arse Ne THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY 2 Wear Bor N | _ The person charging this material is re- sponsible for its return to the library from which it was withdrawn on or before the Latest Date stamped below. Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books are reasons for disciplinary action and may result in dismissal from the University. UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN JAN 0 2 199 DEC 05 19 L161— O-1096 SPAIN IN THE WEST A SERIES OF ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS FROM FOREIGN ARCHIVES VOLUME I WV an Nh ber py ea | () DA RACER SET ey Wy it PMN NOLWHOGXZ | voy ISe7A Neon v WM OL HEINE ° Cisaug = og ? ‘NoIsciy “ONF5F7~ % WOTIGTITITY WM OLR II + = S04 ON ey 0 SIGtHL TIE) NOL70@ FJ LYIGUYIn Ag viva TN/dSIYO WOH GITMdIWOD eee RINGO HINGIS ae AA TENT | SVX4L 10 dVwW 3 - ot FON HD O14 TPO ororeze, “sr S J oN 2y¥ dV ni? . Pha | ) 2 gst copenae NeS)O ¥* u40S | g (x oe 6elr eave Nilacz . oar b 0: | Nee Pee F we we vy xf (Aare 92 reer yp, v7 | 1) A yt e NSA Q 7G et . I ) yee yy > 5 rt 4 Wel /7 ry $ ‘ — “ oath os niided Oo) \ R ; _ aX . : [pesinéo2xe) L505¢ WAS 294 \ | \? esis ) 29) woe it = Nvaysz 7 eu DIC wv ies F | ét-2zur oe | (4x2¢510d) - b 21) Sy tief gp po 770 9N ge iyi | ( 1 9 777d 10) ES = bits ‘, © a Bi z ( eapinerors, (X p ht oova ue oe 1. Lun (ar ¢o7¥2) SICINOWS Ld Ly We 4 Cs ‘ i ol { 5 o somite i * i y ; r H t ‘ 5 ¥ / gs. » 4 wa . ' e 2 ee ee Sete pea ee ted S18 2M 8 Ra ath tga Mea ee a Lay aR na RAIN Ae satin ee v.88) oF hates ATHANASE DE MEZIERES AND THE LOUISIANA-TEXAS FRONTIER 1768-1780 DOCUMENTS PUBLISHED FOR THE FIRST TIME, FROM THE ORIGI- NAL SPANISH AND FRENCH MANUSCRIPTS, CHIEFLY IN THE ARCHIVES OF MEXICO AND SPAIN; TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH ; EDITED AND AN- NOTATED, BY HERBERT EUGENE BOLTON, Pu.D. PROFESSOR OF AMERICAN HISTORY, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA VOLUME I THE ARTHUR H. CLARK COMPANY CLEVELAND: 1914 NAN ® j el t . On AC EY FT ae his} i » Von aaa x LPS “copyRIGHT, 1913, BY slat ar) See al ae i iy BAL EAT Viewhy At i TRG Atay aye iy Ve Te Li KID PG) al SPA TY AL Alt Mallat Ge nfe HALa { h eis a f i 7, Kiet ay De Hee HY 7 ; ; TO GERTRUDE ate ea fi { | » } | aes Wide y Wy i il 1 wit iM ni i I See A hal br i UP We { Pit s005 WARD dR JO UR ult hit } i u} Nein, Rh) Put t ABA Wht i it a) oh ae Gas PN W i CONTENTS PREFACE HIsToRICAL ee Aico SOURCES OF THE MANUSCRIPTS . I CoNDITIONS ON THE FRONTIER, AND THE Bevanierper OF SPANISH RULE, 1768-1770 00O ON AOU FW DN ee WwW Nw — = U Oo HO HO HY HK BH HS HS hRwWNH HOW CON DD Ulloa to O’Conor, 1768 O’Reilly to De Méziéres, September 23, 1769 O’Reilly to De Méziéres, January 22, 1770 O’Reilly to De Méziéres, January 22, 1770 O’Reilly to De Méziéres, January 23, 1770 O’Reilly to De Méziéres, January 23, 1770 O’Reilly to De Mézieres, January 23, 1770 De Meziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, February 1, 1770 De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, February 1, 1770 De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, February 1, 1770 De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, February 1, 1770 De Meziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, February 1, 1770 Contract of Juan Piseros with De Méziéres, Natchi- toches, February 3, 1770 De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, February 1, 1770 Instructions for the traders of the Cadaux d’Acquioux and Hiatasses Nations, February 4, 1770 O’Reilly to De Méziéres, February 19, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, March 15, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Mézieres, March 15, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, March 15, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Meéziéres, March 15, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Mézieres, March 16, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, March 16, 1770 De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, March 22, 1770 Agreement made with the Indian nations in assembly, April 21, 1770 13 17 123 127 ce 29 ATHANASE DE MEZIERES De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, April 30, De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, May 15, De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, May 15, De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, May 20, De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, May 20, De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, May 20, De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, May 20, De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, May 20, De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, May 20, Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, May 31, Unzaga y Amezaga to De Mezieres, June 1, De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, June 10, De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, June 10, De Mezieres to Unzaga y Amezaga, June 10, De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, June 10, De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, June 10, De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, June 16, De Mezieres to Unzaga y Amezaga, June 27, De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, June 27, Unzaga y Amezaga to De Meéziéres, July 28, De Mézieéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, August 21, De Meézieéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, August 21, De Meézieres to Unzaga y Amezaga, August 21, 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 1770 [ Vol. Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, September 20, 1770 De Mézieres to Unzaga y Amezaga, September 27, 1770 De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, October 23, 1770 De Mézieres to Unzaga y Amezaga, October 23, 1770 De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, October 23, 1770 De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, October 23, 1770 De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, October 23, 1770 De Méziéres to Gonzalez, October 26, 1770 Gonzalez to De Méziéres, October 30, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, November 27, 1770 De Mezieéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, November 29, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Meéziéres, December 1, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, December 1, 1770 Unzaga y Amezagato De Méziéres, December 2, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, December 2, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, December 2, 1770 one | CONTENTS 9 II THE CoNFERENCE AT CADODACHOS WITH THE NATIONS 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 ya 72 1h. OF THE NorTH,1770 é 2 199 De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Pas Ea May 20, eee De Mezieres to Unzaga y Amezaga, May 20, 1770 De Meziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, June 27, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, September 20, 1770 De Meziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, September 27, 1770 Report by De Méziéres of the expedition to Cado- dachos, October 29, 1770 Depositions relative to the expedition to Cadodachos, October 30-31, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, November 18, 1770 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, November 29, 1770 De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, November 29, 1770 III TREATIES OF PEACE WITH THE NATIONS OF THE NorTH; PROPOSALS CONCERNING TRADE AND ANOTHER Ex- PEDITION, 1771-1772. . : 227 De Meéeziéres to Unzaga y ‘Ariel: Hea. 28, a De Meézieres to Unzaga y Amezaga, March 14, 1771 De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, circa March 14, L771 De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, March 20, 1771 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Meéziéres, April 6, 1771 De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, July 3, 1771 De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, July 3, 1771 Unzaga y Amezaga to De Méziéres, October 4, 1771 The Baron de Ripperda to De Meziéres, October 7, 1771 Treaty with the Taovayas, October 27, 1771 Declaration of Gorgoritos, Bidai chief, December 21, 1771 The Baron de Ripperda to Unzaga y Amezaga, Decem- ber 31, 1771 The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, April 28, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to Unzaga y Amezaga, May 26, 1772 Areche to the viceroy (dictamen fiscal), Mexico, July 31, 1772 IO CONTENTS IV THe EXxpeEpITION OF 1772 FROM NATCHITOCHES TO THE 89 90 gI NATIONS OF THE UPPER I RINITY AND BRAzos RIVERS . 283 De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, February 25, 1772 De Méziéres to the Baron de Ripperda, July 4, 1772 De Meézieéres to the viceroy, July 16, 1772 De Méziéres to the Baron de Ripperda, July 4, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, July 4, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, July 4, 1772 ‘The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, July 5, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, July 5, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, July 6, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, July 6, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, July 6, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, July 7, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, August 2, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, August 2, 1772 De Méziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, August 20, 1772 De Meéziéres to Unzaga y Amezaga, August 20, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to the viceroy, August 25, 1772 The Baron de Ripperda to Unzaga y Amezaga, September 