Toward a History of Missionary Work by German-Speaking Jesuits in 17th and 18th Century Latin...

This is a contribution from Historiographia Linguistica 37:1/2© 2010. John Benjamins Publishing Company

This electronic file may not be altered in any way.The author(s) of this article is/are permitted to use this PDF file to generate printed copies to be used by way of offprints, for their personal use only.Permission is granted by the publishers to post this file on a closed server which is accessible to members (students and staff) only of the author’s/s’ institute, it is not permitted to post this PDF on the open internet.For any other use of this material prior written permission should be obtained from the publishers or through the Copyright Clearance Center (for USA: www.copyright.com). Please contact [email protected] or consult our website: www.benjamins.com

Tables of Contents, abstracts and guidelines are available at www.benjamins.com

John Benjamins Publishing Company

Toward a History of Missionary Work by German-Speaking Jesuits in 17th and 18th Century Latin America*

Otto ZwartjesUniversity of Amsterdam

The Society of Jesus was founded by the Navarrese Iñigo López de Recaldo, better known as Ignatius de Loyola (1491–1556). After Ignatius de Loyola obtained papal approval in 1540, his Order quickly became an enormous success. In 1551, the Jesuit College was founded in Rome, and by the time Loyola died in 1556, there were 46 Jesuit colleges in Europe, Brazil and India, with some 1,500 mem-bers (Alden 1996: 16–17). The Society was particularly present in Italy, France, the German-speaking territories, Eastern Europe, particularly the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the Iberian Peninsula. In 1767 the Jesuits were expatriated from the Portuguese and Spanish Empires, France, the two Sicilies and Parma, and in 1773 Pope Clement XIV formally suppressed the Order of the Jesuits. It was revived in 1814 by Pope Pius VII.

There are a great number of studies that deal with the Jesuits generally (Worcester 2008), or the Jesuits in specific areas, such as the Portuguese territo-ries (Alden 1996), in Germany (Duhr 1907–1928), France (Fouqueray 1913–1924) and elsewhere. It is well known that the Jesuits came from different European na-tions and that all served a common goal: spreading the faith. The Society of Jesus “was instituted to serve or glorify the Lord and His Vicar on earth, and specially to promote the spiritual progress of souls in Christian doctrine and living, and the propagation of the faith, by means of a wide variety of ministries” (Loyola, Consti-tutions, cited in Alden 1996: 24). Portugal and Spain became the ‘springboard’ for

* On the occasion of: Desde los confines de los imperios ibéricos: Los jesuitas de habla alemana en las misiones americanas ed. by Karl Kohut & María Cristina Torales Pacheco. (= Textos y estudios coloniales y de la Independencia, 16.) Frankfurt/Main: Vervuert; Madrid: Iberoamericana, 2007, xxxvii, 741 pp. ISBN: 978-84-8489-321-9 (Iberoamericana) / 978-3-86527-364-2 (Vervuert) € 68.00 (PB). — The author of this review article would like to thank both the editor and the review editor for their careful attention to the preparation of the final text.

Historiographia Linguistica XXXVII:1/2 (2010), 145–163. doi 10.1075/hl.37.1/2.06zwaissn 0302–5160 / e-issn 1569–9781 © John Benjamins Publishing Company

© 2010. John Benjamins Publishing CompanyAll rights reserved

146 Otto Zwartjes

Jesuit enterprises on four continents, and their members came both from the vari-ous territories of the Iberian Peninsula, where different languages were spoken, and from different nations in Europe. Yet the question of the geographical origins of the members of the Jesuit order has scarcely been a topic of systematic research. Can we distinguish between Jesuits from Spain, from Portugal, the Austro-Hun-garian Empire, etc.? Is it even a legitimate question, given that we know that the Jesuit Order is a priori a supra-national and universalistic enterprise, not limited to a specific linguistic area, nor governed by national boundaries? I shall return to this matter at the end of this article.

The book under review is a collection of articles devoted to the Jesuits in the Spanish Empire who had German as their native language. Nearly all of the papers were presented at a conference organized in Mexico City (12–15 September 2005), entitled “Diversidad en la unidad: Los jesuitas de habla alemana en Iberoamérica, siglos XVI–XVII”, coordinated by Manuel Ramos Medina, Alicia Mayer and the two editors of this volume, Karl Kohut and María Cristina Torales Pacheco. As we learn from the preface, researchers from 23 academic institutions participated, and of a total number of 28 articles published, only four are by authors who had not taken part in the meeting. This means that the book constitutes a volume of proceedings, rather than a collection of selected papers. The authors have different backgrounds: some are Jesuits, others are historians (or both), art historians, mu-sicologists, ethnographers, etc., with few linguists. The articles of greatest interest to historians of linguistics are found in Section 4 of the volume (see below).

In the introductory essay, Karl Kohut (xv–xxxvii) explains why he prefers the term ‘German-speaking’ in the title (“Los jesuitas de habla alemana en las misio-nes americanas”) to ‘German Jesuits’ (‘jesuitas alemanes’, or ‘germanos’), a term that risks being anachronistic if we refer to today’s maps of the German territories, for the German territories of Europe once included territories which are today independent states, such as Austria or Poland. Another complicating factor is that the term ‘the German language’ also leads to confusion (p. xvii). For instance, there are Jesuit fathers from Bohemia who had Czech as their native tongue, and even within the German-speaking territories, there were speakers of different varieties and dialects. The author justifies the choice of the word ‘German-speaking’ (‘habla alemana’) by stating that the German language was a constant and common fac-tor among all those Jesuits who had German as their native tongue, or who came from territories where German was deeply rooted, or where German was used in the educational practices of the Jesuits, even if they had a different native tongue, as was often the case, for instance, in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The Spanish adjective ‘alemán’ means ‘German’ (in German, ‘deutsch’), i.e. 1) ‘of, or pertain-ing to Germany or its inhabitants’; ‘native to or originating in Germany’; ‘charac-teristic of or attributed to Germans or Germany’; 2) ‘belonging to, written in, or


