the royal library, the Biblioteca Real (today, Biblioteca Nacional), portraying this construction as an act endowed with great heroism. By creating this ‘museum,’ González de Barcia argued that the king had won the battle against envy: ‘el maior de los monstros, el Daño mas perjudicial’ (‘the greatest of the monsters, the most prejudicial Evil’; ‘Al catolico’ in León Pinelo [1982] 1:[1r]). Furthermore, Barcia praised the creation of what he saw as this important monument to and for scholarship: ‘[C]olmò V. Mag. los triunfos, que destinò la Omnipotencia à su glorioso Espiritu de estableciendo Numerosa, Esquisita, i Apreciable, publica Bibliotheca, en su Real Corte’ (‘Your Majesty surpassed the triumphs that the Almighty had destined to your glorious Spirit by founding a Voluminous, Exquisite, and Estimable public Library in your Royal Court’; ‘Al catolico’ in León Pinelo [1982] 1:[1r–v]). However, despite the scholarly ideal inherent in the so-called ‘glorious spirit’ of the library, the Biblioteca Real had a very serious political foundation. As Carmen Martín Gaïte pointed out in her work on Melchor de Macanaz (1670–1760), the archbishop of Valencia and arch-rival to Macanaz, Antonio Folc de Cardona, was a man of great wealth who owned a considerable collection of books (90). However, during the War of Spanish Succession, Folc de Cardona supported the Habsburg rival to Felipe V’s throne, Archduke Charles III (later Charles VI of Germany). When the Bourbon monarch was firmly placed on the Spanish throne, the archbishop had to flee the country.4 As a result, Martín Gaïte notes, Macanaz brought the 2000 volumes that constituted the archbishop’s library to Madrid, forming with them the nucleus of the collection housed at the Royal Library (148). The library, consequently, symbolized more than just increased access to books and manuscripts, as both Macanaz and González de Barcia well knew. The Librería Real utilized the spoils of war in order to provide the foundations for a greater Spanish nation. As a result, the creation of the library, as well as González de Barcia’s dedication to the king in praise of its creation, concerned highly political events.

102 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

If, on the one hand, the War of Spanish Succession provided a cache of volumes with which to furnish the Librería Real, on the other hand, throughout Europe it provided scholars with added incentive to intensify the promotion of the Spanish Black Legend. Indeed, in the decade leading up to the death, in 1700, of Charles II, seven editions of Las Casas’s Brevísima relación de la destrucción de las Indias – the book most commonly associated with the promotion of the Spanish Black Legend – were printed (Stiffoni ‘Historiografía y política’ 138n14). To confront this, Spanish scholars writing in the first half of the eighteenth century worked in a vein of critical historiography, which implied a constant reference to source citation (Mestre ‘Historiografía’ 817). Using the marginal note, González de Barcia displayed his awareness of the importance of documented scholarship. For example, his six-page Dedicacion to Philip V included thirty-eight scholarly notes (see figure 3.3). Indeed, presented in columns side by side, the text and the notes stand out as near equals in terms of the space needed to print them. Consequently, the political dimensions of his writing must be set in the context of this scholarship. Solid references to scholarly claims aided the research of the members of what was known by González de Barcia and other scholars as the Republic of Letters. Anne Goldgar has characterized the Republic of Letters as a nonbordered republic where scholars could travel from one so-called ‘cabinet of the curious’ (libraries or museums) to another in the pursuit of knowledge (2). Ideally, the pursuit of knowledge was a pure scholarly enterprise, not embedded in political prejudices. As Goldgar notes, cities with poor libraries or towns without good scholars were considered ‘infertile in the Curiosities, & in curious people’ (13). Curious men satisfied their thirst for knowledge via recourse to the scholarly cabinet. In his aprobación to the second edition of the Epítome, Gerónimo Pardo indicated that this understanding of scholarship existed in González de Barcia’s circles: No hallo en [el Epítome] cosa alguna, que pueda detener, ò impedir el erudito deseo, de quien sin detenerle lo excesivo de los gastos, ni las igualmente trabajosas, que indispensables tarèas, enriquece aora, como ha hecho otras veces, las Librerias de los Hombres curiosos. (In León Pinelo [1982] 1: ¶¶¶2r) I find nothing in [the Epítome] that might detain or impede the erudite desire of he who, undeterred by the excessive costs or the equally labori-

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

103

ous but indispensable work, now enriches, as he has at other times, the Libraries of curious Men.

This reference to González de Barcia’s editorial work highlights the idea that he undertook his numerous editions in order to provide a useful service to fellow scholars. As Álvarez de Miranda has emphasized, the principle of usefulness (utilidad) constituted one of the fundamental tenets of the Enlightenment agenda in Spain (Palabras e ideas 301). Usefulness to curious scholars: González de Barcia the editor was providing an important service at home and, potentially, abroad. As such, his bibliographical mission was to create an updated work of the León Pinelo Epítome that would influence both the intellectual understanding as well as the political debate of the individuals who belonged to the international, non-bordered, scholarly world known as the Republic of Letters. 4 Politics of Scholarship in the Republic of Letters González de Barcia was also a member of the Council of Castile from December 1714, when Melchor de Macanaz appointed him, until June 1715, when, after Macanaz’s fall from grace, González de Barcia was relieved of his new responsibilities (Fayard ‘La tentative’ 275–7). However, he maintained his association with this and other councils throughout the entirety of Philip V’s reign. Indeed, after more than twenty years in exile, the once powerful Melchor de Macanaz now wrote to González de Barcia – who, in 1739, was preparing his new edition of Nicolás Antonio’s Bibliotheca Hispana – to ask that an extract of his bio-bibliography be granted permission from the king for inclusion therein (Maldonado de Guevara 155). While many politicians and intellectuals came and went, González de Barcia’s relationship with the monarchy remained strong throughout the early decades of the 1700s. For this reason, González de Barcia would have been aware of the prejudice of other scholars against a member of the political establishment claiming status as a scholar. As Goldgar states, although there is no easy definition of what the Republic of Letters was, a key feature related to the existence of one specific communal standard: ‘[T]he scholarly world considered itself to be in some ways separate from the rest of society. Seventeenth- and eighteenth-century scholars felt that, at least in the academic realm, they were not subject to the norms and values of the wider society’ (3). Through the use of pseudonyms and

104 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Figure 3.3 ‘Al catolico y poderosisimo monarca don Filipe V.’ In Antonio de León Pinelo, Epitome de la bibliotheca oriental, y occidental, nautica, y geografica. Ed. Andrés González de Barcia. Madrid: Francisco Martínez Abad, 1737–8. Volume 1. Courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library.

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

105

by refraining from adding his name to the title pages of his works, González de Barcia perhaps attempted to avoid this prejudice. Nonetheless, his identity was no secret, as the editors of the famous scholarly journal of arts and sciences, commonly known as the Mémoires de Trévoux, pointed out in their 1738 article on González de Barcia’s Ensayo Cronológico: ‘L’Auteur, qui tient un rang distingué en Espagne, a jugé à propos de se déguiser sous le nom de Gabriel de Cardenas z cano; mais toute l’Espagne sçait qu’il est de D. André González de Barcia’ (‘The Author, who is of distinguished rank in Spain, has deemed it appropriate to disguise himself under the name of Gabriel de Cardenas; but all of Spain knows that the work is by Don Andrés González de Barcia’; ‘Article XLI. Ensayo Chronologico’ [April 1738] 631–2). Although all Spain knew his true identity, González de Barcia maintained the use of pseudonyms with devotion. Indeed, it was not until 1749, six years after his death, that a compilation of a selection of his editions bore his name on the title: Historiadores Primitivos De las Indias occidentales, que juntò, traduxo en parte, y sacò à luz, ilustrados con eruditas Notas, y copiosos Indices, El Ilustrissimo Señor D. Andrés Gonzalez Barcia, Del Consejo, y camara de S. M. Madrid, 1749. However, although González de Barcia might have attempted to avoid scholarly prejudice by using pseudonyms, his choice of material could not have been more political. As someone identified with the courts of the Spanish royal monarchy, González de Barcia understood the ultimate goal of Spanish diplomacy as that of maintaining the integrity of the New World empire (Béthencourt 5). Still, as someone who participated in the Republic of Letters, he knew the ultimate goal of scholarship was to further knowledge in the so-called learned world: ‘one world, international and nondenominational, rising above the petty concerns of church and state. Or so, at least, scholars claimed’ (Goldgar 3). González de Barcia’s use of the Protestant Struve’s work manifests this idea vis-à-vis the Church. However, his decision to edit rare and out-of-print texts and manuscripts that spanned the period from Columbus’s voyages through the conquest of Mexico, Peru, and Río de la Plata in fact combined political and scholarly considerations.5 Consequently, González de Barcia’s editions capture the pulse of Spanish historiography at a time when, as Henry Kamen notes, the accession of the Bourbons to the Spanish throne, in 1700, gave rise to the hopes of the ruling circles of Madrid that the rule of Felipe V ‘would restore the greatness and virtue of a decaying world power, so as to give them a new lease on history’ (‘Melchor de Macanaz’ 699).

106 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

This ‘new lease,’ however, did not arrive overnight. Indeed, one is constantly overwhelmed by what Béthencourt has labelled the ‘huge leap’ taken by Spanish political and intellectual culture between the reign of Charles II, which ended in 1700, and that of Charles III, which began in 1759 (Béthencourt 2–3). However, his rapid growth was not unique to Spain. As Jonathan Israel notes, in terms of the study of the Enlightenment period in Europe, ‘there is a case for arguing that the most crucial developments were already over by the middle of the eighteenth century’ (Radical Enlightenment 6). González de Barcia’s contribution to this progress offers great insight into the advancements in the historiography on the Spanish Indies during this period. As we have seen, however, to discuss González de Barcia’s contribution requires coming to terms with the mode in which this contribution was made. Using the original text as a base, González de Barcia added his own commentary in order to update the information with arguments pertinent to the new scholarly and political realities of eighteenth-century Spain. Again, an analysis of what Gérard Genette has called the paratext helps elucidate these additions. The paratext created by González de Barcia as editor refers to that added or emended information found in his editions that serves to distinguish them from the originals. The paratext created by González de Barcia for the edition of the Epítome served to mediate and present great works of Spanish history to a republic of scholars very interested in these matters. However, these paratextual accompaniments were not only politically motivated; they also pertained to González de Barcia’s scholarly world. The case of the marginal note offers some initial guidance in explaining the dual role (at once scholarly and political) of the paratext. The primary aim of the Enlightenment footnote or marginal note was to mediate: the original text filtered through the notes offered the reader a unique and sometimes controversial text. For example, the 1715 edition by Pierre Coste (1668–1747) of his translation of John Locke’s The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695) and Coste’s 1735 edition of his translation of Locke’s Essay concerning Human Understanding (1689) offer concrete examples of the controversial application of this paratextual apparatus. As Anne Goldgar remarks, ‘without opposing Locke’s reasoning, Coste felt free to enlighten the public by publishing a few of his own opinions in his footnotes’ (126). Indeed, as Goldgar goes on to state, because of the notes, ‘the implication was that Locke’s books were not completely Locke’s. In some ways they were now Coste’s. They certainly provided Coste with a forum for publishing his

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

107

own ideas on the matters Locke discussed’ (129). Like Coste’s footnote, González de Barcia’s commentary mediated between the bibliographical compilation and the reader of bibliography, providing the Spanish editor an opportunity to present his own views regarding the scholarly issues under discussion. In this way, even without signing his name to the additions, González de Barcia knew that scholars would identify his contribution. In a letter to Francisco Almeida, González de Barcia made this claim explicitely by noting that although he had not given his name for the additions to the Origen de los Indios, they nonetheless had been ‘mui alabadas y [en] especial de los P.P. Feijoó y Sarmiento aunque si las viessen â fondo no lo hicieran ni tanta merced como V.S. se sirve hacerme’ (‘very praised, and especially by Fathers Feijoó and Sarmiento, although if they were to see them closely they would not offer as much praise as you have given me’; Almeida, 8 Feb. 1737).6 Although González de Barcia refrained from taking credit for his additions, he recognized that his were the ones that Feijóo, Sarmiento, and Almeida had praised, as the pronoun ‘me’ clearly indicates. 5 Constructing the Bibliographical Paratext As Genette argues, no text can exist without paratext; however, paratexts do exist without texts: ‘for example, disappeared or aborted works of which we only know the title ... These titles alone are enough to make men dream’ (‘Introduction’ 263). That an individual title provides paratextual information is an important consideration, especially when dealing with a bibliographical repertory like the Epítome. Of course, bibliographers have described this attribute for many years. Henry Harrisse, for example, made a similar point about bibliography’s influence on the scholar: ‘A bibliography is not necessarily a list of books contained in a certain library; but even when limited by this modest definition, it yet possesses a value which subsists, and is available, long after the books described may have been scattered or destroyed. A mere title frequently supplies the historian with the link which alone can impart a logical connection to this work’ (vi). By compiling many new titles in his edition of the bibliography, González de Barcia endeavoured to create a scholarly work with political implications. However, attuned to the scholarly misuse of titles, he did not effect these implications with titles alone. Louis Noël Malclès identifies the following, basic bibliographical information included in most references: (1) the entry, which consists

108 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

of the author’s name, the title of the book, and its place and date of publication; and (2) annotations, abstracts, descriptive notes, or critical commentaries that accompany this entry (1). For example, in the following reference on López de Gómara, taken from the González de Barcia edition of the Epítome, we can identify two distinct groups of information, each with a unique status: Francisco Lopez de Gomara, Presbytero, Historia General de las Indias, en dos partes, una General, i del Perù, i otra de Nueva España, imp. 1552. fol. 1553. fol. 1554. fol. con Estampas, fol. i en dos Tomos en 4. es Historia libre, i està mandada recoger por Cedula Antigua del Consejo Real de las Indias; pero el Año de 1729. permitiò que se bolviese à imprimir, i se està acabando, 1631 [i.e., 1731]. fol. (In León Pinelo [1982] 1:589) Francisco Lopez de Gomara, Preacher, Historia General de las Indias, in two parts, one General, and on Perú, the other on New Spain, published 1552. Folio. 1553. Folio. 1554. Folio with Engravings, Folio. and in two Volumes in quarto. It is a candid History and it has been ordered seized by an Ancient Warrant from the Royal Council of the Indies. But in the year 1729 it was granted that it may be printed again, and it is nearly completed, 1631 [i.e., 1731]. Folio.

The bibliographical entry serves a purely functional role, giving specific and, for the most part, non-changing information. In this case the entry consists of the author’s name, Francisco López de Gómara; the title of his work, Historia General de las Indias; and dates of publication. Evaluation of this information is based solely on the accuracy of the information: the more accurate, the better the entry. The second part of the reference provides additional information relevant to the specific entry. In this case, the commentary informs the reader that the work was ordered to be withdrawn from public circulation by the Consejo Real de las Indias. However, this commentary is immediately countered with the information that in 1729 Gomara’s history was granted royal permission to be printed again. Had this been the bibliographical compilation of one author, the accompanying commentary might seem awkwardly written, if only for the use of the present progressive in the first comment and the preterit in the second. However, the second edition of the Epítome was the production of León Pinelo and González de Barcia. Unfortunately, González de Barcia did not provide any method, such as the brackets he used in the García edition, with which to distin-

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

109

guish the 1629 text from the 1737–8 additions. As such, it is essential to identify the information each contributed. By identifying the original 1629 León Pinelo text, we now begin to understand the method González de Barcia employed to inscribe his paratextual contribution. Repeating the same entry on López de Gómara now, we may visually discern León Pinelo’s text and González de Barcia’s paratext: Francisco Lopez de Gomara, Presbytero, Historia General de las Indias, en dos partes, una General, i del Perù, i otra de Nueva España, imp. 1552. fol. 1553. fol. 1554. fol. con Estampas, fol. i en dos Tomos en 4. es Historia libre, i està mandada recoger por Cedula Antigua del Consejo Real de las Indias; pero el Año de 1729. permitiò que se bolviese à imprimir, i se està acabando, 1631. fol. (In León Pinelo [1982] 1:589) Francisco Lopez de Gomara, Preacher, Historia General de las Indias, in two parts, one General, and on Perú, and another on New Spain, published 1552. Folio. 1553. Folio. 1554. Folio with Engravings, Folio. and in two Volumes in quarto. It is a candid History and it has been ordered seized by an Ancient Warrant from the Royal Council of the Indies. But in the year 1729 it was granted that it may be printed again, and it is nearly completed, 1631. Folio.

What we glimpsed loosely with the earlier example regarding Clavigero’s reading of the second edition here becomes apparent. González de Barcia blended or intercalated new information into the original León Pinelo reference (underlined). The new, accompanying commentary (not underlined) belongs to González de Barcia’s specific time, to a contemporary public. It exists on the fringe of the 1629 León Pinelo text. González de Barcia’s paratext mediates between the earlyeighteenth-century reader and León Pinelo’s bibliographic entry data and original commentary. Perhaps, as León Pinelo feared, an augmented Epítome, as connotes the oxymoron, is too confusing to be useful. A later bibliographer certainly thought as much. In his introduction to his Bibliotheca Americana (1807), the Ecuadorean bibliographer Antonio de Alcedo (1735–1812) stated that González de Barcia hizo un cuerpo monstruoso en tres volúmenes en folio, y tan lleno de errores en los nombres y apellidos de los autores, en los títulos de las

110 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library obras y en los años y lugares que se imprimieron, que o ya fuese por defecto de los copiantes o del impresor, apenas hay artículo sin yerro, por cuya razón es de poquísima utilidad y no merece el titulo que tiene. (my emphasis) (5) made a monstrous body in three folio volumes, and so full of errors in the names and surnames of the authors, in the titles of the works and in the years and places where they were published that either due to a defect of the copyist or of the printer, there is barely one entry without an error. For this reason it is of little use and it does not deserve the title it has.

On the level of the bibliographical entry, Alcedo made a convincing point. Many times the bibliographical information González de Barcia provided in the entry was incorrect.7 Nonetheless, González de Barcia cannot be dismissed so easily. Even on the level of bibliography, Obediah Rich commented in his Bibliotheca Americana Nova (1835–46) that the greatest value of González de Barcia’s Biblioteca Occidental ‘consists in the notices it gives of Spanish manuscripts on the subject [of America]’ (55). Rich emphasized at least one important aspect of González de Barcia’s Epítome, even if Alcedo might have hoped that this ‘monster’ never had escaped what León Pinelo called ‘los confusos quadernos.’ On the level of literary scholarship, however, I will suggest that if confusion does exist in the second edition of the Epítome, it is best understood by recurring to the Latin root meaning of the verb to confuse: confundere, to blend together.8 By confusing or intercalating himself with the bibliography written by León Pinelo, González de Barcia was able to bend the rules of the Republic of Letters so that his political commentary in defence of the Spanish nation could coexist with his interest in participating in the world of scholarship. Indeed, it was the ability to participate in the latter that enabled him to contribute to the defence of Spain. As a result, it is up to the scholar of González de Barcia to identify and analyse the paratext. In the García edition, the brackets separating González de Barcia’s additions from the original text make this analysis less onerous. The lack of any such feature in the Epítome converts the identification of the paratext into a complex endeavour. However, this task proves as insightful as it is challenging. Indeed, as Malclès knew, ‘interpreting the development of bibliography from the 15th century to our own time is obviously necessary. Carried out in accor-

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

111

dance with the methods of archaeology and history, it would be as long and painstakingly exact as it would be exciting and revealing’ (‘Introduction’). This is certainly the case with Andrés González de Barcia. Separating the original León Pinelo text (both entries and commentaries) from those entries and commentaries added by González de Barcia is only part of the work involved in identifying the 1737–8 paratext. It becomes important to cross-reference as much of the new information as possible in order to discern what it might reveal regarding the so-called ‘genio de el tiempo’ that influenced González de Barcia. For example, in the reference to Gómara, cited above, González de Barcia wrote that the Historia general had received in 1729 the necessary permission to be re-published. In his appendix to the Biblioteca Occidental he identified the new, post-1729 edition: ‘Fol. 589. Francisco Lopez de Gomara, Añade al fin: i saliò la nueva impresion en Madrid. 1735’ (in León Pinelo [1982] 1:914v). In fact, this edition was prepared by González de Barcia, and it was included in the posthumous publication of his Historiadores primitivos. Therefore, while he blended his commentary into the Epítome, he also incorporated references to his other scholarly editions The combination of additional scholarly commentary in the second edition, as well as citations of his other scholarly editions, constitute the critical forum (the paratext) in which González de Barcia made his ideas public.9 González de Barcia’s paratext enabled him to utilize the rules of scholarship of the Republic of Letters in order to defend Spain’s very real political interests in the Indies. Returning to the series of bibliographical references related to Fray Bartolomé de las Casas, with which we began this chapter, best illustrates the confluence of the scholarly and political agendas at work in the execution of González de Barcia’s bibliographical mission. 6 The Example of Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas González de Barcia substantially increased the length of León Pinelo’s references on Las Casas. The first reference of the series displays this augmentation with clarity. Again, I will underline the original León Pinelo text: D. Fr. Bartolome de las Casas, ò Casuas, Dominico, Obispo de Chiapa, i por sus Escritos celebrado de los Estrangeros: Paulo Frehero, en el Teatro de los Varones Claros, en Erudicion, part. 1. sect. 3. fol. 163. dice que pasò à las

112 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library Indias, con Fr. Buil; i que alli viò las crueldades de los Españoles, en los Indios, que predicò muchos Sermones, contra su avaricia, en vano, i se bolviò à España, pone algunas Obras mal puestas, i dice muriò el Año de 1555. i que florecia el de 1560. i otros desatinos; los quales autoriça con Geronimo Ghilini, en el Teatro de los Varones Letrados, i con la Bibliotheca de España, de varios Autores, impreso en Frankfurt, que parece la de Escoto, que no concuerdan con lo que afirma, porque este Autor, cantò, siendo moço, la primer Misa, Año de 1510. (Herrera, Decad. 1. lib. 7. cap. 12. fol. 195.) i 17. Años antes no havia de predicar; i el P. Andres Escoto, aunque le nombra en la Bibliotheca Hispana, fol. 230. nada dice de lo que afirma Frehero, sin acordarse con la raçon, i la verdad: no imprimio Libro ninuno; pero de Tratados, que para diversos intentos sacò a luz, en forma de Memoriales, se junta vn cuerpo de sus Obras. (In León Pinelo [1982] 1:566–7) Don Fray Bartolomé de las Casas, or Casuas, Dominican, Bishop of Chiapas, and on account of his writings the most celebrated among Foreigners: Paul Frehero, in the Teatro de los Varones Claros, en Erudicion, part. 1 section. 3, folio. 163. says that he went to the Indies with Father Boil, and that there he saw the cruelties of the Spaniards against the Indians; that he preached many sermons against their avarice, in vain; and he returned to Spain. He alludes to some works incorrectly, and he says that [Las Casas] died in the Year 1555, and that he was thriving in 1560, and other absurdities; all of which he authorizes using Geronimo Ghilini, in the Teatro de los Varones Letrados, and with the Bibliotheca de España, of various Authors, published in Frankfurt (that seems to be Schott’s). Both of which do not agree with what [Las Casas] affirms. Because this Author, sang his first Mass as a lad, in the Year 1510. (Herrera, Decada 1. book. 7. chapter. 12. folio. 195) and 17 Years earlier he would not have preached. And Father Andres Schott, although he names him in the Bibliotheca Hispana, folio 230, says nothing about what Frehero affirms without agreeing with reason and truth: he published no Book; but some Treaties, which for diverse purposes he released to the public, in the form of Memorials, he made a book of the Works.

González de Barcia added almost two-thirds of the information in this initial reference. Not discernable without the underlined sections, the León Pinelo / González de Barcia blend becomes visually obvious thereafter. The importance of this editorial ‘confusion’ or commingling consists of providing González de Barcia with the opportunity to criticize the scholarship of other intellectuals who ‘no concuerdan con lo

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

113

que [las Casas] afirma’ (‘do not agree with what [Las Casas] affirms’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1:566). He focused on the perhaps minor point of when Las Casas gave his first mass in order to cast a shadow on the other claims issued by Schott and Frehero.10 González de Barcia stated that Las Casas ‘cantò, siendo moço, la primera Misa, Año de 1510’ (‘sang his first Mass as a lad, Year of 1510’; ibid.). As Wagner and Parish show, Las Casas himself stated in his Historia de las Indias that he gave his first mass on November 1510 (5). The other bibliographers, therefore, are simply mistaken. As a result, the subordination of citations must change. Frehero ‘authorizes’ (‘autoriça’) his claims by using Ghilini’s Teatro and Schott’s Bibliotheca. González de Barcia, however, utilized Herrera as the source for the 1510 claim. This new source permitted him to conclude his commentary by offering a complete refutation to the scholarship of Frehero: ‘nada dice [Schott] de que afirma Frehero, sin acordarse con la raçon, i la verdad’ (‘[Schott] says nothing about what Frehero affirms without agreeing with reason and truth’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1:566–7). Focusing on a verifiable and discrete historical fact (the date of Las Casas’s first mass), González de Barcia showed that at least three scholars of Europe had failed to ascertain the truth. Furthermore, by utilizing the Herrera edition, González de Barcia provided what he could only have considered the official source needed to ascertain the truth regarding Spain’s most controversial colonial-era figure. However, the fact that the Herrera edition was itself a work edited by González de Barcia serves to highlight González de Barcia’s personal involvement in what, overtly, were objective, scholarly additions to a bibliographical catalogue. As we will see, this confusion of interests became more pronounced as the series of references to Las Casas progressed. The reference on Las Casas’s most infamous treatise best displays this idea of scholarly work being employed for political ends: Brevisima Relacion de la Destruicion de las Indias, por su libertad; es el Tratado que mas apetecen los Estrangeros, i por èl todas las Obras de este Autor, impreso 1552. 4. 1646. 4. Algunos quieren que esta Obra no sea suia, sino es de algun Malevolo, que en Generalidades irreparadas, vertiò su veneno, vestido del trage de zelo de este Varon sigular, como dice el Doct. Don Francisco Antonio Montalvo, en el Juicio de los Verdaderos Tesoros de las Indias, del P. Fr. Juan Melendez, aplaudiendo su dictamen, en quanto, à que falsamente se imputa esta Obra al P. Casas, i hace mencion de su Ori-

114 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library gen, refiriendo, que Monsiur de Luceu, le dijo havia visto en su Casa el Original M. S. del Memorial. (In León Pinelo [1982] 568) Brevisima Relacion de la Destruicion de las Indias, because of its liberties, it is the treatise that foreigners most desire; and because of it, [they desire] all the Works by this Author, published 1552. Quarto. 1646. Quarto. Some believe that this Work is not his but is by some Evildoer, who in irreparable Generalities unleashed his venom under the guise of the zeal of this singular Man, as Doctor Don Francisco Antonio Montalvo, in his Juicio de los Verdaderos Tesoros de las Indias, says about Father Fray Juan Melendez, applauding his opinion, inasmuch as [he claims] one falsely attributes this Work to Father Casas. And he makes reference to its Origin, saying that Mister de Luceu told him he had seen the Original Manuscript of the Memorial in his House.

León Pinelo presented the entry information briefly, followed by his own commentary: ‘es el Tratado que mas apetecen los Estrangeros’ (‘it is the treatise that foreigners most desire’). González de Barcia’s updated commentary added to this idea, stating that Las Casas might not have been the author of the Brevísima.11 Authorizing his claim with Meléndez, González de Barcia promoted the idea that the infamous account was in fact falsely attributed to Las Casas: con nombre del Obispo de Chiapa, corre impreso en todas las Lenguas, para que en todas ellas se maldigan los Españoles, que tan execrandas maldades, como alli se inventan, i se les atribuien, cometieron, en las Conquistas del Nuevo Mundo. (In León Pinelo [1982] 1:568) With the name of the Bishop of Chiapas, it has been printed in all languages, so that all of them can slander the Spanish by noting that such loathsome evils as are invented therein and attributed to them were committed during the Conquest of the New World.

The message is clear: other writers in all languages defame Spain using this Las Casas work. By casting doubt on Las Casas’s authorship of the Brevísima relacion de las destrucción de las Indias, González de Barcia showed that new sources were needed with which to evaluate the Spanish involvement in the Indies. González de Barcia provided the sources with which scholars should investigate Spanish history:

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

115

Vease à Don Juan de Soloçano, del Derecho, i Govierno de las Indias, lib.2. cap. 19. desde el num. 22. i lo que D. Gabriel Daza de Cardenas, dice en el nuevo Proemio, à la Historia de la Florida, del Inca, desde el Verso. Vno escrivia Año de 1541. pues lo que afirma defendiendo à Hernando de Soto, favorece à todos los Conquistadores. (In León Pinelo [1982] 1:569) See Don Juan de Solórzano, on the Rights and Government of the Indies, book 2. chapter 19. from number 22, and that which Don Gabriel Daza de Cardenas says in the new Prologue to the History of La Florida del Inca, from the Line: Vno escrivia Año de 1541. For what he affirms while defending Hernando de Soto favours all of the Conquistadores.

Instead of the Brevísima, González de Barcia suggested that scholars obtain the truthful accounts of the history of the Indies from the works of Juan de Solórzano Pereira and Gabriel Daza de Cárdenas. Although Solórzano’s work De iure indiarum is well known, the importance of the second reference (in editorial, scholarly, political, and paratextual terms) becomes clear when we recall, as we have seen, that Gabriel Daza de Cárdenas was one of the many pseudonyms that González de Barcia used when publishing his own works (Aguilar Piñal 280). Therefore, it is González de Barcia whose defence of Hernando de Soto favours all the conquerors. Ostensibly, González de Barcia provided objective commentary on matters of bibliography while at the same time appealing to scholars to ascertain the truth before making accusations that would damage the historical reputation of the Spanish nation. However, the personal nature of this new bibliographical subordination manifests itself in the fact that he used his own work to support his claims. Obviously, González de Barcia challenged the idealized border between political involvement and scholarly purity. However, with an issue as politically charged as Las Casas’s writings, even someone as careful as González de Barcia found it difficult to remove himself completely from the reader’s purview. The last reference in the bibliographical series on Las Casas exemplifies González de Barcia’s personal role in the 1737–8 edition: El Testamento, y Codicilo, que ofreciò à Felipe II. poco antes de morir, segun Don Nicolàs Antonio. Dialogo del Derecho à las Indias, Interlocutores Senior, i Juvenio, en Latin, i esta es la noticia, que de las Obras de este Autor, he hallado algunas, se entregaron en el Colegio de San Gregorio de

116 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library Valladolid, al Secretario Juan Lopez de Velasco, el qual en virtud de Cedula del Principe Don Felipe III. dada en 29. de Septiembre de 1597. lo entregò al Secretario Juan Ibarra; en cuio nombre los reciviò Pedro Ortes de Velasco, con la asistencia del Lic. Benito Rodriguez Baltodano, del Consejo de Indias, por vna Memoria de Antonio de Herrera; lo qual està Original en la Libreria de Don Andres Gonçales de Barcia; i aunque ai Memoria impresa de Autores de la India Oriental, que nombran al Obispo Casas entre ellos, no escriviò cosa alguna que la tocase, como largamente tratarè en mi Bibliotheca grande. (In León Pinelo [1982] 1:572; my bold emphasis) The Testament and Codicil that he offered to Felipe II shortly before dying, according to Don Nicolás Antonio, Dialogo del Derecho a las Indias, Interlocutores Senior, i Juvenio, in Latin. And this is the notice regarding the Works of this Author. I have found some that were given over at the College of Saint Gregory in Valladolid to the Secretary Juan Lopez de Velasco, who in virtue of the Warrant of Don Felipe III given on 29 September 1597 handed them over to the Secretary Juan Ibarra, in whose name they were received by Pedro Ortes de Velasco, with the assistance of the Licentiate Benito Rodri-guez Baltodano, of the Council of the Indies, as referred in a Memorial by Antonio de Herrera, whose Original is in the Library of Don Andres González de Barcia; and although there is a published Memorial of Authors of the East Indies, which names Bishop Casas among them, he did not write anything that dealt with it, as I will explore in detain in my large Bibliotheca.

This labyrinth of bibliographical reference characterizes González de Barcia’s understanding of his editorial mission. He informed the reader of a new source, first cited by Nicolás Antonio. Furthermore, the complete entry reveals with clarity González de Barcia’s personal role in the political debate. At two points in this long sequence the first-person singular is used. The second use, underlined here so as to distinguish the 1629 text, serves as a pronoun for León Pinelo. However, the first use of the first-person singular, which I have emphasized with bold font, refers to the editor of the second edition, Andrés González de Barcia. Moreover, his relationship to this scholarship is codified toward the end of his commentary by citing the Barcia Library or ‘Libreria de Don Andres Gonçales de Barcia.’ With very little mention of his involvement in the creation of the paratext, González de Barcia blended himself into the text of León Pinelo’s bibliography of the Spanish Indies. Through these commentaries, although Herrera and Solórzano are cited as historical references, the real source is Andrés

The Epítome de la Biblioteca, After

117

González de Barcia. Combining his own scholarship with a defence of Spain, he attempted to influence the scholars of the Republic of Letters. If, however, he declared critical objectivity, he could not escape personal engagement. In this sense, it is perhaps ironic that González de Barcia felt compelled to mention one additional factor relating to the scholarship of Bartolomé de las Casas: El mal teñido zelo del P. Casas, ha desacreditado en el Mundo la Nacion Española, aunque esto solo puede militar con los ignorantes; pues los demàs saben que muchas veces el zelo, mantenido del empeño, i fervor, destruie la Verdad. (In León Pinelo [1982] 1:568) The poorly concealed zeal of Father Casas has discredited the Spanish Nation around the World. However, this can only work with the ignorant. For the rest know that many times zeal, maintained by determination and fervour, destroys the Truth.

In the end, González de Barcia acknowledged that scholarship made the difference. Excessive zeal produced emotional treatises that tended to present too radical a picture of what in fact were multifaceted historical issues. Nonetheless, González de Barcia argued that any intelligent scholar knew better than to accept wild accusations that destroyed truth. Although he attempted to maintain his scholarly objectivity, removing himself from the text through the use of pseudonyms, many times he himself failed to escape the excessive zeal to which this warning attests. The lesson is perhaps one of the most valuable contributions he made to his edition of the Epítome.

4 Andrés González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library and His Edition of Gregorio García’s Origen de los Indios

Como si fueran indices del poder, tanto los muchos Soldados, en los Campos, como los numerosos Libros, en las Bibliotecas. As if they were indices of power: both the many Soldiers in the Fields and the numerous Books in the Libraries. (Juan Rodríguez de León ‘Apologética’ in León Pinelo [1982] 1:¶2r)

In his work Hijos de Madrid ilustres en santidad (1789), Joseph Antonio Álvarez de Baena (1750–1803) provided, in a four-page brief, one of the earliest published studies of Andrés González de Barcia’s life and work. Written nearly fifty years after González de Barcia’s death, Álvarez de Baena’s sketch (one of more than 1600 biographies included in the four-volume catalogue of Madrid’s illustrious men)1 focused primarily on González de Barcia’s scholarly work at the expense of any extended remarks regarding his personal life. Álvarez de Baena, in fact, lamented this inevitable bias of the bibliographical over the biographical. However, he explained that such lacunae in the personal information regarding González de Barcia’s life were unavoidable: Nadie admire que se hable con esta incertidumbre de un sugeto tan reciente, y que tiene en el dia parientes en esta Corte, porque he experimentado en este asunto tanta incuria, ó insensibilidad, aun en aquellas personas que debian procurar con todo desvelo la publicacion de las glorias de sus ascendientes, ó antepasados, que me han negado las corre-

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

119

spondientes noticias, como si les hubiera pedido en préstamo algunas cantidades. (1:106–7) No one should be surprised that I should talk with this uncertainty about a subject so recent and who has family in this Court today. For I have experienced such negligence or insensibility in this matter – even with those persons who should attend with all devotion to the publication of the glories of their ancestors, or forefathers – that they have denied me the corresponding notices as if I were asking them for a loan of great sums.

Álvarez de Baena criticized the descendents of González de Barcia for their failure to make public the glories of their famous family member (‘procurar ... la publicacion de las glorias de sus ascendientes’). For Álvarez de Baena, these achievements needed to be placed within the biographical context of the man who accomplished the work; that is, Álvarez de Baena wanted personal information on González de Barcia and lamented his inability to obtain and provide it for his readers. However, González de Barcia’s nephew and namesake, Doctor don Andrés González de Barcia Carballido (hereafter, Barcia Jr),2 also emphasized the bibliographical over the biographical when praising his illustrious relative. In the dedication Barcia Jr provided to the posthumous publication of his uncle’s edition of Antonio Agustín’s (1517– 86) Dialogo de medallas (1587), Barcia Jr praised the work of both his uncle, Andrés, and his father, Alexandro. Written in 1744, only one year after González de Barcia’s death, Barcia Jr’s dedication illuminated how his uncle’s scholarship, as well as his life, might best be understood: Las heroicas inclinaciones de los ascendientes, canonizadas por el objecto à quien se dirigen, sobre la conveniencia de imitarse, fueron siempre à los posteriores el mas noble empeño de seguirse. En el vastissimo termino de mas de ochenta años, que merecieron servir à V. Mag. hasta los Supremos Consejos de Guerra, Castilla, y Camara Don Alexandro, y Don Andrès Gonzalez de Barcia, mi Padre, y Tio, no encuentro accion que no procurassen elevar à los Reales Pies de V. Mag. y de donde notoriamente no se esparciesse en beneficio comun. A la muerte llegò esta perpetua inclinacion de sus vidas, y esta es la que mi vida debe continuar desde sus muertes. (‘Dedicación’ in Agustín [1744] 1)

120 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library The heroic inclinations of one’s ancestors, canonized by the object to whom they are directed, were always the most noble aim, in terms of the compatibility for imitating them, that their descendents could pursue. In the vast period of more than eighty years during which Don Alexandro and Don Andrés Gonzalez, my Father and Uncle, were privileged to serve Your Majesty [in commissions as high as] the Supreme Councils of War, Castile, and Chamber, I find no action that they fail to elevate to the Royal Feet of Your Majesty, and from where, notoriously, it might continue to spread to the benefit of all. This perpetual inclination of their lives continued until death, and it is the one that my life should continue after their deaths.

The most effective tribute an individual could offer to his elders, opined Barcia Jr, consisted of continuing their works. As much as remembering their personality, carrying on their intellectual activities served to celebrate their legacies. By assuring the posthumous publication of his uncle’s edition of Agustín’s study, Barcia Jr in fact anticipated a response to Álvarez de Baena by literally ‘publishing the glories’ of his illustrious relative. Consequently, while Álvarez de Baena searched for Andrés González de Barcia the man, Barcia Jr emphasized the work that this man accomplished as being the decisive characteristic of his identity. The posthumous publication of González de Barcia’s Historiadores primitivos de las Indias Occidentales, in 1749, provided an additional example of the importance of emphasizing González de Barcia’s intellectual production as a true reflection of his character. As evidence of this association, the publisher included González de Barcia’s legal name on the title page: Historiadores Primitivos De las Indias occidentales, que juntò, traduxo en parte, y sacò à luz, ilustrados con eruditas Notas, y copiosos Indices, El Ilustrissimo Señor D. Andrés Gonzalez Barcia, Del Cosejo, y camara de S. M. Divididos en tres tomos, cuyo contenido se verà en el folio siguiente. (Madrid, 1749). Historiadores Primitivos De las Indias occidentales, that the Most Illustrious Señor Don Andrés Gonzalez Barcia, of the Council and Chamber of His Magesty, brought togther, translated in part, and published, adorned with erudite Notes and copious Indices, in three volumes whose contents will be seen on the following page.