8, 1772 The viceroy to the Baron de Ripperda, September 16, 1772 ILLUSTRATIONS Map oF TEXAS IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY ( Frontispiece FACSIMILE OF THE SIGNATURE OF THE BARON DE RIPPERDA [text cut] : ‘ 4 : ’ : : 256 FACSIMILE OF A PAGE OF DE Mezizres’s REPORT : , 287 FACSIMILE OF THE SIGNATURE OF VICEROY BUCARELY Y Ursua [text cut] . ; : ; / \ i } 350 PREFACE It is no small satisfaction to be able to bring forth from an unmerited obscurity a man who was useful and even distinguished in his day and way, and to make his ser- vices known again in the land where he wrought. Atha- nase de Méziéres y Clugny, the author, the recipient, or the central figure of the documents here published, was for years the foremost Indian agent and diplomat of the Louisiana-Texas frontier. He alone, perhaps, of the Louisiana Frenchmen of the second half of the eight- eenth century is comparable in this respect with Saint Denis of the first half. It was he above all others who, in the capacity of lieutenant-governor of Louisiana, es- tablished the Spanish rule in the Red River Valley. And yet he has been done scant justice by history, for the reason, it would seem that, through the political changes and vicissitudes of the Southwest, the records of his services have been lost to view and his work, in con- sequence, forgotten; for, indeed, historians have barely mentioned his name. But to record the activities of De Mézieres is not the primary aim of publishing his letters and reports. Of greater interest than the man is the wealth of historical information which his papers contain. ‘The history of the French and Spanish régimes in Texas and Louisiana is to a large extent the history of an Indian policy, in its various aspects; and for light on the Indian affairs of what are now Texas, western Louisiana, Arkansas, and Oklahoma during the period between 1768 and 1780, 14 ATHANASE DE MEZIERES [ Vol. and on the problems of Indian control in that period, as well as on the establishment of Spanish rule in western Louisiana, there is perhaps no other single group of documents in existence so important as the correspond- ence and reports of De Méziéres here published. These writings of De Meézieres, taken together with the related correspondence of the governors and mis- sionaries of Louisiana:and Texas, the commandant- general of the Interior Provinces, and the viceroy of New Spain, reveal in a way impossible to learn from any other available source the all-absorbing nature of the task of controlling the Nations of the North (the tribes inhabiting the vast region lying on both sides of the Red River) on the one hand, and the more dreaded Apache of western Texas on the other; the importance of the transfer of Louisiana to Spain in its effects upon the administration of her frontier provinces; the jealousy which continued to exist between French Louisiana and Spanish Texas long after the two colonies had become subject to one crown; and the way in which, in spite of this jealousy, Spain felt compelled to abdicate to French agents and French traders the control of the Nations of the North, as the only means of maintaining these tribes as a makeweight against the Apache and the only guar- anty against complete destruction of the frontier settle- ments by the combined hostility of both. To this enum- eration of values should be added the great wealth of data for the ethnology and the historical geography of the region concerned. Perhaps the best illustration of the importance of these reports of De Méziéres is found in the fact that till the end of the eighteenth century at least, they were the chief reliance of the governments at Chihauhua, Mexico, and Madrid for information con- cerning the geography, ethnology, and Indian politics one | PREFACE 15 of the northeastern frontier of New Spain. In short, they became a sort of statesman’s text-book for the region. And yet they have hitherto remained unpub- lished and almost unknown to scholars. No attempt has been made to publish here all the ob- tainable writings of, to, or about De Méziéres, only such being included as relate primarily to his services after he became a Spanish subject through the transfer of Louisiana to Spain in 1762. Nor could all of such avail- able be included, and selection has not been the least of the editor’s tasks. The major portion of the docu- ments have been gathered from the archives of Mexico and Spain, a fact which illustrates the great importance of those archives for the early history of the Southwest. Several papers not found in Mexico or Spain, however, were obtained from the Bancroft Collection at the Uni- versity of California, the British Museum, and the Bexar Archives at the University of Texas. The collec- tion of Papeles Procedentes de la Isla de Cuba, at Se- ville, was found to be especially rich in original manu- scripts throwing light on the Louisiana side of the Louis- iana- Texas frontier, and in this way to supplement the view which had formerly been gained from the archives of Mexico and Spain. Materials for the early career of De Méziéres were found in the archives of France, while a small amount of information was secured from Louisiana. 