If Beristain read this, he may have been misled by the Latin of
"published," [36] _in lucem edidit_, which may indeed mean printed
and published, but also means quite properly published in the sense
of written in manuscript and copied and circulated. We agree with
Schilling [37] that this latter meaning was the one intended. One
other statement that Quiñones' works were printed may derive from
the same misunderstanding. About the year 1801 Pedro Bello wrote an
account, still in manuscript and unpublished, of the writings of the
Augustinians. His remarks on Quiñones, first printed by Santiago Vela
[38], we believe are only an extension of Herrera's _in lucem edidit_.

This same confusion in terminology has been used [39] to support
Beristain's claim by introducing as evidence the letter of Philip II of
May 8, 1584. Salazar, the Bishop of Manila, probably shortly after the
Synod of 1582, had written the King a letter, now unfortunately lost,
in which he spoke of a decision to standardize linguistic works. In
answer to the Bishop, the following letter in the form of a royal
cedula was sent:


"To the President and Judges of my Royal Audiencia situated
in the city of Manila in the Philippine Islands.--It has been
told me on behalf of Don Fray Domingo de Salazar, Bishop of
that place, that it was agreed that no priest might make a
grammar or vocabulary, and that if it were made it might not
be published before being examined and approved by the said
Bishop, because otherwise there would result great differences
and disagreements in the doctrine; and this having been seen
by my Council of the Indies, it was agreed that I should
order this my cedula which decrees that when any grammar or