relations with most of the great personages of his day and his personal knowledge of the countries he describes, the events he portrays, and the men who figured in them, collected an enormous mass of data, which, however, he never properly classified. He is, therefore, confused and confusing, self-contradictory and something of a plagiarist, of whom it was said that, not content with drawing his information from the higher and more trustworthy sources, he did not scruple to collect the gossip of the camp from common soldiers, and the cancans of great mens' ante-chambers. Las Casas describes his work as "a wholesale fabrication, and as full of lies as pages. Oviedo and Las Casas were poles asunder, and the good bishop was so averse to the sentiments and opinions of his contemporary (so contrary to his own) that he could see no good either in him or his work.
Despite the blemishes which mar his work, Oviedo must be considered an astute observer, nor can it be thought that he consciously or intentionally misstated facts. From the same events, two different observers draw opposite conclusions, and, in the study of historical records, their value may be more accurately estimated by considering the character of the medium through which they reach us.
Oviedo died at Valladolid in 1559,while on a visit to Spain to prepare for the publication of the remainder of his work.
(4)
bernardino de sahagun
The Historia Universal de Nueva España of Fray Bernardino de Sahagun serves as a most valuable text-book for all students of Mexican antiquities.
The author was born at Sahagun, and entered the Franciscan Order in Salamanca, where he studied at the University. He went to Mexico in 1529, where he devoted his energies to the conversion of the Indians. He entered upon this task on the basis that, to convert the natives to Christianity, it was first necessary to know them, to understand their language, beliefs, and traditions, and, most of all, to be thoroughly versed
