1 Primeros intentos de evangelización franciscana en Tierra Firme (1508–1533),” Archivům franciscanum historicum, L (1957), 99–118. My later investigations confirm that the Franciscan attempts to evangelize the coast regions of eastern Venezuela and the island of Margarita continued after 1534. An effort was made to erect a friary close to the fortress at Cumaná. This project was abandoned apparently in 1537 in favor of the completion of one at Cubagua and of founding one on the island of Margarita. The cedularios recently published by Enrique Otte in Caracas with the aid of the John Boulton and Eugenio Mendoza Foundations [Cedularios de la monarquía española relativos a la provincia de Venezuela (1529–1552), 2 vols., Caracas, 1959, and Cedulario de la monarquía española relativo a la isla de Cubagua (1523–1552), 2 vols., Caracas, 1961] do not change our conclusions. It should be remembered, however, that these cedularios do not contain all of the cedulas issued during the years mentioned for Venezuela and Cubagua.

2 The original, which is in reality a notarized copy made in the presence of Pimentel himself, is found in the Archivo General de Indias (AGI), Patronato, legajo 294, n. 12, In the same place there is a nineteenth-cenutry copy which is erroneously dated 1572. Apparently this was the copy used to prepare the first edition in which the original title is replaced with another which states, with manifest anachronism, that the Relación was written in 1572 in response to a questionnaire of 1577. The copyist read: “. . . it was begun on December 1, 1572.” This was the origin of the first mistake. The document was published in the Boletín de la Academia Nacional de la Historia in two issues. In the first issue the title and text of the Seville edition are reproduced; but in the second, the editor, misled perhaps by a hasty reading of the colophon, prefixed this note: “This narrative, which Don Juan Pimentel signed in Caracas on May 9, 1585, he began to write in 1572 and completed it because of the royal questionnaire of 1577.” Thus the second error of date was introduced.

3 His study, “La iglesia de San Francisco de Caracas,” appeared in the Boletín de la Academia Naciona de la Historia, XXXVI (1953), 298–302. Other authors had noted the error before Moller but his article is cited here because of the similarity of the themes. In another article, “La Santa Iglesia Catedral,” Boletín de la Academia Nacional de la Historia, XLIII (1960, 336, Father Carrocera insists on considering the Relación of Pimentel as written in 1577.

4 de Carrocera, Fray Cayetano O. F. M. Cap., “El antiguo e histórico Convento de San Francisco de Caracas y sus grandes transformaciones a través de los siglos,” Boletín de la Academia Nacional de la Historia, XLI (1958), 459–478.Google Scholar The reference is found on page 460.

5 These geographical reports concerning the Indies correspond to a general plan announced in a cedula of Philip II issued at El Escorial, May 22, 1577. Governor Pimentel commanded that the order should be carried out while at Caraballeda, November 28, 1578. Besides the report which he p repared for Caracas and its surrounding province, there are others from Venezuela such as that of El Tocuyo (December 13, 1578), Barquisimeto (January 2-May 3, 1579), and Trujillo (January 3, 1579).

6 There are reports on the first two of these expeditions in AGI, Contaduría, leg. 299, fols. 7, 10, 14, 61, 67, 74, 76, 82, 86, 94, 102. Nine of the friars brought over by Fray Andres de la Puebla were in Santo Domingo before August 30, 1567 as seen in AGI, Contaduría, leg. 1052, fol. 36v. Fray Rodrigo Manrique had arrived with twenty friars before November 19, 1569 (loc. cit., fol. 19v.). Concerning the expedition of Fray Francisco Patiño, see, AGI, Contaduría, leg. 304, fols. 42, 43, 44, 47, 50, 51, 79. One of the group of thirteen friars who came to Santo Domingo between the end of 1571 and the beginning of 1572 was Fray Antonio de Argamasilla, who was the custos until the beginning of 1572. See AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 71, lib. 3, fol. 3. Concerning the nature of the reform-commission given to Fray Francisco de Segura and the group of thirteen whom he was to bring with him, whose names are not known, consult the several cedulas of 1573 as given in AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 868, lib. 3, fols. 8 and llv, and Indiferente, leg. 2869, lib. 1, fol. 90v.

7 The original letter is found in AGI, Santo Domingo, leg 96. Shortly after it was written, the religious whom Fray Francisco de Arta was bringing for Venezuela arrived in Santo Domingo. Segura, in a letter of April 30 (loc. cit.), expresses his pleasant surprise at their coming, although he did not favor the plan that Venezuela should become an independent custody and much less than Cuba should be elevated to the same rank, as was then intended. He felt that there were very few friaries and friars. The accounts of the royal treasury officials in Santo Domingo (AGI, Contaduría, leg. 1052, fol. 37v) show us that fourteen friars in all arrived: twelve besides Fray Francisco de Arta and two servants on the ship Trinidad with Alonso Parrón as master and one friar more on a vessel of Gonzalo Vals Vello.

