SemOpenAlex |

SemOpenAlex

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2066406679> ?p ?o ?g. }

Showing items 1 to 100 of ±105 with 100 items per page.

W2066406679 endingPage "76" @default.
W2066406679 startingPage "43" @default.
W2066406679 abstract "The epigraph is telling of Nahua Christianity in an eighteenth-century Jesuit milieu. By all accounts the privilege and esteem of the Good Death Society, a Jesuit-sponsored sodality for the benefit of Mexico City Nahuas, was cause for celebration1; in fact, the resignation of the indigenous sacristan, who recorded the Society’s first election in a long series of entries in Spanish and Nahuatl in the official book of the Congregación de la Buena Muerte at the Colegio de San Gregorio, the Jesuits’ secondary school for Indians in Mexico City, reflected the cultural paradox of the juxtaposition of Indians and Spaniards.2 Furthermore, the semantics and praxis of elections differed between Spaniards and Nahuas. Nahuas had a cultivated corporate identity; the Spaniards also enjoyed common identification, but it was determined by a very different sort of social exclusivity.3Brought to me by accident at the Archivo Histórico in the National Museum of Anthropology in Mexico City, I glanced through the Buena Muerte manuscript as I waited for the page to locate the correct volume. Puzzled by the eighteenth-century Nahuas’ interest in a European formula for a “good death”4 but not surprised by their diligence in listing the name, provenience, and office of each member of the Good Death Society year after year—a list made all the more conspicuous by its significant increase in the use of Nahuatl as time passed—I wondered what might have provoked local Jesuits to seek approval from Rome to bring the institution to the Colegio de San Gregorio or compelled Nahuas to join and work so hard to keep the Congregation operational. It is important to point out that the Society held “elections” until May 24, 1767, and this suggests that neither the Jesuits nor the Nahuas anticipated the sea change in the events that followed.5In this article I argue that an analysis of the Nahuas’ Congregation of Good Death serves as a means to better understand the lives of indigenous peoples in eighteenth-century Mexico City. The manuscript, one of a pair, the other (now missing) presumably for financial accounts,6 is a rich store of information about Nahuas affiliated with the Jesuits and their Colegio de San Gregorio. As annals covering the period from 1710 to 1767,7 the membership register reveals much about indigenous naming patterns, social dynamics and polity affiliations, the continuing importance of titles and officeholding, gender roles and parity, and Nahua Catholicism.8 Assuredly, the sodality exemplified Nahua cultural vitality even toward the end of the eighteenth century.What was the context for the Jesuits’ Roman Bona Mors at San Gregorio? Is there evidence of the urban cofradía as a devolution of the ancient Nahua polity, or was it just another branch of another European confraternity? Finally, what can be gleaned about Nahua life at their Colegio, and in what ways did the Good Death Society influence indigenous concepts of life and death in and around Mexico City?The cultural distance between the Eternal City in Rome and the Imperial City in New Spain at the beginning of the eighteenth century was not as great as might be expected. European confraternities had been flourishing in both hemispheres for centuries, and in some ways the operation of the Jesuits’ sodalities resembled those of their religious counterparts. All the Jesuit groups were, however, affiliated with one of their colleges and its church and were in line with other Counter-Reformation prescriptions.The Marian congregations, the Society’s special brand of sodality, enjoyed the beneficence of Gregory XIII, who in his 1584 bull Omnipotentis Dei granted his approval for the aggregation of all such congeries in an archconfraternity. In 1587 Pope Sixtus V’s bull Superna Dispositione granted the Society’s Rome-based Superior General the right to communicate indulgences and the singular authority to enforce the conformity of all daughter congregations by means of a set of standardized regulations.9 Although the Jesuits were devoted to the worship of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Society’s organization was fundamentally Christocentric, with supreme emphasis on the suffering and death of Jesus; Mary was marginalized. The names of both the Bona Mors congregation and St. Ignatius’s Compañía de Jesús itself speak to Jesus rather than Mary.10Additionally, the Jesuits were careful to make clear the distinction between the principle and purpose of their post-Tridentine hierarchically structured “congregations,” as they were to be referred to thereafter, and lay confraternities in general. Uniquely individual-centered, students gathered together at their college under the tutelage of a Jesuit director to contemplate and enrich their spiritual lives. Using