Adorno, Rolena - Censorship and Its Evasion Jerónimo Román and Bartolomé de las Casas

Censorship and Its Evasion: Jerónimo Román and Bartolomé de las CasasAuthor(s): Rolena AdornoSource: Hispania, Vol. 75, No. 4, The Quincentennial of the Columbian Era (Oct., 1992), pp. 812-827Published by: American Association of Teachers of Spanish and PortugueseStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/343849Accessed: 27/05/2010 12:09

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aatsp.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

American Association of Teachers of Spanish and Portuguese is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserveand extend access to Hispania.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/stable/343849?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aatsp

Rolena Adorno, Princeton University

Censorship and its Evasion: Jeronimo Roman and Bartolome de las Casas

In 1575, the Augustinian friar Jer6nimo Ro- m6n (1536-1597)' published an encyclopedic work on the civilizations of the world that he called the

Replblicas del mundo.2 Within a few

months of its publication, the Council of the Indies asked Philip II to have the work with- drawn from circulation because it dishonored the first conquistadores and cast doubt on the legiti- macy of Spanish rule in the New World.3 In 1583, the Repdiblicas appeared on the Spanish Inquisition's index of prohibited books, and in 1584, on its index of books to be expurgated.4 Overcoming these obstacles by eliminating the passages considered controversial by the censors (descriptions of Jewish customs and views on ecclesiastical immunity and Christian doctrine),5 Romain managed to get a second edition published in 1595.6 Involving both pro forma censorship and unexpected publication, notable courage and massive plagiarism, the case of the Repiublicas del mundo merits our attention for what it can reveal about the attitudes and reac- tions of authors (and censors) toward state and ecclesiastical censorship in the period of its apogee.7

I. Fray Jer6nimo Romain's Worlds

Roman's work is a study of the institutions and customs of diverse societies and cultures, characterized in the sixteenth century by policia or civility; policia had the double meaning of the existence of organized government and the quali- ties that defined a good citizen (see Rowe 6).8 He drew up his divisions according to the functions represented by priests, judges, and governors, and studied the constituents of an organized society such as religion, governance, laws, and rites of passage (including marriage, burial of the dead).9 Repdiblicas," he said, was the same as saying 'book of the public work,' ("libro de la

cosa pdblica"), which he elsewhere specified as the essential laws and customs by which people lived. He disdained the narration of wars and reigns of kings as irrelevant to his purpose, and as we shall see later, this "disinterest" in affairs of state was part of his criticism of them (1595: vol. 1, fvii, verso; vol. 3, f22r).10

The Repalblicas del mundo belongs to a tradition well established in the sixteenth century. The standard version of the survey of customs was Johannes Boemus's The customs, laws, and rites of all peoples, first published in Latin in 1520 and translated and reprinted many times thereafter (Rowe 4). It appeared in Spanish as El libro de las costumbres de todas las gentes del mundo y de las Indias, translated by Francisco Tamara and published in Antwerp by Martin Nucio, 1556. Tamara added to the work some one hundred ninety pages on indigenous New World cultures (Rowe 4; Tamara f4v), following Aristotle's criteria on the institutions that make up a civil society. Lamenting that few of the world's societies were characterized by policia and reason, most being filled with "barbarous infidels, evil idolaters, and perverse men," Tamara's work triumphantly proclaims that the Amerindian world has been converted to Chris- tianity." Tamara's work appears especially me- diocre when viewed alongside the crowning achievement in this genre in the sixteenth century: Fray Bartolom6 de las Casas's magisterial Apologetica historia sumaria [1560].12 Las Casas's explicit goal was to examine "all the infinite nations of this vast orb" and to demonstrate that the Indians of the New World were as capable of creating organized societies (and had done so) as were any other peoples in the world, ancient or modern (Casas Obras 3: 3-4). In 1967, Henry Raup Wagner and Helen Rand Parish (288-89) established that Romain had published enormous portions of Las Casas's Apologetica

CENSORSHIP AND ITS EVASION: JER6NIMO ROMAN AND BARTOLOME DE LAS CASAS 813

in the Republica de los Indios Occidentales. This is one of the matters we shall take up here, but first we shall set forth the theme of censorship in the Repalblicas del mundo and then its censorship history.

II. Roman Censored

Romain's views about censorship are implied in a digression to one of his discussions of Amerindian societies, in his Repablicas de los Indios Occidentales, Book 2, Chapter 4, on how the Indians deliberately refrained from punish- ing all the sins of the people, but rather permitted some to go unnoticed, "as is properly done in all well-ordered republics" (1897: 1: 271). Praising the "buena gobemaci6n" of the Amerindian peoples, Romain makes the argument that princes should not prohibit by law all the sins and vices that their people might practice, for to do so would result in greater harm than good. He advises princes to feign indifference and allow certain vices to go ignored, since it is much better to ignore than attempt to control such vices as simple fornication and evil thoughts (1897: 1: 272-73).13

These statements of Romian on the futility of any attempts of the state to control thought and behavior are interesting for several reasons: First, for the boldness of the sentiments themselves, as they are clearly a criticism of censorship; second, for the fact that they were untouched by the expurgation orders of 1584, even though fornication and blasphemy were crimes punished by the Inquisition, and third, because they are not the words of Fray Jer6nimo RomSan at all but rather those of Fray Bartolom6 de las Casas. That is, they represent the views of Romain only at second hand: The entire thesis with its four supporting arguments comes word- for-word from Chapter 214 of Las Casas's Apologetica historia sumaria (Obras 4: 269- 70). Roman directly challenged censorship; let us see how he fared.

The Repablica hebrea inaugurates the entire work. The honor RomSan intentionally accords by this position is borne out by his statement that Hebrew civilization is the most ancient in the world (1897: 1: 318) and by another tribute that he pays indirectly. In explaining the arrangement of his work, he says he has placed the Repablica cristiana (in Part One) prior to that of the

Replblica gentilica (all of Part Two) because divine topics are to be preferred over the human, and the good over that which is not. Furthermore,

although he had dedicated his youth to the study of antiquity, in his maturity he left these trivial things to focus on higher matters. Thus, he says, he has worked like the artist who paints the face of his portrait subject last, knowing that for his viewers, the face will be the thing first enjoyed (1595: 2: f3r). While it is true that the Repaiblica cristiana precedes the Repalblica gentilica, it is also true that the Repaiblica hebrea, like the part of the portrait that is appreciated before all else, occupies the first position of all. This implicit statement of respect and admiration for ancient Hebrew and modem Jewish traditions is given substance in the ninety folios Roman devotes to them. 14

It is clear that RomSan was challenging In- quisitorial censorship with his lengthy account of Jewish culture. He was not put off by the stipulations of the Indices of 1551 and 1559 that strictly forbade the publication of works written in Arabic or Hebrew or those, like his own, that "contributed to the remembrance of Jewish rituals" (Pinto Crespo, Inquisici6n 287). He could not have been ignorant of the seriousness of these restrictions, because his fellow Augustin- ian, Fray Luis de Le6n, had been in the Inquisi- torial prison at Valladolid since 1572 on charges of not accepting the infallible authority of the Vulgate (Bell, Luis 154).

Given the circumstances, Romain's fearless- ness suggests that he saw his work as a test case against all the proscriptions of censorship. The freedom with which he wrote about controversial and forbidden topics leads in this direction, and the evidence reveals that he was partially successful. The royal censor Esteban de Garibay y Zamalloa had no objection to any of Romain's passages ultimately deemed offensive by the Inquisition. After the Inquisitorial expurgation, Garibay tried to get himself off the hook by claiming that he had examined and licensed the work but that Romain had subsequently made alterations while the work was in press. Thus, RomSan "received the censure that his effrontery deserved" in the Index of expurgation (Lea 84; Garibay 344).15 We must ask if Garibay protests too much, for this instance reveals a leniency of pre-publication censorship by a censor who was himself a writer.16 This is the first clue that intellectuals as censors may have exercised more independence of judgment than a strict applica- tion of the rules. But let us see what the Inquisi- tion did in post-publication censorship in this case.

The expurgated copy of the original 1575

814 HISPANIA 75 OCTOBER 1992

edition of the Repablicas del mundo that I examined, conserved in the Lilly Library, Bloomington, Indiana, suffered many suppressions, with lines of text inked over and entire folios cut out. While the sites and extent of expurgation are always shocking, the censorship of the Repablicas del mundo is not as comprehensive as might be expected, and it will subsequenty behoove us to attempt to investigate the reasons for it.

The materials on Jewish customs and ritual received the most severe expurgation.17 Of the 24 chapters constituting Book One of the Repablica hebrea, all of which were devoted to religion, the two chapters concerned with "the feasts and solemn days that the Hebrew people had to honor the Lord" are expurgated. Chapter 14 is inked over (1575: 1: f30v); Chapter 15, folios 31-37, is cut out entirely. Although there is no remaining reference to the specific contents of Chapter 15, Chapter 14 can be read through the ink stains.'"

In the 1595 edition, these chapters are omitted altogether, and the chapter numbers have been adjusted to exclude them. However, the evidence of materials removed remains in the listing of the contents of these chapters in the argumento of Book One (1595: 1: flr), and the folio numbering skips from 35 to 42.

Book Two of the Repablica hebrea consisted originally of eighteen chapters, three of which were expurgated. While matters of government, war, the administration of justice and the like are untouched, the chapters pertaining to rites of passage and sacred books were partially censored. Chapter 3, on the ancient Biblical sanc- tions and customs regarding marriage, was inked over (1575: 1: f46v). The same fate befell his discussion of Jewish marriage customs, to which he referred as being "full of mystery" (1575: 1: f46v).

