The Abecedario and A Check-List of Mexican Inquisition Documents at the Henry E. Huntington Library

In 1907 Walter Douglas purchased forty-six volumes of Mexican Inquisition documents for $1,500 from Michael Blake, a dealer in old books and manuscripts in Mexico City. Mr. Douglas bequeathed these to the Henry E. Huntington Library and Art Gallery of San Marino, California. Previously, they had been offered for sale to Henry C. Lea.¹ Thirty-one volumes of the forty-seven had been offered by E. Nott Anable to Elken N. Adler of England. Mr. Adler published a partial description of them as an Appendix to his Auto de Fe and Jew.²

No cheek-list has heretofore been published of the contents of the forty-six volumes. This article will discuss some of the findings to be adduced from volume 2, “Abecedario” and its relationship to volume 1, “List of Inquisition Trials from 1525 to 1811.”

There is considerable inaccuracy and lack of concern for detail and consistency, resulting in many omissions in both volumes and variances between them. The secretariat and other officialdom of the Inquisition paid little heed to spelling, dates, and chronological order. The “Abecedario” is not a running account kept by each secretary of the Inquisition, but was compiled sometime after 1715. The “List” was supposedly prepared at divers times over the course of the three centuries it covers. The “Abecedario” has only ten entries after 1700 and none after 1709. For some unexplained reason the secretariat was directed to prepare the “alphabetical” summary. One conjecture was that about 1720 a visitador came to New Spain to investigate the affairs of the Inquisition. The list may have been prepared for him.

The “Abecedario” is not an alphabetical list in our sense of the word. Under each letter the names appear in (more or less) chronological order. However, few are listed by family name. Under “A” are Ana, Antonio, Álvaro, and so forth; all first or Christian names. Many women, neither of whose names begin with “D,” appear under that letter because their names were preceded by the title “Doña.” The same occurs with members of religious orders who are listed under “F” because “Fray” preceded their names. Maestro Nicolas de Hales, a Flemish surgeon, appears under “M.” In spite of its shortcomings, the “Abecedario” serves to fill many lacunae in our knowledge of life in colonial Mexico as it is revealed in the Inquisition trials.

We learn that many and varied legajos were in existence. In the entry of Juan de Jérez, a Negro slave, we read that he received 100 lashes in the public streets of Puebla on June 9, 1632, for having blasphemed or denied (renegado) Jesus and the saints and ends “legajo 10 de negros y mulatos y otras personas que reniega” (bound volume of documents #10 of Negroes and mulattoes and other persons who blaspheme). There were legajos for those publicly penanced outside of an auto and others for those penanced in the hearing or trial room of the Audiencia.

This document and the “List” make obsolete comments such as, “Less than a century after its establishment in 1570 the Inquisition in New Spain … had passed its apogee. The great auto de fe of 1649, … appears to have been the culminating spectacle of this character in the viceregal capital,…”³

There were at least 541 trials conducted by the Inquisition from 1650 to 1800. This number is a minimum because no attempt has been made to make a complete comparison of all the trials before the Holy Office as they appear in the two volumes. A preliminary study of the first few years after 1571 (the year the Tribunal was established in Mexico) shows many cases in the “List” that do not appear in the “Abecedario” and vice versa.

For the years 1528 to 1550 there are 92 names of prisoners in the “List” which do not appear in the “Abecedario” and there are 43 names in the latter document that are not listed in the former. The “List” contains only names and dates. It is inexplicable how or why the names of Hernando Alonso and Gonzalo de Morales, among many others, were omitted from the “List.” These two men were burned at the stake in 1528 for heresy, and records of their trials are in the Mexican National Archives.⁴ Many famous names appear in the “List,” such as Don Carlos of Texcoco, the great Indian cacique and grandson of Netzahualcóyotl, but are absent from the second volume.

There is a partial explanation for some discrepancies. The “List” is an Inventario de los expedientes, etc. while the “Abecedario” is de los Relajados, Reconciliados y Penitenciados. Many expedientes were instituted by denunciation, information, and the like, but not all cases proceeded to final judgment. The “Abecedario” should contain all cases that fall into this latter category but, unfortunately, it is incomplete. This fact will be discussed at length below.

The Abecedario

My paleographed copy consists of 163 single-spaced pages in length, and it contains 1734 entries. With few exceptions, each entry is of a single individual. For the period from 1528 (the first year) to 1590, most entries are brief. For those after 1590, more information is supplied, but for practically every individual the place of birth, the nature of the charge against him, and the final sentence are set forth.