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

121

Referring to him as ‘el ilustrissimo Señor D. Andrés Gonzalez Barcia,’ the title page of the 1749 compilation served to recognize the value of González de Barcia’s scholarship, which included translations into Spanish of some of the histories, erudite notes to illustrate the material, and copious indices to direct readers to those matters deemed most important by the late editor. Ironically, however, in attributing these republications directly to González de Barcia, the publisher reversed the editorial practice – exercised by González de Barcia throughout his entire Americanist project – of either remaining anonymous or using pseudonyms. During the 1730s González de Barcia completed his preparation of the works contained in this three-volume collection of early historians of colonial Spain.3 However, González de Barcia never directly acknowledged his involvement in their production. Likewise, the remaining collection of Americanist works that constitute what can be identified today as the Barcia Library (whose composition serves as the focus of this chapter) never indicated a direct attribution of González de Barcia’s scholarly role. Indeed, in some instances González de Barcia intentionally misled his readers regarding his editorial identity in the Americanist editions. In what follows, I will suggest that González de Barcia’s decision to focus on the library of texts he created, thus eschewing his function in their production, provides the best access to understanding the intellectual project he designed. In doing this, moreover, I hope to show that an appreciation of the biography of the scholar (which he never brought into consideration in his published works) begins with an accurate definition of the library or bibliothecarial space he created (a place he consistently sought to publicize).4 In the first section of this chapter, I will further review the definition of library in an attempt to develop González de Barcia’s understanding of the term. I will illustrate that, in his construction of the library, González de Barcia revealed an awareness that included both the physical location of the library and the library of books and manuscripts that were shelved at that location. In the second section, I will continue to develop González de Barcia’s understanding of the bibliothecarial space he created by focusing on the metaphorical relevance inherent in the conceptualization of the Barcia Library. The pages of the books he edited, like the location of his library, provided González de Barcia with the foundation upon which to arrange the bibliographical references adduced in his marginal commentary. This commentary,

122 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

moreover, reflected González de Barcia’s vision of the ideal book collections for the libraries of any scholar interested in New World studies. In the third section of the chapter, finally, I will review the boundaries of González de Barcia’s Americanist library. I will show that the Barcia Library provided the foundation upon which he could advance his New World project by providing him access to the bibliographical authorities he needed to develop his historical arguments. However, by relying on the bibliothecarial space he created, González de Barcia acknowledged that his work was beholden to the material available to him therein. By defining the limits or boundaries of his library, therefore, we will observe how González de Barcia was subservient to his creation. Throughout this chapter, I will elucidate the fact that González de Barcia’s genius revealed itself in the creation of the book. As such, I am interested in his library as much as in his views. I will focus attention on the paratextual apparatus that permitted González de Barcia to articulate these positions. It is in this creation that the importance and originality of González de Barcia’s vision is best manifested. 1 The Place of the Library 1.1 Defining the Library as Biographical Reflection Walter Benjamin articulated the importance of considering the library as a reflection of the individual who created its collection. In his essay ‘Unpacking My Library,’ Benjamin emphasized the intimate relationship between the ‘genuine collector’ of books and the works themselves, located in his or her personal library. Benjamin claimed that he was such a collector, and he revealed that when discussing his collection with his readers he in fact was speaking only about himself (59). The personal library allowed Benjamin to offer an intimate and, in many ways, autobiographical reflection of its creator. Indeed, Benjamin wrote that ‘the phenomenon of collecting loses its meaning as it loses its personal owner’ (67). Consequently, when Benjamin asked his readers to join him among the piles of volumes in his library, he invited them to enter the personal domain of the ideal bibliophile whose love of books defines and gives meaning to his life. Spanish literature of the Golden Age also produced a character whose passion for literature was so great that it transgressed the walls of his library. The sixth chapter of part one of Miguel de Cervantes’

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

123

Don Quixote de la Mancha – ‘El donoso y grande escrutinio que el cura y el barbero hicieron en la librería de nuestro ingenioso hidalgo’ (‘Of the diverting and important scrutiny which the curate and the barber made in the library of our ingenious gentleman’) – presents the enduring symbol of the library as a place emblematic of its owner and creator. Don Quixote’s library, we are told, contained at least one hundred volumes of large folio works, all elegantly bound, as well as other smaller tomes (Cervantes 130). As the priest and the barber reviewed this collection, deciding the fate of these so-called enchanted works, they revealed the literary interests of the gentleman (Alonso Quijano, el Bueno) who owned the library. To learn why and how don Quijano lost his way, that is, the priest and the barber looked to the library as a place in which to discover the secrets of their friend’s transformation into knight errant (el caballero de la Triste Figura). It is relevant to begin a study of González de Barcia’s intellectual production with these references to the potential of the personal library to provide biographical information. Like Benjamin, who revealed himself through his books, and like the barber and the priest, who attempted to diagnose don Quixote’s malady by reviewing the collection assembled by the knight errant, so too might we begin to expose González de Barcia’s scholarly ambitions by looking at the one creation he always referred to by name: ‘la Libreria del Señor Don Andrès Gonçalez de Barcia, de los Consejos Supremos de Castilla, y Guerra’ (‘the Library of Señor Don Andrés González de Barcia, of the Supreme Councils of Castile and War’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in Torquemada [1725] 1:*r). Throughout his complete editorial project González de Barcia identified his library as the scholarly locus from which his editorial productions emerged. For example, in his introduction to the Ensayo cronológico para la historia general de la Florida, González de Barcia listed the books he considered to be the most important. Of note, he indicated that many of these works could be found in ‘la Libreria del señor d. Andrès Gonçalez de Barcia’ (‘in the Library of señor Don Andrés González de Barcia’; ¶6r). Although he refrained from using his personal name when attributing either editorship or authorship of the works he produced (choosing instead to use the pseudonym Cárdenas), when he referred to his personal library he used his legal name. Indicative of this strategy, in his 1737–8 edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome de la biblioteca, González de Barcia provided the following bibliographical entry regarding his work on Hernán Cortés’s letters: ‘D.

124 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Gabriel de Cardenas, supliò la primera [carta] con las demàs, ... M. S. en la Librería de Barcia’ (‘Don Gabriel de Cardenas added the first [letter] to the others, ... Manuscript in the Barcia Library’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1:598). The close juxtaposition of pseudonym and proper name indicates González de Barcia’s diligence in distinguishing his scholarship from his library. Although he devoted considerable energy to his scholarly work, the personal library or ‘Librería de Barcia’ served as the creation for which González de Barcia wished to receive official praise. As stated previously, I argue that González de Barcia’s intellectual project for New World scholarship consisted of the creation of the colonial Spanish American library. Consequently, he developed a definition of the library (a term that was rendered in eighteenth-century Spanish as both biblioteca and librería) that united three main characteristics: (1) the place of the library, similar to a museum; and, (2) the series of editions, all related and with a specific order, that filled the library’s shelves. Finally, (3) among these editions González de Barcia’s library included the bibliographical catalogue that allowed scholars to move beyond the books and walls of one library. As we saw in the preceding chapters, the bibliographical catalogue was also called a biblioteca. In this chapter, however, I wish to review the other manifestations of the library, that is, as a location and a collection. On the most fundamental level, I use the category of library (instead of archive, for example) because it is the one González de Barcia himself used when referring to his creation.5 As such, a discussion of the library as both place and collection begins with an accurate understanding of the definitions given for the term during the historical period under consideration. This discussion, however, implies negotiating the ambiguities involved with translating the word library from English into the Spanish of eighteenth-century Madrid. The definition for library provided by the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) includes the following primary meaning: ‘A place set apart to contain books for reading, study, or reference’ ([1989] 7:888). This first definition for the term refers to a physical place where books are kept for the purpose of intellectual pursuits. The OED also provides a definition that stresses the collections of books held within this place: ‘Often used in the titles given by publishers to a series or set of books uniform or similar in external appearance, and ostensibly suited for some particular class of readers’ ([1989] 7:888–9). While the first definition refers to the library as a location, the second alludes to the works that fill its shelves. In eighteenth-century Madrid, the term for library was either biblio-

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

125

teca or librería. Both renderings referred to the idea of a place set apart for books, as connoted by the first of the two definitions given by the OED, cited above. For example, in the fourth volume of the Diccionario de Autoridades, the Spanish academicians gave the following definition for librería: ‘La tienda ò paráge donde se venden los Libros. Lat. Bibliotheca. Libraria, ae’ (‘The store or place where Books are sold. Latin Bibliotheca. Libraria, ae’; Real Academia Española [1963] 4:399–400). The first Spanish definition for librería refers, as it continues to do today, to the place of business were books were bought and sold. The term librería, however, was more fluid in eighteenth-century Madrid, as can be seen by the following definition: ‘Se llama assimismo la Bibliotheca que, privadamente y para su uso, tienen las Religiones, Colegios, Professores de las ciencias, y persónas eruditas. Lat. Bibliotheca privata’ (‘It is also referred to as the Biblioteca that, privately, and for their use, Churches, Colleges, Professors of science and erudite people have. Lat. Biblioteca privata’; Real Academia Española [1963] 4:400). As inferred by the Latin derivations provided by the Real Academia to explain the etymology of this word, librería shared the qualities associated with the English words bookstore and library: a place of business and a place of study. In addition to the definition provided for librería, the definition provided for the word biblioteca displayed a broad range of possible meanings. The Diccionario de Autoridades stated the following regarding biblioteca: Nombre Griego, que en su riguroso sentido significa el paráge donde se venden libros; pero aunque en nuestra léngua se suele entender assi alguna vez, mas comunmente se toma por la Libreria que junta algun hombre grande y erudito, y por las que hai en las Comunidades Religiosas, y principalmente por las que son comúnes para el beneficio público, de que hai várias en Europa, y la tiene el Rey nuestro señor en su Real Palácio. (Real Academia Española [1963] 1:602) Noun of Greek origin, which in its rigorous sense means the place where books are sold. But although in our language it is occasionally used in this way, more often it is understood as the Library that some great and erudite Man brings together, such as those found in Religious Communities and, principally, those which are open for the benefit of the public, of which there are various in Europe, and the King our lord has one in his Royal Palace.

126 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Although rarely, if ever, used to refer to a place of business, or bookstore, the Academicians felt compelled to suggest that possibility as an initial meaning. However, the definition quickly moved to the word’s more common meaning of personal library, maintained by an educated man for the purpose of scholarship and study. As these definitions indicate, during this period biblioteca could in many ways act synonymously with librería to define a place where books were kept for the purpose of intellectual pursuits. Moreover, using the verb ‘juntar’ – defined by the Real Academia as ‘[u]nir las cosas entre sì’ (‘to bring things together among themselves’; Real Academia Española [1963] 4:331) – the Diccionario de Autoridades suggested that the term biblioteca could also refer to the books themselves. The academicians emphasized this dual connotation of location and collection implied by the definition for biblioteca: while the library was a place where collections of books were brought together, it was also the books themselves (‘la Libreria que junta algun hombre’). The bipartite understanding of the library as place and collection is borne out by at least one other dictionary from the early Enlightenment period. In the first edition of the Dictionnaire de l’Académie francaise [1694], the following series of definitions were given for the word bibliotheque: ‘Le lieu où l’on tient un grand nombre de Livres ... Il signifie aussi, Les livres mesmes ... On appelle aussi, Bibliotheques, Des recüeils & compilations d’ouvrages de mesme nature’ (‘The place where one has a large number of Books ... It also means the books themselves ... One also calls Bibliotheques those anthologies and compilations of works of the same nature’; ARTFL). The French Academicians revealed their understanding of the word library as a designation of a place for books and a collection of books. As we will see, González de Barcia’s design for his Americanist library considered both the place of the library and the works that formed part of its collection. 1.2 The Library as a Location Throughout his Americanist project, González de Barcia revealed the importance of the library as a location for scholarship by indicating to readers the availability in his personal library of manuscripts referenced in his prefaces, marginal notes, and other paratextual scholia. In his edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome, for example, González de Barcia concluded his discussion of Bartolomé de las Casas’s bibliography

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

127

with a reference to Antonio de Herrera. González de Barcia stated that Herrera, in a manuscript report, provided further documentation on the writings of the bishop of Chiapas. González de Barcia announced the location of this report: ‘lo que està Original en la Libreria de Don Andres Gonçalez de Barcia’ (in León Pinelo [1982] 1:572). Furthermore, on numerous occasions, González de Barcia continued to cite his personal library by saying that certain works of importance could be found ‘en la Libreria de Barcia’ (in León Pinelo [1982] 1:576, 582, 584– 8ff.). Consequently, first and perhaps most importantly, González de Barcia conceived of the library as a place in which a scholar might advance his studies.6 Paula Findlen, whose work on Renaissance museums provides appropriate analytical categories for understanding the relevance of the early Enlightenment library, underlines the importance of the location of scholarship for the cultivation of ideas during the early modern period. As she indicates: ‘The peculiar expansiveness of musaeum allowed it to cross and confuse philosophical categories such as bibliotheca, thesaurus, pandechion, with visual constructs such as studio, casino, cabinet, galleria, and theatrum, creating a rich and complex terminology that described significant aspects of the intellectual and cultural life of early modern Europe’ (Possessing Nature 48–9). An intellectual’s research varied depending on the house of knowledge built for the purpose of conducting investigations. The intellectual edifice used by González de Barcia was his personal library, the Barcia Library or Librería de Barcia. As such, it provided him with a place where he could work and advance his own scholarship through recourse to the bibliographical materials held therein. The use González de Barcia made of his library paralleled in many characteristics that made by scholars of the Renaissance of the museums they entered. A scholar visited a museum, as he would a library, in an attempt to give intellectual coherence to his scholarly agenda. The Diccionario de autoridades provided the following definition for the museum, which serves to indicate further the similarity of the museum and the library in terms of scholarly space: Museo: s. m. El lugar destinado para el estudio de las Ciencias, letras humanas y artes liberales ... Se toma tambien por el lugar en que se guardan varias curiosidades, pertenecientes à las ciencias: como algunos artificios mathematicos, pinturas extraordinarias, medallas antiguas, &c. (Real Academia Española [1963] 4:636)

128 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library Museum: singular, masculine. The place designated for the study of the Sciences, humanist writings and liberal arts ... It is understood also as the place in which various curiosities, pertinent to science, are kept: such as some mathematical devices, extraordinary paintings, ancient medallions, et cetera.

In its primary sense, the museo, like the librería and biblioteca, indicated a location of scholarship where intellectual inquiry and contemplation occurred. Using these places of study, the scholar could advance his work. However, on at least one level, the library performed a more fundamental role. Contemplation required objects of thought. As such, no museum was complete without a collection of books. Where artefacts were lacking, books supplied the scholar with sufficient material with which to further his studies. As illustrative of this point, Findlen refers to a private letter Giacomo Scafili wrote to the Jesuit polymath Athanasius Kircher (1602–80) upon receipt of the latter’s book. As Scafili wrote: ‘[E]ven if there were nothing else in the [museum] save for this lone book, it could rightly be called the room of the Muses (stanza delle Muse) because the book contains them all’ (in Findlen ‘The Museum’ 60). Scafili’s remarks reveal that he did not think his museum merited such a name until it counted Kircher’s Musurgia (Rome, 1650) among its collections. As this suggests, from the vast terrain of available materials upon which to base arguments of fact, scholars utilized the concept of the library to bring coherency to their investigations and focus to their studies. González de Barcia entered his library to find reprieve from the quotidian burdens of political life. The library provided him the space needed to develop his ideas. However, González de Barcia was not the first nor even the most famous scholar who retreated to the library in order to develop his work. As Adi Ophir writes, Michel de Montaigne’s search for his ‘self,’ the subject to which he dedicated himself for twenty-one years, ‘has a peculiar space of its own, the place where the essays are being written – the library’ (163). Although González de Barcia never left his official duties in order to devote himself to his studies, as Montaigne had done (cf. Ophir 163), González de Barcia nevertheless escaped to his library in order to further his intellectual activities. For example, Cotarelo y Mori reminds us that González de Barcia worked from his home library when called upon by the Real Academia Española to execute the fastidious review of the dictionary

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

129

entries for words beginning in A and B (116). By retreating to the location of his personal library, González de Barcia indicated the importance of the place of study in the realization of scholarly obligations.7 However, the library provided González de Barcia with more than a place in which to advance his scholarly work. It also served as a symbol of his erudition. When, for example, Julián del Río Marín prepared his edition of Francisco Antonio de Bances y Cándamo’s Obras Lyricas, he acknowledged the assistance obtained from the Barcia Library: Apenas llegué a la Corte quando solicité con gran desvelo recoger las Obras de D. Francisco Candamo para juntarlas a las que traje de Andalucía, y darlas a luz. Debí a Don Manuel Pellicer de Tobar, Ingenio felicíssimo de nuestro siglo, conseguir mi intento. Pues, aplaudiéndole, me comunicó el Romance Al Primer Ministro, muy bien corregido, y me dió noticia de las muchas Obras de D. Francisco que (entre inumerable manuscritos) estaban en la Librería del Señor D. Andrés Gonçalez de Barcia. (In Bances y Cándamo 57) I had just arrived at Court when I sought with great effort to collect the Works of Don Francisco Candamo in order to bring them together with those that I brought from Andalusia and publish them. I owe the success of my intent to Don Manuel Pellicer de Tobar, one of our century’s sharpest minds. For, praising the idea, he provided me with the Romance to the Prime Minister, skilfully corrected, and he informed me of the many Works of Don Francisco that (among innumerable manuscripts) were in the Library of Señor Don Andrés González de Barcia.

The reference to the setting of the library indicates the importance this location had on both a social and an intellectual level. Scholars could go to the Barcia Library, located on San Bernardo street in the northwest section of Madrid, and browse the stacks, study the collection, and advance their work.8 In addition to this social aspect, however, González de Barcia, like Montaigne before him, utilized his library as a space for thought. As Adi Ophir writes: ‘The library as a social space and the library as a space of knowledge were not contiguous spaces, even though they inhabited the same place’ (164). For González de Barcia, the social space of the library served as a source of honour within his community of scholars. However, the library as a space of knowledge enabled him to conduct his research. The Barcia Library allowed González de Barcia to bridge the divide

130 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

between his political and intellectual lives. It enabled him to engage in a process of lateral thinking in which bibliographical information provided structure for his inquiries. For González de Barcia, however, the Americanist library he created needed to contain the very editions to which he would refer his community of scholars. While the library of Renaissance humanists counted on the ancient Greek and Latin texts for their canon, without the benefit of ancient scholars to elucidate the study of the New World, González de Barcia understood that he needed to furnish his Americanist library with an initial textual foundation for intellectual inquiry into matters of the Indies. In addition to its location, therefore, the Barcia Library included a series of Americanist editions issued by the editor/scholar, Andrés González de Barcia. 1.3 The Library as a Collection While the place of the library offered scholars a location from which to pursue their studies, the bibliographical works collected in the library and organized on its shelves served to bestow honour and value (both intellectual and economic) on the scholarly edifice. For its part, González de Barcia’s personal collection reflected a large monetary investment. His complete collection was appraised in 1743 at 300,000 reales (Mestre and Pérez 29–31). Moreover, it contained works deemed of considerable value, such as Juan Mathías Estevan’s Linages de Aragón (priced at 1200 reales); the Biblia Poliglota of Antwerp (1500 reales); as well as many works by Pedro Fernández de Pulgar, the tenth Chronicler of the Indies from 1686 to 1698 (ibid.). Considering that less than ten years earlier González de Barcia had purchased jurisdiction over four villages, for which he paid the sum of 276,358 reales (Fayard Los miembros 325), we can see in relative terms the immense value of the bibliothecarial collection.9 However, González de Barcia desired that his editions and publications of Americanist texts and manuscripts reveal an intellectual value. Once scholars were inside the walls of the library, therefore, he intended to ensure that they had access to works of only the highest quality.10 In his essay ‘The Humanist as Reader,’ Anthony Grafton observes that humanists read in different ways: ‘One who wished to treat ancient poetry as a pastime could do as Machiavelli did, taking a pocket Ovid out into the country to read about love. But one who wished to treat ancient poetry as the highest branch of philosophy could do that as well, reading a folio Virgil in his study’ (183).

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

131

González de Barcia’s devotion to the production of exquisite scholarly publications reflected his attempt to ensure that his readers would situate his Americanist editions among the most important humanist works of the Renaissance library. He understood that editorial decisions regarding the size of the publication had serious implications for any reader. The scholar who approached a quarto volume had different expectations than when he approached the folio. Consequently, when preparing the works that he hoped would form the textual canon for the study of the New World, González de Barcia settled only for editions published in folio. In his 1730 edition of Antonio de Herrera’s Décadas or Historia de los hechos de los castellanos, González de Barcia articulated his dedication to producing editions of superior quality. Indeed, he needed to express this view in order to promote his Herrera edition over another Spanishlanguage edition of the Décadas published outside of Spain. Before González de Barcia could finish, in 1730, the final volume of his Herrera edition, a publisher from Antwerp named Jean Batiste Verdussen released, in 1728, a competing edition of the Herrera masterpiece. In an attempt to recommend the superiority of his edition, therefore, González de Barcia wrote one of his most passionate statements in praise of the scholarly work under his editorship. In the prefatory piece, entitled ‘El Impresor, a los lectores, sobre los defectos de la Nueva Reimpresion de Amberes’ (‘The Publisher to the Readers, regarding the defects of the New Antwerp Republication’), González de Barcia stated: Con esta advertencia espero, que nadie sea engañado en la compra [de la edición de Verdussen], porque (como và dicho) al cabo, si necesita estos Libros, i gasta el dinero en los de fuera del Reino, ha de bolver à comprar estos, que sin reparar en gastos, ni ganancias, se han impreso, traiendo Letra de Amsterdàm, i Papel de Genova; i no ha sido mucho para vnos Libros tan grandes, que merecen Letras de Oro, en Laminas de Bronce. (‘El Impresor, alas lectores’ in Herrera [1730] 1:[6]) With this warning I hope that no one may be fooled into purchasing [the Antwerp edition]. Because, as has been noted, in the end, if one needs these Books and spends his money on those from outside the Kingdom, he will have to return to buy these, which without stopping to consider the cost, or profit, have been printed using Amsterdam font and Geneva Paper; and it is the least one can do for such important Books, which deserve Letters of Gold, on Sheets of Bronze.

132 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

González de Barcia’s focus on the reader illustrates a fundamental characteristic of his editorial project. He desired to circumscribe the scholar within his newly formulated library of New World historiography. In this library, only the most exquisitely designed editions would suffice; and González de Barcia intended to produce, publicize, and sell such editions. The comments given in scholarly journals of the Enlightenment evidenced González de Barcia’s success in this diffusion. The Mémoires de Trévoux, for example, reviewed both the Antwerp edition (published by Verdussen) and the González de Barcia edition of Antonio de Herrera’s Décadas and offered the following words of scholarly advice: ‘On doit donc la préference à l ‘Edition de Dom André Gonzalez de Barcia. Celle qui parut depuis 1601. jusqu’en 1615. ne doit venir qu’après, & vous regarderés comme un livre méprisable, & comme du papier inutilement employé l’Edition de Verdussen, de 1728’ (‘Therefore, we owe preference to Don Andrés González de Barcia’s edition. The one published between 1601 and 1615 must only come afterward; and you should deem the Verdussen [Antwerp] edition as a contemptible book and as paper worthlessly used’; ‘Lettre au sujet des Editions’ in Mémoires de Trévoux [June 1730] 1097). Choosing the Antwerp edition, so the Jesuit scholars stated, equalled purchasing wasted paper; the González de Barcia edition, which aspired to pages of bronze with letters of gold, was even more authoritative than the first edition. In his battle to fill the bookshelves of the reading public of the Spain of the early Enlightenment, González de Barcia stressed the calibre of his books within the library collection. Moreover, in emphasizing this quality, González de Barcia began to ensure that readers would purchase, read, and properly shelve his Americanist publications. González de Barcia, in fact, devised a shelving order for his editions of New World history. This order, moreover, served to intimate the proper reading sequence for the library collection. For example, in his edition of Antonio de Herrera’s Décadas, González de Barcia indicated that the Descripción de las Indias occidentales, the work that he considered to be ‘la Llave de esta Famosa Historia’ (‘the key to this Famous History’; ‘El impresor, a los lectores’ in Herrera [1730] 1:[1]), would be the first work on the shelf, as it was also the first volume of the Herrera opus. Immediately following this work, however, González de Barcia wanted to shelve Gregorio García’s Origen de los Indios: Conocida ià la Tierra, de que se habla en esta Historia [i.e., Herrera’s Descripción], era consiguiente procurar saber el Origen de las Gentes, que

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

133

la poblaron, i el Viage que hicieron à ocupar tan grandes, i singulares Paìses: ... por esto haviamos determinado se siguiese à la Descripcion de las Indias el Origen de los Indios ... [D]espues hallè por conveniente saliese separado de la Obra de Herrera, por los motivos que en el nuevo Prologo, que està à su frente, se declaran, i esta advertencia servirà de que la vea el que tuviere este gusto, à quien serà facil colocar su leccion, adonde le pareciere. (‘El impresor, a los lectores’ in Herrera [1730] 1:[1]) Familiar now with the Land about which this History [i.e., Herrera’s Descripción] speaks, it was proper then to try to learn of the Origin of the People that populated it and the Travels they undertook to occupy such great and singular Countries: ... For this reason we had decided that the Origin of the Indians should follow the Description of the Indies ... [L]ater I found it more convenient to publish it separately from the Herrera work, for the reasons which are declared in the new Prologue which is in the opening pages. And this warning will allow he who has this desire to see it: for whom it will be easy to read the books in the order that seems best.

González de Barcia suggested that the ideal place to situate the reading (‘colocar su lección’) was to place the Origen de los Indios next to the Descripción de las Indias occidentales.11 Although he later altered this aspect of his editorial plan, González de Barcia acknowledged nonetheless that a system of organization existed. Furthermore, in the preliminary pages of Herrera’s Decada primera, the second volume of the 1730 edition, González de Barcia added another note to the reader in which he revealed that after shelving García’s Origen de los Indios next to Herrera’s Descripción, the reader should situate León Pinelo’s Epítome de la biblioteca, followed by the remaining volumes of Herrera’s Decadas. As González de Barcia explained: Este lugar se havia destinado, para el Epitome de la Biblioteca Oriental, i Occidental, Esferica, Nautica, i Geografica, que escriviò el Lic. Antonio Leon Pinelo, ... pero se ha aumentado su breve Volumen, tanto, con las Notas, Adiciones i Enmiendas, que duramente la Impresion de Antonio de Herrera se han puesto en ella, que ha parecido acertado sacarla separada, por guardar igualdad en los Tomos de esta Obra; i porque siendo bastante Volumen, puede colocarla aqui el que gustare de saber los Escritores, de quien se sacò esta Historia, i los que de la Indias Occidentales, i de las Materias referidas han escrito antes i despues. (‘Al Lector’ in Herrera [1730] vol. 2)

134 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library This place had been designated for the Epitome de la Biblioteca Oriental i Occidental, Esferica, Nautica, i Geografica, written by the Licentiate Antonio León Pinelo ... But its small Size has been so augmented with the Notes, Additions, and Emendations that we have been obliged to add while printing the Antonio de Herrera edition, that it seemed correct to release it separately so as to maintain the regularity between the Volumes of this Work. And because [the Epítome] is so Large, he who wishes to know about the Writers sampled in this History, and those who have written previously and later about the Indias Occidentales and the referred Matters, can read it now.

Had González de Barcia been able to design the complete library according to his ideal vision, he would have ordered the books according to the scheme elaborated above: After completing his edition of Herrera’s Descripción, he would have placed his completed García edition followed by the completed León Pinelo edition. All of these works, in turn, would have been followed by Herrera’s Décadas. However, González de Barcia in fact varied this ideal shelving order. He finished the García edition first (in 1729), then the Herrera edition (in 1730), and, finally, the León Pinelo edition (in 1737–8). Nonetheless, despite the final configuration of authors, González de Barcia’s concern for the order in which the Americanist collection should be shelved displayed an early manifestation of his editorial design. The bibliothecarial space González de Barcia designed, however, was not limited to the location of the library and the order of its Americanist collection. While the place of the library and the properly shelved editions contained therein served to facilitate New World scholarship, González de Barcia indicated that another component of his library, one that was inherently metaphorical in nature, revealed itself in the editorial paratext introduced by González de Barcia into the editions themselves. In what follows, I will review the process through which González de Barcia attempted to re-create his library within the editions he produced. 2 The Metaphor of the Library 2.1 Reproducing the Library in the Second Edition of the Origen de los Indios Although his dedication to colonial Spanish American history has earned him great posthumous recognition, Andrés González de Barcia

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

135

led a multifarious and active intellectual life, producing numerous other scholarly works. As an example of this diversity, one may recall that before he concluded his work on the additions to Nicolás Antonio’s Bibliotheca Hispana (in 1743), before he embarked on his Americanist editions (from 1722 to 1738), and before he participated as a founding member of the Real Academia Española (in 1713), González de Barcia wrote numerous theatrical comedies. In 1704, for example, in a compilation entitled Comedias nuevas, parte quarenta y ocho, escogidas de los mejores ingenios de España, he contributed three of the eleven works in a publication that included such illustrious playwrights as Pedro Calderón de la Barca and Lope de Vega. One of González de Barcia’s three plays, ‘El Sol Obediente al Hombre,’ related the story of the biblical hero Joshua, captain of the Israelites, in his fight against invading barbarians. In the stage directions provided at the opening of the play, one observes González de Barcia’s talents for creating the theatrical scene. To evoke the passion of battle, González de Barcia, who wrote using the anagram García Aznar Velez, provided detailed instructions for effecting the mise en scène: Suena dentro gran ruido, cayendose todo el Frontis del Theatro, que era de Muralla, levantandose gran polvo, oyendose ruido de Armas, Gemidos, Caxas, y Trompetas, lo mas horroroso que pueda imitarse, y durarà hasta que salga Josuè. (González de Barcia [1704] 197) From inside a great sound is made; the whole Façade of the Theater, which was a Wall, is falling; great dust is raised; and one can hear the sounds of Arms, Groans, Crates and Trumpets, the most horrific that one can imagine; and it will last until Joshua enters.

The sounds of war served to add a sense of urgency to the bellicose atmosphere González de Barcia wished to describe. Moreover, the visual aspects indicated in the stage directions – falling facades, clouds of dust, and the dramatic entrance of the hero – intensified the opening theatrical scene. By addressing the details of the setting of the action, the playwright ensured that his theatrical work would engage the audience. The experience of designing the theatrical stage offers an early tribute to González de Barcia’s ability to organize the place of discourse. Later in life, when his desire to participate in the intellectual community of the academies overshadowed his artistic ambitions as a play-

136 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

wright, González de Barcia continued to display his talent for textual design. In 1713, for example, when the Real Academia began the preparations for the Diccionario de Autoridades, the academicians called upon González de Barcia to develop the design scheme (planta) that would be used to organize the material included therein. As Lazaro y Carreter notes, on 10 August of that year, in addition to petitioning the King for official recognition of the constitution of the academic body, the newly assembled group approved the work guide and design scheme that González de Barcia had drawn up, earlier that week, for carrying out the plan to develop the Diccionario de Autoridades (21). González de Barcia’s role in the earliest stages of the formation of the Real Academia Española testifies to his importance within the group. Called upon to design the format for their most important project, González de Barcia quickly drafted a proposal for the layout of the work. In both the world of the arts and the world of the scholarly sciences, González de Barcia capitalized on his ability to organize the place of thought. This ability to organize this space served him well, as we have seen, when he worked to create his Americanist library. Although his ideas often materialized in forms different from those he originally anticipated, the fact that he conceptualized methods to facilitate the acquisition of knowledge points to his interest in presenting and organizing scholarly discourse. Consequently, one discerns that in his creation of the Spanish American library, the direction González de Barcia offered was not distinguished for a profound analysis of the historical material. His sense of presentation, a talent born of the stage, was characterized by its ability to lead scholars to those bibliographical sources he considered most authoritative. More a director than a writer, that is, he did not display his talents by providing original analytical thought. González de Barcia had the mind of a commentator more than that of a philosopher; and like all commentators, he articulated his ideas through the discursive exchange built around the historical works he edited. In this way, the early Enlightenment González de Barcia displayed the traits of many medieval ecclesiastical commentators. José Faur has noted that ‘the most peculiar aspect of the medieval thinker is that he developed his ideas around a text and expressed them as a commentary’ (in Henderson, 3). Moreover, the importance of marginal commentary can be seen in modern writers as well. In his study of the French writer Paul Valéry, Lawrence Lipking provides an example of Valéry’s practice of writing in the margins: ‘Margins, for Valéry, exem-

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

137

plify the infinite extension of thought, the profound white space forever waiting to be filled, that supplies the necessary condition of mental life’ (610). The area surrounding the text offers discursive space in which a reader, scholar, or editor, from the medieval period until today, may document his thoughts. As we will see, González de Barcia utilized this space to great avail. Writing in the margins around the text, González de Barcia sought to underline what he considered to be the truth regarding colonial Spain. Consequently, it is appropriate to look to the margins of his scholarly editions as a space where his mental life was documented. As any student who uses an edition from the Barcia Library becomes aware, González de Barcia’s genius manifested itself in the bibliographical web of reference established in his paratext. Through a careful reading of his marginal notes, we see that he provided his readers with documentation of his scholarly activity. Moreover, inasmuch as this activity pertained to the bibliothecarial space he created, the marginal notes evoke a metaphorical reflection of the Barcia Library. As a result, when reading González de Barcia’s paratext included in his edition of Gregorio García’s Origen (as well as the other editions), one enters the scholarly space he designed. As we will observe in the García edition, these notes served to give authority to González de Barcia’s intercalated commentary. Indeed, the notes and the commentary functioned in unison in the presentation of his paratext. Anthony Grafton, who has pointed out the similarities of these types of scholia, reminds us that ‘[h]istorical footnotes resemble traditional glosses in form’ (The Footnote 32). Therefore, by reading the notes as an extension of González de Barcia’s intercalations, one sees that his paratextual weave consisted of repositioning the García text so as to reflect his own updated editorial mission. Like the theatrical mise en scène, which provided him with his earliest fame, the editorial mise en livre allowed González de Barcia to implement his editorial paratext. 2.2 García’s Scholarly Mission When Gregorio García published the Origen de los Indios del Nuevo Mundo in 1607, it quickly became an important scholarly source for the study of the indigenous people of the New World. As Huddleston states, García’s work ‘is one of the most widely quoted and most generally misunderstood books in origin literature’ (74). Although the work has been widely quoted, scholars from García’s time until today

138 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

have criticized it for failing to favour one dominant theory on the origins of the Indians. As González de Barcia pointed out in the preface to the second edition of the Origen de los Indios, Juan de Solórzano criticized García for not emphasizing a single theory: ‘duodecim diversis Opinionibus insudavit, nuliam tamen earum admitit’ (‘he worked hard on twelve different theories; however, he admitted none of them’; quoted in ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in García [1981] [1]v, right margin). For his part, Huddleston stated: ‘García, trapped by his intellectual assumptions, genuinely believed all theories probable’ (106). However, García indicated in the prologue to his treatise that the true acquisition of knowledge required that the scholar consider a wide variety of sources. Following the ideas expounded by Aristotle in the first chapter of the Metaphysics, García wrote: ‘asi el entendimiento de el Hombre con la especulacion, i contemplacion de diversas cosas, recibe grande gusto, i deleite; con cuyo conocimiento se perfecciona’ (‘in this way, Man’s intellect receives great pleasure and delight from the speculation and contemplation of diverse things, the knowledge of which refines the intellect’; García [1981] 2). García’s main objective in the writing of his treatise consisted of identifying all possible theories that sought to explain the origins of the indigenous people of the New World. Through the contemplation of diverse things, so García suggested, man is led ever closer to intellectual perfection. Instead of developing and defending one dominant theory, therefore, García felt that he could provide the greatest service to his community of scholars by reviewing all the known theories. By providing this panorama, García claimed to offer to his readers the scholarly diversity that the ancients obtained only through extensive travel. As García explained, scholars of the ancient world, like Pythagoras, travelled to visit the prophets of Memphis, while Plato had walked to Egypt in order to meet the philosopher Archytus Tarentinus (García [1981] 2). García indicated that many men of the modern world had travelled to the Indies out of a similar desire to increase their knowledge. As García protested: ‘no todos que han ido à las Indias andaban buscando Oro, i Plata: algunos huvo, que buscaban el Tesoro de la Ciencia’ (‘not everyone who has gone to the Indies went in search of Gold and Silver: there were some who were searching for the Treasure of Science’; García [1981] 4). For these men, the realization that they could be wise in Europe and still ignorant of the Indies, prompted their writings, as it propelled then to wander. García provided a bibliographical review of the writers who, ‘por el

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

139

bien comun dejaron sus Escritos, dandonos cuenta, i refiriendo lo que vieron, i contemplaron’ (‘for the good of the public, left their Writings, giving us an account and relating what they saw and contemplated’; García [1981] 4). He focused on Pedro Cieza de León, Agustín de Zárate, Juan de Betanzos, El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, and Joseph Acosta, among others, as writers who wrote from first-hand experience (i.e., as a ‘testigo de vista’). Moreover, among these historians, García included himself: Yo, aunque indigno de ser contado entre Autores tan graves, i honrados, estuve tambien en aquellas Partes; vivi en el Perù nueve Años adonde todo este Tiempo tuve grande curiosidad en vèr, preguntar, oìr, i saber casi infinitas cosas, que en aquella Tierra ai. (García [1981] 5) Although unworthy to be considered among such serious and honoured Authors, I was also in those Parts. I lived in Peru for nine Years where all of that time I was very curious to see, question, hear, and learn about the almost infinite things that there are in that Land.

By cataloguing these diverse authorial voices in his treatise, García presented a wide selection of works that the reader of the Origen could utilize when contemplating Indian origins. Similarly to the collection of books in a library, García’s monograph offered access to the fundamental bibliographical material scholars needed in order to further their research. By bringing together the ideas of writers whose authority resided in their access to first-hand testimony, moreover, García offered his readers a scholarly panorama of great value to any library collection.12 When concluding his work, for example, García wrote: asi me parece que Yo havia cumplido mi obligacion, con solo referir las Opiniones que he puesto, i compuesto, diversas, i contrarias entre sì, para que el Lector, que ha de ser Juez de esta causa, juzgue qual le parece verdadera, i qual debe ser condenada por falsa. (García [1981] 314) In this way it seems to me that I have fulfilled my obligation by merely relating these Theories – diverse and contradictory among themselves – that I have provided and conceived of for the Reader, who is to be the Judge of this matter and determine which seems truthful to him and which should be condemned as false.