3 Acknowledgments are due especially to Mr. Roscoe R. Hill for providing me with the necessary bibli- ographical data regarding the contents of the group of papers in Seville named above, and for supervising the making of my transcripts from that collection. ‘Thanks are due to Mr. Colin B. Goodykoontz, Mr. W. E. Dunn, and Mrs. Beatrice Quijada Cornish for valued assistance 16 ATHANASE DE MEZIERES [Vol. in compiling the work; to Professor F. J. Teggart, Mr. Hill, Mr. Goodykoontz, and Mr. Thomas Maitland Marshall for reading the “Introduction” ; and to Profes- sor W. A. Merrill for aid with the Latin passages. HERBERT E. BOLTON. Berkeley, California, April, 1913. HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION THE INDIAN IN THE HISTORY OF THE LOUISIANA- TEXAS FRONTIER, 1685-1780 In order to understand conditions on the northeastern frontier of New Spain and the southwestern frontier of Louisiana during the period following the transfer of the latter to Spain, which is the principal theme of the documents here published, one must have a correct gen- eral notion of the distribution, movements, and inter- relations of the various native groups of the same region and of the nature of the contact of the Spaniards and the French with these groups and with each other in relation to these groups before the period covered. ‘To provide such an historical background is the purpose of the brief sketch constituting this Introduction and of the accom- panying map. While some of the facts involved in this sketch are well known to specialists in the field, many others have not been available; moreover, it is hoped that the survey here presented from the standpoint of the different tribal confederacies will serve to make more clear than has ever yet been shown the importance of these groups as separate factors in the unfolding, and consequently in the interpretation, of the history of the area and period concerned.* 1 Documentary sources for the organization, distribution, and early history of the tribes treated in this sketch are still largely in manuscript form. For the tribes of eastern Texas and western Louisiana, and the relations of the French with them during the eighteenth century, much is to be found, of course, in Margry’s Découvertes et Etablissements des Francais dans L’ouest et dans 18 ATHANASE DE MEZIERES [ Vol. The Native Tribes of Texas and western Louisiana in the eighteenth century When at the close of the seventeenth century the Spaniards and the French came face to face on the Louisiana-Texas frontier in a contest for commerce and empire, they found there several well marked groups or confederacies of native tribes, which, sooner or later, became so many bases for the struggle. Viewed from the standpoint of their geographical relation to the Span- ish possessions, they represented two broad divisions, an outer and an inner, which in relation to international politics were respectively of primary and secondary im- portance. The frontier groups formed a great arc ex- tending from the Karankawa on the Gulf coast eastward through the Arkokisa and Bidai to the Hasinai and the Caddo, and then westward through the Tonkawa and Wichita to the Apache (later to the Comanche) of the upper Red and Arkansas Rivers. Farther north and le Sud de L’Amérique Septentrionale and in French’s Historical Collections of Louisiana, though it is to be noted that some of the documents printed in the latter work are far from being faithful copies of the originals. Indeed this charge has been made against some of Margry’s. The guide to the principal archives of France being prepared for the Carnegie Institution of Washington by Mr. W. G. Leland will doubtless bring to light a great store of sources for the subject hitherto not generally known or available. For documentary mate- rial relating to the tribal history of most of the tribes of Texas and to their early relations with the Europeans, recourse must be had in the main to the archives of Mexico, Spain, and Texas. A collection of perhaps twenty-five thousand sheets of transcripts of documents in these archives has been made by the present writer and is now in his possession. Some results of a study of the early Texas tribes made within recent years in the archives of Mexico and Texas have appeared in Part u of Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico (Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin, no. 30, edited by Frederick Webb Hodge, 1910) and others are printed in various articles in the Texas State Historical Association, Quarterly. ‘Though no