Although chapters 4 and 5 of Book Two were cut out almost entirely, it is clear from the sum- mary of the book's contents that these dealt with "what letters the Hebrews had, how many holy and canonical books, [and] who was the author of each one of them" (1575: 1: f48r). Folios 47-49 and 51-52 were cut out completely. Judging by the intervening folio 50, which was left uncut but inked over in 1575 and excluded in 1595, this section would have included a discussion of "the three orders of Hebrew books, which are legal, prophetic, and hagiographic" (1575: 1: f50v). The only portion of this exposition in Book 2, Chapter 5, not to be expurgated concerns sacred Hebrew books which had been lost.19

Finally, the conclusion oftheRepablica hebrea

was expurgated. Romain begins by recounting how the emperor Hadrian banished the Jews from Jerusalem, and "thus from this time forward, never were they residents nor tenants nor lords of the holy city of Jerusalem, nor of their country" (1575: 1 :f67v; 1595:1: f78r). He contin- ues that the Jews who live there today are the most mistreated people of all peoples and nations in the world: "There has been no nation where they have not been abused and exiled nor any city where they have not suffered injury, being killed or exiled or having their properties taken from them" (1575: 1:f67v-68r; 1595: 1: f78r).

Up to this point in the text, nothing is suppressed. However, his subsequent remarks, in which he implicates Spain in the perpetration of these unconscionable atrocities, are all inked over. He challenges those readers who do not believe what he says to read the histories of Spain, in which they "shall see the outrages that have been committed against the Jews and, in spite of some of them having converted to Chris- tianity (of which I believe there are few who have done so truly), there are none more persecuted than they are. Whether it be at public affairs, in churches or city councils, in religious congrega- tions, wherever it might be, they are detested and abhorred. May the people of this nation pardon me, for in truth I am loath to speak ill of them" (1575: 1: f68r).

In this final statement, which can only be read through the censor's ink, we come to the conclusion of the Repaiblica hebrea. In total, some twelve folios of the original ninety were cut out and passages on two or three more were scratched out. Suppressed are the accounts of rituals and traditions that the censors considered dangerous because they portrayed sympathetically the customs destined for eradication. The censors obviously also objected to the author's statement of sympathy for the Jewish people and the assign- ment of guilt to Spain for crimes committed against them. Nevertheless, Romain's courage and outspokenness were not deterred by the censorship that he knew could befall his work.

Although books do not bleed, it is a chilling experience to survey the violence done to them by the Inquisition. It is perhaps even more dis- turbing to see the destruction of an account of a living cultural tradition, such as that of the Jews, than it is to see the censorship of books dealing in abstractions. Put simply, this type of censorial correction is a reminder of people punished, tortured, or, in the words of Cervantes, "exiled from the Christian republic like a people un-


wanted."20 From Roman's viewpoint, this xeno- phobia could not be tolerated. He challenged the mechanisms of censorhip on certain occasions by pointing out the superficial similiarities between Jewish and Christian tradition, as in the temporal organization of sacred occasions cited above. At other moments, he appealed to the Christian reader's fascination with the exotic or the unknown, as in his description of Jewish marriage customs as being "full of mystery."

I do not believe that these are unmotivated remarks; on the contrary, they stand in solidarity with the courage of Fray Luis de Le6n and others who were not intimidated by Inquisitorial regu- lations. It was generally understood that Fray Luis was imprisoned for giving more authority to the Hebrew text of the Bible over the Vulgate and for being of Jewish descent (Bell, Luis 145). Romain would have known, for example, that the mortal enemies of Luis de Le6n, particularly the professor of Greek at the University of Sala- manca, Le6n de Castro, had kept alive the charges and ill will against Fray Luis (see Bell, Luis 149). His imprisonment was protracted by the brilliance and vigor of his own self-defense; when released nearly five years later all charges had been dropped (Bell, Luis 151). Romain was sympathetic with the cause for intellectual freedom if not an open advocate of it, and his Re-

plblica hebrea stands as testimony to it.

III. Partial Censorship2"

The multiple jurisdictions over censorship, and the indifference of one agency to another, are revealed by what could be censored and what is not. The

Replublica de los Indios Occidentales

receives no expurgation whatsoever. However, we might have expected accounts like the following, which suggest the precolumbian knowledge of the Christian gospel, to have been censored by the Inquisition. This is the second clue that suggests that Romain's work was subjected to only the most minimal form of censorship.

On the authority of Las Casas, Roma.n reports that the inhabitants of the island of Cozumel off Yucatan knew about the Holy Trinity: "All this the bishop of Chiapa says, on the basis of reports that he had in his bishopric." In this way, RomVin reports, the Indians knew about, although in a confused manner, the "Holy Trinity and our lady the virgin Mary and her blessed mother Saint Anne" (1897: 1: 60-61). If all this is true, Rom6.n concludes, then the Christian faith must have already been preached among these people. He

believes that the Indians' great buildings and their writings are additional evidence to support this theory (1897: 1: 61). Although Romain para- phrases much of this from Chapter 123 of Las Casas's Apologetica historia sumaria (Obras 3: 427), he also oversimplifies and distorts Las Casas's view on this subject. Romain gives cre- dence to the idea of the ancient American knowledge of Christianity, an idea that the Dominican had explicitly rejected.22

The Replblica cristiana, however, is expur-

gated and it represents a different logic of censorship than we saw in the

Replblica hebrea. Books

One, Four, and Five contain passages, but never entire folios, that have been inked over. While some points regarding the sacrament of com- munion were corrected in numerous places (1575: 1: ffl05v, 206r, 216v), as well as matters pertaining to church councils (ibid., ff224r, 225v), heresy (ibid., ff259r, 260r, 261v), and, in the

Replblica septentrional, baptism (ibid., f351v), Roma.n presents a major criticism of the Spanish state vis-a-vis the church which is only mini- mally censored. This is the third (and strongest) hint that Romin's is a case of "soft" censorship, at least on certain issues.

The pertinent statement concerns ecclesiastical immunities and I translate it in its entirety, italicizing the portion that was expurgated: At the time that Alaric, king of the Goths, entered Rome by force, at the time that he entered he commanded throngs with a public crier that no one, under pain of death, should kill or do harm to those who fled to the temples...[a policy] which was carried out with great rigor.... And as he was asked afterward how he had made that exemption, he responded that he had come to make war not against saints and temples but against the Romans. Today for our sins, everything is going to ruin because every petty peace officer and public servant breaks divine laws and human ones, casting out of temples and away from altars those who seek refuge there, and thus they hang people and execute sen- tences on them as if it had been granted by God to them to do so, because of which things and many similar ones I consider that Spain suffers so many trials and calamities (1575: 1: fl05r).

This passage is remarkable on two counts. First, the limited extent of the suppression leaves the major declaration intact. Only the phrase "as if it had been granted to them by God to do so" is taken out. Second, the declaration itself raises a further question as to its meaning. Would calamities befall Spain simply because local justice officers fail to respect the sanctity of the church as a sanctuary for the accused? Tying the viola- tion of ecclesiastical immunity to Spain's ruin is an elliptical statement that does not make sense without the existence of some greater concern -


and another text- behind it. That other text is some version of Bartolom6 de las Casas's unpub- lished De exemptione sive damnatione (Parish with Weidman, Las Casas).23

The question raised in the De exemptione is whether ecclesiastics are exempt from the coer- cive power of secular princes and judges even though from birth they have been subjected to them. However, instead of being a disputation in standard Scholastic style, ending with the conclusion that ecclesiastics do have such immunity, the work has a second part. This second proposition is a warning: If this divine and human law is disobeyed, the punishment is damna- tion. The rash secular prince will suffer the triple death, --corporal, spiritual, and eternal. "So let the most Catholic prince beware," for crimes against the public good will bring wars, devas- tation, and calamity (Parish with Weidman, Las Casas en Mixico).24

Quite clearly, the censorship performed on Romiin's elliptical recapitulation of Las Casas's judgment and warning is benign. The criticism of the relation between state and church is allowed to stand, and even the part deleted can be read. This remarkable instance raises further questions regarding the censorship imposed (or relaxed, in this specific instance), the fuller relationship between the works of Roman and those of Las Casas, and the criticism of the state that the Inquisitorial censors let pass. We shall take up these questions in order.

