Dear Carlos:

I am very in agreement with Hebe in its reclamation of which the Latin American historiography does not have to be labeled of periphery or center, specially in the case of the Hispanic loudspeakers. My printing was the one of a congress highly worried about the epistemología and historical methodology in general. It is to say that our greater preoccupation was the one of concretizar which is the " correction, " the conference called " crisis, " that historians must implement, in the case of whom we considered correction, or of abolishing, in the case of which they consider " crisis, " so that historians and hearings have I engage in a dialog more significant about what it is history, art or discipline, and its speech.

Nevertheless my peculiar way to think about the intellectual world of the Western Hemishpere forces to respond to me that despite the philosophical spacing between European and Latin American demanded by some Latin American and European thinkers, he is unquestionable for me who the future of the historiography of Latin America in the extreme is related, but nonconditional, and rather guided by the fact that the inhabitants of the Western Hemishpere who were born and they raised speaking an European language, they are European minds. It is to say that the world perspective, mentalité, that conforms Latin American systematic thinking is completely of raigambre European. If we make an analysis of systematic thinking of the Latin American historiography, we would not find its roots between amerindian of the mesoamericana civilization or the Andean civilization, their beginnings are tracked in direction of Europe! The conceptual, definicional apparatus and the epistemologic approach in general used by the historians of Latin America are of raigambre European. This also includes the world perspective, the system of values, the didactic philosophy - here I talk about to the dicotomía of the historical reality between the cognoscitivo agent and what she is wanted to get to know: the disquisition object. This speculative thought ", " this peculiar one to inquire had its génesis in Europe between the helenos in times before Christ. Which is then the future map course of the Latin American historiography can be seen in the intellectual bastions already well known-Enrique Florescano, Carlos Sempat Assadourian, Silvio Zavala, Josefina Zoraida Vasquez, Celso Furtado, Federico Brito Figueroa, Eduardo Arcilas Farías, as well as between the students just arrived at our discipline:Clara Elena Suarez, Antonio Ibarra, Antonio García de León, Támara Estupiñan Viteri, Reinaldo Rojas, Antonio Gonzales Antías, Carlos Suarez, Edelberto Torres, Hector Pérez Brignoli, andothers. All these students are European! Their models of analysis obtain their conceptual scaffolding and its epistemológicas suppositions of Europe. What the content of Latin American systematic thinking changes is the disquisition object, the analysis unit: Latin America.

What they do to these somewhat strange observations is the fact that some Latin American intellectuals protest not to be European. But the conceptual scaffolding thatuses is definitively of western Hindu to him; it is there where all this began. Finally, I want then to emphasize that the content of the Latin American historiography differs from the European simply like analysis unit that is being and was affected by European and nonEuropean exogenous and endogenous factors. Of this it is inferred that for me Latin America is a cultural manifestation of the western civilization. Culture that must be understood in this context like concretización of the community of abstract values that compose a civilization. For that reason, we must speak, in the case of the Western Hemishpere of Mexican European, Colombian European, in contrast to amerindian Colombians, amerindian Mexican, etc.. In the same way that speech of Spain, Germany, France, England, Italy, and other countries in Europe like cultural manifestations of the Western civilization, thus also the existence of cultural manifestations of the western civilization in the Western Hemishpere must be accepted. Very few would object the one that says that the cristiandad of Spain is pronounced very different from the one from England. In the same way, very few would demand, if some, that Spain is not civilizacional member of the Western civilization. The Latin American mental structure is European! This now takes to me to weigh the dependency theory as Carlos in his request requests to us to debate history like systematic thought

The theory of Dependency is indeed a grafía which Ortega and Gasset needed in his " I I am I and my circumstance. " The theory of Dependency is a mental structure of the Latin American systematic thinkers. I say " Latin American systematic thinkers " so that he interests to me to include so much to members of the social disciplines like a the Latin American novelists and writers. So that in my opinion the social historians and scientists find echo in their reclamations of " economic dependency " in the novelists and Latin American intellectuals in general. He is to say that long before that the Latin American social scientists proclaimed that there was an unequal interchange of wealth between the Western Hemishpere and Europe, some Latin American intellectuals already were outstanding in intuitive form the presence of unequal economic conjunctures between these two regions. English:

Eloquent examples of these Galician aseveraciones are it Rómulo (Mr. Danger) and Miguel Asturias Angel (Mr. Gengis Kahn). He is not that I am in agreement with all the reclamations that argue the dependentistas, but want to settle down that to dispatch the dependency theory as if this one did not have success some he is definitively capricious. Some empirical studies demonstrate some of the errors of that theory, but we do not have to leave to the margin the fact that like " mental structure, " the theory dependency if it explains much about the Latin America mentality, for example, Eduardo Galeano and his " the opened veins of Latin America, " and their last historiography. More nevertheless, a glance to the works of Antonio Gonzales Antías, Reinaldo Rojas, Clara Elena Suarez, Antonio Ibarra, Jorge Silva Riquer and Antonio Garcia de Leon demonstrates clearly that the Latin American intellectual young people are opening to new channels of reflection about their history and its position in the historiography global.

The works of these young Latin American historians demonstrate clearly that in Latin America the use of the systematic thought has been welcome in history like discipline in Latin America.

Eugenio Piñero
University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire
Emails: pinero_99@yahoo.com
pinero99@visto.com

Translation made in " Altavista Connections " through Systram Traslation Software (http://babelfish.altavista.com/content/browser.htm)