<P> The next day Archbishop Montúfar opened an inquiry into the matter . At the inquiry, the Franciscans repeated their position that the image encouraged idolatry and superstition, and four witnesses testified to Bustamante's claim that the image was painted by an Indian, with one witness naming him "the Indian painter Marcos". This could refer to the Aztec painter Marcos Cipac de Aquino, who was active at that time . But "if he did, he did so without making a preliminary sketch--in itself a near - miraculous procedure. (...) Cipac may well have had a hand in painting the Image, but only in painting the additions, such as the angel and moon at the Virgin's feet", claims Prof. Jody Brant Smith (referring to Philip Serna Callahan's examination of the tilma using infrared photography in 1979). </P> <P> Ultimately Archbishop Montúfar (himself a Dominican) decided to end Franciscan custody of the shrine . From then on the shrine was served by diocesan priests under the authority of the archbishop . Moreover, Archbishop Montúfar authorized the construction of a much larger church at Tepeyac, in which the tilma was mounted and displayed . </P> <P> The report of this 1556 inquiry is the most extensive documentation concerning the Virgin of Guadalupe from the 16th century, and significantly, it makes no mention of Juan Diego, the miraculous apparition, or any other element from the legend . </P> <P> In the late 1570s, the Franciscan historian Bernardino de Sahagún denounced the cult at Tepeyac and the use of the name "Tonantzin" to call Our Lady in a personal digression in his General History of the Things of New Spain, in the version known as the Florentine Codex . </P>

Where did the virgin of guadalupe come from