Cristóbal Tafoya

Cristóbal Tafoya Altamirano was raised in the Michoacán mining town of Tlalpujahua with his younger brothers Juan and Antonio.  Before the Reconquest, Antonio was serving in the presidio at Cuencamé, a mining area in Durango being attacked by the Tobosa.  Both he and Cristóbal were on the payroll of the Santa Fé presidio in 1697.

They became entangled in the political feud between Diego de Vargas and his successor, Pedro Cubero.  In 1696, Cristóbal was in jail for stealing cattle along with Bartolomé Sánchez of Querétaro and Miguel Gutíerrez of San Luis Potosí.  Antonio Gutíerrez de Figueroa of Zacatecas claimed de Vargas sent the three “gifts of chocolate, knives, and anything else they sent to ask of him” and that he asked Francisco de Anaya Almazán “to drop his complaint.”

The following year, Cubero was using Cristóbal’s brother as a courier to deliver documents to the viceroy.  Since Cubero believed de Vargas ally Juan Páez Hurtado wanted to kill Juan Tafoya, one can assume the packet was related to the case Cubero was building against Vargas.

Whether the brothers, in fact, were committed conspirators, or simply men looking for ways to profit from the venality of their superiors is open to interpretation.  Others made protestations against involvement.  Antonio Gutíerrez protested that de Vargas’ assistant, Alfonso Rael de Aguilar, “should not involve him in those matters.”  Similarly, the man who testified about Juan Tafoya, Juan Roque Gutíerrez, claimed he and Miguel de Herrera had told a representative from de Vargas “they did not want to get involved in such a big, complicated mess.”

A year later, in 1698, Cristóbal married Miguel de Herrera’s sister, Isabel.  That placed him amongst survivors from the Pueblo Revolt who were hoping to recoup their losses.  Miguel and Isabel were the children of Ana López del Castillo and Juan de Herrera who held the encomienda of Santa Clara.  Juan was dead before the Pueblo Revolt of 1680, but family grievances no doubt were perpetuated.

The association with refugee families in El Paso had been formed earlier.  Cristóbal fathered a child by Lucía Varela Jaramillo, probably before the widow remarried in 1696.  Her father, Pedro, had escaped the Pueblo Revolt as a 60-year-old capitán.  Her first husband, Bartolomé Romero de Pedraza, had been an adjutant in Santa Fé with land in La Cañada.  Witnesses for her second wedding included Fernando Durán y Chaves and Baltasar Romero.

Cristóbal’s brother Antonio married María Louisa Godines in 1697.  She was the 17-year-old widow of Alonso García de Noriega, the uncle of both Leonor Domínguez Mendoza and Alonso Rael de Aguilar.  The likely atmosphere in their family circle was discussed in the post for 5 April 2015.

In 1707 Cristóbal and Juan were in trouble again for stealing oxen.  Juan had married Josefa Pacheco, the widow of José Baca.  After she died in 1707, her great-uncle Nicolás Ortiz brought suit over the mistreatment of one her daughters and the abuse of an Indian captive, perhaps one of the Apache he had sponsored in 1705.

When Juan tried to marry another member of the extended Baca clan in 1708, the illegitimate stepsister of María Durán y Chaves claimed she had had relations with Juan and that Cristóbal knew about it.  At the time Juan had one known illegitimate son, Cristóbal.  Angélico Chávez didn’t think the marriage of Fernando Durán y Chaves’s daughter occurred.

It’s not known when Cristóbal retired from the military.  His brother Antonio remained with the presidio, and was with Juan Páez Hurtado in his 1715 expedition against the Faraón Apache.

Cristóbal made his will in 1718.  At that time he had two sons, Juan and Antonio, and acknowledged two daughters by other women, Antonia Tafoya Jaramillo and Gertrudis de Tafoya Ruiz.  His brother Anthony’s oldest boy, Cristóbal, also lived in his household.

He declared he had “a ranch with its necessary lands for agriculture” along with “seventy-eight head of cattle and four yoke of oxen, together with equipment and a cart. Thirty head of sheep. Fifty-four head of horses and mares, and three mules.”

After this, the record becomes confusing.  Cristóbal’s older son, Juan, had married a cousin, Antonia González Bas, in 1716.  Her parents were María López del Castillo and Juan González Bas.  González was the great-grandson of Juan Griego and Pascula Bernal through their daughter Isabel Bernal.  María was the daughter of Pedro López del Castillo and María de Ortega.

Cristóbal’s wife’s grandfather was Diego López del Castillo.  He migrated from Sevilla and may have come north with the military or may have followed Matías López del Castillo, who had been in the solider escort for the Santa Fé supply train in 1628.   Diego married María de la Cruz Alemán in 1664.  She was the granddaughter of Juan Griego and Pascula Bernal through their son Juan Griego.

Chávez suspects the two men were brothers.  He doesn’t guess if Pedro was the son of one or related to a brother who remained in México or Spain.

Juan’s brother, Antonio, married his wife’s sister, Prudencia González Bas, in 1722.  These marriages reinforced the brothers’ ties to the Juan de Herrera inheritance of their mother.  Two years later they made their claim for Santa Clara land, perhaps land they thought was rightfully theirs.

The death date of their father Cristóbal became obscured when a man who said he was their father was present when the Santa Clara protested the grant in 1724.  Cristóbal Torres, the alcalde for Santa Clara, should have recognized Cristóbal and would have heard if here dead.

