{
  "id": "lugo-gramatica-mosca-1619",
  "type": "entity",
  "name": "Fray Bernardo de Lugo, Gramática en la lengua general del Nuevo Reyno, llamada mosca (Madrid, 1619)",
  "summary": "The only grammar of Muisca ever printed, by a Dominican born in Bogotá who held the chair of the language there, set in Madrid in 1619 with a character not in the Spanish alphabet because the language has a vowel Spanish does not. Its front matter lets the language speak in a sonnet; its last pages are a confession manual, which is what the grammar was for; and the editor who reprinted it in 1871 says the printing is too full of errors to be a secure text.",
  "locale": "en",
  "tags": [
    "americas",
    "new-granada",
    "language",
    "books",
    "printing",
    "seventeenth-century",
    "indigenous-peoples",
    "ethnography",
    "spanish-empire"
  ],
  "relations": [
    {
      "rel": "related",
      "target": "catedras-de-lenguas-indigenas"
    },
    {
      "rel": "related",
      "target": "santo-tomas-grammatica-quichua-1560"
    },
    {
      "rel": "related",
      "target": "molina-vocabulario-1571"
    },
    {
      "rel": "related",
      "target": "olmos-arte-lengua-mexicana-1547"
    },
    {
      "rel": "related",
      "target": "bertonio-vocabulario-aymara-1612"
    },
    {
      "rel": "related",
      "target": "montoya-tesoro-lengua-guarani-1639"
    },
    {
      "rel": "related",
      "target": "nebrija-gramatica-1492"
    },
    {
      "rel": "related",
      "target": "hervas-catalogo-lenguas-americanas-1800"
    },
    {
      "rel": "related",
      "target": "piedrahita-historia-general-del-nuevo-reyno-de-granada"
    },
    {
      "rel": "related",
      "target": "quechua-printed-lexicography-1560-1754"
    },
    {
      "rel": "related",
      "target": "timucua-printed-philology-1612-1627"
    }
  ],
  "questions": [
    "Was the Muisca or Chibcha language of Colombia ever written down?",
    "Who was fray Bernardo de Lugo?",
    "What was the only printed grammar of Chibcha?",
    "Did Spanish missionaries invent letters for American languages?",
    "What were missionary grammars of American languages actually used for?",
    "How reliable is the 1619 grammar of Chibcha as a record of the language?"
  ],
  "claims": [
    {
      "id": "c1",
      "text": "The title page of the volume read here reads \"GRAMATICA EN LA LENGVA GENERAL DEL NVEVO REYNO, LLAMADA MOSCA. Compuesto por el Padre Fray Bernardo de Lugo, Predicador General del Orden de Predicadores, y Catedratico de la dicha lengua, en el Conuento del Rosario de la ciudad de Santa Fe.\", with the Dominican arms, \"Año 1619.\" and the imprint \"En Madrid, por Barnardino de Guzmã.\" The book therefore states on its face that the author held a chair of the Muisca language in the Dominican convent at Santa Fe de Bogotá, and that the book was printed in Madrid rather than in the Indies.",
      "sources": [
        "lugo-gramatica-mosca-1619"
      ],
      "confidence": 0.95
    },
    {
      "id": "c2",
      "text": "The front matter contains a sonnet in which the language itself is the speaker, and it is worth quoting because it states what the book was believed to be doing: \"QVIEN eres tu que tan lixera buelas? La lengua Chibcha soy. Ado caminas? Del nueuo Reyno, a tierras peregrinas, Que tendrã mis verdades por nouelas. Dizes muy bien que a todos nos desuelas Con tu profundidad, di que imaginas? Que estudiando sabras lo que adiuinas, Que el docto Lugo preside en mis escuelas. Pusome en Arte siendo yo intricada. Y de Chontal me hizo tan ladina, Que causo admiraciõ al mundo todo.\" The verb the sonnet uses for what the grammarian did is \"pusome en Arte\" — he put the language into a grammar — and the pair it sets up, chontal against ladina, is the same pair the confession manual at the end of the book uses about people.",
      "sources": [
        "lugo-gramatica-mosca-1619"
      ],
      "confidence": 0.85
    },
    {
      "id": "c3",
      "text": "The address to the reader says the arte is arranged on the Latin model, \"Todo distinto, claro, y por su ordẽ, como lo esta en los demas artes de la Gramatica Latina\", warns that the only difficulty will be in the accent, and tells the reader that where the circumflex stands he is to pronounce long, placing the stress on that letter. It then answers the objection the author expects: if anyone says \"que este arte no es importante, o que no esta conforme a las reglas de Gramatica\", let him \"Toque con las manos, y experimente\". The appeal is to trial rather than to authority, in a book whose framework is nevertheless borrowed from Latin.",
