Earthquakes as God’s punishment in 17th- and 18th-century Spain AGUSTIN UDIAS Faculiad de Fisicas, Universidad Complutense, 28040 Madrid, Spain Corresponding author (e-mail: audiasva®jis.ucm.es) be nis areal bined hat berth El htt carts ners considered 5 ‘rot osrences rl oem ines However his ean verumpiicaon, esi cen Sperich wragihe evan a one nine king we he tvpnke and regarded the ts ratrl exceerces Some the Avsotelon ccc ston ‘ezarded them as God's puch sin oop Te cecustce ofa derive carbauake {n'Mtagn in 1680 trough his quevin tat pen Aa ie mom were rene asin the relia serptation The Eston crhguake of | Novem (758 ar he Sect tains cased conser di se many Spr cc. and the eatapabe we [Ex choot Sin. Mr tht cothgaic shana etre of pops ri hon a htt, ih Iuake was ‘atu r ooeraa closians ad ios cn bet shes. ‘Reimpotr group defied be atta chute the occunens a deped be exaust peston of tr orponen tis generally believed that hfe the Enlighinment carthquskes "sere considered a8 sigs of the Wrath {f God as porisiment for men's sins According 10 this oflensepesed opin, earthquakes were mot ‘considered a naira icunmcnces and the objet ofa Seteaibe study uni modem times. This changeit ‘mentality wsualy is thogaht to have occured ater the Lisbon eantkuake of 1788. As we wil ee, his is an oversimplifiation, in that even inthe Middle Ages most wesir authors in academic cirles con sidered earthquakes to be naturel eccurenes. Ths oper invewigates Spanish ators ofthe Tet o 3th fires and ther opinions nthe cause of ch ‘wakes In this study we have to distinguish between Popular and religious wetings and thos of eademe etre, uty writen by university professor. We comsier as religious writings sermons by the clergy fapd documents such as pasta eters ron Bishops ‘They der rom popular writings, usally ancey mo which aio inslded religious sorsieations. The question abo Gas inferemtion comes int the fpenon theoceason ofthe cccumerce co cesraive tuthqlaks, We wil consider hee the reactions alte ‘vo eathguskes that caused major danke insouhern Spain: tht of 9 October L680, in Milas, snd the {isbn cathguake of 1 November 1755. Both events frve ve toa considerable mamber of publigtons in ‘which different interpretations were present ‘The Aristotelian doctrine on earthquakes Up to she laze 17h contury in the west, ideas about che origin of eanbyuakes were based on the Arisottian doctrine, Aristotle ‘proposed his doetine on cuthauakes inthe Meteor: Dlogiconum Lari I. in these books he consiered “aaious phenomena, such as ran, clouds, unde, lighing aid winds, vow included in the modern science of meteorology. but also comets, the Milky ‘Way and eanhken According to Aso, ear aquiker were produced by the dred exhalatons pints or wind) wapped in cavities inside the anh uying to escape toward the ouside and ‘making the Earth sake. The winds (pnewna) ‘Were inroduced ftom oulide oc generated inside thee cavities. Fr this eason, Aisolle considered ‘tha regions with abundant caves or cavities in the Earth wore more pron (0 earthquakes, In his tet ‘ment ofthese phoromena there was ro mention of ‘anything mysterious or sipematral in thei acer: ‘rence Pliny the Eker and Seneca, two Latin authors Ofte frst century, wore very influential in he ears ‘Middle Ages, and they pretemted ts Asisovelisn doctrine with some nino changes. Early Chistian ‘authors, sch ay St Isidore of Seville in he seventh Gentury and the Venonble Bede in the eighth century, repeated Play's and. Seneca's dex. They also wrote nothing akout divine intervention in cambquakes. Between the 120) and the 13th century, Aisles works were Wanslated into Latin, fist fem Arabic and then fom the angina Greek. University profescrs om this period ‘wrote commentaries on the teases of Aristotle incading’ the Aeteorofogica Two of the mos import 13ih-centry commentators on Avis were Albers Mags and Thosnas Agus. Aas Fron: KOUBL-EDERT, Me) Geoegs and Religion: History of Harmen ard Hostile DOL IUIIES/SPH10. OHIS4719/09/S15D0 1 The Geologic Soity f London 200,2 A.uolas roe Tong commentary divide io 20 cepts, fon the subject of canhquakes, but he never mentioned that earthquakes are signs of God's ‘wrath (Albertus Magnus 1890) Aquinas, known specially for his monumental theological work, terove a mote lierl commentary, chiding Arioo- tle's Greek text ais Lato translation, He also did ot include any religious commentaries on earth ‘quakes. Because of his influence on later Catholic Shihors, Hs imporianl 19 seareh in is olor works for religions considerations of eathguakes ‘The only place where these rs found isin his eon rmontary on Ps 17, wiscussing the verse: “The fan swayed and qisked, the foundations of the mountains