This was the same Cristóbal Torres mentioned in the post for 21 October 2015 who was distributing some of the land in his 1724 grant along the Chama river to the widowed María Margarita Trujillo.  In 1719, the daughter of Jose Trujillo and Antonia Luján had married the 20-year-old illegitimate son of the senior Tafoya’s brother Juan.  To keep the Cristóbals straight, they called this one El Moso.

Notes: Juan de Herrera was discussed in the post for 13 April 2014.  The Spanish origins of the Tafoyas aren’t known.  Altamirano usually refers to someone from the area of Altamira in Cantabria.

Arias de Quirós, Diego. “Report on the Costs for One Hundred Soldiers of Santa Fe,” August 1697?, in Kessell 2000.

Chávez, Angélico. New Mexico Roots, Ltd, 1982.

_____. Origins of New Mexico Families, 1992 revised edition.  Fernando Durán y Chaves was an ancestor of Chávez.

Gutíerrez, Juan Roque. Statement, 3 December 1697, in Kessell, 2000.

Gutíerrez de Figueroa, Antonio. Statement, 3 December 1697, in Kessell, 2000.

Kessell, John L., Rick Hendricks, Meredith D. Dodge, and Larry D. Miller. That Disturbances Cease, 2000.

_____, _____, _____. To the Royal Crown Restored, 1995.

Tafoya, Cristobal. Will, 1718, republished by Henrietta Martinez Christmas, “Cristobal Tafoya - 1718 Will,” 1598 New Mexico website, 7 July 2014.

Thomas, Alfred B. After Coronado, 1935; contains 1715 rosters for August 28 and August 30 for Juan Páez Hurtado expedition.

Santa Clara Lands

Indies law was clear: natives had a right to enough land to feed themselves. In 1568, Gastón de Peralta set the allotment at 500 varas in all directions from a settlement. As the new viceroy of New Spain, he ruled the measurement was made from the location of the local church and that no grant could be within 1000 "varas of cloth and silk measure distant." That is, 500 varas within the pueblo and 500 outside.

In 1687, the Consejo de Indias realized many settlers were encroaching native land. It had Charles II increase the minimum to 600 varas measured from "the last boundaries and houses" for "sowing lands." Further, estancias for cattle were to be a minimum 1100 varas away. Viceroys were given the right to increase those clearances if necessary.

Charles Cutter said, pueblos became proficient in enforcing a league from the church as the legal minimum. In 1700, Pedro Cubero granted Mateo Trujillo land west of the Río Grande between Santa Clara and San Ildefonso. There was a dispute over the outer boundary because the pueblo hadn’t planted during the drought, and Trujillo had claimed it was available. As a result, the governor, Felipe Cherpe, and the war captain, Juan, said:

"They had only 2,200 varas of land on which they were planting, the land being theirs and they always planted it, as was shown by an irrigation ditch which was on the tract, and they not having in any other direction any place they could plant, there remaining for Trujillo, from the Indians’ boundaries of the table-land, about three hundred varas."

The differences between varas and the league that Juan Páez Hurtado measured were relatively small, given the accuracy of measuring instruments. A vara was just under 33", so 500 varas was a little less than 16,500'. 600 varas was less than 19,800'. A league was roughly 18,228'.

Cattle were the primary problem. Fences didn’t exist. Only human supervision could keep them from abandoning dry range for more succulent crops. In 1718, settlers near San Juan were chided for "for allowing their cattle to trespass upon the lands of the Indians" by Páez. In 1732, Gervasio Cruzat y Góngora admonished settlers in Santa Cruz "to take better care of their stock and guard the same."

Santa Clara had a different problem in 1715 when Francisco Xavier Romero, José Vasquez, and Santiago Romero stole a steer belonging to a pueblo member, Lucas de Azenbua. They confessed, but said they only did it because their families were hungry, and, "since the natives never took good care of the stock, there was little harm in killing a few cows." They were found guilty by Juan Flores Mogollón, but Felix Martínez granted Romero land in the Cañada de Santa Clara the following year.

Santa Clara protested vehemently in 1724 when Juan Tafoya and his brother Antonio requested all the land west of the pueblo to the "high mountain range," and everything from "a high, wooded black hill" on the north to a line west of "the little table-land of San Ildefonso." That included the canyon that carried what is now called Santa Clara creek.

The pueblo pointed out that cultivating lands in that area would "result in grave injury" because there wasn’t enough water in the stream to water their fields. Tafoya received the grant from Juan de Bustamante after "Cristóbal Tafoya, who was present as the representative of the two grantees, his sons, stated that they did not want the tract for agricultural purposes, but only to build corrals and keep their cattle and horses there."

Settlers in 1727 complained the Tafoyas were keeping them "out of the common pasture lands in the Cañada de Santa Clara." When Bustamante ordered the father and two sons to present their title to the alcalde, Antonio said he would go to Santa Fé to see the governor. When he failed to appear, he was arrested.

Antonio next asked for a copy of the petition to prepare his answer. Ralph Twitchell noted, "here, the proceedings abruptly ended." It’s less likely they had influence with Bustamante, than they did with whoever was managing the archives when this grant was disputed again.

Notes:
Athearn, Frederic J. A Forgotten Kingdom, 1989; quotation from Romero case.