      "sources": [
        "lugo-gramatica-mosca-1619"
      ],
      "confidence": 0.85
    },
    {
      "id": "c4",
      "text": "The book adds a letter to the alphabet, and explains why in articulatory terms. Lugo writes that the Indians in their pronunciation lack two letters, D and L; that Castilian Z is not to be sounded sharp but like S; and that to speak the language properly, \"como haze el Indio\", one must use \"vn caracter, ò letra que no esta en nro. A. B C.\", which usage has introduced and which \"es vna y. ypsilon inuersa\" — an inverted ypsilon, printed as a distinct sort. He gives the example \"hɣchaguɣ\" for \"yo soy\" and instructs that it be pronounced with \"los dientes abiertos sin cerrar los labios, y que la lengua no tope en el paladar\". That is a description by mouth position of a vowel Spanish does not have, published in 1619; the character is then carried through the body of the book, so the printer had to keep the sort in the case for some 150 pages.",
      "sources": [
        "lugo-gramatica-mosca-1619"
      ],
      "confidence": 0.9
    },
    {
      "id": "c5",
      "text": "What the grammar was for is printed at the end of it, and so is its cost. The last part of the volume is a confession manual in Muisca, commandment by commandment: at the seventh, \"Ipqua atabê vm mûbia guâ?\" and \"Iglesianâ guêuca ipqua atabê vm mûbia guâ?\" — have you stolen anything, have you stolen anything from inside the church. The Spanish rubrics between the questions instruct the confessor how far to go, and one of them reads \"Y esta pregunta basta para la India chontal, sin mas diligencia: porque la tal no sabe qual es ordenado, y con solo esto entiende.\" The same book that took the trouble to cut a new letter for the language also tells the priest to ask an unhispanicised Indian woman less, because she will not be able to tell an ordained man from another.",
      "sources": [
        "lugo-gramatica-mosca-1619"
      ],
      "confidence": 0.85
    },
    {
      "id": "c6",
      "text": "The nineteenth-century editor of the Chibcha corpus, Ezequiel Uricoechea, states three things about the author that the book itself does not. Lugo was \"natural de Bogotá\" — American-born, and his biography otherwise unknown; he taught for long years in the Dominican Universidad Pontificia at Bogotá; and, his knowledge of the language being notorious and his modesty natural, \"solo se obtuvo que escribiera la gramática i el diccionario bajo precepto de santa obediencia a un mandato del superior\". Uricoechea adds that this grammar \"anda impresa i es la única que existe\", and that two printings were made of it which differ from each other considerably.",
      "sources": [
        "uricoechea-1871-gramatica-chibcha"
      ],
      "confidence": 0.8
    },
    {
      "id": "c7",
      "text": "The same editor, who had every reason to praise the text he was republishing, instead files the sharpest verdict on it: \"Hasta la gramática impresa del P. Lugo está tan sumamente llena de errores tipográficos que en realidad no se puede tomar por texto seguro i solo el estudio comparado me ha hecho hallar las verdaderas palabras chibchas.\" He publishes it anyway, because \"aunque defectuosos estimo en más su valor histórico i su autoridad filolójica\" than a modern text of his own making would have. Anyone citing the 1619 sheets for the phonology of Muisca is citing a printing its own editor called unsafe.",
      "sources": [
        "uricoechea-1871-gramatica-chibcha"
      ],
      "confidence": 0.85
    },
    {
      "id": "c8",
      "text": "Uricoechea also names the structural defect of the whole missionary genre, and it is the defect of the Latin frame the prologue advertises. The Spanish authors of the age of conquest, he writes, took their model from a grammar that \"vino a ser el cánon universal moderno\", from which come \"las especialidades que vemos copiadas en casi todas las gramáticas americanas\". In Chibcha, he argues, there are not the four conjugations of Lugo's Arte — one in scua, one in suca, a negative and an interrogative — but only the two answering to the verb endings, the negative and interrogative being formed by adding a particle: from bquyscua, hacer, come bquy, bquy za and bquy ua. The grammar's categories are partly an artefact of the template.",