8 Z., María Teresa Bermejo (ed.), “Relación geográfica de la provincia de Cuycas, Trujillo, 3 enero 1579,” Boletín de la Academia Nacional de la Historia, XXVII (1942), 289–308 Google Scholar. The citation is found on page 297. One of the co-workers of Fray Francisco de Segura, whom he sent to Spain in 1576 (see the letter cited in note 7) as his procurator was Fray Cristóbal de Maldonado, who is met again in 1592–1593 as guardian of the friary in Trujillo. He was succeeded in this post by Fray Juan Peraza (AGI, Contaduría, leg. 1610).

9 AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 218. In his letter of January 17, he was responding to a cedula which cautioned him not to admit into his diocese priests or friars who had come without permission. He answers that he has not done this and that up to the present “ni cura ni fraile” had remained in that country. He admits, however, that because of the scarcity of priests he had used some of those who had landed there, such as those who came with the fleets of Juan Ponce, Diego Fernández de Serpa, and Pedro de Silva, “que todos vinieron a parar en esta tierra.” In another place of the same letter, the bishop states: “The persons at present in this jurisdiction are two Domincans, one called Fray Melchor Benavente and the other Fray Miguel de Vitoria. Both had come to the Indies with the permission of your majesty and later had come to this province for some reason. Since by the grace of God a short time ago I began some doctrinas, I have stationed them in two of these. Besides they assist from time to time in the villages of Christians. . . .” He adds that in Trujillo since two years ago, the Portuguese priest P. Bartolomé Fernández was working alone. He is old but performs his duties very well. By this letter, Bishop Agreda was trying to thwart the efforts of Governor Mazariegos to bring religious. Two years before, the same bishop had written to the king (Caracas, May 3, 1574) concerning the need for priests, that “when some friars come here, I try to keep them even though they may not be the best qualified so that they may celebrate Mass and administer the sacraments. Many times the villages would be without these sacred helps if it were not for some friars who take the place of the diocesan priests all of whom wish to pass on to the Nuevo Reino and to Popayán and to Quito. . . .” AGI, Santo Domingo, 218. (Author’s italics.) On the other hand, Oviedo, y Baños, (Historia [New York, 1940], p. 274)Google Scholar, states that as a result of the efforts in Spain of Sancho Briceño (1570) on commission by Bishop Agreda and the city of Coro, several cedulas were sent to the Domincan and Franciscan superiors on Hispaniola, ordering them to send friars to Venezuela. Although it seems that these cedulas did not have the desired effect at that time, as Oviedo y Baños observes, they and other facts which we shall mention shortly may well explain the temporary presence in Venezuela before 1575 of some Franciscans. In this way, we can understand how two Franciscans took part in the first diocesan synod celebrated apparently by Bishop Agreda in 1574 and not in 1560 as has been stated even in recent times. Thus de Lodares, Fray Baltasar, Los Franciscanos en Venezuela (Caracas, 1922), p. 4.Google Scholar

10 Letters of Mazariegos are found in AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 193. There is a copy in volume 7 of the Colección Rionegro in the Academia Nacional de la Historia in Caracas. Agreda was still attacking Mazariegos even after he had left, as can be seen in his letter of November 13, 1576 in AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 218.

11 These cedulas may be seen in AGI, Indiferente, leg. 2869, lib. 1, fols. 157, ff. His stop in Santo Domingo is dealt with in note 7. In the appendix are published the two cedulas sent to the Audiencia and the royal officials of that island specifying the help which they should give the missionaries. It is probable that the name should be written Artá since it is derived apparently from the name of the village Artá on Mallorca. However, since this is merely a conjecture, it is preferred here to write the name as it appears in the documents, without the accent

12 This memorial was published by López, Atanasio O. F. M., Archivo Ibero-Americano, XVI (1921), 36–38.Google Scholar

13 Compare with the statement of Esteban de Asensio in his Historia memorial, cap. 1.

14 See note 7.

15 AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 193; also AGI, Contaduría, leg. 1609.

18 AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 218. We have a synopsis of the letter made in the office which received it. Of the letter itself, there is only the last page unless perhaps the remainder of the letter is scattered through the bundle. This is a possibility since the bundle is made up of loose papers without pagination and without any apparent order.