History of Missionary Work by German-Speaking Jesuits in 17th and 18th Century Latin America 147

spoken in the German language’, and ‘German-speaking’ is the English translation of ‘habla alemana’. The Spanish adjective ‘germano’ means both “Germanic”, which is itself ambiguous: (a) ‘characteristic of or attributed to Germans’, and (b) “of, pertaining to, or designating the former peoples of the Germanic-speaking areas, such as Scandinavians, Anglo-Saxons or Germans)” and “German”, while Spanish ‘germánico’ is only used for ‘Germanic’. Throughout the book, Kohut allows the alternatives ‘alemán’, ‘germano’ and ‘centroeuropeo’ (pp. xvi–xvii), not to mention the fact that some authors use the adjective ‘germánico’, apparently as a synonym of ‘alemán’ or ‘germano’ (Torales Pacheco, p. 156: “impacto de la corporación je-suita y de la cultura germánica en la cultura novohispana”). It is also obvious that the book does not just aim to describe and analyse sources written in German, since many German-speaking Jesuits wrote their works in Latin. One of the cen-tral questions raised in the introduction is: How can we differentiate between the German-speaking Jesuits and those who spoke other languages? (p. xvii). Do their works reveal different attitudes towards the indigenous people of the Americas? (p. xx)

The author of the introduction provides some important figures (p. xxi), citing Mathes (this volume, p. 124, n.1): There were 3,189 Jesuits with a European back-ground (i.e., not including Creoles) in South America and New Spain; 414 of them were German-speaking Jesuits, constituting approximately half of the non-Iberian Jesuits. The authors of this volume analyse the life and work of approximately 25 German-speaking missionaries — not a comprehensive treatment of the group, as the editors concede. They claim, however, that these case studies are representa-tive (p. xxxiv). Geographically, the book concentrates particularly on the Northern territories of New Mexico, such as Baja California / Nueva Vizcaya (a province of the Viceroyalty of New Spain, corresponding to the modern Mexican states of Chihuahua and Durango, the eastern parts of Sinaloa, Sonora and the southwest of Coahuila),1 which is understandable, since the conference was organized in that country. Other territories covered are Paraguay, Eastern Bolivia, the Jesuit mis-sions of the Grão-Pará and Maranhão. The book includes only one paper on the ciceroyalty of New Granada (the ‘Virreinato de Nueva Granada’, an administrative entity in northeastern South America, corresponding roughly to Panamá, Colum-bia, Venezuela and Ecuador).

The volume is divided into six sections, arranged thematically:

1. Theological and philosophical foundations2. Biographies; Living in the borderlands

1. Not to be confused with a province with the same name on the island of Luzón in the Philip-pines.


148 Otto Zwartjes

3. Art4. Missionaries’ attitudes towards the indigenous people5. The study of nature6. The reception of Jesuit literature in Germany

The first section entitled “Fundamentos teológicos y filosóficos de la misión” contains five contributions. The first article, by Michael Sievernich (3–23), deals with the “spiritual foundations of the Jesuit mission”. Sievernich demonstrates that the meaning of the Latin word missio or Spanish ‘misión’ was different in the Middle Ages (Spanish equivalents are ‘empeño’, ‘esfuerzo’, ‘cuidado’, or ‘gasto’) from the sense it bears today. The word missio is now used as a synonym for what was earlier called conversio infidelium, praedicatio gentium, promulgatio Evangelii, propagatio fidei, apostulatus, labor evangelicus, annuntiatio evangelica or novella Christianitatis plantatio. This introductory essay is useful for all those scholars who are less familiar with the history of the Jesuits, but contains only a relatively brief section (16–18) devoted to the topic of the volume: the German-speaking Jesuits. The Jesuits mentioned by the author are Franz Hermann Glandorff (Fran-cisco Germán Glandorff, 1687–1763) and Joseph Neumann (José Neumann; 1648–1732), founder of the Jesuit mission of the Tarahumares (or: Tarahumar, Rarámuri, Ralámuli) in Northern Mexico, and Johann Gummersbach (Juan Gum-mersbach, 1691–1736), who worked in central Mexico where he learned Nahuatl. The second contribution, by Peer Schmidt (25–43), investigates the concepts of ‘Konfessionsbildung / Konfessionalisierung’ in the context of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation, concluding that the Jesuit enterprise was relatively ‘mod-ern’ as a consequence of its ‘global’ and universalistic approach.

Markéta Křížová (45–64) compares the organization of the Jesuits with that of the Moravian Protestants in the 18th century, and comments on the concept of the ‘[American] dream’. Francisco Xavier Cacho’s article (65–87) concentrates on the Jesuit missionary and historian Eusebio Francisco Kino (born as Eusebio Fran-cesco Chini in the Bishopric of Trent, Austrian Empire, in present-day Italy, 1645–1711), who worked in the ‘Pimería Alta’ in California. Kino’s approach to evange-lization was original, viewing the “inculturación de la fe” as an important element in the process of evangelization (p. 69). In the age of Kino, ‘faith’ and ‘cultures’ were typically inseparable concepts. In order to be a Christian, one must neces-sarily be ‘westernized’. According to Francisco Xavier Cacho, Kino can be labeled “a modern apostle” (p. 71) in the sense that he established a formal distinction be-tween ‘faith’ and ‘cultures’. The first thematic section closes with a contribution by Manuel Olimón Nolasco on Father Franz Hermann Glandorff, already mentioned, who lived and worked with the Tarahumares. In contrast to the importance of Neumann’s works as sources for what we know of the Tarahumares (see also the



article of María del Carmen Anzures y Bolaños in this volume), Glandorff is not the most important figure to have left historical accounts of the people he worked with. The author Olimón Nolasco accordingly concentrates on the formation of the legend surrounding this Jesuit; his article tells us little more than some details about his life, and concentrates instead on references to him in later sources (up to the 20th century).

The second section “Vidas fronterizas” (“lifes at the borderlands”) contains seven articles. María del Carmen Anzures y Bolaños’s (107–121) paper is devoted to Belgian-born Joseph Neumann (1648–1732). Neumann is the author of a his-tory of the rebellions of the Tarahumares in New Viscaya (1730). It is surprising that an important reference work is not mentioned at all in this paper, the volume edited by Charles W. Polzer and others in 1991 as volume 19 in the series Span-ish Borderlands Sourcebooks, entitled The Jesuit Missions of Northern Mexico, and containing, amongst others, an article on Neumann written by Allan Christelow, “Father Joseph Neumann, Jesuit Missionary to the Tarahumares (pp. 249–269), previously published in the The Hispanic American Historical Review.2 In fact, this contribution is little more than a brief summary of the history of the rebel-lions of the Tarahumares. It is also a little puzzling that Tomás de Guadalaxara (1645–1729) is included in the appendix, a list of “German-speaking Jesuits”, on the grounds that this Spanish-speaking Jesuit “played a prominent role in the last rebellion of the Tarahumares” (p. 117). It would have been preferable to have dealt with this Jesuit in another section of the article, since he has nothing to do with ‘German-speaking Jesuits’. The conclusion of the paper is not a summary of the au-thor’s own research, but contains only an unmotivated reference to Luis González Rodríguez: “quién no conoce la obra del doctor Luis González Rodríguez, no co-noce la historia de esta region del país” (p. 120).