How can the mildness of the censorship of this part of the Repalblicas del mundo be explained? Because of its date of prohibition and expurgation, we know that Romin' s work was submitted to Inquisitorial censorship by a team that included Juan de Mariana, the Jesuit writer and historian, and the aforementioned Le6n de Cas- tro, who occupied the cdtedra of Greek at Salamanca (Mirquez 131, 156). Although the influence of the reactionary Le6n de Castro on the Index of 1583 is uncertain, the great humanist Mariana was the effective author of the Indices of 1583 and 1584 (ibid.). Mariana has been considered a liberal-minded censor (Marquez 150), and we can assume that his own strong, critical view of the monarchy would have allowed him and like-minded officials to approvingly "look the other way" regarding statements critical of the crown. Mariana himself would later be brought before the Inquisition for the 1609 printing in Cologne of his works that criticized royal mon- etary policy; he spent a period of time encarcerated in a monastery as a result (Pinto Crespo,

Inquisicidn 226). Mariana had adopted the Expurgation Index

and its method of partial preservation from its inventor, Benito Arias Montano (Marquez 132, 150). Arias Montano, the great editor of the Antwerp Polyglot Bible and Hebraist (who was possibly of converso origin),25 had devised this comparatively liberal method of censorship, which specified passages for deletion rather than whole books for destruction, for the Louvain Index of 1570 (Rekers 16-17). Although book censorship in the Low Countries was a royal prerogative rather than an Inquisitorial one because the Spanish Inquisition had no jurisdiction there (Marquez 131), Mariana's initiative made the Expurgation Index a standard Inquisitorial feature from the Quiroga Index of 1584 onward (Mirquez 143). Although passages blotted out with ink four hundred years ago are likely to be much more legible today (as the ink fades) than they were at the time, expurgation indisputably lessened the extremity of the losses to intellectual culture suffered by censorship. In both the methods employed and his disposition toward the task, Mariana's critical spirit as an intellectual is apparent. He could follow the rules for prohibition on heretical matters, and appropriately leave criticism of the affairs of state intact.

This could explain why Romain's famous criticism of the conquests in Mexico and Peru was left unchecked despite a request from the Council of the Indies to have the book recalled and objectionable passages removed (Torre Revello xxv). Under whose jurisdiction would this request fall? The Council of the Indies asked the king to have the Council of Castile take action. How much post-publication censorship did the state actually do? The questions raised by this case cannot be answered here. Since we cannot know at what point the request was blocked or ignored, we can at least speculate about the timing of the request itself. It most likely had to do with the death of the extraordi- nary president of the Council of the Indies, Juan de Ovando.26

Ovando was president of the Council of the Indies from 1571 to 1575; he died on August 28, 1575, and the Council's request to withdraw Romen's work is dated September 30, 1575. Prior to that time, the Council would not have taken action against anti-conquistador criticism, for Juan de Ovando, as royal investigator (visitador), had courageously exposed the corruption of the Council of the Indies before be- coming its president, and he supported all the


laws of reform for the Indies that had not been modified. It was he who began the Recopilaci6n de las leyes de Indias (Shifer 1: 129-33). The fact that the complaint against Roman's book came forth only after Ovando's death suggests that the councilors knew they could act only with him gone.

Ovando is of interest as a member of a highly placed circle of people of which Rom6.n and others no doubt formed a part. Previously a member of the General Council of the Inquisi- tion, Ovando was a man of wide learning and friend of Arias Montano. Ovando was in regular correspondence with Arias Montano during the years that the latter was in Flanders, supervising the new printing of the Polyglot bible, working on the Index of Louvain, and buying books for Philip's library at the Escorial, which Philip hoped would rival that of the Vatican (Rekers 75, 105, 126). Arias Montano also bought books for Ovando, and the cordiality of their relationship suggests a meeting of learned, worldly, and critical minds (Jim6nez de la Espada 476-98).

Romain's place in this circle of highly placed officials and ministers of the king is suggested by his literary work. His willingness to defy the censoring authorities, as did Luis de Le6n, Benito Arias Montano, Juan de Mariana, and the already deceased Las Casas, reveals that criticism was possible in the supposedly closed society of Spain at the time. What begins to emerge is the profile of a small but determined group of individuals ---elites to be sure- who were not afraid to defy the politics of the state and worked from the inside to mitigate its repressive measures. Obviously, the entire sixteenth century was a period of excessive vigilance. If the cases prosecuted in the second half of the sixteenth century were fewer (due to the fact that Protestantism had not taken root in Spain), they were nevertheless more spectacular, and they speak both to the continued pressure of the Inquisition and the notable obstinacy of courageous individuals.

As for Philip's concern, it is expressed in this case through the indifference of the Council of Castile to take action against Romain's work. Stem condemnations of the conquistadores were evidently not a matter that merited royal concern. The second publication ofthe work in 1595, with royal license, supports this conclusion. Here, however, it is crucial to bring forth a ca- veat about what kind of criticism could be expressed.

Philip's use of the Inquisition against his political enemies was another matter.27 Of

course, individuals were sometimes persecuted for taking positions on abstract theological matters that were considered heretical. Fray Luis de Le6n, who challenged the church's insistence on the authority of the Vulgate, was one of them.28 Nevertheless, this was rarely solely a religious battle. Although Fray Luis's challenge to the authority of the Vulgate allowed the king to have him put in the Inquisitorial prison, his outspoken views on affairs of state also come into play (see Bell, Luis 265-83). Fray Luis was an intellectual activist who espoused a revolu- tionary doctrine that stated that master and servant were equal by nature and under the law, and he repeatedly denounced corruption and tyranny (ibid., 267, 275). On the Indies, he condemned the cruelty and greed of the conquistadores and insisted that neither the law of God nor that of nature allowed for forcible conversion of the Indians (ibid., 279). After nearly five years in prison, Fray Luis was acquitted of all charges, which pertained to heresy. He was more fortu- nate than others (Gudiel, Grajal) who had died while encarcerated (ibid., 38-61).

The famous case of Bartolom6 Carranza de Miranda, imprisoned for having written a cat- echism that had won the approval of the Council of Trent but in 1559 was supposedly considered heretical, also makes the point. Wagner and Parish examine the case, noting that Men6ndez y Pelayo had detected in his study of the proceed- ings "a blind anger unworthy of a king." They conclude that the "accusation of heresy against Carranza was simply one on which to hang some others, in which the Inquisition had no authority" (Wagner/Parish 223).29 Carranza had been released and cleared of the most serious charges only shortly before he died in 1576 (ibid.).

The cases of Luis de Le6n and Carranza reveal that, while "heretical" ideas were cause for censorship, they alone were not cause for imprisonment; when physical encarceration accompa- nied literary suppression, something more was at stake. Both men were prominent and influential figures and outspoken critics of the crown policy. Carranza was prepared to keep Philip from selling Peru and its native inhabitants to the encomenderos (Wagner/Parish 213-16), and, as a catedrdtico, Fray Luis de Le6n had access to the best young minds of Spanish society at the premier university of Spain. The works of others were censored, to be sure, but if their intellectual labors did not make them Philip's enemies they were spared encarceration. A few examples will reveal the contrast.


Juan Huarte de San Juan applied the same scientific, philological methods as Luis de Le6n.30 His works were expurgated, but he was not imprisoned (Torres 25-35). Neither was Roman. Arias Montano, strongly critical of Philip's policy toward the justifiably rebellious Low Countries (Rekers 31), was safe abroad and then brought home to organize the library at El Escorial. There, the quantity of books acquired annually was so large that Arias Montano was granted the right to expurgate them without the intervention of the high office of the Inquisition, which allowed him and his colleagues to develop their intellectual interests without restraint (Rekers 108). In light of the risks that Philip's enemies ran, it is clear that select individuals such as RomSan and Arias Montano made a real contribution to Spain. Striving quietly to keep their country open to the world of European intellectual culture, past and present, they managed to do what the repressive legislation of the time should have made impossible.

Apart from the damaging if haphazard character of censorship in practice, however, it is clear that the larger targets of censorship (wider learning, the autonomy of reason, empirical methods, criticism of church and state) remained elusive. We examine two of these below. The first is Roman's effective publication, under his own name, of Las Casas's Apologetica historia sumaria, and the second is Roman's own critique of Spanish history and politics.

IV. Las Casas in the Work of Roman

In their valuable narrative and critical bibliography of Las Casas's writings, Wagner and Par- ish (288-89) signalled the great reliance of Ro- main on the Apologetica historia sumaria of Las Casas for the bulk of the former' s descriptions of the native societies of Mexico, Guatemala, Hon- duras, and Espafiola. My own textual comparison of the two works has revealed that, in addition, Roman took his entire account of the Incas and their predecessors from the Apologetica. RomSan cites Las Casas by his title as bishop of Chiapa (but never by name) some five times in his Repablica de los Indios Occidentales, beginning in Book I, Chapter 1 by noting: "huve papeles del santo var6n don fray [en blanco] Obispo de Chiapa" (1897: 1: 46). The space for the name, left blank in both the 1575 and 1595 editions, seems to be a deliberate oversight that conve- niently fails to name the author whose works were officially suppressed in the 1570s, both

within local jurisdictions and by the crown.31 Roma"n occasionally cites the bishop's "papers" by the title "Apologia." I have not been able to determine how and why Las Casas's manuscripts came into his possession. What can be documented is how he made use of them.

Roman devotes some sixteen of his fifty-two chapters of the Repablica de los Indios to the cultures of Peru; Las Casas had devoted to the same topic some twenty-five, out of a total of 267 chapters. The datum is revealing, because, on the one hand, RomSan seems to have expanded Las Casas, giving a full one-third of his exposition to information that had occupied only about ten per cent of Las Casas's work. RomSan gives a great deal of vividness to the descriptive materials, even though he seldom strays far from Las Ca- sas's text. What RomSan loses in the process, on the other hand, is Las Casas's extensive and sophisticated comparisons with ancient societies. The purpose of Las Casas's exposition is to show, which he does in chapters 71-74, the universal propensity and natural inclination of humanity to seek its maker and first cause, and to suggest the utility of the observance of religion and set forth the principles that characterize societies that are particularly religious (chapters 183-86). These remarkable and extensive discussions are nowhere to be found in Romain. The latter gives an encyclopedia of religious custom, carefully lifted from Las Casas, but he does not capture the incisive, critical character of Las Casas's writing.32 RomSan does not communicate the richness of Las Casas's thought nor there- fore convey its persuasiveness.

