Our regular readers will know our fondness for everything related to the organizations the Basques created in the Americas during colonial times to protect, back, and support each other.  Of these early “Basque centers,” all of which were born under the protection of Our Lady of Aránzazu, the Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu of Lima was the pioneer.

This group, made up of the “members of the Basque nation in Lima” on February 13, 1612 was, along with those of Mexico and Chile, a “key point” in the network that the Basques wove among themselves in the New World.

This year, therefore, marks the 410th anniversary of the creation of this “brotherhood of Basques,” which is still alive and thriving today.

We here at the association and specifically at the blog have carried out many activities and published many articles in collaboration with this Brotherhood and with the Basque Center born of it, the Limako Arantzazu Euzko Etxea.

A long collaboration

The list of collaborations we’ve done with the members of the Brotherhood of Aránzazu of Lima and with the Basque Center born of it, both jointly and with mutual communicative support, is quite numerous and varied in topic.

We’ve translated, and published, the Basque version of the Novena a la Señora de Aránzazu, which the Brotherhood created over two centuries ago as part of its religious observance.

We’ve also spoken of its history as a Brotherhood, regarding not only its raison d’être, but also its outreach and its resistance to its forced disappearance by governmental decree.

We’ve even collaborated on two series of historical articles:

  • One series, which we began in July 2021, brings together historical articles regarding the Bicentennial of the Independence of the Republics of the New World.  There, we have been collaborating on articles regarding the participation of Basques in the creation of the new republics of the Americas that were created in the first third of the 19th century.
  • The other series, regarding the Basque guilds and brotherhoods in the Americas, was begun on December 18, 2021.  That was commemoration date for the 340th anniversary of the creation of the Guild of Our Lady of Aránzazu of Mexico City.  We dedicated a detailed article to that event, including a video filmed at the Sanctuary of Aránzazu itself speaking of those organizations, and a greeting from the Basque Center in Santiago de Chile, the natural heir of the guild the Basques formed in that capital.  We’ve also recalled the creation of the Colegio de San Ignacio de Loyola – Vizcaínas by the members of the Mexico City guild.

But, apart from everything directly related to the Brotherhood and its history, we’ve also collaborated on sharing many other issues and topics:

So, it’s easy to see, we’ve done a lot together, which we wanted to remember on the 410th anniversary of the Brotherhood’s creation.  It all got started when we published an article in 2014 which “opened our eyes” and helped us understand the importance of the groups of Basques in colonial America, and especially the Brotherhood of Aránzazu in Lima, because, after all, it was the first place where Basque from different places and territories joined together to defend their common interests.

Some time after writing that article and becoming aware of that reality of the Basques in the New World, we found in that world a contact, thanks to the internet, and from that was born all this hard joint work.

José de la Puente Brunke

José de la Puente Brunke has a PhD in history from the University of Seville and a bachelor’s in Law from the Pontificate Catholic University of Peru.  He is the lead professor at this university, ex-director of the Riva-Agüero Institute, and chosen dean at the School of Letters and Human Sciences at the same university, 2017—2020.  He was the editor of “Histórica” magazine and is a member of the “Revista de Indias” Advising Council.  His research focuses on social and political history in the Viceroyalty of Peru and the history of Indian rights.  A great historian, he is the son of antoher great historian, José Agustín de la Puente Candamo.

But, as is normal for these articles of ours with a clear historical facet, we’re going to bring you a scientific work written up by  a prestigious historian; in this case, José de la Puente Brunke.

This work is a part of the series of articles by renowned researchers focusing on the Brotherhood of Aránzazu of Lima and the other fraternal Basque organizations found throughout the Americas.  This series was published by the Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu of Lima as a book to celebrate its 400th anniversary.

Because of its interest, we’re sharing this series of articles, one by one, here on the blog, with the goal of making these scientific works freely available to all interested parties.

We’ve already published one of them: the work by Elisa Luque Alcaide titled “The Guilds of Aránzazu in the colonial capitals of Lima and Mexico City: a comparative review“» which we published in one of the entries dedicated to the commemoration of the birth of the Aránzazu Guild of Mexico City.