Miguel Mathes, the author of the second contribution of this section (123–136), also describes the missions of the Baja California Peninsula. It contains the biographies of 16 German-speaking fathers (out of a total of 58, i.e., the largest group of ‘foreign’ Jesuits), emphasizing the importance of their contribution to cartography and ethnography (133–134). The third article, by María Eugenia Ponce Alcocer (137–154), focuses on the fathers Antonio Tempis (1703–1746) and Fernando Consag (born as Ferdinand Konščak in Croatia, 1703–1759), who worked in the Baja California Peninsula and spoke several dialects of the Cochimí language. Both are praised by the author for their spiritual life and for their con-tribution to ethnography. One of the two editors, María Cristina Torales Pacheco (155–174), offers a paper on the German-speaking temporary coadjutors (it might

2. This volume also contains important studies on Thomás de Guadalaxara (Dunne 1941) and Father Kino (Burrus 1961).


150 Otto Zwartjes

have been helpful for non-specialists if the author had explained what a ‘tempo-rary coadjutor’ in fact means; generally, this term is used for a person appointed to assist a bishop or other ecclesiastic) while Alicia Mayer (175–196) describes the contribution of Johann Nepomuk Planck (alias Juan Nepomuceno Plant, 1732–1765/66), whose letters reveal the modus operandi of Jesuits in the northwestern part of the Viceroyalty of New Spain (‘virreinato de Nueva España’ which lasted from 1535 to 1821, corresponding to present-day California, Southwestern United States, Mexico, Central America — except Panama — Florida and the Caribbean, and later extended to the Philippines and Marianas). These letters, describing the ‘mixed’ culture of Europeans and Indians in the Jesuit missions, are of great im-portance for cultural historians and ethnographers.

The sixth article of this section, by Martín M. Morales (197–229), describes the diaries of Tadeo Javier Enis (who died in Spain after the expulsion) and Bernardo Nusdorffer (born as Bernhard Nussdorfer in Bavaria, 1686–1762) in the Province of Paraguay during the war from the Treaty of Madrid of 1750 until its annulment of 1761.3 Nusdorffer’s and Enis’s diaries are important tools for the reconstruc-tion of the historical facts, and the missionaries’ attitude towards ‘Indians’ and the concept of ‘ladinez’ are analysed. Being ‘ladino’ clashes with the traditional vision that Europeans held of the indigenous peoples, who were usually represented as passive, childish, etc., whereas once they became ‘ladino’, their ‘ladinez’ was seen as a menace (p. 224), reflecting the conflict between the Spanish and the world of ‘mestizos’, i.e., the world outside the reducciones (p. 226):

Como este pueblo del Yapeyú es el que siempre tiene mucha comunicación con las ciudades cercanas de los españoles por tierra y por agua, hay entre los indios muchos que saben algo de lengua española, estos en esta occasion han sido los que más daño han hecho, porque estos fueron los interpretes de las cartas

[Since this Yapeyú tribe always has frequent contacts by land and by water with the neighboring cities of the Spaniards, there are many among them who know something of the Spanish language; these have been most harmful, since they were the interpreters of the letters.]

In this section of the book, most papers deal with the Spanish colonies in North-ern New Spain and in Paraguay. The last article of the section, however, by In-maculada Fernández Arrillaga (231–261), describes the contribution of German-speaking Jesuits in Portuguese territories, particularly in the Jesuit missions of the

3. The Treaty of Madrid was signed by the Spanish and Portuguese kings on 13 January 1750. Its annulment in 1761 allowed further expansion by the Portuguese and led to the formation of the Empire of Brazil. Had this treaty remained unchanged, the Spanish territories would have held what is today the city of São Paulo and all the territories west and south of this city.



Grão-Pará and Maranhão. The article analyses several documents related to the expulsion of the Jesuits from these territories.

In sum, most articles of the second thematic section are predominantly de-scriptive. Some documents have been published earlier but are possibly less known among non-specialists, while others are published for the first time. The analysis in Spanish of sources written in Latin and German is valuable, allowing specialists in the Spanish-speaking world easier access to them. Nevertheless, it would have been useful if the authors of this section had provided more detailed information about the ‘state of the art’ of their topic. Only a minority of the articles have a clear conclusion, since there are no specific research goals expressed explicitly at the be-ginning of the papers. For a newcomer it is not always possible to ascertain to what extent the data presented are new or never previously published. Only rarely do we find a short overview of the results of relevant research of the sort that makes it possible to ascertain just what is the specific contribution of the paper in question to the field.

The third section gathers four articles devoted to the history of art. Johannes Meier’s (265–287) richly illustrated paper describes the importance of music in the educational practices of the Jesuits in America and, more specifically, the role of German-speaking Jesuits, such as Anton Sepp (1655–1733), Ignaz Pfefferkorn (1726–1798), Ignaz Tirsch (1733–post 1769 in Bohemia), Jakob Wetzl (d. 1751) and Bernhard Havestadt (1714–1778). The last of these would have merited a more prominent place in this book for his importance in the history of linguis-tics, as the author of the Chilidúgú sive Res Chilenses, a three-volume grammar of Mapudungun (or: Mapuche), written in Latin (Münster: Aschendorff, 1777). This work includes a grammar, a dictionary, a catechism in Mapudungun, and even songs with accompanying melodies from Cologne, Havestadt’s birth-place. Heinrich Pfeiffer (289–296) focuses on art (particularly the icons “Maria Hilf ” and paintings of the Virgin). Jens Baumgarten’s (297–325) paper deals with art in the North of Brazil, beginning with Johann Philipp Bettendorf (1625–1698), a Ger-man-speaking Jesuit born in Luxembourg. Bettendorf published in 1687 a work with the title Compêndio da Doctrina Christãa na Lengua Portuguesa e Brasilica (Lisbon: Miguel Deslandes) and a historical work entitled Chrónica dos padres da Companhia de Jesus no Estado do Maranhão. Bettendorf, who studied in Trier and in Italy, was familiar with the educational system of the universities of Évora and Coimbra. He served as a rector of the Jesuit Colleges of Maranhão and Pará and was a Superior of the Jesuits of the entire Brazilian mission. He was a linguist avant la lettre, an architect, and a painter, although his paintings are lost. In addition, the work of Johann Xaver Treyer (1668–1739) is analysed. The author concludes that elements from Tirol, Luxembourg, Bohemia, and Silesia are brought together in the context of the New World. The final paper of this section, by Eckart Kühne


152 Otto Zwartjes

(327–353), concentrates on the “misiones de Chiquitos” in Eastern Bolivia, par-ticularly on the Jesuit father Martín Schmid (1694–1772). Schmid was an architect who introduced polyphone Baroque music to South America and who even built organs. The article ends with a great number of useful illustrations.