17 The documents concerning the organization and the trip of the group of Fray Alonso Vidal are found in AGI, Contratación, leg. 4683, fols. 381–382, 391v, 393v, and leg. 5538, fol. 12, and in Contaduría, leg. 1053, fol. 17. The dates of these documents range from December 1579 to March, 1580. In AGI, Contaduría, leg. 1053, fol. 10v, are noted the payments of the royal officials in Santo Domingo on October 27, 1580, to the Friary of San Francisco of that city for the medicines and the sustenance of “the twelve friars of Saint Francis who came to this city enroute to the province of Caracas . . . for the entire time that they were in this city . . . four pesos . . . for each day for each friar from June 23 of the said year to October 11, on which day they sailed to continue their voyage to the province of Caracas.” According to this statement, twelve friars of the group—that is, all of the original members, less one—should have sailed from Santo Domingo for Caracas in October, 1580. Yet, Fray Francisco de Rojas, who was a member of that expedition even though his name does not appear in the official lists which are now at our disposal (a fact which should persuade us to use caution when appraising these lists) said in 1587 that of the twelve friars “no more than three arrived, the remainder died because of the bad weather.” Rojas asked that thirty more friars be sent. AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 221. The trip of Fray Alonso Vidal to Spain began before January 9, 1579. He carried good credentials, among them a letter of Bishop Agreda. But the bishop with his customary fickleness soon changed his mind and, in a letter of the same date written at Nueva Valencia, rectified his recommendation, writing, among other things: “Afterwards I learned here with certainty that his Order took his habit from him and that he is even considered a mestizo. He is not educated but has only the external appearances of learning. After his departure certain lapses have come to light and on this account it would be better that he should not return to this country.” AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 218.

18 AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 218. Rionegro (Vol. VIII, fol. 7) dates what seems to be the same letter as of January 30, 1581. The difference in dates does not dimmish the value of the testimony as far as our point is concerned.

19 Reference to the supplying of provisions and equipment for this group are dated in February and March, 1580, and can be found in AGI, Contratación, leg. 4683, fols. 387–388, 390v-391, and leg. 5538, fol. 11. The friars came from New Castille. Payment for the transportation of the friars in accordance with a cedula issued in Madrid, April 22, 1580, was listed by the royal officials of Santo Domingo among the accounts paid in 1580, but there is no other date. AGI, Contaduría, leg. 1053, fol. 36.

20 Already on September 24, 1580, Fray Alonso de las Casas, Commissary of the Province of the Holy Cross of Hispaniola and “of the territories of Caracas and Venezuela,” had promulgated in Santo Domingo some rules for the Poor Clare monastery of that city. These were to cause him some trouble later on and even, according to a letter of those nuns of August 8, 1584, were the reason why the President of the Audiencia, Cristóbal de Ovalle, exiled him to Caracas, “whence he frets us.” (The letters of these nuns are found in AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 96, ramo 3.) While it is prudent to reserve judgment concerning the accusations of the nuns against this friar, their letters do point up the fact that Fray Alonso de las Casas was in Venezuela in 1584. Evidence for the rules issued for the Poor Clare monastery is found in Torrubia, Fray José, Chronica de la religion de N.P.S. Francisco. Novena parte (Rome, 1765)Google Scholar, lib. I, cap. 19, n. 135. Torrubia had access to the general archives of the Franciscan Order. He was a chronicler of good critical judgment.

21 The declaration of Fray Mirueña was dated in March, 1593, and is found in AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 15. The “room” where the friars were living had been constructed some seven years earlier, that is, towards the end of 1585 or the beginning of 1586. Martín de Gámiz, an old inhabitant of Caracas, refers in his declartion to the time when “the friars moved to the said monastery and room which had been built.”

22 The letter of Rojas as well as that of Osorio are found copied in the Colección Rionegro (Academia Nacional de la Historia, Caracas) Vol. VIII, fols. 88v and 135, respectively. Both are said to be copies of their originals in the Archives of the Indies. The letter of Rojas is indeed found there (AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 193), but the reference given in Rionegro for the letter of Osorio does not seem to be exact and it has not been possible to locate the original and compare it with the copy.

23 The testimony of Fray Juan Ortiz de Valdivieso was given in May, 1598, and is found in AGI, Santo Domingo, leg. 15. The regidor Mateo Díaz de Alfaro adds the detail that the church had been begun four years before. With the donations gathered since that time, they have been able to bring the work “hasta enrasarla.” The grant voted by the City Council is recorded in Actas del Cabildo de Caracas (Caracas, 1943), I, 493. In the royal account books of Venezuela for the years 1592–1598, several entries appear for the Friary of San Francisco of Caracas and a few for the church. In 1598, the community there numbered eleven friars. See AGI, Contaduría, leg. 1610, fols. 2, 3, 5, and 21 of the part entitled “Data.”