      "sources": [
        "uricoechea-1871-gramatica-chibcha"
      ],
      "confidence": 0.8
    },
    {
      "id": "c9",
      "text": "The printed grammar mattered more than its print run, because everything else stayed in manuscript and degraded. Uricoechea records that Lugo's dictionary \"es el que ha servido de base para todos los que hoi se encuentran\", and that those surviving copies, apart from a few added pages, are the work of copyists — \"jente inhábil, i poco o nada versada en la lengua española i casi ignorante de la chibcha\" — from which comes the great difficulty of deciphering them and the doubt in restoring the true words. The single printed book is the fixed point against which the manuscript tradition has to be corrected.",
      "sources": [
        "uricoechea-1871-gramatica-chibcha"
      ],
      "confidence": 0.8
    },
    {
      "id": "c10",
      "text": "Uricoechea attributes the difficulties of the Dominican school at Bogotá to rivalry between orders, writing that the Jesuits, \"deseosa de conservar el privilejio exclusivo de la enseñanza\", wished to destroy the Dominican establishment out of jealousy and rivalry. This is the editor's assertion, made in 1871 by a liberal scholar with a low view of both orders, and it is recorded here as his and not as established fact.",
      "sources": [
        "uricoechea-1871-gramatica-chibcha"
      ],
      "confidence": 0.6
    }
  ],
  "takeaways": [],
  "faqs": [],
  "evidence_tier": "secondary",
  "evidence": {
    "level": "industry_observation",
    "source_types": [
      "paper"
    ]
  },
  "moat_flag": false,
  "winning_edge": "Muisca is normally met in English as a line in an encyclopaedia entry — an extinct Chibchan language of the Bogotá plateau, with a grammar printed in 1619 — and Lugo himself as a name with no book attached. What is missing is the book. This object quotes the 1619 sheets: the title page that makes him catedrático of the language at Santa Fe, the sonnet in which the language answers back, the passage that adds an inverted ypsilon to the alphabet and describes the vowel by the position of teeth, lips and tongue, and the confessionario at the back with the rubric telling the priest that one question is enough for an \"India chontal\". Against that it sets the technical verdict of the man who reprinted the whole Chibcha corpus in 1871: the printing is too full of errors to be a secure text, the four conjugations are an artefact of the Latin template, and the manuscripts that depend on it were copied by people who knew neither language well. Achievement, purpose and defect from two documents that can be opened, rather than a summary of either.",
  "confidence": 0.85,
  "last_verified": "2026-08-12",
  "canonical_url": "https://hispanic-legacy.com/k/lugo-gramatica-mosca-1619",
  "api_url": "https://hispanic-legacy.com/api/k/lugo-gramatica-mosca-1619.json",
  "jsonld": {
    "@context": "https://schema.org",
    "name": "Fray Bernardo de Lugo, Gramática en la lengua general del Nuevo Reyno, llamada mosca (Madrid, 1619)",
    "description": "The only grammar of Muisca ever printed, by a Dominican born in Bogotá who held the chair of the language there, set in Madrid in 1619 with a character not in the Spanish alphabet because the language has a vowel Spanish does not. Its front matter lets the language speak in a sonnet; its last pages are a confession manual, which is what the grammar was for; and the editor who reprinted it in 1871 says the printing is too full of errors to be a secure text.",
    "url": "https://hispanic-legacy.com/k/lugo-gramatica-mosca-1619",
    "license": "https://spdx.org/licenses/CC-BY-4.0.html",
    "dateModified": "2026-08-12",
    "citation": [
      {
        "@type": "CreativeWork",
        "name": "Fray Bernardo de Lugo, Gramatica en la lengua general del Nuevo Reyno, llamada mosca (Madrid, 1619)",
        "url": "https://books.google.com/books?id=wbJkAAAAMAAJ"
      },
      {
        "@type": "CreativeWork",
        "name": "Ezequiel Uricoechea, prologue to Gramatica, vocabulario, catecismo i confesionario de la lengua chibcha (Paris, 1871)",
        "url": "https://books.google.com/books?id=iOE2kaPEHQsC"
      }
    ],
    "@type": "Article",
    "headline": "Fray Bernardo de Lugo, Gramática en la lengua general del Nuevo Reyno, llamada mosca (Madrid, 1619)"
  }
}