tembled and shook shen fis ath flared up’ Fist, he affirmed that te fist ese of ‘oe motion is divine will. Second. he sated tha xigiment of eanth tremors lo dine wrath h ‘only. etaphorical (hare exprimit- meraphorice) land the tention to move men to penance bas to be understood ina mystica sense (tice destena ur perhoccommott onan ae poentoriam. In the following paragraph, he explained the eigin of camhauakes according 0 Avitwelin ideas. This, his authoty armor he itd 10 support tt earth ‘quakes were tought t be caused by divine wrath (aguins 1915), ‘Aristo's doctrine was predominant in weserm universities ine Heth to Ith centuries. Among the ‘Spanish commentators on Ankotl's Meteora. iglea was Alfonso Perey (876), who dedicated tives chapters tothe subject of eamthquakes. The ‘only reference 1o Gee's intervention he ade was in respect 0 the earthquake atthe tine of Chis’: (ath. Perez comideved tis eanhuake vo have teen caused directly by Gallas signe the reaction ‘of maure tothe death of Christ on he cross Francisca ‘Maia dea Liana (1615) wrote @ more extended commentry on eartgkes, giving a desi Hit oF ‘effects produce by them. He state thatthe fis was the fear and teror they produced, and ade ‘God makes everything in order 10 bring to His serve thove who ive having forgtien it” This was bis only mention ofthis wet. Francisco Alfonse (edD) a profes inthe Jenuit Cllege of Alcala, ‘published a hid commentary. He added the Anis. {etelian doctrine the presence inside the Earth inflammable material sich a slptur and bitumen asthe cause of sabterancan fies. Again. there was ‘fo mtion in his Work of Gas interven Spanish authors before the Lisbon earthquake Citic of Aristotelian ideas on ether subjects by the proponents of modern science extended also fo the origin of earthquakes. Martin Lister in England in 1648 and Nicolas Lemery in France boat 1700 were the frst propose tha earthquakes ‘were produced by lags explosions of inflammable ‘materiel formod bya combination of sulphur coal, hitre and other substances accumulated in the ants Ineroe. The explosive theory became very popular snd can he four ska in Newton's Opes (1718) and Butfon’s Hisaire marurele (W7A9~ 1788) (Taylor 1975), Im Spain those ideas were rice with organist point of view, in which the Earth was compared with living organism, In this respect there was an important inuense on Spanish authors by -Athonesus Kisehsr (1601 1640), est professor at the Collegio Romano, especially in his work Manaus Subrerranens (668) (Glick 1971: Capel 1980). Kircher proposed the existence in the interior ofthe Earth of thee ‘sate of conduits thrugh which fs, str nd tir ciculated. He called these systems pyrophylae tha. Apophylacia and erophtacias The Girt ‘wore relate fo the volcanoes and connected them wih firs nthe ome of the Hanh, Kircher toght earthquakes we fof condbits. with fie heating the ait, which expanded, causing the Earth to tremble. He adéed also the explosion of inflammable materials. Jose Zaragoza, a professor of matheraties a the Jesuit Imperial College of Madrid. was considered to be one of the Best Spanish mathematicians of bis tim, and he tented th subjoct of earthquakes Jnhis work on astomomny and geophysics Zaragoza 1675). After explaining the Aritoseian theory ad Kirchersidoas, he adds Itseems more ascording to Cristian Philosophy” thar many times earth quakes are natal eflet and at other times God uses them, or lets the Deion da it inorder 10 punish men” This is an expliit cation. in a putely sciatic work, of God's intervention ia enupeakes.althigh Zaragora ited Uh only ‘1 sire occasions could they be dredy abated. to God as a punishment. It is imeresting that Zaragoza considered, 26 another possibilty, tha Sometimes Gad may peomit the Devil 10 cause ceantpakes. Toms Vicente Tosa, 2 priest of the Oratory. in his mnumcetal nine-vlame work Componio mathenatico, site 8 shor shaper On feanhypakes (Tose 1707-1715) He expired that earthquakes were caused by explosions of jaflammable materials inside the Earth siilar to those in mies: he dig pot mention God's interven tion in thom. This ako the cise tn the pcs tueaie of AndeésPiguer (Pier 1783), Diego Torres de Villaroe, 2 professor atthe University of Salamanca, published the ist com plete work on earthquakes in Spanish (Tomes de Nittaroot 1748). tn this lengthy weatise. i which Kircher's onganicint tess tere mixed with the ‘explosive theory, there Was ony shor mentionEARTHQUAKES AS CODY'S PUNISHMENT of the religious prublem. After describing the destructive power of earthquakes. which “kvel buildings and: mountains and destroy cies and provinces, Torres ce Vilaroe! wrote thst thete ‘lemarnena sean tobe pretenatral nd