140 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

García permitted his reader to enter and browse, like the place of the library, the selected theories. The reader, as judge, could decide which theory to reject or accept. Consequently, for those scholars unable to travel, García’s work provided some of the most direct sources of the theories collected by García on the origins of the peoples of the New World. One example of a scholar who made use of this rich archive was Andrés González de Barcia, someone whose travels, from what can be known, were limited to the environs of Madrid. The ideas presented in the 1607 Origen de los Indios served to direct his research on this topic. In his edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome de la biblioteca, for example, González de Barcia utilized García’s work to support his own claim regarding the possible connection of the mythical Atlantis with the newly discovered Indies: ‘Algunos entienden la Atlantica, por las Indias, ò por vna gran Isla mui cercana à ellas, segun Fr. Gregorio Garcia, Origen de los Indios, lib. 4’ (‘Some consider Atlantis to be the Indies, or some large Island very near them, according to Fray Gregorio García Origen de los Indios, Book 4’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1:561). As one of numerous works housed in the Barcia Library, García’s treatise assisted González de Barcia’s studies by providing references to important historical sources. Consequently, by replacing the cartographical grid of the map with the bibliographical grid of the library, González de Barcia attempted to confront the scholarly unknown by using the books of his library. With these works he could remain in the metropolis without sacrificing his scholarly objectives. Moreover, by documenting his studies in the marginal notes surrounding his 1729 edition of the Origen de los Indios, González de Barcia indicated the materials that guided his thought on Indian origins. As a result, his edition of García’s treatise provides a reflection of the bibliothecarial locus from which he conducted his research. 2.3 The Origen de los Indios as a Stage for the Barcia Library González de Barcia’s decision to edit and substantially augment Gregorio García’s Origen de los Indios was facilitated by the fact that García’s methodological framework allowed him to insert his supplemental material with relative ease. In a work that held as its stated objective the review of numerous known theories, González de Barcia needed only to update the various sections with those works that were left out of the first edition. The page, therefore, becomes a stage. More-

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

141

over, similarly to González de Barcia’s attention to the mise en scène of his theatrical works, the page upon which he effected his mise en livre reveals much evidence of the attention and care he gave to providing the proper context for reading, a context that González de Barcia himself held as ideal. Using his edition of the Origen de los Indios as a stage, therefore, he added bibliographical references of his Americanist repertory alongside the original corpus of authorities cited by García in the 1607 edition. By distinguishing the original 1607 notes written by García from those added by González de Barcia to the 1729 edition, we may review González de Barcia’s contribution.13 Like the mise en scène of his theatrical works, the work executed by González de Barcia on the original 1607 García text consisted of organizing the visual space of the page in order to expand on and emend García’s scholarship. As we have noted before, González de Barcia highlighted this visual characteristic of his paratext: ‘và puesto en las Margenes, i en la Obra con la menor molestia, i la maior brevedad, ... señalamos lo añadido en la Obra entre dos Corchetes [ ] con intencion, de que sino mas perfecto, salga mas abundante este Tratado’ (‘it has been placed in the Margins with the littlest of inconvenience and the greatest brevity ... We identify the material added in the Work between two Brackets [ ] with the intention that, if not much improved, the Treaty might provide greater abundance’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in García [1981] [2]r). His use of the marginal and intercalated space symbolized his conceptualization of the 1729 edition as a reconstruction in which he updated the bibliographical references made by García in the 1607 publication. To this effect, marginal notes allowed González de Barcia to cite the authoritative works that enabled him to support his ideas, which I will review presently. From the margins surrounding the text, and from within the bracketed space placed into the text, González de Barcia effected a paratext in which he articulated his ideas on New World historiography with bibliographical authority. The marginal paratext enabled González de Barcia to cite the works he considered most valuable. Moreover, by acknowledging these works, he conferred authoritative status on them. Regarding the Enlightenment English historian Edward Gibbon’s (1737–94) use of marginal notes, G.W. Bowersock notes: ‘Gibbon’s text may have seemed offensive, but the notes were more dangerous because they gave authority to the text’ (56). González de Barcia used his notes in order to cite his own Americanist editions. The danger for other schol-

142 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

ars and editors, therefore, consisted of the fact that by providing the new edition of García’s Origen de los Indios, González de Barcia also promoted his entire Americanist project. His editorial mise en livre, therefore, consisted of carefully inserting references to his own Americanist library into the marginal documentation that accompanied the second García edition. At the same time, González de Barcia indicated the importance of the Barcia Library within the canonical structure of the humanist scholarly enterprise. In order to accomplish this manoeuvre of intellectual repositioning, González de Barcia utilized the languages of both classical and New World scholarship: humanist Latin and Americanist Spanish. 2.4 Languages of the Barcia Library Although he wrote his commentary in Castilian Spanish, González de Barcia used Latin for his marginal notes. On one level his decision to use Latin related to the fact that García also had used Latin for his marginal notes. However, by maintaining and amplifying the practice of using Latin for these notes, González de Barcia accomplished additional editorial objectives. Although Spanish was the language of the conquistadors, the scholar who desired to provide a historical context for the discovery of the New World needed to utilize the humanist canon, which meant reading in Latin. A work intended for use by intellectuals required that the author write in Latin in order to communicate to the largest audience of readers. Indeed, when the French Jesuit journal of arts and sciences, Mémoires de Trévoux, solicited assistance from the European reading public for the inaugural issue of their French-language journal, they wrote their petition in Latin: ‘Haec sunt autem in quibus hujus novi Diarii Auctores adjuvari se postulant’ (‘These are the ways in which the Editors of this new Journal desire to be helped’; in Dumas 183). Although the journal itself was published in French, the editors used Latin in their announcement for assistance in order to assure themselves of the widest pool of potential participants. González de Barcia’s use of this language revealed his awareness of the fact that Latin continued to be the language of scholarship. However, scholars searched eagerly for ancient authorities that spoke about the New World, in any language.14 For this reason, in the dedication to Philip V, included in the 1730 edition of Antonio de Herrera’s Descripción de las Indias Occidentales, González de Barcia stated

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

143

the following with confidence: ‘Ninguna de las Historias Profanas, Griegas, Latinas, i Orientales, puede competir con la que ampara la Real Proteccion de V. Mag’ (‘None of the Profane, Greek, Latin or Oriental Histories can compete with the one supported by the Royal Protection of your Majesty’; ‘Dedicación’ in Herrera [1730] 1:[1]). González de Barcia noted that all things (cosas) related to the New World were ‘remotissimas de el pensamiento de los doctos Antiguos’ (‘most remote from the thoughts of the learned Ancients’; ‘Dedicación’ in Herrera [1730] 1:[2]). Thus, González de Barcia’s library served as the point of departure for scholarship on the New World; the editions he produced, so González de Barcia argued, provided the authoritative documentation all intellectuals needed to advance their arguments and, consequently, had to be published in Spanish. Indeed, González de Barcia emphasized the importance of Castilian by indicating that Herrera’s narrative (narración) was ‘adornada de la elegancia i pureça del Idioma Castellano’ (‘adorned with the elegance and purity of the Castilian Languages’; ‘Dedicación’ in Herrera [1730] 1:[2]). While humanists routinely utilized Latin works and works translated into Latin for their scholarship, González de Barcia maintained and promoted the use of Castilian Spanish for his scholarly canon.15 Nonetheless, González de Barcia used Latin for his marginal notes and he even translated the titles of his Americanist editions from Spanish into Latin. In doing this, he attempted to facilitate the incorporation of these authoritative works into the bibliographical canon of humanist Europe. Indeed, González de Barcia desired this close juxtaposition. Having created his personal library and having initiated a major editorial plan of Americanist editions with which to fill the shelves of his and, potentially, other scholars’ libraries, González de Barcia set out to publicize the relevance of his collection. The marginal notes, written in Latin, and the commentary, written in Spanish, allowed him to devise a paratext that spoke on two levels to the reading public. On the one hand, the marginal notes indicated the classical scholarship that influenced and informed González de Barcia’s work; on the other hand, the intercalated commentary emphasized the canonical relevance of Castilian as the language of New World scholarship.16 By creating this multilingual paratext, González de Barcia sought to combat the effects of anti-Hispanic historiography devoted to the New World. The 1729 edition of the Origen de los Indios offers many examples of this defensive activity. For example, when Gregorio García indicated that the universal geographers of his day used the name

144 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

‘America’ to refer to the New World, González de Barcia responded with the following marginal note: Iniustè tamen: ostendit Solorçan. de Iur. Indian. lib. 1. cap. 5. ex num. 15. & 12 [sic]. Lipsio, Alderete, Carolo, Stephan. Ortel. & Herrera, Dec. 1. lib. 4. cap. 11. & 24. lib. 7. cap. 1. relatis n. 51. 59. & seqq. P. Sandoval de Insti. Aetiop. Salut. part. 1. cap. 1. lib. 1. late Simon Not. 1 de la Conq. de Tierra firme, cap. 9. & seqq. Cardenas Ensaio Chron. in Introd. circa fin. (In García [1981] 5, right margin) Unjustly, however: as shown by Solorzano in his de Jure Indiana, Book 1, Chapter 5 from number 15 and 12 [sic]; and Lipsius, Alderete, Carolus, Stephanus, Ortelius; and Herrera in the first Decada of book 4, chapter 11 & 24 and book 7, chapter 1, in notes 51, 59, and following; and Father Sandoval in his Instauranda ethiopum salute part 1, chapter 1, of book 1; and extensively by Simón, first Notice from the Conquista de la Tierra firme, chapter 9 & following; and Cardenas, Ensayo cronológico in the Introduction, near the end.

Against the claim that the proper noun ‘America’ referred correctly to the lands Columbus called las Indias, or the New World, González de Barcia utilized his marginal note to apply the full force of his library. The note referred the reader to other editions that supported González de Barcia’s claim that the name America was used unjustly (‘iniustè’). Most importantly, however, he included his own work, the Ensayo cronológico, which he published using a pseudonym, among the authorities used to refute the use of this toponym. Using Latin, González de Barcia ensured that his readers, if not completely fluent in Spanish, would appreciate the intellectual inappropriateness of calling the New World America. The notes, however, inevitably served to suggest the process of lateral thinking that González de Barcia understood as central to his job as commentator. In this case, the reader who decided to pursue González de Barcia’s references and review, for example, ‘Cárdenas’s’ introduction (‘near the end’) to the Ensayo cronológico would find the apologia written in Spanish: ‘y tambien debiera perecer, el [Nombre] de America, que sin raçon impuso Americo Vespucio (cuios fraudes descubre, Herrera, Decad. 1. Lib. 4. Cap. 2. y 3)’ (‘and another thing that should perish is the [name] America, which Americo Verspucio [whose frauds are revealed by Herrera, Decade 1. Book 4. Chapter 2 and 3]

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

145

imposed foolishly’); ‘Introducción’ Ensayo cronológico 1723 ¶8r).17 Although the bibliographical information given in this commentary in the Ensayo cronologico is similar to that given in the marginal note in the Origen de los Indios (both, for example, cited book 4 of Herrera’s ‘Década primera’), the language of the marginal note and that of the commentary reveal two discrete editorial objectives. On the one hand, the study of the New World would employ Spanish as the canonical language of the library. On the other hand, by utilizing Latin, the marginal notes allowed González de Barcia to announce the relevance of this library to the scholarly community of the Respublica Literaria.18 By carefully and methodically putting references to the Barcia Library into Gregorio García’s book, González de Barcia used the notes and the commentary to resituate the 1607 text. 2.5 Putting the Library into the Text The first book of the García treatise provides an illustration of González de Barcia’s execution of the editorial mise en livre. Like a director providing stage cues, González de Barcia, the editor, offered references to the bibliographical context surrounding García’s writing. When, for example, García provided his first tenet of three upon which his book was constructed, he stated: ‘que todos quantos Hombres, i Mugeres huvo, i ai, desde el Principio del Mundo, proceden, i traen su Principio, i Origen de nuestros primeros Padres Adàm, i Eva’ (‘for all the Men and Women that exist and have existed since the Beginning of the World come from and trace their Beginnings and Origin to our first Parents Adam and Eve’; García [1981] 7). García continued to stipulate that this common beginning implied that all people descended from Noah’s offspring after the Flood. The first aspect of the text, therefore, that González de Barcia desired to expand on was the meaning that this post-diluvial beginning had on the possibility for maritime navigation before Noah. Immediately following the words ‘nuestros primeros Padres Adàm, i Eva,’ written by García in the 1607 text, González de Barcia added, in brackets, the following paratextual comment: ‘[Asi ocioso serà para nuestro intento disputar si antes del Diluvio huvo Navios, como hiço Maiolo, ò si fueron estas remotisimas Tierras pobladas, como Torquemada, i otros]’ (‘[For this reason it will be pointless for our purposes to dispute whether there were Ships before the Flood, as Maiolus asserted, or whether these most remote Lands were populated, as Torquemada and others say]’; in García [1981] 7). González de

146 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Barcia introduced his commentary into the García text in order to advise readers of the greater implications associated with García’s first tenet. For González de Barcia, sailing began with Noah; the population of the world, consequently, began with the travels of Noah’s sons after the Flood. Placing his editorial instructions between square brackets, González de Barcia directed the reader to the library by citing the works of Simon Maiolus and Juan de Torquemada. Providing the commentary, however, constituted only part of González de Barcia’s paratext. The metaphorical placement of the Barcia Library into the García edition involved providing detailed references to the sources being used in the commentary. To have scholarly value, the commentary needed the bibliographical context. For example, González de Barcia returned to Torquemada’s Monarquía Indiana, an edition he himself had published, in order elucidate García’s ideas. García mentioned that sailors had mapped out the geography of the Straight of Magellan ([1981] 8). In the marginal note, González de Barcia provided the references with which to appreciate the idea stated by García: Torquem. lib. 1. cap. 6. tom. 1. Solorç. de Iur. Ind. lib. 1. cap. 5. num. 35. Ovalled Hist. de Chile, lib. 2. cap. 2 & 3. Herrera Descrip. de Indias cap. 37. (In García [1981] 8, left margin) Torquemada. Book 1. Chapter 6. Volume 1. Solórzano, de Iure Indiarum. Book 1. Chapter 5, Number 35. Ovalle. Historia de Chile. Book 2, Chapter 2 & 3. Herrera, Descripción de las Indias, Chapter 37.

It is significant that, except for Solórzano’s de Iure Indiarum, the historical works referenced in the note were all editions produced by González de Barcia. Consequently, his placement of these bibliographical references in the margins of García’s text allowed González de Barcia to promote the Barcia Library. The presentation of the Barcia Library, however, constituted only part of González de Barcia’s editorial mission. To ensure that his editions received proper authoritative status, González de Barcia needed to indicate the relevance of these works within the larger humanist canon. His elaboration of a statement given by García regarding his own modus operandi offers one example of this process. García stated that the only way to learn of Indian origins consisted of basing the discussion on ‘theories’ (opiniones). Using square brackets to denote

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

147

his paratext, González de Barcia attempted to expand upon García’s idea: [La qual {opinion}, para alcançar el Origen, se ha de fundar en la Lengua, Costumbres, Religion, i conveniencia de Nombres, i Palabras, i aun de las facciones, i modo de los cabellos, i su adorno, como con Seneca, Plinio, Tacito, Strabon, Dionisio, Halicaraseo, Herodoto, i otros afirma Hornio: ...]. (In García [1981] 11) [The aforementioned {theory}, in order to arrive at the Origin, must ground itself in the Language, Customs, Religion, and the approximation of Names and Words, and even facial characteristics, the style of hair and decoration, as Horn affirms, following Seneca, Pliny, Tacitus, Strabon, Dionisius, Halicareseus, Herodotus and others: ...]

González de Barcia used his commentary, like a director his stage cues, to instruct the scholar on the methodology for proper reading.19 Metaphorically, then, González de Barcia filled the shelves of his library, that is, the margins of his editions’ pages, with the authorities of humanist learning that would influence the study of Indian origins. González de Barcia completed this bibliographical arrangement in his notes. For example, in the right-hand margin above the bracketed commentary quoted above, González de Barcia provided a note referring to his Americanist collection: ‘Torquem. lib. 2. cap. 1 & 3 ... Garcilaso Com. Real. lib. 5. cap. 18. Tom. 1.’ (‘Torquemada, Book 2. Chapter 1 & 3 ... Garcilaso, Comentarios Reales, Book 5, Chapter 18. Volume 1.’; in García [1981] 11, right margin). Below this note, in the same margin of the same page, González de Barcia offered an additional marginal citation intended to highlight his classical sources: ‘Plin. Senec. Halicarras. Tacit. Strab. & aliis relat. Horn. de Orig. Ameri. lib. 1. cap. 9’ (‘Pliny, Seneca, Halicarnassus, Tacitus, Strabo, and others reported by Horn, de Originibus Americanis Book 1, Chapter 9.’; in García [1981] 11, right margin). (See figure 4.1.) Using the commentary and notes, González de Barcia inserted his library into the humanist framework that scholars used to posit human origins. By placing a reference to Torquemada’s Monarquía Indiana near a reference to Halicarnassus’s Scripta quae extant omnia, and by placing a reference to Antonio de Herrera’s Decadas near a reference to Strabo’s De situ orbe, he positioned his Americanist library within the purview of the early Enlightenment reader.

148 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

No longer only a work of García, which González de Barcia has edited for re-publication, the 1729 second edition of the Origen de los Indios underwent a transformation in which González de Barcia’s scholarly agenda (an agenda symbolized by the bibliothecarial space he created) was implanted into the structure of the text via his paratext. Moreover, although he used pseudonyms to disguise his direct involvement with these additions, González de Barcia could not remove himself completely from the paratext. When concluding his comment on the comparative method he would use to substantiate García’s theories, González de Barcia wrote: ‘[... i asì referirè aqui las Opiniones]’ (‘[... and I will follow this style here to relate the Theories]’; in García [1981] 12). González de Barcia’s interjection of the first person revealed the personal commitment he had in placing his library into the edited book. By allowing his library to augment the humanist repertory, González de Barcia did more than offer scholarly commentary or bibliographical references: his paratext permitted him to emphasize his own intellectual production. From this position of authority, finally, González de Barcia was able to offer his commentary with intellectual security. 2.6 Providing Commentary from within the Library González de Barcia displayed his vast bibliographical knowledge on almost every page of the second edition of the Origen de los Indios. He revealed this genius in his notes and commentary by establishing for the reader the intellectual context for the debate on Indian origins. If, as some scholars claim, he failed to advance truly original ideas regarding the origins of the Indians, this was partly due to the fact that González de Barcia’s goal, like that of García before him, was to provide the bibliographical context within which these ideas could be conceived.20 In addition to this, however, he aspired to prove that the Barcia Library was at the heart of this context. Chapter three of book 1 of the Origen de los Indios offers an important case in point. In book 1, chapter 3, of the Origen de los Indios, entitled ‘De la segunda objeccion contra esta primera Opinion’ (‘On the second argument against this first Theory’), González de Barcia limited much of his supplementary writing to the space provided to him in the margins. However, these marginal notes displayed the immense scholarly activity in which he was engaged. For example, the second objection to the theory that Indians intentionally travelled to the New World stated

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

149

Figure 4.1 García Gregorio, Origen de los indios de el Nuevo Mundo, e Indias Occidentales. Ed. Andrés González de Barcia. Madrid: Francisco Martínez Abad, 1729. Page 11. Courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library. The selected marginal notes from the lower left-hand column are original to the 1607 edition. All the remaining marginal notes were added by González de Barcia to the second edition. Circled are the original square brackets added by González de Barcia to identify the new material he added to the 1729 edition. Of note, González de Barcia’s paratextual commentary surrounds García’s original text.

150 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

that sailors of the ancient world could not have travelled by sea to those lands because they lacked any knowledge of the Indies. As García wrote: ‘porque hasta que D. Christoval Colon descubriò aquellas Tierras, por Relacion que tuvo de un Piloto, que antes las havia descubierto, i muriò en Casa del dicho Colon, no se tenia noticia de las Indias’ (‘because until Don Christopher Columbus discovered those Lands, following an Account he received from a Sailor who had discovered them earlier and died in the home of the said Columbus, no one had knowledge of the Indies’; García [1981] 22). It is important to note that González de Barcia did not refute the sailor’s report. However, he was concerned with this sailor’s nationality. As Manzano Manzano writes, Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo, Francisco López de Gomara, and Fray Bartolomé de Las Casas all agreed that the sailor who supposedly confided his discovery to Columbus was from the Iberian Peninsula; however, no authority would identify his homeland as either Portugal or Castile (Colón 144). In order to stipulate that this sailor was in fact a native of Castile, therefore, González de Barcia returned to his library. In one of the most elaborate paratextual arrangements of the 1729 Origen de los Indios, González de Barcia responded to García by offering abundant bibliographical references. García wrote that the sailor from whom Columbus received the first report of the New World had truly returned from a land that was, ‘no sabida, no puesta en Mapa’ (‘unknown and not located on a Map’; García [1981] 22). Immediately following the word ‘Mapa’ González de Barcia placed an asterisk that served to alert the reader to an extended footnote found directly below the main text. (See figure 4.2.) It is of interest that, while García’s text was printed in two columns with marginal notes on either side of the page, González de Barcia’s footnote was printed in a smaller font in one wide column at the bottom of page. The visual contrast between text and paratext emphasized the urgency of the note. Moreover, the commentary provided in the footnote had its own marginal notes, which González de Barcia placed in the left margin. González de Barcia began his footnote by indicating that some foreign scholars denied the veracity of the sailor’s report: ‘Ficcion de los Españoles llaman Hornio, i Laet à este Navegacion casual’ (‘Horn and Laet call this happenstance Voyage a Fiction of the Spainish’; in García [1981] 22, footnote). In the marginal note associated with this commentary, González de Barcia provided his source references: ‘Horn de Orig. Amer. lib. 1. cap. 2. fol. 12. & 13. & lib. 2. cap. 1. fol. 121. Laet in

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

151

Disert. contra Grot. f. 7’ (‘Horn, de Originibus Americanis Book 1, Chapter 2, Pages 12 & 13 & Book 2, Chapter 1, Page 121. Laet, in his Dissertationem contra Hugonis Grotii De Origine Page 7’; in García [1981] 22, left margin). Although González de Barcia provided detailed bibliographical references to these authors, he did not agree with this view, writing: ‘En este modo de hablar se vè su ignorancia; pues aun niegan que fuese Español el Piloto ... i equivocan su Nombre proprio’ (‘In this manner of speaking one sees their ignorance, for they even deny that the Sailor was Spanish ... and they confuse his proper Name’; in García [1981] 22, footnote). González de Barcia confronted this ‘ignorance’ by offering the proper marginal references to the library collection of Americanist works. He cited Antonio de Herrera, Juan de Torquemada, José de Acosta, El Inca Garcilaso, and Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo, from among his Americanist editions; however, he also referenced other writers such as Geronimo Benzonius, Bernardo Alderete, Hugo Grotius, Juan de Mariana, and Gerard Mercator (in García [1981] 22, left margin). In all cases González de Barcia indicated their relevance as sources needed to provide a proper bibliographical context.21 By revealing his comprehensive bibliographical knowledge, González de Barcia promoted the Barcia Library as the source for historical authority for New World history. As he wrote: ‘Los Estrangeros estàn disculpados en negar lo que leen dudoso, pues aun niegan lo que les consta, como se vè en Hermano Coringio, que dice haver descubierto Colon las Indias de orden del Rei de Portugal, i otras cosas semejantes’ (‘Foreigners are forgiven for denying what they read doubtfully, for they even deny what they know, as is seen in Herman Conring, who says that Columbus had discovered the Indies by order of the King of Portugal, and other such things’; in García [1981] 22). While learned scholars of Europe, like Herman Conring (1606–81), confused even the most basic facts of Americanist historiography, González de Barcia highlighted his own ability to bring clarity to even the minor issues of the field. This clarity was achieved by keeping the base of information in Spain. As González de Barcia noted: ‘lo cierto es, que ningun prudente dudarà que este Piloto se llamò Alonso Sanchez de Huelva, Natural de Huelva, en el Condado de Niebla: asi es tradicion constante de Andalusia’ (‘What is certain is that no one who is prudent will doubt that this Sailor was named Alonso Sanchez de Huelva, Native of Huelva, in the County of Niebla: this is long-standing tradition in Andalusia’; in García [1981] 22, footnote). The place of the Americanist

152 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Figure 4.2 García Gregorio, Origen de los indios de el Nuevo Mundo, e Indias Occidentales. Ed. Andrés González de Barcia. Madrid: Francisco Martínez Abad, 1729. Page 22. Courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library. Circled are the original square brackets added by González de Barcia to identify the new material he added to the 1729 edition. The marginal notes and the extended footnote were all added by González de Barcia.

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

153

library, in Spain, combined with the collection of the library, editions written in Spanish, allowed González de Barcia to speak with authority to all scholars of the Republic of Letters. He showed that his ideal library was both textual and architectural, a paratextual weave that served as the beacon for New World scholarship. By focusing on the bibliothecarial space, he refuted the claim of any scholar who had not first visited the Barcia Library. However, having placed his library into the text, and having indicated the relevance of its authoritative status, González de Barcia proceeded to utilize this intellectual space to advance his own ideas on Indian origins. As he wrote in the preface to the second edition, although García’s work was exemplary, it was not perfect: hallamos ser el P. Fr. Gregorio Garcia ... el que mas cuerdamente, i con maior diligencia, i estudio empleò su Ingenio en formar de lo mejor de la erudicion ... el Origen de los Indios ...; i aunque el suio [parecer] conviene à todos las Opiniones que defiende, si huviere de seguirle el Lector, se quedarà, como reconoce Solorçano, en la misma duda; porque llegarà à concebir quien fueron los Pobladores, pero no los primeros, sin negar la posibilidad de los que llegaron despues. (‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in García [1981] [2]) We consider Father Fray Gregorio Garcia to be ... the one who most prudently and with the greatest diligence and study employed his Intellect in discovering to the best of his erudition ... the Origin of the Indians ... And although his [personal theory regarding Indian origins] agrees with all the Theories that he defends, if the Reader were to follow him he would find himself, as Solorzano recognizes, with the same doubt; because he would be able to conceive of who the Founders were, but not the original ones, without being able to rule out the possibility of those who arrived later.

Although González de Barcia included García’s treatise in his selection of authoritative authors of New World historiography, his use of the conjunctive ‘pero’ – which connotes, in a colloquial sense, the idea of a defect22 – indicated that García still lacked at least one key piece: he did not identify the first migrant settlers to the New World. To this effect González de Barcia stated the following: ‘determinamos reimprimirle añadiendo el Cap. XXIV. del Libro IV. en cuio §. XIV concisamente se trata de los primeros Pobladores’ (‘we have decided to re-publish it

154 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

[i.e., García’s Origen], adding Chapter 24 of Book 4, in whose Section 14 the first Settlers are dealt with concisely’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in García [1981] ¶7r). In what remains of this chapter I wish to review this specific addition in an attempt to explore the boundaries and limits of the bibliothecarial space that González de Barcia created. 3 The Limits of the Library 3.1 The Boundaries of the Barcia Library González de Barcia’s interest in the study of the indigenous people of the New World had little to do with a desire to praise their cultures. In his Ensayo cronológico, for example, he described them as ‘aquellos miserables Indios (que muchos viven sin Lei, sin Dios, sin Habitacion, ni Cabeça)’ (‘those miserable Indians [many of whom live without Law, without God, without Residence, without Leadership]’; ‘Introducción’ [19]). Moreover, in the preface to his edition of Gregorio García’s treatise, González de Barcia reiterated his feelings for these people, who ‘aun viven en aquellas distantes i dilatadisimas Regiones, mas incultos que los primeros Barbaros’ (‘still live in those distant and vast Regions, more uncivilized than the first Barbarians’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in García [1981] [1]v). Obviously, González de Barcia held the Indians in low esteem. However, he knew that the presence of an indigenous population in lands unknown before 1492 prompted considerable reflection on the part of any serious scholar. As a result, when González de Barcia provided his rationale for his decision to re-publish the Origen de los Indios, he emphasized the relevance of this type of scholarship within any Americanist library: Pero como el mas descuidado Genio, leiendo las Historias de Indias, despierta su curiosidad à saber el Origen de los Indios ... nos pareciò preciso, haviendo reimpreso las Historias de las Indias Occidentales, ... reconocer los Escritores, que tratan el Origen de los Indios de proposito, ò de paso, i que llegaron à nuestro poder. (‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in García [1981], [1]v) But since the most absent-minded Genius, when reading the Histories of the Indies, is aroused by his curiosity to learn about the Origin of the Indians ... it seemed essential to us, having re-published the Histories of the West Indies, ... to recognize the Writers that have dealt with the Origin of

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

155

the Indians as their main topic of study or merely in passing, and whose writings have come into our possession.

Any scholar who entered a library dedicated to the study of the New World required access to information regarding its earliest inhabitants. Having re-published a selection of New World historiography (‘Historias de las Indias Occidentales’), González de Barcia considered appropriate the inclusion of a work on Indian origins. With limited geographical knowledge, however, the question of Indian origins could not receive any definitive answer. The collections of the library, in fact, represented one of the few sources available to scholars who desired to learn about the New World. Ideally, scholars needed empirical evidence in order to ascertain how the Indians migrated to the New World. As González de Barcia wrote: durarà la incertidumbre, hasta que la Providencia Divina permita se revele à los Hombres este secreto, manifestando los Limites del Mundo al Norte, i al Sur, en cuios desconocidos Paises, i remotisimos Pielagos, creen los mas Eruditos se hallaràn algunas señas demostrativas, que guien el incierto juicio àcia alguna invencible raçon. (‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in García [1981] [1]v) Uncertainty will last until Divine Providence should permit that this secret be revealed to Man, manifesting the Boundaries of the Northern and Southern World, in whose unknown Countries and remotest Seas the most Erudite believe that there will be found some demonstrative signs that might guide one’s doubtful judgment towards some irrefutable proof.

Until accurate information regarding the earth’s land masses could show how the first people and animals migrated to the New World, these origins would remain a mystery. Still, if unable to travel the globe, all scholars could search the collections of their library in an attempt to find sources therein with which to advance their hypotheses. González de Barcia offers a prime example of this type of bibliothecarial investigation. While Virtus Bering (the Danish navigator who explored the seas off the coast of Russia on behalf of the tsar) discovered, in 1728, the strait that today bears his name, González de Barcia, in 1729, published an excursus, intercalated into the fourth book of the

156 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Origen de los Indios, in which he explored the furthest reaches of history and geography by using his library. Having constructed this site, González de Barcia developed his writing on Indian origins by utilizing the resources contained in his library. However, although his library permitted the intellectual exploration of the origins of the Indians, the necessity of working from within this structure placed limits on his examination. While González de Barcia exploited the intellectual pillars of his library, he was also confined by the scholarly edifice he created. In order to understand his use of the bibliothecarial space, therefore, we need to identify the boundaries of the Barcia Library. 3.2 The Foundation of the Barcia Library At the base of the Barcia Library, the work that González de Barcia claimed provided him with the foundation for his review of Indian origins was the Bible. In this way, the Catholic González de Barcia followed the lead of the priest, friar Gregorio García. García articulated his understanding of the biblical base of the Origen de los Indios, reminding his reader that ‘[e]l primer fundamento, es de Fe Catolica’ (‘the first foundation is Catholic Faith’; García [1981] 7). Likewise, González de Barcia began his contribution on Indian origins by rejecting all theories that did not accept the creation account given in Genesis. As he wrote, these heretical theories suggested that ‘puede haver otros que los descendientes de Adàm, contra lo que enseña la Escritura’ (‘there can be descendents other than those of Adam, which goes against what is taught in the Scriptures’; in García [1981] 248). The Bible formed the cornerstone of González de Barcia’s work on Indian origins; no theory that went against biblical teachings would be accepted. Barrera y Leirado provides an important context for González de Barcia’s understanding of biblical accounts. In an early theatrical manuscript from around 1693, González de Barcia, using a pseudonym, gave one of the few recorded references to his days as a student: ‘Escribíala [i.e., La comedia nueva y famosa de ‘Los peligros por amar’] don Jácome de Cárdenas, bachiller en teología, por la Universidad de Alcalá de Henares’ (‘[La comedia nueva y famosa de “Los peligros por amar”] was written by don Jácome de Cárdenas, bachelor in theology at the University of Alcalá de Henares’; Barrera y Leirado 177). This reference to his studies in theology offers an explanation for González de Barcia’s profound knowledge of the literature surrounding human

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

157

origins. In González de Barcia’s time, moreover, such knowledge proved invaluable to any scholar writing on the origins of man. As Grafton notes: ‘No subject pricked more sensibilities, caused more pens to be dipped in gall, or generated more original critical scholarship than the problem of the origins of the modern English, Dutch, German, Italian, and Spanish peoples’ ( Joseph Scaliger 2:76). As both a student of theology and a devoted servant of the Catholic monarchy of Philip V, González de Barcia desired to contribute to this critical scholarship by refuting the heretical, outlining the canonical, and indicating Spain’s importance in this resurgence of thought brought about by the discovery of the indigenous people of the New World. His studies in theology, consequently, provided him with the intellectual support needed to offer an intelligent argument. Nonetheless, some scholars today consider González de Barcia’s reedition of García’s Origen de los Indios a regressive step in the study of the Indian origins. As Huddleston writes: ‘The republication of the Origen reaffirmed the credulity of the Garcían Tradition and constituted an effective rejection of the Acostan school’ (109). According to Huddleston, the Acostan tradition, that is, the writings starting with and based upon José de Acosta’s Historia natural y moral de las Indias, represents ‘the finest result of Spanish scholarship on the subject of the origins of American Indians’ (78).23 However, as we have seen, García’s work, not Acosta’s, provided González de Barcia with the most effective structure into which he could introduce his paratext. Consequently, in providing this paratextual commentary, González de Barcia placed the reader at the heart of the debate on the study of the origins of the Indians. In using his paratext to reflect the bibliothecarial space, González de Barcia provided scholarly references to the corpus of works that pertained to the origins debate. As a result, more than offering a profound new theory on the origins of the Indians, González de Barcia’s contribution in the second edition of the Origen de los Indios, as I have suggested, consisted of providing the bibliographical point of departure from which these ideas grew. In this light, Franklin Pease, in his introduction to the facsimile edition of the 1729 Origen de los Indios, offers one of the most accurate reviews of the work’s importance for scholars today. Pease notes that while today the work seems to be the product of a delirious whim (‘caprichoso delirio’), when it was first released it represented a fair reaction of the writers who were trying to make sense of the New World (xl). From within the space provided by the

158 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

library, González de Barcia carried out his study of this difficult topic. At the heart of his research González de Barcia placed the Bible. In addition to this base, however, the collection of authoritative and scholarly works constituted the figurative body, or corpus, of texts that he used to further his Americanist project. González de Barcia’s extended commentary in book 4, chapter 24 provides an example of the purpose to which he put these bibliographical sources in his own writing. He began his excursus by clearly stating his view of what he considered to be the heretical theories of Indian origins: ‘Aun no quisieramos acordarnos de los pareceres indignos, de Algunos verdaderamente blasfemos, i mas barbaros que los Indios, que no merecen nombre de Opiniones, sino de locuras’ (‘We would not even wish to recall the despicable feelings of Some truly blasphemous writers, and more barbarous than the Indians, that do not deserve to be called Theories, but acts of madness’; in García [1981] 248). The biblical authority that provided the foundation for both García’s and González de Barcia’s ideas would not allow either to tolerate theories that they deemed blasphemous. In his marginal notes, González de Barcia indicated the works that he considered fell into this category. For example, before contesting the idea that the first Indians were generated spontaneously from putrid matter, one of the theories reviewed in the Origen that was considered particularly heretical, González de Barcia used the margin to identify one of the leading proponents of this explanation: ‘Ex Avicen. Andr. Cisalpin. lib. 1. Perip. quaest. 1’ (‘Following Avicena, Andrea Cesalpino, book 1 of the Peripateticorum quaestionum’; in García [1981] 248, left margin). As Gliozzi writes, Andrea Cesalpino (1519–1603) was known for having openly declared his desire to demonstrate, following the principle of Aristotle, that man could originate from putrid matter (260). To refute this heretical reference, therefore, González de Barcia included additional references in his marginal notes: ‘Solorçan. de Iur. lib. 1. cap. 9. num. 37 & in Politic. lib. 1. cap. 5. vers. Por mas desatinada’ (‘Solorzano, de Iure Indiorum Book 1, Chapter 9, number 37 and in Política Indiana Book 1, Chapter 5, at the line Por mas desatinada’; in García [1981] 248, left margin). González de Barcia fulfilled the responsibilities of scholarly accuracy by reporting the works he used when commenting on heretical authors. However, he did not allow those sources to remain uncontested. Using the note, González de Barcia indicated, by way of Solórzano, the foolishness (‘Por mas desatinada’) of Cesalpino’s ideas.24 Moreover, by providing the short quote, González de

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

159

Barcia allowed Solórzano’s words to amplify the message he himself, offered in his commentary. With appropriate scholarly information provided in the margins, González de Barcia revealed in his commentary, intercalated into the text, his confidence that no reader would deny his concluding remarks: Estas, i otras semejantes no se pueden tener por Opiniones, sino ceguedades, publicadas por Hombres dudosos en la Fè, sabios en su presumpcion, i engañadores del Mundo, que con mentiras, i fraudes se oponen à la palabra Divina. (In García [1981] 248) These and other similar ones cannot be taken as Theories but only as blindness published by Men doubting their Religion, wise in their presumption, and tricksters of the World who oppose the Divine word with lies and frauds.

González de Barcia’s access to the resources of his library allowed him to develop his ideas. Using the Bible to ground his scholarship, he proceeded to employ the works in his library to add substance to his commentary. As we will now see, however, the boundaries of the Barcia Library were not limitless. Inadequate works or works that did not pertain to the library collection prevented González de Barcia from providing a definitive study. In what follows, I will conclude my review of the Barcia Library by revealing how González de Barcia confronted the inevitable constraints placed on his intellectual goals when the library no longer provided the necessary sources for scholarship. 3.3 The Limits of the Barcia Library As noted earlier, in his preface to the second edition of the Origen de los Indios, González de Barcia lamented Gregorio García’s decision to avoid indicating the origins of the first migrants to the New World. To emend this perceived deficiency, González de Barcia stated that he would respond to the question of America’s earliest inhabitants in section 14 of the added chapter 24, book 4, of his 1729 publication. In that section, he provided a commentary on the Scythians in an attempt to account for the origins of the Indians. The Scythians were an IndoEuropean tribe that migrated into the area around the Caspian Sea in the years circa 700 BCE (Johnson 250). As James William Johnson notes, the Scythians never developed a central government, relying,

160 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

instead, on ‘a loose alliance of tribes much in the manner of the American Indian; and, like the Indian, the Scythian lived in a portable house, practiced social communism, used tomahawks, and scalped his enemies’ (250). Mentioned throughout history by writers such as Ovid, Shakespeare, and Rousseau, these people became ‘sires to the Franks, Celts, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Swedes, and numerous other races’ (Johnson 257). For González de Barcia, the Scythians provided a welldocumented theory with which to explain the origins of the Indians. As he stated: ‘Siendo conformes Scythas, è Indios en tan principales Costumbres, como quedan referidas, parece que ai poca duda en este Origen’ (‘Since Scythians and Indians both observe such important Customs, as have been referred, it seems that there is little doubt about this Origin’; in García [1981] 307). This theory provided González de Barcia with what he hoped would be certain proof with which to establish the origins of the first indigenous settlers in the New World. However, his attempt to articulate the Scythian theory forced him to confront the bibliographical limits of his library. In what follows I do not intend to provide an analysis of the intellectual history surrounding the Scythian civilization. Conversely, I intend to review how González de Barcia used his library to formulate the discursive strategies through which he attempted to articulate this history. As we will see, his emphasis on Scythian origins presented him with two fundamental bibliographical obstacles: (1) the use of historical works that he considered inadequate; and (2) the absence of works from his revered library collection. Both served as hurdles with which González de Barcia needed to contend. An example of González de Barcia’s use of what he considered to be inferior bibliographical sources can be seen in his commentary on one of the theories of Scythian migration to the New World. In order to suggest that the Scythians arrived in the Indies via the northernmost islands of Europe and Greenland, González de Barcia utilized the scholarship of George Horn (the seventeenth-century German professor of history, geography, and law at the University of Haderwyk).25 In his preface, González de Barcia stated that Horn’s book was written ‘tan atropelladamente, que dà à entender bien (aunque èl no lo de-clararà) la escasa madurèz al tiempo de escribirle’ (‘so hastily that it easily reveals [although he does not declare it] the insufficient maturity of ideas at the time it was written’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in García [1981] ¶7r). Nonetheless, Horn’s work de Originibus Americanis libri quator (1652) was cited often in the second edition of Origen de los

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

161

Indios and offered González de Barcia much important information. For example, referring to Horn, González de Barcia wrote: Martin Forbister [sic] viò en el Estrecho, que llamò de su Nombre, ... Indios chatos, ... i en muchas cosas eran semejantes à los Samojedes, Groenlandos, i Lapones: tanto, que dice Hornio no se debe dudar, que sean vna misma Gente, i todos Hunos, i Scythas. (In García [1981] 287) At the Straight that bears his Name, Martin Frobisher saw ... short Indians; ... and in many ways they were similar to the Samoyeds, Greenlanders, and the Lapons: so much so that Horn says one should not doubt that they are the same People, and all Huns and Scyths.

González de Barcia’s use of George Horn, a writer whom he held in low esteem, exemplifies one of the limits of the Barcia Library. The testimony offered by Frobisher and recounted by Horn provided González de Barcia with invaluable information with which to further his Scythian commentary. However, having promoted the scholarly value of his Americanist editions, González de Barcia needed to address the relevance of a history, the de Originibus Americanis, that, although neither written in Spanish nor published in Madrid, provided information with which González de Barcia could advance his research. In order to minimize the authoritative value of Horn’s history, therefore, González de Barcia provided a marginal note in which he referred to both Horn’s work and a second study: ‘Horn. lib. 3. cap. 6. Carden. Ensai. Cronolog. à la Histor. de la Florid. in Introduct. vers. El Padre Avril’ (‘Horn, Book 3, Chapter 6. Cárdenas, Ensayo Cronólogico para la historia de la Florida, in the Introduction, at the Line ‘El Padre Avril’; in García [1981] 287, left margin).26 González de Barcia used his note to suggest the proper context within which the scholar should consider Horn’s de Originibus Americanis. By providing a reference to Cárdenas’s (that is, González de Barcia’s) essay on La Florida, González de Barcia stressed the importance of reading Horn in conjunction with an edition from the Barcia Library.27 By juxtaposing editions from his library with histories from the wider scholarly canon of the Republic of Letters, González de Barcia displayed a desire to offer his readers multiple bibliographical sources. Using these sources in conjunction, González de Barcia presented his commentary with intellectual confidence. However, although the utilization of histories that he considered to

162 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

be inferior constituted one obstacle to his work, the absence of works that he considered to be fundamental constituted an even greater limitation. As we will see, the attempts made by González de Barcia to make use of the scholarship of the Mexican savant and polymath Carlos de Sigüenza y Gongora (1645–1700) served to demarcate the outermost barrier of the bibliothecarial space he created. The Scythian theory that González de Barcia developed in his added chapter (i.e., book 4, chapter 24) grew out of his awareness of the writers who had studied this civilization. His use of George Horn, as well as other scholars documented in his marginal notes, indicated that González de Barcia had a thorough knowledge of this vast textual corpus. However, in his preface, González de Barcia lamented his inability to consult the work of one specific author: D. Carlos de Siguença i Gongora, que escriviò por la Opinion contenida en el referido § XIV. no ha llegado a nuestras manos, solo de el Titulo de su Obra nos diò noticia D. Nicolàs Antonio en sus M.Ss. (‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in García [1981] ¶7v) We have not been able to obtain a copy of Don Carlos de Sigüenza y Góngora, who wrote in favour of the Theory contained in the aforementioned section 14 [of book 4, chapter 24]. In his manuscript, Don Nicolás Antonio only gave notice of the Title of this Work.