Regrettably, many dates of the sentences were omitted. Often, the date cannot even be ascertained by the position of the entry between that immediately preceding and that following, even if both are dated. Recourse was had to José Toribio Medina,⁵ Richard E. Greenleaf,⁶ or my own work⁷ to learn the date. Most entries also reveal the residence at the time of the commission of the crime and many contain the trade or occupation of the accused.

With respect to those accused of judaizante, “observing the law of Moses,” or being a Jew (these were three separate charges), the names of parents, spouses, and children and their ages also appear. Similar data is not supplied for those accused of Lutheranism or belonging to other Protestant sects.

Negroes and mulattoes are described as such, and their status as slave or free seems never to have been omitted. Some unusual descriptive terms appear, such as negro criollo and negro ladino. Most historians have employed criollo as a term for the Mexican-born child of European parents. Now we see that it was also used for Mexican-born Negroes of Negro parents. Negro ladino refers to a Negro who could speak Spanish understandably. The use of the term for less than half of the Negroes before the Inquisition should suggest a serious problem of communication between master and slave.

The word “judaizante” has generally been translated as “one who resorts to or performs Jewish practises.” The word also meant a Jew and was so employed even though the words Judío and hebreo are also found.

The conduct, nature, and number of autos de fe is clarified. The number constitutes a correction of Joaquín García Icazbalceta’s classic work.⁸ García lists 13 public autos between 1528 and 1795 in which 41 persons were burned alive and 99 in estatua (in effigy). He made no list of autos particulares or autillos. Of course, for at least three decades, his figures on the number of public autos de fe have been known to have been greatly underestimated. There were over 100 in Mexico City alone. In addition to the autos, however, many were penanced publicly fuera de auto (outside of an auto). While none of these penances fuera de auto involved the stake, there were severe penalties imposed such as that of Diego Hojeda who, in 1582, received 200 lashes and was consigned to the galleys.

In the sixteenth century (1527-1599) there were only 17 years in which no one was penanced. In the seventeenth century there were only 11 years without one or more penitents. The period from 1639 to 1644 inclusive (six of the aforesaid 11 years) covered a period when the Inquisitors had apprehended over 100 Jews. Lack of final judgment in any year thus does not indicate lack of activity.

While cases of “Lutheranism” appear as early as 1537, Calvinism is first mentioned in 1601. It may be remembered that prior to that year, all Protestants were grouped under Lutheranism as a generic term.

Classifications

The total of 1744^* individual crimes have been broken down into the following classifications:

Some comments on the classifications are in order. “Blasphemy” was used in the “Abecedario.” Dr. Greenleaf’s Zumárraga and the Inquisition makes it clear that the word covered a multitude of oral sins. “Heretical statements” include not only those words so characterized by the compiler of the “Abecedario” but also such charges as palabras malsonantes.

Among those found guilty of “administering of sacraments” were priests and monks whose ordination did not include the privilege of administering all the sacraments. A great many of the priests and monks were guilty of hearing confessions without having the right to do so, and a few preached without license.

“Disrespect” is self-explanatory and requires no comment. “Solicitation” referred to the request of the confessor of his hijas espirituales (spiritual daughters) to engage in carnal relations. The secular clergy (34 of them) constitute the largest group of malefactors in this category. They are followed by the Franciscans (30); Dominicans (10); Carmelites (nine); Augustinians (eight); Jesuits (six); and one from Our Lady of Mercy, and there was a Franciscan among the bigamists. Another Franciscan, Domingo de Sosa, died in 1620 in jail where he had been incarcerated for being a Jew and for blasphemy. He was reconciled in effigy outside of a public auto. Not included in this category are the cases of solicitation of some young boys for acts of sodomy. The solicitors were men of the orders.⁹

“Simple fornication” appears either in those words or in the statement simple fornicación no es un pecado. The statement meant that sexual relations between two unmarried people of opposite sexes was not a wrong. The Church or Inquisition obviously did not share this view and apprehended and castigated the utterer of these words. They considered adultery as inclusive of all extramarital sexual indulgence regardless of the marital status of the actors.