canbe con sidered astirales.covchding.wecam belive tht {hey are God's wrath, punishment and. sited by Hit Majsty for our sins and i his way they are deseribo by Cahalic physicist Another group of Spenish authors who con sidered carhquakes are those Writing about the newly discovered nds of Central and South ‘America, where large desrctve earhqukes are common. They woe forthe learsed public. pe ‘ening the natural aspects ofthe ew Tas. Four Of the mest important of those authors were Jose {Se Acosta (1590) and Bermané Cobo (1890), both fof hom were Jesuit missionaries, and Antonio de Uiles and Jorge Jaan, who were naval officers and Scientists patciating in the meastrement ofthe smenidian atthe egealor (do Ulloa & Juan 1738). ‘This effort was organized hy the Feach Academy cf Sciencex The uthors describe some of the largest earthquakes in Peru and Chik. which had ‘been folloeed in some easss by tsunamis, They speculated shout the nature of carthguakes in Similar-terms 10 other comtemporary Spanish authors, but did not make any reference 10 God's Intervention. This is important because some of the earpaker described caused thousands of ‘estates and for de Aco ard Cobo. they woud have bsea a stable occasion for a ‘eligous consideration, The 1680 Malaga earthquake [Risonethingto write about carthauakes fromthe a ‘ene point view, bata vry afferent thing to doi ater fisthnd expeience of «damaging shack. On9 ‘Ocioher 1680 a desmuctive cartnquake took place with its epicente near Malaga, Ht caused 60 deans tnd injured 150 people, and. caused. widespread ‘estrction inthe Gy and pea towns ts aeni= tude has heen ested as M, = 65 (Maron & Usias 1988). Six cays later the bishop oF Malaga, Aloneo de Toms, wate Yong pastoral letor in Winch he made it very clear thatthe earthquake had been caused by the many sins ofthe people of Msloga. In the fist parasraph fe expressed the ide tat the cause of so mich cress i ua sing, and supgesed that the ealaities and howars wor the effec of cur evils, whieh forced God to make us experince his punishment, In te rst of fis commentiry be provided many. quotations fron the Bible and exe is ear to change thei ves and make penance so as be reconciled wih God, Ate ete ordeced al he priests of 35 ioceses to make public penanees and atone for ‘har scandals and sins eipious processions Were ‘mage im all churches the following Sunday (de ‘Tomie 1680), An anonymous popular descripion of the cathgeake, published shonly afterwards, Ihegan with asentense declaring tht the cause of tho carthguake had been many sins and thatthe jsice of God had Id the harshess of his wrath Upon the people. The description then sonsidered that Gaal es used the creatures tbat benefit men to be snsuments of thir ruin, terror end ent (Canceymous 16802). In another publication ofthe tame (ype. wich relaed how the shock wk Fel Jn Made. the canhqanke, together, with eter cal mites, a5 considered a3 wating from God {0 take pence and fepent of ev eusioms. Iwas ated that though these events Gea desied that ten tar to him (Anny T6808). Most other documents of popular character recouniing the danae of the’ 1680 earthquake fecepted it as a clear sign of the deplete of God and punishneat for the sins of the people ‘There were no dissenting voices and no alles to refute ths idea. Although we have seen tht a that tie university professors in Spain expsined the natural causes of earthquakes using Aristtcian tutial philosophy, oe Ive not four! any daca ‘ment that applied these idess to this actual earth ‘quake. The only document with a known author, Signed by the Priest Antonio de Cea y Panag, fonceraal_ how the carhquahe was felt in Cordova. The author, an ats staduate, refused 10 sake a natural explanation, and wrote: "se will ‘omit the pbilossphieal question (Mules here) fon the cise of earthquakes, when forthe knowl feige of piety inthe Fast Cause against the obvious bier acts of his justice, the clear testimony of his clemency Is enough (Ge Cea y Paniaga 1680), He recognized th there were aso natural uses fof earthquakes. but they were aot applicable 10 this case. He considered. pertinent only the feligious sosigerstions. ‘The eanhquake occured dating the eign of (Charles Th tbe st king Uke Spanish Austrian séynasy: this was atime of cultural and econorae ‘Seay and of exacerbated felgious ferveur Ths Fra hoemafen prevented the reas behind refer. fing fo the carhqucke es a supernatural event (eteiro Barbero 1986). However, evoking the wweath of God immediately afer an canhquake ‘Was ot an exclisvely Sparish phenomenon of the tn, Similar ideas were wed then by Protestant sreechers in Englaa. For example, Thomas Doolt Ale the Purkan ministr of t-Alpnage, Londen, js sens alter the London earthquake of 1692, itinguived between earthquakes that Were ‘cased indirectly and dieetly by God, The lator frovoked the human response of fear, tremblingand immediate contition. Doone called i aly fear’ that i an setivating fear that produced moral eves: the greater the fear, the more wense the reforming piety (van Wetering. 