attempt will be made in this brief sketch to furnish a complete bibliography, special sources of informa- tion will be cited in connection with the different points discussed. Most of the Spanish manuscripts here cited are transcripts in the author’s private col- lection, which will be referred to as B. Mss. one] HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION 19 west, on the New Mexico — Louisiana frontier, were the Jumano, of the Arkansas, and the Pawnee, of the re- gion south of the Platte. The inner division lay be- tween this cordon of frontier groups and the Rio Grande. In the sketch which follows the groups will be described in a geographical order, but the contest for the control of the separate divisions will be considered in an order determined in general by historical develop- ments rather than by geographical location.’ THE KARANKAWA. The region embracing the Gulf coast and the littoral islands from Galveston Bay to and perhaps beyond the mouth of the San Antonio River was the home of the Karankawan tribes, who occupied from the first a peculiar position on the frontier be- tween France and Spain. Though there were numer- ous petty subdivisions of this group, its principal tribes (using the most common Spanish forms of the names) were the Cujanes, Carancaguasas, Guapites or Coapites, Cocos, and Copanes. They were closely interrelated, and all apparently spoke dialects of the same language, which was different from that of their neighbors far- ther inland. Unless the Coahuiltecan tribes be ex- cepted, these Karankawa represented perhaps the lowest grade of native society in all Texas. They were fierce cannibals, were frequently at war with the interior tribes, and were from their first contact with the Euro- 2 Contrary to the commonly accepted opinion that Texas, on the coming of the Europeans, was inhabited by roving tribes, without fixed habitat, it is a fact that, with the exception of the southward migration of the Wichita and Comanche, and of the retreat of the Lipan before the last-named tribe, the larger Texas groups were relatively stable all through the eighteenth century. Thus, the Caddo, the Hasinai, the Bidai, the Arkokisa, and the Karankawa, were to be found at the end of the eighteenth century in essentially the same places where they had been encountered at the end of the seventeenth or at the opening of the eighteenth. It might be said that the eastern Texas tribes were relatively stable, while in western Texas there was a general movement south- ward. 20 ATHANASE DE MEZIERES [ Vol. peans to the end of the Spanish régime regarded as par- ticularly dangerous to mariners on that perilous coast, not a few of whom succumbed to their savage attacks.* THE BIDAI, ARKOKISA, AND ATTACAPA. Lying to the eastward and northeastward of the Karankawa and on the Louisiana- Texas frontier, were the tribes occupying the region between the Hasinai Confederacy and the Gulf coast. ‘They were, principally, the Bidai, Arko- kisa, and Deadoses, who lived on either side of the lower Trinity, and farther east, the Attacapa, on the lower Neches and Sabine and to the eastward thereof. These tribes, formerly but no longer thought to be Caddoan, were of somewhat higher advancement than the Karan- kawa, were all closely associated with one another, and were evidently kin.* THE HASINAI. West of the Sabine River, on the An- gelina and the upper Neches, was the compact Hasinai [ Asinai, Cenis, Texas] Confederacy, consisting of some ten or more tribes, of which the best known were the 3 For the Karankawan tribes see Gatschet, “The Karankawa Indians” [Pea- body Museum, Archeological and Ethnological Papers, vol. i, no. 2, 1891]; Bolton, “The Founding of Mission Rosario,” in the Texas State Historical As- sociation, Quarterly, vol. x, 113-139. References to the ill fate of shipwrecked mariners among the cannibals of this coast, beginning with the Cabeza de Vaca party, in 1528, are frequent in the annals of Texas and Louisiana clear down to the nineteenth century. £A great addition to our knowledge of this group of tribes has been made by the present writer’s study of hitherto unused manuscript sources relative to the activities of the Spaniards on the lower Trinity and on the San Xavier River in the eighteenth century, and by the work of Dr. John R. Swanton, of the Bureau of American Ethnology, upon the tribes of western Louisiana. The results of Dr. Swanton’s work are published in his Indian Tribes of the Lower Mississippi Valley and Adjacent Coast of the Gulf of Mexico [Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin, no. 43, Washington, 1911]. For information relative to the Bidai-Arkokisa groups I am particularly indebted to the manu- script thesis of Miss Elise D. Brown (now Mrs. Lane), one of my former students at the University of Texas. My researches have determined the lin- guistic affiliation of the