On this occasion, the article, by Dr.José de la Puente Brunke, is about the Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu of Lima itself.  It was first presented at the International Arantzazu and Basque Franciscans in the Americas Congress, held in Oñati, Gipuzkoa in 2000, organized to celebrate the 5000th anniversary of the founding of the Sanctuary.  Later, it would become one of the works presented at the 400th anniversary of the Brotherhood of Lima.  At the time, Dr. de la Puente Brunke was the director of the prestigious Riva-Agüero Institute.



José de la Puente Brunke
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú


The brotherhoods and guilds in the Viceroyalty of Peru have not been the subject of great interest for historians.  While the topic has been covered by many authors on general lines, or within the framework of works with a wider scope, the most noteworthy of which would be the one by P. Rubén Vargas Ugarte S.J.[2], guilds specifically studied are small in number.  In that regard, some approaches to the guilds in the whole of the Viceroyalty of Peru can be noted, such as the one by Olinda Celestino and Albert Meyers, referring to these corporations in the central Andes[3]; while its topic was the indigenous guilds, it offers a wider and clearer view of the history of guilds in general.  Another more recent work which must also be cited is that of Beatriz Garland Ponce[4], as well as the work by Jesús Paniagua Pérez on the Lima guilds of San Eloy and de la Misericordia[5], and two newly-appeared contributions: an article by Diego Lévano Medina, offering us an overview of the guilds in Lima in the 17th century[6], and the work by Ciro Corilla Melchor, in which he estudies the guilds of Lima from the point of view of ethnic conflicts[7].  In the case of the Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu, two authors have gone into some detail: Guillermo Lohmann Villena[8] and Elisa Luque Alcaide[9].  The documentation of the brotherhoods and guilds of Lima can be found at the Archives of the Society for Public Charity of Lima, a body that took over all the assets of these institutions as a result of a Supreme Decree issued in 1965 by President Mariano Ignacio Prado[10].

The origins of the Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu

At the beginning of the 17th century, the number of Basques residing in Lima was already important, and many of them were taking part in the most representative and powerful sector of merchants who carried out their work in the capital of the Viceroyalty of Peru.  It is known that from the beginning of that century, a group of Biscayans used to meet at the convent of St. Augustine, with the purpose of defining a brotherhood that would bring them together, which would come to pass a few years later.  However, by the 1610s, specifically on February 13, 1612, a bigger step was taken in the same direction, when a group of “the noble sons of the Basque nation” met in order to grant power via notary to six fellow countrymen of theirs to acquire, in their name, the Chapel of the Incarnation of Our Lady and the Annunciation of Our Lord at the Church of St. Francis.  The authorizers committed, at the same time, to jointly raise 10,000 pesos in order to fulfill the aforementioned purchase[11].  The operation also included the crypt, so that the members of the guild and their descendants could be buried there[12].  The following year, the designation of a commission to draw up the statutes of the nascent corporation was laid out, though it is true that the definitive constitution would not be concluded until years later in 1635[13].

The process to organize the Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu of Lima was a slow one.  For example, it took until 1619 to carry out the first election of majordomos, and the following year, the document recognizing the Brotherhood as the owner of the chapel acquired in 1612 at the church of St. Francis was finally issued, and it venerated Holy Christ and Our Lady of Aránzazu[14].

The constitution was published by Guillermo Lohmann Villena[15], and it was specified therein that first, the corporation would be made up of the residents of Lima who were originally from Biscay and Gipuzkoa, and their descendants, as well as those residents from Álava, Navarre, and the “four towns” of Laredo, Castro-Urdiales, Santander, and San Vicente de la Barquera.  The primary mission of the Brotherhood was set out to be the “exercising among themselves and with those of their nation to carry out works of Christian charity in life and in death”.

The right to be buried in the aforementioned chapel for all natives of the abovementioned locations was also established, for them and their spouses, unless the widows had been re-married with someone who was not a member of the Brotherhood, and their descendants, warning that in the latter case, any person who was “stained or defamed by Jew or Moor upon whom penitence was imposed by the Holy Office or who was married to an Indian or black mulatta or who had any vile profession” was to be excluded.