“Witchcraft and sorcery” constituted a catch-all category. “Unclassified” includes those unspecified crimes as well as perjury, incest, other illicit sexual relationships, possession of prohibited books, priests living with women and siring children, revelations, Alumbrado, carrying messages to and from the prisoners in the secret cells of the Inquisition, a term consistently used in the document, impersonating officials of the Inquisition, astrology, being a Moslem, beating or defacing figures of Christ or the saints, and others.

“Bigamy” is self-explanatory. It includes several who were guilty of having three spouses. There were several slaves who enjoyed the company of more than one spouse, each thinking that she was the legitimate wife. Adherence to Church law was imposed upon the slaves. The ability to have more than one spouse indicated that many slaves had certain freedoms which included great mobility. Often Negro slaves were sent on long trips without custodians. Bigamy was not confined to males, for there were several women who practiced polyandry without the knowledge of their respective husbands.

Many suspects are listed in the “Abecedario,” but they were rarely found guilty. Contrary to popular belief, on the other hand, there were some acquittals and the return of property that had been sequestered by the Inquisitors’ constables (usually at time of arrest). Seventy-two such acquittals are listed in the document. Of these, 31 absueltos were rendered prior to 1574, by which time the Holy Office had been completely organized and had begun to pass on cases which it had instituted.

Punishments

Heretofore, Joaquín García Icazbalceta’s statistics have been cited on those burned at the stake. While the “Abecedario” reveals 49 as the number burned alive, the number is for the years 1528 to 1704, while García Icazbalceta’s includes the years through 1795. There are other statistics gleaned from the “Abecedario” which suggest that, contrary to belief, the Mexican Inquisition was not much milder than its counterpart in Spain. To the best of my knowledge, figures such as the following have never been taken into account:

The sentences “to serve at the disposition of Governors and “to serve in hospitals” became frequent after 1670. Lashes were administered without discrimination as to sex, with the criminal stripped to the waist and subjected to objects thrown by the onlookers as well as the scourge. The only wrongdoers spared the lash were members of religious orders. They also made infrequent appearances at public autos.

With almost no exception, bigamists were consigned to the galleys. The fact that the male left two women (and sometimes three) each with children and that there were problems of food and clothing for all of them in the absence of a provider seemed to be of no concern to the Inquisitors. Their zeal to uphold the sacrament of marriage transcended the rights of the individual women and children to have someone serve as their means of support. This aspect of punishment, the placing of the importance upon the wrong done the Church rather than the possible injury to innocent individuals, is deserving of study.

Mention of the incompleteness of the “Abecedario” has been made. The Guide to Jewish References in Mexican Colonial Era has an alphabetical list of over 800 individuals for the same period covered by the document. These names of Jews are only those culled from the procesos in the Mexican National Archives. As against this figure, there are only 378 Jews mentioned in the Huntington instrument. This would establish that many names are missing from the compilation. The name of Luis de Carvajal, el mozo, reconciled in 1590, is among those not appearing for that year although his 1596 sentence is recorded. On the other hand many names not in the Guide (which was based on personal research in the Archives) or in the works of Medina, Greenleaf, or Genaro Garcia’s Documentos inéditos o muy raros para la historia de México, are included.¹⁰

Yolanda Mariel de Ibáñez made a statistical study in the Mexican Archives of Inquisition proceedings,¹¹ limiting her study to the years 1522 to 1599. Without doing a detailed analysis and comparison between her findings and those of the “Abecedario,” a few comments will corroborate the incompleteness of the latter. She reports 84 Jews against 78; she has 246 cases of bigamy for 77 years against 127 for the same period. Similar disparities appear for every category with the “Abecedario” always having lesser figure. The Ibáñez work contains only numerical statistics, for she did not supply names. It is therefore difficult to ascertain those that are missing.

One of the facts not disclosed by the “Abecedario” is the amount of fines and value of property confiscated by the Inquisitors or as it should be written, “by the Inquisition.” Without going too far afield and based on reports by visitadores such as Medina del Rico, there is reason to believe that the Inquisitors personally profited as much if not more than the Holy Office by the total consfication of the property of hundreds of prisoners.

The Jews were the ones who suffered total loss of their worldly wealth. When there were fines the amount is stated. There were several who paid fines running into the thousands of ducats; the largest was 20,000 ducats, and was paid by a Jew. After 1659 most Jews paid substantial fines, and there does not seem to be the total loss of property and perpetual exile as formerly.