the “First Week” of St. Ignatius’s arduous Spiritual Exercises as a guide,11 Jesuit congregations were formed to facilitate each individual’s endeavors to achieve personal spiritual perfection. Only when some degree (or all) of this pious ideal was realized did the individual begin to reach out to family and others in the congregation. Always as individuals but sharing membership, the congregation then undertook charitable ministrations.12The Jesuits’ first congregation was the Congregazione della Beatissima Vergine Annunciata, established in 1563 at their prestigious Collegio Romano.13 Within 11 years a satellite institution, the Congregación de la Anunciata, was founded at their Colegio Máximo in Mexico City and soon reported a patronage of some 400 Spaniards.14 Shortly thereafter, another Anunciata congregation was established at the inchoate Colegio de San Gregorio for Nahuas.However, abundant information about early Jesuit congregation activities in Mexico City is hard to come by. At the Colegio de San Gregorio, Gerard Decorme noted the existence of the Marian Anunciata congregation and described the group’s Jesuit-directed religious parades through the city streets along with provisions of food for the poor; however, in 1701 it was replaced by the Congregación del Señor San José.15 Juan de Tovar, one of New Spain’s first Jesuits who subsequently became rector of the Colegio, reported that a second San Gregorio sodality, the Congregación de la Circuncisión del Señor, served the needs of many of the city’s foresteros.16 In addition, a will dictated in 1633 by a moribund Nahua included donations to both congregations along with a sincere wish that the two groups would reconcile their differences.17Confraternities in New Spain did not become common among Indians until the latter half of the sixteenth century.18 In his Nahuatl-language journal, Mexico City Nahua historian Chimalpahin presented a rare glimpse of the indigenous perspective when he told of the beginnings of two different indigenous cofradías (1591 and 1612). As an eyewitness to the festivities, he reflected on the Nahuas’ pride in participating in the city’s processions.19Doubtless there were numerous other indigenous cofradías in the capital by that time, but detailed information about them to date is scarce.20 Charles Gibson has suggested a chronological correlation between the disintegration of the traditional tlatocayotl-altepetl (rulership-kingdom, or ethnic state) and the ready acceptance of the cofradía as a means to retain some form of corporate structure.21 And while there were precedents for cofradías with similar purpose and organization in the precontact calpolli (one of a number of subunits making up an altepetl)—with deity, temple, ceremony, hierarchy of officers, and sociopolitical affinity22—one was not necessarily related to the other. In fact, the Nahuas seem not to have had their own term for the institution of the cofradía, which is also suggestive of its European origin. Rather, the cofradías’ appeal rested with popular expression in collective festivities, including the celebration of the liturgy and religious pageantry.23 Just how the Jesuits were able to successfully reconcile their emphasis on the individual as the fundamental premise of their congregation operation with the Nahuas’ traditional community-as-core organization is still not well understood.24 Nevertheless, their knowledge of indigenous languages and their long-standing commitment to furnishing Nahuas with a classical education at San Gregorio may explain at least in part a close relationship based upon mutual compromise.The Congregación de la Buena Muerte was a fairly late addition to the complement of sodalities at San Gregorio. In 1710 it had not yet received final approval from Rome, but the Nahuas (perhaps to demonstrate their good intentions) began to perform the requisite devotions and exercises in order to obtain the coveted indulgences.25 Officiating at the inauguration ceremonies was the rector of the Colegio, Father Diego Velez, who had received approval from the Society’s provincial, Antonio Xardón, to proceed with the establishment of the Buena Muerte sodality. Xardón and a cohort of Jesuit priests were on hand for the initial festivities.26There is no information as to why the Buena Muerte institution was established at San Gregorio. Perhaps the impetus was the enormous popularity of the Bona Mors devotion in Rome, for a now open membership encouraged the participation of people from all walks of life. Moreover, a Mexican priest was one of the ten founders of the Roman secreta group,27 and a daughter congregation already existed at the Jesuits’ Casa Profesa on the western side of Mexico City’s traza.28 Additionally, the Jesuits had been promoting a special devotion in honor of Nuestra Señora de Loreto since the middle of the seventeenth century, and the San Gregorio church was largely refurbished as a result. Creoles, too, were taken with yet another trendy pious observance, and they donated large