{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03008595988538682, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011938872970391595, 'mean_word_length': 5.486068111455109, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The FBI in Latin America: the Ecuador files

their use as documentary sources was perhaps more clearly problematized. Typical of this publisher’s work, this is a gorgeous book, skillfully edited, although sometimes the inventive prose – “knowledge hustlers” (p. 100), for instance – is less revealing on second pass. Despite the broad subtitle, this is a book about the seventeenth-century Hispanic Caribbean almost exclusively, and wavers somewhat when considering the larger region. Neither Barbados nor Bermuda “changed hands during the 1600s” (p. 27) in the sense implied here, for example, nor did other spaces on his list. Some readers will wonder what Gómez would make of the ScotsIrishman Hans Sloane, institutionally trained across Europe, whose patient histories taken in 1680s Jamaica and published in 1707 also proposed the universalism of bodies that Gómez attributes to Caribeños healers (p. 187). Like many of the Spanish officials in this book, Sloane chose to be treated by a female healing practitioner from the African diaspora. Still, despite his subsequent prestigious London career, and his influence on tropical bioprospecting, Sloane’s position did not compel change among hismedical contemporaries, who took ideological comfort in their certainty of bodily and geographic difference. Here, then, too lays Gómez’s argument about the incommensurability of institutionalized ways of knowing and local Caribbean experiential practice, particularly in the face of expanding imperial political economies in the eighteenth century. Though it is not directly his subject, Gómez’s book speaks in valuable ways to Schiebinger’s engagement with the concept of agnatology, or “culturally-induced ignorances”, in particular knowledge and practice which did not transfer from colonial to imperial spaces (Schiebinger 2004, 3). Barriers lay not just in intentionality of imperial power, but, as Gómez’s work compellingly shows, also in the difficulty of transferring experiences formed in the dense and mutable cultural and environmental context of the early modern Greater Caribbean.