In that same constitution, it was repeated that the main goal of the Brotherhood was to “carry out pious works, mainly with the brothers thereof,” with these works including visiting ill Brothers at hospital, or helping out the poor in general, especially outsiders and “greenhorns” from Europe; visiting prisons and taking interest in the presence there of Brothers or of others originally from the Basque-Navarrese provinces; or trying to be aware of the arrival of “newbies” from the “nations of this brotherhood” to Lima in order to help them should they require it.

Moreover, the constitution clearly laid out that the Brotherhood must be perpetually exempt of “any ordinary secular or regular or clerical ecclesiastical” jurisdiction, without the archbishops or the superiors of the Franciscan order being able to “come in to ask for reasons or reckonings of the pious works it does or the money or charity it raises”.  However, Elisa Luque Alcaide has already pointed out that a circumstance that seemed to contradict that exemption from jurisdiction is the presence of the Franciscan convent’s guardian at the Brotherhood’s general assemblies, though he had no right to vote[16].

The Church of St. Francis, where the Brotherhood was headquartered, ended up taking in nine guilds, despite being a church that had been founded ot house a maximum of six[17].

In the last few years, as we have said, two articles specifically referring to the Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu have been published.  The first, by Guillermo Lohmann Villena[18], is a detailed study of the circumstances surrounding the foundation and early development of this brotherhood, including the aforementioned publications of its constitution, as well as an interesting retelling of the difficulties the Brotherhood’s chapel at the church of St. Francis of Lima went through, mostly due to the earthquakes that destroyed the City of the Kings.  The other is by Elisa Luque Alcaide[19], which is a comparative reflection between the guilds in Lima and in New Spain, specially referencing the social reach and validity of both institutions.  In this respect, in addition to pointing out that the Basques in Lima made up “the strongest core of the merchants in the city,” the same author also lays out the hypothesis that the members of the Brotherhood in Lima were more frequently rooted in the society of the viceroyalty than their peers in New Spain, given that the latter incorporated into their festivals those which corresponded to the patron saints of Basque-Navarrese territories, while the brothers in Lima only venerated Our Lady of Aránzazu and Holy Christ[20].

The Brotherhood and its members in Lima in the 18th century

It was in the 18th century when several members of the Brotherhood of Aránzazu had a specially noteworthy role in the society and economy of Peru.  Let’s not forget that the Bourbon reforms caused notable changes in the economy and commerce, which were especially important in Peru.  However, while it has traditionally been said that these reforms brought about times of crisis for the mercantile elite of Lima, it is true that recent research has shown that in the second half of that century, the ability of those merchants based in Lima to build fortunes was still quite strong, despite the fact that the city had lost its place as the center of mercantile distribution in South America.  This is what is claimed by Cristina Mazzeo, that by virtue of “free commerce” (not that that means total freedom), Lima lost its monopoly on some trade routes and territories, but never lost economic power.  The mercantile elite of Lima focused on new activities, such as the exportation of non-traditional products, the importation of slaves, and financial dealings[21].

In fact, it is clear that in the 18th century, an important number of Basque and Navarrese merchants arrived and settled down in Lima, and played leading roles in the economic life of the capital.[22].  Alberto Flores Galindo drew up a list of the “leading figures of the upper class of Lima” in the final decades of the 18th century through to Independence, with fifty names appearing on said list[23].  Upon analyzing that information, César Pacheco Vélez reached the conclusion that twenty-two of them were from Lima, one from Ayachucho, another from Trujillo, and the remaining twenty-six were from the Peninsula, having mostly arrived at Peru after 1750.  And of those twenty-six, fifteen were Basques or Navarrese.  But there were also sons of Basques or Navarrese who had been born in Peru[24].  Guillermo Lohmann Villena has precisely paid attention to the group of Basque merchants who were active in Lima in the second half of the 18th century:

The activity of the Basque businessmen in Peru is drawn up with such sharp profiles in the second half of the 18th century that their magnitude can only be measured by projecting it as the consequence, within the economic sector, of the course laid out by their predecessors, drawn by the call of their transatlantic destiny.  The coin of some and others could have been the old Plus Ultra, a constant promoter of the “beyond” of the expansive drive that beats, since time immemorial, in the veins of the individuals of that race[25].