1983) ‘Thus some carhguakes, iclaling the London 1692 event, were dietlyatribued w God with 4 religous purpose. However, this was nota wiversa tite of religious considerations ofthe tine. A ‘ear contrary example was the reaction of Gaspar de Villatoel, Bishop of Sentiage de Chile, alter the ‘caustic eathyuake of 3 May. 1607, ‘which Toul desroyed that city. Reflecting on Whether the earthquake could be considered as a Punishment of Gra! for the sin of the people of Chile. te gave the comtary ans: “whoever has Seen the ruin of Santiago will aot proceed with the sincerity that teaches the Gospel i he dares to jnige tha thie eanauake we & punishment of the citizen’. He added “This issn agreement with & good theology and Goa’ Taw so dat it will be a mortal sin to judge that their sins destroyed this ey” (Amunategu 1882), ‘Alhough, bodh Catholic and Protestant clogy in the 17th century, used the eeeurrence of eat quakes to move people to repentance for their Sins, toy did not isnore the theones about the natural origin of earthquakes, based on ether Aris totelian doctrine othe nos proposals involving inflammable materials inside the Fath, The sie ious considerations were preseated at the same lume as natural causes were alven. The recourse (0 Gou's aetion was not a sbine forthe rural explanations. which were filly understood sccorde Ing to knowledge ofthe mes, but was areeognition Of the special zeton of Gea in cerain eases ‘The Lisbon earthquake of 1755 ‘The Lisbon canlnquake of 1 November 1738 was felt over the whole Iberian peninsula. 1 caused heavy damage and aout 200) casualties as a result of both the eathqucke and the sucoquost tsunami especialy ia the nearby cites of Hasta, Cali and Seville (Manner Solres & Leper Arroyo 2004). This extraordinary event produced fan abundant Hterature published in’ Spain, fxpecislly in Seville, Many publications. ere Short popular accounts of aw the estungoake was, Feltina single locality and many included religions considerations motivated by the event. Mest of {ese anonsinous publitons were generally short works ofa few pages. and were of 3 popular horace, with exaggerated naratives of dmge fr curious occurences supposed to fave taken place during the earthquake. Some ofthe accounts were writen in verse, Many wore predominantly of raigious character. asking for help from God, ‘or giving thanks t0 God forthe dstiserance from the effects of the earthquake. We have ientted 49 ofthis typeof publication. ‘Omer pubiicstons belong tothe academic cat- ‘egory. and some were extended weatises om the pystcal,phiwoplical x! thewiggieal aspects of the event: They stere writen by sal piloso= pers and theologians, many of hem umversity pro fessor. Mest of these authors handled two main ‘questions. The fist was whether ths ws rat ‘ens ora supernatural one, ats ce diel a= tuted to God The secon’ was aboot the rata ease ‘of this earthquake and the origin of eathcuakes in ‘general. A special pou discussed was how it was pow forthe eaftuake to be fet tthe sine Lime in widely sepated rogions. On this second ‘question, rdiionl and new ideas about the tre ‘fearhquskes Were discussed and debuted ‘Natural or supernatural event “The occurence ofthe Lisbon earthquake generated in Europe am intense debate about wht fas be called ‘eigitcenthcentary earthquake theology" ‘Kendck 1958), At the cent of this debate was the opinion, generally ssertd by many of the clergy, both Catholic and Procesaa, shat te earth ‘quake wasa deliberate punishment by Godot snfal people. A constant theme fn sermons. tacts and Iralizing post), thoughout Europe as Ut (Goa in is anger uk destoyed Lion fecal ff the sins of its inhbitants Tn Portal the debate as intense with, among others. the Jesuit Gabriel Malagrida on one side and Semastien Joss de Carilho © Mello, Marquis of Pombal, the ‘powerful minister of King Jose, onthe other Mabie {rida took an extrme position and insists in hi Sermons thatthe earthguake had been caused bY the wrath of Gad for the sine of the people of Lisbon. Porbal. who took » pragmatic atid to forganize the cate of the victims and oversee the ‘oconsevtion of the city, greed the sermons of the clwgy apd especially those of Malagnda. his opinion such statements only led to pessviy in te people. Pombal ordered that Malgrida be sent to prison, 6 year later o be executed