The fourth section, entitled “Los misioneros ante los naturales de América”, contains four articles. Two deal with ‘missionary linguistics’, particularly the lin-guistic work of Matthäus Steffel (born in Jihlava, Moravia, 1734–1806). The first is by María M. Brumm Roessler (395–408), the second by William L. Merrill (409–439).

Dietrich Briesemeister’s paper (357–375) deals with José Domingo Mayr (or Mayer, born in Wald, south of Sigmaringen in 1680, a missionary who worked among the Mojos (ancient spelling ‘Moxos’, a tribe in Northern Bolivia). This ar-ticle contains a paragraph entitled “El problema lingüístico” (362–364) including relevant data concerning the linguistic diversity of these regions, a ‘Babylonian variety’ which was according to Mayr ‘demonic’ (p. 362), following José de Acosta’s (1539–1600) De procuranda Indorum salute. Mayr mentions that at least 30 lan-guages are spoken in those regions, and he observes that when he started to learn Bauré, his ‘tongue has to be adjusted into a totally different model’;4 he had to learn the language like an ignorant child. When he learned the language, he literally “hangs on the lips of the native speakers” (extremis, ut ita loquar, labiis linguam ipsorum haurire) (p. 363). The Jesuit and Latinist Bayr also informs us that Cas-tilian was only useful between members of the Jesuit Order, whereas Latin was used for ecclesiastical matters and for praying the breviary. He also reports that he was never able to use his German and that he was actually losing his skills in his native language, as in Latin too (p. 363). He was able to hear and understand the confessions of the indigenous population in six different languages, and he was even able to speak the language fluently, although he sometimes needed the help of an interpreter. Briesemeister observes that it is not clear whether Mayr knew the Arte de la lengua moxa, con su vocabulario, y cathecismo (Lima 1702). Probably Briesemeister refers to Pedro Marbán’s (1647–1713) Arte de la lengva moxa con sv vocabulario, y cathecismo. Compuesto por el M.R.P. — — de la Compañía de Jesvs, Superior, que fue, de las Missiones de Infieles, que tiene la Compañía de esta Pro-vincia de el Perù en las dilatadas Regiones de los Indios Moxos, y Chiquitos ([Perú]: En la Imprenta Real de Joseph Contreras), published in 1701 (not in 1702) and reprinted by Julio Platzmann (Leipzig: B. G. Teubner) in 1894.5 The main focus of this article, however, is not linguistic, but the ‘image of the Indian’.

4. “… die Zunge sich in einen gantz andren Model schicken muβ”.

5. Another work which is almost identical is the anonymous Arte y vocabulario de la lengua morocosi. Compvesto por vn padre de la Compañía de Jesvs, missionero de las provincias de los



The second article of this section is a study concerning the work of the Alsa-tian Johann Jakob Baegert (1717–1772) by Hans-Jürgen Lüsebrink (377–408), and deals with “inter-cultural misunderstandings” between Jesuits and the indigenous tribes of ‘Baja California’. Baegert’s Nachrichten von der Amerikanischen Halbin-sel Californien mit einem zweyfachen Anhang falscher Nachrichten was published in 1772 (Mannheim: Churfurstl. Hof- und Academie-Buchdruchteren). Baegert describes the cultural difficulties caused by the different nature of the languages that the missionaries encountered. According to Baegert, the Waikuri lack a word for ‘illness’, although they have an expression for ‘being ill’; ‘marriage’ in their lan-guage is tikéré undiri, which literally means “crossing the arms or the hand”, and he comments that their numerical system goes no further than the number six (for more than six the expression ‘many’ is used). Baegert also devotes an extensive chapter to Waikuri, analysing several important features of this extinct language, once spoken in the southern uplands of the Sierra de la Giganta and the Magda-lena Plains, between the Huchití and Laimon Cochimí tribes in the east and north respectively. Baegert describes conjugations, comparative adjectives, etc., but un-fortunately no further grammatical details are specified by Lüsebrink, although he gives more information on the level of semantics: an extensive list with words without a Waikuri equivalent, such as ‘life’, ‘weather’, ‘time’, ‘reality’, ‘honor’, ‘peni-tence’, and giving some approximate translations of these concepts. Although I have not been able to check the original text of the Nachrichten, I have the impres-sion that the grammatical information given by Baegert was probably of limited scope. Zamponi (2005: 156) mentions only “The Lord’s Prayer, a translation of the twelve articles of the Creed, a verb paradigm, and a few additional words and short sentences”. The Nachrichten contain about 370 morphemes and it is remark-able that Baegerts points continually not just to the dissimilarities between Wai-kuri and European languages on the grammatical level, but also to the lack of lex-emes at the level of semantics: the ‘pitiful and surprising lack of a great number of words, without […] which it is hardly possible for reasoning creatures to converse with each other …’).6 This negative attitude is far from exceptional among Jesuits working among the indigenous tribes. As Mariani (2007: 31) points out, histori-ans and missionary linguists established a sharp contrast between the language of the allies — the Tupinambás — and those languages spoken by all other nations,

moxos, dedicado a la serenissima Reyna de los Angeles, siempre Virgen Maria, Patrona de esta Missiones (Madrid: [no publisher], 1669). A copy can be found in the National Library, Madrid, Signature R/2631.

6. ‘… arbärmlichen und erstaunlichen Mangel unendlich vielen Wörter, ohne … [die es] nicht möglich …. [ist], daβ vernünftige Geschöpf mit einander redden, […] Gespräch unter sich füh-ren könnten” (Baegert 1772: 177–178), translation from Zamponi (2005: 156).