Charles II. Royal cédula, 6 June 1687, translated by Frederic Hall in The Laws of Mexico, 1885, as "Upon the Fundo Legal of the So-called Indians - The Ancient Mode of Measuring It, and the Increase of a Hundred Varas above the Five Hundred of the Primitive Ordinance, issued by Antonio Ortiz de Otalora, secretary of the Council of the Indies;" quotations from regulation.

Cutter, Charles R. The Legal Culture of Northern New Spain, 1700-1810, 1995.

Twitchell, Ralph Emerson. Spanish Archives of New Mexico, 1914; volume 1 has San Ildefonso, Twitchell, and Santa Clara-Tafoya quotations; volume 2 has quotations from 1718 San Juan case.

Graphics: United States Department of the Interior, Geological Survey map. Española Quadrangle, New Mexico, 15 minute series (topographic) 1953; location of Santa Clara pueblo settlement has moved slightly since 1724.

Río Chama Land Grants

Land grants were meant to reward men who had served the state. They weren’t intended to encourage land speculation, nor were they supposed to countenance bribery. The Spanish government monitored them to ensure they were used as intended. In 1724, Juan de Bustamante questioned all the concessions made by Juan Flores Mogollón in 1714 along the Río Chama.

Antonio Trujillo claimed he had received land "which is wild and unsettled, on the opposite side of the Del Norte river" from Flores. He then "made a ditch and plowed up a field" that was shown as proof of occupancy.

His father, Diego Trujillo, had been granted land west of the Chama in 1714. Antonio’s apparently was the same San Gabriel-Yunque land granted to Bartolomé Sánchez that year. Trujillo described it as having a hill on the east bank of the Río Grande, and a table land reaching the Chama on the west and north. The Chama river was the south boundary.

Diego had married Catalina Griego, granddaughter of Juan Griego II. Antonio’s wife was María Márquez de Ayala, whose parents migrated from Mexico City in 1693. Witnesses for their diligencia matrimonial included Cristóbal Crespín.

Crespín’s grant also was called for revalidation. He said he had come north from Zacatecas with his mother, Juana de Ancizo de la Cruz. Since she was not given "even a small lot of land to enable her to build a house," he had enlisted with the Santa Fé presidio. He retired in 1714 because he had become too ill to serve. He had asked for an extension to prove settlement in 1715, because he was still ill. At the time, he complained José Trujillo was infringing on his land by building corrals.

His partner in the grant, Nicolás Griego, was the son of Augustín Griego and Josefa Luján. Angélico Chávez didn’t know Augustín’s relation to the family. Ralph Twitchell didn’t include the outcome of his grant inquiry in his summary of the Spanish archives in Santa Fé.

Cristóbal de Torres gave Antonio Trujillo "royal possession" of his grant in 1720 as chief justice and war captain for Santa Cruz. In 1724 he received his own grant for land on the Chama from Bustamante. He then gave lands to Nicolás Jorge, Juana Luján, Josefa de Madrid, Antonio de Sandoval, Juan de Serna, José Trujillo, Mateo Trujillo, Francisco Trujillo, and María Margarita Trujillo.

In 1731, Torres’ son Diego was tentiente alcalde in Santa Cruz when he petitioned Gervasio Cruzat y Góngora to clarify the grant. His father had died, and none of the subgrantees had made settlements.

This one was judged speculation by Cruzat, who revoked it in 1733. Mateo Trujillo had been granted land south of Santa Clara in 1700, that was revoked in 1724 because all he had done was erect a cross on two Sundays. Antonio de Sandoval lived in Santa Fé. Nicolás Jorge’s father had been sargento mayor of the presidio in 1694 when Crespín enlisted.

However, Diego must have been allowed to keep his family’s portion. His mother, Angela de Layva, made her will in 1727 in Chama. Angélico Chávez lists him as one of the original settlers of the community in 1731.

The term Chama was used for any settlement along the river, not just the one at San Gabriel-Yunque. In 1727 Pablo Manuel Trujillo of Pojoaque married Francisca Márquez of Chama. Marriages were contracted between all the families. One of Diego Torres’ sisters, María, married Antonio de Salazar. Another, Margarita, wed Bartolomé Trujillo, likely brother of José.

So many people were living west of the Río Grande by 1732 that Crozat ordered a ferry be established.

Notes:
Chávez, Angélico. New Mexico Roots, Ltd, 1982.

_____. Origins of New Mexico Families, 1992 revised edition.

Christmas, Henrietta Martinez. "Cristobal Crespín - Lands near the Chama River 1714," 17 April 2013 posting for her blog, 1598 New Mexico; quotation from Crespín grant.

Páez Hurtado, Juan. Petition in regard to the calling of their grants, in Twitchell; includes Bartolomé Lobato, Salvador de Santisteban, Antonio Trujillo, Antonio de Salazar, Cristóbal Crespín, Nicolás Griego, Nicolás Valverde, and Juan de Mestas.

Twitchell, Ralph Emerson. Spanish Archives of New Mexico, volume 1, 1914.

Land Grants

Settlement patterns in northern Nueva México were closely tied to the presence of governors willing to make land grants and to the perceived safety of lands on the perimeter of settlement. Men given grants were considered accessory conquistadores. They were expected to use their own funds to recruit settlers and provide for their defense. They weren’t promised titles like Oñate or de Vargas. Instead, they were rewarded with whatever wealth they produced.