While many members of the Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu were among the most important merchants and businessmen in Lima, it should be noted that their social prestige was quite varied.  It is interesting to note the case of Navarrese Martín de Osambela, born in the modest village of Huici in 1754, and who made a great fortune upon moving to Peru thanks precisely to the then-current-standing “free trade”.  Now, his fortune was quite important, and he himself managed to make a notable rise through the social ranks, but he never reached the highest spheres, probably because he never married anyone who as from an important Creole family[26].

It is also interesting to state the claims made by Paul Rizo-Patrón, who pointed out that while those who most stood out in Lima commerce in the 18th century were the Basque-Navarrese immigrants, not all were hugely successful, be it due to lack of ability, or because they worked without worrying about their social standing, or because they never had enough of an economic bonanza or the necessary social networking to rise up[27].

A notable case is that of the Querejazu family, whose members belonged to the Brotherhood, and who were one of the most power families in the second half of the 18th century.  Their main representative was Antonio Hermenegildo de Querejazu y Mollinedo,  who became the oldest judge of the Lima Court, and knight of the Order of Santiago, as well as the possessing one of the largest fortunes at the time.  He had been born in Peru, and was the son of a man from the peninsula who settled down in the Viceroyalty in the first half of that century, Antonio de Querejazu y Uriarte, originally from Mondragón, in Gipuzkoa, who ended up becoming a majordomo for the Brotherhood[28].  Obviously, he reached this last position thanks to his relevance in the society of Lima at the time: he was a knight of the order of Santiago, governor of Quijos y Macas, and prior at the Court of the Consulate of Lima, and in 1706 marred Juana Agustina de Mollinedo y Azaña, from Lima, neice of the famous Bishop of Cuzco, Manuel de Mollinedo y Angulo, who rebuilt the city after the 1650 earthquake[29].

In the documentation of the Brotherhood’s that is preserved, Antonio de Querejazu y Urriarte was first referred to in some information in 1704.  Indeed, in the meeting held on May 3 of that year, a list of all those who had offered charity for the the altar of Our Lady of Aranzazu was published.  There, both Mateo and Antonio de Querejazu appear, donating 100 pesos, with there being only five others who contributed more, with the highest ones being offered by the Brotherhood’s majordomos, Pedro de Ulaortua and Juan Bautista de Palacios[30].  The following year, according to the “List of brothers who have sent charity for the altar of Our Lady of Aránzazu in 1705”[31], Antonio de Querejazu again donates 100 pesos; this time, it is he who offers the highest sum.

From then on, Antonio de Querejazu tried to be elected a majordomo for the Brotherhood, but he only achieved it in the meeting held on May 3, 1713, when he was elected alongside incumbent Juan Bautista de Palacios, who by then was the Lieutenant General of the Cavalry.  Before that, Querejazu had been a committee member for the Brotherhood[32].

In the registry of burials held in the crypt of Our Lady of Aránzazu, several members of this important family appear.  So, on January 3, 1761, Tomás de Querejazu, knight of the Order of Santiago and canon of the cathedral of Lima, was buried[33].  In June of 1772, Juana de Querejazu, Countess of San Juan de Lurigancho, daughter of the aforementioned Antonio Hermenegildo, was buried[34].  In February of 1775, the latter’s wife, Josefa de Santiago-Concha y Errazquin, and on January 18, 1792, Antonio Hermengildo himself was buried.  On December 14, 1797, José de Querejazu y Santiago-Concha, Count of San Pascual Bailón, the latter’s son, was buried[35].

