1746-1759, commissioned Burriel and Santiago Palomares to examine the archives of the kingdom and to copy and form into a collection such of the manuscripts as they should deem best. This collection was placed in the _Biblioteca Nacional_ at Madrid. Other collections were made during the two following reigns by Abella, Traggia, Velazquez, Muñoz, Navarrete, Sans, Vargas Ponce, and Villanueva, which found lodgment in various localities. The early chroniclers of the Indies picked up their knowledge as best they might, by observation, by conversation, and by the examination of written evidence. Las Casas and Oviedo spent much time in the New World; Peter Martyr had access to whatever existed, beside talking with everybody who had been to America; Gomara copied much from Oviedo. Everything was at the disposal of Herrera as crown historiographer, as a matter of course, though he did not always make the best use of his opportunities. Gashard affirms that both Cabrera and Herrera were ignorant of the existence of many of the most valuable documents of their day. Ramusio, Hakluyt, Purchas, and others, succeeded in getting now and then an original paper on the Indies to print in their several collections. Among the first English historians who attempted for purposes of history to utilize the Archives of the Indies was William Robertson, who published the _History of the Reign of the Emperor Charles_, London, 1769; and in 1777, his _History of America_, 2 vols. 4to, several editions appearing subsequently also in 8vo. Robertson was a Scotch clergyman of great learning and ability. His style was elegant and vigorous, and he was by far the most philosophic writer on America up to his time. Although his statements are full of errors, intensified by dogmatism, but for which he cannot always be blamed, all who have come after him have profited by his writings; and some of these, indeed, have reaped richer rewards than he to whom they owed their success, and with far less labor. [Sidenote: ROBERTSON AND MUÑOZ.]