niard, as changing perceptions that favored written titles worked against the indigenous town, but the unfolding of details of this case serve Hidalgo’s broader goal of complicating and revising the assessment of previous scholarship with regard to indigenous maps. In chapter 2, Hidalgo turns to the crucial role played by the indigenous painters of maps, and foregrounds their unique and powerful position as intermediaries between the Spanish and native worlds. The author details how painters, through experimentation, innovation, legal savviness, and intercultural and multi-lingual competency, adapted their skills over time to cater to multiple audiences. This adaptive power is further proved in chapter 3, where Hidalgo probes the material dimension of maps, showing howmaterials were adapted and exchanged. The chapter’s hefty discussion on how native painters incorporated European iron-gall ink and paper counters the narrative of decline associated with indigenous maps, and instead offers a model that understands indigenous mapmaking as a site of experimentation, transfer of knowledge, and willful and intelligent adaptation to new resources and political realities. Trail of footprints also counters pervasive notions that indigenous maps were marginal, distrusted, misunderstood, or even useless (I’ll use myself as an example, for before reading this book I myself held to the notion that the maps from the Relaciones Geográficas, for example, were nothing but a grand failure.) Hence, chapter 4 unveils the multifaceted effort to legitimize the contents of a native map through the practice of authentication, which made maps legible by relying on written notarial formulas designed to shape and classify individuals and their activities. Hidalgo admits that reducing signs and pictorial representation to alphabetic expression proved to be an imperfect process, but nonetheless his point remains that, in its quest for sameness, the authentication process showed that these maps were hardly inconsequential for natives and colonizers alike. Moreover, in the epilogue Hidalgo traces the afterlife of these maps, and through the figure of Lorenzo Boturini the author illustrates how the maps’ allure eased a transformation of them from legal objects to historical objects worthy of study and collection. Both studies derive their best insights from close visual readings and close attention to material history with which they confidently revise and challenge previous interpretations that may have gotten carried away by certain theoretical notions. But it must be said that they do so in an expansive manner that remains inviting and trans-disciplinary. In other words, these scholarly works prove that works of historical rigor need not be self-enclosing, but much like the painters at the center of their inquiry, this scholarship manages to remain open, nimble, and generous.

中文翻译：

---

征服的炼金术。科学、宗教和新世界的秘密，

niard，因为支持书面标题的观念不断变化，对土著城镇不利，但本案细节的展开有利于伊达尔戈更广泛的目标，即复杂化和修改先前关于土著地图的学术评估。在第 2 章中，伊达尔戈转向了土著地图画家所发挥的关键作用，并突出了他们作为西班牙和土著世界之间中介的独特而强大的地位。作者详细介绍了画家如何通过实验、创新、法律知识以及跨文化和多语言能力，随着时间的推移调整他们的技能以迎合不同的观众。这种自适应能力在第 3 章中得到进一步证明，其中 Hidalgo 探讨了贴图的材料维度，展示了材料是如何适应和交换的。本章对本土画家如何结合欧洲铁胆墨水和纸张进行了大量讨论，反驳了与本土地图相关的衰落叙事，而是提供了一个模型，将本土地图制作理解为实验、知识转移和有意和智能适应的场所新资源和政治现实。足迹足迹也反驳了普遍的观念，即土著地图是边缘的、不信任的、被误解的，甚至是无用的（我将以我自己为例，因为在阅读本书之前，我自己坚持认为来自 Relaciones Geográficas 的地图，因为例如，这只不过是一个巨大的失败。）因此，第 4 章揭示了通过身份验证实践使本地地图内容合法化的多方面努力，它依靠旨在塑造和分类个人及其活动的书面公证公式使地图清晰易读。伊达尔戈承认，将符号和图形表示简化为字母表达被证明是一个不完美的过程，但尽管如此，他的观点仍然是，在寻求相同性的过程中，认证过程表明这些地图对当地人和殖民者来说都不是无关紧要的。此外，在尾声中伊达尔戈追溯了这些地图的来世，并通过洛伦佐·博图里尼的形象说明了地图的魅力如何使它们从合法物品转变为值得研究和收藏的历史物品。这两项研究都从仔细的视觉阅读和对物质历史的密切关注中获得了最好的见解，他们自信地修改和挑战了先前可能被某些理论概念带走的解释。但必须指出的是，他们以一种广泛的方式这样做，并且仍然具有吸引力和跨学科性。换句话说，这些学术作品证明了历史严谨的作品不需要自我封闭，但就像处于探究中心的画家一样，这种学术设法保持开放、灵活和慷慨。