While little documentation has been preserved to our days regarding the Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu, some data are quite revealing about what the life of the corporation was like.  As an example, we can mention the issue of the material needs referred to in the daily operations of the Brotherhood’s chapel at the Church of St. Francis, and specifically to the fact that there was a black slave, as cited in several periods, dedicated to serving the chapel.  So, for example, by means of a receipt dated July 24, 1743, we know that a black man, named José Vicente, was purchased by those who were the Brotherhood’s majordomos at the time, José de Arescurenaga and Pablo de la Urrunaga.  This slave was aged 18, and was purchased for 300 pesos, before being sold back to his original owner for 350.  Now, slaves who served the Brotherhood were not always acquired against payment.  Some decades prior, for example, the Brotherhood had received a slave via a will, left by Captain Antonio de Monasterio Guren, who left said black man, named Antonio Mina, “to serve at the chapel of Our Lady after having served Mrs. Isidora Blanco Rejón, widow of aforementioned Monasterio Guren, for five years.”  The fact of setting out in years prior to the receipt of said slave by the Brotherhood caused a serious problem: the slave ended up in the hands of General Juan Bautista de la Rigada, who refused to hand him over to the Brotherhood.  Given this, the corporation sued the general at the War Court, which found in their favor, and so decreed on February 25, 1699, in a hearing led by the War general auditor, who was judge Antonio Pallares y Espinosa at the time[36].

The veneration in Lima of the Virgin of Aránzazu

As for the holidays celebrated to honor the Virgin of Aránzazu, P. Benjamín Gento Sanz stated the following:

The Basque colony, rich and prosperous in colonial times, was also generals in the extreme, by manifesting their religiousness with the Virgin they venerated, that of Aránzazu or of the Hawthron, which, in Basque, is “Aránzazu”, on the hawthorn, that brings back so many memories of those faraway mountains … The festivals held for the Virgin of Aránzazu were sumptuous, and the jewelry and gems dedicated to her worship are numerous, rich, and abundant[37].

But the comment made by his contemporary, Fray Diego de Córdova y Salinas, is much more notable, regarding a very specific event: receiving and placing, in the Brotherhood’s chapel in Lima, the image of Our Lady of Aránzazu, in 1646.  Here is the story:

The divine outsider was received in Lima with great pomp and joy by the residents, while bells rang from all the churches to celebrate their joy.  Once the holy image had been placed in its immensely wealthy diamond frame, which shone regardless of the sun, she left triumphantly upon the shoulders of the priests of the Cathedral and was taken to the main square, under the canopy, like the Queen and Lady of Heaven and Earth that she is, her sovereign face shining beams of light, giving life to all those who so devotely looked upon her.  She was accompanied by all the nobles and commoners of the city, the Viceroy, the Royal Audience, the Canonry and Religions.  She was taken on a procession with pomp and circumstance, lights, music, and dance; the streets and balconies were decorated with silks and rich fabrics to the home of the injured seraphim, Francis, where the following day, on the eighteenth of October of sixteen-forty-six, with the same fanfare, festival, music, Viceoy, and Tribunals, signs and tears of joy, and joy of an innumerable group of those broght toghether, the holy image was placed upon its hawthorn (divine rose among the thorns) inside a niche of elegant backing, to whose majesty run two curtains that were very hard to make[38].

The contributions of the members of the Brotherhood to paying the expenses that the festivals and everything that had to do with venerating the Virgin of Aránzazu were notable and continuous.  For example, in the beginning years of the 18th century, the abovementioned contributions were frequent and used to building the altar of the Brotherhood’s chapel.  When what was collected was not enough, some members on occasion would loan the corporation money.  This happened with Captains Pedro de Ulaortua, who ended up becoming prior of the Consulate’s Tribunal, and Juan Bautista de Palacios, who were, as was said before, majordomos of the Brotherhood in the first years of the 18th century.  According to books, in 1704, both were owed 15,133 pesos, which were sent the Brotherhood and then forgiven by each, and by all those brothers they were thanked for their service to the Most Holy Virgin of Aránzazu and for the good they had done and were doing in keeping the festivals and other expenditures of the Brotherhood going[39].