154 Otto Zwartjes

called ‘Tapuyas’, who were their enemies. This explains why historians usually had a negative attitude towards the languages of the Tapuyas:

Todas estas setenta e seis nações de Tapuyas que têm as mais differentes, são gente brava, silvestre e indomita, são contrarias quasi todas do gentio que vive na costa do mar, vizinhos dos Portugueses […]. D’estes [tapuyas] ha muitos christãos […] e somente com estes Tapuyas se pode fazer algum fructo; com os demais Tapuyas, não se pode fazer conversão por serem muito andejos e terem muitas e differentes linguas difficultosas. (Cardim 1584: 121, cited in Mariani 2007: 31))

[All the seventy six Tapuya nations, that speak the most different languages, are brave people, wild and savage, have quite different attributes as compared to the people who live on the coast, neighbors of the Portuguese […]. Among these [Tapuyas] there are many Christians […] and only to these Tapuyas some good can be done: with the rest of the Tapuyas, conversion is not possible since they are true ramblers and have many different and difficult languages.] (Translation by Mariani 2007: 31)

The characterization of the language of the Tapuya tribe of the Aimorés is illustra-tive:

E são estes aimorés tão selvagens […] a sua fala é rouca da voz, a qual arrancam da garganta com muita força … (Gabriel de Sousa 1587: 79, citation from Mariani 2007: 31)

[And these Aimorés are so savage […] their speech is hoarse in voice, which they utter from their throat with great force.] (Mariani’s translation)

However, the negative attitude of such historians is not the rule among Jesuits. On the contrary, Jesuits generally point at the ‘copiousness’ and ‘elegance’ of the languages studied, as we can infer from the following citations:

(a língoa da costa) é fácil, e elegante, e suave, e copiosa, a dificuldade della está em ter muitas composiçòes. (Cardim 1584: 121)

[(the language of the coast) is easy, and elegant, and smooth, and varied, the main difficulty being its many compositions. (Translation by Mariani 2007: 31)

For instance, Francisco Ximénez (1666–1730) observes that the Quiché language (a Mayan language spoken in Guatemala) is the most ‘orderly’ language of the world.7

7. “En esta lengua Quiché, son como signos naturales con tal orden y correspondencia que no hallo otra lengua más ordenada ni aun tanto, de tal modo que me he llegado a persuadir que esta lingua es la principal que hubo en el mundo” (Ximénez, cited in Chinchilla 1993: xiv) and in his Arte we read that “son imperceptibles algunos conceptos, que se explican en algunas composiçiones, que no me espanto, algunos se desatinen, y no entiendan de el la palabra, y lo



In North America we find similar attitudes. For instance, Peter S. Du Ponceau (1760–1844), working in Washington, D.C., wrote to the Moravian missionary John Heckewelder (1743–1823) in July 1816 (cited in Gray 1999: 153) that

… if the beauties of the [Delaware] language were found in the ancient Coptic, or in some ante-diluvian Babylonian dialect, how would the learned of Europe be at work to display them in a variety of shapes and raise a thousand fanciful theories on that foundation! What superior wisdom, talents and knowledge would they not ascribe to nations whose idioms were formed with so much skill and method! But who cares for the poor American Indians?

While historians generally assumed a correlation between civilization and linguis-tic refinement, the missionaries generally did not.8 They accepted the cultural su-periority of the Christian nations, but when analysing the languages of the indig-enous people, they admiringly talk about the ‘copiousness’ and ‘elegance’ of these languages, often rating them highly for their refinement. The view of Garcilaso de la Vega (‘el Inca’) (c.1539–1616) regarding Quechua illustrates this:

… it has this particular flair, worth celebrating, that is as useful to the Peruvian Indians as Latin is to us. In addition to the benefits that it provides them in their commerce and contracts, it makes them wittier and more prone to learning, and from barbarous people it transforms them into politicians and urban ones. (Gar-cilaso el Inca, Com. VII, 4. cited in Binotti 2000: 277).

To return to one of the main questions raised in the introduction of this book, it is not advisable to seek any ‘national’ tendencies in such observations. It would be absurd to postulate — and Lüsebrink of course does not — that the negative attitude of Baegerts has anything to do with ‘typical German’ features, as opposed to more positive observations by others, since non-German speaking Jesuits also report both negatively and positively on these ‘exotic’ languages. This demon-strates that the main questions raised in the introduction are not always relevant to the various individual topics covered in this volume. Lüsebrink concludes that Baegerts’s description of this indigenous language is surprisingly modern (p. 386), but he does not mention recent linguistic studies, such as that of Zamponi (2005), which provides a morphemic analysis of Baegerts’ texts in Waikuri. The second

que digo, por lo que he penetrado de estas lenguas; que de todas las que yo tengo notiçia entre la latina, o la nuestra castellana, alemana, italiana, etc. no ay lengua, ni mas propia, ni mas genuina, ni mas ordenada, ni regular que me holgara tener tiempo para irlo probando individualmente de cada cosa …” (Ximénez 1993 [c.1710], Cap. 4: f.34r; ed. Chinchilla, p. 70; emphasis mine: OJZ).

8. I am aware that this a simplification of the facts, and it is in strong disagreement with Mi-gnolo (2003, chap. 1); cf. his analysis of Bernardo de Aldrete (1565–1645) and José de Acosta (1540–1600).


156 Otto Zwartjes

author analysed by Lüsebrink is Martin Dobrizhoffer (born in Graz in 1717; died in Vienna in 1791), who published a history of the Abipones (Gechichte der Abipo-ner, Wien: Joseph von Kurbek k.k. Hofdruckerey, Groβ- und Buchhändler, 1783, of some 1,700 pages). Lüsebrink compares Dobrizhoffer’s attitude towards the in-digenous tribes with that of Baegerts, and concludes that the former is far more positive than the latter (p. 389), which demonstrates that there are, as one might expect, considerable individual differences, not just between the views of Jesuits in general, but even between these two ‘German-speaking Jesuits’. The section on Dobrizhoffer is much shorter and does not contain relevant information about language, even though Dobrizhoffer devoted two extensive chapters to it (English translation: 1822, vol. 2, Chapter XVI and XVII: 157–206). It is true indeed that Dobrizhoffer’s attitude is more balanced. He explains the ‘poverty’ of the language, and in doing so, he does not differ considerably from Baegerts (“The Abipones are destitute of some words which seems to be the elements of daily speech […]. They have no words whereby to express man, body, God, place, time, never, ever, every-where, … cited from the English edition, 1822: 183), but “After having exposed the poverty of this language by examples”, Dobrizhoffer makes the reader acquainted with its “richness” (p. 186). Dobrizhoffer mentions the “incredible number of syn-onyms” and also, on the grammatical level, he observes that the language “affixes various particles to words to denote the various situations of the subject of dis-course” (1822: 188); “How great is the variation of the verb ‘to follow’?” (p. 188); “Metaphors are familiar among these savages” (p. 194), etc. His description of the handling of neologisms among the Abipones is interesting:

