Missionary reports are the earliest modern records to explicitly mention the Kizilbash, and the “Kizilbash Kurds” in particular. Therefore, they have been utilised relatively extensively by researchers in the field, sometimes at levels disproportionate to their reliability and usefulness. This article develops my previous work on the perils of the missionary reports’ utilization without sufficient critical scrutiny of their inherent biases and limitations, and highlights, on the basis of an original missionary letter, the editorial process that they were likely subjected to before publication. It argues that the real significance of these sources lies not in their broad and biased speculations concerning distant (Kurdish) Kizilbash origins, but in the casual observations and incidental details they unwittingly supply.