﻿Vol.2] 
  COLONIAL 
  QUECHUA 
  — 
  KUBLER 
  401 
  

  

  The 
  great 
  campaign 
  of 
  extirpation 
  was 
  accompanied 
  by 
  a 
  systematic 
  

   effort 
  to 
  extend 
  the 
  peripheral 
  conversions. 
  Yet, 
  in 
  1626, 
  the 
  feeling 
  

   existed 
  among 
  the 
  clergy 
  that 
  little 
  or 
  nothing 
  had 
  been 
  achieved. 
  An 
  

   archepiscopal 
  report 
  of 
  that 
  year 
  expresses 
  horror 
  at 
  the 
  discovery 
  of 
  

   numberless 
  communities 
  in 
  which 
  no 
  Indian 
  did 
  not 
  engage 
  in 
  idolatry, 
  

   and 
  the 
  fault 
  was 
  blamed 
  upon 
  the 
  small 
  numbers 
  of 
  the 
  clergy 
  in 
  Peru. 
  

   It 
  was 
  even 
  recommended 
  that 
  the 
  enforcement 
  of 
  Christianity 
  among 
  

   the 
  Quechua 
  be 
  confided 
  to 
  the 
  Inquisition 
  (Tovar, 
  1873, 
  p. 
  327 
  ff., 
  

   338-39). 
  As 
  late 
  as 
  1646, 
  archepiscopal 
  inspectors 
  were 
  appointed 
  to 
  

   travel 
  throughout 
  the 
  provinces 
  in 
  search 
  of 
  idolaters 
  (Tovar, 
  1873, 
  

   p. 
  413). 
  

  

  It 
  is 
  somewhat 
  surprising, 
  therefore, 
  to 
  read 
  in 
  1667 
  that 
  genuine 
  

   idolatry 
  no 
  longer 
  existed 
  in 
  Perti 
  (Pefia, 
  1698, 
  pp. 
  231-40). 
  The 
  

   campaign 
  of 
  extirpation 
  had 
  ceased; 
  the 
  Indians 
  were 
  regarded 
  as 
  

   practicing 
  Christians, 
  and 
  the 
  Church 
  expressed 
  satisfaction 
  with 
  the 
  

   spiritual 
  condition 
  of 
  the 
  Indian 
  communities. 
  Of 
  course, 
  a 
  double 
  

   process 
  is 
  present: 
  true 
  idolatry 
  was 
  on 
  the 
  wane, 
  but 
  also 
  the 
  clergy 
  

   became 
  more 
  tolerant 
  of 
  "superstitions" 
  which 
  formerly 
  had 
  been 
  

   regarded 
  as 
  pure 
  idolatry. 
  

  

  From 
  the 
  churchmen's 
  point 
  of 
  view, 
  an 
  old 
  scholastic 
  distinction 
  

   between 
  idolatry 
  and 
  superstition 
  made 
  the 
  change 
  of 
  attitude 
  pos- 
  

   sible. 
  The 
  distinction 
  turned 
  upon 
  the 
  question 
  of 
  whether 
  the 
  

   subject 
  apprehended 
  divinity 
  in 
  the 
  objects 
  of 
  his 
  worship. 
  If, 
  in 
  the 
  

   view 
  of 
  the 
  clergy, 
  the 
  Indians 
  practiced 
  huaca 
  worship 
  without 
  

   attributing 
  any 
  divine 
  essence 
  to 
  the 
  huacas, 
  they 
  were 
  the 
  victims 
  

   only 
  of 
  superstition, 
  and 
  defined 
  as 
  those 
  who 
  "seek 
  good 
  or 
  flee 
  evil 
  

   by 
  useless 
  and 
  disproportionate 
  methods" 
  (Pefia, 
  1698, 
  p. 
  240) 
  . 
  Thus, 
  

   it 
  became 
  possible 
  for 
  many 
  baptized 
  Indians, 
  while 
  sincerely 
  believing 
  

   in 
  Christianity, 
  still 
  to 
  revere 
  their 
  huacas, 
  certain 
  stones 
  and 
  moun- 
  

   tains, 
  without 
  becoming 
  idolaters. 
  The 
  churchmen 
  understood 
  that 
  

   the 
  object 
  of 
  this 
  veneration 
  was 
  merely 
  to 
  propitiate 
  the 
  irrational 
  

   forces 
  of 
  nature, 
  and 
  that 
  as 
  such 
  it 
  could 
  be 
  tolerated 
  by 
  curates 
  as 
  

   being 
  nonheretical, 
  i.e., 
  without 
  error 
  or 
  infidelity, 
  although 
  in 
  effect 
  

   it 
  contaminated 
  the 
  worship 
  of 
  the 
  True 
  God 
  and 
  was 
  to 
  be 
  dis- 
  

   couraged. 
  

  

  Gradually, 
  the 
  conditions 
  under 
  which 
  the 
  ritual 
  was 
  performed 
  

   came 
  to 
  be 
  taken 
  into 
  account 
  by 
  the 
  clergy. 
  For 
  instance, 
  when 
  

   Indians 
  participated 
  in 
  the 
  great 
  huaca 
  festivals, 
  it 
  was 
  granted 
  that 
  

   the 
  participation 
  might 
  be 
  undertaken 
  without 
  interior 
  faith. 
  If 
  the 
  

   Indians 
  were 
  moved 
  by 
  the 
  compulsions 
  of 
  Indian 
  society, 
  the 
  act 
  

   was 
  external 
  and 
  not 
  to 
  be 
  regarded 
  as 
  true 
  or 
  perfect 
  idolatry. 
  In 
  

   any 
  case, 
  it 
  was 
  urged 
  after 
  1667 
  that 
  mildness 
  be 
  shown 
  in 
  the 
  pun- 
  

   ishment 
  of 
  actual 
  cases 
  of 
  idolatry 
  because 
  of 
  the 
  scanty 
  indoctri- 
  

   nation 
  and 
  the 
  limited 
  understanding 
  of 
  the 
  Indians 
  (Pefia, 
  1698, 
  

   pp. 
  232-33). 
  When 
  an 
  Indian 
  threw 
  stones 
  upon 
  an 
  apacheta, 
  the 
  

  

  