Having reviewed Nicolás Antonio’s manuscripts, González de Barcia learned that Sigüenza y Gongora wrote a monograph that dealt with the Scythian civilization. However, with the bibliographical catalogue as his only reference, González de Barcia was unable to incorporate the information provided by Sigüenza y Gongora into the updated edition of Gregorio García’s Origen de los indios. Nonetheless, throughout his commentary to the second edition González de Barcia promoted the scholarship of the learned Mexican. This promotion, however, exposed a second limitation inherent in González de Barcia’s library. In the index to the 1729 Origen de los Indios, González de Barcia indicated his use of Sigüenza y Gongora: ‘D. Carlos de Siguença i Gongora escriviò la Antiguedad, i Origen de los Indios. 308.1’ (‘Don Carlos de Sigüenza y Góngora wrote the Antiguedad y Origen de los Indios. 308.1’; ‘Tabla de las cosas notables’ in García [1981] [14]). As part of the ‘Tabla de las cosas mas notables contenidas en el libro antecedente del Origen de los Indios’ (‘Table of the most notable things contained in the pre-

González de Barcia’s Creation of the Spanish American Library

163

ceding book on the Origin of the Indians’), González de Barcia’s inclusion of Sigüenza y Gongora further highlighted the value that he saw in the Mexican scholar’s work.28 However, without access to the book Sigüenza y Gongora wrote, González de Barcia could not include the Mexican savant’s research. Reviewing the first of the two references to Sigüenza y Góngora made in the ‘Tabla de las cosas notables,’ we may discern the second limit inherent in González de Barcia’s bibliothecarial space. The information provided in the index indicated that on page 308, left column, the reader would find a reference to Sigüenza y Gongora’s writing on the antiquity and origin of the Indians. Turning to that section, which coincides with the conclusion of González de Barcia’s excursus on Scythian origins, one sees that González de Barcia ended his discussion by indicating to his readers the limitations of his scholarship: ‘Queda advertido, que no sabemos de Fè Divina la Poblacion de las Indias, porque la Sagrada Escritura no dice fuese à poblarlas alguno de los Hijos, ò Nietos de Noè’ (‘It has been noted that we do not know about the population of the Indies by Divine Faith, because the Sacred Scriptures do not say that any of the Sons or Grandsons of Noah went there to settle’; in García [1981] 308). The Barcia Library permitted González de Barcia to advance his commentary on New World history. Grounding his narrative in the biblical base, González de Barcia underscored the foundation of his theoretical review. Only the library corpus of texts offered him the possibility to advance his ideas. As such, his desire to find Sigüenza y Góngora’s manuscript symbolized the endpoint of González de Barcia’s bibliothecarial space. As he concluded: pero en el fecundo Vergel de la Sabiduria hemos de procurar descubrir alguna flor, que persuada la Poblacion de las primeras Gentes del Mundo en las Indias, que aunque sabemos que D. Carlos de Siguença i Gongora escriviò el mismo asumpto, i hemos procurado ver su Obra para ponerla en este §. no hemos hallado noticia mas individual de ella, que el Titulo, manifestado por D. Nicolàs Antonio: lo qual nos basta para detenernos poco en èl; pues cuando se descubra este Tesoro, que oculta Mexico, quedarà inutil nuestro trabajo. (In García [1981] 308) But in the fertile Orchard of Knowledge we must try to discover some flower that allows us to be persuaded of the first People of the World in the Indies. For although we know that Don Carlos de Sigüenza y Góngora

164 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library wrote on the same matter, and although we have attempted to see his Work in order to refer to it in this section, we have not found any record of it except for the Title cited by Don Nicolás Antonio, which makes it unnecessary for us to spend more time with it here. Indeed, when this Treasure hidden by Mexico is discovered, our work will become useless.

The library as place and collection guided González de Barcia’s entire intellectual project. He worked from within its walls and used the knowledge it contained to advance his commentary. As a result, his scholarship developed from within the discursive locus constructed between the biblical base and the bibliographical unknown of the Barcia Library. Although the library empowered González de Barcia in his scholarship, it limited his ability to provide definitive arguments. He presented a profound bibliographical awareness of the intellectual history related to the origin of the Indians. However, he could not permit himself to recognize any conclusive value in his scholarship without first reading the scholarly treasures hidden in the Mexican archives. The library that symbolized his erudition also prevented him from achieving his highest scholarly goal. González de Barcia’s acknowledgment of this failure indicates the limit of his scholarly creation. As Juan Rodríguez de León, whose words serve as an epigraph to this chapter, said: ‘Como si fueran indices del poder, tanto los muchos Soldados, en los Campos, como los numerosos Libros, en las Bibliotecas’ (‘As if they were indices of power: both the many Soldiers in the Fields and the numerous Books in the Libraries’; Juan Rodríguez de León ‘Apologética’ in León Pinelo [1982] 1:¶2r). For González de Barcia, we see that the books of a library, like soldiers in the battlefield, symbolized the power of Spanish civilization. He desired to enter only the strongest opponents into this theatre of battle regarding New World historiography. Although his edition of Gregorio García acknowledged at least one weakness, González de Barcia’s manipulation of the paratext added to the 1729 publication illuminated the determination of purpose he revealed in his attempt to combat all antiHispanist discourse. By placing a reflection of the Barcia Library into the text, González de Barcia argued that Americanist scholarship began with the civilization that discovered, conquered, and attempted to bring order to that New World. Finally, by making this argument within the bibliographical context that informed the scholarship on the Indies, González de Barcia asserted the relevance of the Barcia Library as the prototype of all libraries devoted to New World scholarship.

5 The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool in the Americanist Editions of Andrés González de Barcia

Index ipse est anima illius corporis. The index itself is the soul of this work. (Joseph Scaliger, in a letter to Isaac Casaubon, Ep. 73. In Scaliger Epistolae [1628], 104)

1 The Index as Paratext In his prologue to the second edition of Juan de Torquemada’s (1557– 1624) Monarquía Indiana (1st ed. Seville, 1615), Andrés González de Barcia, writing under the assumed identity of his publisher, alluded to the many changes the reader could find by comparing the 1615 first edition to his new edition: Luego que empeçè la impresion, por el original, hallè, que en la primera Impresion huvo mas omisiones, y errores, que los que son regulares en todas ... procurè suplir vnas, y añadir otras, como facilmente se reconocerà, comparando esta Edicion, con aquella. (‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in Torquemada [1725] *r, my emphasis) After I began the printing, using the original, I discovered that in the first Printing there were more omissions and errors than those that are common in all ... I tried to fix some and touch up others, as one will easily recognize comparing this Edition with that one.

More than merely bringing the chronicles to press, González de Barcia performed a detailed analysis and close reading of the manuscript and

166 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

first edition. He proceeded, thereafter, to emend the errors and supplement the omissions. He suggested that any reader with access to both editions of the Torquemada chronicle could verify these numerous corrections introduced into the second publication. The method of close textual comparison recommended by González de Barcia, in fact, offers an effective analytical tool for the evaluation for the entire corpus of his editorial work. By scrutinizing, on a quantitative and qualitative level, the alterations introduced by González de Barcia, we gain a fundamental understanding of the elements of the editorial paratext that he considered to be most important in the construction of the Barcia Library. In some of the González de Barcia editions (e.g., García’s Origen de los Indios and León Pinelo’s Epítome de la biblioteca), the quantitative alterations performed by González de Barcia on the original works were apparent to the discerning eye of a scholar even before he or she opened the book. For example, he transformed his edition of the Epítome from a one-volume quarto edition of roughly two hundred pages into a three-volume folio edition of over a thousand pages. For this reason, any browsing patron who saw them side by side on a bookshelf would have discerned immediately that González de Barcia’s 1737–8 edition appeared substantially different from the 1629 first edition of the work. However, the 1725 second edition of the Monarquía Indiana did not reveal its alterations with such readily apparent clarity. Indeed, both the first and second editions of the Monarquia Indiana consisted of three-volume folio editions, each totalling over two thousand pages in length (cf. Sabin 305). The table opposite, based on the descriptions of the editions provided by Jorge Gurría Lacroix, represents the total number of pages per volume of the 1615 and 1725 editions of the Monarquia Indiana (in Torquemada [1983] 7:467–9). Although the second edition has fewer pages per volume than the 1615 princeps, when placed side by side on the bookshelf of a library, the editions had very similar external compositions. While the reader could judge the external appearance of González de Barcia’s edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome and immediately recognize changes in publication format between the two editions of the work, no such quantitative distinction was obvious between the two editions of the Monarquía Indiana. Nonetheless, González de Barcia highlighted his edition of Torquemada’s chronicle as the one that he desired his readers to compare to the first edition. However, further analysis of the two editions of the Monarquía Indiana on a qualitative level unveiled no immediately discernable alterations of substance.

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

Vol. 1 Vol. 2 Vol. 3

1615 ed.

1725 ed.

844 pages 666 pages 714 pages

768 pages 623 pages 634 pages

167

Focusing on the title pages – the obvious point of entry for any reading of the chronicle – the reader, in fact, discovered even more similarities between the two editions. The harmony between title pages of the two Torquemada editions is unique within González de Barcia’s Americanist editorial production. The majority of his re-publications included an announcement on the updated title page that served to indicate to the reader the changes he or she would find therein. The 1729 edition of Gregorio García’s Origen de los Indios, for example, included the following additional information supplied by González de Barcia on the title page: Segunda impresion. Enmendada, y añadida de algunas opiniones, o cosas notables, en maior prueba de lo que contiene, con tres Tablas mui puntuales de los Capitulos, de las Materias, y Autores, que las tratan (‘Title Page’ in García [1981]) Second printing. Emended and to which were added some theories or notable things in greater proof of what it contains. With three very punctual Indices of the Chapters, of the Subjects, and Authors that discuss them.

From the 1729 title page, the reader learned that the second edition of the García work included: (1) new theories in support of the original theories adduced by García; and (2) three concise indices. However, as we will see, González de Barcia added no such comments to the title page of his 1725 edition of the Monarquía Indiana. Moreover, except for stylistic embellishments, he changed very little of the format of the 1615 title page. A review of the two frontispieces substantiate this claim. As Gurría Lacroix notes, the 1615 frontispiece portrayed a scene of a religious congregation framed within a large arch supported by two Ionic columns, both of which rested on two quadrangular support bases (in Torquemada [1983] 7:467). (See figure 5.1.) Inside the left base

168 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

one finds the symbol I.H.S. The symbol M.R.A. is written inside the right base. The long title of the Monarquía Indiana – I. [II.III.] Parte de los veynte y vn libros y Monarchia Indiana con el origen de los Yndios Occidentales De sus poblaciones Descubrimiento Conquista Conuersion y Otras Cosas Maravillosas de la Mesma tierra distribuydos En tres tomos – was provided within the inner curvature of the arch. To the left of this arch, a Franciscan friar stood near a banner that displayed the crossing forearms of two individuals. To the right of the arch, a second Franciscan friar stood near a second banner on which five bleeding wounds were displayed. Finally, within the frame and directly underneath the long title, a Franciscan friar delivered a sermon from an elevated pulpit to a large group of indigenous people of the New World. The sermon, as indicated by the preacher’s pointer, was devoted to the subject Christ’s sufferings along the path of the Via Dolorosa. Notably, directly behind the friar one sees a minor friar who, overwhelmed, perhaps, by the topic of study, has dozed off in the midst of the exposition. González de Barcia’s 1725 edition reproduced the themes of the 1615 frontispiece with great attention to detail. (See figure 5.2.) Moreover, in an attempt to ensure a reproduction of the highest quality, González de Barcia solicited the aid of the Franciscan engraver Matías de Irala (1680–1753), one of the most well-known artisans of early-eighteenthcentury Spain. As Andrés Ubeda de los Cobos notes, Matías de Irala developed a theological vision of art that aspired to place painting at the service of religion (1033). Moreover, Antonio Bonet Correa reminds us that Matías de Irala was one of the most important contributors to the repertory of the late Spanish Baroque (9). As such, his work offers a gauge of the dominant artistic aesthetic during the reigns of the first two Bourbon kings, Philip V and Ferdinand VI (Bonet Correa 9). Having already chosen the famous and highly respected Nicolás Rodríguez Franco as the publisher for the Torquemada edition, González de Barcia’s selection of Matías de Irala – who also contributed to González de Barcia’s 1730 edition of Antonio de Herrera’s Décadas – further evidenced his desire to cultivate the most ideal conditions of publication for his scholarly editions destined for the New World library he was creating. As Bonet Correa notes, Matías de Irala’s title page for the 1725 Monarquía Indiana, which Irala finished in 1723, was one of his most well-known artistic works (20). However, González de Barcia, apparently, did not commission from Irala an original design for the visual space of the page. Rather, Matías de Irala developed a title page that

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

169

Figure 5.1 ‘Frontispiece.’ Juan de Torquemada, IIa parte de los veynte y vn libros rituals y monarchia yndiana. Seville: Matthias Clavijo, 1615. Courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library.

170 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Figure 5.2 ‘Frontispiece.’ Juan de Torquemada, Segunda parte de los viente i vn libros rituales i monarchia indiana. Madrid: Nicholas Rodriquez Franco, 1723 [1725]. Courtesy of the John Carter Brown Library.

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

171

followed much of the spirit of the composition of the original frontispiece. Irala, for example, altered only slightly the Ionic columns of the 1615 title page by replacing them with Corinthian columns, which he embellished with garlands. Within the arch, moreover, Irala replicated the placement of the 1615 long title, making only minor changes of orthography: Primera [Segunda, Tercera] Parte de los Veinte ivn Libros Rituales i Monarquia Indiana, con el origen y guerras, de los Indios Occidentales de sus Poblaciones, Descubrimientos, Conquista, Conuersion y otras cosas maravillosas de la mesma tierra distribuydos en tres tomos. Although the second edition’s title page was not an identical recreation, its similarity to the first edition indicated González de Barcia’s desire to follow the design of the 1615 frontispiece. This desire to replicate the first edition frontispiece is further seen in the two Franciscan friars and the two religious banners reproduced by Irala from the 1615 frontispiece for the 1725 edition. As in the 1615 scene, underneath the title one friar is delivering a sermon, this time on the Passion of Christ,1 while a second, lethargic minor friar sits below him. Finally, Irala replicated the row of caciques seated on benches in the lower left-hand corner of the ecclesiastical scene. However, in the 1725 publication of the Monarquía Indiana, the portrayal of the indigenous elite evinced a stylistic transformation characterized by the exotic. For example, the caciques’ vestments for the 1615 frontispiece consisted of plain tunics; and the caciques themselves lacked elaborate head ornamentation. Those depicted in the 1725 edition, conversely, wore ornate headdresses with delicate feather adornments that served to emphasize the imagined style of dress of the indigenous leadership. Although the embellishments of the 1725 frontispiece distinguish it from the 1615 original, the general theme and overall presentation show a great similarity between the two editions. For this reason, one may again pause when recalling that González de Barcia advised his readers to review both editions of the Monarquía Indiana in order to discern the changes he claimed to have made. As we have seen, both editions were published in three volumes, and the frontispieces adorning the volumes showed little variation in content from the 1615 edition to that of 1725. However, if not at the beginning, one obvious emendation could be seen at the end of each volume of the 1725 edition: González de Barcia prepared substantial subject indices to accompany the new publication. The 1615 edition of the Monarquía Indiana had included only modest indices. The index for the first volume, for example, was entitled

172 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

Vol. 1 Vol. 2 Vol. 3

1615 ed. index

1725 ed. index

5 pages 4 pages 6 pages

71 pages 56 pages 42 pages

‘Indice de las Cosas mas notables de los cinco libros deste primer tomo’ (‘Index of the most notable Things from the five books of this first volume’; ‘Indice de las cosas mas notables’ in Torquemada [1615] 1:[1]). It consisted of five pages of keyword entry headings presented in alphabetical order. The index for the second volume was four pages in length, while that for the third and final volume consisted of six pages. In contrast, González de Barcia equipped his 1725 edition of the Monarquía Indiana with elaborate systematic indices. For example, the index for volume 1 consisted of 71 pages of keyword entry headings arranged in alphabetical order. The second and third volumes, moreover, consisted of 56- and 42-page indices, respectively. The table above represents the dramatic alteration of the indices in the 1725 edition. In a second edition whose total number of pages decreased from that of the first edition, the substantial increase in index pages demands critical attention. The fact that this component of the González de Barcia editorial paratext differed significantly from the original 1615 obliges us to consider the importance that this analytical device had within the context of his Americanist project. 2 Defining the Index González de Barcia’s decision to supplement his Americanist editions with substantial indices discloses his awareness of the implications these scholarly devices held within the intellectual community. A review of the role of the index among European scholars of the early modern period provides a foundation upon which to advance the study of González de Barcia’s paratext. Theorists and compilers of indices indicate the late Middle Ages as the starting point for the compilation of this scholarly tool of reference. One of the primary uses consisted of offering a tool for studies of the Bible. As Mary and Richard Rouse write, biblical scholarship relied heavily on the comparison of the Gospels or passages of the New Testament with passages from the Old (‘La naissance des index’ in Martin 1:77b). In an attempt to organize this

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

173

material, biblical scholars developed systematic indices with which they could analyse and compare the various versions of the Gospels and coordinate their readings between the New and Old Testaments. For this reason, the editors of the Catholic Encyclopedia remind us that the index resembles the design of the biblical concordance: ‘[C]oncordances ... are verbal indexes to the Bible, or lists of Biblical words arranged alphabetically with indications to enable the inquirer to find the passages of the Bible where the words occur’ (Herbermann 195). In order to accommodate the need to compare various passages, scholars followed the concordance model and developed indices with which a reader could locate the desired information with greater facility. The Rouses develop the idea of the index as an information locator used to facilitate the acquisition of knowledge. Using the index, a student could locate even those passages whose location he or she could not recall (‘La naissance des index’ in Martin 1:78b). An aide-mémoire, at a fundamental level the index was a time-saving device. In her work Printed Commonplace-Books and the Structuring of Renaissance Thought, Ann Moss expands upon this point: ‘The purpose of all this editorial activity was the easy search of reference books and the quick retrieval of excerpts to be cited as authorities for proof or comparison’ (43). Moss reiterates the idea that the index functioned in part as an alphabetically ordered ‘finding system’ (96). However, in addition to this service as a locator of textual passages, the index also offered a substantial summary and epitome of the text. Lancaster provides a wider definition of the index that serves to clarify this aspect: ‘The main purpose of indexing and abstracting is to construct representations of published items in a form suitable for inclusion in some type of database’ (1). Lancaster views the index as a scholarly tool that provides the reader with an overview, a ‘representation,’ of the text. The index compiler describes the contents of a text using selected index keywords that ‘serve as access points through which a bibliographic item can be located and retrieved in a subject search in a published index’ (Lancaster 5). However, by creating a device intended to provide access to the work, the index writer obliges the reader to place his or her trust in the scholar who compiled the index. This consideration of scholarly trust merits review. The compiler of an index, although he or she may strive to systematize the work, does not produce an intellectual tool characterized by its scientific rigor. As Harrod remarks: ‘Indexing is not a science but an art and [it] poses many problems to indexers, especially those who deal with long and

174 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

complicated texts’ (ix). In theory, the indexer attempts to provide a representation of the ‘book consciousness’ (Witty 6b), by which is meant a recounting of the dominant thematic components presented in a text. However, the development of this ‘consciousness’ involves a process of selection determined by the subjectivity of the individual index creator. As a result, this representation is also an interpretation of the text. As the ‘consciousness’ of the book, the index, although located at the end of the publication, serves an exegetical role that functions, potentially, from the beginning of and throughout the work. The index, in this way, guides the subsequent readings of the text it ostensibly represents. Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida offers a valid description of this counter-intuitive characteristic of the index. In act 1, scene 3, of the 1609 historical tragedy, the Greek soldier Nestor responded to his comrade Ulyssus: ‘And in such indexes, although small pricks / To their subsequent volumes, there is seen / The baby figure of the giant mass / Of things to come at large’ (quoted in Knight ‘The Problem of Copyright’ 9a). Located at the end of a book, the index is in no way an afterthought; it serves to present the reader with a glimpse of ‘things to come at large.’ Indeed, as Liz Stalcup notes: ‘Unless an index does reveal the character of a book, it remains a list’ (101). In sum, the index serves as a representation of the book, acts as its ‘consciousness,’ and, potentially, reveals its character. Far from a role at the periphery of the book, the index is central to the book’s presentation. Nonetheless, literary scholars rarely make the index an object of study. In part this is due to the fact that indices are often excluded from works of fiction (one notable exception being the ‘Indice de personajes’ in José Camilo Cela’s Colmena). In addition, while some historians have dealt with the index as a scholarly tool, few, if any, have considered its capacity for guiding textual interpretation. However, in a historical or scholarly work the index serves an invaluable exegetical role. In this way, its location at the end of a book does not symbolize its value. Not limited by its subordinate position, in many instances the index has the potential to define the topics of scholarly interest, that is, the index ‘leads’ scholarship. The index serves as a key component of González de Barcia’s bibliothecarial construction. In all of the editions published during his lifetime, and in nine of the sixteen histories published posthumously in the 1749 Historiadores primitivos, González de Barcia supplied a detailed analytical index. This feature served to display further González de Barcia’s desire to construct a scholarly library that exemplified the highest

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

175

ideals of all library design. Insofar as ‘librarianship is the management of knowledge’ (Shera 16), the use of the index permitted González de Barcia to attempt to codify New World scholarship by directing scholars to the topoi within a book that he considered most apposite for the study of the Spanish Indies. The potential advantage (or danger) inherent in this attempt at codification consisted of the fact that it permitted the index compiler to attempt to predetermine the reading of a book. For this reason, Shera is correct to assert the following: ‘If one may learn anything from such a cursory examination of the history of classification it is that every scheme is conditioned by the intellectual environment of its age or time’ (82). The index offers many examples of the varying conditions influencing the design scheme of this system of bibliothecarial classification. A review and comparison of two index entries from different historical moments make this point clear. The index compiled for the historian Eugene Rice Jr’s classic study The Foundations of Early Modern Europe, 1460–1559 elucidates the standard organization of this scholarly apparatus during the twentieth century and today. Before I begin this comparison, I wish to state that in using Rice’s work here in order to review the obvious but seldom articulated rules governing the contemporary index, I acknowledge that almost any modern index could serve to provide a point of reference. In this instance, I chose Rice’s 1994 index because his work continues to serve as a most commonly used introductory text to the study of early modern Europe. Thus, it will provide us with an immediately recognizable point of comparison for our subsequent study of the eighteenth-century indices constructed by González de Barcia. The first component of the organization of Rice’s index involves the alphabetization of keyword entry headings. These initial headings are followed by a subset alphabetization of subjects or subheadings relevant to each principal entry heading. For example, Rice’s alphabetical index includes the following sequence: Cennini, Cennino, 98 ceremonies, symbols and, 113–14 Ceuta, capture of, 33 Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, 48, 51, 53, 119, 135, 184, 186, 197, 200, 201 elected emperor, 125 empire of, 124–32 administration in Sicily, 131

176 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library administration in Spain, 131 administration in the Netherlands, 131, 132 diversity of territories under, 126, 131 German dominions of, 127–30 inherited territories of, 127–25 political traditions of, 125–26 royal marriages as a form of diplomacy in, 136 German territories and, 192–93 in Habsburg-Valois struggle, 135–37 retirement of, 132 in stand against Luther, 191–92, 193, 194 see also Holy Roman Empire Charles VII, King of France, 135, 136 (Rice 210)

The indexer, that is, the compiler of the index or index writer, for Rice’s text provides entries on people, places, and things relevant to the subject of the origins of early modern Europe.2 Focusing on Charles V allows us to discern further the method of organization employed in this index. First, the indexer entered the heading ‘Charles V’ in the proper alphabetical location following ‘Ceuta.’ Immediately following the primary heading, the index writer specified that the person under consideration was the Holy Roman Emperor and thereafter provided page references to where the indicated information could be found (‘Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, 48, 51 ...’). Within the entry, however, the index writer included subheadings related to Charles V. For example, the reader learns that Charles V was elected emperor; that he ruled over a large empire that included the administration of Sicily, Spain, and the Netherlands; and that he took a stand against Luther. The reader, moreover, who wishes to learn more is directed to the index entry ‘Holy Roman Empire.’ By reading the index, the student of Rice’s history obtains a preliminary orientation to the matters in the text relating to Charles V. By comparison, González de Barcia’s entry on Charles V, included in the 1725 edition of Juan de Torquemada’s Monarquía Indiana, utilized a different style of organization: Carith, voz Hebrea, què significa? 24.1. *Carlos V.* 340.1. su afabilidad y sencillèz. 616.1. tolera á dos Soldados le quiten el Pan de la Mesa Real en tiempo de hambre. 204.1. Despacha á los Provinciales Mendicantes, Comisarios á Mexico. 615.2

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

177

Don Carlos de Zuñiga lleva al Baptismo vn Hijo del Marquès del Valle, Don Martillo. 629.1. (‘Tabla’ In Torquemada [1725] 1:[10]) Carith, Hebrew word, what does it mean? 24.1 *Carlos V.* 340.1. his affability and simplicity. 616.1 he permits two Soldiers to take Bread from the Royal Table in a time of hunger. 204.1. He dispatches the Mendicant Provincials as Commissaries to Mexico. 615.2 Don Carlos de Zuñiga brought a Son of the Marquis del Valle, Don Martillo, to be Baptized. 629.1

Like Rice, González de Barcia used alphabetical order to organize the subject entry headings provided in his index. He correctly positioned the entry for ‘Charles V’ between ‘Carith’ and ‘Carlos de Zuñiga.’ However, although Rice’s entry on Charles V maintained this strict alphabetical order throughout its subheadings, González de Barcia did not utilize this method of organization for his subheadings. Moreover, the page references for the subheadings in González de Barcia’s Charles V entry followed no apparent numerical order: the entry references began with page 340, column 1, moved to page 616, column 1, returned to page 204, column 1, and ended with a reference to page 615, column 2. To determine González de Barcia’s system of organization for the index, one must recall the exegetical capacity inherent in this scholarly device. Although González de Barcia’s index utilized alphabetical order for the primary entry headings, having once directed the reader to these headings he based his system of organization on a narrative or, what I will term, a narrative index. In this case, González de Barcia’s narrative index attempted to attest to Charles V’s kindness and humility. From reading the complete entry, we learn that, although powerful, this king did not allow his exalted position to prevent him from showing kindness to his soldiers. Moreover, by rendering his narrative index in one continuous paragraph without breaks, González de Barcia emphasized the exegetical function at work in the construction of the scholarly apparatus. To use the index most effectively, the reader had to review the entry in its entirety. In this way, while his index acted as a representation of the text, González de Barcia presented the reader with a narrative that related only a portion of the text. This portion, of course, was selected by him. González de Barcia designed an index entry that resembled the flowing construction of a narrative. His selection of information for incorporation into the index narrative, consequently, permitted him to

178 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

favour the material that best supported his interpretive design. This is apparent in the entry on Charles V. In León Portilla’s index to the 1983 third edition of the Monarquía Indiana, León Portilla identified more than fifty references under the primary entry heading ‘Carlos V, emperador’ (‘Índice Analítico’ in Torquemada [1983] 7.590). From these numerous references, González de Barcia had selected only four for use in his narrative index. This selectivity, however, afforded him one of his most powerful scholarly advantages. As we will see, his construction of the index narrative constituted one of his main paratextual strategies for the presentation of the text. Unfortunately for González de Barcia, however, he was not the only scholar who attempted to provide textual interpretation using the index. The polemical exchange between González de Barcia and J.B. Verdussen surrounding their competing editions of Antonio de Herrera y Tordesilla’s (1559–1625) Descripción and Historia de los hechos de los castellanos (1601–15) exemplifies the profound influence the index exerted in determining the historical canon for New World scholarship. 3 J.B. Verdussen versus González de Barcia and the Duelling Indices of Their Herrera Editions On 24 September 1728, the Belgium publisher Jean Batiste Verdussen II (1659–1759) received permission from the Royal Council of Brabant – a council that acted on behalf of King Charles VI, the one-time Habsburg contender for the Spanish throne after the death in 1700 of Charles II – to publish his four-volume edition of Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas’s Historia general de las Indias Occidentales. Verdussen came from a distinguished Antwerp family of publishers. As Le Clercq notes, along with his cousins Henri and Corneille, Verdussen was one of the principal printers in Antwerp from the end of the seventeenth to the middle of the eighteenth century (17). The Herrera edition, for example, was one of more than fifty-five editions of various literary and historical works published by both J.B. Verdussen and his father, of the same name, from 1671 to 1728 (Le Clercq 114). Among this editorial production, the Verdussen family released many Spanish titles, such as Lorenzo [i.e., Baltazar] Gracián’s Obras (Antwerp, 1669),3 Cervantes’ Vida de Don Quijote (Antwerp, 1672), and Juan de Solórzano’s Política Indiana (Antwerp, 1703). In an attempt to promote to his readers the value of his Herrera edition, Verdussen indicated on the title page the improvements

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

179

made to his edition of the Décadas: ‘Nueva Impression enriquecida con lindas Figuras y Retratos’ (‘New Printing, enriched with charming Figures and Portraits’; ‘Frontispiece’ in Herrera [ed. Verdussen, 1728] vol. 1). Verdussen promoted the engravings reproduced in his edition as one of the elements that distinguished his new edition from earlier ones by himself and others. However, only one year after Verdussen’s edition was released, Andrés González de Barcia published a strong critique of it in his own edition of the Herrera history. González de Barcia worked on his edition of Herrera’s Decadas throughout the 1720s. Indeed, he received the royal privilege from Philip V – the Bourbon winner of the Spanish War of Succession, and the king who displaced Charles VI – on 3 December 1722 (‘Suma del privilegio’ in Herrera [ed. Barcia, 1730] vol. 1). However, González de Barcia’s complete five-volume edition was not published until 1730. For this reason, his comments regarding Verdussen’s edition of the Décadas merit discussion. Writing, again, under the identity of his publisher, González de Barcia issued a polemical review of the Verdussen edition, entitled ‘El Impresor, a los lectores, sobre los defectos de la Nueva Reimpresion de Amberes’ (‘The Printer to the Readers regarding the defects of the New Antwerp Reprinting’). González de Barcia left no room for doubt as to his view of the merit of Verdussen’s competing edition: El Año pasado de 1728. saliò reimpresa en Amberes, en quatro Volumenes en Folio, la Obra de Antonio de Herrera, acomodando, para hermosearla, algunas Laminas viejas, abiertas nuevamente con Agua fuertes, de las que para engañar al Mundo, publicaron Teodoro Bry, i sus Hijos, en los Libros, que intitularon, America, copiandolas en todo, aunque toscamente, i con mas impropriedades, que sus Originales: estrategema, con que imaginò Verdussen lograr el codicioso fin, que en todas las Impresiones Castellanas fuera del Reino llevan los Estrangeros. (‘El Impresor’ in Herrera [ed. Barcia, 1730] 1:1) This past year of 1728 the Work of Antonio de Herrera was re-published in Antwerp, in four Folio Volumes. In an attempt to make it more splendid, [the work] included some old Illustrations, newly re-etched, from those which, in order to fool the World, Theodore Bry and his Sons published in the Books they entitled America. [Verdussen] copied these etchings in their entirety, albeit sloppily, and with more improprieties than the Original. With this Strategy Verdussen imagined that he would achieve

180 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library the greedy objective that [all] foreign [publishers of] Castilian [works] from outside the Kingdom have.

From his reference to the anti-Spanish Protestant printer Teodoro de Bry, it is immediately evident that the object of González de Barcia’s criticism was J.B. Verdussen’s anti-Castilian publication strategy (‘estratagema’). González de Barcia considered the use of illustrations in Verdussen’s edition as symptomatic of Verdussen’s desire to compete with his Spanish edition. He accused Verdussen of failing to attend to substantive editorial errors ‘por la mucha priesa para acabar la Impresion antes que Yo’ (‘on account of the great rush to finish the Publication before I do’; ‘El Impresor’ in Herrera [ed. Barcia, 1730] 1:1– 2). Consequently, González de Barcia strove to dissuade all readers from purchasing what he considered to be the hastily prepared Verdussen edition: he tenido por de mi obligacion anotar algunas [faltas], que no es facil especificarlas todas, para dàr à entender, de que es vn engaño aparentemente hermoso, i que se quedaràn burlados los que emplearen el caudal en su Reimpresion, porque les serà preciso gastar otra vez en esta, si necesitaren de estos Libros (‘El Impresor’ in Herrera [ed. Barcia, 1730] 1:1) I have considered it my obligation to note some [errors], for it is difficult to specify them all, in order to show that, while apparently of quality, it is in fact a sham. And those who invest their money in his Re-publication will be deceived, because it will be necessary for them to spend their money again for this one, if they were to need these Books.

By alluding to the financial loss that would result from purchasing the Verdussen edition, González de Barcia presented himself as a thoughtful member of the intellectual community who wished to prevent his colleagues from squandering their money. However, as we will see, González de Barcia also would have noticed the paratextual implications that purchasing the Verdussen edition entailed. He concentrated his most energetic criticisms in response to these perceived threats. Although not mentioned by González de Barcia, Verdussen’s own Royal permission attempted to place limitations on the sales of any competing edition, among which González de Barcia’s edition would have figured prominently:

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

181

Carlos VI. por la gracia de Dios Emperador de los Romanos, Archiduque de Austria, Duque de Brabante, &.c., &.c. Permitiò à Juan Verdussen, Impressor jurado en la Villa de Amberes, que él solo puede imprimir el Libro intitulado Historia general de las Indias, escrita por Antonio de Herrera, &.c. y vedò a qualquier Impressor y Librero de imprimir el dicho Libro, y de venderle, y traerle en este Pays de otra impression por el tiempo de nueve años sô las penas contenidas en la Carta del Privilegio. Fecho en Bruselas 24. de Setiembre 1726. (‘Suma del Privilegio’ in Herrera [ed. Verdussen, 1728] vol. 1; my bold emphasis) Charles VI, by the grace of God, Roman Emperor, Archduke of Austria, Duke of Brabant, etcetera, etcetera permitted Jean Verdussen, sworn printer in the Village of Antwerp, that only he can print the Book entitled Historia general de las Indias, written by Antonio de Herrera, etcetera and [the King] forbade any Printer or Bookseller from printing the said Book and from selling it and bringing it to this Country by a different publisher for a period of nine years under the penalties contained in the Deed of Privilege. Dated in Brussels, 24 September 1726.

The privilege consisted of a restriction on the import and sale of other editions into territories governed by Charles VI, which, during the 1720s, included Belgium, the German territories, Bohemia (in what is today the Czech republic), and Hungary, as well as ‘the empire of Lombardy, Naples, Sicily, parts of Serba, of Wallachia and the Netherlands’ (Stoye 64).4 González de Barcia, of course, ignored this sanction and proceeded to publish his edition and distribute it throughout Europe. However, he knew that readers of the Republic of Letters would receive a different understanding of the Spanish Conquest of the Indies from the Verdussen edition. González de Barcia, therefore, began a preemptive program of publicity for his edition. In a competition between scholarly publications reminiscent of the War of Spanish Succession, Andrés González de Barcia entered into the ‘culture wars’ in order to take aim at his competitors and provide his productions with the most solid editorial foundation. González de Barcia attempted to guarantee his editorial primacy within the international intellectual community by maintaining an active presence among the network of scholars who made these determinations. In all cases, González de Barcia focused on the scholarly quality that he considered exemplary in his edition. In his polemic

182 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

against the work of Verdussen, for example, González de Barcia had written: Nuestra Impresion contiene todo quanto dibujò Herrera, i demàs las Estampas al principio de las Decadas, conformes à los Sucesos que refieren. Las mentiras, que por error de los Amanuenses, i de la Impresion havia en èl enmendadas, i lo que dejò en blanco, suplido. la Apologia, que se contiene en el Proemio, i otras cosas: i vltimamente el Indice, ò Tabla, que ha tenido mas costa, i trabajo, que toda la Obra, i es el medio vnico para vsar de ella. (‘El Impresor’ in Herrera [ed. Barcia, 1730] 6) Our Publication contains all the things Herrera presented, as well as the Plates at the beginning of each Decade, [whose images] conform to the Events related therein. The Lies, due to the errors of the Amanuenses and to the original Publication, have been emended, and that which was left blank has been updated. [This edition also includes] the Apology, found in the Preface, as well as other things. And, finally, [our edition] contains the Index, or Table, which has represented a greater expense and cost than the entire Work, and is the sole means through which to access the History.

It is by now clear that the battle between these editions took place at the level of the paratext. González de Barcia emphasized his role in the composition of the edition and stressed the scholarly apparatuses designed to aid the reader. Among these paratextual devices, the index – as it had for González de Barcia’s Torquemada edition – assumed an essential role. Not only did González de Barcia’s index constitute the most challenging and intellectually demanding component of his editorial paratext (‘que ha tenido mas costa, i trabajo’), it served as the privileged point of entry for all readings of the long history (‘el medio vnico para vsar de ella’). The index to his edition of Herrera provided González de Barcia with a key difference between the two competing editions. Following his suggestion, the review article from the Mémoires de Trévoux, emphasized the scholarly value of the index as the qualitative distinction between the competing Herrera publications. The Jesuit reviewer at the Memoires de Trévoux revealed the impact of González de Barcia’s influence: Enfin pour ne sien laisser à désirer, Dom Barcia, joint à son Ouvrage les figures nécessaires pour l’intelligence de son Auteur: Il s’est même

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

183

engagé dans le sterile, & penible travail d’une Table des matiéres; secours aussi utile aux Sçavans, qui veulent profiter d’une lecture déjà fait, que difficile, & désagréable pour ceux qui s’en sont chargés. (‘Lettre au sujet des editions’ [June 1730] 1091; my bold emphasis) Lastly, so as not to leave anything wanting, Don Barcia added to his Work the materials needed to comprehend the Author: He also engaged in the sterile and tiresome work of a Table of Contents [or Index]; an aid as useful to Intellectuals who wish to profit from a pre-reading as it is difficult and disagreeable for those who are responsible for [compiling] it.