by the Porugucse Inquisition Tn France the eathuibe cased queions shout the gencrally sensed optimism of the ties, which Feld that the word was good place in which every- thing hac happened ws stowed to Belo te bow Frangois Mate Velie. inbis Pte srl détre de Lisbonne sna his novel Conde, wrote 4 strong ‘ack om this optimistic viewpoint. On the oar ‘sid, authors suchas Jean Jacques Rousseau defended te optimist position, and rejected Vola’: gloomy picture of man’s unkapry fate on Earth, Ho GermanyEARTHQUAKES AS GOD'S PUNISHMENT 4s Immael Kent, adhering 10 Gottiiod Wilhelm LLeeni's opimistietnodies, which ld thet this was "the bet of al posible aris publsed tree heat papers the Lisbon earhguake in 1786 He was more iteresed in the scenic aspecs of the phenomenon, but touched also onthe subject of earthquakes in elation to God's governmact ofthe ‘wari The optimist postion was heavily wounded by Voltaire’ sharp stacks in Cane. Volare’ negative. poston finally cared the dey” in the Europ: ofthe Enlightenment (Kemanek 1985) in Spin the debate wax centr om the sperma ‘oral or natural character ofthe crthuake abd the ulscussion began a few days afer its occurence Popular anonymcus publicstions were generated and sermons in the churches Were given, im Which {he sopernatur character of the iter was pre- sent Same of them asked forthe help of hcavenly [ato or thanked various sant fr thei pabection mons them of the Virgin Mary. SL Frncisof Borsa (by the Jess, St. Pip of New by he Orton). land St Jusia sa St. Ruin, pan saints of Seville (by the noremonastic clergy) Many of the anon symeous popular publications od s similar theme ad many of them were published in Seville, Most of ‘hem took it Rar pred that te eantyake Was Gots punishment forthe sins of the people, Ths. public religious services were organized im the day's immediately following the earhquake (Aguila Pinal 1973}, As we have seen, 75. your before the Lishan event, the cache that destroyed ‘Malaga in 1680 was generally thought to have been punishment by Go wih no dissenting vices. The two semons of Frncsco Olvaval y Oly. ola, the Canon of the cathedral of Savile, of 27 Apil 1755 and 28 February 1756, ate examples of purely celigious literature. Olazsval y Olzola Inlited thal the many sins of the ity of Saville wore the couse of this ponishiem, which the rnercy of Ga not peste to be even peat (Olazaval y"Olayzela 1758). Agustin Sanchez, a Trinitarian theologian and preacher, in a note inclased fa Francisco Mariano Nifo'y Cagial’s work, insisted “God anes the cca to fase Fear in sinners and. move. them 10 repentance (Sito y Copizal 1753). Even toe yours leer, José: Manin’ Guzman's sermons insisted on this intercetation, The frmescefener of the sierms ‘ural character ofthe earthquake was Miguel de San Jes, the Bishop of Guadi and Baza (Granade), who published 2 short leer in which he refured the opinions of dese who regatded this as a ratura event, especially de Cevalos, and affirmed that “only to dooy ce Joube that earthquakes fand other disse ore usally the effect OF the ‘wrath of Ged, com be conser! an error in the Faith’ (San Jose 1756). Similarly. short ter of ‘Thomas del Valle, Me Bishop of Cadi, ealed tention te the sins ofthe people of Cadiz, noting that God) had punished them and called for ‘their repemance (Sel Vall 1733) Francisco Javier friar of the Minims Onder, confronted this rigid poston and wrote, answering the bishop, that God docs not need (0 interfere with notre: Gongsler rated tht kind of disaster with Sins only ima very general Toc, as a consequerce ofthe original sin (Gonzdler 1757. In contrast to what happened after the Malaga carthquake, by 1755 tere wos sere questioning about stating the eauake to a diect action bby Ged. José de Cevallos (1726-1776), 2 theolo- jan fiom Seville an ater the Rector ofthe Univer- Sity Was the strongest defendor ofthe position that theearthguake ve anatural event He was found Ing member ofthe Real Soctedad de Sova nd of the Real Academia de Buenas Lets, to leomed socicties of Soville. where enlightened ideas were discussed. De Cevallos expressed his position in his introductory nite (Censara) to Beno Jerse joo y Moaiencgto's werk, where he concluded: “the cartuake hes been ently natal, caused by natural and proportioned second causes, im Which God partaes in ay other natural effect (Feito y Montenegro 1756). He refined the oppo site opinion as being theologically unsound. and ised tht if preachers dd have their devotion ‘and zeal ruled BY witdom and discretion, they will Produce disorders! effects and fe believes De-Cevallon also rcfued those whe considered i ‘heresy 10 maintain that God does not eauss cath ‘quakes. bosing