The Beatification of Ignatius de Loyola, 1610

There was ample evidence to buttress Moscoso's critique of Incaic symbolism in religious fiestas, though his assertion that Incaic dress was de rigueur for the indigenous nobility on ‘all’ civic and ecclesiastical occasions remains problematic. Certainly, there is little support for this in contemporary descriptions of civic ceremonies; it might be supposed that such splendour on mundane occasions would have elicited some comment on the part of the authorities. In 1787 the Cuzqueño savant, Ignacio de Castro, in his ponderous yet erudite encomium to the King on the occasion of the ceremonies marking the foundation of the Real Audiencia in Cuzco, recorded (somewhat patronisingly) the appearance of the indigenous elites in procession thus: ‘Los caciques y los Indios nobles de la Ciudad, de las Parroquias y de los contornos, eran los que aparecian al principio, vestidos no ya de sus antiguos trajes, sino del uniforme Español en caballos bellamente enjaezados que saben ya montar, manejar y adiestrar’. There is, of course, a strong presumption that this circumstance was the direct result of the strictures of Moscoso and Areche on the deleterious effects of Incaic symbolism, and Castro certainly seems to imply that Incaic costume had been the norm but had been recently abandoned, yet this awaits further proof. However, it seems to have been more the result of a related 1785 representation to the Viceroy by the Intendant Mata Linares, in which he called urgently for the extirpation of Incaic costume on festive occasions, and with it abolition of the office of the indigenous alférez real and the bearing of dual standards or banners on such occasions. This latter, he duly noted, was a custom singular in the entire Hispanic world, and the Viceroy, Teodoro de Croix, agreed to suspend such usages pending further advice. Neverthless, it is abundantly clear that Incaic raiment was worn on major ecclesiastical occasions. For all that, descriptions of only six of these have come down to us, each an eloquent testimony to the Andean ‘capacity for mimicry’ and ‘capacity for reinterpreting theatrical forms introduced by early evangelisation’.