In 1667 Baltazar Pereyra was convicted for being a Jew and while he was to abjure de vehementi and required to wear a sambenito, he was fined only 2,000 pesos aplicados para gastos del santo oficio (applied to the expenses of the Holy Office). Many fines were so indicated but some added the adjective “extraordinary” before the word “expenses.” Jorge Ramírez de Montilla of Querétaro was fined the 20,000 ducats in 1648 “para gastos extraordinarios.” This would be the proverbial king’s ransom. He was not lashed nor exiled, as were practically all other Jews between 1646 and 1649. While the Jews suffered the penalty of the stake almost exclusivley, Pedro García de Arias, fifty years of age, and a dogmatista of the sect of Alumbrados, was burned in the general auto de fe of November 19, 1652.

The age of prisoners ranged from a low of 12 years to a high of 85. Punishment was impersonal and fairly impartial regardless of age or physical condition. A blind man of 67 was convicted as a bigamist and sentenced to receive 200 lashes and then to serve for six years in an ironworks.

Breaches of Jurisdiction

In spite of the rules of the Inquisition that had been the law of the Tribunal since the days of Torquemada,¹² the “Abecedario” reveals numerous breaches by the Inquisitors. We find torture being applied twice to the same individual, e.g., Isabel López Cardado, who died two months later, and the stay in the cells before sentence sometimes ran into the years. Juan Rodríguez del Bosque was imprisoned July 13, 1642, until the public auto of April 16, 1646, and Juana Enríquez was incarcerated from 1642 to 1648. Ferdinand de Medina, alias Moisés Gómez, was in jail from 1691 to 1699, when he was finally burned. There are many cases that indicate even a longer imprisonment prior to the auto. Hearings were delayed for weeks or months.

Among the breaches committed by the Inquisitors was taking jurisdiction of cases which did not involve matters of the Faith. One of the cases over which they presided involved a man who stole a valise of clothing belonging to an Inquisitor. There is no indication of whether any of the Inquisitor’s clerical garb was in the valise. The culprit, Gaspar de la Cruz, a free mulatto, received 200 lashes, was penanced in the Hall of the Audiencia and exiled for two years.

Another aspect of violation of proper jurisdictional bounds was the trial of Lutherans, Jews, and Moors who had never been baptized and were never members of the Catholic Church. “By what sophistry could the Jews [and the others] be included in the category of heretics? Heresy implies a deviation from a prescribed and accepted course but not refusal to pursue that course ab initio.”¹³ Few of the non-Catholics were ever charged with herejías. Every Protestant was accused of being a Lutheran or Calvinist. With respect to the Jews, there were the three charges already mentioned: judaizante, being a Jew, or being an observer of the Law of Moses.

The word “judaizante” deserves philological study. Dr. Greenleaf defines it as “the term applied to Jewish pseudo-converts to Catholicism who were discovered practising and teaching the old religion.”¹⁴ Trachtenberg gives it a similar meaning by terming judaizing “the commonest charge against the heresies” which inspired schismatic sects.¹⁵ Jewish practices by one who had been baptized would be subject to the jurisdiction of the Holy Office as a deviating Catholic.

The Inquisition also used other terms to indicate Judaism. “Hebreo” was used and is to be distinguished from hebreo-cristiano. The inference, and in many cases the fact, was that the victim had never been inducted into Catholicism. Margarita Morera and Micaela Enríquez were charged as being Jewesses observing the Mosaic laws. There is no indication of heresy in numerous cases of non-Catholics.

The aforementioned two females were both born in Mexico and their ages indicate that Jews had resided in Mexico for many years. A case that arouses curiosity is that of the fifty-year-old Pedro Carretero, alias Pedro de la Varga, born in Tlaxcala, who in 1696 gave falso testimonio de haber cometido diferentes delitos de judaismo a una imagen de Nuestro Señor Jesucristo y estar testificado de diferentes supersticiones y embustes. He was sentenced as an imposter, given 200 lashes, and sentenced to six years in the Philippine galleys “without pay.” The case is mentioned because of the use of the word “judaismo.” More than 22 per cent of the cases in the “Abecedario” involved Jews.

Being reconciled, which meant re-acceptance into the Church, did not serve to alleviate the penalty for having lapsed or having been born and raised as a Lutheran. The year 1574 witnesses the trials of several Englishmen, Irishmen, and Germans all “reconciled” and then lashed and sent to the galleys.