The Jesuit reviewer emphasized an essential characteristic of the Herrera edition’s index by reminding the reader that by using it he or she would profit from a pre-reading (‘une lecture déjà faite’) of the text. Although the index caused as much burden for the compiler as it did aid for the user, González de Barcia’s decision to include the scholarly apparatus in his edition commanded respect from those who reviewed the 1730 edition. González de Barcia’s index for the 1730 Herrera edition continued to receive positive reviews into the late nineteenth century. Diego Barros Arana, the nineteenth-century Chilean literary scholar, offered praise for the index, saying that in an additional volume González de Barcia provided a copious alphabetical index of proper names and subjects that allowed the work to be easily consulted (102). Barros Arana emphasized the proleptic role the index played in the pursuit of scholarship. Barros Arana praised González de Barcia’s analytical indices for the aid they provided in guiding scholars to the information they desired to find (like the concordances reviewed by the Rouses; see section 2, above). In this way, by permitting the reader to forgo reading the entire work, the index offered a pre-reading – ‘une lecture déjà faite’ – of the Herrera chronicle. From the earliest moments of the release of González de Barcia’s edition of the Décadas and throughout the years that followed, the index served as a privileged scholarly accessory that added to the value of González de Barcia’s editorial productions.5 Considering the importance that this paratextual device has for scholarship, one regrets Gerard Genette’s decision to refrain from developing his theory to include a discussion of the paratextual function of the index. Indeed, Genette’s primary reason for having an index does little to endorse its relevance within the category of the paratext:

184 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

‘the real function of this index, as of most, is to save the author from the taunt: “No Index” ’ (Paratexts 419). However, in González de Barcia’s time, as we are learning, the index played a fundamental role in making accessible the variety and quantity of information presented in multi-volume works, and therefore it contributed, at least potentially, to the acquisition of knowledge. The emphasis often made on González de Barcia’s title pages to the presence of the indices in his editions, moreover, points to his desire to utilize and manipulate this scholarly apparatus. The organization of the indices allowed González de Barcia to position his reader vis-à-vis the text; it allowed him to circumscribe his reader within the interpretive framework conditioned by his index. By reading the indices, and by attending to the exegetical quality built into their construction, one further discerns González de Barcia’s editorial mission: to create a colonial Spanish American library that served to highlight and praise Spain’s contribution to world history. As the Herrera polemic reveals, González de Barcia dedicated his most passionate energies to this intellectual mission. We turn now to his conceptualization of the index. 4 González de Barcia’s Conceptualization of the Index In addition to the well-established position it had within the intellectual arena of scholarship from the medieval period and throughout the Renaissance, the index had a well-defined role of considerable importance within the intellectual environment of early Enlightenment critical historiography. By reviewing the scholarly onus for utilizing authentic source material, we will discern the value of the index for scholars of this period. For example, in his work Norte crítico con las reglas mas ciertas para la discrecion en la historia (Valencia, 1733), the eighteenth-century Spanish historian Jacinto Segura (1668–1751) highlighted as a fundamental obligation of critical historiography the duty of all critical scholars to ascertain the truth through direct engagement with primary source material: ‘Para la Critica en general de las Historias es necesario ... gran copia de noticias, y memorias de la antiguedad con las partidas de suma prudencia, y grave juicio’ (‘For the general Criticism of Histories one needs ... a great abundance of notices and accounts from antiquity with evidence of great prudence and serious judgment’; 10). Critical historiography obliged the historian to dedicate great attention to source detail. In order to ascertain the truth regarding events of the past, the critical historian used only the most

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

185

authentic accounts. Segura explained: ‘Es asi, que la Critica para algunos es odiosa ... porque su ejercicio es mostrar, y aclarar la verdad: y de muy antiguo esta dicho: Veritas odium parit’ (‘It is in this way that Criticism for some is odious ... because its task is to show and clarify the truth: and from ancient times it has been said: Truth begets animosity’; 11). Although fastidious, the critical historian investigated these sources and tracked down the citations adduced in the writings of other historians. For this reason, Segura emphasized that the indices played an enormous scholarly role: ‘son muy frequentes los errores en las citas ... En este caso es preciso el recurso a los Indices’ (‘Errors in citations are very frequent ... In this case having recourse to the Indices is necessary’; 20). Without question, in the spirit of this critical scholarly imperative, González de Barcia included indices in his editions. A review of the marginal notes included in González de Barcia’s edition of Gregorio García’s Origen de los indios provides a pertinent example of his desire to highlight his indices. In the supplemental section of the fourth book of his 1729 edition of García’s treatise, González de Barcia pointed out that the indices of his Americanist editions were a source through which his readers could verify his theories: ‘Vt videre est in completissimis Indicibus Garcilas. Torquemad. Herrerae, Oviedi, & aliorum nuper secundò luci publicae exposuit’ (‘As is seen in the detailed Indices of Garcilaso, Torquemada, Herrera, Oviedo, and others recently published for the second time for the enlightenment of the public’; in García [1981] 235, left margin). González de Barcia’s repeated focus on the index attests to the importance these devices had within his broad editorial design. The previously mentioned Jacinto Segura was not the only scholar in González de Barcia’s intellectual purview who praised the value of the scholarly index. The antecedents and successors of Nicolás Antonio help us to fully appreciate the role and character of the index as it developed in early modern times. One of Spain’s most famous Renaissance scholars and the author of the Bibliotheca Hispana (Rome, 1672), Antonio served as one of González de Barcia’s foremost scholarly models. Antonio’s comments regarding the index suggest the concrete influence that his practice had on González de Barcia’s scholarly work. In the prologue to his bibliography, Antonio indicated the value of the index: Y finalmente, para que la obra no careciese del ornamento y compendio de índices, hemos compuesto tanto cuantos consideramos que pudieran

186 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library ser útiles, no sólo a ti sino a los venideros [lectores], y los que juzgamos convenientes para su mejor y fácil uso. De todos estos índices encontrarás, tú lector, la razón justificaria en el pequeño prólogo que precede a los mismos. (‘Sobre la utilidad’ Biblioteca Hispana Nueva [1999] 1:xv) And finally, so that this work will not lack the ornament and outline of indices, we have composed only so many as we have considered will be useful, not only to you but to future [readers]. We have also composed indices that we judge useful for the better and easier use [of this work]. In the short prologue that precedes them, you will find, O Reader, the subtantiating reason regarding all of these indices.

While the bibliographical catalogue served as a guide to the library, the index allowed the reader to obtain guidance to an individual book. In this case, Nicolás Antonio’s index constituted a fundamental component of his catalogue. The index, as Antonio had emphasized, required a profound engagement with the text. As exemplary of the dedication needed to compile a scholarly index, Nicolás Antonio acknowledged the work of one of Renaissance Europe’s most important intellectuals, Joseph Juste Scaliger (1540– 1609), who had compiled the indices for Janus Gruterus’s (1560–1627) Inscriptiones antiquae totius orbis Romani (Heidelberg, 1603). In Antonio’s prologue to the indices for the Bibliotheca Hispana, he stated: José Escalígero, hombre en extremo erudito ¿no cosechó una gran gloria y agradecimiento de todos los amantes del estudio de la antigüedad por haber confeccionado con un trabajo y tenacidad propios de Hércules y con no menor preocupación los Indices Thesauris Gruteriani Inscriptionum [i.e., Gruterus’s Inscriptiones antiquae]? (Biblioteca Hispana Nova [1999] 2:433) Did not Joseph Scaliger, a man of extreme erudition, reap the great rewards and thanks of all the lovers of the study of the Ancient past for having prepared, with the labour and tenacity known to Hercules, and with no less care, the Indices Thesauris Gruteriani Inscriptionum?

Although a monumental task, the compilation of an index served as one of the major components of Renaissance and Enlightenment textual scholarship. Following Nicolás Antonio’s citation to his source of inspiration serves to elucidate this claim.

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

187

When Gruterus’s Inscriptiones antiquae was re-published in 1707, the 356-page index compiled by Scaliger needed little amendment from Joannes Graevius (1632–1703), the scholar who revised and updated the original Scaliger index. Except for the obligatory updating of page references, Graevius noted that his work involved little alteration: ‘Indicibus XXIV, a Scaligero elaboratis, addidi vigesimum quintum, in usus eorum, qui scire desiderant quid lapidibus olim inscripserint poëtae Romani, Graecique’ (‘To the 24 Indices compiled by Scaliger, I have added a twenty-fifth, for those who desire to know what, in their time, the Greek and Roman poets inscribed on their gravestones’; ‘Indicum’ in Gruterus [1707] vol. 2:[2a]). A review of both the first edition and the 1707 edition reveals that except for updating the page numbers and adding the twenty-fifth index, the editors of the 1707 edition changed little of the original format (see ‘Indicum’ in Gruterus [1707] 2:[1a–b]).6 Scholars from throughout Europe praised Scaliger’s indices and felt little desire to alter the work he had done for Gruterus’s publication. However, when Scaliger himself was first asked, he did not accept the request to compile the index with an initial show of exuberance. As Anthony Grafton writes: ‘The making of indices, [Scaliger] snorted, was a job not for a busy scholar but for printers’ workmen or some one else with nothing to do’ (‘J.J. Scaliger’s Indices’ 109). Indeed, Scaliger noted: ‘At conficere Indicem Herculei laboris, et improbae molestiae est’ (‘compiling the index is a Herculean job as well as an enormous pain’; quoted in Grafton ‘J.J. Scaliger’s Indices’ 109n2).7 Nevertheless, when he finished his work on Gruterus’s indices, Scaliger wrote the following praise of the index in a letter to Isaac Casaubon: ‘Index ipse est anima illius corporis’ ‘The index is the soul of this work’; quoted in Grafton ‘J.J. Scaliger’s Indices’ 109n5).8 In confronting the Herculean task of compiling an index, Scaliger, like Nicolás Antonio more than half a century later, proved that the work involved was worthy of even the most dedicated scholar. It is clear that González de Barcia consciously continued this timehonoured tradition by equipping his scholarly editions of the Chronicles of the Indies with topical indices. More than any other paratextual device, the index was a defining characteristic of almost every Americanist edition that González de Barcia produced, and it served as his signature feature. If, as we have seen, the index reveals the character and acts as the soul of a book, we will now review how González de Barcia utilized the index to emphasize what he considered to be the

188 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

core message of Spain’s colonial historiography: the heroism of the Spanish explorer and conquistador as the focal point of the proSpanish interpretation of history that he desired his readers to embrace. 5 Indexing the Heroism of Hernán Cortés As noted, González de Barcia’s indices served a vital role within the culture of critical historiography in which he worked. In addition, however, the indices allowed González de Barcia to select the elements of the scholarly pre-reading that he deemed most appropriate. His narrative index on Hernán Cortés offers an exemplary case in point of this politicized historical exegesis. A study of González de Barcia’s indices for both the Herrera and the Torquemada editions, moreover, evinces González de Barcia’s commitment to this historical agenda. By focusing on these examples of the narrative index, we will see how he utilized his indices to present an image of Hispanic heroism to the readers of the Republic of Letters interested in the Conquest of the Indies. González de Barcia’s choice of Hernán Cortés for the role of model Spaniard followed a strong scholarly tradition among Spanish intellectuals of praising Cortés as the hero of colonial conquest. In his prologue ‘Al mui ilustre señor Don Hernando Cortes’ (‘To the most illustrious señor Don Hernán Cortés’), included in his work Obras que Francisco Cervantes de Salazar ha hecho, glosado y traducido (1546), Francisco Cervantes de Salazar (ca. 1514–ca. 1575) provided one of the most exemplary statements on the importance of Cortés within Spain’s colonial historiography. When explaining the criteria for selection of the dedicatory epistle, Cervantes de Salazar praised Cortés’s many superlative traits: ‘he sido en esto dichoso de aver entre tantos ilustres hallado a V. S. en todo tan ilustre, i que no le falta parte alguna para mi deseo’ (‘In this I have been fortunate in having found you, most illustrious among so many illustrious men, and who lacks nothing to my liking’; 2). To Cervantes de Salazar, Cortés was the ideal hero of the Spanish conquest of the Indies. Not only a soldier, Cortés also composed lengthy reports (the so-called Cartas de relación), which he sent to the Holy Roman Emperor, Charles V. As Cervantes de Salazar wrote: Alexandre con los Macedonios, siendo rei, i Julio Cesar con los Romanos, siendo emperador, conquistaron las provincias que leemos: i V. S. acom-

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

189

pañado de sola su virtud, sin otro arrimo, vino a igualarse con ellos, i no sé si diria mas bien a ser mejor. (7) Alexander with the Macedonians, as king, and Julius Ceasar with the Romans, as emperor, conquered the provinces about which we read. And you, accompanied only by your virtue and with no other support, were able to raise yourself to their level (and I do not know if I should truly say to a higher level).

The Greek and Roman worlds assumed an equal position with a New World conquered, in part, by Hernán Cortés. However, as Cervantes de Salazar noted, although scholars had access to these Greek and Roman worlds through the historical works of classical antiquity (‘conqistaron las provincias que leemos’), the literary canon on New World historiography did not benefit from a codified library of literary and historical sources. As we have noted throughout this book, González de Barcia’s decision to create a library of colonial Spanish American historiography aimed to provide scholars with some of the foundational texts for such a canon. While Cervantes de Salazar utilized his dedicatory epistle to praise Cortés, González de Barcia, as we will see, utilized his indices to ensure that all readers of his Americanist library would easily appreciate the example of Hernán Cortés’s heroic virtue. The patently political agenda inherent in González de Barcia’s indices becomes especially evident if we first review, as a point of comparison, the index that J.B. Verdussen provided in his competing edition of Herrara’s Décadas. The Verdussen edition equipped each of the eight Décadas with its own index. The index for the first Década offers a typical example of the characteristics of Verdussen’s editorial agenda. Entitled ‘Tabla de las cosas mas notables de la primera Decada’ (‘Table of the most notable things from the first Decade’), the Verdussen index followed an alphabetical order for its subject headings. However, although all the headings under ‘A’ began with that letter, the entries did not follow the alphabetized order throughout the entire word. As Witty writes, this tendency was not unusual: ‘When we speak of alphabetic order in antiquity, we do not mean the detailed, “letter-for-letterto-the-end-of-the-word” arrangement so dear to the heart of the librarian’ (4b). For example, in the Verdussen edition, a heading beginning with ‘As,’ for ‘Astucia,’ preceded one beginning with ‘Al,’ for ‘Algunos.’ The headings under ‘A,’ therefore, did little to serve as a guide to the

190 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

contents of the book. Conversely, they allowed the Protestant Verdussen to present a thinly veiled polemic against Spain. For example, Verdussen provided many headings that portrayed an anti-Castilian point of view: ‘Astucia del Cazique Quibìa: para echar à los Castellanos en la Tierra de enemigos. 116 ... Algunos Castellanos se amotinan en Jamayca, y son sus caudillos los Porras. 128’ (‘Cunning [Astucia] of the Cacique Quibía in pushing the Castilians into enemy Territory. 116 ... Some [Algunos] Castelians revolt in Jamaica, and become subject to the Porras Indians. 128’; ‘Tabla’ in Herrera [ed. Verdussen, 1728] 1:[1]). In place of complete alphabetical order, Verdussen utilized the page numbers of the text to establish the dominant order of the headings. While the entries followed a numerical order (page 116 precedes page 128), the alphabetization extends only to the initial letter on the heading. Of greater importance, however, the headings served to suggest a negative interpretation of the text: indigenous cunning (astucia) prevailing over Castilian disorder. Further examples of this anti-Hispanic attitude are found under the heading for entries beginning with the letter ‘C.’ Verdussen wrote: ‘Cinco Caziques se conciertan de dar sobre los Castellanos. 201. Confusion de los Castellanos. 204’ (‘Five [Cinco] Caciques coordinate an attack on the Castilians. 201. Confusion of the Castilians. 204’; (‘Tabla’ in Herrera [ed. Verdussen, 1728] 1:[3]). As seen in these two examples of entries in the Verdussen index, Spanish glory in the New World at times took second place to indigenous heroism. Against this paratextual polemic that attacked the honour of the Spanish empire, González de Barcia engaged in his own polemic, using his index to counter Verdussen’s critique. In opposition to the negative example of the Castilian conquistador presented in the Verdussen index, González de Barcia developed an elaborate index that allowed him to accentuate his opinion of Spanish valour. However, González de Barcia avoided an overt statement of his political agenda by attempting to construct an index of exceeding scholarly quality. The qualitative differences between the competing Herrera indices began with the index titles of the 1728 and 1730 editions. For example, while Verdussen, as noted, gave a succinct title for his index, González de Barcia provided the following elaborate title for his: Tabla General de las cosas notables, y personas contenidas en la Descripcion de las Indias Occidentales, i en las ocho Decadas antecedentes. La S. puesta entre dos palabras, dice, significa. Colon, es D. Christoval Colon.

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

191

Cortès, es D. Hernando Cortès. Piçarro, es D. Francisco Piçarro. Gonçalo, es Gonçalo Piçarro. Almagro, es Diego de Almagro; ...; Y asi el mas famoso se entiende por el Apellido, quando ai muchos de vno mismo. La D. significa la Descripcion, i donde no està puesta, el primer numero Romano significa la Decada: el segundo el folio, i el tercero la columna; i se omite el primero, donde prosigue la misma Decada. (‘Tabla de las cosas mas notables de la primera Decada’ in Herrera [ed. Barcia, 1730] vol. 1) General Table of the notable things and persons contained in the Description of the Indies, and in the eight preceding Decades. The S. located between two words means, Signifies. Colon, refers to D. Christoval Colon. Cortés, referes to D. Hernando Cortés; ...; And in this way the most famous [Conquistadors] are inferred from their Surname, when there are many of the same last name. The letter D. means Description, and where there is no letter D, the first Roman numeral refers to the corresponding Decade, the second to the Folio, and the third to the column; and the first [Roman numeral] is omitted when the same Decade immediately follows.

González de Barcia noted that he designed his index as a comprehensive guide to both Herrera’s Descripción and the eight Décadas of the Historia de los hechos de los castellanos, providing elaborate instructions for their use.9 He clarified the meaning of the numerical references following the subheadings: the initial Roman number indicated the Década in which the reference could be located; the second number (given in Arabic numerals) indicated the page number; and the third number (also Arabic) provided the column location. Also, González de Barcia took time to explain the short-hand nomenclature employed for Spanish explorer/conquerors: Colón stood for Don Cristóbal Colón; Cortés for Don Hernando Cortés. As a representation of the book, his indices allowed González de Barcia to emphasize the famous heroes of Spanish conquest (‘asi el mas famoso se entiende por el Apellido’). He announced at the head of his index that he intended to focus on Spain’s heroic explorers and conquerors of the Indies. In response to Verdussen’s attack on the Spanish, González de Barcia countered with his own apologetic for his countrymen, while still striving to offer a solid scholarly interpretation of the Conquest of the Indies. González de Barcia’s entries for the headings Indios and Hernán Cortés in his edition of the Herrera chronicle reveal immediate differences in comparison to Verdussen’s index entries. The two headings present the extremes of the narrative spectrum of González de Barcia’s

192 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

indices. For example, González de Barcia eschewed all ambiguity when articulating his (negative) views of the indigenous population of the New World: Indios, descendientes de Adam, i Noè I. 9. 2. son mui flojos I. 9. 1. II. 18. 1. 55. 1. viciosisimos. III. 94. 1. 191. 1. grandes borrachos. III. 91. 2. 93. 2. 94. 1. IV. 188. 2. por inclinacion II. 72. 2. holgaçanes I. 256. 1. 275. 1. II. 72. 2. especialmente solos III. 139. 2. i mas en Tierra firme I. 275. 1. flacos. II. 27. 2. embusteros mentirosos. III. 94. 2. IV. 188. 1. VI. 68. 1. noveleros. IV. 188. 2. VI. 68. 1. mudables ligeros I. 70. 2. III. 37. 1. VIII. 141. 1. i mas en Quito. V. 241. 1. pereçosos VIII. 226. 2. embaidores III. 92. 2. sucios. IV. 188. 2. reboltosos, i Ladrones IV. 118. 2. ingratos III. 94. 2. IV. 188. 2. incorregibles I. 70. 2. vengativos III. 94. 2. VIII. 141. 1. mas que otras Gentes. III. 140. 2. i de tan corta capacidad. I. 70. 2. II. 27. 2. que se dudò si eran racionales III. 44. 2. (‘Tabla General’ in Herrera [ed. Barcia, 1730] 5:¶60vv) Indians, descendants of Adam, and Noah I. 9. 2. they are very lazy I. 9. 1. II. 18. 1. 55. 1. most vicious. III. 94. 1. 191. 1. terrible drunkards. III. 91. 2. 93. 2. 94. 1. IV. 188. 2. by inclination II. 72. 2. Sloths I. 256. 1. 275. 1. II. 72. 2. especially alone III. 139. 2. and more so on the Continent I. 275. 1. weak. II. 27. 2. deceitful liars III. 94. 2. IV. 188. 1. VI. 68. 1. dreamers IV. 188. 2. VI. 68. 1. easily manipulated I. 70. 2. III. 37. 1. VIII. 141. 1. and more so in Quito. V. 241. 1. lazy VIII. 226. 2. tricksters III. 92. 2. dirty. IV. 188. 2. mischievous, and Thieves IV. 118. 2. ungrateful III. 94. 2. IV. 188. 2. incorrigible I. 70. 2. vindictive III. 94. 2. VIII. 141. 1. more so than other People. III. 140. 2. and of such low capacity I. 70. 2. II. 27. 2. that one doubted if they were Rational beings III. 44. 2.

González de Barcia’s laundry list of the negative traits of the Indian distinguished his opinion of these people from that suggested by Verdussen in his index. Where Verdussen highlighted indigenous cunning, González de Barcia questioned the Indians’ basic abitily for reason. Having focused earlier on the format of González de Barcia’s entries, I wish to discuss now the way he used this format to present his paratextual interpretation. The primary entry heading for ‘Indios’ is given in the correct alphabetical order among the multiple entries. The subheadings, however, are more challenging to discern. By presenting the information in a format similar to indices of today, we begin to understand the strategy of González de Barcia’s index structure:

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool Indios, descendientes de Adam, i Noè I. 9. 2. son mui flojos I. 9. 1. II. 18. 1. 55. 1. viciosisimos. III. 94. 1. 191. 1. grandes borrachos. III. 91. 2. 93. 2. 94. 1. IV. 188. 2. por inclinacion II. 72. 2. holgaçanes I. 256. 1. 275. 1. II. 72. 2. especialmente solos III. 139. 2. i mas en Tierra firme I. 275. 1. flacos. II. 27. 2. embusteros mentirosos. III. 94. 2. IV. 188. 1. VI. 68. 1. noveleros. IV. 188. 2. VI. 68. 1. mudables ligeros I. 70. 2. III. 37. 1. VIII. 141. 1. i mas en Quito. V. 241. 1. pereçosos VIII. 226. 2. embaidores III. 92. 2. sucios. IV. 188. 2. reboltosos, i Ladrones IV. 118. 2. ingratos III. 94. 2. IV. 188. 2. incorregibles I. 70. 2. vengativos III. 94. 2. VIII. 141. 1. mas que otras Gentes. III. 140. 2. i de tan corta capacidad. I. 70. 2. II. 27. 2. que se dudò si eran racionales III. 44. 2. Indians, descendants of Adam, and Noah I. 9. 2. they are very lazy I. 9. 1. II. 18. 1. 55. 1. most vicious. III. 94. 1. 191. 1. terrible drunkards. III. 91. 2. 93. 2. 94. 1. IV. 188. 2. by inclination II. 72. 2. Sloths I. 256. 1. 275. 1. II. 72. 2. especially alone III. 139. 2. IV. 188. 1. VI. 68. 1. and more so on the Continent I. 275. 1. weak. II. 27. 2. deceitful liars III. 94. 2. IV. 188. 1. dreamers IV. 188. 2. VI. 68. 1. easily manipulated I. 70. 2. III. 37. 1. VIII. 141. 1. and more so in Quito. V. 241. 1. lazy VIII. 226. 2.

193

194 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library tricksters III. 92. 2. dirty. IV. 188. 2. mischievous, and Thieves IV. 118. 2. ungrateful III. 94. 2. IV. 188. 2. incorrigible I. 70. 2. vindictive III. 94. 2. VIII. 141. 1. more so than other People. III. 140. 2. and of such low capacity I. 70. 2. II. 27. 2. that one doubted if they were Rational beings III. 44. 2.

Presenting the information in this way, with multiple line breaks, facilitates the review of the content of González de Barcia’s entry.10 However, one still notes that the subheadings, although easier to read, are not alphabetically arranged, nor are they based on the order of the pages. While Verdussen utilized the initial letters of the headings and the page numbers where those headings occurred in the text as a means to provide order for his index, the subheadings for González de Barcia’s index entries were not guided by alphabetization or by page number. In place of an organizational strategy that favoured the alphabet or the page numbers of a text, González de Barcia constructed a narrative; in fact, the narrative impulse was the guiding principle of his index entries. This is more discernable when the page references are removed (note that I have modified the punctuation): Indios – descendientes de Adam, i Noè. Son mui flojos, viciosisimos; grandes borrachos por inclinacion; holgaçanes, especialmente solos i mas en Tierra firme; flacos, embusteros mentirosos, noveleros, mudables ligeros, i mas en Quito; pereçosos, embaidores, sucios, reboltosos, i Ladrones; ingratos, incorregibles, vengativos mas que otras Gentes. I de tan corta capacidad que se dudò si eran racionales. Indians – descendants of Adam, and Noah. They are very lazy and most vicious; terrible drunkards by inclination; sloths especially alone and more so on the Continent; weak, deceitful liars; dreamers easily manipulated and more so in Quito; lazy tricksters, dirty, mischievous, and Thieves; ungrateful; incorrigible; vindictive, more so than other People. And of such low capacity that one doubted if they were Rational beings.

González de Barcia’s commentary serves as the principle of organization for this entry. The structure of this commentary is based on a

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

195

narrative. However, although the entry without page references is perhaps easier to read, the page numbers in fact served an important role. For González de Barcia, the index provided the ideal opportunity to write and compose the perfect critical narrative: each idea is supported by a specific assertion in the text, which González de Barcia duly cited. Moreover, the reader needed to look no further than the very book in his or her hands in order to ascertain the validity of the commentary. In this way, the index for González de Barcia served as a powerful tool of critical exegesis. The implications of this strategy become apparent when one compares the entry for ‘Indios’ with that for ‘Hernando Cortés’ from both the Herrera and the Torquemada editions. For example, González de Barcia’s entry on Cortés was one of the longest of the entire Herrera index. While his entry for Charles V constituted 3½ columns (‘Tabla General’ in Herrera [ed. Barcia, 1730] 5:¶18r–v), and the entry for Christopher Columbus took 11 columns (‘Tabla General’ in Herrera [ed. Barcia] 1730 5.¶22vv–¶23vv), his entry for Cortés constituted 32 columns (ibid. 5:¶53vv–¶57vv). The extended elaboration of the Cortés entry reveals that González de Barcia desired to emphasize this heading as one of the most important of the index. Reviewing the opening lines of the narrativized index for ‘Hernando Cortés’ elucidates González de Barcia’s attempted exegesis: Hernando Cortés, sus Padres, i Viage à Salamanca à estudiar Leies. I. 165. 1. si fue à Valencia para pasar à Italia. I. 166. 1. se embarca à Indias, con licencia de sus Padres. I. 165. 2. fue dotado de las cosas que deben adornar vn Capitàn, i el primero a dar ejemplo. II. 107. 2 (‘Tabla General’ in Herrera [ed. Barcia, 1730] 5:¶37rr) Hernando Cortés, his Parents, and his Journey to Salamanca to Study Law. I. 165. 1. if he went to Valencia in order to continue on to Italy. I. 166. he embarks to the Indies, with the permision of his Parents. I. 165. 2. he was graced with those qualities that should adorn a Captain, the first being that of setting an example. II. 107. 2

Although only a selection of the complete Cortés entry, the initial index narrative makes evident González de Barcia’s desire to present Cortés as the hero figure, playing a role in opposition to the villainous Indios. The index narrative permits González de Barcia to make his critical commentary, and the page-number references provide the

196 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

scholarly foundation he needed to support the claims. For example, to verify his commentary regarding Cortés’s exemplary persona (‘fue dotado de las cosas que deben adonrar vn Capitàn’), the reader needed only to turn to the second Década, page 107, column 2 of the 1730 publication. For every idea González de Barcia provided a specific citation. Moreover, he continued this practice throughout his complete editorial production. Comparing the index narrative on ‘Hernán Cortés’ from the 1730 Herrera edition to that of the 1725 edition of the Monarquía Indiana provides a broader spectrum with which to review the program of paratextual commentary apparent in González de Barcia’s indices. Torquemada dedicated more than 250 pages of text to the subject of Cortés and of the Conquest of Mexico. Nonetheless, the entry for Hernán Cortés from the 1615 index for Torquemada’s Monarquía Indiana did little to offer additional praise of the hero. In his 1615 index, Torquemada wrote: Fernando Cortes dignissimo Marques del Valle, su nacimiento, ventura y ecelencias, desde 373. concluye la conquista de Mexico. 626. gouierna la Nueua España, y otros sucessos suyos, desde 641. (‘Indice de las cosas’ in Torquemada [1615] 1:[2b]) Hernán Cortés most deserving Marqués del Valle, his birth, good fortune and distinctions, from 373. he concludes the conquest of Mexico. 626. he governs New Spain, and other events of his, from 641.

In comparison to this entry, González de Barcia provided the readers of his 1725 edition of the Monarquía Indiana with an updated entry numbering more than nine columns in length. González de Barcia began his entry on Cortés by rehearsing the information given in the 1615 index: ‘*Don Fernando* Cortès, Marquès del Valle, nace en Medellin. 334. 1. Año 1484. 340.2.’ (‘*Don Hernán* Cortés, Marqués del Valle, born in Medellin. 334. 1. in the Year 1484. 340.2’; ‘Indice’ in Torquemada [1725] 1:[21]). Much of the remaining index narrative followed the progression of the text, detailing the information from chapters 1 through 105 of book 4 as well as the initial chapters of book 5. However, in the last lines of the entry, which deal with Cortés’s death, González de Barcia offered a valuable example of how he used the index to promote his interpretation of Cortés as a heroic figure:

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

197

Fabrica para su Entierro el Hospital de el Marquès. 301. 1. su Cuerpo depositado en Tetzcuco, 301. 1. procurò se le embiasen Misioneros. 344. 2. sosegò muchas inquietudes. 606. 1. sujetò à la Nueva-España, y como? 340. 1. si fue elegido de Dios para esta empresa? 341. 1 disculpado de los excesos que le imputan. 342. 1 injustas quejas que de èl tenian 699. 2. 600.1 hiço algunas cosas contra su grado. 342. 2. Cartas que escriviò à Carlos V. 342. 1. diò á la Iglesia mas Christianos, que le quitò Lutero. 340. 2. vanamente quiso disminuìr su Fama, Nuño de Guzmàn. 338. 2. comparado à Moises. 34. 1. 342. y á David. 348. 1. su Temor a Dios 472. 2. su animo en las grandes Empresas. 392. 2. su practica en la Guerra. 540. 1. su rara fidelidad. 285. 1. ningun Capitan obrò maiores haçañas que èl. 364. 2. (‘Indice’ in Torquemada [1725] 1:[24]) The Hospital of the Marqués prepares for his Burial. 301. 1. his Body is deposited at Tezcuco, 301. 1. he arranged that Missionaries be sent to him. 344. 2. he calmed many nerves. 606. 1. he took control of New Spain, and how? 340. 1. if he was chosen by God for this venture? 341. 1. excused for the excesses for which he is accused. 342. 1. the unjust complaints that they had against him 699. 2. 600. 1. he did some things against his will. 342. 1. Letters that he wrote to Charles V. 342. 1. he gave to the Church more Christians than Luther took from it 340. 2. Nuño de Guzmán vainly tried to play down his Fame. 388. 2. compared to Moses. 34. 1. 342. and to David. 348. 1. his Fear of God 472. 2. his eagerness for great Undertakings. 392. 2. his experience in War. 540. 1. his uncommon fidelity. 285. 1. no Captain did greater deeds that he. 364.2.

The epitome of all heroic figures for González de Barcia, Cortés undergoes an apotheosis worthy of the greatest warriors of world history. In contrast to the derogatory characteristics applied to the Indians, González de Barcia’s Hernán Cortés received the highest words of praise. Cortés calmed men’s worries (page 606, column 1); he conquered New Spain (p. 340, col. 1); indeed, he was elected by God for the task (p. 341, col. 1); Cortés served as a counter-force to Luther (p. 340, col. 2); his fame was compared to Moses and King David (p. 34, col. 1 and p. 348, col. 1). Finally, the culmination of González de Barcia’s attempt to praise the heroic is seen in the phrase with which he ended his commentary on Cortés: ‘ningun Capitan obrò maiores haçañas que el’ [‘no Captain did greater deeds that he’]. González de Barcia made of Hernán Cortés the exemplary Spanish figure with

198 González de Barcia and the Colonial Spanish American Library

which to announce to all of Europe the enormity of Spain’s contribution to the history of mankind. By using his index as a means through which he could publicize this interpretation, González de Barcia showed that this paratextual device served an important exegetical function. Although placed at the end of the book, González de Barcia’s indices stood at the threshold of his intellectual and political design for the colonial Spanish American library he fought to create. 6 Conclusion As employed in the Barcia Library, the index served to mediate between the editor and the reader. Similarly to the reference provided by bibliographical catalogues to numerous books and to the libraries in which they were held, the index guided the reader of a discrete book to the specific pages where desired information could be found. For González de Barcia, the scholarly analytical index allowed him to attempt to exert a profound influence over his readers. By highlighting the importance of the index in his Americanist republications, González de Barcia further evinced that his indices served as signature paratextual accompaniments to his New World Library. In this chapter, I highlighted and reviewed González de Barcia’s development of index narratives. These prosaic formulations facilitated the exegetical function inherent in his system of organization for the indices. By selecting the textual information to be indexed, González de Barcia crafted a narrative that allowed him to defend the glory of Spanish conquest and exploration in the New World. However, González de Barcia was not the only scholar interested in commenting on Spanish colonialism. J.B. Verdussen’s edition of Herrera exposed a very real threat to González de Barcia’s editorial plan. Verdussen’s presentation of the Herrera text was a thinly veiled critique of Spain. At the level of the paratext, González de Barcia confronted Verdussen’s challenge by producing his own polemical response. Insofar as the scholarly apparatus for these editions attempted to ensure an intellectual foundation intended to promote pro-Spanish interpretations of the text, González de Barcia’s narrative index for Hernán Cortés offers one exemplary illustration of this tendency. The index afforded González de Barcia an ideal paratextual device. By composing his entries in narrative form, and by referring to the indexed information using a well-defined system of pagination, González de Barcia ensured that every comment and every point

The Index as Scholarly and Political Tool

199

of view received the solid critical support of actual textual assertions. Using this method, González de Barcia successfully mixed the prerequisites of scholarship with the priorities of his political agenda and coordinated his political objectives with those of his critical historiography.

This page intentionally left blank

Appendix: Complete Bibliography of González de Barcia’s Americanist Editions (1720–1743)

The following constitutes an initial attempt to compile the numerous Americanist publications produced by González de Barcia. I have provided the bibliographical information for the Barcia editions, placing the references in chronological order according to their release between 1720 and 1743. In all cases I have noted within brackets the place and date for the first edition. 1 Garcilaso de la Vega, el Inca. Historia general del Perú, trata, el descubrimiento, de el, y como lo ganaron, los españoles: las guerras civiles, que huvo entre Pizarros, y Almargros, sobre la partija de la tierra. Castigo, y levantamiento de tyranos, y otros sucesos particulares, que en la Historia se contienen. Escrita por el Ynca Garcilaso de la Vega, Capitan de su Magestad, &. Dirigida ala limpisima Virgen Maria, Madre de Dios, y Señora Nuestra Segunda impresion, enmendada, y añadida, con dos tablas, una de los capítulos, y otra de las materias. Año 1722. Con privilegio. En Madrid: En la Oficina Real, y a Costa de Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, Impresor de Libros, se hallaran en su Casa. [Córdoba, 1617.] 2 Garcilaso de la Vega, el Inca. La Florida del Inca. Historia del Adelantado, Hernando de Soto, Governador, y Capitan General del Reino de la Florida. Y de otros heroicos caballeros, españoles, e indios. Escrita por el Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, Capitan de su Magestad, natural de la Gran Ciudad del Cozco, Cabeça de los Reinos, y Provincias del Perú. Dirigida a la Reina nuestra señora. Van enmendadas en esta impresion, muchas erratas de la Primera: Yañadida Copiosa Tabla de las Cosas Notables. Y el ensaio cronologico, que contiene, las sucedidas, hasta en el Año de 1722. Con Privilegio:

202 Appendix

En Madrid. En la Oficina Real, y a Costa de Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, Impresor de Libros. Año [1723]. Se hallarán en su Casa. [Lisbon, 1605.] Note: Some bibliographers incorrectly date this publication as 1723, but the European Americana shows that the true date is 1722, the 1723 publication being a reissue of the 1722 edition (European Americana 5:293b). In the Catalogue of the Spanish Library of Ticknor, James Lyman Whitney is correct to note that the Ticknor copy is the 1723 second printing (389a). The previous 1722 printing did not contain the Ensayo cronológico, but did, apparently, contain typos that were fixed for the second printing in 1723. La Florida del Inca and the Ensayo cronologico formed a two-volume set within the four-volume collection with which Barcia began his Americanist editions (European Americana 5:290a). 3 Barcia, Andrés González. Ensayo cronologico, para la historia general de la Florida. Contiene los descubrimientos, y principales sucesos, acaucidos en este Gran Reino, à los Españoles, Franceses, Suecos, Dinamarqueses, Ingleses, y otras naciones, entre sì, y con los Indios: cuias Costumbres, Genios, Idolatria, Govierno, Batallas, y Astucias, se refieren: y los Viages de algunos Capitanes, y Pilotos, por el Mar de el Norte, à buscar Paso à Oriente, ò vnion de aquella Tierra, con Asia. Desde el Año de 1512. que descubrió la Florida, Juan Ponce de Leon, hasta el de 1722. Escrito por Don Gabriel de Cardenas z Cano Dedicado al Principe Nuestro Señor. Con Privilegio: En Madrid. En la Oficina Real, y à Costa de Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, Impresor de Libros. Año de [1723]. Se hallaràn en su Casa, en la Calle de el Poço, y en Palacio. 4 Inca Garcilaso. Primera Parte de los Commentarios Reales, que tratan, de el origen de los Incas, reies que fveron del Peru, de sv idolatria, leies, y govierno, en paz, y en guerra: de sus vidas, y antes que los Españoles pasaran, a él. Escritos por el Inca Garcilaso de la vega, Natural de Cozco, y Capitan de su Magestad. Dirigidos a el Rei nuestro señor. Segvnda impresion, enmendada: y añadida la vida de Inti Cusi Titu Iupanqui, penultimo Inca; con dos tablas; una, de los capitulos; y otra, de las Cosas Notables. Con Privilegio: En Madrid. En la Oficina Real, y a Costa de Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, Impresor de Libros. Año [1723]. Se hallaran en su Casa, en la calles de el Poço, y en Palacio. [Lisbon, 1609.]

Complete Bibliography of González de Barcia’s Americanist Editions

203

5 Los viajes de algunos capitanes y pilotos por mar del Norte a buscar paso a Oriente o unión de Florida con Asia desde el año 1512 ... a 1722, por D. Gabriel Cardenas Cano, Madrid, 1723. Note: Horacio Capel refers to this publication, stating that it was written by González de Barcia, using the anagram D. Gabriel Cardenas Cano. This work, which I have not consulted, is housed in the University of Valencia Library (Capel xxxv). 6 Torquemada, Fr Juan de. + Primera parte de los veinte i vn libros ritvales i Monarchia Indiana, con el origen y guerras, de los Indios Occidentales de sus Poblaciones, Descubrimiento, Conqquesto, Conuersion, y otras cosas marauillosas de la mesma tierra distribuydos en tres tomos. Compuesto por F. Juan de Torquemada Ministro Prouincial de la Orden de Nuestro Serasico Padre San Fransico en la Prouincia del Santo Evangelio de Mexico en la Nueba Espana. Dico ego opera mea regi Saeculorum immortali et inuisibili. Con privilegio En Madrid en la Oficina y a costa de Nicolas Rodriguez Franco. Ano de 1723 [i.e., 1725]. [Seville, 1615.] 7 García, Fr. Gregorio. + Origen de los Indios de el Nuevo Mundo, e Indias Occidentales, averiguado con discurso de opiniones por el Padre Presentado Fr. Gregorio Garcia, de la Orden de Predicadores. Tratanse es este libro carias cosas, y puntos curiosos, tocantes a dicerdad Ciencias, i Facultades, con que se hace varia Historia, de mucho gusto para el Ingenio, i Entendimiento de Hombres agudos, i curiosos. Segunda impresion. Enmendada, y añadida de algunas opiniones, o cosas notables, en maior prueba de lo que contiene, con tres Tablas mui puntuales de los Capitulos, de las Materias, y Autores, que las tratan. Dirigido al Angelico Doct. S. to Tomas de Aquino. Con privilegio real. En Madrid: En la Imprenta de Francisco Martinez Abad. Año de 1729. [Valencia, 1607.] 8 Herrera, Antonio de. Historia general de los hechos de los castellanos en las Islas i Tierra Firme del Mar Oceano. Escrita por Antonio de Herrera Coronista Mayor de Su M.d de las Indias y sv coronista de Castilla En quatro Decadas desde el Año de 1492 hasta el de 1531. Decada primera Al Rey Nu.ro Señor. En Madrid en la Imprenta Real de Nicolas Rodiguez [sic] Franco Año de 1726. [Madrid, 1601–15.] 9 Fernández, Diego. Primera, y segunda parte de la Historia del Perú. 1731. [Seville: F. Díaz, 1571.]