this opinion on the exalogue of heresies by Saint Pilates, an Taian shop of the fourth cemury. He noted that mos! other rc gious writes di! not hold this opinion. Suan Lai Roche.a physician bom in Catalonia andestabised in Seville, defended the same opinion, adding that thre was no relation between tne commited and the occurence of carthguakes. Rhetoiclly he asked: "Ate Lisbon snd Seville worse than ther cies?” For him those considerations were only ps opinions of theologians". Roche censtred the thealogians who attacked the physicists (pi: cas) who explained these phenomena by purely ‘otal peineples (ei y Montenearo 1756), “The matral charter of the earthquake wae defended nd discussed. in several Mxtres at tho Real Academie Sevillam de Buonas Lets, founded in 1751, which served ao forum for now ides, Several si institutions were exsisbed Jn Spain at this time, when most universities in Spain were sill atached 10 teadiional Siew, Roche held the fst lecture on the earthguake on 12 Novernber 1755 (Sobre ef teremoto sel I de Noviembre) The following year thee were lestues by Jeronimo Audite de li Puente (Formacion ‘efector de fos rerremoros, 27 March 1730) and By« A.ubias Francisco de Céspaies (Kelocién Iistivicn del terremota de 173, 5h). These discs the cecurten ‘quake from a secular perspective, took part in these conferences, tte were No formal theological discussions athe. Academia (Gish Blanco 1999) oth de Cevallos und Roche supported theie opinions wath the auhonty of Benito Jerinimo Feiffo y Montenegro (16761762), 4 Benedictine roessor of tology of the University of Oviedo Bnd a key figure in the Spanish Figen Sno was the author of Theatre erica universal (1726-1730) “and Cartas emdtas¥ “carina (0782-1760), two very inant works ithe introduction of sciemifc ideas in Spain, Pijio y Montenegro defended the natural character of the ‘earthquake, but beady an old man, did not enter the controversy. He wrt that man stould fear sudden death more thn eamyuates, since the former is more common “Another defender ofthe nota character of ea ‘quakes wes Antonio Jacobo del Barco» Gasca (1716-1783). pried and hitonan of Huet, ‘whe main work was doce to the hist and ‘gticulture of the reson. Del Barco wrote that he intend t sudy ‘252 philosopher’ the causes, dr thon, extension and elit of the earhguake Devending His natal character, he a tha rata did not mean “cas, al thintype of occur rence fod tobe used as an exc Toe men 40 tu (0 (Goa dal Barco 1756) sido Onl Callan de Vi laroe! tbe PofessroY Matheratesatthe Uriversity fof Salamanca, explained the natural causes of the ‘sarhquake nd dd ot want to entrinothe theoogi- al qusstion of whether oF noi was wang ren God {On Gallardo de Viisneel 1733), ‘Somme authors heli a mie position, comment ing thatthe earthquake was a natural event, but ‘God could have used it to punish or wary siners Miguel Cabrera of the Order of Minis 2 thea sof Seville, cso thatthe eathguake Was tual its caus, iis bing adi is come quences’, but, 2 spovil providence could have ‘ordered ito happen ata particular place and time (Cabeern 1759) Francisco de Buena Ponce (1721-1800), x priest from Seville, poct, physician fof tbe Avchbishop of Seville, and the author of ‘works om history and medicine, eld the same pinion (Feiigo y Montenegro 1756). He stated ‘he eathguakes. altwugh produced by mata causes. could be sometines “punishment by the Divine Hand”. Francisco Matinee Moles. pr fossar atthe University of Alcalde Henares eho argued that carguakes could be signs of divine Wrath, took a similar position (Maite Moles 1755). He mete, "if this was o nat phenomeren caused naturally cam be investigated ean Espino 17 September However, he went on 40 suggest that there were reawns for sing that God had ordered the earth ‘quake 38 panier for sos, Francico Mariana Nifoy Cagizal (1719-1803), founder of the fist, nenspaper in Madrid, hold Smile view «No y ‘Cagigal 1753) After explaining the natural eausos ‘of eamhyunkes, he add! what cam be considered their moral causes and effects, noting that God sould use these phenomena as vanes to sinners Tor tet repentance. van de Zug, 4 eter (0 Feil y Mortengro, explained the anal eas cof catigaakes and commented om how Gea axed natural causes o show his cspleasare of man's sins {Feijoo y Montenseto 1736) by De Zuaiza (1756. Pik Trebral, a member o the letmed societies of Seville, after giving the daa ofthis debate in his ‘unpublished long manuseript onthe subject gave tnt 0 the problem by rejecting the supe character and defending it 3s @ natura ever, Bot ‘Suggesting tha it was no ently so bocase had 4 preteatural character. That i, some evil spit rngy have produced the earthquake Trcbaal 