The principal difference between Las Casas and RomSan is that the former conceptualizes native views as bona fide religious beliefs while Roman refers to them flatly as superstition and idolatry.33 I believe this practice has at least two origins. First, Romain is not engaged in the critical, evaluative, argumentative project of Las Casas. In fact, I would gather that he has been persuaded by Las Casas's demonstrations, and so simply sums up his conclusions to the effect that the Indians are less reprehensible than the ancients in all aspects of their religious views and practices. Second, as a connoisseur and student of ancient and pagan cultures of many nations, Romin simply does not flinch at the mention of "idolatry." Las Casas does not do so either, but since his purpose is the defense of the Indians, he must handle his materials with greater aplomb. As a student of civilizations both ancient and modemrn, RomLn digs in with the


relish he has for other groups and takes for granted the shocking content with which he is so familiar.

Romain betrays his enthusiasm for his Repablica de los Indios Occidentales in spite of his protestation that he placed this unit alongside his discussions of the Moors and Turks because all three were societies contrary to Christianity; this seems appropriate, he says, because "the holy would not live well alongside the profane, nor light amid darkness" (1595: 2: f3r). He takes great pride and interest, however, in the portion of his work devoted to "nuestros Indios Occidentales," and his statements that these people are "contrary to our holy faith" do not undercut his sympathetic interest in "one of the most remarkable peoples found anywhere in the world and one which is bound to cause great wonder in all readers" (1595: 2: f3r). Overall, Romdn as a writer emerges, like Las Casas, as devoutly Catholic but sophisticated enough not to feel threatened by the existence of other cultural traditions. Nowhere is this more evident than in their shared views on the written traditions of the Amerindians.

Romain sees no threat in studying pagan societies and in fact condemns, as Las Casas had done, the burning of the sacred books of the Mesoamericans. These remarkable books might have been useful precisely to the evangelization effort, says Romdn. This view comes from Las Casas, who attests to having seen the Christian doctrine taught to the Indians by employing the very figures and images which they read in the same manner that he would read a document composed of letters (Obras 4: 346). What harm, asks Romdn, could books written in pictures and figures of animals do, if they could only be read by the learned members of native society (1897: II: 65)? He reveals his opinion that the learned sector of Indian societies, like that of any other, would not be corrupted by contact with ideas or doctrines understood to be false.

These observations on the books of Amerindian religions and their specialist readers reveal Romdin's sympathetic attitude toward native societies more than do his categorical statements about their beliefs, which conform to an ecclesiastical editorial standard to which he sub- mits without hesitation. At the same time, thanks to his ability to condense and concentrate the flavor of Las Casas's lengthy and subtle discussions of all other native customs, he produces a memorable description of Inca society. What Roman loses in the presentation of Las Casas's

argumentation, whose purpose was to show the merit and worth of Amerindian societies, he gains by creating a vivid and moving portrait of Inca history and traditions.

While pure Las Casas, Roman's account of the Incas reveals his deep admiration for his subject. Following Las Casas, he divides Andean history into two periods: the era of "reyes pequefios" ("se governaban siempre por Reyes" (Roman 1897: 1: 325; Casas, Obras 3:. 248-49) and the Incas. He dismisses cannibalism from the Andes, as occurring only near Panama (327; Casas 387), and follows Las Casas's comparison of an Andean creation myth with a similar one of the Romans.34 Las Casas's account of the reign of Pachacuti Inca Yupanqui provides a wonderful narrative that Romain follows, describing Pachacuti, as does his source, as "another king Solomon" (Romain 1897: 2: 20; Casas, Obras 4: 396). Here he notes that he cannot continue to follow his accustomed order of exposition, because to do so would force him to skip some of the remarkable things that existed in that king- dom (1897: 2: 20).

His interest in the customs is such that he twice gives information about Andean marriage, adding as a little flourish to the privileges enjoyed by the principal wife of the Inca: "the bed was hers whenever she wanted it" (2: 113), in contrast to Las Casas's more discrete statement, "the principal wife had with her husband more frequent communication in public matters and in secret" (Obras 4: 389). Often, Romain reveals his gusto by adding explanatory commentary, most often by giving an analogy from the current or recent history of Spain to explain to his readers the concept or the practice in question (1897: 2: 31, 41, 42, 57, 58). He assimilates to a large degree Las Casas's opinion of the Amerindians as enjoying a public order, stating that they are "not as barbarous" as many writers have painted them (1897: 2: 50-51).

Romain also shares Las Casas's views of the conquering Spaniards. The first apparent Las- casian note struck is the greed of the conquistadores (Romain 1897: 1: 88, 91, 109). Describing the pillaging of the gold and silver that adorned the temple of Pachacamac, he observes that the greed of any people would be sufficient to de- spoil the place, but in this case it was the Span- iards, whose great greed exceeded any found in history (88). His condemnation of the conquistadores of Peru is complete: "Francisco Pizarro and his other brother, -and afterward there were three-, who were called Gonzalo


and Francisco Pizarro, the most evil men who departed any nation, and the kings of Spain earned more dishonor with them and their companions...because on account of them many things have been said among great learned men and men of conscience" (221).35 Among these men of conscience, Roman no doubt had in mind not only Las Casas, but others such as Fray Luis de Le6n, Benito Arias Montano, and Juan de Ovando.

V. The Evasion of Censorship

What are we to make of Roman's plagiarism of Las Casas, particularly in light of his claim in the Repablica Gentilica, to have made a scrupu- lous use of his sources? He assures his readers that they do not have to be concerned about the truth of his account because "the infinite number of authors [that I cite] will stand witness to this, and I was principally obligated to this more than others because I am a strict censor of those who write things without [mention of] the authors on whose credibility the work rests" (f3r). In his multi-volume work, Roman cites an "infinite number of authors;" the question is, how many of them did he assimilate or appropriate into his own voice? As we know, in the Repablica de los Indios Occidentales, although he stated at the outset that he had the use of the papers of the bishop of Chiapa and the works of others that circulated in print, he depended exclusively on the former. How are we to interpret the following statement, which we find in his introduction to Book One on native religions: "Since I am the first who treats this topic, it will be good that I speak at some length" (1897: 1: 47).

Here I would argue that the Romdin/Las Casas case has more to do with the evasion of censorship than with plagiarism. Roman knew that Las Casas was dead and that the "papeles del obispo de Chiapa" would lie dormant and unread. Fur- thermore, he would have understood that any attempt to bring the work out under Las Casas's own name within the first decade of his death would be defeated. There is no doubt that he was much taken by the work. To have brought it forward, under his own name and under the covers of the Repablicas del mundo, was to assure that this remarkable compendium of information, if not its subtle and complex argumentation, would be circulated. Romain understood censorship and did not fear it. His willingness to defy the threat of censorship is most clearly borne out in the first of all his

"republics of the world," the ninety printed folios of the Repablica hebrea, and in his willingness to make his own Las Casas's criticisms of the rights of kings. Furthermore, his criticism of Spain's actions in the New World goes beyond his condemnation of the conquistadores. Like Arias Montano, whose sympathy with the de- mands of the Flemish against Philip's harsh rule was so great that he sought the views of the Flemish themselves to help defend their notion of the morally right (Rekers 31), Roman concen- trated his reflection on the victims of Spanish abuse. We close with a reflection on Romin's critique of Spanish history vis-a-vis the other "reptiblicas del mundo." This is the question of his attitude toward the Jews of Spain and the Indians of America as peoples whose historical paths crossed that of the Catholic Kings.

VI. Jews and Amerindians in Spanish History: Persecution and Destruction

It should be stated that this inquiry has nothing to do with the theory of the origin of the Indians as one of the ten lost tribes of Israel; in fact, quite the contrary.36 Roman was concerned with the treatment of Jews in history, not their origins, and here his thinking coincides with, and perhaps goes beyond, that of Las Casas.

The theory that the Indians descended from the Semitic peoples was the first idea to attract thinkers in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, beginning with the identification of America with Ophir, described in the first Book of Kings as a mysterious place of wealth to which the Israelites travelled and from which they brought gold, precious stones, marble, and other precious goods (Alcina Franch 14-15). After his third voyage, Columbus identified Haiti with Ophir; it was subsequently identified by others, following dubious philological arguments, with Peru. The theories that specifically identified the Indians as descendants of the Israelites were not accepted by Las Casas or Roman, who, like many other enlightened and reasonable thinkers, rejected the idea completely (Roman 1897: 1: 317-18; Casas, Obras 4: 365-66). Nevertheless, he makes an oblique reference to one or more scholarly works that discussed common ancient origins, the opinions of which he did not share but whose authors he clearly respected.

Here appears a new theme: the consideration of both peoples through a common lens as victims of usurpation by the Spanish, at home in the case of the Jews, abroad in the case of the In-


dians. Reading back and forth between Roman and his source in Las Casas, we can perceive how the implicit analogy between the sufferings of the ancient Israelites and the contemporary Indians becomes almost explicit.