They ingeniously invented names borrowed from their native tongue, for things introduced from Europe, or made by Europeans. They did not like either to ap-pear poor in words, or to contaminate their language by adopting foreign ones, like the other Americans who borrow from Spaniards. Horses, which the Span-iards call cavallos, the Guaranies call cavayù […] The Abipones, on the contrary call a horse ahëpegak […] though, before the coming of the Spaniards, they were unacquainted with these animals. (Dobrizhoffer 1822 [1783]: 193)

The third and fourth articles of this section deal with the Tarahumares. Brumm Roessler (395–408) deals with the dictionary of Matthäus Steffel (1734–1806), while Merrill (409–439) covers the entire linguistic work of the same Jesuit. Brumm Roessler’s paper is less ‘linguistic’ and highlights ‘inter-culturality’ aspects in Steffel’s dictionary of Tarahumara. It is unclear why Brumm Roessler inserts in this connection a long citation related to orthography, which actually does not tell us much about ‘inter-culturality’. It is also a simplification of the facts to claim that missionary grammars are a priori ‘normative’ or ‘prescriptive’ (p. 400). It is widely recognized that many grammars were indeed prescriptive, describing the more



‘elegant’ forms of the élite, whereas other ‘lower’ varieties are labeled as ‘vulgar’ or ‘rustic’. Nevertheless, it is also obvious and well known that many other mission-ary grammarians and lexicographers attempted to record the natural and collo-quial speech exactly as they perceived it. Often no preference for a certain form is given, and no higher or lower varieties are distinguished; in contrast, co-existing varieties or colloquial forms are given simultaneously as equivalents, without any ‘normative’ assessments. The author does not explain with examples why Steffel was ‘prescriptive’. On the level of semantics, some attention is paid to the flora and fauna and the manners of the Tarahumares, and the article closes with a sec-tion concerning the political and scientific context in Europe: Catharine II the Great — in Spanish Catarina, not ‘Catalina’ — (p. 405), Lorenzo Hervás y Panduro (1735–1809) and Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767–1835).

Merrill’s article is a linguistic analysis of Steffel’s work. The author explains that Steffel composed at least four works on Tarahumara, of which at least three survived: (1) a Tarahumara-German dictionary entitled Tarahumarisches Wör-terbuch nebst einigen Nachrichten von den Sitten und Gebräuchen der Tarahuma-ren (Moravský zemský archive, G 11, č 809, finished before 1778, the so-called Brno manuscript); (2) the printed version of this dictionary which appeared in the volume Nachrichten von verschiedenen Ländern des Spanischen Amerika, aus eigenhändigen Aufsätzen einiger Missionare der Gesellschaft Jesu edited by Chris-toph Gottlieb von Murr (1733–1811) (Halle: Joh. Christian Hendel, 1809), part I, 293–374; and (3) a grammar written in Latin: Grammatica linguae Tarahumaricae Americanae nationis in regno Novae Viscayae, concinnata a P. Thoma de Guadalax-ara …. (Brunae Moravorum, 1799, Archiv města Brna, col. Mitrovští), which is a revised version of the Spanish grammar composed by the Jesuit Thomas de Gua-dalaxara (Compendio del arte de la lengua de los tarahvares y gvazapares …1683, Puebla de los Angeles: Diego Fernandez de Leon) [an incomplete copy is held in the British Library C38.a. 12]). As Steffel informs the reader, he “ ‘restructured the grammar of Guadalaxara in agreement with the eight parts of speech, following the canonical order as it is known by everyone’, but the question of how his ‘new order’ differs from that of Guadalaxara is left unanswered by Merrill. Since it is not possible to compare the dictionaries of Steffel and Guadalaxara — the only copy of the work of the latter is not complete — it will be impossible to distinguish between what exactly is from the hand of Steffel and which elements were copied from Guadalaxara.

However, Guadalaxara’s grammar does survive, and it is easy to contrast the grammars of the two authors. If we attempt to draw any conclusion concerning Steffel’s originality, an analysis of the differences and coincidences of the grammars must be undertaken. The system of labial consonants is Merrill’s main focus. Mer-rill uses Steffel’s work for the reconstruction of the development of these sounds,


158 Otto Zwartjes

starting with Guadalaxara (p. 417), followed by Steffel (418–419), and finally as they are found in modern Tarahumara. The author also devotes a paragraph to these labials in the context of Uto-Aztecan phonology. The article concludes with nine tables and a map. The first table presents the labial consonants as described in the 18th century, and it is unclear why the author includes a column contain-ing “Spanish graphemes”. Are these ‘graphemes’ from Guadalaxara (whose work is from the 17th century) or are they ‘hispanicized phonemes’ based on Steffel, since this article is written in Spanish? The table would have been clearer with one column listing Guadalaxara’s graphemes first, followed by two columns of Steffel’s, one based on his German manuscript and the other on his grammar written in Latin, which are probably different from each other, and finally the corresponding phonemic value of these graphemes in Spanish (the meta-language of this article), together with their IPA symbols. There are few pre-modern sources describing Tarahumara. If we want to reconstruct the Tarahumara phonological and its dif-ferent orthographies from the first sources until today, then the most important grammar of the 19th century should not be neglected, so it is surprising that the grammar, of Miguel Tellechea, published in 1826, is not even mentioned. Telle-chea’s work is not only a grammar of the Tarahumara language, but also contains a collection of sermons, conversations (pláticas) and a catechism. (The works of Johann Christoph Adelung (1732–1806) and Johann Severin Vater’s (1771–1826), Wilhelm von Humboldt, and Lorenzo Hervás y Panduro are also relevant sources for the study of Tarahumara.)

The fifth section bears the title “Reconocimiento y apropiación de la natu-raleza Americana”. Simona Binková (443–479) describes the expeditions on the rivers Gila and Colorado as described by Adán Gilg (born in Moravia as Adam or Adamus Gilg, 1653–?1708), Ignacio Xavier Keller (born in Moravia, 1702–?1759), and Wenceslao Linck, who was among the first Europeans to traverse the North-ern parts of the Baja California Peninsula overland, up to the Colorado River. This article offers an appendix of fascinating primary texts, for instance by the Fathers Kino, Linck and Keller, among others. Jean-Pierre Clément (481–505) de-scribes the Moxos according to Father Francisco Xavier Eder (born in Schemnitz, Hungary, 1727–1773), whose Descriptio provinciae Moxitarum in Regno peruano … was published posthumously (Buda: Typis Universitatis, 1791). The article is largely descriptive, summarizing Eder’s contribution to science, religion and ge-ography. The author observes that his work differs from the major works written by other Jesuits, although Eder’s work is not inferior, compared with others, such as José de Acosta and Martin Dobrizhoffer. Manfred Tietz (507–539) analyses the Beschreibung der Landschaft Sonora samt andern merkwürdigen Nachrichten von inneren Theilen Neu-Spaniens und Reise aus Amerika bis in Deutschland, nebst ei-ner Landcharte von Sonora written by the Jesuit Ignaz Pfefferkorn in 1794 (Köln:



