Communication

Abstract

October 1, 2005To the Editors:I have given careful attention to the letter from Professor Sabine Hyland, and I would like to respond briefly. I reaffirm that the reasons for Blas Valera’s imprisonment are not clear. Of the documents available in the Inquisition of Lima section of the Archivo Histórico Nacional in Madrid, neither the letters from the Jesuits published by Antonio Egaña in Monumenta peruana, nor the letter from father Lucio Garcete addressed to the commissioner of Panama (and not to the inquisitors, as Hyland states), gives clear information concerning the reasons for his incarceration.According to Hyland, the idea that Valera was accused on account of his “potentially heretical teachings” (p. 186) emerges from the Garcete letter. This statement is not sustainable, insofar as the letter writer only expresses his doubts that Valera’s imprisonment “was for some case of the Holy Office, because it was very closely guarded and lengthy.” I do not deny that Professor Hyland has carried out extensive research in the Archivo Histórico Nacional in Madrid. The papers pertaining to the Holy Office in Peru that are deposited there contain information on many topics, but they do not shed light on everything that we would like them to. Among the hundreds of papers in the AHN-Madrid, only one mentions Blas Valera: the abovementioned letter written by Lucio Garcete. For this reason, it seems a stretch to assert that the AHN-Madrid houses “documents” concerning the case. I therefore stand by my statement that the Neapolitan manuscripts are the only documents supporting the position that Valera was imprisoned for his heretical teachings; I have written an extensive critique of the history and doubtful authenticity of these manuscripts in the Colonial Latin American Review 12, no. 1.Sincerely,