Bidai, Deadoses, and Arkokisa with each other, and of the Mayeye with the Tonkawa. one] HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION 21 Hainai, Nacogdoche, Nebedache, Nasoni, and Nadaco. None of the tribes lived as far west as the Trinity River.” The Hasinai were a settled people, who ap- parently had been long in the place where they were found at the end of the seventeenth century, and where they remained with little geographical change through- out the eighteenth. They lived in scattered agricultural villages, in large conical, communal, grass lodges, and raised relatively extensive crops of maize, beans, cala- bashes, and sunflowers. This food was supplemented by wild vegetable products, small game, bear, and deer from the woods near by, and by buffalo from the prai- ries beyond the Brazos.° THE CApDpo. Another group, the Caddo, as it is now called, extended along both banks of the Red River from the lower Natchitoches tribe,‘ in the vicinity of the 5’This statement is made necessary by the persistent following of old writers, who supposed that the Cenis lived on the Trinity. See, for example, as the latest instance, Coman, Economic Beginnings of the Far West, vol. i, 95. The same author is very much confused regarding the Texas and the Cenis, apparently thinking them distinct [zb7d., 95, 99]. ® For a brief sketch of the Hasinai group of tribes, with a discussion of the meaning and usage of the names “Texas” and “Hasinai,” see Bolton: “Native Tribes about the East Texas Missions,” in the Texas State Historical Associa- tion, Quarterly, vol. xi, 249-276. The best single original source for the early Hasinai is the unpublished manuscript “Relacién” of Fray Francisco Casafias de Jesis Maria, written in 1691 at the mission of Santisimo Nombre de Maria, on the Neches River. It bears the date of August 15, 1691. A sketch of the civilization of these tribes, based mainly on this Relacién is that by Mrs. Lee C. Harby, in the American Historical Association, Annual Report, 1894, pp. 63-82. It gives a fair summary of the document, but a very imperfect notion of its bearing. Articles by Bolton on the different Hasinai tribes, as on most of the tribes hereinafter mentioned, will be found in Handbook of American Indians. 7’'The existence of an upper Natchitoches tribe living near the great bend of the Red River, distinct from the lower Natchitoches living at the site of the city of Natchitoches, is commonly overlooked (see Fletcher, in Handbook of American Indians, part ii), but its existence is thoroughly established by numerous sources. Indeed, a failure to recognize it has led to much confusion regarding the route of the De Soto party west of the Mississippi River. 22 ATHANASE DE MEZIERES [ Vol. present Louisiana city of this name, to the Natsoos and Nassonites tribes, above the great bend of the Red River in southwestern Arkansas and southeastern Oklahoma. The best known members of this group were the Cado- dacho [ Kadohadacho, Grand Cado], or Caddo proper, Petit Cado, upper and lower Natchitoches, Adaes, Yatasi, Nassonites, and Natsoos.* The Caddo and the Hasinai, both divisions of the great Caddoan linguistic stock, were similar in culture and spoke nearly or quite the same language. The Ais tribe, which lay between the Caddo and the Hasinai groups, though somewhat distinct from either, ethnol- ogists believe, in the main shared the history of the lat- ter. The traditional enemy of the Caddo and the Hasinai were the Osage, of the Arkansas and Osage Rivers, and the Apache of the west. Hostility between these groups continued to the end of the eighteenth cen- tury, and even later, and was a constant factor in the policy of tribal balance alike pursued by France and Spain. THE TONKAWAN TRIBES. Occupying a wide range in east-central and northeastern ‘Texas in the middle of the eighteenth century were the Tonkawa and related bands. Just what their early range had been is not known with certainty, but it evidently extended farther north than in later days. What were apparently the Tonkawa and Yojuane were encountered in 1719 by Du Rivage on the Red River seventy leagues above the Cadodacho, while at the same period tribes seemingly Tonkawan were liv- 8 See Mooney, “Caddo and Associated Tribes,” in Bureau of American Ethnology, Fourteenth Annual Report; and Fletcher, the article under “Caddo” in Handbook of American Indians, part i. These articles were written largely on the basis of English sources and of recent conditions and traditions among the Caddo, and without the knowledge of their early history that has since come to light through a study of the Spanish sources, hence the failure of the authors to distinguish with sufficient clearness the Hasinai and the Caddo. one | HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION 23 ing in central ‘Texas near the Colorado. Their range may have been between these points. In