Langenschen Buchhandlung; repr. Bonn: Holos, 1966), one of the most important sources of the early explorers in these regions. According to Tietz, Pfefferkorn’s approach to ethnography is objective and professional (p. 517). Pfefferkorn fre-quently cites the History of the Abipones of Dobrizhoffer, a fact which demon-strates that the author was fairly well acquainted with the progress made by Jesuits in the scientific achievements of that time. José del Rey Fajardo (541–603) is the only contributor to deal with the world of the Sáliva in the ‘Gran Orinoquia’ of the Viceroyalty of New Granada, as described by Father Gaspar Beck (1640–1684), the author of the Missio orinocensis in novo regno, published in 1684. This extensive article is a useful tool for the reconstruction of biographical details, containing a list of 34 German-speaking Jesuits who worked in New Granada.

The sixth and final section of the volume bears the title “La recepción de la li-teratura jesuítica en Alemania”, and contains four articles. The first, by Karl Kohut, is a thorough study concerning the “Voyage to Perú” of Wolfgang Bayer (1722–1794), who wrote several works in the Aymara language. Kohut analyses the recep-tion of Bayer’s work in narrative literature (particularly of travel books) in 18th-century Germany. Bernd Hausberger (631–661) concentrates on Father Joseph Stöcklein (1676–1733), who is also a key figure in narrative travel stories. Galaxis Borja González (663–696) describes the reception of Jesuit literature in Germany, and finally, Ruprecht Wimmer (697–712) analyses the figure of the Spanish con-quistador Hernán Cortés (1485–1547) in Jesuit drama in the German-speaking regions in Europe.

The volume closes with an appendix containing biographical information on the contributors (713–723) and an index of names (725–741).

To conclude this review article, I return to the question posed in the volume’s introduction: is it meaningful to speak of the specific contribution of Jesuits of a particular ‘nationality’ or linguistic area? The Jesuits in the Spanish and Portu-guese colonies had different native tongues, and a great number of them com-posed their work in a language other than their mother tongue, including Spanish, Portuguese, or Latin. Generally, it does not make much sense to trace ‘nationali-ties’ among Jesuits. In the following, I give some examples from ‘missionary lin-guistics’, the field I know best.

In the Portuguese tradition we can note the Spanish Jesuit Joseph de Anchieta, born on 19 March 1534 in S. Cristóval de La Laguna, Tenerife, who was a native speaker of Spanish, and his father Juan de Anchieta was a Basque from Guipúz-coa. Anchieta wrote the first grammar of Tupi in Portuguese and also composed literary works in Castilian, Portuguese, Latin and Tupi. A century later, the Italian Jesuit Luis Vicêncio Mamiani (1652–1730) wrote a grammar of Kipeá-Kiriri, an extinct indigenous language once spoken in Brazil. Anchieta was educated in Por-tugal, and it would be an arduous task to trace any ‘Spanish’ characteristics in his


160 Otto Zwartjes

grammar written in Portuguese. The same applies to Mamiani: are there any traces of Italian grammars in his description of Kiriri? We do not exclude such a possibil-ity, but even if elements could be traced, this would affect only the microstructure, since the macrostructure follows that of ‘universal renaissance grammar’.

To take another example, Thomas Stephens (c.1549–1619), also known in In-dia as Padre Estevão, Estevam, or Padre Busten, de Bustoa, Buston or De Bubston, was born in about 1549 in Bulstan, Wiltshire. Being a Catholic, he left England for Rome, where he completed his novitiate at the Society of Jesus in 1575. He sailed from Lisbon to Goa, where he spent the rest of his life working among the Brahmin Catholics of Salsete, in the college of Espirito Santo, Todos os Santos and Santo Ignácio, usually called the College of Rachol in the Jesuit documents (Alden 1996: 47). Stephens learned Hindustani and also mastered Marathi, Konkani and Sanskrit. He is the author of the Doutrina Christã em lingua Bramana-Canarim, printed in 1622 at the College of Rachol, a Christian work in the Marathi language and Nagari characters. Again, the same question could be raised: how ‘English’ is the grammar of Stephens, a research topic which has, however, barely been raised to date. It is also known that the Jesuits studied foreign cultures and even adapted themselves to the manners of the countries they lived in. Francis Xavier arrived in 1549 in Japan and insisted that followers should respect and understand Japanese culture. Both in Japan and China Jesuits gained the status of Confucian scholar as an introduction to their missionary life, and even became key figures in the Chi-nese civil service. Given that Jesuits were indeed so ‘sensitive’ to foreign cultures and even allowed a dialogue between the European and the ‘other’, it would be totally unimportant and non-significant to highlight the specific ‘national’ charac-ter of a certain Jesuit, or the language he spoke in his home-country as his native tongue. So much for the nationalities of missionary-linguists.

Notwithstanding these methodological complications, Kohut raises some more specific questions in his introduction: 1) Was the attitude of German-speak-ing Jesuits towards indigenous tribes different from that of other Jesuits? 2) Were they more ‘sensitive’ than the others? 3) Do their attitudes and theories reveal par-ticular characteristics which allow us to study them separately? (p. xx),and 4) Why were Jesuits with a German background so enthusiastic, and often more enthusi-astic than other Jesuits? (ibid.). The relevance of these research questions will vary for every individual case study. The papers dealing with art, architecture, dance and music give the most obvious answers to this question, as with Havestadt’s Ger-man-based songs from the Lower Rhine in Mapudungun9 or the ‘hybrid artistic representations’ in the colonies, which have their roots in Silesia, Bohemia, Tirol

9. “[melodías] … que se cantan en las iglesias de mi amada Provincia de origen del Bajo Rin, en especial en Colonia, mi ciudad paterna apreciada [melodies which are sung in the churches



or Luxemburg, as Baumgarten concludes (p. 311) the German influence is appar-ently present here, whereas in other cases, the question will not make sense at all, since Jesuits from a German-speaking background are often ‘absorbed’ by the universalistic Jesuit education, blurring the differences between their original na-tionalities and mother tongues in a drastic way. Indeed, most articles do not even attempt to address these research questions at all, and this is not surprising. As we have tried to demonstrate, it will often be difficult to distinguish between Jesuits from different nations. Yet there are two important factors that justify why Ger-man-speaking Jesuits might be studied separately: (1) their education in Central Europe, before entering the Jesuit seminars, could be different from that of those missionaries who lived in other countries, and (2) many sources analysed in this volume were composed in Germany or in other countries in Europe, after the Je-suits’ expulsion from the Portuguese and Spanish territories. These works, written in German or Latin, possibly contain different features, since their authors lived in a European culture and they had access to the work of other expelled Jesuits and, what is more, they could benefit from the scientific works of scholars in Europe. Works written in the New World are possibly less influenced by contemporary developments in Europe, and expelled Spanish-, Portuguese- and Italian-speaking Jesuits, who often arrived in Italy, took up their work in a different setting to those who returned to Germany. A comparison between the works of German-speaking Jesuits and others after the expulsion, may, then, possibly reveal some characteris-tic features of the first group.