The sepulchral crypt of the Brotherhood’s chapel

We’ve already referred to the rights of the brothers in this corporation, as well as their relatives, to be buried in the crypt of the church of St. Francis.  One book preserved at the Archives of the Society for Public Charity in Lima relates those brothers who were buried in that chapel at the end of the 17th century[40].

In the following century, the ideas of the Enlightenment inspired new policies regarding burials: in an effort to improve public health, which was harmed by the stench arising from the graves where the dead were buried within the cities, it was thought that the best solution was to create cemeteries outside the city centers, so that the dead would cease to poison the living[41].  So, starting in 1808, after the inauguration of the General Cemetery of Lima, it was set out that all churches had to close their crypts, tombs, ossauries, and any place where burials had taken place.  It should be noted that the authorities made special mention of the church of St. Francis in this regard.  It was sought, according to a text of the time, to make it so that “our tempels and hospitals are no longer palaces of death.  At the Sanctuary of the Living God there can only be the pleasant scent of incense; and that of the salutory balm of pious things”[42].

We must suppose that there was a special concern among the authorities for the church of St. Francis as regards burials.  Indeed, it is stated that the prohibition of carrying out burials in that temple had already been imposed in 1804.  That year, the Franciscan religious built a pantheon near the Exercise House of the Third Order, opening it on September 23, and from that day forward, all burials in the church of St. Francis were banned by the superior orders of his excellency, the Viceroy Gabriel de Avilés, and the Archbishop, his excellency Juan Domingo González de la Reguera, the Great Cross of Charles III.  It is for this reason that all crypts were closed, and although the Brotherhood’s was still open, all new burials were prohibited, and the Guardian set aside sixteen niches in the pantheon to which the Brotherhood held rights(…)[43].

That is to say that all burials at the church of St. Francis were prohibited four years before the general prohibition of burials in churches.  But the closing of the crypt took place in 1808, when the General Cemetery was opened.  This closure was detailed in one of the Brotherhood’s books:

By the Provisional Rule that was printed and copied in the Archives of Aránzazu, the two aforementioned leaders[44] ordered that all the churches in this capital should begin to close their crypts, tombs, ossuaries, and other burial places, from the same day as the blessing and opening of the cemetery on, and to be verified within the fifteen days following June the first, prohibiting all burials so that they may never again serve as such, nor that there should be entry with the sepulchral stone, nor anything that denotes it[45].

Following these rules, the Brotherhood’s majordomos removed the bronze tombstone that had been there for over a century, having been installed in 1693, where the following inscripton was engraved: “Here lie the very noble and very loyal sons and descendants of the Province of Cantabria”.  What’s interesting is that in the same document, a series of precise instructions are laid out for those who wished to reopen the crypt, which ends with the following: “This explanation and notice is placed here for those who come later…; should it be necessary to remove it and enter into the crypt”[46].  Everything indicates that indeed, the closing of the sepulchral crypt of the chapel of the Brotherhood was done to the great dismay of the members of the same, who in some way wished to show that they hoped it could someday be re-opened.  This sorrow can be felt in the Brotherhood’s documentation, when referring to the niches reserved in the General Cemetery:

To compensate in some way the lack of a crypt of Aránzazu in its chapel, niches have been reserved in the cemetery … which are distinguished by the inscription that the belong to the Illustrious Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu[47].


[1]      This article was first presented at the International Arantzazu and Basque Franciscans in the Americas Congress, held in Oñati, Gipuzkoa, Basque Country, in the year 2000, on the occasion of the fifth centenary of the founding of the Sanctuary of Aránzazu.

[2]      Se also, among others, his Historia de la Iglesia en el Perú. Burgos-Lima, 1953-1962, 5 vols.; and his Historia del culto de María en Iberoamérica y de sus imágenes y santuarios más celebrados. Buenos Aires, 1947 (second edition).

[3]      Celestino, Olinda and Albert Meyers: Las cofradías en el Perú: región central. Frankfurt, Vervuert, 1981.