204 Appendix

10 Ovalle, Alonso de, S.J. Histórica relación del reyno de Chile, y delas missiones, y ministerios que exercita en el la Compañia de Jesus. 1735. [Rome: F. Cavalli, 1646.] Note: Neither the Fernández edition (#9) nor the Ovalle edition (#10) made it to the publisher and both, apparently, are now lost (Barros Arana 105). 11 Ercilla y Zúñiga, Alonso de. La Araucana, primera [-quinta] parte. Madrid: F. Martínez Abad, 1733–1735. 2vols. [Pt 1: Madrid, 1569; Pt 2: Madrid, 1578; Pt 3: Madrid, 1589.] 12 Santiesteban Osorio, Diego de. La Araucana, quarta, y quinta parte, en que se prosigue, y acaba, la historia de D. Alonso de Ercilla, hasta la reducion del valle de Arauco, en el reyno de Chile por Don Diego de Santestevan Osorio, natural de la ciudad de Leon. Año de 1735. En Madrid: En la oficina de Francisco Martinez Abad, en la calle de la Cruz., [1735]. [Salamanca, 1597.] 13 Leon Pinelo, Antonio de. Epitome de la Bibliotheca Oriental, y Occidental, Nautica, y Geographica De Don Antonio de Leon Pinelo, del Consejo de su Mag. en la Casa de la Contratacion de Sevilla, y Coronista Maior de las Indias, añadido, y enmendado nuevamente, en que se contienen los Escritores de las Indias Orientales, y Occidentales, y Reinos covecinos China, Tartaria, Japon, Persia, Armenia, Etiopia, y otras partes. Al Rey nuestro Señor. Por mano del Marques de Torre-Nueva, su Secretario de Despacho Universal de Hacienda, Indias, i Marina. Tomo primero. Con privilegio. En Madrid: En la Oficina de Francisco Martinez Abad, en la Calles del Olivo Baxo. Año de M.D.CC.XXXVII. [Madrid, 1629.] The following is a list of the works that are attributed to ‘Gabriel Cardenas Z. Cano’ by González de Barcia in his edition of the Epitome that have not already been cited: 14 ‘Carta en que se trata del Pais de los Moxos ... Don Gabriel de Cardenas. la tradujo en Latin, M.S. en la Libreria de Barcia’ (León Pinelo [1980] 1:689). 15 ‘Estado de las Misiones de la Compañía de Jesus ... D. Gabriel de Cardenas, le bolvio en Castellano, M.S. en la Librería de Barcia’ (León Pinelo [1980] 1:662). 16 ‘Don Gabriel de Cardenas, tradujo la Carta [i.e., Oviedo’s Carta al Cardenal Bembo] en Castellano, por no hallarse el Original, de

Complete Bibliography of González de Barcia’s Americanist Editions

205

Oviedo, M.S.O. en la Libreria de Barcia’ (León Pinelo [1980] 1:684). 17 ‘Fr. Francisco de Malinas, Franciscano, Epistola ... D. Gabriel de Cardenas le tradujo en Castellano, i està M. S. en la Librerìa de Barcia’ (León Pinelo [1980] 2:1337–8). In 1743 González de Barcia died in Madrid at the age of 70 (Álvarez de Baena 107). In 1749 the second of González de Barcia’s two careerending projects relating to the colonial Hispanic world was finally realized by his nephew, of the same name (de Andrés 815): 18–33 González de Barcia, Andrés. Historiadores Primitivos De las Indias accodentales, que juntò, traduxo en parte, y sacò à luz, ilustrados con eruditas Notas, y copiosos Indices, El Ilustrissimo Señor D. Andrés Gonzalez Barcia, Del Cosejo, y camara de S. M. Divididos en tres tomos, cuyo contenido se verà en el folio siguiente. Tomo I. Madrid. Año MDCCXLIX. Note: The numbers within square brackets refer to the page numbers. Some works were individually numbered. First volume 18 La Historia del Almirante Don Christobal Colón, que compuso en Castellano Don Fernando Colon, su hijo, y traduxo en Toscano Alfonso de Ulloa, vuelta traducir en Castellano, por no parecer el original. [1–128] 19 Quatro Cartas de Hernán Cortès, dirigidos al Emperador Carlos V. en que have relacion de sus Conquistas, y sucessos en la NuevaEspaña. [1–62] 20 Dos relaciones hechas al mismo Hernán Cortés, por Pedro de Alvarado, refiriendole sus Expediciones, y Conquistas en varias Provincias de aquel Reyno. [63–128; 129–60] 21 Otra Relacion hecha al mismo Hernán Cortés, por Diego Godoy, que trata del descubrimiento de diversas Ciudades, y Provincias, y guerras que tuvo con los Indios. [161–73] 22 Relación sumaria de la Historia Natural de las Indias, compuesta, y dirigida al Emperador Carlos V. por el Capitan Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo. [1–57 plus index] 23 Examen Apologético de la Historica narración de los Naufragios, Peregrinaciones, y Milagros de Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Baca, contra la Censura del Padre Honorio Filopono por Don Antonio Ardoino, Marqués de Lorito. [1–50]

206 Appendix

24 Relación de los Naufragios del Gobernador Alvar Núñez Cabeza de Baca. [1–43 plus index] 25 Comentarios del mismo de lo sucedido durante su Gobierno del Rio de la Plata. [1–70 plus index] Second volume 26 Historia General de las Indias, por Francisco Lopez de Gómara. [1–226 plus index] 27 Chrónica de la Nueva-España, o Conquista de México, por el mismo. [1–214 plus index] Third volume 28 Historia del Descubrimiento y Conquista de la Provincia del Perú, y de los sucessos de ella, y de las cosas naturales, que en la dicha Provincia se hallan, por Agustín de Zarate. [1–176 plus index] 29 Verdadera Relación de la Conquista del Perú, y Provincia del Cuzco, embiada al Emperador Carlos V. por Francisco de Xerèx. [179–237 plus index] 30 Historia, y Descubrimiento del Rio de la Plata, y Paraguay, por Hulderico Schmidèl, traducida del Latin. [1–31 plus index] 31 Argentina, y Conquista del Rio de la Plata, con otros acaecimientos de los Reynos del Perú, Tucumán, y Estado de Brasil, por el Arcediano Don Martin del Barco Centenera, Poema en veinte y ocho Cantos. [1–107 plus index] 32 Viage del Mundo, de Simòn Perez de Torres. [1–45] 33 Epitome de la Relación del Viage de algunos Mercaderes de San Malò à Moka, en Arabia, en el Mar Bermejo, hecho por lo años de 1708. 1709. y 1710. formado, y puesto en Castellano por el Alferez Don Manuel de Grova, natural de la Gran Canaria. [45–8] Note: The last work to be included in the edition is the only one to be dated outside of the sixteenth century. Also, in addition to the works and indexes listed above, in the third tome, before the edition of Agustin de Zarate’s Historia del descubrimiento, one finds the following title: 34 ‘Declaración de la dificultad, que algunos tienen, en averiguar por donde pudieron pasar al Perú, las Gentes, que primeramente le poblaron.’

Notes

Introduction 1 For more on the issue of periodization see Castañón; Hazard; Martínez Shaw; McClelland; Stiffoni ‘Historiografía’; and, especially, Hill and PérezMagallón. 2 See Juan Bautista Diamante et al. Comedias nuevas de los más célbres autores, y realzados igenios de España (Amsterdam: A costa de David García Henríquez, 1726). The comedies written by González de Barcia were published as early as 1706. 3 Over the course of his life, González de Barcia’s work went through at least four intellectual phases: the first, from 1690 to 1710, consisted of his earliest attempts to write poetry and dramas; the second (1713–25) consisted of his work at the Real Academia Española; the third (1720–43) consisted of his Americanist editions; finally, the fourth (1743–88) consisted of work completed throughout his life that was published posthumously, his work on the Additiones ad Bibliotecam Hispanam being the best example. While this book looks specifically at González de Barcia’s third phase, I am currently conducting research for a biography of González de Barcia that considers his entire life’s work within the context of the politics of scholarship in early Enlightenment Madrid. 4 One important, recent contribution to these studies is found in the opening chapter of Fernanda Macchi’s doctoral dissertation, ‘Imágenes de los Incas en el siglo XVIII’ (Yale University, 2003). By focusing her study on a portion of González de Barcia’s editorial work, that which was related to El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, Macchi illustrates how González de Barcia participated in a rebirth of interest in this Mestizo figure that overtook European imagination in the eighteenth century.

208

Notes to page 8

5 In her study Sceptres and Sciences in the Spains (2000), Ruth Hill, by making use of the term ‘Spanish Humanism,’ provides an excellent context for the intellectual history I wish to recount in this study. For a review of the use of the term ‘americano,’ see Álvarez de Miranda’s ‘Para la historia de Americano,’ in Pulcre, Bene, Recte: Estudios en homenaje al Prof. Fernando González Ollé (Pamplona: Ediciones Universidad de Navarra, 2002), 73–87. I thank Dr Pedro Álvarez de Miranda for his helpful insights into the use of this terminology. 6 For example, using the curious anagram Gabriel de Cárdenas Z Cano (about which I will speak in chapter 1 of this book), González de Barcia wrote the Ensayo cronologico, para la historia general de la Florida (Madrid, 1723) and ‘La vida de Inti Cusi Titu Iupanqui, penúltimo Inca,’ which he added to his 1723 edition of El Inca Garcilaso’s Primera parte de los Commentarios Reales (Lisbon, 1609). As this breadth of interest shows, González de Barcia was an Americanist in the broad sense of the term in that he wrote on Peru as well as Florida. 7 The Americanist library created by González de Barcia continues to influence scholars today all over the world. One example of the extension of González de Barcia’s influence is seen in Isagani R. Medina’s thesis, ‘Philippine Items in Leon Pinelo-Barcia’s Epitome 1629 and 1737–38 Editions: A Bibliographical Study’ (Department of Library Science, University of Michigan, Spring 1964). Also, in his 1990 study, A New Andalucia and a Way to the Orient, Paul Hoffman provides González de Barcia’s Ensayo cronológico as one of the sources in his bibliography. 8 ‘BIBLIOTHECA. s.f. Nombre Griego, que en su riguroso sentido significa el paráge donde se venden libros; pero aunque en nuestra léngua se suele entender assi alguna vez, mas comunmente se toma por la Libreria que junta algun hombre grande y erudíto ... Se llaman tambien assi algunos libros, ù obras de algunos Autóres que han tomado el assunto de recoger y referir todos los Escritóres de una Nación que han escrito obras’ (‘BIBLIOTHECA. s.f. Noun of Greek origin, which in its rigorous sense means the place where books are sold. But although in our language it is occasionally used in this way, more often it is understood as the Library that some great and erudite Man brings together ... Also referred to as this are some books or works of some Authors who have taken it upon themselves to gather and describe all the Writers of a Nation who have written works’; Real Academia 602b). Regarding this last sense of the word, that is, biblioteca as bibliographical catalogue, biblioteca could also refer to the discrete subject bibliographies found within a general catalogue. For example, León Pinelo’s Epítome de la biblioteca included four sections: the biblioteca oriental,

Notes to pages 9–22

209

the biblioteca occidental, the biblioteca náutica, and the biblioteca geográfica. See chapter 2. 9 In preparing this introduction I have reviewed Desdevise du Dezert, Fernández Díaz, Lynch, Kamen, among others, whose works are provided in the bibliography. 10 In doing this work I was often reminded of a comment made by Margarita Zamora in her essay ‘Text, Context, Intertext: Columbus’ diario de a bordo as Palimpsest’ (The Americas 46.1 [1989]: 17–40). When studying the possible rhetorical manipulation by Las Casas of the original Colón text, Zamora wrote: ‘As long as the original version remains inaccessible to us it will be impossible to determine with any degree of certainty or precision how and where Las Casas altered the text in his edition of it’ (23). In studying González de Barcia’s alterations of earlier texts he edited, I was fortunate not only to have access to these earlier editions but, also, to have an acceptable facsimile edition of the Barcia edition with which to highlight these alterations. Chapter 1 1 For an important discussion of this episode between Atahualpa and Pizarro see Sabine G. MacCormack, ‘Atahualpa y el libro,’ Revista de Indias 48, no. 184 (1988): 693–714. 2 See Zárate, book 2, chapter 5, 476b, for this episode. 3 In his classic study ‘Cartas, crónicas y relaciones del descubrimiento y la conquista,’ Walter Mignolo stated: ‘Juan Bautista Muñoz, un siglo después de Solís, es quien realiza una de las primeras tareas monumentales de recopilación, copia y organización de los documentos sobre el descubrimiento y la conquista’ (‘Juan Bautista Muñoz, a century after Solís, carries out one of the first monumental works of recompilation, transcription, and organization of the documents regarding the discovery and the conquest’; Mignolo 96). However, as we are beginning to note, and as Guerra Guerra clearly states, González de Barcia’s work constituted the fundamental first step toward this agenda of recompilation. 4 In a reply to J.A. Mayans written 6 December 1785, Muñoz wrote: ‘Yo estoi ya de asiento meditando cómo deducir el hilo de mi Historia’ (‘I am already at work meditating on how to deduce the thread of my History’; Mayans Epistolario 17:396). 5 We may be reminded here of what many people throughout North and South America today see as the imperialist implications of using the name ‘America’ to refer only to the United States of America. By labelling

210

Notes to page 22

González de Barcia an ‘Americanist,’ I have sought, somewhat ironically perhaps, to emphasize the relevance of this scholar to the study of the Americas, broadly conceived. Indeed, as we have seen, scholars throughout Spain and Latin America consider González de Barcia an ‘Americanista’ (cf. Barros Arana; De Andrés; Guerra Guerra). 6 My consideration of what I call the ‘denotative problematic’ has been guided in part by Bertrand Russell’s essay ‘On Denoting’ in Mind 14 (1905): 479–93. 7 The following works pertain to this eight-year period: 1 Garcilaso de la Vega, el Inca. Historia general del Perú ... Segunda impresion, enmendada, y añadida, con dos tablas, una de los capítulos, y otra de las materias. Madrid: Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, 1722. (Córdoba, 1617.) 2 – La Florida del Inca. Historia del Adelantado, Hernando de Soto, Governador, y Capitan General del Reino dela Florida. Y de otros heroicos caballeros, españoles, e indios ... Van enmendadas en esta impresion, muchas erratas de la Primera: Yañadida Copiosa Tabla de las Cosas Notables. Y el ensaio cronologico, que contiene, las sucedidas, hasta en el Año de 1722. Madrid: Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, 1723. (Lisbon, 1605.) 3 – Primera Parte de los Commentarios Reales, que tratan, de el origen de los Incas, reies que fveron del Peru, de sv idolatria, leies, y govierno, en paz, y en guerra: de sus vidas, y antes que los Españoles pasaran, a él ... Segvnda impresion, enmendada: y añadida la vida de Inti Cusi Titu Iupanqui, penultimo Inca; con dos tablas; una, de los capitulos; y otra, de las Cosas Notables. Madrid: Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, 1723. (Lisbon, 1609.) 4 Torquemada, Fr Juan de. Primera parte de los veinte i vn libros ritvales i Monarchia Indiana, con el origen y guerras, de los Indios Occidentales de sus Poblaciones, Descubrimiento, Conquesta, Conuersion, y otras cosas marauillosas de la mesma tierra distribuydos en tres tomos ... Madrid: Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, 1723 [i.e., 1725]. (Seville, 1615.) 5 García, Fr. Gregorio. Origen de los Indios de el Nuevo Mundo, e Indias Occidentales ... Segunda impresion. Enmendada, y añadida de algunas opiniones, o cosas notables, en maior prueba de lo que contiene, con tres Tablas mui puntuales de los Capitulos, de las Materias, y Autores, que las tratan. Madrid: Francisco Martinez Abad, 1729. (Valencia, 1607.) 6 Herrera, Antonio de. Descripcion de las Indias ocidentales and Historia general de los hechos de los castellanos en las Islas i Tierra Firme del Mar Oceano de Antonio de Herrera Coronista Mayor de sv Mag.d de las Indias y su coronista de castilla. En Madrid: En la Oficina Real de Nicolàs Rodríguez Franco, Año de 1730. (Madrid, 1601–15.)

Notes to pages 26–9

211

8 See chapter 4, section 1.2 for more regarding González de Barcia’s involvement with Julián del Río Marín’s edition of Bances y Candamo’s Obras Lyricas. 9 In a note to Almeida, González de Barcia stated that he considered the editions of El Inca Garcilaso, as well as González de Barcia’s own essay, about which I will speak below, to form a set: ‘El Ensaio Chronologica y La Historia de la florida los tengo y buscare el primero y segundo tomo de la Historia del Peru del Ynca que ha dias que se acabaron de vender para embiar el juego como corre a V.S.’ (‘I have the Ensayo Chronologico and the Historia de la Florida and I will look for the first and second volume of the Historia del Peru by the Inca [Guarcilaso de la Vega], which only recently have been sold out, so that I can send you the complete set’; Letter to Almeida, 8 February 1737). 10 Yale’s Sterling Memorial Library reports that their copy of this work has, since 1998, been lost. As a result, this rare 1720 edition has not been consulted. The following 1729 edition, which, although printed by Martínez Abad, has the same bibliographical description, was consulted at the Dodd Center Library at the University of Connecticut: Bances Cándamo, Francisco Antonio, 1662–1709; Río Marín, Julián del. Obras Lyricas ... Madrid: N. Rodríguez, 1729. 11 A 1722 copy is listed in the catalogue of the Goettingen State and University Library (Niedersachsische Staats-Und Univ.), Library request number: 8P LAT REC I, 3364. 12 Indeed, González de Barcia seems to have lamented the fact that he no longer enjoyed such an expert printer when preparing his edition of León Pinelo’s Epítome: ‘Muchos Autores; i Tratados se havràn omitido, i de algunos ià nos consta, por haver llegado despues de acabada la impresion, i los que continuamente se van imprimiendo en toda Europa; pero como dijo Gerardo Juan Vosio, non deerunt unquam horum Amantes Studiorum, qui, & illa omnia, quae me fugerunt, sua supleant industria, en cuias palabras no debe comprehenderse el Impresor, que dejò caer vna hoja en el Titulo XII. Fol. 557. coluna 4. despues del renglon 44’ (‘Many Authors and Treatises will have been omitted, and we already know of some, for they arrived after the printing was finished, as well as those that are continually being printed all over Europe. But as Gerardus Joannes Vossius said, wander not, Friends of these Studies who would complete by their diligence those other things that have driven me away, in whose words the printer must not have paid heed because he dropped a page from Title XII, Fol. 557, column 4. following line 44’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresión’ in León Pinelo [1982] 1:[10]). By this time, González de Barcia’s new printer was Francisco Martínez Abad, who, apparently, was not as careful as his predecessor.

212

Notes to pages 30–53

13 Although González de Barcia gave some copies to colleagues and friends, his editions were also for sale. Copies for purchase could be found at the homes of the publishers whom González de Barcia commissioned to print the works. Consequently, the review writer of the Mercure de France included the following information in his essay on González de Barcia’s edition of Antonio de Herrera’s Decadas. Referring to Francisco Martínez Abad, González de Barcia’s second printer by 1727, he stated: ‘C’est à ce Libraire que les Estrangers peuvent s’addresser pour obtenir à des conditions raisonnables les exemplaires qu’ils souhaiteront de cette nouvelle Edition’ (‘Foreigners can direct themselves to this Bookstore to obtain at reasonable conditions the exemplars that they will want of this new Edition’; Mercure, March 1730, 550). 14 For examples of its use as a primary source, see Hoffman, 144–5; and Adorno and Pautz. 15 Although Salazar published his polemic under the pseudonym Joseph de Salazar, Horacio Capel identified the true identity of the author as Luis de Salazar (xxii). The critique offered by Salazar focused on matters of logic in grammar, not of historical facts. For example, Salazar took issue with words penned by González de Barcia in the 18th decade: ‘En el mismo fol. col. 2. [González de Barcia] dice, llegaron Roberto, y sus Compañeros al Fuerte, casi desudos, sin sombreros. Verdaderamente, dixe, al oir esto, que al que està casi desnudo, de poco le sirve el sombrero’ (‘In the same fol., col. 2 [González de Barcia] says that Roberto and his Companions arrived at the Fort, nearly naked, without hats. Truly, I said, upon hearing this, that he who is nearly naked is little served by a hat’; Salazar 46). 16 For this same reason, I stress the importance of considering González de Barcia’s work within the context of his total editorial production. Reviewing only one edition fails to provide a comprehensive picture of his complete intellectual agenda, best understood within the context of the Barcia Library as a whole 17 For the issues relating to the visual space of the title page, see Laufeur. 18 The first censor’s review, dated 1605, for the 1607 edition was written 120 years before the 1725 edition. Chapter 2 1 In their introduction to The Book History Reader, David Finkelstein and Alistair McCleery note the importance that modern bibliography has for the field of the history of the book: ‘[T]wo key elements were inherited from bibliography by book history: the very recognition that a book is a

Notes to pages 55–73

2

3

4

5

6

7

213

result of a collaborative, albeit for bibliographers a corrupting, process; and a detailed system for describing books on the basis of their production attributes, which provided a universal standard drawing attention to the material object rather than its contents’ (2). As we saw in chapter 1, at least one Spanish writer and intellectual of the sixteenth century, Christóval Suárez de Figueroa, recognized the collaboration that went into every book. Although once disputed, Fernández Sánchez notes that León Penelo was born in Valladolid to a family of Jewish ancestry (41). For more information, see Lohmann Villena, ‘Estudio Preliminar’ xxiii–xxvii. ‘Calidad. Se toma tambien por condicion, requisito particular ò circunstancia que se pone en algun negocio, escritura, contrato u otra cosa para su constitucion y firmeza’ (‘Quality. It is also understood as the condition, special requirement, or circumstance that is applied to some task, writing, contract, or other thing in support of its formation and stability’; Real Academia Española [1963] 2:67b). Regarding Herrera, León Pinelo wrote: ‘En el autor que mas ordenadamente ha escrito de Las Indias, se reconoce mucho esta falta [del saber Cosmografia]’ (‘This lack [of cosmographical knowledge] is noted in the author who has most amply written about Las Indias’; Grand Canciller 42). In an editor’s note to this sentence, Lohmann Villena asserts that León Pinelo directed this comment at the famous and then recently deceased chronicler of the New World Antonio de Herrera (in León Pinelo Gran Canciller 212n11). His criticism of Antonio de Herrera, so strong in El Gran Canciller, is nonexistent in the Epítome. Quite the opposite, in the bibliographical catalogue, León Pinelo writes that Herrera’s Historia general ‘[e]s la historia mas copiosa, que ay de las Indias, por aver su Autor recopilado en ella todo lo escrito hasta el año de 1554’ (‘[i]t is the most copious history we have on the Indies because its Author compiled therein all that had been written until the year 1554’ León Pinelo [1629] 73). León Pinelo’s decision to tone down the critique of Antonio de Herrera might indicate a change in strategy regarding his political future. The original Latin reads: ‘ad rationis verique obrussam’ (Bibliotheca Hispana Nova [1996] 1:139b). For all references to Nicolás Antonio’s Biblioteca Hispana Nueva, I have utilized the authoritative edition and translation by the Fundación Universitaria Española, Madrid, 1999. Manzano Manzano points out that León Pinelo claimed to have begun his bibliographical scholarship on the Indies before knowing of any other scholar’s work in the field (‘El Proceso’ 18b). However, Manzano posits the

214

Notes to pages 81–93

possibility that León Pinelo in fact already knew about Solórzano Pereira’s work (cf. 19a). 8 All quotations are taken from Gomez Bot’s edition republished in 1735 at Seville. Thanks to librarians at the Beinecke Library, Yale University, for holding this edition for me. 9 Modelled on Spanish land allocations known as repartimientos, the encomienda was a system of labour organization in colonial Spanish America in which enslaved indigenous natives were obliged to work for the Spanish conquerors in return for instruction in the Catholic faith (cf. Burkholder 36). Chapter 3 1 González de Barcia emphasized the impact of León Pinelo’s Epítome in his prologue to the second edition: ‘Nuestro Eruditisimo, è incomparable Don Nicolàs Anotnio en la Bibliotheca Nueva Española, le traslada casi todo ... Job Ludolfo en los Commentarios à su Historia de Etiopìa, incluiò el Titulo entero, que trata de estos Reinos ... Alonso Lasor de Varea ... copia la maior parte de esta Obra en los dos Tomos del Orbe de la Tierra ... El Padre Rodriguez, Trinitario, en su Biblotheca Valentina, Frai Jacobo Quetif, i Frai Jacobo Echard es sus Escritores Dominicos, Frai Juan de San Antonio en su Bibliotheca Universal Franciscana, hicieron lo mismo, i entre infinitos Hombres Grandes le aplauden, el Padre Felipe Labbè ..., Antonio Teiser en el Catalogo de los Autores, i las Librerias, Don Francisco Xarque, en los insignes Varones de Paraguay, Don Francisco Moreno Porcel en el Retrato de Manuel de Faria i Sousa, i otros, de que pudiera formarse dilatado Catalogo’ (‘Our most Erudite and without equal Don Nicolás Antonio transcribes almost all of it in the Bibliotheca Nueva Española ... Hiob Ludolf, in the Commentaries to his History of Ethiopia, included the entire Title that deals with those kingdoms ... Alonso Lasor de Varea ... copies the greater part of this Work in the two volumes of the Orbe de la Tierra ... Father Rodríquez, Trinitarian, in his Bibliotheca Valentina, Brother Jacobo Quetif, and Brother Jacobo Echard in their Escritores Dominicanos, Brother Juan of San Antonio in his Bibliotheca Universal Franciscana, all did the same. And among an infinite number of Great Men, Father Felipe Labbè ... Antonio Teiser, in his Catalogo de los Autores, i las Librerias, don Francisco Xarque, in his famous Men of Paraguay, don Francisco Moreno Porcel, in his Portrait of Manuel de Faria i Sousa, and others, with whom one could compile a lengthy catalogue, all applaud him’; ‘Proemio a esta segunda impresion’ in León Pinelo [1982] 1:[1r–v]).

Notes to pages 92–110 215 2 Thanks to Cesar Rodriguez, curator of Latin American books at the Sterling Library, Yale University, for holding the Almeida microfilm for my use. 3 The Epítome in fact provides references for González de Barcia’s other Americanist editions, including two that are now lost: Alonso de Ovalle’s Histórica relación del reyno de Chile, y delas missiones, y ministerios que exercita en el la Compañia de Jesus, 1735 (Rome: F. Cavalli, 1646) and Diego Fernández’s Primera, y segunda parte de la Historia del Perú, 1731 (Seville: F. Díaz, 1571) (Barros Arana 105). After completing these editions, González de Barcia apparently dedicated himself to his additions to Nicolás Antonio’s Bibliotheca Hispana. An example of this scholarly reorientation can be found in a letter González de Barcia wrote to Almeida: ‘Estan puestos en la Bibliotheca Oriental la relacion de la china del Padre Atagallanes [?] y el Viaje à Abisi[ ]ía del Padre Geronimo Sobo aunque no con la extencion que V. S. dio por no permitirla un Epitome; y tengo al P. Sobo de quien necesito noticias mas especiales para la Bibliotheca Hispana’ (‘The account of China by Father Atagallanes [?] and the Travel to Abisi[ ]ía by Father Geronimo Sobo are included in the Bibliotheca Oriental, although without the extended review that you gave, due to the fact that an Epitome does not permit it; and I have Father Sobo, about whom I need more specific information for the Bibliotheca Hispana’; Almeida, 11 Jan. 1737). Ironically, González de Barcia claimed that there was no more room in his ‘Epítome’ for additional bibliographical information! For a more detailed account of González de Barcia’s re-publications, see the appendix. 4 Folc de Cardona was one of many clergymen expelled for having supported Charles VI. As Henry Kamen points out in his recent study Philip V of Spain: The King Who Reigned Twice (2001): ‘It was reported from Rome in 1713 that over 3000 exiled Spanish clergy had taken refuge there’ (47). 5 This example, moreover, proves an important point made by Joaquín Álvarez Barrientos regarding the putative Internationalism of the Republic of Letters. In his book La república de las letras en la España del siglo XVIII, Álvarez Barrientos observes that while the great national literature of Spain served a cultural purpose within the Republic of Letters, Spanish scholars, by making these works known to non-Spanish intellectuals, were able to advertise their cultural patrimony within the European political arena (8). While González de Barcia’s editions circulated in the non-bordered scholarly world of this republic, they also served as an icon of cultural pride. 6 Thanks to Miguel Gomes, Associate Professor of Spanish, University of Connecticut, for help in transcribing this very poor copy of the original letter. 7 For example, in a reference on Inca Garcilaso de la Vega’s Historia general del Peru, González de Barcia mentioned Juan Bodoin’s 1633 and Pierre Riche-

216

8

9 10

11

Notes to pages 110–21 let’s 1670 French translations. However, the 1633 translation was of the Commentarios generales (Alden et al. European Americana 2:335), while the 1670 translation was of the Historia de la Florida (3:276). Harper’s Latin Dictionary provides the following translations for confundere: to pour, to mingle, or to mix together; to unite, to join, to combine. The verb, of course, also conveys the following meanings: to confound, to jumble together, to bring into disorder (Andrews 417). Technically speaking, Genette would call the former ‘peritext’ and the latter ‘epitext.’ Not so minor, however! Errors relating to the basic facts of Las Casas’s biography still haunt some of the scholarship on the bishop of Chiapas. For an excellent analysis of one such case see Prof. Rolena Adorno’s 1993 review article ‘The Politics of Publication: Bartolomé de las Casas’s The Destruction of the Indies.’ Indeed, in the work Tesoros verdaderos de las Indias, published at Rome in 1681–2, Meléndez wrote: ‘pues el memorial en que le alegaban [al Obispo Don Fray Bartolomé de las Casas], por sus fábulas no es todo de aquel venerable Obispo, sino añadido y compuesto por los enemigos de España, impreso en León de Francia, mintiendo en él que fue estampado en Sevilla; lo cual alcancé a saber de muy cierto original’ (‘for the report from which they quote him [i.e., Bishop Bartolomé de la Casas] is not enitrely by that venerable Bishop, as can be discerned from the falsehoods, but added to and composed by the enemies of Spain, published in Lyon, France, falsely stating therein that it was published at Seville; all of which I was able to ascertain from a very authentic original’ quoted in Esteve Barba, 443). Cleary, these ideas permeate González de Barcia’s commentary here.

Chapter 4 1 For a complete list of the individuals reviewed in this work, see Álvarez de Baena’s ‘Indice de Apellidos,’ 4: 415–60. 2 In using this convention to refer to Andrés González de Barcia’s nephew, I am following the example of Antonio Mestre Sanchis and Pablo Pérez García in their edition of G. Mayans y Siscar’s Epistolario (vol. 14, 1996). 3 Evidence of this is found in González de Barcia’s edition of Antonio de León Pinelo’s Epítome de la Biblioteca [1629; 1737–8]. For example, the second volume of the Historiadores primitivos was dedicated to Francisco López de Gómara’s works, Historia general de las Indias and Chrónica de la NuevaEspaña o Conquista de México. As González de Barcia acknowledged in his updated entries to the León Pinelo catalogue, Gómara’s Historia general de

Notes to pages 121–9

4

5 6 7

8

217

las Indias was ready for re-publication in 1731: ‘pero el Año de 1729. permitiò que [la Historia general] se bolviese à imprimir, i se està acabando, 1[7]31. fol’ (‘but in the year 1729 [the Historia general] was granted permission to be reprinted, and it is nearly complete, 1[7]31. fol.’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1:589).’ Another example can be seen in González de Barcia’s republication of Cortés’s letters. The Cartas ò Relaciones, as González de Barcia referred to Cortés’s letters from Mexico, were published in the first volume of the Historiadores primativos. In the Epítome, however, González de Barcia indicated that their publication was almost complete: ‘i [las Cartas] se quedan acabando de imprimir con la siguiente [quarta carta], este Año de 1731. i con licencia de los Supremos Consejos de Castilla, i Indias, en fol’ (‘and [the Letters] are in the process of being published with the following [fourth letter], this Year of 1731, and with permission from the Supreme Councilors of Castile, and of the Indies, in fol.’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1:597). Although both Cortés’s letters and Gómara’s histories were completed in the early 1730s, they were not released as publications until the posthumous 1749 edition of Historiadores primitivos. See also Adorno and Pautz 1999, vol. 3, chap. 14. In choosing the term ‘bibliothecarial’ to describe the Barcia Library, I am guided by the definition given by the Oxford English Dictionary (1989, 2:170) for the adjective bibliothecarial: ‘[o]f or belonging to a library or a librarian.’ In this chapter, I will use the term to refer to all aspects of the Barcia Library. For a review of my use of the term library, please see the Introduction. My consideration of the experience of space and place has been informed by Yi-Fu Tuan’s work Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. Although the Real Academia had already changed the day of their weekly meetings to Wednesday on account of González de Barcia’s duties at the Consejo de Castilla (Cotareli y Mori 34), González de Barcia preferred to work from his private library. One may recall here the observation made in the preface to the Torquemada edition in which the preface writer claimed to have found the Torquemada manuscript at González de Barcia’s library: ‘El beneficio General de todos, me obligò à entrar en el empeño de bolverla à imprimir, haviendo hallado casualmente el Original, que sirviò à la Edicion primera, en la Libreria del Señor Don Andrès Gonçalez de Barcia, de los Consejos Supremos de Castilla, y Guerra, que me le fiò para este efecto’ (‘The General benefit of all obliged me to take on the trouble of returning it to print, having found by chance the Original that served for the first Edition in the Library of Señor Don Andrés González de Barcia, of the Supreme Councils of Castile and of War, who entrusted it to me for this purpose’; ‘Poemio al lector’ in Torquemada [1725]

218

9

10

11

12 13

Notes to pages 130–41 1:[1]). The idea that a fellow intellectual could ‘casually browse’ the Barcia Library serves to highlight the conceptualization of the library as a place for study. I wish to thank Dr Mark Burkholder, Dean and Professor of History at the University of Missouri–St Louis, for calling my attention to this point of comparison. For more information on Barcia’s land holdings, see Fayard, Los miembros, chap. 12. However, this quality did not require that the reader invest unreasonable sums in the purchase of the González de Barcia editions. For example, in Barcia Jr’s letter to Gregorio Mayans, dated February 1744, Barcia Jr responded to Mayans’s query regarding the prices of some of the Americanist editions. Barcia Jr indicated the following: ‘El inca Garcilaso de las Vega: dos tomos de comentarios reales del Perú, y dos de la Florida, historia del adelantado Hernando de Soto. De marquilla, Madrid, 1720 (precio, 200 [reales]). Fray Juan de Torquemada: Monarchia Indiana, 3 tomos folio de marquilla, Madrid, 1723 (precio, 180)’ (‘The Inca Garcilaso de la Vega: two volumes of royal commentaries about Peru, and two about La Florida, history of the governor Hernando de Soto. Regular folio, Madrid, 1720 (cost, 200 [reales]). Brother Juan de Torquemada: Monarchia Indiana, 3 volumes regular folio size, Madrid, 1723 (cost, 180)’; in G. Mayans Epistolario 14:337– 8). At roughly 50 reales per volume González de Barcia’s Americanist editions were affordable to those scholars who already paid large sums for high-quality editions. In González de Barcia’s preface to the Origen de los Indios, he expanded his rationale for varying the order of his publications: ‘Tuvimos intencion de que este Libro [i.e., the Origen] se pusiese despues de la Descripcion de las Indias, de Antonio de Herrera, porque conocida la Tierra, parecia seguirse la Noticia de sus Moradores, i como llegaron à ella; pero nos apartò de esta idèa la mezcla de los Autores, i los diferentes gustos i precisiones de los Lectores: cada vno podrà hacer lo mismo que haviamos determinado’ (‘We had planned for this Book [i.e., the Origen] to be placed after the Description of the Indies, by Antonio de Herrera, because once the geography is known, the Information about its Inhabitants, and how they arrived there, would seem to follow; however, the variety of Authors, and the different desires and needs of the Readers prompted us to change our mind. Each reader will be able to do the same as we had intended’; in García [1981] 4) Regarding the importance of testimony in historical writing, see Adorno, ‘The Discursive Encounter of Spain and America.’ As I noted in the Introduction, I did this through a close textual comparison of both editions in which I underlined, in my 1729 photocopied edition, all

Notes to pages 142–3

219

the original 1607 notes. Thereafter, I was able to focus exclusively on the notes added by González de Barcia. 14 For an excellent study of the ways ancient texts were utilized as tools for elucidating the implications of the discovery of the New World, see Grafton, New Worlds, Ancient Texts. 15 For example, González de Barcia produced an edition of Hulderico Schmidel’s Vera historia admirandae cvivsdam nauigationis, quam Huldericus Schmidel, Straubingensis, ab 1534. usque ad annum 1554. in American vel nouum Mundum, iuxta Brasiliam & Rio della Plata [1599]. He translated this work into Spanish, having reduced it to an epitome version. The Spanish edition was included in volume 3 of his Historiadores Primitivos [1749] under the title Historia, y Descubrimiento de el Rio de la Plata y Paraguay (Medina Biblioteca Hispano-americana entry 401). As González de Barcia stated in his edition of the Epítome: ‘D. Gabriel de Cardenas, la redujo [i.e., Schmidels’s history] à Epitome, con algunas declaraciones para mejor inteligencia de ella, impreso 1[7]31. fol.’ (‘Don Gabriel de Cárdenas, reduced it to an Epitome, with some illustrative notes for a better understanding of it, published 1[7]31. fol’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1: 661). Furthermore, in the appendix to the Epítome’s ‘Titulo X. Historias del Rio de las Plata, i del Paraguay,’ González de Barcia stated: ‘[Despues del] Fol. 661 Don Gabriel de Cardenas, Añade. al fin. 1735. fol. con Notas, i Advertencias vtiles à la verdad de la Historia’ (‘[After] folio 661 Don Gabriel de Cárdenas, Add at the end: 1735 folio with useful Notes and Notices for the truth of the History’; in León Pinelo [1982] 1:919, column 2). For a recent study of Schmidel’s contribution to the study of the River Plate region, see Bolaños, ‘The Requirements of a Memoir.’ 16 Indeed, in his survey of Spanish humanism from 1500 to 1800, Gil Fernández claims that had the Spanish chroniclers of the Indies written in Latin they would have been able to respond directly to the negative claims attributed to Las Casas. Indeed, Gil Fernández decries the lack of training in Latin among the historians of the period as the indirect accomplice (cómplice indirecto) of the Leyenda Negra (66). As intriguing as it is impossible to substantiate, Gil Fernández’s claim is of interest regarding González de Barcia’s decision to use Latin as the language of the marginal notes. Still, perhaps Gil Fernández makes a valid point when stressing the lack of Latin historiography of the New World. As Peter Albinus (1534–98) wrote in his Treatise on Foreign Languages and Unknown Islands, a scholar could not learn of the New World without a reading knowledge of Spanish: ‘This new investigation of the New World [was] an investigation which up to that time lay concealed from many, from their ignorance of the Spanish (since these accounts are said to exist in no other language)’ (51–2).