In 1703, Pedro Cubero granted lands at Chimayó to Francisco Martín, grandson of the first Luis Martín Serrano. The area had been used before the Revolt, and was rarely attacked. It’s major impact on natives living in the valley was an encroachment on traditional lands of San Juan.

Sebastían Martín Serrano, another grandson of Luis and second cousin of Francisco, requested confirmation of his lands south of the Embudo in 1712 from José Chacón. While this reestablished the Español presence in an area settled before the Pueblo Revolt, it also propelled families into an area where tribal territories were being renegotiated by force. This was discussed in the post for 9 July 2015.

While the first round of grants were given to families who had large landholdings before the Pueblo Revolt, many concessions to the north and west of Santa Cruz were given to retired soldiers. The governors were following the tradition of the Romans who settled veterans in the Estremadura to exploit and protect mines.

Juan Flores Magollón granted a number of allotments in 1714 along the Río Chama. Some of the land had been used before the Revolt. The Navajo had exploited the rest when they raided Santa Clara and San Juan in 1705, 1708, and 1709. As mentioned in the post for 21 May 2015, the last battle with them had been in March of 1714.

Chacón had refused a request from men in Santa Cruz in 1712 to resettle the area west of San Juan between the Río Grande and the Chama that had been the site of the first settlement "known as San Gabriel and by other name the Town of Yunque." His aide, Juan Páez Hurtado, had warned it would leave Santa Cruz "practically abandoned."

The group who had requested the grant included children of Roque Madrid. José and Matías Madrid were his sons. Ysabel de la Serna had married his son Pedro. Tomás de Bejarano had married Teresa Madrid, whose parentage was unknown.

It also included Bartolomé Lobato, who had risen to the rank of capitán, and his son or nephew Blas. Lobato was from Sombrerete, as was Andres González. Simón de Córdoba and Cristóbal de Castran were from Zacatecas. Córdoba was in the presidio. Angélico Chávez believed the second surname was actually Castro.

The other two in the group who requested rights to Yunque were Sebastían Durán, who was married to Ana María Martín, and Diego Márquez, who was married to Juana Martín. The parentage of the two Martín girls was unknown to Chávez. Capitán Márquez was the son of Esther Luján.

Flores had no qualms about ceding the same land to Bartolomé Sánchez, who had come from Queretaro and was living in Santa Fé under the name Bartolomé Garduño. He apparently was given priority over the protests of local military families because he carried papers for the viceroy.

Flores also granted land on the west side of the Chama in 1714 to Cristóbal Crespín, Diego Trujillo, and Salvador de Santisteban. The last was described as "las sobras de tierras" of land granted Lobato for wheat and corn. The literal translation is "leftover lands." Santisteban said he would plant wheat and corn.

The land ceded to Crespín was next to that requested by Santisteban. He planned to divide it evenly with Nicolás Griego to grow corn and wheat. It was described as "whatever is left after granting four fanegas to Salvador de Santisteban and Nicolás de Valverde, and the two fanegas with a house, lot and garden which in their outskirts I granted to Capt. Bartolome Lobato."

Next south on the west side of the Río Grande, Flores validated the claims made by Antonio de Salazar that were mentioned in the post for 6 July 2014. He also may have given José López Naranjo the land mentioned in the post for 14 July 2014, or Naranjo may have acquired it directly from Salazar. There are no records in the archive and no one filed a claim in the nineteenth century for the Naranjo land. Angélico Chávez found the reference in William Ritch’s collection of manuscripts.

These grants were dependent on goodwill between neighbors. They didn’t use the English system of metes and bounds, which identified permanent topological features. William Penn’s use of a grid, mentioned in the post for 13 September 2015, foreshadowed the use of surveys with brass posts at specified coordinates that replaced the metes.

Notes: Salvador de Santisteban was an officer of the presidio who went on the Páez expedition of 1715. Diego Trujillo survived the Villasur expedition of 1720. Sebastían Martín’s grant is often located in Taos; the term apparently was used to refer to any land between the San Juan and Taos pueblos.

Chávez, Angélico. Origins of New Mexico Families, 1992 revised edition.

Christmas, Henrietta Martinez. "Cristobal Crespín - Lands near the Chama River 1714," 17 April 2013 posting for her blog, 1598 New Mexico; quotation on Crespín grant.

Ritch, W. G. According to Chávez, 1992, the territorial secretary salavage papers from the archives before they were destroyed; they’re now in the Huntington Library in San Marino, California.

Twitchell, Ralph Emerson. Spanish Archives of New Mexico, volume 1, 1914; quotations on Yunque and Santisteban grants.

Villasur Expedition’s Local Consequences

The viceroy lost interest in Nuevo México after the defeat of Pedro de Villasur because it no longer was as critical to the empire as the new colonies in Tejas. His advisor, Juan de Oliván y Rebolledo, recognized the strength of the Comanche and the weakness of the Apache, but didn’t believe their conflict was critical to the future of Mexico.

The viceroy abandoned plans for a presidio at Jicarilla, and told the governor to resettle the Apache and convert them to Spanish life. Those at Jicarilla had little choice but to acquiesce. The ones at El Cuartelejo had welcomed Bourgmont and the French in 1724. Their autonomy was respected, they were promised peace from the east, and, in fact, were given some support against the Comanche.