the middle of the eighteenth century the best known divisions of the group were usually found between the Colorado and the ‘Trinity Rivers, chiefly above the Camino Real lead- ing from San Antonio to Los Adaes. In the earlier days there had lived on either side of the Colorado below the Camino Real a number of minor tribes, perhaps also of Tonkawan stock; but by 1750 most of them had disap- peared, leaving as the principal divisions of the stock the Tonkawa, Yojuane, Mayeye, and the highly mixed band of the Yerbipiame, or Ervipiame. ‘These tribes were wanderers, who planted few crops, but lived upon the buffalo and small game. Sometimes hostile to the Hasinai and Wichita groups, they were usually ready to join them against the dread Apache, their all-too- close neighbors on the west.” THE WICHITA. ‘As the veil of the unknown was gradually lifted from the district farther north and west, there emerged into view, first on the Canadian River and later on the upper Red,” Brazos, and Trinity Riv- ers, another group of Caddoan tribes, known to the Spaniards of New Mexico as Jumano and to the French as Panipiquet or Panis, but now collectively called by ethnologists the Wichita. Of these tribes the best known to the Spaniards were the Taovayas and Wichita, who habitually lived, after they came distinctly into view, on the upper Brazos, the Wichita, and the upper Red Riv- ers; and southeast of these, the T’awakoni, the Yscanis, and the Kichai, on the Brazos and the Trinity. During the period between 1770 and 1780 a portion of the Panis- Mahas, or Skidi, disturbed it is believed by the Louis- 9 For the Tonkawan tribes, see especially Bolton, in Handbook of American Indians under “Tonkawa,” “Yojuane,” “Mayeye,” and “Sana,” 10 See page 45. 24 ATHANASE DE MEZIERES | [ Vol. iana cession and the movements of the Osage, came south from the Missouri River and settled with the Taovayas, where they remained until the nineteenth century. The civilization of the Wichita was essentially like that of the Caddo and the Hasinai, though they were more warlike, less fixed in their habitat, and more bar- barous, even practicing cannibalism extensively. While they spoke a Caddoan dialect or dialects, their language was considerably distinct from that of the Hasinai and the Caddo. ‘The three groups were closely allied, and had as common enemies, on the one hand, the Apache of the west, and, on the other, the Osage of the north.” THE APACHE AND THE COMANCHE. The greater por- tion of western Texas was the home first of the Apache, a name which included various rather distinct nations, and later of the Apache and the Comanche, the latter na- tion also being subdivided into various bands. ‘Though these two peoples were quite distinct, were the bitterest of enemies, and bore quite different relations to frontier history, yet, because of their close historical and geo- graphical relations to each other, for present purposes they can best be described together. ‘Till after the opening of the eighteenth century the Apache tribes, especially the Lipan, regarded as their own the territory from the upper Nueces and Medina Rivers to the upper Red and Colorado, while their range between summer and winter might cover many hundred miles. But now the Comanche, an off-shoot of the Shoshoni of Wyom- ing, appeared in the north. About 1700 they reached New Mexico and the Panhandle country. Next they attacked the Apache and crowded them southward, de- stroying the extensive Apache settlements of southwest- 11 See article on “Wichita” in Handbook of American Indians, and author- ities therein cited. one | HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION 25 ern Kansas, and occupying the northern Apache lands themselves. ‘To mark the beginning of the southward advance, later Spanish writers tell of a terrible defeat which the Lipan-Apache had met early in the eighteenth century at the hands of the Comanche in a nine days’ battle on the Rio del Fierro, a stream which seems to have been the Wichita River. By the middle of the century the more usual haunts of the Lipan were the districts about the San Saba River, in west central ‘Texas, while the upper Colorado, Brazos, and Red Rivers were in the hands of the Comanche. At this time the Car- lanes, who early in the century had lived in southwestern Kansas, the Chilpaines, Palomas, Pelones, Faraones, and Natagés, were all living southeastward from Santa Fé in what are now eastern New Mexico and western Texas. ‘The Comanche continued to press their retreat- ing enemy southward, and by 1777 the Lipan were liv- ing on both sides of the Rio Grande, while the Mescalero had retreated to the Bolson de Mapimi, in Coahuila. The statements of Yoakum and others, to the effect that the habitat of the Comanche and the Apache on the eve of Spanish occupation was near the Rio Grande and the Gulf coast, are entirely unwarranted by the early rec- ords.”