1756). In conclusion, in Spain there mere defenders of bork epinione abot the natal oF spertur claracier of the ctaguake. Authors balling the fnew eas of the Enlightenment (called in Spain isrades, many of ther clenes) contzeded that the canhgaoke was 2 purly aatural event, and ‘Should he studied fram the purely nats point of ‘malotaned tht the eanbguake Was a punishment ‘or warning of God to sinnors. Even as ft 1788 2 Alvar, wrote dat we prefer to be misthen with St Basil and St. Augostine thar to be correct with Desartes and Newton (Aguilar Pinal 1973) An intermediate postion Was ako presented, i uhich the cathyuake wis thought bea natural pheoemenon but God's aon i> sence used i fo warm sinners. Authors taking this position amped tat then could tafe mowal cone. ences om a natural event. Sanchar Blanes £1999) summarized the dcbte ws one Fetecen to ‘philosophical postions theistic postion in which (God intervenes ciety in natural phenemena ond a destie postion it Which God Mis Ber Kw £0 the universe but dacs not itrvene it is no ‘working. Honever, Spanish authors, such ay de Covell an Rocke, tho defended te concept of the earthguake ay natural phenompenkn, emote ied ett, a6 they held to the Chali tai ‘of divine action in the weeld. AIL participants the debate considered themselves 10 be faith ‘Christian doctrine end di not deny the posible fof divine intervention inthe work. Moreover there ws no reference tothe philosophical dette in Europe about an optimistic or pesiistic iow 6 the World. Spanish authors never mentionedEARTHQUAKES AS GOD'S PUNISHMENT “ Volt. Leibuiz, Kantor any other pattcipant in this debate “The authors who held tat the earthquake was 3 rotor phenomenon foo tis assist to explain the general eases of earthquakes. In thet exp sce Lo what extent they knew abot the scent ideas being developed ot that time in Europe, At the end ofthe 171h century and begin ring of the 18th century ew theories out the gin of cathguakes were proposed tht replaced the (ditional sews founded on Anslotlian dos: teine, Inthe wrings of Spanish aur after the Tiiton ethgeake we fn 3 varkty of theories roposed aging from those based on the tralitonal ‘Antoelian devote ides introduce by rove suthors (Orda? 1983), Cabrera, Nifo y Copia and ‘Tiebnal presemed the most ational point of view an defended the Atisorelian doce, with some ‘modifications, aguing the etacks ef cent auth In thoi explanations they intrxveed ideas in which the Bath is compared with a ivng organism, eby soning Kicher’siatvene. Se aa. ‘ich dt Barco y Gwe, Rocke snd Ori Gallardo ‘ke Vilar, aered tothe theory ofthe explosive ‘ature of euthyuakes. Feige y Momence, is five eters, prose the most orginal ideas about ‘he origin of the carhqaske, He wed tha. inthe Same Way as lighning ard thu are produced in ‘he aospere the electri ofthe clos, ea (quaker ae caused by the eleciclty accumulated Inside the Earth by vive material This was mot 2 Coally orginal idea. ay Willan Suchley in Eneland in 1750 and Giovaoni Batiste Boccana in Tialy in 1753 had already proposed the clerical natne of esrthguakes Tasler 1978), Conclusion ‘The interpretation of earthquakes 35 God's punish ment for sin, in Spanish writings of 17th and T8th centuries, has been examina’ using the versions of the Mabga ewthgahe of 1680 and the Lishan earhuake of 1785. After the 1680 carhauake, this interpretation was generally held ‘wih no dissenting voices. ter the Lisbon event however Spanish writers joined the rest of Europe In dshating the natural or supemotural character oF the earthquake. Authors took positions on both sides of the contoversy. Some, sich ode Bareo y Gave Recie de Cevalloand Fajoy Monieneer, defended the natural oxgia ofthe earthquake. They Stated that this position was not sgains! Cristian Aoetrng, 50 at their postion cannot be ealed ‘kis On this occasion thors also tied to explain ‘atious theories about the origin of cartquakes. aging fom Ariotelian dcctne to organist the fares, and 0 explosive and eleteal tears, Tc uthor acknowledges the revision of the Engh text toy L Drake sd er eis othe tee and come {Uric by We two reviewer K- Bok and ML Weman References AGUILAR PASH F 1978, Conia epi por at ea Seva poe cl tremat de 1758. Aero ‘place 112198 es ‘suaes Mts, 163, De mesos ie I ect tin I, De teraet. br Opens Omnia Vol a Lntnicin Ves Bitola Par ALIGNED. I Diuretic rode gone ‘ioe comune, nue hikes de eters ct ines iho de ri Seni Wines Ms Nene Awe, ML Le 1882, tere ct 18 de ‘Mow de 1607. Rail Dover, Suing de Chik ANON 168s, elcid de arin esacon gue pate to Chad de dla por of nse terenons gue scelid ct Mercier 9 de ‘entre tne presen ata tr ets dev abipte re tengo que Dios noc Sor cs eta ‘head y's