220

Notes to pages 145–61

17 In fact, the introduction to the Ensayo cronologico has thirty unnumbered pages, thus placing this comment, as González de Barcia stated, near the end of the piece. 18 For a history of the use of the expression Republic of Letters, see Waquet, ‘Qu’est-ce que la République des Lettres?’ 19 Indeed, in one instance, González de Barcia inserted his commentary into García’s quotation of José de Acosta. See, for example, García’s quote of chapter 19 of Acosta’s Historia natural y moral de las indias, into which González de Barcia added his own commentary (in García [1981] 34). 20 Huddleston, for example, indicated that González de Barcia merely recited García’s ideas: ‘In each case Barcia followed the first author’s practice of stating and meeting all objections, leaving each of the thirteen new possibilities uncontested’ (109). 21 Regarding the scholarship surrounding the origins of indigenous people of the New World, see Gliozzi’s Adam et le Noveau Monde, in which many of these authors are discussed. 22 The Diccionario de Autoridades indicated this colloquial meaning in the definitions provided for ‘pero’: ‘Pero. Suelen usarle como substantivo, y significa defecto: como Fuláno no tiene pero. Lat. Vitium, ii. Defectus, üs’ (‘But. It is often used as a noun, and it means a defect: as in Jimmie has no defects [pero]. Latin Vitium, ii. Defectus, üs’; [1964] 5:229). 23 Perhaps the best characterization of Acosta’s method comes from Acosta himself. When commenting on the torrid zone, Acosta stated: ‘Como había leído lo que los filósofos y poetas encarecen de la Tórrida zona ... Aquí yo confieso que me reí e hice donaire de los meteoros de Aristoteles y de su filosofía’ (‘Since I had read what the philosophers and poets stress regarding the Torrid zone ... Here I confess to having laughed and made fun of Aristotle’s lofty thoughts and of his philosophy’; 141). 24 González de Barcia, in fact, quoted from section 15 of book 1, chapter 5 of the Política Indiana. In that section, as the reader would expect, Solórzano reviews Cesalpino’s Peripateticorum. Interestingly, Solórzano’s own marginal note on this passage suggests González de Barcia’s close reading of the Política Indiana: ‘Avicen. apud Cesalpin. lib. 1 Peripat. quaest. q. 1. Ego dict. cap. 9, num. 37’ (‘Avicena, in the work of Cesalpino, book 1 of the peripateticorum quaestionum qeustion 1. Ego aforesaid chapter 9, number 37’; 71). González de Barcia provided a nearly exact citation of Solórzano’s note. 25 For a review of George Horn’s writings on the matter of Indian origins, see Gliozzi, Adam et le Nouveau Monde, 404ff. 26 The text to which this note refers is in the right column of the page. 27 Nonetheless, despite his attempt to de-emphasize the value of Horn’s

Notes to pages 165–87

221

work, González de Barcia effectively quoted Horn verbatim. In book 3, chapter 6 of Horn’s de Originibus Americanis, which González de Barcia cited in the note, Horn wrote: ‘In the channel that bears his name, Frobisher saw “barbarians with long faces, flat noses, long black hair, and of olive complexion” ... So that no one who considers the similarity between the Samojedeans, Greenlandians, and Americans can doubt the migration of the Scythians by way of the west’ (‘Forbisserus ad fretum sui nominis, vidit barbaros lata facie, depresis & simis naribus, longo & nigro capillitio, colore olivastro ... Vt de migrationes Scythica per occidentem dubitare nemo possit cui similitudo inter Samojedos, Gronlandos & Americanos cognita’; Horn 160). 28 Conversely, the index entry that González de Barcia provided for George Horn emphasized the negative: ‘Jorge Hornio, altera muchos Nombres proprios de Indias. 242.1. su odio a los de la Compañia de Jesus. 243.2’ (‘George Horn, alters many proper Names on the Indies. 242.2 his hatred for the members of the Company of Jesus. 243.2’; ‘Tabla de las cosas notables’ in García [1981] [45]). The index provided González de Barcia with additional opportunities to guide his readers in their study of the New World. (See chapter 5.) Chapter 5 1 Apparently in the 110 years between the two publications the Franciscan managed to move the topic of discussion on from the sufferings of Christ on the Via Dolorosa to Christ’s crucifixion at Golgotha. 2 My use of the term ‘indexer’ follows the statement made by G. Norman Knight in his essay ‘The Problem of Copyright’: ‘Not many indexers seem to be aware that the copyright in their indexes belongs to them, unless and until they have expressly assigned it. In certain circumstances it may prove a property of some value’ (in Harrod, 106a). 3 Baltasar published his works under his brother Lorenzo’s name. See Blanco ‘Introduction’ in Baltasar Gracián Obras 1:xii. 4 See also Ingrao The Habsburg Monarchy, 1618–1815. 5 For an example from the twentieth century, Miguel de León Portilla evidenced his respect for the 1725 Torquemada index by stating: ‘Al sacar ahora nuevamente a luz la aportación de fray Juan de Torquemada, hubiera sido falta inexcusable presentarla desprovista de índices’ (‘Publishing again now the offering of brother Juan de Torquemada, it would have been an inexcusable shortcoming to have presented it without indices’; ‘Advertencia’ Indice Analítico, in Torquemada [1983] 7:561). 6 For this review I utilized the 1616 printing of the original 1603 first-edition

222

7

8

9

10

Notes to pages 187–94 Commelian printing (at the Houghton Library, Call # 6006.16 F*) and the 1707 Halma edition (at the Watkinson Library [Trinity College, Hartford, CT], Call # 937 G89). My translation is from the Latin original quoted in Grafton (ibid.). I further consulted the 1628 edition of Joseph Scaliger’s Epistolae omnes quae reperiri potuerunt when preparing this section. Nicolás Antonio apparently had read Scaliger’s letters carefully enough to have seen the reference to the ‘Herculean Labour.’ Grafton’s translation from the Latin original quoted in Grafton (ibid. 109n5). Grafton points out that Scaliger’s pun on the word ‘corpus’ is lost in the English translation. In fact, González de Barcia included this type of instruction for almost all of his indices. In one case, his indices served to alert the reader even to the marginal notes. In the eighty-page index included in his edition of García’s Origen de los Indios, González de Barcia wrote: ‘Tabla de las cosas mas notables, contenidas en el Libro antecedente del Origen de los Indios: el primer Numero significa el Folio, i el segundo la Coluna, i margen correspondiente’ (‘Table of the most notable things contained in the preceding Book on the Origin of the Indians: the first Number refers to the Page, and the second to the Column, and corresponding margin’; in García 1729, Index: ‘Title Page’). Verdussen, in fact, presented his indices utilizing a format similar to this one.

Works Cited

Abellán, José Luis. Historia crítica del pensamiento español. Tomo III. Del Barroco a la Ilustración (Siglos XVII y XVIII). Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, S.A., 1981. Acosto, José de. Historia natural y moral de las Indias [1590]. Ed. José Alcina Franch. Madrid: Historia 16, 1987. Adorno, Rolena. ‘The Discursive Encounter of Spain and American: The Authority of Eyewitness Testimony in the Writing of History.’ William and Mary Quarterly 49.2 (1992): 210–28. – ‘The Politics of Publication: Bartolomé de Las Casas’s The Destruction of the Indies.’ New West Indian Guide / Nieuwe West-Indische Gids 67.3–4 (1993): 285–92. Adorno, Rolena, and Patrick Charles Pautz. Álvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca: His Account, His Life, and the Expedition of Pánfilo de Narváez. 3 vols. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1999. Aguilar Piñal, Francisco. Bibliografía de autores españoles de siglo XVIII. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones científicas. Institución Miguel de Cervantes, 1981–99. – Introducción al siglo XVIII. Vol 25. Historia de la literatura española. Ed. R. de la Fuente. Madrid: Júcar, 1991. Aguilar Piñal, Francisco, ed. Historia literaria de España en el siglo XVIII. Madrid: Editorial Trotta, 1996. Agustín, Antonio. Diálogo de Medallas, inscripciones y otras antiguedades [1587]. Ed. Andrés González de Barcia. Madrid: Joseph Francisco Martínez Abad, 1744. Albertan-Coppola, Sylviane, and Marie Christian Gomez-Géraud. ‘La Collection des Navigationi e viaggi (1550–1559) de Giovanni-Battista Ramusio: Mécanismes et projets d’après les para-textes.’ Revue des Études Italiennes 36.1-4 (1990): 59–70.

224 Works Cited Alberto Sánchez, Luis. ‘Don Antonio de León Pinelo: Primer bibliógrafo americano.’ Boletin Bibliográfico 3.5 (1928): 212–22. Albinus, Peter. Treatise on Foreign Languages and Unknown Islands. Ed. Edmund Goldsmith. Edinburgh: Unwin Bros. of London, 1884. Alcedo, Antonio de (1735–1812). Bibliotheca Americana [1807]. Ed. Jorge A. Garces. 2 vols. Quito: Publicaciones del Museo Municipal de Arte e Historia, 1965. Alden, John Eliot, and Dennis Channing Landis. John Carter Brown Library. European Americana: A Chronological Guide to Works Printed in Europe Relating to the Americas, 1493–1776. Ed. John Alden with assistance of D.C. Landis. 6 vols. New York: Readex Books, 1980–97. Almeida, Francisco Antonio de. Correspondencia con D. Francisco de Almeida. Microfilm. Lisbon: National Library, (n.d.) [At Yale University Library, Temporary control number: FNJ3888]. Álvarez de Baena, José Antonio. Hijos de Madrid ilustres en Santidad, Dignidades, Armas, Ciencias y Artes. 4 vols. Madrid: En la oficina de D. Benito Cano, 1789– 91. Álvarez Barrientos, Joaquín. La República de las letras en la España del siglo XVIII. Madrid: CSIC, 1995 Álvarez de Miranda, Pedro. Palabras e ideas: El léxico de la ilustración temprana en España (1680–1760). Madrid: Anejos del boletín de la Real Academia Española, 1992. – ‘Para la historia de Americano.’ In Pulcre, Bene, Recte: Estudios en homenaje al Prof. Fernando González Ollé, 73–87. Pamplona: Ediciones Universidad de Navarra, 2002. Andrews, E.A., ed. Harper’s Latin Dictionary: A New Latin Dictionary. Oxford, 1880. Antonio, Nicolás. Bibliotheca Hispana sive Hispanorum qui usquam unquamve sive Latina sive populari alia quavis lingua scripto aliquid Consignaverunt notitia. 2 vols. Rome: Nicolai Angeli Tinassii, 1672. – Censura de historias fabulosas. Ed. Gregorio Mayans. Valencia, 1742. – Bibliotheca Hispana Nova, sive, Hispanorum scriptorum qui ab anno MD. ad MDCLXXXIV. floruere notitia [1783–1788]. 2 vols. Madrid: Visor, 1996. – Biblioteca Hispana Nueva, o, De los escritores españoles que brillaron desde el año MD hasta el de MDCLXXXIV [1783–8]. Ed. and trans. Miguel Matilla Martínez. 2 Vols. Madrid: Fundación Universitaria Española, 1999. ARTFL. Dictionnaire de l’Académie Française. 1st edition (1694). The Project for American and French Research on the Treasury of the French Language (ARTFL) is a cooperative enterprise of Analyse et Traitement Informatique de la Langue Française (ATILF) of the Centre National de la Recherche Sci-

Works Cited

225

entifique (CNRS), and of the Division of the Humanities, the Division of the Social Sciences, and Electronic Text Services (ETS) of the University of Chicago. http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/efts/ARTFL/ projects/dicos/ ACADEMIE/PREMIERE/. Aznar, Luis. ‘Precursores de la bibliografía histórica americanista.’ Humanidades 28 (1921): 263–315. Baisin, Gian-Paolo. ‘The Periphery of Literature.’ MLN 111.5 (1996): 976–89. Bances y Candamo, Francisco Antonio. Obras lyricas. Ed. Fernando Gutiérrez. Barcelona: Selecciones Bibliófilas, 1949 Barrera y Leirado, Cayetano Alberto de la. Catálogo Bibliográfico y Biográfico del Teatro Antiguo Español, desde sus orígenes hasta mediados del siglo XVIII. Madrid: M. Rivadeneyra, 1860. Barros Arana, Diego. ‘Historiadores de América: Don Antonio [sic] González de Barcia’ Revista de Santiago 3 (1873): 95–107. Bartlett, John Russell. Bibliotheca Americana. A Catalogue of Books relating to North and South America in the library of John Carter Brown of Providence R.I. Part III. – 1701–1800. Vol. I, with notes. Kraus Reprint Corp., 1963. Bautista Diamante, Juan, et al. Comedias nuevas de los más célbres autores, y realzados igenios de España. Amsterdam: A costa de David García Henríquez, 1726. Benjamin, Walter. ‘Unpacking My Library.’ In Hannah Arendt, Illuminations, ed., 59–67. New York: Schocken Books, 1968. Besterman, Theodore. The Beginnings of Systematic Bibliography. 2nd ed., rev. New York: Burt Franklin, 1968. Béthencourt Massieu, Antonio. Patiño en la política internacional de Felipe V. Valladolid: Cuadernos de Historia Moderna, 1954. Biblioteca Nacional. Invertario general de manuscritos de la Biblioteca Nacional. 12 vols. Madrid: Ministerio de Cultura, 1953–88. Blanco, Emilio. ‘Introducción.’ Obras by Baltasar Gracián. Madrid: Biblioteca Castro, 1993. Bolaños, Alvaro Félix. ‘The Requirements of a Memoir: Ulrich Schmidel’s Account of the Conquest of the River Plate (1536–53).’ Colonial Latin American Review 11.2 (2002): 231–50. Bonet Correa, Antonio. Vida y obra de fray Matías de Irala: Grabador y tratadista español del siglo XVIII. 2 vols. Madrid: Ediciones Turner, 1979. Borba de Moraes, Ruben. Bibliographia brasiliana. Rare Books about Brazil Published from 1504 to 1900 and Works by Brazilian Authors about the Colonial Period. Rev. and enl. ed. A–L. Los Angeles: UCLA Latin American Center Publication, 1983. Bowersock, G.W. ‘The Art of the Footnote.’ American Scholar 53 (1983/84): 54–62.

226 Works Cited Broc, Numa. La géographie de la Renaissance. Paris: Éditions du Comité des Travaux historiques et scientifiques, 1986. Cabezas, Juan Antonio de. Diccionario de Madrid: Las calles, sus nombres, su historia, su ambiente. Madrid: Compañía Bibliográfica Española, 1972. Cabrera de Córdoba, Luis. De historia para entenderla y escribirla [1611]. Ed. Santiago Montero Diaz. Madrid: Instituto de Estudios Politicos, 1948. Cañizares-Esguerra, Jorge. How to Write the History of the New World: Histories, Epistemologies, and Identities in the Eighteenth-Century Atlantic World. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001. Capel, Horacio. ‘El Epítome de León Pinelo y el problema de la continuidad de la ciencia española en el siglo XVIII.’ In Antonio de León Pinelo, Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental, y Occidental, Náutica, y Geográfica, vii–xxxii. Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, 1982. Carbia, Romulo D. La Crónica Oficial de las Indias Occidentales: Estudio histórico y crítico acerca de la historiografía mayor de Hispano América en los siglos XVI a XVIII, con una introducción sobre la crónica oficial en Castilla. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Buenos Aires, 1940. Cassirer, Ernst. The Philosophy of the Enlightenment. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1951. Castañón, Jesus. La crítica literaria en la prensa española de siglo XVIII (1700– 1750). Madrid: Taurus, 1973. Cebrián, José. ‘Nicolás Antonio y sus continuadores dieciochescos.’ Archivo Hispalense 226 (1991): 27–45. – Nicolás Antonio y la Ilustración Española. Kassel: Edition Reichenberger, 1997. Cela, José Camilo. La colmena. Madrid: Alfaguara, 1995. Cervantes de Salazar, Francisco. ‘Al mui ilustre señor Don Hernando Cortés.’ In Obras que Francisco Cervantes de Salazar ha hecho, glosado y traducido, 2–13. Madrid: Antonio de Sancha, 1772. Cervantes, Miguel de Saavedra. Don Quijote de la Mancha [1605, 1615]. Ed. Martín de Riquer. Madrid: Editorial Juventud, 1990. Chartier, Roger. ‘Texts, Printings, Readings.’ In Lynn Hunt, ed., New Cultural History, 154–75. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989. – The Order of Books: Readers, Authors, and Libraries in Europe between the Fourteenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Trans. Lydia G. Cochrane. Oxford: Polity Press, 1994. Chatelain, Verne E. The Defenses of Spanish Florida: 1565 to 1763. Washington: Carnegie Institute, 1941. Clapp, Verner W. ‘Bibliography.’ The Encyclopedia Americana, vol. 3: 721–4. Danbury, CT: Grolier Inc., 1989.

Works Cited

227

Clavijero, Francisco Javier. Historia antigua de Mexico [1780]. Mexico: Editorial Porrúa, 1991. Comedias nuevas, parte quarenta y ocho, escogidas de los mejores ingenios de España. Madrid: Francisco Martínez Abad, 1704. Cordero Medina, Luis Agustín. Nicolás Antonio: Bibliógrafo americanista. Lima: Centro Nacional de Documantación e Información Educacional, 1984. Corominas, Joan. Breve diccionario etimológico de la lengua castellana. Madrid: Editorial Gredos, 1961. Cotarelo y Mori, Emilio. ‘La fundación de la Academia Española y su primer director D. Juan Manuel F. Pacheco, Marqués de Villena.’ Boletin de la R. Academia Española 1.1 (1914): 4–38, 89–127. Couceiro Freifomil, Antonio. Diccionario bio-bibliográfico de escritores. Vol. 2. F-O. Santiago de Compostela: Editorial de los Bibliofilos Gallegos, 1952. Covarrubias, Sebastián de. Tesoro de la Lengua Castellana o Española [1611]. Ed. Martin de Riguer. Barcelona: Horta, 1943. Crone, G.R. The Discovery of the East. New York: St Martin’s Press, 1972. De Andrés, Gregorio. ‘La biblioteca manuscrita del americanista Andrés González de Barcia (m. 1743), del Consejo y Camaa de Castilla.’ Revista de Indias 47.181 (1987): 811–31. De Bry, Theodore. Colletiones peregrinatiorum in Indiam orientalem et occidentalem. 25 vols. Frankfurt, 1590–1634. Desdevises du Dezert, D. La España del Antiguo Régimen. Trans. A. Lorenzo González, intro. A. González Enciso. Madrid: FUE, 1989. Dumas, Gustave. Histoire du Journal de Trévoux depuis 1701 jusqu’en 1762. Paris: Boivin & Cie, Éditeurs, 1936. Eguiara y Erguren, Juan José de. Prólogos a la Bibliotheca Mexicana. Ed. Agustín Millares Carló. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1996. Elliot, John H. Spain and Its World. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989. Escolar Sobrino, Hipólito. Historia del Libro Español. Madrid: Gredos, 1998. Espasa-Caple. Enciclopedia universal ilustrada europeo-americana: Etimologías sánscrito, hebreo, griego, latín, árabe, lenguas indígenas americanas, etc.: Versiones de la mayoría de las voces en francés, italiano, inglés, alemán, portugués, catalán, esperanto. 70 vols. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, [1907?]–c. 1930. Esteve Barba, Francisco. Historiografía indiana. Madrid: Editorial Gredos, 1964. Fayard, Janine. ‘La tentative de réforme du Conseil de Castille sous le règne de Phillipe V (1713–1715).’ Mélanges de la casa de Velázquez 2 (1966): 259–79. – Los Membros del Consejo de Castilla (1621–1746). Trans. R. Rodríguez Sanz. Madrid: Siglo XXI Editores, 1982. Feliu Cruz, Guillermo. Historia de las Fuentes de la Bibliografía chilena. Ensayo Crítico. Vol. 1 [of 4]. Santiago de Chile, 1966.

228 Works Cited Fernández, Luis Gil. Panorama Social del humanismo español (1500–1800). Madrid: Editorial Tecnos, 1997. Fernández Díaz, Roberto. La España Moderna, siglo XVIII. Madrid: Historia 16, 1993. Fernández Sánchez, José. Historia de la Bibliografía española. Madrid: Técnicas gráficas forma, 1983. Field, Thomas W. An Essay Towards an Indian Bibliography. Being a Catalogue of Books, Relating to the History, Antiquities, Languages, Customs, Religion, Wars, Literature, and Origin of the America Indians. In the Library of Thomas W. Field. New York: Scribner, Armstrong, and Co., 1873. Repr. Columbus: Long’s College Book Co., 1951. Findlen, Paula. ‘The Museum: Its Classical Etymology and Renaissance Genealogy.’ Journal of the History of Collections 1.1 (1989): 59–78. – Possessing Nature: Museums, Collecting, and Scientific Culture in Early Modern Italy. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994. – ‘Building the House of Knowledge: The Structures of Thought in Late Renaissance Europe.’ In Tore Frängsmyr, ed., The Structure of Knowledge: Classifications of Science and Learning since the Renaissance. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001. Finkelstein, David, and Alistair McCleery. The Book History Reader. New York: Routledge, 2003. Foucault, Michel. The Archeology of Knowledge. New York: Pantheon Books, 1972. – ‘What Is an Author?’ In Donald F. Bouchard, ed., Language, Counter-Memory, Practice. Selected Essays and Interviews. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1977. García, Fr. Gregorio. Origen de los Indios de el Nuevo Mundo, e Indias Occidentales. Valencia: P.P. Mey, 1607. – Origen de los Indios de el Nuevo Mundo e Indias Occidentales [Madrid: 1729]. Ed. Franklin Pease. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 1981. Garcilaso de la Vega, el Inca. Historia general del Perú. Madrid: Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, 1722. – La Florida del Inca. Historia del Adelantado, Hernando de Soto, Governador, y Capitan General del Reino dela Florida. Y de otros heroicos caballeros, españoles, e indios. 2nd ed. Madrid: Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, 1723a. – Primera Parte de los Commentarios Reales. 2nd ed. Madrid: Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, 1723b. Gaskell, Philip. A New Introduction to Bibliography: The Classic Manual of Bibliography. New Castle DE: Oak Knoll Press, 1995. Genette, Gérard. ‘Introduction to the Paratext.’ New Literary History 22.2 (1991): 261–72.

Works Cited

229

– Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation. Trans. Jane E. Lewin. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Gerbi, Antonello. The Dispute of the New World: The History of a Polemic, 1750– 1900 [1955]. Trans. Jeremy Moyle. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1973. Gil Fernández, Luis. Panorama social del humanismo español (1500–1800). [1981]. Madrid: Tecnos, 1997. Gliozzi, Giuliano. Adam et le Nouveau Monde: La naissance de l’anthropologie comme idéologie colonial: Des généalogies bibliques aus théories raciales (1500– 1700). Trans. Arlette Estève and Pascal Gabellone. Paris: Théétète éditions, 2000. Goldgar, Anne. Impolite Learning: Conduct and Community in the Republic of Letters 1680–1750. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995. González de Barcia, Andrés. ‘El Sol Obediente al Hombre.’ In Comedias Nuevas, 1704. – Ensayo cronológico, para la historia general de la Florida. Madrid: Nicolás Rodríguez Franco, 1723 – Historiadores Primitivos De las Indias occidentales, que juntò, traduxo en parte, y sacò à luz, ilustrados con eruditas Notas, y copiosos Indices, El Ilustrissimo Señor D. Andrés Gonzalez Barcia, Del Cosejo, y camara de S. M. Divididos en tres tomos, cuyo contenido se verà en el folio siguiente. 3 vols. Madrid, 1749. González Echevarría, Roberto. Myth and Archive: A Theory of Latin American Narrative. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Grafton. Anthony. ‘J.J. Scaliger’s Indices to J. Gruter’s Inscriptiones Antiquae: A Note on Leiden Univeristy Library MS Scal. 11.’ Lias 2 (1975): 109–13. – Defenders of the Text. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991. – New Worlds, Ancient Texts: The Power of Tradition and the Shock of Discovery. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1992. – Joseph Scaliger: A Study in the History of Classical Scholarship. Vol. 2 Historical Chronology. Oxford, 1993. – The Footnote, a Curious History. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997. – ‘The Humanist as Reader.’ In G. Cavallo and R. Chartier, eds, A History of Reading in the West, 179–212. Trans. L. Cochrane. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1999. Grotius, Hugo. Freedom of the Seas, or, The Right that belongs to the Dutch to take part in the East Indian Trade [1609]. Oxford, 1916. Gruterus, Janus. Inscriptiones antiquae totius orbis romani [1602]. Heidelberg: Commelian, 1618. – Inscriptiones antiqvae totivs orbis romani. Amsterdam: F. Halma, 1707. Guerra Guerra, Arcadio. ‘“Ensayo Cronológico para la Historia General de la

230 Works Cited Florida” de Gabriel de Cárdenas z Cano (Andrés Gonçalez de Barcia).’ Revista de Estudios Extremeños 1 (1946): 97–109; 2 (1946): 199–214. Gurría Lacroix, Jorge, ed. Francisco López de Gomara. Historia general de las Indias y Vida de Hernán Cortés. Caracas: Biblioteca Ayacucho, 1991. Hakluyt, Richard. Principal navigations, voyages and discoveries of the English nation, made by sea or over land to the most remote and farthest distant quarters of the earth within the compass of these 1500 years. 3 vols. Oxford, 1589. Harrisse, Henry. A Description of Works Relating to America Published between the Years 1492–1551 [1866]. Madrid: Librería general Victoriano Suarez, 1958. Harrod, Leonard Montague, ed. Indexers on Indexing: A Selection of Articles Published in The Indexer. New York: R.R. Bowker Co., 1978. Hazard, Paul. The European Mind (1680–1715) [Paris, 1935]. New York: Meridian, 1963. Henderson, John B. Scripture, Canon, and Commentary: A Comparison of Confucian and Western Exegesis. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991. Herbermann, Charles G. ‘Concordances.’ The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 4. New York: Universal Knowledge Foundation, Inc., 1913. Herrera, Antonio de. Historia general de las Indias ocidentales. 4 vols. Antwerp: J.B. Verdussen, 1728. – Descripcion de las Indias ocidentales and Historia general de los hechos de los castellanos en las Islas i Tierra Firme del Mar Oceano de Antonio de Herrera Coronista Mayor de sv Mag.d de las Indias y su coronista de castilla. 5 vols. Madrid: Nicolas Rodriguez Franco, 1730. Higgins, Antony. Constructing the Criollo Archive: Subjects of Knowledge in the Bibliotheca mexicana and the Rusticatio mexicana. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 2000. Hill, Ruth. Sceptres and Sciences in the Spains: Four Humanists and the New Philosophy (ca. 1680–1740). Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2000. Hoffman, Paul E. A New Andalucia and a Way to the Orient: The American Southeast during the Sixteenth Century. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1990. Horn, George. De originibus americanis libri quator. Hague: Adrieni Ulaco, 1652. Huddleston, Paul Eldridge. Origins of the American Indians: European Concepts, 1492–1729. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1967. Ingrao, Charles W. The Habsburg Monarchy, 1618–1815. Cambridge: Cambridge Univesity Press, 1994. Israel, Jonathan. Empires and Entrepots: The Dutch, The Spanish Monarchy and the Jews, 1585–1713. London: Hambledon Press, 1990. – Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity 1650–1750. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.

Works Cited

231

Johnson, James William. ‘The Scythian: His Rise and Fall.’ Journal of the History of Ideas 20.2 (1959): 250–7. Juderías, Julián. La leyenda negra: Estudios acerca del concepto de España en el extranjero. Castilla y León: Junta de Castilla y León, Consejería de Educación y Cultura, 1997. Kamen, Henry. ‘Melchor de Macanaz and the Foundations of Bourbon Power in Spain.’ English Historical Review 80 (1965): 699–716. – Philip V of Spain: The King Who Reigned Twice. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001. Kany, Charles Emil. Life and Manners in Madrid, 1750–1800. New York: AMS Press, 1970 Kelly, Joseph. ‘Pandects.’ In The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 11. New York: Encyclopedia Press, 1913. Kenney, E.J. The Classical Text: Aspects of Editing in the Age of the Printed Book. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974. Kerkoff, Manfred. ‘“Discurso de opiniones” (Gregorio García y su Origen de los Indios).’ Revista de Estudios Hispánicos, Río Piedras 9 (1992): 101–14. Kerrigan, Anthony, and Herbert E. Bolton, eds. Barcia’s Chronological History of the Continent of Florida. Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1951. Knight, G. Norman. ‘Book Indexing in Great Britian: A Brief History.’ In Harrod, ed., Indexers, 9–13. – ‘The Problem of Copyright: An Indexer’s Triumph.’ In Harrod, ed. Indexers, 106–7. Kreigel, Brandine. L’histoire à l’Age classique. I. Jean Mabillon. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1988. Lancaster, F.W. Indexing and Abstracting in Theory and Practice. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 1991. Laufeur, Roger. ‘L’espace visuel du livre ancien.’ In Henri Jean Martin et al., eds, Histoire de l’édition française, vol. 1: 479–99. Paris: Promodis, 1982. Lázaro y Carreter, Fernando. Crónica del Diccionario de Autoridades (1713–1740). Madrid: Real Academia Española, 1972. Lechner, Jan. ‘América en las bibliotecas públicas y universitarias de los Países Bajos Septentrionales hasta comienzos del siglo XVIII.’ In Karl Kohut and Sonia V. Rose, eds, Pensamiento europeo y cultura colonial, 378–93. Madrid: Iberoamericana, 1997. Leclerc, Charles. Bibliotheca Americana: Histoire, Geographie, Voyages, Archéologie el Linguistique des Deux Amériques et des iles Philippines. Paris, 1878. Le Clercq, L. Les Verdussen: Imprimeurs-Libraires et Bibliophiles Anversois. Louvain, 1933. León Pinelo, Antonio de. Discurso sobre la importancia, forma, y disposición de la

232 Works Cited Recopilación de las Leyes de las Indias Occidentales [1623]. Ed. José Toribio Medina. Santiago de Chile: Fondo Historico y Bibliográfico José Toribio Medina, 1956. – Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental i Occidental, Nautica i Geografica. Madrid: Juan González, 1629. – Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental i Occidental, Nautica i Geografica. Ed. Andrés González de Barcia. Madrid: Francisco Martinez Abad, 1737–8. – Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental, y Occidental, Náutica, y Geográfica [1737–8]. 2 vols. Ed. Horacio Capel. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona, 1982. – El Gran Canciller. Ed. Lohmann Villena. Seville: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas, 1953. Lestringant, Frank. ‘The Crisis of Cosmography at the End of the Renaissance.’ In Phillipe Desan, ed., Humanism in Crisis: The Decline of the French Renaissance, 153–79. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1991. Lipking, Lawrence. ‘The Marginal Gloss.’ Critical Inquiry 3.4 (1977): 609–55. Lohmann Villena, Guillermo. ‘Estudio preliminar,’ In León Pinelo, El Gran Canciller, vii–clxxxvi. – ‘Fuentes bibliográficas del Epítome de Pinelo.’ Revista Interamericana de bibliografía / Inter-American Review of Bibliography 5.3 (1995): 153–62. López Piñero, José María. ‘La Carta filosofica-medico-chymica (1687) de Juan de Cabriada, Punto de Partida de la Medican Moderna en España.’ Asclepio; archivo iberoamericano de historia de la medicina y antropología médica 17 (1965): 207–14. – ‘La introducción de la ciencia moderna en España.’ Revista de Occidente 35 (1966). – La introducción de la ciencia moderna en España. Barcelona: Ariel, 1969. Lynch, John. Spain under the Habsburgs. Vol. 1. New York: New York University Press, 1981. – Spain under the Habsburgs. Vol. 2. New York: New York University Press, 1981. – Bourbon Spain: 1700–1808. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell Inc., 1989. Macchi, Fernanda. ‘Imágenes de los Incas en el siglo XVIII.’ Doctoral Dissertation, Yale University, 2003. MacCormack, Sabine G. ‘Atahualpa y el libro.’ Revista de Indias 48, no. 184 (1988): 693–714. Malclès, Louise Noëlle. Bibliography. Trans. Theodore Christian Hines. New York: Scarecrow Press, 1961. Maldonado de Guevara, Francisco. ‘La fundación de la Bibioteca Nacional y la Biblioteca privada de D. Antonio de Cardona, Arzobispo de Valencia.’ Revista de Valencia de Filología 1 (1951): 151–7. Manzano Manzano, Juan. ‘El proceso recopilador de las leyes de Indias hasta

Works Cited

233

1680.’ Recopilación de Leyes de los Reynos de las Indias, 11–67. Madrid: Ediciones Cultura Hispánica, 1973. – Colón y su secreto. Madrid: Ediciones Cultura Hispánica, 1976. Martial. Epigrammata. Ed. and trans. David Roy Shackleton Bailey. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993. Martin, Henri Jean, et al., eds. Histoire de l’édition française. Vol. 1. Paris: Promodis, 1982. Martín Gaïte, Carmen. El Proceso de Macanaz. Madrid: Editorial Moneda y Credito, 1970. Martínez Shaw, Carlos. El siglo de las Luces: Las bases intelectuales del reformismo. Historia de España 19. Madrid: Historia 16, 1996. Mayans y Siscar, Gregorio de. Epistolario. Ed. A. Mestre. 17 vols. Valencia: Publicaciones del Ayuntamiento de Oliva, 1972–2000. – ‘Vida de don Nicolás Antonio.’ In Nicolás Antonio, Censura de historias fabulosas, i–xxxv. McClelland, I.L. Idealogical Hesitancy in Spain 1700–1750. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 1991. Medina, Isagani R. ‘Philippine Items in Leon Pinelo-Barcia’s Epitome 1629 and 1737–38 Editions: A Bibliographical Study.’ Dissertation for Department of Library Science, University of Michigan, Spring 1964. Medina, José Toribio. Biblioteca Hispano-Americana (1493–1810). Vol. 4. Santiago de Chile: Impreso y grabado en casa del Autor, 1901. Mémoires de Trévoux. ‘Article XLI. Ensayo Chronologico.’ Memoires por L’histoire des sciences & des beaux arts, April 1738: 630–43. – ‘Lettre au sujet des Editions nouvelles des Décades d’Antonio de Herrera.’ Memoires por L’histoire des sciences & des beaux arts, June 1730: 1086–97. Mercure de France. ‘Memoire sur deux Editions nouvelles des Décades d’Antonio de Herrera, publiées, l’une par le sieur Verdussen, Libraire à Anvers en 1728. l’autre à Madrid l’an 1729. par les sions de Dom André González de Barcia, Membre du Conseil de Castille.’ March 1730: 544–50. Reissued on microfilm, Paris: A.C.R.P.P., 1958. Mestre, Antonio. ‘Prólogo.’ In Gregorio Mayans i Siscar, Vida de Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra. vii–xciii. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1972. – Despotismo e ilustración en España. Mexico: Editorial Ariel, 1976. – Humanismo y crítica histórica en los ilustrados alicantinos. Universidad de Alicante, 1980. – ‘La imagen de España en el siglo XVIII: Apologistas, críticos y detractores.’ Arbor 115:11 (1983): 49–73. – ‘Historiography.’ In Francisco Aguilar Piñal, ed., Historia literaria de España en el siglo XVIII, 815–82. Madrid: Editorial Trotta, 1996.

234 Works Cited – Manuel Martí: El Deán de Alicante. Alicante: Instituto de Cultura Juan GilAlbert, 2003. Mestre Sanchis, Antonio, and Pablo Pérez García. ‘Estudio preliminar.’ In Gregorio Mayáns y Siscar, Epistolario XIV: Mayans y los Altos cuadros de la magistratura y administración borbónica, 1 (1716–1750). Valencia, 1996. Mignolo, Walter. ‘Cartas, crónicas y relaciones del descubrimiento y la conquista.’ In Historia de la literatura hispanoamericana. Coordinator Luis Iñigo Madrigal. Vol. 1: 57–116. Madrid: Cátedra, 1992. Miró Quesada S., Aurelio. ‘Presentación.’ Francisco López de Gómara, Historia General de las Indias. Edición facsimilar de Franklin Pease. Lima: Comisión Nacional del V Centenario del Descubrimiento de America-Encuentro de dos mundos, 1993. Moliner, María. Diccionario de uso del Español. 1st ed. 2 vols. Madrid: Editorial Gredos, 1994. Moraes, Rubens Borba de. Bibliographia Brasiliana. Amsterdam: Colibris Editora, 1958. Moréri, Louis. El gran diccionario historico, o Miscellanea curiosa de la historia sagrada y profana, que contiene en compendio la historia fabulosa de los dioses y de los heroes de la antiguedad pagana: las vidas y las acciones notables, de los patriarchas, jueges, y reyes de los Judios ... El establecimiento y el progresso de las ordenes religiosas y militares; y la vida de sus fundatores. Las genealogias de muchas familias ilustres de España, de Portugal, y de otros paises. La descripcion de los imperios, reynos republicas, provincias, ciudades, islas ... La historia de los concilios generales y particulares, con el nombre de los lugares donde se celebraron. 10 vol. Paris and Lyons: Hermanos de Tournes, 1753. Moss, Ann. Printed Commonplace-Books and the Structuring of Renaissance Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996. Ophir, Adi. ‘A Place of Knowledge Re-Created: The Library of Michel de Montaigne.’ Science in Context 4.1 (1991): 163–89. The Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. Ed. J.A. Simpson and E.S.C. Weiner. 20 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989. Palau y Dulcet, Antonio. Manual del librero hispano-americano: Bibliografía general española e hispano-americana desde la invención de la imprenta hasta nuestros tiempos, con el valor comercial de los impresos descritos. 28 vols. Barcelona: A. Palau, 1948–77. Pease, Franklin. ‘Estudio preliminar.’ In Gregorio García, Origen de los Indios del Nuevo Mundo, ix–xli. Facsimile ed. Mexico: FCE, 1979. Pérez Magallón, Jesús. Constuyendo la modernidad: La cultura española en el Tiempo de los Novatores (1675–1725). Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 2002.

Works Cited

235

Pfeiffer, Rudolf. History of Classical Scholarship, From 1300–1850. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976. Philoponus, Honorius. Nova Typis Transacta Navigatio. 1621. Porras Barrenechea, Raul. ‘Don Antonoi de León Pinelo (1596–1660) [sic] y su obra “El Paraíso en el Nuevo Mundo” (1650).’ El Paraíso en el Nuevo Mundo, iii–xlv. Lima, 1943. Ramusio, Gian Battista. Delle Navigazioni e Viaggi. 3 vols. Venice, 1550–6. Real Academia Española. Diccionario de autoridades. Ed. facsímil de Diccionario de la lengua castellana, en que se explica el verdadero sentido de las voces, su naturaleza y calidad, con las phrases o modos de hablar, los proverbios o refranes, y otras cosas convenientes al uso de la lengua. Dedicado al rey nuestro señor Don Phellipe V. (Que Dios Guarde) A cuyas reales expensas se hace esta obra. Compuesta por la Real Academia Española. Tomo primero que contiene las letras A. B. Con Privilegio. En Madrid: En la Imprenta de Francisco del Hierro, Impressor de la Real Academia Española. Año de 1726. Madrid: Editorial Gredos, 1963. Rey Soto, Antonio. Galicia venera y venero de España. La Coruña: Imprenta Editorial, 1949 Rice, Eugene F. The Foundations of Early Modern Europe, 1460–1559. 2nd ed., Anthony Grafton. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1994. Rich, Obediah. Bibliotheca Americana Nova (1835–1846). 2 vols. New York: B. Franklin, 1963. Rodríguez de León, Juan. ‘Apologética.’ In Antonio de León Pinelo, Epítome de la biblioteca. Ed. González de Barcia. Madrid, 1737–8. Romero Muñoz, Vincente. ‘Estudio del bibliófilo sevillano Nicolás Antonio.’ Archivo Hispalense: Revista Histórica, Literaria y Artística 12.39–41 (1950): 57– 92; 13.42–44 (1950): 29–56; 13.43–44 [sic] (1995): 215–37. Russell, Bertrand. ‘On Denoting.’ Mind 14 (1905): 479–93. Sabin, Joseph. Bibliotheca americana. A dictionary of books relating to America, from its discovery to the present time. Begun by Joseph Sabin, continued by Wilberforce Eames and completed by R.W.G. Vail for the Bibliographical Society of America. 29 vols. New York, 1868–1936. Salazar, Joseph de. Crisis del Ensayo a la Historia de la Florida. Alcalá de Henares, 1725. Saltet, Louis. ‘Salamis, Epiphanius of.’ The Catholic Encyclopedia: An International Work of Reference of the Constitution, Doctrine, Discipline, and History of the Catholic Church. Vol. 13 (1913): 393–5. Sánchez, Manuel Isidoro. Madrid en la mano: Noticia cierta de las calles, y plazuelas de esta coronada Villa de Madrid. Madrid: M. Martin, 1763.

236 Works Cited Sánchez-Blanco Parody, Francisco. Europa y el pensamiento español del siglo XVIII. Madrid: Alianza Editorial, 1991. Scaliger, Joseph Juste. Epistolae Omnes Quae Reperiri Poruerunt. Francofurti, 1628. Segura, Jacinto. Norte critico con las reglas mas ciertas para la discrecion en la historia, y un tratado preliminar para instruccion de historicos principales. Valencia, 1736. Shackleton Bailey, D.R. See Martial. Shera, Jesse H. Libraries and the Organization of Knowledge. Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1965. Solís, Antonio de. Historia de la conquista de Mexico. Ed. Juan Gomez Bot. Seville, 1735. Solórzano Pereyra, Juan. Política Indiana. Madrid: Fundación José Antonio de Castro, 1996. Stalcup, Liz. ‘The Editor and the Indexer.’ In Harrod, ed., Indexers, 101–4. Stiffoni, Giovanni. ‘Historiografía y política en los historiadores de indias de la primera mitad del siglo XVIII.’ Nueva Revista de Filogía Hispánica 33.1 (1984): 133–56. – Intellectales, sociedad y estado. In Historia de España, tome 29, vol. 2: 5–148. Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1985. Stoye, J.W. ‘Emperor Charles VI: The Early Years of the Reign.’ Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 12 (1962): 63–84. Struve, Birkhard Golhelf. Introductio in Notitiam Rei Litterariae et vsvm bibliotecarum. Jena, 1715. Suárez de Figueroa, Cristoval. Plaza Vniversal de todas ciencias, y artes [1615]. Perpiñan: Luys Roure, 1630. Torquemada, Juan de. Ia.[–IIIa.] parte de los veynte y vn libros rituales y monarchia yndiana. Sevilla: Matthia Clavijo, 1615. – Primera [segunda, tercera] parte de los veinte i vn libros rituales i monarchia indiana. Madrid: N. Rodríguez Franco, 1725. – Monarquía Indiana. Ed. Miguel León-Portilla. 7 vols. Mexico: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, 1975–83. Tuan, Yi-Fu. Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1997. Úbeda de los Cobos, Andrés. ‘Literatura artística.’ In Francisco Aguilar Piñal, ed., Historia literaria de España en el siglo XVIII, 1029–64. Madrid: Editorial Trotta, 1996. Wagner, Henry Raup, and Helen Rand Parish. The Life and Writings of Bartolomé de las Casas. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1967.