sums of money. Among the benefactors was Captain don Juan Echavarría y Valero, knight of the Order of Santiago, who provided substantial revenues from his hacienda at Acolman to support the Colegio and church.29 A Mexican Jesuit, Francisco de Florencia, even went so far as to write and publish a book in exaltation of the mysteries of the Mary of Loreto.30In December 1712, the bulls arrived from Rome. The following March, along with approval and license from the Santo Comisario de la Santa Cruzada in Mexico City, official recognition of the Congregation and the indulgences was made public at the Colegio’s Nuestra Señora de Loreto Church in the presence of the Father Prefect and all the Nahua Good Death Society officers.31 But why did the Nahuas embrace this new institution with such enthusiasm?The Colegio de San Gregorio was probably as good a place as any for the Good Death Society.32 Indeed, even though arriving 50 years after the conquest and finding other religious and secular clergy well entrenched in the colonial capital, the Jesuits situated their headquarters in the epicenter of the city almost immediately. Capitalizing on their successful experiences at the Collegio Romano in using their schools as strategic founts for their Counter-Reformation evangelical endeavors,33 in little more than a decade foundations began to be laid for their colegios, or secondary schools, to educate the colony’s creole and indigenous student populations.34 With prime locations within a block or two of the cathedral, the Colegio de San Gregorio was established at the far edge of the Colegio Máximo compound, a one-way door leading into the Nahua students’ quarters. The Nahuas’ church next door, Nuestra Señora de Loreto, still stands at the end of the city block.35Although in many ways conspicuously peripheral to the Jesuits’ main enterprises (the only facility more marginalized was their school for Nahua girls, the Colegio de Indias Doncellas de Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe, established in 1753, which was even farther down the street),36 the Colegio de San Gregorio was ideally situated to serve Mexico City’s indigenous population. The school extended into the reaches of the old Tenochtitlan calpolli, the colonial barrio of San Sebastián Atzacoalco, and the home of at least one of the capital’s Nahua first families, the Moteucçomas. Considering the presence of the Templo Mayor, the precontact ceremonial centerpiece of the calpolli, it is difficult to overstate the significance of this venue. The seat of the indigenous counterpart of Mexico City’s civil government was in another Tenochtitlan district, San Juan Moyotlan, located to the south of the Jesuits’ schools.37 However, the interaction across the traza was such that even early on in its history San Gregorio’s rector, Juan de Tovar, went before don Antonio de Valeriano, the Nahua gobernador in San Juan, to petition for exemption from work and tribute payments on behalf of the Nahua boys in his charge at the school.38Filling the void after the demise some 30 years before of the Franciscan’s Colegio de Santa Cruz at Santiago, Tlatelolco, the Colegio de San Gregorio was established in 1586 by the Jesuits with the express purpose to educate the sons of elite Indians.39 But these were not to be boys just from the capital; rather, they were recruited from all over central Mexico, thus creating important Jesuit ties with indigenous populations well beyond their Atzacoalco neighborhood. The boys studied everything from reading and writing to theology and music.40 Latin was probably part of the curriculum for a select group. The Jesuits’ stated intent was that after several years the graduates would return to their home regions and assume local leadership positions in politics and church administration.41 They abandoned an earlier initiative for a Nahua priesthood, apparently allowing only the Texcoca Antonio del Rincón to join their Society of Jesus.42Gibson places little stock in the pedagogical endeavors at San Gregorio43; although no records of the students seem to be extant and we know little of their careers, the school enjoyed large, steady enrollments44 and managed to survive the political turmoil of both the expulsion of the Jesuits and Mexico’s independence from Spain. In fact, the Colegio served the indigenous community until 1848, when one of its graduates and also its last rector, the Nahua lawyer and politician Juan Rodríguez Puebla, died and the school closed.45 To date, the only other known San Gregorio graduate of any renown is the nahuatlato and historian Faustino Galicia Chimalpopoca.46As with the Collegio Romano and its Church of Saint Ignatius, it was not possible to separate the school’s congregation activities from those of its church. Of great importance too was the Collegio’s close affiliation with the magnificent Chiesa del Gesú, the Jesuits’ mother church and attached to their Roman Casa Professa. San Gregorio’s church, first called the Xacalteopan (Straw-topped Temple), was constructed