Las Casas treats Jewish civilization at many points throughout the Apologitica historia sumaria, in particular with regard to religious devotion and ritual practices. In his Chapter 163, "On the great inclination that the Jews had for idolatry and of its causes," his explanation of the Israelites' apostasy reveals a rational and ultimately sympathetic view. Las Casas makes an implicit analogy between the impact of suffering on the spiritual life of the Israelites in captivity and the situation of the Amerindians after conquest. He offers four reasons why the ancient Israelites turned away from God: First, they spent some four hundred years in bondage in Egypt, which was virtually the cradle of idolatry (107). Second, because it seemed to them that their God did not help them, but rather delivered them into the hands of their enemies, it was reasonable that their faith should grow cool (108). Third, the cults of false gods, which appealed to the senses and carnal impulses, had great immediate appeal (108). Fourth, insofar as the position of celestial bodies and disposition of the earth can influence human behavior, the location of the land of Canaan disinclined its inhabitants from monotheism (II, 108-09).37

The implicit analogies that Las Casas makes between the historical experience of the Israel- ites and that of the Indians of America are summed up in his statement to the effect that, under captivity, their faith diminished, and little by little it was lost, since they did not have preachers to help them remember what their ancestors had learned from Abraham long before Moses and Aaron were born: "And this is certain that those who live as captives and who are under grave obligations oppressed, as were the Jews in Egypt, can only with great difficulty devote themselves to the cult of the divine and holy things" (1897: 2: 107).

At this crucial juncture, the analogy that Las Casas has built between the experience of the ancient Israelites and the Amerindians of both ancient and modemrn times fully emerges. There are two issues here: the first is natural tendencies toward polytheism; the second, the social circumstances that prevent religious sentiment from developing. The former pertains to the ancient Amerindian past, while the latter, to the situation of subjugation that the native societies

of the New World suffered subsequent to the Spanish invasion and conquests. Las Casas's explanation of the Israelites' polytheism reiter- ates his arguments about how the Amerindians lost their ancient, imperfect knowledge of God with the passage of time and why they failed to embrace Christianity when it was presented to them. Regarding the Indians, Las Casas makes clear his point about the social conditions of oppression and the negative influence of the oppressors: "But the land being in the state that it is today, it will be a great miracle of God that some Indian should convert, because in us they see the absolute opposite of what we preach and what our holy faith teaches" (Obras 5: 536). Here, the enlightened and courageous views of Las Casas stand in contrast to the triumphalist apology of Francisco de Tamara mentioned earlier.

The common elements we find in Las Casas's views of the ancient Israelites' and the contemporary Amerindians' religious experiences come from the basic formulation of his project in the Apolog"tica. As mentioned earlier, Las Casas undertakes to demonstrate the universal employ- ment of natural reason to create an ordered life, the fundamental impulse of which is to establish a relationship with the divine. He argues that all humanity has some knowledge of the supreme cause that governs the world and that, along with this confused knowledge, all humanity has a natural desire and inclination to know it better. People cannot live without religion because their hardships cause them to seek the source of power that can remedy their suffering. As a result, since humanity began to multiply, the world has always known the cult of the divine and sacrifices offered to the true God (latria) as well as "false offerings made to false gods" (idolatria) [Obras 3: 244]. In Las Casas's view, the religious history of man is characterized by events that came about naturally: humanity's need to seek its creator, the corruption of humanity owing to its ignorance of the divine (which in turn was due to the sin of Adam and Eve), and the birth of idolatry as a natural consequence afterward (Obras 3: 241, 244-45).

If Las Casas studies the religious life of ancient civilizations in order to illuminate and defend the relative sophistication of the beliefs and practices of the contemporary Indians, he always differentiates the special character of ancient Hebrew culture from the others he exam- ines. He points out that the Israelites were the chosen people especially loved by God


(Obras 3: 286; 4: 71), and praises the greatness of Solomon and the bravery of the Maccabbees (ibid., 4: 332-33). By excluding the Jews from the list of the "enemies of Christ," Las Casas's views on the Jews of the modem period implic- itly follows the same line of thought. Las Casas repeatedly states that the current enemies of Christianity are the Moors and the Turks, and that this antagonism consists of "opposing the republic of Christendom with all their might, killing and capturing the members of Christ, as we see each day, and attempting to impede and destroy the faith and the name of Christ and extend their own nefarious sect" (Obras 4: 106, 442; 5: 488). The Jews clearly do not fit this criteria.

This last entry leads us to the expurgated version of

Rommin's Repablicas del mundo. He discusses heresy in the Repablica cristiana, and makes an identification of the "enemies of Christianity" that also explicitly excludes the Jews from the charge, at least for present times for which he identifies the Moors and pagans. In a statement that was subsequently expurgated, he makes the charge against the Israelites exclusively for ancient times, placing them alongside the Romans and the Persians (1575: 1: f259r). Was this remark censored because Romain failed to place the Jews among the "enemies of Christ"? Probably so, because apart from Ma- riana, the Inquisitorial expurgation team included Le6n de Castro (Marquez 156, Pinto Crespo, Inquisici6n 192), who carried on a cam- paign against Arias Montano in Flanders, Spain, and Italy for years and considered that anyone who went beyond the Vulgate and studied the Hebrew original deserved "persecution and condemnation as ajudaizante, friend of Rabbis, and declared enemy of the Doctors of the Church" (Bell, Arias Montano 24-25).

Roman's deep respect for Jewish culture is further revealed in his statements about its antiquity. Revering Hebrew civilization as the most ancient in the world, he has little patience with non-Jews who think they can make judgments about the long and complex history of the Jews. "There is no reason," he says, "to treat here the question of the Amerindians as descended directly from one of the sons of Noah, because only the Jews can pronounce on that subject, and no other people in the world whatsoever can do it" (1897: 1: 318; 2: 51). Here Romin refrains from making the connection between the Amerindians and the ten lost tribes of Israel, because such so- called "similarities" of custom andbehavior were

almost always based on racist stereotypes.38 He dismisses those who have made the Indians the descendants of the Israelites without the cultural authority to do so. This authority he leaves to thinkers of Jewish background or tradition.

Thus, Romain refers secretly to Fray Luis de Le6n or to Benito Arias Montano, or both. Arias Montano's work on the antiquities of the Jews, Antiquitatum Judaicarum libri IX, was part of the Polyglot bible Apparatus which was excluded from the Catholic privilege in 1576 (Rekers 189); Arias Montano included the question of the origin of the Indians of the New World in his biblical commentary. Fray Luis de Le6n commented on the topic also. Both can be read in Diego Andres Rocha's Tratado Unico y singular del origen de los Indios Occidentales del Pira, Mexico, Santa Fe y Chile [1681], which includes many references to Arias Montano's work, finally published in Leiden in 1593 (Rekers 189), and the many works of Fray Luis de Le6n which touched on the subject.39 Romain never mentions Luis de Le6n or Arias Montano by name, but he is obviously ac- quainted with studies pursued by them and others.

Romain's final reflections on the fall of the great American empires (book 3, chapters 14, 15), which aroused the ire of the Council of the Indies, begin with a lament that great kingdoms fell just when they were enjoying prosperity, peace, honor, and renown. Not surprisingly, the historical examples he presents are the Persians, the Assyrians, and the Hebrews (1897: 2: 211). Romin's greatest interest lay, however, in the parallel modem histories of the contact of the Jewish people with Spain and the history of the Spanish domination of the Indians. Through his implicit comparisons, he argues that both the Indians and the Jews have been attacked without just cause, one by persecution and exile, the other by conquest and subjugation. The persecution of the Jews, like the conquest of the Amerindians, was undertaken wrongly: the Indians had never invaded sovereign Spanish territory with the desire of taking it over; the Jews of Spain had never shown themselves to be the "enemies" of Christianity by attempting to spread adherence to their beliefs. Both were the victims of Span- ish history.

Despite the gulf separating vastly different cultures in extraordinarily different circumstances, the principles involved are the same. Even after being censured and expurgated, Ro- mAn still raises the same burning question: How


far, in the name of Christianity, does theRepablica cristiana go to extend itself over the Repablicas del mundo? Does the mere fact of holding different beliefs, without even trying to propagate and spread them, inevitably bring about the effort to crush them in the name of all that is holy?

Romain's two conclusions to the Repablica hebrea, that is, one written before and one after expurgation, provide the answer. We recall that he began this final comment with a statement that appeared in both editions: There is not a country where the Jewish people have not been mistreated or exiled, nor any city where they have not suffered some injury, being killed, exiled, or having their property confiscated (ibid., f68r). In the 1575 edition, he went on to remark (and this portion was censured) that reading the histories of Spain would bring to mind the fact that in any public place in Spain, religious or civil, the Jews were detested and that he deplored this shameful situation (1575: 1: f68r). Rom~in's disgust at the injustice done to the Jews is nowhere more eloquently stated than in those remarks published in 1575 and expurgated thereafter. The 1595 edition carries an alternate conclusion, and in the context of his overall outlook, it may be considered more critical of his homeland than of the Jews: "If the readers wish to discover that which has been said in this Repablica, they will find that no people has ever been more favored by God and afterward more abhorred, but all because of their sins, as is apparent" (1595: 3: f78r). Satisfying the censors (Le6n de Castro?) for giving an appropriately stem and clipped remark on the Jews, the statement, seen within the larger purview of Romain's work, turns a critical eye on Spain and a warning about the sins committed by her ministers civil and ecclesiastical. Here is Mariana as censor, who let pass Romain's reference to Las Casas's threats about Spain's fate.