* 12 Cabello, Informe . . . sobre pazes de los Apaches Lipdnes en la Colonia del Nuevo Santander, 1784 [B. Mss.]. Lafora’s map (1771) shows Rio del Fierro. The name (River of the Iron) suggests the worshipped me- ‘teorite mentioned by De Méziéres in 1772 in that region. The best and almost the sole study of the Apache of western Texas is the thesis of Mr. W. E. Dunn, one of my students in Leland Stanford Jr. University, on “Apache Relations in Texas, 1718-1750” printed in the Texas State Historical Association, Quarterly, in 1910. While he found Cabello’s Informe useful, he also found it to contain numerous errors. Powell’s map of the “Linguistic Families of American Indians North of Mexico” (Bureau of American Ethnology, Seventh Annual Report) on the first contact with Europeans, shows the Shoshonean stock, with the Comanche in mind, no doubt, to extend south below Austin, Texas. This is very erroneous, 26 ATHANASE DE MEZIERES [Vol. The Apache was a veritable Ishmael of the plains, for his hand was against every man and every man’s hand was against him. As far back as history reaches, his nation was hostile to most of the preceding groups of tribes, as well as to those along the whole Rio Grande from EI Paso to its mouth. Indeed, the word “Texas,” in its broader sense, seems to have signified among the eastern tribes the common enemy of the Apache [ Sad- ammo, Cannecy], and to have included fifty or more tribes. As an illustration of this widespread hostility to the Apache it may be noted that Joseph Urrutia, who lived with the Indians of eastern and central Texas from 1693 to about 1700, claimed, perhaps with exaggeration, to have more than once led ten thousand or more allies against this common enemy.’* But the Apache, in their long sweeping raids into the territory of the eastern tribes and into the Spanish settlements, usually repaid with good interest all injuries received. While of the Texas and Louisiana tribes it was prin- cipally these groups on the northeastern frontier of Texas that furnished questions of international interest, as between France and Spain, they were by no means the only ones that occupied the attention of the provin- cial, or even of the national, officials. Because of inter- tribal alliances and hostilities and of the field which they offered to French traders, both Spanish and French policy with regard to the more important frontier for it was well into the eighteenth century before the Comanche lived, or even ranged habitually, as far south as that. Yoakum [in Wooten, Comprehensive History of Texas, vol. i, 10-11] says “They occupied the Rio Grande as low as the mouth of the Salado, and raided the colonies of Panuco, Ei Paso, Monclova, and Monterrey.” ‘This was not true until very late in the eighteenth century, if at all. The Lipan he pictures as living in the later seventeenth century with the Karankawa, along the coast from the Rio Grande to the lower Brazos and Colorado Rivers. ‘This is as incorrect as the foregoing opinion regarding the Comanche. 13 See Urrutia’s letters cited in footnote 27. one | HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION 27 groups at all times involved a consideration of those of the Spanish interior, while to the Spaniards these latter were a constant factor of internal politics and mission- ary development. THE COAHUILTECAN TRIBES. At the end of the sev- enteenth century the Spaniards found between the lower San Antonio and the lower Rio Grande Rivers a re- markably large number of small and weak tribes, now called collectively Coahuiltecan, or Pakwan, from the common language which many of them spoke. In the earlier years of Spanish contact they extended from the coast inland to and beyond the Camino Real, or public highway, leading from San Antonio to the mission of San Juan Bautista, below modern Eagle Pass. Within this area some seventy different tribal or subtribal divi- sions have been identified by the present writer. Among them some of the more prominent were the Xarame, Pampopa, Pacoa, Payaya, Aguastayas, Pacuache, Ocana, Papanac, Pastaloca, and Patzau. These were the tribes or bands that furnished the bulk of the neophytes for the San Antonio and Rio Grande missions. But by the mid- dle of the eighteenth century many of the bands had become much reduced or had entirely disappeared, ex- hausted by smallpox, measles, and the drain made by the missions. Soon after this date, the Lipan, the great Apache division of whom the Coahuiltecan tribes stood in mortal dread, crowded southward into the original territory of the Coahuiltecos and forced the survivors to the coast.” 14The chief sources of information for the Coahuiltecan tribes are the diaries, mostly unprinted as yet, of the early expeditions into Texas, baptismal records of the San Antonio and the Rio Grande missions, and the various reports of the missionaries.