in 1586 by some 3,000 Tlacopaneque, whose ruler, don Antonio Cortés Totoquihuaztli, reportedly stated that his ancestors had participated in the building of the cathedral, and expressed his desire to be part of the Jesuits’ church and school for Indians in Mexico City.47 Above all, it was the exquisite ecclesiastical musical performances in the same Xacalteopan that brought so much fame to the Colegio.48 But the consummate eloquence of the oratorical talents of its priests served to enhance its reputation as well. For example, the marketplace (tianquiztli) Christian preaching by the aforementioned Father Tovar was legendary. Tovar’s contemporaries, who knew him as the “Cicerón de mexicano,” noted that he “inspired not only the Nahua nobility, but the vilest of commoners as well.”49 The ceremonial temple and musical performances along with high rhetoric and a prestigious school, all in a familiar locale, were reminiscent of a not-too-distant past.As a stalwart advocate for the Colegio and his San Gregorio students, Tovar of course had only praise, and he reported that the Nahuas were “quicker than young Spaniards.”50 Many of the boys were star performers in church services, and as adults some even found positions in the elite circle of Xacalteopan cantors, who enjoyed great prestige.51 Other musicians held positions and performed at the cathedral and at festivities in the city.52 Thus, to find that even a century later hundreds of Nahuas were still involved in activities associated with the Colegio and were enlisted as officers in the new Congregation should come as no surprise.Most Indians worked in or near the traza, a 13-square-block section in the center of the city designated for Spanish inhabitants only. According to historian R. Douglas Cope, for the Spaniards, “the traza was the city.”53 Indians lived outside the traza in four districts following the precontact organization. One, renamed San Juan Tenochtitlan, initially more or less surrounded the traza. Laws prohibited cross-residence, but priorities for a prosperous colonial economy meant constant industry and movement in and out of Spanish and indigenous neighborhoods.54 The laws came to be enforced only when the Spaniards felt threatened.The Spaniards certainly considered themselves in great danger shortly before the Nahuas came together to form their Good Death Congregation in 1710. In 1692 Mexico City was the site of a violent uprising in the heart of the city, in the traza itself, and just a few blocks from San Gregorio. Although the uprising was exacerbated by famine, unemployment, disease, and generalized privation, colonial officials placed the burden of responsibility on traza Indians.55 They were blamed for setting fire to the viceroy’s palace and the building housing the cabildo and for looting plaza stores. Spanish pogroms produced guilty-enough parties and justice was served just a few days later at a public gathering when muskets were put to the heads of three Indian men, blowing away their skulls. The bodies were then hanged from the gallows, after the right hands had been cut off for display in various parts of the city. Eighty-six in all were tried, the great majority being indigenous men.56Still afraid, Spanish officials imposed restrictions on their activities, confining them to their barrios once again. Furthermore, they limited the number of Indians who could be together on the street at any one time and implemented dress codes and other measures to keep them in their own space and under control.57However, such barriers simply reinforced negative perceptions of colonial authority and enhanced the common ethnicities that had been operative for hundreds of years.58 As noted earlier, of the numerous manifestations of corporate identity, the indigenous sodality was among the most successful, for it afforded a sense of community that otherwise might not have existed in the city.It is possible that the 1692 riots represented only one of several ongoing conditions that influenced the founding of the Good Death Society at San Gregorio. Contemporaneously in Rome and elsewhere, there were similar conditions of hardship that were aggravated by epidemics, poverty, and the like. Death and the hereafter were increasingly of paramount concern, and with the Jesuits as the main impetus there was a purposeful augmentation of interest in an artful death. Citing Montaigne, “Men must be taught to die in order that they may learn to live…. Let us remove [death’s] strangeness and practice it instead.”59There was actually an illustrated “how-to” manual, the Ars moriendi, published in numerous languages and hundreds of editions since the end of the fifteenth century.60 The Jesuits were very familiar with Desiderius Erasmus’s version (1534), which likely served in some form as the basis for Society theologian Roberto Bellarmino’s classic edition a century later. As canon, the manual was to serve as a handy step-by-step guide for individuals and priests to ward off mortal fears and the devil’s temptations and