Romain has been critical of the Inquisition at home, the abuses of civil power, the wantonness of the royal court filled with "dogs and flatter- ers," and the low level of Spanish culture even among the grandees of Spain. He condemns, with Las Casas, the bloody and shameful enter- prise of Spain in America. In 1566, Las Casas instructed in his last will and testament that all the letters and reports that continually came to him from the Indies, as testimony of the truth that he "always upheld about the destruction of the Indi- ans," should be catalogued and preserved in the monastery of San Gregorio in Valladolid. In that manner, "if God should determine to destroy Spain, it will be seen that it is because of the

destruction we have done in the Indies and the reason of its justice shall be apparent" (Obras, 5: 540).

The author of the Repablicas del mundo also sees a warning in history. Concluding the Repablica de los Indios Occidentales, Roman recalls Hernando Cort6s's murder of Cuahtemoc as "the worst and most cruel thing that any man ever did in the world, and as such I place it here as a warning for the future. That which I most deplore is that there was no punishment for it, but the pardon was such that it brought guilt upon itself, because to free himself from the infamy that threatened him, he killed a great king" (1897: 2: 214-15). On the destruction of the Incas, he concludes that there could be no greater testimony to the punishment that God brought upon the conquistadores, recalling their bitter ends, than the words of Pedro de Alvarado as he lay dying after being crushed by a horse. When asked what part of his body hurt him the most, he cried, "My soul! My soul!" (1897: 2: 225-26).

Romain's remarkable survey of all the peoples of all the world is much more introspective that its extroverted title would seem to suggest. His critique of Spanish policy and society has been too profound and too pervasive to be excised by the mundane (and sometimes light-of-touch) in- struments of expurgation. As Romain (or rather, Las Casas as assimilated by Romain) warned, it is useless and even harmful for the prince to attempt to suppress all vices in the republic.

As a scholar of ancient and modem cultures and a critic of the affairs of state and church, Jer6nimo Romain presents a case of far greater interest and scope than these pages can successfully illuminate. I have no doubt that his experience deserves much fuller treatment, particularly to flesh out the literary and affective relationships among the group of courageous biblical and antiquarian scholars who knew in varying degrees the repression of church and state. The merits of such an inquiry are obvious, if for no other reason than to contemplate how he came to the question with which his work leaves us: How far, in the name of Christianity, does the "reptiblica cristiana" go to extend itself over the rest of the "reptiblicas del mundo"? Since he claimed that his interest was not in the origins of kingdoms but how they came to their end (1897: 2: 50), his reflections on the triumphs of Spain should not be read without listening for the ring of the prophetic."


0 NOTES

'Born in Logrofio in 1536, Roman took the habit of the Augustinian order in his adulthood and is said to have travelled extensively in and outside of Spain gathering materials for his ecclesiastical and secular works (Moral 14). I have found no evidence that he travelled to the New World. He was not the Augustinian provincial of New Spain three times, as stated by Juan Friede (62). Fray Jer6nimo's remarks on that office pertain to the life of Alonso de la Vera Cruz, not his own (1897, II, 250). He wrote some twenty books during his lifetime, and was named chronicler of the Augustinian order in 1573, two years before he published his Repablicas del mundo.

2 Because I refer to three editions of the work (the original of 1575 as expurgated, the corrected version of 1595, and the modem, partial version of 1897), parentheti- cal citations employ date of publication -not short-form titles- for proper identification.

3 The consulta of the Council of the Indies is reproduced in Torre Revello xxv.

4Lea assessed this case of censorship on the basis of the expurgation instructions in Quiroga's Indice expurgatorio of 1584. A new edition of the Index de l'Inquisition espagnole, 1583, 1584, is in preparation by the Centre d'6tudes de la Renaissance, Universit6 de Sherbrooke, Quebec, under the direction of J. M. de Bujanda.

5 Lea (82) and Perez Pastor (cited in Medina 398) have discussed this particular case of expurgation, but they did not study it in detail.

6 The 1575 publication of the Repablicas del mundo occurred at Medina del Campo; the expurgated edition of 1595 appeared in Salamanca. In 1897, the section of the work entitled Repablicas de los Indios Occidentales was published in two volumes under the title Repablicas de Indias: Idolatria y gobierno en Mixico y Peru antes de la conquista. All citations will be identified by the year of publication of the edition used. Unfortunately, there has not been any more recent or complete edition of this work.

7 Philip II turned the Inquisition into the most effective instrument of political control of the state; see Contreras (701-13) on the apogee of the Santo Oficio (1564-1621 ) and Mohler for an excellent overview of book censorship in Spain and its implementation on New World themes. From 1556 onward, Philip used both state licensing as a means of pre-publication censorship and the Inquisition for post- publication censorship. The competing and overlapping jurisdictions of royal and ecclesiastical authorities lent confusion to the process. As Mohler (272-73) concludes, only detailed studies of individual authors can reveal the extent to which these circumstances affected publication; such is the task that orients this study.

8 As a concept, "civilization" did not come into use until the end of the seventeenth century; "policia" was its sixteenth-century near-equivalent (Rowe 7).

9 The Repiblicas del mundo is divided into three parts. Part One consists of the Repablica hebrea and the Repabli- ca christiana; Part Two, the Republica gentilica; and Part Three, a great number of "republics" given lesser coverage (Moscovia, Venecia, Genova, Ethiopia, Inglaterra, Luca, China, Fez, and the Turks). The Repablica de los Indios Occidentales receives by far the longest treatment in Part Three, occupying some seventy folios of the volume. It in turn is divided into three books: Book One concerns the religion of the Indian peoples, their gods and sacrifices; Book Two, their government, public order, and laws; and Book Three, "the other things pertinent to war and peace:" "dress, entertainments, marriage, burial, child-rearing, war,

and the destruction of the two republics of Mexico and Peru" (1897: 1: 34, 237; 2: 73-74).

10 His wish is to show how "people so remote from ourselves lived, and what rites they had in their religion, and how they governed themselves at the time when our people came to have dealings and traffic with them." For this, he says, he does not need to treat the question of origins ior measure the longitude and latitude of the lands: "Let this be the work of those charged with writing the royal histories (if they can!), because they enjoy the favors and salary of their lord and king" (Romain 1897: 2: 50).

1 He enumerates the conversions to Christianity, boast- ing that ten million Indians have been baptized in New Spain alone; not a person remains unconverted in four hundred leagues and they live "almost free" (Tamara f272r; see also ff 269v, 273r, 289r, 304r-v, 307r, 319r).

12 For chronology and dating of this work, see Wagner and Parish 287-92.

13 He gives four reasons why such activities cannot be regulated by law: 1) the faculty of avoiding sin comes from God, not human law; 2) any attempt to regulate such behavior inevitably leads to greater evil and harm to the republic; 3) to attempt to eliminate all vices is as futile as trying to control men's thoughts; and 4) the only function of law is the conservation of a just and ordered state (1897: 1: 273-74).

"Simple fornication" (between a man and woman who are both unmarried) represented a social practice generally considered innocent until the Council of Trent. It was targeted by the Inquisition from 1573, when the Suprema became particularly alarmed by such practices. In Toledo, for example, Kamen (264) calculates that "simple fornication" constituted a fifth of all cases prosecuted by the Inquisition between 1566 and 1570, a third of those between 1581 and 1585, and a fourth between 1601 and 1605. Kamen (264) asserts that fornication and blasphemy were two of the Spanish Inquisition's dominant preoccupations during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The question that still arises is whether these were real targets of the Inquisition or whether these were simply the convenient charges on which people could be convicted.

14 The Repiblica hebrea consists of two books, and its topical organization is the model followed in the other Republicas del Mundo. Book One contains the exposition of the Israelites' religion, including descriptions of sacrifices, holy places, solemn feasts, punishments for wrong- doing, and the clerical hierarchy (1575: 1: fflr-47v). The second book is devoted to "the way the republic was governed, when they had military leaders and nobles, when judges, and what reasons they had to be ruled by kings and priests." The administration of justice in the civil order, and the ceremonies associated with marriage and burying the dead, are all treated at length. The remainder of the book is devoted to sacred and canonical books, their authors, the translation of Mosaic law into other languages, and "what kind of teachers the rabbis are, what is Kabala, and Tal- mud." Concluding the book are discussions of ancient apostasy and polytheism, and "the misfortunes that these people suffered, until their reign ended" (1575: 1: ff48r- 90r).

'5 Lea (82) finds this explanation suspect, suggesting that no author would have dared to introduce such additions as those expurgated in a work of which the manuscript pages had been numbered and all prior corrections rubri- cated.

16 This phenomenon was common (Ma6rquez 26, 121). Garibay (343) complained about the burdens of his censorship chores because they interrupted his own literary work.

CENSORSHIP AND ITS EVASION: JERONIMO ROMAN AND BARTOLOME DE LAS CASAS 825

As a writer, he too had trouble with the censors in getting his Compendio de las Crdnicas published (Lea 193-96).

'~ P6rez Pastor was of the opinion that if an expurgated edition had been prepared, the Repablicas hebrea and cristiana would have been reduced to a third of their original length (cited by Medina 398). The facts are other- wise in the 1575 Lilly Library copy of the expurgated edition. The Repablica hebrea was reduced from 90 to 78 folios, and some ten folios of the Repablica cristiana had passages inked out; none were cut out. In the 1575 edition in the Lilly Library, about ninety-seven per cent of the entire original text was untouched.