[4]      Garland Ponce, Beatriz: “Las cofradías en Lima durante la colonia. Una primera aproximación”. In: Ramos, Gabriela (compiler): La venida del reino. Religión, evangelización y cultura en América. Siglos XVI-XX. Cusco, Centro de Estudios Regionales Andinos “Bartolomé de las Casas”, 1994, pp. 199-228.

[5]      Paniagua Pérez, Jesús: “Cofradías limeñas: San Eloy y la Misericordia (1597-1733)”. Anuario de Estudios Americanos, vol. LII, N°1 (Seville, 1995), pp. 13-35.

[6]      Lévano Medina, Diego Edgar: “Organización y funcionalidad de las cofradías urbanas. Lima siglo XVII”. Revista del Archivo General de la Nación, 24 (Lima, May 2002), pp. 77-118.

[7]      Corilla Melchor, Ciro: “Cofradías en la ciudad de Lima, siglos XVI y XVII: racismo y conflictos étnicos”. In Carrillo S., Ana Cecilia (et al.): Etnicidad y discriminación racial en la historia del Perú. Lima, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú – Instituto Riva Agüero and World Bank, 2002, pp. 11-34.

[8]      Lohmann Villena, Guillermo: “La Ilustre Hermandad de Nuestra Señora de Aránzazu de Lima”. In Los vascos y América. Ideas, hechos, hombres. Madrid, Banco de Bilbao y Vizcaya Foundation, 1990, pp. 203-213.

[9]      Luque Alcaide, Elisa: “Coyuntura social y cofradía. Cofradías de Aránzazu de Lima y México”. In Martínez López-Cano, María del Pilar, Gisela von Wobeser, and Juan Guillermo Muñoz Correa (coordinators): Cofradías, capellanías y obras pías en la América colonial. Mexico City, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, 1998, p. 98.

[10]     Celestino y Meyers, op. cit., p. 195.

[11]     Lohmann Villena, op.cit., p. 203.

[12]     Benjamín Gento Sanz O.F.M., in his monography about the Church of St. Francis, makes reference to the burials of the members of the Brotherhood held in that crypt. Gento Sanz O.F.M., Benjamín: San Francisco de Lima. Estudio Histórico y Artístico de la Iglesia y Convento de San Francisco de Lima. Lima, Imprenta Torres Aguirre S.A., 1945, p. 210.

[13]     Lohmann Villena, op. cit., p. 204.

[14]     Ibíd., pp. 204-205.

[15]     Ibid., pp. 206-210.

[16]     Luque Alcaide, op. cit., p. 98.

[17]     Garland, op.cit., p. 210.

[18]     Lohmann Villena, op. cit.

[19]     Luque Alcaide, op. cit.

[20]     Luque Alcaide, op. cit., pp. 94 y 101.

[21]     Mazzeo, Cristina Ana: El comercio libre en el Perú. Las estrategias de un comerciante criollo. José Antonio de Lavalle y Cortés, Conde de Premio Real, 1777-1815. Lima, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 1994, p. 230. On this same topic, see also Rizo-Patrón Boylan, Paul: Linaje, dote y poder. La nobleza de Lima de 1700 a 1850. Lima, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 2000, pp. 37-47 y 71-78.

[22]     In any case, the importance the Basque in Lima already had in the 17th century should not be omitted, as regards the economic and cultural life.  A good example of this is given to us by Biscayan Juan de la Plaza, who, in the 1620s, founded a bank in the capital, which would be the third, as by then there were already two others, founded by Bernardo de Villegas and Juan de la Cueva, respectively; the latter was famous for the spectacular bankruptcy that took place in 1635.  Margarita Suárez makes reference to the fact that there was a great deal of resistance to de Plaza’s founding a bank, and that the written support of several merchants in Lima, many of the Basque, was required.  See also: Cfr. Suárez, Margarita: Desafíos transatlánticos. Mercaderes, banqueros y el estado en el Perú virreinal, 1600-1700. Lima, Instituto Riva-Agüero – Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Fondo de Cultura Económica, Instituto Francés de Estudios Andinos, 2001, pp. 70-72.