Samora Cont emblem, Sle iiseceNavone Madd VE 196/173, urate hs dnc nei) seo sof of espn ona ont ge bei Ctevonmats tila de Medi cel menclrmare ‘escne Bs Nana Nid NE 18/198. Agus, 1.196, Commerarn nos Actas tncewokghor. Cheer Vise: NiWRW. De {Smenote Super Pano 1. fe: Thon Aquat ‘rv Ris Gaon Rome 8 So CCuitte, ITS Eipliswonphyce mechan de coven del venblrde ter omo cons sea Aseria det principe te kn fisfon ritkes, a ew el dea ve cto Yale. ero favo gute) borer des asian Bago de S Rnd y Cue Sev. (casts Ht 180, Oremicnr fs intro teem. hia enchaexua de igo XVI nn Fao coo, A180 isridel neva Res Sev Ive has de Ln Ser be Cen'y Pastacng A 1680 Relacon de ferro Iveg el a de 9 de Oembre de 1580 ec ta atid ie Cnt decent Coo, ww Fowss BA Het Cons Parl et hac» Resend Siar DF. Moo de Tore Obi Je Md fate de sigan ee Soe Dies mca Sefor cass esta dal 4 ‘eure conan tnd de Fe Saas Bibi Nate Mind VE 19/128, br Viton, AL Ma J 13 Rela hike det ij imince Hordonat Aetna Mad bet cor Gxeen, ArT 186, Cat Docc Baro. Catdrtco de Phiooptis y Vino do Mie Mavs 2 Don 8. wick sani ‘guns eos sabe nremon de eet do[Noviembre de 1755. du: GRAEE, J E.(o) Discaror Mersuraes Heirs, XIV, 368-106 DEL VALLE: T1753 Despes dela ere espaesay 2 ructos js jams vs forenta del Temblor de ‘Tents fe Carts fer Ce Cai. DE ZONA, 11956. terre ss, Dichanen de ‘in P ro. Fr Ben Fe. apn Nie, ‘Toledo, Fendo ¥ MoNFENEOKO, BJ. 156. Nese shone Vebie la couse pipes de lon terranes xpicude rer an phenrtenas lercon yada ol oe Pedec Expat ‘on prince de Noenbre de ake fracedkra de 1736. Cat Real tela Caden ‘eno de Sanaa (Contains, wih the fee Ietere by. de author Dedtra® by han Las ose, ‘Cenc by Joud de Coals, ‘Conc By Transeo de Buca’ y Ponce. “Aprckxic ‘Mute! Antonio de Opi, ard Pritgo apoiogs tio" and Cana Sex by In Las Roche) GGuice, TF, 1071 One nian a Kira Spl 062,79 38, GoRTLLES 11757 Referer wre a spre "carts del ibn. Deuter Pray Mae de Sen “esaph ee pj sea virnereaua del or err fetal es Esra Padres esis Gowen fe Rest Feeten Scher Beieton Ser KESDRICK. TD. IUSS. The LshonEarquate ip a Philedelin PA igen frac de! tremens pede edie 1 {0 Rovenbre de 1735: ar canoes eo ponijron Sar qc tks les proce Presexenguceecedo Tomeneauncla torrente mewone yespecctinde eden hecers Sue de San Main, Mai “The prew stra 1955 canhgnake ets and dag Spl Jot mal Stamey 8. 275-298 MuRoe,D.& UniassA. 198, Ertan of dana aed fource panne of te Mula conga of (ciober 1680 fe LEC. WH. Ke MUvERS. IL & Shuteneaht, K(k) Honors! etonmerani ond Enrilnates of te World. Neadenie Prose Sen Diego. 8-24 MURGINBELS LANA F166. Trtado lV, Delascons tices I elewer er. Copa M.D bs ee tnst tembloes de laa Compendia defor Imecora del Prinipe ae feof rego» Tins Avice fr enter de ta de cao > sora yess arises later de a de Sen gees ores Suan de a Cs, Mad Niro'y Crovoaty FM. 185. Expoacion plaice orl de tar cas, hain, diforuncas ctr de Tn terran cot ne rtacion vay esac de hs tnar formuubiee y Tunas uc ha pode to Trea dade el principe Bnd has fa Ineo de Hnienbve desea ie 1758 Meteo. 10. Goran Mas OLazavat y OLAveOLA. FJ. L758, Mis del ere rane expernemtde ei aikedo iat de Neviobre Ge [sco respec ala de Dis ela cad de Sea remedies paras tenga cfrecides inary wine Able ef prog et Ser San flan cl nobimo Aspens de fs iad a sas de occ de rac Der, Gosia 6 Cast, Sen. (Onba2. 1988 Bl enemas Je Usa de 1788 y 9 npc ene ito ceco coat: Ate ft Sinposio ive el Pens te scl, Cea Fem Ove, 483-442 (Ontie Guttanbo OF ViLARROEL. 1.1788 eines ‘chrissy carn phys stogiea! tae ‘ehicicws sere ener. canes} sete de li teemarar » expectarcte desta 9 Seales var ees cf sede en Ey en ct te Diego de lar, Sev. edo y aus munitions ea a Mig del ns XVIE Jabee, 5232-58, Prat. A. 1S, Snoe ie race fru rononcpia Herero de eC, Salman rotrk A. 178. Presi 67 Lm tees 5 ‘sso fuego atteren fr Face aera rai aly eeriacal Pawel Garin Vara 278-278 El terern de 175. Tass Mali. keto Joe de eval enashowpes devin ests TAO J. GTS, Bich cerry carPiuale thee caedions avestgun nt cara tev of the tayo ear nthe Bicone PAD thesis Universy of labs, Noonan, OF tion dels leas» ton nevi Tern” femaiosdgormcte Tero de ott fas. sles alin. prnetces Horas ‘inde Tira, Mac. Tosca TeV. 1107-1718. De es Leeman y con froeoros suberiaes. be Compendio matemtisn ‘que cowiecn dass raisons Seles Centan ue fe Ca Soseph Cac. Nalencia 147-82 ‘Tershal. P1756. Trialophiskoitcoen que becha ‘eco retton de fans torrets sob i payee Te Nove de 1738, 5 prour snarls ats de Tone ck ret ype lel aro pram En omc macho aaes (runic, Baers {ke la Real Acadenia det vo Maid 9/2766, ‘aw WIT RING. S982 Merling in Pers tra Tience Msetewwe in canter Teel of he iy of cs 3 17-838 Paarcors. 11618. La Il, Propo Xl, De Ihe Exper en conn cee) terngoe as