18 The portions inked over are all legible today, but the ink has faded over the past four centuries. Would these deletions have been so readable then? Roman begins by noting that the feasts and solemn days of the Jewish people are many and very festive, "which I find are divided in two parts, as are ours today, because there were ordinary feasts and special ones, as we have our major feasts and the regular one which occurs every seven days. They also had their ordinary feasts, which were Saturdays, and others, that were celebrated like Sundays and from one month to another.... Now I would like to take up the first, for it is good that it be known which feasts God commanded, and which ones, afterward, were instituted by the Hebrews" (1575: 1: f30v).

19 "And if I should be asked why they do not appear, I would respond two ways, saying either they were lost after the Babylonian captivity and burned with other precious things, or upon seeing that they were not essential for the authority of the temple and synogogue, they were not put among the canonical books and thus they perished with many other books; this explanation seems to me sufficient with regard to the books that pertained to the old covenant" (Roman 1575: 1: f53r).

20 This quotation ("dignos de ser desterrados de la

reptiblica cristiana, como a gente intitil") is among the canon's remarks about the books of chivalry and what ought to befall them in Don Quijote, Part One, Ch. 47 (1: 482). Thanks to Andrew M. Shapiro for drawing my attention to this remark.

21 I use the term in two of its meanings, -affecting only the part, not the whole, and favoring one side over another, expressing biases potentially negative or positive, according to the case.

22 In this chapter of the Apologetica, Las Casas reports that a friar of "mature age and honorable," named Francisco Hernandez, had informed him that he had met an old lord of Yucatin who told him that they had an ancient religion based on a trinitarian god. If this is true, says Las Casas, then it seems that the news of the faith had spread abroad; but since it is found nowhere else in the Indies (save in Brazil where they claim to have traces of the visit of St. Thomas), then it cannot be said that they had the gospel but only that they enjoyed special blessings and great antiquity, as exem- plified by their unique architectural and written traditions.

23 Helen Rand Parish has identified Romain's statement as being of Las Casas's authorship. I am deeply grateful for her generosity in sharing her knowledge with me and for making possible the following discussion of the De exemptione. This treatise was previously described by Wagner and Parish (257) as a work of some thirty-odd leaves that was loaned, with others, to Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas in 1597 by Juan L6pez de Velasco, the official chronicler for the Council of the Indies. More recently, Parish and Weidman have translated the De exemptione into Spanish as "iLa exenci6n o la damnaci6n!"; it is fully analyzed in their Las Casas en Mixico.

24 For the circumstances that led to Las Casas's compo-

sition of the De exemptione sive damnatione, see Parish with Weidman, Las Casas en Mexico. A similar work by Las Casas, Quaestio de imperatoria potestate, was published outside of Spain after his death. As a series of dissertations on the right of kings, Las Casas argued that kings did not have limitless power but rather were the servants of nations. It is the people who make kings, who must rule for the well-being of all (Wagner/Parish 188). The Inquisition had intended to prosecute Las Casas because of these works, but evidently refrained from doing so (ibid.).

25 Rekers (3) considers it difficult to ascertain whether Arias Montano was of Jewish origin. However, his enemy Le6n de Castro pursued him for years in three countries, as though he were.

26 Thanks to Helen Rand Parish for this suggestion. 27 As recent scholarship has taken the approach that the

Inquisition was an agency of ideological control (Marquez 37; Pinto Crespo, Inquisici6n 307; idem, Control 651; Kamen 84), Lea's position of a hundred years ago again gains currency: "The matters liable to condemnation were by no means confined to heresy, but covered a wide region of morals and of ecclesiastical and secular politics, for the Inquisition was too useful an instrument of statecraft not to be effectively employed in maintaining monarchical as well as clerical absolutism."

28 Marquez (107) discusses how Fray Luis's Castilian translation and commentary of the Cantar de los Cantares were also condemned, but he emphasizes that here too the reasons were theological, not literary. The censors's quarrel was not with poetry and eloquence but with the discipline of philology, which challenged the allegorical, authoritative interpretation of Scripture based on the church fathers, and attempted to establish formal and empirical criteria that clashed with the dogmatic conceptions of the inquisitors. Philology was the cultural orientation of Christian human- ism, and it was often considered Hebraistic and rabbinical in its preference for literal rather than symbolic meanings. Its inquisitorial persecution continued to the very end of the sixteenth century (Marquez 40-41, 104-08).

29 See also the treatment of Carranza's case in Parish, "Las Casas's Spirituality," in Casas, Bartolome' 51-53.

30 Huarte's Examen de ingenios appeared on the 1585 Index of Portugual and the 1583 and 1584 Spanish indices (Torre 27). The instructions for its expurgation occupied three folios of the 1584 expurgatorio of Quiroga (Marquez 153) and some forty-four places in the work were expurgated, leaving untouched only three chapters (Torre 27). Huarte's "dangerous" views consisted in his conviction that the intellectual faculty is by itself capable of bringing humanity to the understanding of transcendental truths. Torre (29) summarizes Huarte's radical ideas: "Nature is the teacher who instructs humanity how to comport itself. The intelligent person knows the truth and consequently can discuss the true sense of sacred texts by following the "law of the letter." Marquez (171) also concludes that the censorship of Huarte de San Juan was due not to his opinions on details of dogma (the last chapter, completely suppressed, concerned the temperament of Jesus Christ), but rather his rational predilection for reducing to historical or human interpretation certain phenomena traditionally considered transcendental.

31 In his article on censorship of books on American themes, Juan Friede (60-63) attributes Rom6in's success with the censors to the posthumous influence of Las Casas. However, the latter's works, sequestered locally since 1553 in Mexico (see Parish with Weidman,Las Casas en Mxico) and 1572 in Peru (Levillier, Gobernantes vol. 4, pp. 46, 442), were delivered by royal order to Juan L6pez de


Velasco, the first official chronicler of the Indies, in 1579 (Wagner/Parish 256-57). Las Casas's writings did enjoy a great underground reputation after his death among reform activists, but the record shows that royal and conciliar officials did everything to suppress them as dangerous.

32 Rom.n telegraphs Las Casas's conclusions: The sacrifices of the ancients were more cruel than those of the Indians; the gods of the Indians were less disgusting than those of the Romans; the feasts were not as immodest and corrupt as those of the latter (1897: 1: 232-33; Casas, Obras 4: 203).

33 Roman states, for example: "Eran mis supersticiosos los del Perti que los de Nueva Espafia" (1897: 1: 65). This contrasts with Las Casas (Obras 3: 432): "A todas las cosas que les parecia tener alguna calidad sefialada...crefan tener alguna participaci6n de deidad por lo cual le tenian especial devoci6n." On solar religion in Peru, Roman declares: "...dudo yo si el Sol fue en alguna parte tan estimado y servido desde que comenz6 la idolatria" (1897: vol. 1, p. 69). Las Casas (Obras 3: 435): "...plugiese al verdadero Dios, que a ejemplo de aquel que le ignoraba, nosotros que por su benigna condescencia le cognoscemos, cerca de su servicio fu6semos tan solicitos y devotos como 61 lo era para con el Sol."

34 In the Andean account, the first people on earth ascended to heaven, and, Las Casas says, the Romans, "que se tenian por tan reptiblicos," had a similar belief regarding Romulus (Casas, Obras 4: 393; Romain 1897: 2: 9). Again substituting Las Casas's critical evaluation with sheer enthusiasm, Romain overlooks his source's discussion of the relation of fact and fiction in this origin myth to simply state that the Andeans took it to be "true and certain" (Romain 1897: 2: 8, Casas, Obras 4: 393).

35 One view quite different from Las Casas is Romin's praise for Cort6s's military leadership, which is repeated and extended in the second edition (I, 44-45; also 213). It is countered, however, by his condemnation of Cort6s's tortu- re of Cuauhtemoc, which resulted in the Mexican lord's death, as "the most evil and cruel thing that ever a man did in the world, and I place it here to be remembered in the future" (214).

36 In Chapter 241 of the Apologetica historia sumaria, Las Casas discusses the notion that the Indians might be descended from the Israelites. Taking up the apparent coincidence of some Hebrew and Amerindian words, the latter used on the island of Hispaniola, Las Casas dismisses the similarity as trivial and meaningless. On the issue of the practice of circumcision, Las Casas presents a number of classical sources to refute the notion that the coincidence of this practice is proof of common ancestry. He observes that in the ancient world there were many non-Jewish cultures that also practiced circumcision: "they were neither Jews, nor were they descended from them, nor did they have anything to do with one another" (Obras 3: 365). In this way, Las Casas puts to rest an argument brought forth regarding circumcision as practiced in Yucatan; he adds that he has heard no such reports from any other part of the Indies). Roman follows and summarizes Las Casas's arguments and ancient sources on these points and also concludes with an emphatic statement to the effect that the Indians could not be descended from the Israelites (1897: 1: 316-18).

37 Rom6.n does not repeat this discussion, at least not in the Repablica de los Indios Occidentales; however, it may be worthwhile to peruse his Repablica hebrea to see if he incorporates there this explanation of the religious inclina- tions of the ancient Israelites.

38 Toribio de Benavente Motolinia and Diego Dur6in

were among the first missionaries who inclined toward the view that the Indians were descended from the ten lost tribes of Israel (see Keen 119). For accounts of these presumably shared traits and customs that cast disparagement on both groups, see Durain 1: 1-9 and Garcia 177-314.

