Ambiguity In Peru

With the conclusion of Burns’ Into the Archive: Writing and Power in Colonial Peru, Burns asks the audience to considering broadening their analysis—enough so to be able to look at a source, as well as through them. In essence, this statement is a request of not just analyzing content, but a request of looking at the historical context behind the creation of the document. Burns emphasizes that the analysis of a source’s context may very well be just as important, if not even more important than the content itself, because Burns’ states her in quote that “…Whatever we may lose in the way of certainty (and, to be sure, definitive meaning can become more elusive if we study our sources’ ambiguities) is compensated by what we gain: many new, often

Burns makes a point to reference the Monterosso, the essential rulebook of how a notary is to operate. Burns points out that the Monterosso heavily focused on authenticity and objectivity, while following strict routine to maximize these factors. After introducing the Monterosso, Burns immediately contrasts this with prefabricated forms, and how these forms would act as a slippery slope to diminish a notary’s authenticity. This is highlighted through the signing of blank forms, which according to Burns, goes against “royal provisions” . The reason that these blank forms were signed by notaries was to further create ease in creating documents. No longer would notaries have the need to show up and be a witness to an event. With the use of blank documents, notaries could now write documents using information that was provided by their patrons. Burns explains the significant problem behind this: Objectivity is eliminated. These documents are supposed to act as a legal truth, but this cannot be done if a notary receives their information from their patrons. The information becomes completely subjective as a result, and the integrity of the document is put into question. This is precisely what Burns means by looking at the document. The time period of the document’s creation matters, as a notary may have signed off when the days of the Monterosso’s writings were honored, versus a time where money and convenience trumped provision. These differences highlight how there is more to a document than just the mere “truth” it may claim to