Works Cited

237

Waquet, Françoise. ‘Qu’est-ce que la République des Lettres? Essai de sémantique historique.’ Bibliothèque des chartes 147 (1989): 473–502. Whitnet, James Lyman. Catalogue of the Spanish Library and the Portuguese Books bequeathed by George Ticknor to the Boston Public Library. Boston, 1879. Williams, William Proctor, and Craig S. Abbott. An Introduction to Bibliographical and Textual Studies. 3rd ed. New York: MLA, 1999. Witty, Francis J. ‘The Beginnings of Indexing and Abstracting: Some Notes towards a History of Indexing and Abstracting in Antiquity and the Middle Ages.’ In Harrod, ed., Indexing, 3–8. Zamora, Margarita. ‘Text, Context, Intertext: Columbus’ diario de a bordo as Palimpsest.’ The Americas 46.1 (1989): 17–40. Zárate, Agustín de. Historia del descubrimiento y conquista de la provincia del Perú [Antwerp, 1555]. Ed. Enrique de Vedia. vol. 26, Biblioteca de Autores Españoles. Madrid: Ediciones Atlas, 1947.

This page intentionally left blank

Index

Ab urbe condita (Livy), 32–3 Acosta, Joseph, 139, 151, 157, 220n23 Adam and Eve, 145 Additiones ad Bibliotecam Hispanum (González de Barcia), 207n3 Adorno, Rolena, 216n10 Age of Olivares, 65 Aguiar y Acuña, Rodrigo de, 62, 71–5 Agustin, don Antonio, Archbishop of Tarragona, 79, 119 Albinus, Peter, 219n16 Alcedo, Antonio de, 10, 109, 110 Alderete, Bernardo, 151 Almeida, Francisco de, 94, 107, 211n9, 215n3 Álvarez de Baena, Joseph Antonio, 5–6, 118, 120 Álvarez Barrientos, Joaquín, 215n5 Álvarez de Miranda, Pedro, 4, 103 America, 22; Barcia’s refutation of the use of name, 24; imperialist implications of, 209–10n5; las Indias, 99 American Indians: origins of, 45, 48, 157 Americanist, 209–10n5; Barcia as,

7–8, 121; bibliographer, 80; Epítome 1737–8 edition, 95; León Pinelo as, 75, 77; library, 16, 122, 130, 136, 208n7; publications, 15; shelved collection, 134; texts and manuscripts, 130; themes, 57 Americanist editions, 131, 143, 207n3; prices of, 218n10; scholarly value of, 161 Americanist project, 142, 158; importance of index, 172 Americanist scholarship, 9, 91, 164 anagrams: González de Barcia’s use of, 35 Ancient History of Mexico (Clavijero), 88 Andrés, Gregorio de, 29 anonymity: González de Barcia’s use of, 36 anti-Hispanic discourse, 88 anti-Hispanic historiography, 143 Antonio, Nicolás, 5–6, 15, 54, 65–6, 84–6, 103, 115, 135, 164, 185–7, 215n3, 222n7; bibliographical mission, 77–83; on controversy and bibliographical information, 85;

240 Index and the Indies, 81; life of, 78–80; scholarly writings of, 82 Antwerp, 85, 131 Apasterosis sive in astrum conversio. Elegia D. Emmanuele Matino Decano Alonensi auctore (Martí y Zaragoza), 28 Araucana, La (Ercilla), 8 Araucana, La (Zúñiga), 95 archive: concept of, 11; peoples of the New World, 140 Archive of the Indies (Seville), 5, 11 Aristotle, 138, 158 Atahualpa, Prince, 18–19 authorial function, 51 authorship: dialectic of, 44 Bances y Cándamo, Francisco Antonio, 26, 28, 129 Barcia Library, 8, 11, 16, 121, 161; bibliographical authorities, 122; boundaries of, 154–6; characteristics of, 10; creation of the book, 122; foundation of, 156–9; languages of, 142–5; limits of, 159–64, 162; location of, 129; metaphorical relevance of, 121; Origen de los Indios as a stage for, 140–2; promotion of, 146; source for New World history, 151 ‘Barcia’s Bibliography,’ 88 Baronius, Cardinal, 90–1 Barrera y Leirado, Cayetano Alberto de la, 32, 156 Barros Arana, Diego, 183 Bayle, Pierre, 77 Beinecke Library, 13 Benjamin, Walter, 122–3 Benzonius, Geronimo, 151 Bering, Virtus, 155

Betanzos, Juan de, 139 Béthencourt, Antonio, 106 Bible, 156, 158–9; concordance, 173; creation account, 156; as foundation for review of Indian origins, 156; systematic indices of, 172–3 Biblia Poliglota, 130 bibliographers, 52; of Enlightenment, 52; of Renaissance, 52 bibliographical catalogue, 16, 52, 186 bibliographical studies, 10 bibliographies, 52–3; context, 145; influence on the scholar, 107; national role of, 54; obstacles, 160; Occidental, 64; Oriental, 64; as political tool, 54, 69–75; systematic, 80 biblioteca, 126; bibliographical catalogue, 124; de Barcia, 88; as a concept, 9; definition of, 208–9n8; Geográfica, 68 Biblioteca Americana (Alcedo), 10, 109 Biblioteca Americana Nova (Rich), 110 Biblioteca de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales, Náutica y Geográfica (León Pinelo), 94 Biblioteca Hispana (Antonio), 5, 6, 15, 77, 82–3, 86, 185–6 Biblioteca Hispana Nova (Antonio), 78, 80, 83 Biblioteca Hispana Vetus (Antonio), 80 Biblioteca Mexicana (Eguiara y Erguren), Prologue IX, 10 Biblioteca nacional. See Royal Library Biblioteca Occidental, 67, 111 Biblioteca Oriental, 64–5, 67 Biblioteca philosophorum (Frisius), 70 Bibliotheca (Schott), 113 Bibliotheca Hispana (Antonio), 80, 215n3

Index Bibliotheca Hispana Nova: entries on Spanish Indies, 80 bibliothecarial: term, 217n4 bibliothecarial collection: value of, 130 bibliothecarial space, 137, 157; design of, 134; limits inherent in, 163 bibliotheque, 126 biographical reflection, 122–6 Black Legend of Spain, 9 Boil, Father Peter, 18–19 Book History Reader, The (Finkelstein and McCleery), 212n1 Bourbon monarchy, 105, 168 Bowersock, G.W., 141 Brazil, 64 Brevisima relación de la destrucción de las Indias (Las Casas), 9, 16, 66, 83– 4, 90, 102, 114–15 Brown University, 13 Bry, Johann de, 71 Bry, Teodoro de, 180 Bulgarians, 160 Cabriada, Juan de, 4–5 Cajamarca, Peru, 18 Calderón de la Barca, Pedro, 4, 6, 79, 135 Cañizares-Esguerra, Jorge, 9 Capel, Horacio, 13 Cárdenas, Jácome de, 156 Cárdenas z. Cano, Gabriel de (pseud.), 31–3, 42–3, 123, 144, 161, 208n6 Carta filosófica, médico-chymica (Cabriada), 4 Cartas ó Relaciones (Cortés), 216–17n3 Casaubon, Isaac, 187 Castile, 150

241

Castilian, 142–3 Castillo, Bernardo Perez del, 83 Catalunia: revolt of, 79 Catholic Encyclopedia, 173 Cebrián, José, 85 Cela, José Camilo: Colmena, Indice de personajes, 174 Celts, 160 censors, 46 Censura de historias fabulos (Antonio), 85 Cervantes, Miguel de, 79, 122–3, 178 Cervantes de Salazar, Francisco, 188 Cesalpino, Andrea, 158 Cevallos, Luis Ignacio, 28 Charles II, King, 4, 8, 79, 102, 106 Charles III, King, 4–5, 88, 106 Charles V, King, 83, 88; index entry, 177–8 Charles VI, King, 101, 178, 181; Cervantes de Salazar reports to, 188–9 Chartier, Roger, 12, 25, 49; authorial function, 40 Chatelain, Verne E., 34 Chiapas, Bishop of. See Las Casas, Fray Bartolomé de (bishop of Chiapas) Chile, 65 Chrónica de la Nueva-España o Conquista de México, 216–17n3 Chronicles of the Indies, 7, 9 Chronological Essay to the History of La Florida (Kerrigan), 32, 34 Cieza de León, Pedro, 139 classification: design scheme, 175 Clavijero, Francisco Javier, 88, 91; polemical position of Las Casas, 90 Cobos, Andrés de los, 168 codification, 175 Colectores de libros de Indias, 71

242 Index collections: ideal book, 122 colonial Spanish America, 8–9, 14, 20; creation of library, 124; labour organization, 214n9. See also Spain colonial Spanish historiography: Europe’s debt to, 98–103 Columbus, Christopher, 18–19, 22, 33, 43, 99, 105, 150; report of the New World, 150; voyages of, 7 Comedia nueva y famosa de los peligros de Amar, La (González de Barcia), 32 Comedias nuevas, parte quarenta y ocho, escogidas de los mejores ingenios de España, 135 Commentarios generales, 216–15n7 Commentarios Reales de los Incas (Garcilaso de la Vega), 18, 22, 26, 42–3, 49–50 commentary, 145–6; Cortés’s exemplary persona, 196; from within the library, 148; political, 17; in Spanish, 143; structure of, 194 concordances: reviewed by the Rouses, 183 confundere: translations for, 216n8 Conquest of the Indies, 188; scholarly interpretation of, 191 Conring, Herman, 151 Cordero, Luis Agustin, 80 Córdoba, Luis Cabrera de, 58 Córdoba del Tucumán, 55 Correa, Antonio Bonet, 168 Cortés, Hernán, 17, 81–2, 216–17n3; bibliographical entry, 123–4; Cartas ó Relaciones, 217n3; entries for, 195– 8; heroism of, 188–98; interpretation of as a heroic figure, 196–7; praise for ‘Aprobacíon,’ 83 cosmography, 22, 59

Coste, Pierre, 106–7 Cotarelo y Mori, Emilio, 128 Council of Castile, 6, 103 Council of the Indies, 72 Councilor of Castile: Barcia as, 31 Covarrubias, Sebastián de, 56–7 Crisis del Ensayo a la Historia de la Florida (Salazar), 34 critical historiography, 188 criticism, 34 culture wars: of González de Barcia, 181 Cyprus, 90 Czech republic, 181 Daza de Cárdenas, Gabriel (pseud.), 115 Décadas. See Historia general de los hechos de los castellanos Dedicacion, to Philip V, 102 De Exilio (Antonio), 79 De gobierno Indarum (Solórzano Pereira), 76 De historia para entenderla y escribirla (Córdoba), 58 De iure indiarum (Solórzano Pereira), 115, 146 De nominibus propii Pandectarum (Agustin), 79 denotative problematic, 210n6 De Originibus Americanis libri quator (Horn), 160–1, 220–1n27 De Re Diplomatica Libri (Mabillon), 3 Descripción de las Indias occidentales (Herrera), 132–4, 142, 178, 191 design scheme, 136; conditions influencing, 175; of González de Barcia, 136 De situ orbe (Strabo), 147

Index Dialogo de medallas (Agustin), 119 Diccionario de autoridades, 5–6, 125–7, 136; definition of biblioteca, 8 Dictionnaire de l’Académie française, 126 Dispertador del alma religiosa (Cevallos), 28 Dissertationem contra Hugonis Grotii De Origine (Laet), 150, 151 don Ibon (pseud.), 32 Don Quixote de la Mancha (Cervantes), 122–3 Dutch: works related to, 67 Dutch East India Company, 65 Dutch empire, 65 Dutch West India Company, 65 East Indies, 67 Echevarría, Roberto González, 11 editorial project, 184; and authoreditor, 42–51; mission, 36–42; names and naming, 21; objectives, 142, 145. See also paratext Eguiara y Erguren, Juan José de, 10 El Gran Canciller de las Indias (León Pinelo), 57, 70 Elliot, John, 79 El Paraiso en el Nuevo Mundo (León Pinelo), 76 ‘El Sol Obediente al Hombre’ (González de Barcia), 135 Enamorado, D. Marcos, 44–6 encomienda, 214n9 Encyclopédie métodique, 98 Enlightenment, 3–4, 106, 136, 141; and the Americanist library, 147; critical historiography, 184; footnotes, 90; library, 127; scholarly journals of, 132; in Spain, 20, 103 Ensayo cronológico para la historia de la

243

Florida (González de Barcia), 8–9, 12, 21, 23–4, 26, 29, 32, 34, 123, 144– 5, 154 Epiphanius of Salamis, 90 Epítome de la Biblioteca Oriental i Occidental, nautica i Geografica. See Epítome Epítome (León Pinelo), 9–10, 16, 21, 23–4, 61–3, 82, 87, 95, 97–8, 106, 110, 215n3, 219n15; author index, 72; case study of, 15; facsimile edition, 13–14; four divisions of, 64; publication changes, 167; 1737–8 edition, 15, 43, 54, 93, 108, 123, 214n1; 1629 edition, 7, 54, 87, 109 Ercilla, Alonso de, 8 Essay concerning Human Understanding (Locke), 106 Essay on the History of La Florida (Cárdenas z. Cano, pseud.), 31 Estevan, Juan Mathías, 130 Ethiopia, 64 European Mind, 1680–1715, The (Hazard), 4 exegesis: politicized historical, 188 Fajardo Monroy, Juan Isidro, 28 Faur, José, 136 Fayard, Janine, 30 Feijóo, Benito Jerónimo, 4, 107 Felipe V, King. See Philip V, King Ferdinand VI, King, 168 Fernández, Diego, 215n3 Fernández, Gil, 29, 219n16 Fernández Munilla, Miguel, 26, 45 Fernández de Navarrete, Martín, 20 Fernández Pacheco, Juan Manuel, marquis of Villena, 6 Fernández de Pulgar, Pedro, 130 Fernández Sanchez, José, 80

244 Index Fifth Lateran Council, 45 Findlen, Paula, 127, 128 Finkelstein, David, 212n1 Florida del Inca, La (Garcilaso de la Vega), 23–4, 26, 33, 36, 43 Florus, Lucius Annaeus, 33 Folc de Cardona, Antonio, 101, 215n4 folio, 131 footnote, 96, 106, 150 format: Verdussen edition, 189 Forner, Juan Pablo, 98 Foucault, Michel, 36, 49 Foundations of Early Modern Europe, 1460–1559, The (Rice): alphabetized order index, 175–6 Franks, 160 Freedom of the Seas, or, The Right that belongs to the Dutch to take part in the East Indian Trade (Grotius), 67–8 Frehero, Paul, 111–13 Freytas, Fray Seraphin de, 68 Frisius, Joannes Jacobus, 70 Frobisher, Martin, 161 ‘Frontispiece’: Epítome (Léon Pinelo), 89 frontispiece: Herrera edition, 179 Gale, Thomas, 78 García, Gregorio de, 14, 26–7, 38, 42– 3, 51, 95, 132–3, 145, 153, 156, 159, 164, 166–7; scholarly mission, 137– 40; writing of, 145 Garcían tradition, 157 Garcilaso de la Vega, el Inca, 9, 18, 21–3, 26, 33, 42–3, 49–51, 139, 151, 207n4, 208n6, 211n9, 215–16n7; indices in, 39–40; indices of works of, 39 Gaskell, Philip, 53

Gaspar de Olivares, Count Duke, 54– 5, 57, 60–2, 78–9 Genesis, book of, 156 Genette, Gerard, 12, 91, 106, 107, 183 German territories, 181 Ghilini, 113 Gibbon, Edward, use of marginal notes, 141 Giménez, Fray Francisco, 78 Ginammi, Marcos, 85 Gliozzi, Giuliano, 158 Golden Age, Spanish literature of, 122 Goldgar, Anne, 102–3, 106 Gómez Bot, Juan, 6 González, Juan, 61 González de Barcia, Alexandro, 119 González de Barcia, Andrés: background of, 5–7; home library, 128; legal name, 120; marginal notes, 143; and the monarchy, 103, 105; personal library, 94–5, 123, 128, 130; political agenda, 190–1; political commentary, 110; prices of editions, 218n10; role of in political debate, 116; sale of editions of, 212n13; studies in theology, 156–7; use of pseudonym, 30–6, 40 González de Barcia, Andrés (Barcia Jr), 119 González de Barcia Carballido y Zúñiga, Andrés. See González de Barcia, Andrés Gonzalo Fernández de Oviedo, 21, 150–1 Gracián, Lorenzo, 178 Graevius, Joannes, 187 Grafton, Anthony, 90, 130, 137, 157, 187, 222n8

Index Greek and Roman worlds, 189 Greenland, 160 Grijalva, Fray Juan de, 66 Grotius, Hugo, 67–8, 151 Gruterus, Janus, 186–7 Guerra Guerra, Arcadio, 20 Gurría Lacroix, Jorge, 37, 166, 167–8 Gutierrez Davila, Julian, 28 Guzmán, Gaspar de, 57, 78 Halicarnassus: Scripta quae extant omnia, 147 Harrisse, Henry, 65, 107 Harrod, Leonard M., 173 Harvard University, 13 Hazard, Paul, 4, 77–8 headings, 194 Heidelberg, 85 Herrera, Antonio de, 12, 21, 23–4, 59, 65, 95, 111, 113, 127, 132, 132–4, 142, 144, 147, 151, 168, 178, 191; criticism of by León Pinelo, 59; duelling indices, 178–84; polemic, 184 Herrera chronicle: comparison with Barcia-Verdussen index entries, 191–2 Heyn, Piet: capture of Spanish treasure ship, 65 Higgins, Anthony, 10 Hijos de Madrid ilustres en santidad (Álvarez de Baena), 118 Hill, Ruth, 208n5 Hispaniae bibliotheca (Schott), 80 Hispanic heroism, 188 Hispano-Dutch confrontations, 65 Historia, y Descubrimiento de el Rio de la Plata y Paraguay (Schmidel), 219n15 Historia de la conquista de Mexico (Solis), 6, 81, 83

245

Historiadores primitivos, 111 Historiadores primitivos de las Indias Occidentales (Herrera), 120, 178, 216–17n3 Historia de la Florida (Richelet), 215– 16n7 Historia general de los hechos de los castellanos (Herrera), 23–4, 29, 95, 111, 131, 132, 134, 147, 168, 178, 179, 191 Historia general de las Indias (López de Gómara), 108, 216–17n3 Historia general del Perú (Vega), 215– 16n7 Historia de los hechos de los castellanos (Herrera), 12 Historia de las Indias (Las Casas), 113 Historia del Libro Español (Sobrino), 45 Historia natural y moral de las Indias (Acosta), 157 Historia del Nuevo Mundo (Muñoz), 20 Historia del Perú (Garcilaso de la Vega), 26 Historia primitivos: Herrera edition of González de Barcia, 174 historians of the Indies, 59 Histórica relación del reyno de Chile, y delas missiones, y ministerios que exercita en el la Compañia de Jesus (Ovalle), 215n3 historiography: critical, 184–5 history: writing of, 40–1 History of La Florida, 26 History of Peru, 26 Holland: independence of, 79 Horn, George, 160–1, 220–1n27; de Originibus Americanis, 151; index entry, 221 Houghton Library, 13 Huddleston, Paul Eldridge, 46, 48, 137–8, 157

246 Index humanism, 130–1 humanist canon, 142–3, 146 humanists, 143 human origins: humanist framework, 147 Hungarians, 160 Hungary, 181 Iberian Peninsula, 150 impresor, 25, 39 index: Chronicles of the Indies, 187; in García’s Origen de los Indios, 222n9; Gruterus’s Inscriptiones antiquae, 187; Origen de los Indios, 185; 1730 Herrera edition, 182–3; Verdussen edition of Herrera’s Décadas, 189 indexer: book consciousness of, 174; representations of published items, 173; term, 221n2 indexing: art of, 173–4; as representation of the ‘book consciousness,’ 174 index structure: Barcia’s strategy of, 192–6 India, 64 Indians, 148; derogatory characteristics applied to, 197; origins of, 146, 158, 159, 160 Indias, las (‘America’), 22, 99 indices, 24; alphabetical order of, 175, 177, 194; Americanist republications, 198; compiling, 187; as comprehensive guide, 191; conceptualization of, 184–8; contemporary, 175; counter-intuitive characteristics of, 174; database inclusion, 173; defining, 172–8; as employed in the Barcia Library, 198; exegetical function of, 177;

Herrera editions, 188; as information locators, 173; keyword entry headings, 172–3; narrative, 177–8, 188, 194–6, 198; page numbers, 194, 195; as paratextual device, 198; paratextual function of, 165– 72, 178, 183–4, 198; political agenda inherent in, 189; role of, 17; scholarly, 173, 198; subheadings, 177, 194; subject entry headings, 177; Torquemada 1725 edition, 188, 221n5; in twentieth century, 175 Indices Thesauris Gruteriani Inscriptionum, 186 Indies, 140; bibliography of, 69; science of, 64; Spanish abuse in, 83; Spanish explorations to, 20 Inscriptiones antiquae totius orbis Romani (Gruterus), 186–7 intellectual advancement, 16 intellectual value, 130 Introductio in Notitiam Rei Litterariae et vsvm bibliotecarum (Struve), 96 Irala, Matías de, 168; 1725 edition title page, 168; 1615 long title, 171 Isabel Farnesio, Queen, 23 Israel, Jonathan, 3, 65, 77, 96, 106 Israelites, 38 Iuli Flori Epitomae de Tito Livio Bellorum Omnium Annorum DCC Libri II (Florus), 33 Jesuits, 88 John Carter Brown Library, 13 Johnson, James William, 159 Kamen, Henry, 105, 215n4 Kenney, E.J., 20 Kerrigan, Anthony, 32, 34

Index keywords: alphabetization of, 175 Kircher, Athanasius, 128 Knight, G. Norman, 221n2 Konnick, Andrián, 85 Laet, 151 Lambriche, Fray Ignacio, 28 Lancaster, F.W., 173 language: marginal notes, 145; of scholarship, 142 Las Casas, Fray Bartolomé de (bishop of Chiapas), 9, 16, 55, 83–4, 113, 114, 115, 117, 126–7, 150, 216n10; anti-Hispanic discourse, 88; biography and bibliography, 83–6; critique of entry on, 111–17; León Pinelo’s bibliographical references to, 66; political agendas, 111; scholarly agendas, 111; writings in favour of the Indians, 88 Latin, 142–3, 145; as the language of marginal notes, 219n16; language of scholarship, 142; titles, 143 Latin America. See colonial Spanish America Lazaro y Carreter, Fernando, 136 Le Clercq, L., 178 León, Juan Rodríguez de, 62, 69, 164; ‘Discurso apologético,’ 82 León Pinelo, Antonio de, 7, 13, 14, 16, 23–4, 43, 52, 54–5, 57, 70–2, 74–6, 80, 82, 87–8, 90, 108, 123, 126, 133– 4, 140, 166–7, 208–9n8, 211n12, 213n2, 214n1, 216–17n3; bibliographical mission of, 55–61; commenting on his Epítome, 76–7; dedication to the Duke of Medina de las Torres, 61–3, 69; Epítome, case study, 53–5; Epítome, facsimile

247

edition, 104; Epítome, self-references in, 70–1; Epítome, 1629 edition, 91; on Las Casas and his Brevísima, 85; loss of larger bibliography, 93–4; political insight of, 67; and political power, 57; Relator in the Consejo de las Indias, 61; scholarly publications, 76; scholar of the Indies, 63; text, 10 León Pinelo / González de Barcia blend, 112 León-Portilla, Miguel de, 35–7, 221n5; facsimile edition for Torquemada work, 170 Leo X, Pope, 45 Leyenda Negra, 219n16 Liber de scriptoribus ecclesiasticis (Tritheim), 70 librarianship: management of knowledge, 175 library, 11, 16; as biographical reflection, 122–6; as a collection, 130–4; of colonial Spanish American historiography, 189; definition of, 121, 124; of the Indies, 36; limits of, 154–64; as location, 126–30; as metaphor, 134–54, 147; social space of, 129; textual foundation, 130; translating the word, 124 librería: definition of, 125–6 Librería Real, 101–2 Libros Reales de Govierno, 62 Licence and Privilege, 27 Linages de Aragón (Estevan), 130 Lipking, Lawrence, 136 Livy, 32–3, 57 Locke, John, 106, 107 López de Gómara, Francisco, 108, 111, 150, 216n3 Luis I, Prince, 23

248 Index Mabillon, Jean, 3 Macanaz, Melchor de, 101, 103 Macchi, Fernanda, 207n4 McCleery, Alistair, 212n1 Madrid, 30, 101, 140; San Bernardo street, 129; term for library, 124–5 Madrid en la mano (Sánchez), 30 Magellan, Strait of, 146 Maiolus, Simon, 146 Malclés, Louise Noëlle, 52, 107 Manzano Manzano, Juan, 74, 150, 213–14n7 Mare liberum, 67 marginal commentary, 121–2; importance of, 136 marginal notes, 102, 106, 137, 140, 141, 142, 144, 145, 148, 150; bibliographical arrangement, 147; in Latin, 143 marginal paratext, 141 Mariana, Juan de, 151 maritime navigation, 145 Martí, Dean, 29 Martí, Manuel, 29; critique of, 10 Martínez Abad, Francisco, 26, 27, 93 Martín Gaïte, Carmen, 101 Martí y Zaragoza, Manuel, 28 Mayans, Gregorio de, 20, 78, 85, 100, 218n10 Mayans, J.A., 20–1, 30–1, 100, 209n4 Mayansian Library, 21 Mazzarino, Cardinal, 79 Medina de las Torres, Duke of, 54, 69, 79 Meibom, Henri, 78 Meléndez, Father Fray Juan, 114, 216n11 melting pot, 65 Mémoires de Trévoux, 31, 105, 142;

Antwerp edition, 132; review article, 182 Memorias para la Historia de Don Felipe III, Rey de España. Recogidas por Don Juan Yáñez (Fajardo Monroy), 28 Méndez de Haro, don Luis, 79 Mercator, Gerard, 151 Mestre, Antonio, 98, 100 Metaphysics (Aristotle), 138 Mexican archives, 164 Mexican Indians, 38 Mexico, 105; ancient, 88 Mignolo, Walter, 209n3 Migrodde, Jacobo, 85 mise en livre, 24–30 Monarquía Indiana (Torquemada), 26, 35–42, 95; analysis of the two editions of, 166–72; index as paratext, 165–72; indigenous elite portrayed in, 171; León-Portilla’s edition, 37; paratextual commentary, 196; re-publication of, 36; 1725 edition, 38, 166–72, 196; 1725 edition frontispiece, 170; 1725 edition index, 221n5; 1730 Herrera edition, 196; 1615 edition frontispiece, 167– 9 monetary value: of collection of González de Barcia, 130 Montaigne, Michel de, 128 Morocco, 64 Morvilliers, Masson de, 98 Moss, Ann, 173 Muñoz, Juan Baptista, 20–1, 209n4 Muñoz, Romero, 78 Murillo, 79 museum: and the collection of books, 128; definition of, 127 Musurgia (Kircher), 128

Index Nación Española, la, 100 Newton, Sir Isaac, 3 New World, 9, 24, 64, 143, 148, 157, 190; ‘America,’ 144; ancient authorities, 142; anti-Hispanic historiography, 143; Columbus’s report, 150; commentary on its history, 163; empire, 105; exploration and conquest of, 9; historical texts, 14; historiography, 8, 62, 87, 141, 189; history, 13, 57–61, 64; immigration to, 55; indigenous people of, 137–8, 154, 157; legal codes, 56, 60; migrant settlers to, 153, 159; political issues, 73; scholarship, 69, 143, 164; shelving order for history of, 132–3; Spanish language, 219n16; studies, 16, 100, 122 New World Library, 198 Nicolás Bernart, María, 78 Noah, 145–6 Norte crítico con las reglas mas ciertas para la discrecion en la historia (Segura), 184–5 Nova Typis Transacta Navigatio (Philoponus), 18 Núñez Cabeza de Vaca, Alvar, 21 Obras (Gracián), 178 Obras Lyricas (Bances y Cándamo), 28, 129 Obras que Francisco Cervantes de Salazar ha hecho, glosado y traducido (Cervantes de Salazar), 188 Ophir, Adi, 128, 129 Oración fúnebre en las dolorosas y expresivas exequias (Lambriche), 28 Origen de los Indios (García), 14, 24, 27, 88, 95, 137, 145, 148; additions, 107; biblical base, 156; defensive

249

activity, 143; entries for, 193–5; González de Barcia, contribution of, 141; index to 1729 edition, 162; Indian origins, 139; marginal notes and boxed text, 149; preface to, 137, 218n11; preface to 1729 edition, 47; review of, 157; 1729 edition, 44, 134–7, 140, 160; 1729 edition, re-publishing of, 154; 1729 edition, transformation of, 148; 1729 facsimile edition, 152, 157; 1729 title, 45; 1729 title page, 167; 1607 edition, 137, 140; textual additions to, 43; textual additions to 1607 edition, 47–9 origins debate, 157 Ortega y Gasset, José, 4 Ovalle, Alonso de, 215n3 Ovid, 160 Oxford English Dictionary (OED), 125; definition of library, 124 Panaríon (or Medicine Chest), 90 Pandects, 78–9 paratext, 87–93, 106, 141, 164–5; and apparatus of, 122; authorial function in, 15; battle between the Herrera editions, 182; bibliographical reference, 137; bibliographies, 107– 11; as commentary, 196; of Genette, 12; of González de Barcia, 13; of León Pinelo’s text, 109–11; Origen de los Indios, 1729 edition, 150; scholarly and political, 106; two levels of, 143 Pardo, D. Geronimo, 23, 47–9, 102 Parish, Helen Rand, 113 Pease, Franklin, 14, 157 Pellicer de Tobar, don Manuel, 129 Pérez-Magallón, Jesús, 11

250 Index pero: definitions provided for, 220n22 personal collection, 130 personal library: definition of, 126 Perú, 9, 55, 65, 105 Philip II, King, 64, 79, 88 Philip III, King, 57, 78 Philip IV, King, 54, 55, 57, 75, 78, 79 Philip V, King, 5, 6, 9, 11, 101, 103, 105, 157, 168; dedication to, 22–3, 142 Philip V of Spain: The King Who Reigned Twice (Kamen), 215n4 Philoponus, Father Honorius, 18–21 Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica (Newton), 3 Pizarro, Francisco, 19 Plato, 138 Plaza Universal de todas la ciencias (Suárez de Figueroa), 25, 50 Politica de Dios (Quevedo), 61 Politica Indiana (Solórzano Pereira), 178, 220n24 politics: agendas, 111; and bibliographical work, 62–3; and Epítome, 1737–8 edition, 63–9, 101; European, 9; objectives of, 199; realities of, 15; of scholarship, 103–7; and self-advancement, 16 Portugal, 65, 150; secession of, 79 Potosí, 65 Prado, Lorenzo Ramírez de, 72 Primera, y segunda parte de la Historia del Perú (Fernández), 215n3 Primera parte de los Commentarios Reales (Garcilaso de la Vega), 208n6 Printed Commonplace-Books and the Structuring of Renaissance Thought (Moss), 173

printing press: and errors, 20 ‘The Problem of Copyright’ (Knight), 221n2 Proemio, 37, 39 pseudonyms, 15, 34, 36, 103, 105, 115, 144, 148 Ptolemy, 22 Pythagoras, 138 Question moral si el Chocolate quebranta el ayuno Eclesiastico (León Pinelo), 76 Quevedo, Francisco de, 57, 61, 79 Radical Enlightenment (Israel), 77 Ramusio, Giovanni Bautista, 68, 71 Rapheleng, Francisco, 85 Real Academia Española, 6, 35, 85, 125–6, 135–6, 207n3, 217n7 Real Consejo de las Indias, 60, 62 Reasonableness of Christianity, The (Locke), 106 Recopilación de las Leyes de las Indias (León Pinelo), 55, 62, 71–2, 74, 75 Relacion del auto particular de fe, que celebró el Santo Oficio de la Inquisicion de esta ciudad, y reynado de Sevilla, domingo 14. de diziembre de este present año de 1721 (Anon), 28 Relacion del auto particular de fe, que celebró el Santo Oficio de la Inquisicion de la ciudad, y reyno de Granada, el dia 30. de noviembre de este presente año de 1721 (Anon.), 28 Renaissance, 98, 127 Renaissance humanism, 60 Renaissance library, 131 Republic of Letters, 23, 31, 46–7, 98, 100, 102, 105, 110–11, 145, 153, 181,

Index 188, 215n5; politics of scholarship, 103–7; scholarly canon, 161; scholars of, 22–3, 117 república de las letras en la España del siglo XVIII, la (Álvarez Barrientos), 215n5 Repuesta de un inglés desinteresado a un Wigh transportado, sobre el combate naval de la flota de España con el Ayudante Vinchs (Anon.), 28 Respublica Literaria, 145 Rice, Eugene, Jr, 175–7 Rich, Obediah, 110 Richelet, Pierre, 215–16n7 Río Cao y Cordido, D. Benito de, 44 Río de la Plata, 55, 105 Río Marín, Julián de, 128 Rodriguez, Cesar, 215n2 Rodríguez Franco, Nicolás, 22, 27, 29, 35, 37–8, 39–40, 168; and partnership with González de Barcia, 30; printed works, 28; publisher, 24–30 Rome, 79 Rouse, Mary, 172–3 Rouse, Richard, 172–3 Rousseau, Jean Jacques, 160 Royal Academy, 5 Royal Chronicler of the Indies, 7 Royal Commentaries, 26 Royal Council of Brabant, 178 Royal Library (Biblioteca nacional), 5, 11–12, 101 Russell, Bertrand, 210n6 Rymer, Thomas, 78 Salazar, Joseph de (pseud.), 34 Salazar, Luis de, 34–5, 39, 212n15 Sánchez, José Fernández, 213n2 Sánchez, Manuel Isidoro, 30

251

Sanchez de Huelva, Alonso, 151 Sarmiento, Father, 107 Scafili, Giacomo, 128 Scaliger, Joseph, 68, 186–7, 222n7 Sceptres and Sciences in the Spains (Hill), 208n5 Scheldt, 65 Schmidel, Hulderico, 219n15 scholarly: agendas, 111; canon, 143; discourse, 136; editions, 24, 100; notes, 102 scholarship: documented, 102; goal of, 105; for Monarchy, 22; for political ends, 113; rules of, 111 Schott, Andreas, 80, 113 Scythians, 159–61 Sebastian, King, 64 Segura, Jacinto, 184–5 Seville, 78 Shakespeare, William, 160, 174 Shera, Jesse H., 175 Sigüenza y Gongora, Carlos de, 79, 161–4 Sobrino, Hipólito Escolar, 45 Solis, Antonio de, 6, 81, 82, 83 Solórzano Pereira, Juan de, 62, 72, 75–6, 115, 138, 146, 158–9, 178, 213– 14n7, 220n24; bibliographical entry, 73 Soto, Hernando de, 115 Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience (Tuan), 217n6 Spain, 143, 145; aggression against, 65; attitude of European scholars towards, 98–100; Black Legend, 16, 88, 102; colonial historiography, 188; and colonialism, 137, 198; cultural inheritance, 100; diplomacy of, 105; León Pinelo and errors in fact on, 68; in the New World, 96–

252 Index 7; political interest in the Indies, 111 Spanish American library, 136 Spanish empire, 65 Spanish Enlightenment, 103 ‘Spanish Humanism,’ 208n5, 219n16 Spanish Royal Academy of History, 5, 35 Stalcup, Liz, 174 Strabo, 147 Struve, Burkhard Golthelf, 96–7, 105 Suárez de Figueroa, Cristóbal, 25, 50, 212–13n1; commentators, 49–51 Supreme Councils of Castile and War, 123 Swedes, 160 Tacitus, 59 Tarentinus, Archytus, 138 Teatro (Ghilini), 113 Tesoro de la Lengua Castellana o Española (Covarrubias), 56–7 Tesoros verdaderos de las Indias (Meléndez), 114, 216n11 theatre: design scheme, 135–6 Tibonian, 78 Ticknor, George, 37 Torquemada, Juan de, 21, 26, 35, 95, 151; accusation of plagiarism against, 37, 40; Conquest of Mexico, 196; historical writer, 41; manuscript, 37, 217n8; Ia parte (1615), frontispiece, 169; Primera parte (1725), frontispiece, 170; prologue to 1725 Monarquía Indiana edition, 165; title pages of editions, 166–7 trans-Atlantic reality, 91 Tratado de Confirmaciones Reales, 61, 76

Treatise on Foreign Languages and Unknown Islands (Albinus), 219n16 Treaty of the Pyrenees, 79 Tritheim, Johann: Father of Bibliography, 70 Troilus and Cressida (Shakespeare), 174 Tuan, Yi-Fu, 217n6 Ugarte y Grimaldo, María de, 61 University of Alcalá de Henares, 156 University of Salamanca, 78 University of San Marcos, 55 University of Valladolid, 68 Valdivieso, José de, 75 Valenzuela, Juan Baptista, 72 Valéry, Paul, 136 Vega, Lope de, 6, 79, 135; praise of Epítome, 70 Velázquez, Diego de, 78–9 Velez, García Aznar (pseud.), 32, 135 Velos Antiguos i modernos en los rostros de las mugeres (León Pinelo), 76 Venice, 85 Verdussen, Corneille, 178 Verdussen, Henri, 178 Verdussen, Jean Batiste, 131, 132, 178–84, 194; alphabetized order of index, 189–90; anti-Castilian publications, 180, 190; edition of Herrera, 198; polemic against Spain, 190; Royal permission of, 180–1 Verdussen, Jean Batiste, II, 178 Vespucci, Amerigo, 22, 71, 144 Vetus. See Biblioteca Hispana Vetus (Antonio) Vida de Don Quijote (Cervantes), 178 ‘La vida de Inti Cusi Titu Iupanqui,

Index penúltimo Inca’ (González de Barcia), 208n6 Vida de Miguel de Cervantes (Mayans), 100 Vida y virtudes de el Siervo de Dios el Venerable Padre D. Domingo Pérez de Barcia (Gutierrez Davila), 28 Vossius, Gerardus Joannes, 211n12 Wagner, Henry Raup, 113 Waldseemüller, Martin, 22 War of Succession (1700–15), 8, 101–2

253

Witty, Francis J., 189 Yale Sterling Memorial Library, 211n10 Yale University, 13 Yáñez de Avilés, Fr. Pablo, 32–3, 51; ally of González de Barcia, 39 Zamora, Margarita, 209n10 Zárate, Agustín de, 139 Zeitgeist, 96 Zúñiga, Ercilla y, 95

This page intentionally left blank

STUDIES IN BOOK AND PRINT CULTURE General editor: Leslie Howsam

Hazel Bell, Indexes and Indexing in Fact and Fiction Heather Murray, Come, bright Improvement! The Literary Societies of Nineteenth-Century Ontario Joseph A. Dane, The Myth of Print Culture: Essays on Evidence, Textuality, and Bibliographical Method Christopher J. Knight, Uncommon Readers: Denis Donoghue, Frank Kermode, George Steiner, and the Tradition of the Common Reader Eva Hemmungs Wirtén, No Trespassing: Authorship, Intellectual Property Rights, and the Boundaries of Globalization William A. Johnson, Bookrolls and Scribes in Oxyrhynchus Siân Echard and Stephen Partridge, eds, The Book Unbound: Editing and Reading Medieval Manuscripts and Texts Peter Stoicheff and Andrew Taylor, eds, The Future of the Page Bronwen Wilson, The World in Venice: Print, the City, and Early Modern Identity Elizabeth Sauer, ‘Paper-contestations’ and Textual Communities in England, 1640–1675 Janet Badia and Jennifer Phegley, eds, Reading Women: Literary Figures and Cultural Icons from the Victorian Age to the Present Jonathan Earl Carlyon, Andrés González de Barcia and the Creation of the Colonial Spanish American Library