The 200 peso fine levied on Valverde was used to benefit the church, not the colony. Three-fourths was set aside "to help buy chalices and ornaments for the missions of La Junta de los Ríos." The mission, at the confluence of the Conchos with the Río Grande, was intended to pacify local bands hostile to slave raids. It was important to the safety of El Paso.

The rest was to be used to pay priests "for masses for the souls of the soldiers killed in this campaign." Nothing went to the families of the fallen. Most were married, and many of those, no doubt, had children. Those women who didn’t remarry quickly would have faced hard times.

In fact, only five widows did remarry before 1730. Only one of those had a husband wealthy enough to leave an estate, Jean l’Archevêque. He and Manuela Roybal had been married less than year and as yet had no children. With that inheritance and the support of her father, Ignacio de Roybal, she would have been comfortable. She married Bernardo de Sena in 1727. He had considerable real estate in Santa Fé.

Archevêque had two children by his first wife, Antonia Gutíerrez. Both had married before his death, the boy to Manuela’s sister, the girl to the son of Capitán Francisco Lorenzo de Casados. Both father and son were legal go-betweens in Santa Fé.

In addition, he had fathered another son while he was married to Antonia by an unnamed unmarried woman. Augustín also had married before his father’s death and was active in his father’s business in Santa Fé. His wife was the granddaughter of a soldier, Manuella Trujillo. Her father, Augustín, was the son of Mateo Trujillo and María de Tapia.

The vulnerable one was the infant born in 1719 just before Archevêque’s second marriage. The mother, María de Mascareñas, was an orphan who served as a servant in his household. Even though she was remembered in the will, Juan later used his mother’s name.

Destitution would have been the fate of others whose extended families could not support them. Ana Maria de la Vega, the widow of Domingo de Mendizábal, had no parents. She would have had difficult years before she married Manuel Flores in 1723. He was the son of a skilled tradesman.

In the absence of state support for veterans and their families, men in the military looked after one another. Juana de Abeytia, widow of José Antonio Fernández, married Antonio de Armenta, survivor of the expedition, in 1725. She would have suffered years of hardship because her father was dead.

Josefa Montoya, widow of Manuel de Silva, married José Santisteban, survivor of the expedition, in 1720. Her father, Andres Montoya, was an ayudante and owned considerable land in Santa Fé. His father, Salvador Santisteban, was an alférez.

Maria Vigil, wife of Domingo Romero de Pedraza, married José Tenorio, in 1722. He was the grandson of Miguel Tenorio Alba, who died in the expedition. She would not have been secure because her father, Francisco Montes Vigil, a survivor, had land.

The survivors may have fared better. The Reglamento de Habana stipulated totally disabled veterans in Cuba should be granted salaries if they had served 15 years. Those wounded in battle who’d served fewer years were given half salary.

Notes: Juan de Acuña was the viceroy in 1727. Francisco Lorenzo de Casados’ son was Francisco Casados.

Chávez, Angélico. New Mexico Roots, Ltd, 1982; there is a gap in the surviving record from 1730 to 1750.

____. Origins of New Mexico Families, 1992 revised edition.

Cloud, William A., Steve Black and Jennifer Piehl. "La Junta de los Rios: Spanish Frontier 1715-1821," Texas beyond History website.

Felipe V. Reglamento de Habana, 1719, in Thomas H. Naylor and Charles W. Polzer, Pedro de Rivera and the Military Regulations for Northern New Spain, 1724-1729, 1988.

Oliván y Rebolledo, Juan de. Report to the viceroy, 29 May 1727, in José Antonio Pichardo, manuscript, translated and annotated by Charles Wilson Hackett as Pichardo’s Treatise of the Limits of Louisiana and Texas, volume 1, 1931.

Villasur Expedition Consequences

People living in Santa Fé evaluated danger differently than did officials in Mexico City. Ever since they first heard rumors of La Salle’s plans to found a colony on the gulf coast, the viceroy and his advisors had been strengthening the Empire’s position in Tejas.

During the 1719 war between France and Spain, Diego Ramón, comandante of the San Juan Bautista presidio in Nuevo León, passed on exaggerated reports of French activity to the viceroy. He, in turn, ordered the governor of Nuevo México, Antonio Valverde, to investigate.

Valverde demurred because he was planning a campaign against the Faraón Apache. As it was, he had to postpone that to punish Shoshone speakers for attacking settlers like Cristóbal de la Serna and Diego Romero.

In December, the Junta de Guerra in Mexico City ordered Valverde to establish a presidio on the northeastern border with the French at El Cuartelejo. He and his advisors balked at the idea of sending 25 soldiers from the presidio with their families into danger. Missionaries were no happier at the idea of sending two or three men to convert Apache.

People living in Taos argued it was better to have an outpost at Jicarilla that would protect them from Shoshone-speaking Utes and Comanche. Valverde suggested it would take at least 50 additional men to be effective The Athabascan-speaking bands probably agreed. The Apache living at Jicarilla were begging for help. Those at El Cuartelejo most likely didn’t wish to invite reprisals by the Pawnee.

The delay was fatal to the presidio in Santa Fé. In the year between the viceroy’s order and Valverde’s compliance, the French cemented the alliance Claude Charles du Tisné had made in September with the Pawnee by promising guns and presents in return for trading rights.