Visitors to New Spain were also subject to the jurisdiction of the Holy Office. There were many prior to 1571, and a few thereafter who were punished for blasphemy or other untoward liberties of speech. Fines were the usual punishment and the notations appear that they were visitors to New Spain. Among the non-residents of Mexico was Julio de Araujo, a Portuguese resident of Caracas. He escaped from the Inquisition prior to 1649 and was burned in effigy because he had died in Caracas. There were several families from Peru, including some fugitives from the Inquisition of Lima.

Names

The existence of aliases was almost commonplace. Some had as many as three and four names. Sons and daughters did not necessarily carry either the family names of their father or mother. Duarte de Torres, for example, was the son of Gerónimo Rodríguez and Luisa Enríquez. The names of many married women appear without the names of their husbands. Another illustration is Pedro Gómez who was the son of Duarte Rodríguez and Clara Tejoso. Josefa Cruz was the wife of Duarte de Torres. While the foregoing practice was very common among the Jews, it occurred also with great frequency among the Christians.

There were many who used the maiden names of their mothers as their family names. Francisco Febo appears as the son of Juan Rodríguez Núñez de Castro and Catalina Febo. Francisco de Campos was the son of Alvaro Núñez and Doña Gridonia de Campos.

The plague of poor spelling is very evident in the names. An innocuous example is “Cerveron” in the “Abecedario” and Cervero as used by Dr. Greenleaf who studied the proceso itself.

Among the mestizos, Negroes, and mulattoes, the family names of “de la Cruz” and “de la Concepción” were predominant. These were obviously baptismal names given by the officiating priest or monk.

Concluding Observations

The “Abecedario” is a most human document. It presents a vivid portrayal of many aspects of life in the first two centuries of Mexican colonial life. It represents more than its name or a description thereof would imply. It is of historical import in every sense of the word.

Treatment of slaves and mestizos is evident. Variance in punishments may have been due to influence and then again it may have been due to the facts in the individuals cases. That many slaves were disloyal to their masters is apparent. There is, of course, no mention of those who were kind or merciful, but the relationship between cruel treatment and a scorn for statues of Christ and the saints is obvious from the number of those who were apprehended for beating the statues or for blasphemy against Jesus.

The long arm of the Inquisition extended to the Philippines, which were under the jurisdiction of the viceroy of Mexico. Sebastián Gutiérrez, born in Mexico, was a soldier in the Philippines. He wks arrested in 1620 because he had previously fought on the side of Holland against Spain and had been a Calvinist. His proceso would make an interesting study.

Search must be made for the many legajos referred to in the document. New facts are presented to Latin American historians. The task ahead is a challenge of translation, study, and interpretation.

List of Mexican Inquisition Documents At the Huntington Library Bequeathed by Mr. Walter Douglas^*

• Vol. 1. List of Inquisition trials, 1525-1811. The original “borrador” with entries made from time to time by different, secretaries of the Mexican Inquisition.

• Vol. 2. “Abecedario” of all prisoners, 1525 to the eighteenth century.

• Vol. 3. Tlaxcala. Trial of Francisco Yanes, for stealing a statue, two sambenitos. 1578.

• Vol. 4. Trial of Pedro Oñate for soliciting. 1581.

• Vol. 5. Trial of Fr. Cornelio de Vie for soliciting. 1582.

• Vol. 6. Trial of Luis de Ayala for soliciting. 1595.

• Vol. 7. Trial of Leonor Rodríguez for Judaism. 1597.

• Vol. 8. Trial of Fray Buenaventura de Salinas for soliciting. 1597.

• Vol. 9. Trial of Francisco de León for soliciting. 1598.

• Vol. 10. Letters and communications. 1601. [Marked No. 31.]

• Vol. 11. Trial of Leonor de Cáceres for being a Jewess. 1601.

• Vol. 12. Denunciation against Bartolomé Barba and others for heresy. 1602.

• Vol. 13. Trial of Gerónimo Rivera for bigamy. 1602.

  Trial of Fr. Joseph Pérez de Ugarte for posing as an officer of the Inquisition. 1603.

• Vol. 14. Trial of Francisco Muñoz for soliciting. 1609.

  Information re: limpieza de sangre of Pedro de la Requera and Doña Francisca Villa Verde, his wife. 1613.

  Information 43. Fr. Frechel, an Augustinian. Valladolid 1617.

• Vol. 15. Trial of Fr. Esteban Rodríguez of Tlaxcalilla for soliciting boys in the confessional. 1629.