39 Rocha studies the opinions of Luis de Le6n and Arias Montano, to whom Rocha refers as 'my compatriot.' He recalls Arias Montano's complex arguments based on great erudition and the knowledge of Hebrew and other ancient languages, his identification of "Peru" with the Hebrew "Ophir," and the identification of Mount Sephar with the cordillera of the Andes (Rocha 62, 85). Rocha notes that Arias Montano had followed Luis de Le6n's commentary on the last chapter of Obadiah (see Metford 12), identifying the creation of the New Israel with the conquest of the Indies (Rocha 145): "Men from the Negeb will occupy the Mount of Esau,/men from the Lowlands the country of the Philis- tines;/they will occupy the land of Ephraim and the land of Samaria,/and Benjamin will occupy Gilead./The exiles from this army, the sons of Israel, will occupy Canaan as far as Zarephath;/and the exiles from Jerusalem now in Sepharad/will occupy the towns of the Negeb./Victorious,/ they will climb Mount Zion/to judge the Mount of Esau,/ and the sovereignty shall belong to Yahwey" (Obadiah 19- 21; Jerusalem Bible, 21).

Rocha includes Arias Montano among those who iden- tify the prophecies of Isaiah 18 with the discovery and conquest of the New World (Rocha 134): "Country of whirring wings/beyond the rivers of Cush,/who send am- bassadors by sea,/in papyrus skiffs over the waters./Go, swift messengers/to a people tall and bronzed,/to a nation always feared,/a people mighty and masterful,/in the country criss-crossed with rivers....At that time, offerings will be brought to Yahwey Sabaoth on behalf of the tall and bronzed nation, on behalf of the nation always feared, on behalf of the mighty and masterful people in the country criss-crossed with rivers, to the place where the name of Yahweh Sabaoth dwells, on Mount Zion" (Isaiah 18: 1-2, 7; Jerusalem Bible 1170-71). According to Rocha (133), Luis de Le6n's views about how the lost tribes were to be incorporated into the church is found in the prohibited commentary on the Song of Songs, Chapter 8.

40 A preliminary version of this essay was read at the "Books of the Americas" Conference, John Carter Brown Library, Providence, Rhode Island, June 20, 1987.

I would like to thank Helen Rand Parish for important new information, Andrew M. Shapiro for many readings and insightful commentaries; the Lilly Library, Bloomington, Indiana, and the Newberry Library, Chicago, for access to the Roman editions; and the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation for research support.

0 WORKS CITED

Alcina Franch, Jose. "Introducci6n," in Diego Andr6s Ro- cha, 1988: 7-37.

Bell, Aubrey F. G. Luis de Le6n: A Study of the Spanish Renaissance. Oxford: Oxford University, 1925.

. Benito Arias Montano. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1922.

Bennassar, Bartolom6. Inquisici6n espafiola: Poderpoliti- co y control social. 2nd ed. Barcelona: Editorial Critica, 1984.

Bujanda, J.M. de., ed. Index de l'Inquisition espagnole, 1583,1584. Qu6bec: Centre d'6tudes de la Renaissance, Universit6 de Sherbrooke, Qu6bec, (in press).

Casas, Bartolom6 de las. Apologetica historia sumaria. Obras escogidas de Fray Bartolome de Las Casas, III


y IV. Edition by Juan P6rez de Tudela Bueso. Biblioteca de Autores Espafioles, 105, 106. Madrid: Atlas, 1958.

. "De exemptione sive damnatione." In Parish with Weidman.

. Bartolome de las Casas: The Only Way: A New Restored Version. Edited by Helen Rand Parish, translated by Francis Patrick Sullivan. Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist Press, 1992.

Cervantes Saavedra, Miguel de. Don Quijote de la Mancha. Text and notes by Martin de Riquer. Barcelona: Juventud, 1985.

Contreras, Jaime. "Las coyunturas politicas e inquisitoriales de la etapa." In "El apogeo del Santo Oficio 1569-162 1" in Historia de la Inquisici6n en Espahia y America. Ed. Joaquin P6rez Villanueva y Bartolom6 Escandell Bonet, 2nd ed. Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos y Centro de Estudios Inquisitoriales, 1984. 701-13.

Durnn, Diego. Historia de las Indias de Nueva Espalia y islas de Tierra Firme. Mexico: Editora Nacional, 1967.

Friede, Juan. "La censura espafiola del siglo XVI y los libros de historia de America." Revista de historia de Ameri- ca. No. 47 (junio 1959): 45-94.

Garcia, Gregorio. Origen de los Indios del Nuevo Mundo. Estudio preliminar de Franklin Pease G.Y. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Econ6mica, 1981.

Garibay, Esteban de. Memorias, in Memorial hist6rico espaiol: colecci6n de documentos, opusculos y antigiiedades. Tomo VII. Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia, 1854.

Huarte de San Juan, J. Examen de ingenios para las cien- cias. Edited by Esteban Torre. Madrid: Editora Nacio- nal, 1976.

Huerga, A. "Los hechos y las actividades inquisitoriales en Indias (1569-1621)." In P6rez Villanueva y Escandell Bonet 1984: 919-83.

The Jerusalem Bible. Alexander Jones, General editor. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Co., 1966.

Jim6nez de la Espada, Marcos. "Correspondencia del doctor Benito Arias Montano con el licenciado Juan de Ovando."Boletin de la RealAcademia de la Historia 18 (1891): 476-98.

Kamen, Henry. La inquisici6n espaiiola, new rewritten edition. Gabriela Zayas, trans., Barcelona: Critica, 1985.

Keen, Benjamin. The Aztec Image in Western Thought. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University, 1971.

Lea, Henry Charles. Chapters from the Religious History of Spain. Philadelphia: Lea Bros., 1890.

Leonard, Irving. Books of the Brave [ 1949], rpt. New York, 1964.

Levillier, Roberto. Gobernantes del Peri: Cartas y Pa- peles, Siglo XVI. vols. 4, 5. Madrid: Imprenta de Juan Pueyo, 1924.

Llorente, Juan Antonio. A Critical History of the Inquisi- tion of Spain [1823]. Introd. Gabriel H. Lovett. Willamstown, Mass.: Joyn Lilburne, 1967.

Marquez, Antonio. Literatura e Inquisicidn en Espafia (1478-1834). Madrid: Taurus, 1980.

Medina, Jos6 Toribio. Biblioteca hispano-americana. San- tiago de Chile, 1958, t. I.

Metford, J. C. J. Dictionary of Christian Lore and Legend.

London: Thames & Hudson, 1983. Mohler, Stephen C. "Publishing in Colonial Spanish

America: An Overview." Inter-American Review of Bibliography 28 (1978): 3: 259-73.

Moral, fray Bonifacio. "Noticias de Fr. Jer6nimo Roman, sacadas principalmente de sus obras." En Roman y Zamora 1897: t. I, 13-28.

Parish, Helen Rand. "Introduction: Las Casas' Spiritual- ity-the Three Crises." In Casas, Bartolome, 9-58.

Parish, Helen Rand, with Harold E. Weidman. Las Casas en Mixico: Historia y obra desconocidas. Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Econ6mica, (in press).

P6rez Pastor, G. Bibliograffa madrileria de los siglos XVI y XVII. 3 vols. Madrid, 1891-1907.

P6rez Villanueva, Joaquin, director. La Inquisici6n espaiola: Nueva visi6n, nuevos horizontes. Madrid: Siglo XXI, 1980.

P6rez Villanueva, Joaquin y Bartolom6 Escandell Bonet. Historia de la Inquisici6n en Espafia y America, T. I. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Inquisitoriales, Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1984.

Pinto Crespo, Virgilio. Inquisici6n y control ideol6gico en la Espaiia del siglo XVI. Prologue by Joaquin P6rez Villanueva. Madrid: Taurus, 1983.

. "Control ideol6gico: censura e 'Indices de libros prohibidos.'" In P6rez Villanueva and Escandell Bonet, eds, 648-700.

Rekers, B. Benito Arias Montano (1527-1598). Lon- don: The Warburg Institute, University of London, 1972.

Rocha, Diego Andr6s. El origen de los Indios. Edited by Jose Alcina Franch. Madrid: Historia-16, 1988.

Roman y Zamora, Fray Jer6nimo. Repiblicas del mundo, divididas en XXVII libros. Medina del Campo: Francis- co del Canto, 1575.

. Repiblicas del mundo, divididas en tres par- tes. Salamanca: Juan Fernandez, 1595.

. Repiblicas de Indias: Idolatria y gobierno en Mexico y Perui antes de la Conquista. Tomos I y II. Colecci6n de libros raros y curiosos que tratan de America, 14 y 15. Madrid: Vitoriano Suarez, 1897.

Rowe, John H."Ethnography and Ethnology in the Sixteenth Century." The Kroeber Anthropological Society Papers, no. 30, pp. 1-19.

Schdifer, Ernesto. El Consejo Real y Supremo de las Indias. 2 Vols. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, 1935-1942.

Schons, Dorothy. Book Censorship in New Spain. Austin: University of Texas, 1950.

Tamara, Francisco. El libro de las costumbres de todas las gentes del mundo y de las Indias. Antwerp: Martin Nucio, 1556.

Torre, Esteban. "Introducci6n," in Huarte de San Juan 1976: 9-54.

Torre Revello, Jose. El libro, la imprenta y el periodismo en America durante la dominaci6n espafiola. Buenos Aires: Peuser, 1940.

Wagner, Henry Raup and Helen Rand Parish. The Life and Writings of Bartolomd de las Casas. Albu- querque: University of New Mexico Press, 1967.

Documents

Adorno, Rolena - Censorship and Its Evasion Jerónimo Román and Bartolomé de las Casas