CUAMAN POMA AND THE MANUSCRIPTS OF FRAY MARTIN DE MURUA PROLEGOMENA TO A CRITICAL EDITION OF THE HISTORIA DEL PERO by Rotrna ADoRNO AND Ivaw Bos Introduction the 2004 publication of the facsimile edition of Fray Martin de Muria’s Historia del origen y gencalogia real de los reyes ingas del Pint, dated 1590 on its frontispiece and referred to here as "Murcia 1590,” is a revolutionary event in Andean and Spanish colonial studies. It was known until 2004 0 through glimpses andl brief reports (Jiménez de la Espada 1879, and ines various partial editions (Gonziiler de Ia Rosa 1911, Urteaga Loay 1946) anda complete one (Bayle 1946). Yet the source of these scholarly efforts ia 15907 but rathera copy of it, made in 1890, “Murtia 1590" was, furthermore, confused with another manuscript work (Muriia 1613) by the same author. Asa result, “Muntia 1590" has been the object of many speculative and unsubstantiated theories that have obscured, rather than illuminated, the character of the original. However, the Madvid facsimile, produced thanks to the vision and guidance of Juan M. Ossio, makes available for the first Gime the evidence that allows us to address four aress needing evaluation: first, the history of the *Murtia 1590" manuscript and its editions; second, the evidence of its g, fragmentation, and reconstruction; third, wo the (Murvia 1613) with which it since 1951, ithas been compared it that have come to be commonplaces terrogation mind, we turn to the matter that called attention to “Mura namely, its evidence of the intervention in its pages of the Andean chronicler, Felipe Guaman Poma de Ayal: In his Nueva cerinica » buen gobierna (Copenhagen, Royal Library, GkS 2232, 4to) Guaman Poma inchided a short chapter on “previous ¢ of the ancient history of Peru. He mentioned Fray Martin de Murtia b mong others, and his lengthy comm 'swork exceeds even those that he 1 of the views108. Kotena dorno and foun Boserap devoted to José de Acosta and Domingo de Santo Ton works Guamatt Poma knew well! His comment reveals his intimate knowledge of the Merced: iar’s we And another book was that of Fray M. of Mercy of the Redemption of Captives; he wrote about the history of the Inc He stared to write and he did not finish, o, better said, he neither began nor ended, because he docs not declare where the Inea came from nor how nor in what manner nor from wh rulers and how their line came toan end. Ne nor of the great lords or of other things, but rather everything [he wrote was] ahout [the Incas’] menacing andl aggression against the gentile Indians and ahout how, frightened by them, the gentile Indians heeame idolaters, just as happened with the Spaniards of Spain, who were gentiles, and the Romans {who conquered them] had idols to Jupiter and to the calf (Guaman Pom 1618, 1090; our translation} n de Mura of the Order of Our Lady did he write of the Guaman Poma comp! or legitinnacy of the Incas, noranyt thent, and that Murda liad devoted himself instead to telling a tale of the Incas? menacing intimidation auc conquest of other peoples, forcing them into idolatry, just as the Romans had conquered and impoxed their gods on th peoples of Spain, Guaman Poma would [ater correct this fearsome view of the Incas own work. Our interest here, however, is in the work that provoked the Andean chronicler’s commentary, Munta’s Historia general del Pird in the version (“Muriia 1590") that he had the opportunity to illustrate with pintaras colored Tine drawings) in the ute 1590s. The 2004 facsimile publication of "Murti 1590" invices ts r the first time not the final manuscript version of Mur Inca history (title page date of 1613) but most spectacularly this earlier one, more or less exactly a 1 Poona would have k ‘The close relationship of Guamans Poma to Murcia ident with the 1946 publication of Constatitino Basle’s edition of “Murcia 1590,” based had written nothing about the proxenance ancient lymasties that preceded ‘works, Be undue ne ons (1581) and his mission icy De portant iocina sabu (SSS), a8 well as the docu Acosta'esupervsion by the Third Prexineial Cou (1583, 1584). He “Tomes Lesion o vacua de ds Iga gear di Pod (USI), reomasking th ial works published incler as Denning Santo Tom fe a Tenge eed van Poma 1615, sh anise mp the vi hays, Quieiva, to ws Anelcan largages with the Spanish Chee ce boeabub Garo, Cl 1089-000). rebut com ia lengua espaol’) (GaGraman Powe and the Manuscripts of Fray Mastin de Murti 19. on the 1890 copy. Bayle reproduced five drawings whose affinities with those of Guaman Poma were self-cvicent? In 1961 Emilio Mencizatbal Losack took up their siucly Only one year later, Manuel Ballesteros Gaibrois’ 1962 publication of the first Volume of his edition of M tia 1613 revealed the presence of three more of Guaman Poma’s drawings. These newly revealed illustrations subsequently became the object of Ballesteros’ as well ay Mendizabatl Losack's comparativist interests ‘The intellectual, artistic, and affective relationships beuseen Guaman Poma and Muriia have been discussed and debated at lengih over the past decades. From Mendixibal’s early suggestion that Guaman Poma had been Murtia’s illustrator the idea developed that Guaman Poma had been Murita’s m or only informant, Simultaneously the problem of priority arose: Was Mui inspired by Guaman Poma's Nurea corinica, or was the latter inspired by M Historia? This question was variously answered. For Ballesteros, Guaman Poma had inspired Muntia; for Ramiro Condareo Morales, it seemed more probable that Guaman Poma got the idea of writing an illus Ae from worked for Murtia over a period of time, ‘The evidence of the Muria/Guaman Poma relation nce Bayie’s edition scemed to revea very unfinished text, with places designated for chapters that were named but s therefore, great expectations were aroused when the ted chee hip, nevertheless, wats sp did not appear. In 199 = Tile Gin Muri 19409, 146,192, 182, $24,495) reprdueed a otal pf five drawings. We speeily here the ion inthe 1590 sxamusript anil its 2001 facsimile, The fist isl triste Aman” being led in rope or ehains by the Spanish eaptain, ela in sail, "Love that the [nea exceution by Main “The second isthe roy iter of the Ine (Es). The hit isa very poor vendien of Pachacud Loe prince Tape Amar being led into his capt holding a Ueto Hneacbanl) int hand. which is abou PaenaeuttYneaVapanqul Ice mercedes 150). The fart is th hs 14), ane he fh isthe graphic ofthe "sg of he dee” (F145 recto) ® Comparing the Basle sition drovings with thon of Guinot Pousa, Mendlizabal Losack (1961, robe placed on the heal of aa Toa caplin Sleeping princess, “el sc 1 Pom probably mae the dang Mui’ behest" sem 10, Jo queserfa ns posible Pans pro eneargo del ale tal que pe erque Murine que las ions ee Ta exile Mu a las eae el propio Wi gy 1961 he Gann Pom Mura graphic comparison on the bss of Bales el ‘of*Mursis L590," Medial (1989) goesen to carnider* Morrie I concentrated on M " allesteres consid 1 1613 nascar niet (Moco de eaminar dle fos reyes cas?) and Chuguillant 2 1513. 1978, he pentalatel that ony oxo the M ongs mere dana by (Mode de ‘gue he Gata Po sma Poon nae de fas eorasy reinas") (Fols 67/ ie nd 71/9; vespeetivels, and in SINT he #eseries of dravings of [eas anal Capos the Nueva conic y ae gobierno wore the somrces for Muria’s paintings of the sane subjects,