to record a last will and testament (one last gesture to gain an indulgence).61 Moreover, as a text with vivid, fearsome illustrations, it had wide appeal, for the laity need not be literate to understand the best way to a holy death (see figures 1–2).An excellent example of a prominent individual concerned with such matters was reflected in the well-mannered living and dying of the celebrated Italian artist Gianlorenzo Bernini (1598–1680), a favorite of both royalty and popes, who epitomized the Jesuits’ state of the art of dying by the 1690s. Said to be among the founding members of the Society’s Roman devotion to the Bona Mors in 1648, Bernini spent the remaining years of his life as a pious devotee to a “good death.”62A fundamental precept of the Bona Mors organization was that by means of individual spiritual perfection and thus living the best life possible, one could anticipate death with complete confidence. Thus, where graphic representations in the Ars moriendi portrayed macabre skeletons knocking at one’s death door and devils and monsters lurking about as inevitable alternatives for the unfaithful, Bernini’s masterpiece, Sangue di Christo, reconciles God the Father, the Virgin, and heaven-bound angels surrounding a crucified Christ, whose exsanguinating wounds create a sea of blood that camouflages all else in the world. For Romans, Bernini’s paradigm for death was text, art, and piety as apotheosis.63 Nor was such a protocol for death unknown in Mexico City.Considering the atmosphere in Mexico City, then, the good news of indulgences for the Congregation was timely, since the Bona Mors was designed to meet the needs of three groups—the living, the dying, and the dead.64 The purpose was “to prepare its members by a well-regulated life to die in peace with God.”65 The Nahuas were by no means devoid of Christian spirituality: the 1692 revolt had occurred during the holiest of the city’s religious festivals, yet the rebels were said to have stopped their protestations out of respect when the Holy Eucharist was paraded before them.66 Christ-centered worship, with monthly, even weekly Communion, and Friday prayers and festival activities revolving around an altar or chapel with ecclesiastical artifacts portraying the image of a crucified Jesus: obviously, the Good Death devotion was well suited to the city’s Natives.67In 1710, 17 Indian men were elected to office in the Buena Muerte sodality. The offices by rank were rector, secretarios, asistentes, conciliarios, sacristanes, and çeladores.68 The çeladores represented the barrios of Santiago, San Pablo, San Sebastián, and Las Salinas and were charged with determining who all did not attend Congregation activities and why. A çelador mayor was responsible for noting the attendance, absences, and punctuality of all the officers and discovering vices or lapses in the moral behavior of the congregantes. He was to notify the Father Prefect as well as the barrio çeladores.69 All male officers were distinguished with the Hispanic title don, and for at least the first few years some of the highest-ranked offices were held by the same men.70At the same time 27 Nahua women were elected to counterpart offices of rectora, with two compañeras as assistants, and sacristanas, who were responsible for maintaining the good appearance of the altar and the church. In addition, there was a special office for the compañeras de la Virgen de los dolores, who were young, unmarried female congregants and were expected to be among the most punctual and devout as well as to recruit acquaintances. The doncellas would also be known as tlachpanque (sweepers). Finally, there were çeladoras from numerous barrios, women charged with determining if someone was ill and notifying members and the Jesuit Prefect so that appropriate care would be given. The çeladoras too were to report absences and illicit activities, which, unfortunately, could be cause for names being erased from the Congregation register. All these women are titled as doña, and in most cases their marital status and barrio are indicated.71Each year for the next 56 years the indigenous sacristans followed the same format, listing and ranking the offices, titles, and men first, with their marital status and barrio, then the women, with similar information. Recruiting efforts paid off immediately, for the officers soon had numerous compañero and compañera assistants, many of whom came from an increasing variety of neighborhoods. Jesuit schools and churches were not parish-based, so widespread participation in the Good Death Society was easily achieved. Some officers traveled considerable distances, in spite of possible restrictions on their activities. As the membership swelled, so too did the number of locales, with listings like “de la calle Tacuba” and “de hacia la Misericordia,” and sub-districts appear, such as San Antón tepiton and San Antón grande. Dozens of sites are recorded, and there is abundant evidence demonstrating constant movement of Nahuas about Mexico City.72Within 