[23]     Flores Galindo, Alberto: Aristocracia y plebe. Lima, 1760-1830 (Estructura de clases y sociedad colonial). Lima, Mosca Azul Editores, 1984, pp. 74-76.

[24]     Pacheco Vélez, César: Memoria y utopía de la vieja Lima. Lima, Universidad del Pacífico, 1985, p. 189.

[25]     Lohmann Villena, Guillermo: “Los comerciantes vascos en el virreinato peruano”. In Los vascos y América. Actas de las Jornadas sobre el comercio vasco con América en el siglo XVIII, y la Real Compañía Guipuzcoana de Caracas en el II Centenario de Carlos III. Bilbao, Fundación Banco de Vizcaya, 1989, p. 55.

[26]     See also Hampe Martínez, Teohdoro: “Auge y caída de don Martín de Osambela, comerciante navarro en el Perú (ca. 1754-1825)”. In Revista del Archivo General de la Nación, N° 22 (Lima, 2001), pp. 273-292.

[27]     Rizo-Patrón, Paul: “Vinculación parental y social de los comerciantes de Lima a fines del periodo virreinal”. In Mazzeo de Vivó, Cristina Ana: Los comerciantes limeños a fines del siglo XVIII. Capacidad y cohesión de una elite. 1750-1825. Lima, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú —Dirección Académica de Investigación, 1999, p. 20.

[28]     Central Archvies of the Sociedad de Beneficencia Pública de Lima (hereafter ACBP) book N° 8178, f. 15 vto.

[29]     Lohmann Villena, Guillermo: Los ministros de la Audiencia de Lima en el reinado de los Borbones (1700-1821). Esquema de un estudio sobre un núcleo dirigente. Seville, Escuela de Estudios Hispanoamericanos, 1974, p. 110.  Regarding the Querejazu family, see also Rizo-Patrón: Linaje, dote y poder… cit., pp. 106-109.

[30]     ACBP, libro N° 8179, f 190.

[31]     ACBP, libro N° 8179, f. 192 vto.

[32]     ACBP, libro N° 8179, f. 203 vto.

[33]     ACBP, libro N° 8178, f 12.

[34]     ACBP, libro N° 8178, f. 15 vto.

[35]     ACBP, libro N° 8178, ff. 16, 19 y 22.

[36]     Cfr. ACBP, libro N° 8180.

[37]     Gento Sanz O.F.M., op.cit., p. 210.

[38]     Córdova y Salinas, Diego de: Crónica Franciscana de las Provincias del Perú (New Edition with Notes and Introduction by Lino G. Canedo, O.F.M.). Washington, Academy of American Franciscan History, 1957, p. 529.

[39]     ACBP, book N° 8179, f. 188. It is specified that of the 15,133 pesos owed to said majordomos, 8,314 were owed to Juan Bautista de Palacios, and 6,819 to Pedro de Ulaortua.

[40]     “Libro de los hermanos que se mueren y se entierran en la bóveda de la capilla de Nuestra Señora de Aránzazu que corre desde el año de 1695”.ACBP, book N° 8178.

[41]     See also. Casalino Sen, Carlota: “Higiene pública y piedad ilustrada: la cultura de la muerte bajo los Borbones”. In O’Phelan Godoy, Scarlett (compiler): El Perú en el siglo XVIII. La era borbónica. Lima, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú -Instituto Riva-Agüero, 1999, p. 326.

[42]     Casalino, op. cit., pp.338, 339 y 342.

[43]     ACBP, book N° 8178, f. 23 vto.

[44]     Referring to Archbisohp Las Heras and to Viceroy Abascal.

[45]     ACBP, book N° 8178, f. 26.

[46]     ACBP, book N° 8178, f. 26 vto.

[47]     IbId.

The Bicentennial of the Independence of the New World Republics series is a project of the Euskadi Munduan Assocaition, the Limako Arantzazu Euzko Etxea, the Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu of Lima, and the Editorial Archives of Oiga Magazine.

Header photo: Recipient for the Holy Oils, Brotherhood of Our Lady of Aránzazu of Lima, 17th century.  One of the few assets that was not seized