The viceroy sent a visador north to evaluate Mexico’s frontier defenses. Pedro de Rivera’s report on the ambush of Pedro de Villasur was forwarded to the Oidor de Guerra. Juan de Oliván y Rebolledo was a strong proponent of Tejas.

He faulted Villasur for incompetence rising from inexperience. He noted the circumstances "refutes the pretentions of the paper which is evidence of the commissions which he had held, but not of his abilities; it refutes the evidence of his honors - which are accustomed to be given ad honorem - but not that of the military practice which gives experience."

It was the first time since the Bourbons had ascended the throne of Spain that a weakness in bureaucratic governmental processes was exposed in Mexico City. Résumés were as vulnerable to manipulation as had been the earlier reliance on patronage and spoils.

Oliván responded by asserting a new precept, that a man was responsible for the consequences ensuing from appointing an incompetent subordinate. He felt the need to cite religious precedents for what, in fact, was a revolutionary concept. He recalled the bishop of Valladolid was fined when a vicar in his jurisdiction had not "executed an obligatory decree. As the vicar had no property, the bishop was fined because of having chosen him." He also noted the Duc de Béxar had been fined because an underling "failed to execute another such decree."

He did not acknowledge the internal weaknesses caused by Spain’s wars with France, which left México with limited funds. The increased demand for slaves in the sugar colonies in the Caribbean and Veracruz had led to slave raids on bands living just beyond the mining towns. They were responding, much as were the Comanche, with attacks on Spanish outposts. The state didn’t see the profits from slavery but it bore the costs when it couldn’t meet the frontier demands for more presidios.

Oliván also did not criticize the cumbersome means of mobilizing an army that don’t seem to have changed much since Juan de Oñate marched north with a herd of livestock. Juan Páez Hurtado’s expedition against the Faraón in 1715 began too late in the season, never found its quarry, and disappointed potential Apache allies. Valverde cut short his mission to the Apache because he ran out of food for his army and couldn’t provide for incoming refugees.

Presidio troops simply had no agility to engage mobile bands, and lacked the empathy needed to convert them to allies.

Notes: The viceroy in 1720 was Baltasar de Zúñiga y Guzman; the one in 1726 and 1727 was Juan de Acuña. Zúñiga then was president of the Consejo de Indias or Council of the Indies. Juan de Oliván Revolledo was the Oidor de Guerra or auditor of war.

John, Elizabeth A. H. Storms Brewed in Other Men’s Worlds, 1996 edition.

Johnson, John G. "Oliván Rebolledo, Juan Manuel de," Handbook of Texas Online.

Lewis, Anna. "Du Tisné’s Expedition into Oklahoma, 1719," Chronicles of Oklahoma 3:319-323:1925.

Oliván y Rebolledo, Juan de. Report to the viceroy, 29 May 1727, in Pichardo.

Pichardo, José Antonio. Manuscript, 1808-1812, translated and annotated by Charles Wilson Hackett in Pichardo’s Treatise of the Limits of Louisiana and Texas, volume 1, 1931.

Rivera, Pedro de. Report to the Oidor de Guerra, 1726, in Pichardo.

Villasur Expedition Roster

Below is a list of men killed during the ambush of Pedro de Villasur’s expedition, with their rank, military experience, marital status, and calculated age. Those with relatives in Santa Cruz are listed first. When there’s a difference between the name used by witnesses and the name in published lists, I’m giving priority to the witnesses.

Santa Cruz
1. Córdoba, Simón de, married, 31
         Páez expedition
         Sister was María de Córdoba, wife of Bernardo Romero
2. Domínguez de Mendoza, José, married, 65
         Ayudante-general, Villasur’s war council, Páez expedition
         Uncle or step-brother of Leonor Domínguez
3. Gallegos, Juan, married, 31
         Páez expedition
         Chavez say probably Juan de Sayago
         Married niece of Cristóbal de Tafoya Altamirano
4. Herrera Sandoval, Antonio de, married, 25
         Páez expedition
         Son of Tomás de Herrera Sandoval
5. Jirón, Nicolas, married, 37
         Son of Tomás Jirón de Tejeda
6. Luján, Pedro, married, 52
         Capitán, Villasur’s war council, Páez expedition
         Married granddaughter of Luis Martín Serrano
7. Madrid, Bernardo, married, 28
         Grandson of Roque de Madrid
         Nephew of Cristóbal de la Serna
8. Medina, Ramón de, married, 32
         Sister married Diego Romero
         Brother and sister married children of Cristóbal Martín
9. Naranjo, José López, married, 50
         Páez expedition
         Married daughter of Matías Luján
         Had land west of Río Grande north of Santa Clara
10. Romero de Pedraza, Domingo, married, 34
         Páez expedition
         Married sister of Francisco Montes Vigil
         Widow marry grandson of Miguel Tenorio Alba
11. Serna, Cristóbal de la, married, 45
         Capitán, Villasur’s war council,
         Married daughter of Roque de Madrid
         Their daughter married son of Alejo Martín
12. Silva, Manuel de, married, 26
         Páez expedition
         Son of Antonio de Silva
         Widow marry José Santisteban, survivor
13. Tenorio de Alba, Miguel, married, 36
         Capitán, Villasur’s council,
         Son married Barbara Tafoya