20 years, the register included a category of çeladores for afuera de la ciudad (outside the city limits). This indicates enlistment by both men and women of Congregation officers well beyond the traza to provincial towns like Azcapotzalco, Xico, Xochimilco, and Chalco. By the 1740s, considered by some to be peak years for the church in Mexico City,73 the number of male officers was close to 100, with nearly two and one-half times that number of women.74 These figures are particularly impressive, for they follow the 1736–39 epidemic, when some 200,000 people reportedly died in New Spain. Doubtless many survivors were drawn to the Good Death Congregation at that time because of the hoped-for benefits related to living well in order to die well, accounting in large part for the increase in membership.75Evidence of demographic crisis appears in the 1737 list, where a significant number of offices were not filled.76 In 1738 the mark of a small cross follows the names of many officers, perhaps an indication of attendance, for an alarming number of names were crossed out as well. When possible, a replacement (with a cross mark) was found, sometimes, but not always, from the same locale. Some names with cross marks have also been struck through, and it appears that some districts suffered greater losses than others. As a sort of personal code and tribulation on the part of the sacristans, the dash, the double dash, stars, crosses, duplicate crosses, and crossovers on the register’s pages reveal repeated efforts to maintain continuity of the Buena Muerte officer hierarchy during hard times.77Even more remarkable, though, in addition to the surge in membership after the epidemic one final indicator of change was that from 1739 on, whenever possible, Nahuatl-language entries, as with in qualli miquiliztli (Good Death), replaced Spanish headings, titles, and glosses.78 For example: “In nican tlapohualtin intequitzin in ceceyaca quimonemiliz … ica in itequipanolocatzin in totlaocoxcanantzin ipan inin xihuitl 1739 In toquichtin intequitzin …” (Here is the listing of each of the offices [duties] that are to be carried out in service to Our Lady of Sorrows in the year 1739. The offices of the men are … [translation mine]).79 The wording of the inscriptions and the hands of the sacristans changed, of course, but the Nahua voice prevailed thereafter.As the Congregation became ever more popular, its bureaucracy of offices became all the more elaborate. Among the titles for the men, the position of Nahua lector existed almost from the beginning; his duty was described as “lector de la doctrina y cuida los enfermos y congregantes de las panaderías.”80 Then, doctrineros and çeladores de pretendientes were added. Finally, the doncellas were divided into three distinct groups of tlachpanque (sweepers): inahuac Loreto (near the image of Nuestra Señora de Loreto), inahuac Santo Entierro (next to, or around, the image of the Holy Sepulcher), and tlanepantla (the area between the two artifacts).Additionally, sweeping, a ritual practice for purification that traces back long before the invasion of the Spaniards, was sacred work for women. Traditionally charged with maintaining cosmic order in the Nahua world, as latter-day vestal virgins the doncellas presumably performed similar functions as they carried out their spiritual and practical duties at San Gregorio.81Each year there were two dozen doncellas at least (and often many more) who enlisted, and one cannot help but wonder if it might have been their industry that prompted the Jesuits to create what came to be the first colegio for Indian girls in Mexico City.82 Established in 1753 across the street and intended to share the same church, the Colegio de Indias Doncellas de Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe enrolled some 20 girls, who were to learn Christian doctrine; to learn to read, write, cook, and embroider; and to develop other feminine skills.83To have their secondary school named after the Virgin of Guadalupe was fitting, considering the postepidemic Mexico City celebrations at that time and the designation of the same Our Lady as patrona of all New Spain in 1756.84 Yet the Virgin of Guadalupe was by no means the Indians’ only icon of succor, for 28 years earlier the image of Our Lady of Loreto from San Gregorio had been paraded through the streets to attenuate the ravages of a sarampión epidemic.85This large operation inevitably generated considerable paperwork. As additional officers, escribientes, that is, tlacuiloque yn quicuilosque yn cuenta ica Zihuacicitin (notaries who will keep the accounts for the women),86 were to help with the written records. On occasion there were tlacuiloque for the male officers, but most often they were assigned to the women—perhaps an indication of indigenous female illiteracy, although we do not know for certain. The last entries, in 1767, were quite like all the others, except that the office of asistente (for the Blessed Sacrament) was struck over with esclav" @default.