Although many questions remain unanswered, this book is an impressive contribution to scholarship, since many works written in German or Latin are less known and less studied in the Iberian world than those written in Spanish, Portuguese, or Italian. Without any doubt, this makes the volume an important tool for those working in the fields of colonial history, anthropology, art history, music, etc. The editors of the volume evidently decided not to devote a separate chapter of the book to the contribution of German-speaking Jesuits to the history of linguistics, although it is commonly known that their linguistic works are also relevant for other disciplines, such as the history of languages, descriptive linguis-tics, the didactics of foreign-language learning and teaching, translation theory, lexicography, semantics, etc. In sum, there is still much to be done in this field. Nevertheless, this book has some interesting aspects to offer to those of us work-ing in the field of the history of linguistics. Since the linguistic achievements of the Jesuits were not the central topic of this volume, it remains to be hoped that this will be the subject of further study in the near future.

of my beloved province of origin, the Lower Rhine, particularly in Cologne, my appreciated paternal town]” (Haverstadt [sic] 1777, cited in the article by Meier, p. 269).


162 Otto Zwartjes

RefeRenCeS

Alden, Dauril. 1996. The Making of an Enterprise: The Society of Jesus in Portugal, its empire, and beyond 1540–1750. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press.

Binotti, Lucia. 2000. “La lengua compañera del imperio: Observaciones sobre el desarrollo de un discurso de colonialismo lingüístico en el Renacimiento español”. Zwartjes, ed. 2000.259–288.

Burrus, Ernest J. 1965. Kino and the Carthography of Northwestern New Spain. Tucson, Arizona: Arizona Pioneer’s Historical Society. (Repr. in Polzer et al. eds. 1991.297–465.)

Chinchilla, Rosa Helena. 1993. “Introducción”. Francisco Ximenez, O.P. Arte de las tres lenguas kaqchikel, k’iche’ y tz’utujil. (= Biblioteca Goathemala, 31.) Guatemala: Academia de Geo-grafía e Historia de Guatemala. 1993.ix–xxxii.

Christelow, Allan. 1939. “Father Joseph Neumann, Jesuit Missionary to the Tarahumares”. The Hispanic American Historical Review 29:4.423–442. (Repr. in Polzer et al., eds. 1991.249–269.)

Dobrizhoffer, Martin. 1783. Historia de Abiponibus, equestri bellicosaque Paraguaina natione […].Vienna. [A German translation appeared the same year entitled Geschichte der Abipo-ner, einer berittenen und kriegerischen Nation in Paraguay. Wien: Joseph von Kurbek k.k. Hofdruckerey, Groβ- und Buchhändler, 1783–1784. We cited from the English translation of 1822: An Account of the Abipones, an Equestrian People of Paraguay. London: John Mur-ray.]

Duhr, Bernhard. 1907–1928. Geschichte der Jesuiten in den Ländern deutscher Zunge. 4 vols. Freiburg im Breisgau: Herdersche Verlagshandlung.

Dunne, Peter M. 1941. “Tomás de Guadalajara, Missionary of the Tarahumares”. Mid-America 23:4.272–287. (Repr. in Polzer et al., eds. 1991.232–248.)

Fouqueray, Henri. 1913–1924. Histoire de la Compagnie de Jésus en France des origins à la sup-pression (1528–1762). 5 vols. Paris: Alphonse Picard et Fils.

Gray, Edward G. 1999. New World Babel: Languages and nations in Early America. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Guimarães, Eduardo & Diana Luz Pessoa de Barros, eds. 2007. History of Linguistics 2002: Select-ed papers from the Ninth International Conference on the History of the Language Sciences, 27–30 August 2002, São Paulo–Campinas. (= Studies in the History of the Language Sciences, 110.) Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Mariani, Bethania. 2007. “Linguistic Ideas and the Discourse on Languages in Early Brazilian History”. Guimarães & Pessoa de Barros, eds. 2007.27–40.

Mignolo, Walter D. 2003 [1995]. The Darker Side of the Renaissance: Literacy, territoriality and colonization. 2nd ed., with a new afterword by the author. Ann Arbor. Mich.: University of Michigan Press.

Polzer, Charles W. et al., eds. 1991. The Jesuit Missions of Nothern Mexico. New York: Garland.Tellechea, Miguel. 1826. Compendio gramatical para la inteligencia del idioma tarahumar. Ora-

ciones Doctrina Cristiana, Pláticas, y otras cosas necesarias para la recta administracion de los Santos Sacramentos en el mismo idióma. Dispuesto por el P. Fr. — — Predicador Misionero Apostólico del Colegio de Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe de Zacatecas, Ministro del Pueblo de Chínipas y ExPresidente de las Missiones de la Tarahumara. México: Imprenta de la Federa-ción en Palacio [Copy in National Library, Mexico, D.F., R 497.7 TEL.]

Worcester, Thomas, ed. 2008. The Cambridge Companion to the Jesuits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.



Zamponi, Raoul. 2005. “Fragments of Waikuri (Baja California)”. Anthropological Linguistics 46:2.156–193.

Zwartjes, Otto, ed. 2000. Las gramáticas misioneras de tradición hispánica (siglos XVI y XVII). Amsterdam & Atlanta: Rodopi.

Author’s address:

Otto ZwartjesRomance LinguisticsUniversity of AmsterdamSpuistraat 134NL-1012 VB AmsterdamThe Netherlands

e-mail: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Toward a History of Missionary Work by German-Speaking Jesuits in 17th and 18th Century Latin...

Documents

Transcript of Toward a History of Missionary Work by German-Speaking Jesuits in 17th and 18th Century Latin...