Others Who Didn’t Return
14. Agüero, Pedro Nicasco, married, 33
15. Archevêque, Jean le, married, 49
         Villasur council, Páez expedition
         Widow marry Bernardo de Sena, not involved
16. Avilés, Ignacio de, married, 52
17. Casillas, Bernardo, married, 34
         Alférez, Villasur council, Páez expedition
18. Fernández, José Antonio, married
         Widow marry Antonio de Armenta, survivor
19. González, Sebastían, married
         Pichardo lists Francisco González, married, 43
20. Griego, José, married, 30
         Corporal, Villasur war council, Páez expedition
21. Lira, Juan de
22. Lugo, Pedro
23. Mendizábal, Domingo de, married, 21
         Son of Pedro de Mendizábal
         Widow marry Manuel Flores, not involved
         Pichardo lists Pedro de Mendizábal, married
24. Mínguez, Juan
         Chaplain
25. Olguín, Tomás, 52
         Maestro de campo, Villasur’s war council,
26. Ortiz, Luis, 30
         Páez expedition
27. Perea, Francisco García de, married, 41
28. Rodríguez, Lorenzo, married, 33
         Corporal, Villasur’s war council, Páez expedition
29. Rojas, Juan Rico de, 27
         Páez expedition
         Pichardo lists Juan Río de Rojas
30. Segura, Lorenzo
31. Segura, Pedro, married, 48
32. Tapia, Francisco de, married, 44
33. Trujillo, Domingo, 24
         Páez expedition
34. Velásquez, Diego, married, 25
         Páez expedition
35. Villasur, Pedro de, married, 62
         Commander

Auxiliaries
Eleven, unnamed
         Alonso Rael de Aguilar said 12 or 13

Servants
François Sistaca, probably Francisco, fate unknown
         Pawnee servant of Cristóbal de la Serna
Four servants of Antonio Valverde y Cosío
         Naylor said servants were with Cristóbal de la Serna

Survivors with Ties to Santa Cruz
1. Armenta, Antonio de, 19
         Daughter marry son of José López Naranjo
         Marry widow of José Antonio Fernández
         Witness marriage for Manuel de Silva’s widow
2. Lobato, Juan Caetano, married, 22
         Son of Bartolomé Lobato
3. Madrid, Matías, married, 45
         Son of Roque de Madrid, uncle of Bernardo Madrid
         Married sister of Cristóbal de la Serna
4. Rael de Aguilar, Alonso, married, 60
         Villasur’s war council, Páez expedition
         Witness quoted by Pichardo and Thomas
         Cousin of Leonor Domínguez
5. Santisteban, José de, 22
         Witness quoted by Pichardo
         Son of Salvador de Santisteban
         Marry widow of Manuel Silva
6. Trujillo, Diego, married, 46
         Wife was great-granddaughter of Juan Griego and Pascuala Bernal
7. Vigil, Francisco Montes, married, 23
         Son of Francisco Montes Vigil
         Sister married to Domingo Romero de Pedraza

Other Survivors
8. Ambrosio de Aragon, 19
         Witness marriage for widow of José Antonio Fernández
9. Barrios, Juan Antonio, married
10. Guillén, Pedro, married, 39
         Witness against marriage of José Domínguez de Mendoza’s son
11. Ledesma, Juan de, married, 22
         Witness for marriage of widow of Manuel de Silva
12. Mares, José, married
         Wife was daughter of Lorenzo Rodríguez
13. Perea, Jacinto de, married, 28
         Witness for marriage of widow of Manuel de Silva
         Witness for marriage of widow of José Antonio Fernández
14. Sánchez, Joaquin, 25,
         Witness for marriage of widow of José Antonio Fernández
15. Tamaris, Felipe de, married, 34
         Witness quoted by Pichardo and Thomas
         Witness for marriage of widow of Domingo de Mendizábal
         Witness for marriage of widow of Jean l’Archevêque
16. Tenorio Alba, Manual, married, 22
         Son of Alfonso López and Luisa Gómez de Arellano
         Witness for marriage of widow of Jean l’Archevêque

Auxiliaries
Alonso Rael de Aguilar said they began with 60, and 12 to 13 died, which meant 47 or 48 survived.

Servants
17. Giravalle, Santiago
         Servant of Jean l’Archevêque
         Witness for marriage of widow of Jean l’Archevêque
18. Gonzales, Antonio, 27
         Indian servant of Sebastían González
         Witness for marriage of widow of Domingo de Mendizábal
19. Rodríguez, Melchor, married, 23
         Mulatto servant of Pedro de Villasur
         Witness for marriage of widow of Domingo de Mendizábal

Notes: The list of those who died may be incomplete. Antonio Valverde y Cosío was reporting to the viceroy. As commander he named those in the royal presidio who were in the viceroy’s pay. The others were of less direct interest to the viceroy.

Ths list of survivors may also be incomplete. The number varies from source to source, and most probably do not include servants.

Ages calculated by adding or subtracting 1720 to date when age reported. Names standardized to those used by Chavez. The Juan Páez Hurtado expedition was discussed in the posting for 12 August 2015.

Chávez, Angélico. New Mexico Roots, Ltd, 1982; names of survivors.