• Vol. 16. Trial of Pedro Martir Palao for soliciting boys in the confessional. 1622.

  Trial of Sebastial Domínguez for bigamy. 1624.

• Vol. 17. Trial of Baltazar del Valle, Portuguese, for being a Jew 1634.

  Documents re: nobility of Don Frutus Gómez Casillas de Solórzano Velasco.

• Vol. 18. Trial of Pedro Martir Palao for soliciting in the confessional. 1624.

• Vol. 19. Trial of Francisco de St. Joseph for blasphemy. 1625.

  Trial of Pedro de Alamilla for soliciting. 1625.

• Vol. 20. Trial of Fr. Domingo Ramos for soliciting. 1626.

• Vol. 21. Veracruz. Trial of Doña Antonio Bello for heresy. 1626.

• Vol. 22. Trial of Pedro Rodríguez for reciting mass without ordination. 1631.

  Testimony re: Father Rodrigo de Rivero. 1633.

• Vol. 23. Trial of Baltazar del Valle for being a Jew. 1634-44. Continuation.

  Documents re: Francisco de Vidaurre of Manila and his wife Doña Isabel Herrera. 1621-38.

• Vol. 24. Trial of Simón López de Aguarda for observing the Law of Moses. 1642.

  Trial of Jorge Jacinto for observing the Law of Moses. 1642.

• Vol. 25. Trial of Doña Francisca Texodo (Texoso) for being a Jewess. 1642.

  Trial of Jorge de Montoya for being a Jew. 1642.

• Vol. 26. Trial of Francisca Ruiz for heresy. 1642.

  Trial of Diego Juárez de Figueroa for being a Jew. 1642.

• Vol. 27. Trial of Antonio for being a Jew. 1642.

  Trial of Diego de San Martir for bigamy. 1642.

• Vol. 28. Trial of Doña Isabel Texosso for being a Jewess. 1642-59.

• Vol. 29. Trial of Catalina Enriquez for observing the Law of Moses. 1643.

  Trial of Gaspar de Fonseca for heresy.

  Trial of Juan Agustín for bigamy. 1642.

• Vol. 30. Trial of Lorenzo de Torquemada for making himself a minister of the Holy Office. 1643.

  Trial of Francisco Razin (Rassen) for heresy. 1643-53.

• Vol. 31. Trial of Margarita Morera, Jewess. 1643. (Unbound.)

• Vol. 32. Information concerning the genealogy of Capt. Gaspar de Armas of Guatemala. 1647.

• Vol. 33. Trial of Joseph Brunon de Vertiz for apostasy. 1649.

• Vol. 34. Publication of the “Edicto General de la Fee” and the letter of anathema in the Real de Minas, Chichicapa. 1650. Also other documents.

• Vol. 35. Trial of Juan Manuel, a mestizo, for apostasy. 1652.

  Trial of Juan Rodríguez. 1672.

• Vol. 36. Trial of Juana Gutiérrez for witchcraft. 1655.

  Trial of Luis Ramé, alias Ramírez, for heresy. 1658.

• Vol. 37. Denunciation against Melchor Dias de Posadas for blasphemy. 1661.

  Trial of Pedro Correa for blasphemy. 1666.

• Vol. 38. Testimony against Pedro Correa.

  Trial of María Garcés for witchcraft. 1678.

• Vol. 39. Trial of Lic. de Sebastián Balaños for soliciting. 1692 (Guatemala).

• Vol. 40. Trial of Fr. Cristobal Basurte for having married. 1693.

  Trial of Ignacio Corabazel for soliciting. 1787.

• Vol. 41. Trial of Alexandre Suárez de Mezquita for Judaism. 1718.

  Trial of Gabriel Clemente Ferris.

• Vol. 42. Decrees concerning the Holy Tribunal. 1718. (8 vo. vol., 12 pages)

• Vol. 43. Trial of Fr. Francisco de San Juan de la Cruz for soliciting. 1762.

• Vol. 44. Case against Fr. Francisco Caveres and Manuel Fernández Domínguez. 1775.

• Vol. 45. Case against Fr. Domingo Mauriño. 1771-1792.

• Vol. 46. Trial of Fr. Eusebio Villarejo for apostasy. 1788.

  Mr. Douglas’ bequest included another document which was not an Inquisition document and is included in order to complete the inventory.

• Vol. 47. Sta. Isabel, Guatemala, Libro de Matrimonios. 1743-1805.

Author notes