(...) if censorship is in itself a serious issue in the same language and culture, it is even more serious if it operates via translation. That is to say, from one language (and culture) to another, given that, if departing from the sense, function and form of a source text if transferred from a language to another, if the translated text is partially or wholly translated (i.e. "no-translation") or even amended, the result is a text that will definitely not resemble the original. The consequences of this are great, not only affecting the writer in the source language, but also the image, or idea, of the whole source literary system.Sadly, one of the problems scholars face when researching censorship is how difficut it is to trace it back. How do we know if a text is(n't) a translation and is(n't) available in another language? Was it translated and censored then? When we fortunately have a text translated into a different language, we can definitely say that the text has been "edited" in transferring it to the source language, that is partially censored, deleting some 'dangerous' fragments for a determined doctrine? However, this difficulty even transcends where we know the text has been censored, and it is extremely difficult to search, consult, compile and reproduce the censorship files in the Alcalá de Henares Archive.