W2066406679 created "2016-06-24" @default.
W2066406679 creator A5014546403 @default.
W2066406679 date "2000-02-01" @default.
W2066406679 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
W2066406679 title "Jesuits, Nahuas, and the Good Death Society in Mexico City, 1710-1767" @default.
W2066406679 cites W1524963194 @default.
W2066406679 cites W1542453615 @default.
W2066406679 cites W178405447 @default.
W2066406679 cites W1815685355 @default.
W2066406679 cites W1977812926 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2006285268 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2013417984 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2014693904 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2017524633 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2034208298 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2037655592 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2037842351 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2041316285 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2061344613 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2096684205 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2098942706 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2100852824 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2103212318 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2106011845 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2111894177 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2114595590 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2114679279 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2121310492 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2127277896 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2132943903 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2136229881 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2138732421 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2148090522 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2149121137 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2158954325 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2160761201 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2312799581 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2320612098 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2321353361 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2323426358 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2328324252 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2331497739 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2333632962 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2343063612 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2592212707 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2729324932 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2797192996 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2798241874 @default.
W2066406679 cites W279858298 @default.
W2066406679 cites W2800909525 @default.
W2066406679 cites W3004880048 @default.
W2066406679 cites W3092810625 @default.
W2066406679 cites W404454932 @default.
W2066406679 cites W47641292 @default.
W2066406679 cites W572570565 @default.
W2066406679 cites W601321790 @default.
W2066406679 cites W615802798 @default.
W2066406679 cites W616178895 @default.
W2066406679 cites W623573166 @default.
W2066406679 cites W637044067 @default.
W2066406679 cites W658010683 @default.
W2066406679 cites W1489349552 @default.
W2066406679 doi "https://doi.org/10.1215/00182168-80-1-43" @default.
W2066406679 hasPublicationYear "2000" @default.
W2066406679 type Work @default.
W2066406679 sameAs 2066406679 @default.
W2066406679 citedByCount "36" @default.
W2066406679 countsByYear W20664066792012 @default.
W2066406679 countsByYear W20664066792013 @default.
W2066406679 countsByYear W20664066792015 @default.
W2066406679 countsByYear W20664066792017 @default.
W2066406679 countsByYear W20664066792018 @default.
W2066406679 countsByYear W20664066792019 @default.
W2066406679 countsByYear W20664066792020 @default.
W2066406679 countsByYear W20664066792022 @default.
W2066406679 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
W2066406679 hasAuthorship W2066406679A5014546403 @default.
W2066406679 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
W2066406679 hasConcept C6303427 @default.
W2066406679 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
W2066406679 hasConceptScore W2066406679C17744445 @default.
W2066406679 hasConceptScore W2066406679C6303427 @default.
W2066406679 hasConceptScore W2066406679C95457728 @default.
W2066406679 hasIssue "1" @default.
W2066406679 hasLocation W20664066791 @default.
W2066406679 hasOpenAccess W2066406679 @default.
W2066406679 hasPrimaryLocation W20664066791 @default.
W2066406679 hasRelatedWork W1993436326 @default.
W2066406679 hasRelatedWork W2015164543 @default.
W2066406679 hasRelatedWork W2033417960 @default.
W2066406679 hasRelatedWork W2121577132 @default.
W2066406679 hasRelatedWork W2312514561 @default.
W2066406679 hasRelatedWork W2315934196 @default.
W2066406679 hasRelatedWork W2321392793 @default.
W2066406679 hasRelatedWork W2326504415 @default.
W2066406679 hasRelatedWork W4241356829 @default.
W2066406679 hasRelatedWork W4252137346 @default.