____. Origins of New Mexico Families, 1992 revised edition; family details, names of survivors.

Kessell, John L., Rick Hendricks, and Meredith Dodge. Blood on the Boulders, volume 2, 1998; names of survivors.

_____, _____, _____. To the Royal Crown Restored, 1995; family details.

Naylor, Thomas H., Diana Hadley, and Mardith K. Schuetz-Miller. The Presidio and Militia on the Northern Frontier of New Spain, volume 2, part 2, 1997.

Pichardo, José Antonio. Manuscript, 1808-1812, translated and annotated by Charles Wilson Hackett in Pichardo’s Treatise of the Limits of Louisiana and Texas, volume 1, 1931.

Rael de Aguilar, Alonso. Deposition, July 1726, in Pichardo.

Thomas, Alfred B. After Coronado, 1935.

Valverde y Cosío, Antonio. Letter to viceroy, 15 June 1720, in Pichardo; official list of men who died.

Villasur Expedition Ambushed

Testimony from participants taken in July of 1726, and taken on behalf of widows of the deceased.

Day 3 (August 13 or 14)
Alonso Rael de Aguillar recalled, he was in the main camp with Pedro de Villasur that fateful morning. "They all unsaddled at once to change horses. At this moment, a body of the people who were ambushed fell upon them, and with both firearms and arrows committed the havoc which is well known."

Felipe Tamaris, who was with the animals, testified: "The horseherd had been gathered at daybreak; and at the time when all the soldiers were exchanging horses, an ambush of some five hundred enemies fell upon them with firearms, lances, and arrows."

José de Santisteban, who also was with the horse herd, remembered: "At daybreak they brought the horses to the camp, and the soldiers were unsaddling them in order to remount. At this moment the enemy advanced, attacking them, many troops with firearms assaulting the camp."

He continued, "Don Pedro de Villasur at once told the witness and his comrades to hasten to stop it, encouraging those who were in camp to defend themselves. The witness saw that at a volley he fell to the ground."

Melchor Rodriguez was with Domingo de Mendizábal "near the tent of his master, General Don Pedro de Villasur, when the French attacked, and during the fray he heard the General tell Mendizábal to bring out the carbines from the tent, then saw the latter go in but does not know if he came out or was killed there." Antonio de Armenta added he had not seen "Mendizábal die, but saw him later when the camp was in a blaze."

The horses stampeded. It took time, but the men recaptured many. Santisteban’s corporal "having overtaken the horses, as is stated above, the said José Griego charged the enemy with a halberd, killing all whom he met, until at a shot he fell from his horse."

Antonio Valverde had been told in September of 1720, "it was almost impossible for them to see one another for the smoke and dust which was arising. Hearing the voices of the few who courageously defended themselves among such a multitude of enemies, the officer in charge of the horses, with three others who followed him, charged fearlessly, breaking through the circle which they had made, and killing many of the Panana Indians. This enabled about seven of our men to escape, although badly abused and wounded from the shower of bullets and arrows. The said officer and a comrade were killed in the assault."

Rael testified, "Although our men put themselves on the defensive, in comparison with that multitude they were few, and were unable to hold out. And although those who were mounted were sufficiently strong to beat off those great numbers, yet because most of them were already dead, they were not able to succor all."

He added, "they did rescue the deponent, who had nine wounds, and was in such condition that the Indians had cut off a lock of his hair which he had braided."

Santiago Giravalle, servant of Jean l’Archevêque in the main camp, "stayed with him until he died, and then escaped with a bullet shot in his chest and several other wounds." Rodriguez "escaped from a ring of Pawnees."

The Days Following
Villasur’s men wounded enough of their attackers that they were not followed when they fled with the horses. They got as far as the Apache, presumably at El Cuartelejo, who fed them for two days and supplied them "from their paltry stores of provisions."

Valverde only mentioned their care of the Españoles, but they also would have been helping the warriors from the pueblos and, if there had been any, their own guides or those from Jicarilla. He vouchsafed:

"This is admirable that, being heathen, and seeing our people so reduced in health and strength, they did not attempt to take from them the horses which were bringing, without which have been in worse state than those whom they had left dead in the fight."

Notes: Panana was the Spanish term for the Pawnee; the Skidi band of southern Pawnee lived along that part of the Platte. The viceroy in 1720 was Baltasar de Zúñiga y Guzman.

Armenta, Antonio de. Testimony for the 1723 marriage of Manuel Flores to the widow of Domingo de Mendizábal, in Chávez.

Chávez, Angélico. New Mexico Roots, Ltd, 1982.

Giravalle, Santiago. Testimony for the 1727 marriage of Bernardino de Sena to the widow of Jean l’Archevêque, in Chávez.

Pichardo, José Antonio. Manuscript, 1808-1812, translated and annotated by Charles Wilson Hackett in Pichardo’s Treatise of the Limits of Louisiana and Texas, volume 1, 1931.

Rael de Aguilar, Alonso. Deposition, July 1726, in Pichardo.

Rodriguez, Melchor. Testimony for the 1723 marriage of Manuel Flores to the widow of Domingo de Mendizábal, in Chávez.

Santisteban, José de. Deposition, July 1726, in Pichardo.

Tamaris, Felipe. Deposition, July 1726, in Thomas.

Thomas, Alfred B. After Coronado, 1935.

Valverde y Cosío, Antonio. Letter to the viceroy, September 1720, in Pichardo.