USA > Arizona > History of Arizona and New Mexico, 1530-1888, Volume XVII > Part 40
USA > New Mexico > History of Arizona and New Mexico, 1530-1888, Volume XVII > Part 40
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88
19 Sertelmair, Relacion, 816-54; Id., Entrada, 20; Apost. Afanes, 351-8; Venegas, Not. Cal., ii. 530-6; Alegre, Hist. Comp. Jesus, ii. 283-4.
367
SEDELMAIR'S ENTRADAS.
were concerned; for in a cédula of November 23, 1745, the king confessed that he had been deceived by false testimony respecting the geographical position, the hostile disposition, the strength, and the apostasy of the Moquis, as well as the lack of zeal and facilities for their reduction on the part of the friars; and he accordingly revoked the order of 1741, thus putting an end to the company's project.20 As I have said before, the Moquis were now left to their own salva- tion by missionary orders for some thirty years. The Gila and Colorado field still remained open to Jesuit effort, but various obstacles prevented any notable
success. An effort seems to have been made to reach Moqui in connection with the military movement of 1747, but nothing was effected. Sedelmair, however, made two more entradas in 1748 and 1750. In the first, from Tubutamna, by a route not described, he reached the Gila at a point near the ranchería pre- viously called San Felipe Uparch, and went down the river, noting the 'painted rocks,' to the point where in 1744 he had turned off to the north-west. Here he named the warm spring rancheria, in a fine site for a mission, Santa María del Agua Caliente.21
Thence he went on for the first time on the north- ern bank to the Yuma country, and finally crossed over to the Colorado at a point about two leagues above the junction, subsequently going down to the last Yuma ranchería below the Gila. But the Yumas were not very friendly, and it had been a year of drought for all the friendly Cocomaricopa tribes. The padre's return was by the same route.22 His second and last tour was made at the end of 1750,
20 N. Mexico, Cédulas, MS., 46-55; Hist. North Mex. States, i., chap. xviii. -xix. The latter version is here somewhat modified and extended by the former documents.
21 He says the spring had never been seen before; but it, or another near by, is mentioned in his Relacion of 1745 or 1746. Above the 'piedras escritas ' is named a sierra of Sibupue.
22 Sedelmair, Entrada à la Nacion de los Yumas gentiles, 1749 (S), in Sonora, Mat., 18-25; Apost. Afanes, 360-1. A mission site on the Gila was called S. Judas Tadeo; that near where he struck the Colorado, S. José; and that at the junction Nra Sra de Loreto.
368
PIMERIA ALTA AND THE MOQUI PROVINCE.
and about it we known only that he went farther down the Colorado to the Quiquima or Quimac ran- cherías, found the natives hostile, and returned across the desert by way of Sonoita. 23
During the remaining years of the Jesuit period, 1751-67, the missions of Pimería Alta barely main- tained a precarious existence. The Spanish Jesuits in many cases had been replaced by Germans, and all were more or less discouraged and disgusted by the complicated and fruitless controversies of earlier years. There was no progress, but constant decadence. As I have said in another volume, "a few neophytes were induced, by the persuasions of the padres, and by the hope of occasional protection from the presidios against the Apaches, to remain faithful; the missions were, moreover, convenient places for the Pimas, Sobas, Pápagos, and Sobaipuris in which to leave their women, children, old, and infirm, while living them- selves in the mountains, or, perhaps, aiding the Seris or Pimas Bajos in their ever-increasing depredations- convenient resorts for food when other sources failed, and even well enough to live in occasionally for brief periods. The natives lived for the most part as they pleased, not openly rebellious nor disposed to molest the padres, so long as the latter attempted no control of their actions, and were willing to take their part in quarrels with settlers or soldiers. Missionary work proper was at a standstill; the Jesuit establishments had only a nominal existence; the mission period of Sonora history was practically ended. But for the hostility between Pimas and Apaches the Spanish occupation of Pimería Alta would probably have been confined to the four garrisons, with a few bands of adventurous miners risking an occasional sortie beyond the protection of the presidios."
These general remarks from the annals of Sonora may be applied especially to the northern establish- 28 Apost. Afanes, 362-4.
369
PRESIDIO AND MISSIONS.
ments of the later Arizona; but particulars relating to the latter, which I would gladly present here in full, are extremely meagre. A presidio of fifty men was established in 1752 at Tubac, or San Ignacio; and under its protection the two missions of Guevavi and Bac with their half-dozen pueblos de visita were enabled to exist, as was Suamca, some of whose visitas were also north of the line. Exactly how long they had been abandoned after the revolt of 1750 is not known; but in 1763 Padre Alonso Espinosa was in charge of Bac, as he was still at the time of the Jesuit expulsion of 1767. At Guevavi the minister was Ignacio Pfefferkorn in 1763, Padre Jimeno in 1764, and Pedro Rafael Diez in 1767. At Suamca Padre José Barrera was in charge in 1760-7, while his predecessors from 1751, according to fragments of the mission register before me-some of them doubt- less mere visitors-were Keller, Vega, Nentoig, Diaz, Álava, and Labora. The ranchería of Tucson was a visita of Bac in these years, and a few Spanish set- tlers seem to have lived there; but in 1763 it was, like the mission, abandoned by all but a few sick and infirm Indians. This state of things, especially on account of the gente de razon at Tucson, called out much correspondence and several plans for relief which brought no relief. There were also nearly 200 gente de razon at Guevavi, Santa Bárbara, and Buenavista. The visitas of Tumacácori and Calabazas were com- posed of Pima and Pápago neophytes, but the latter had run away in 1763. Respecting the expulsion of the Jesuits in 1767, nothing is known except the names of the three padres, Espinosa, Diez, and Bar- rera. The whole number of Arizona neophytes in 1764-7 seems to have been only about 1,250.24
24 Lizazoin, Informe, 1763, p. 686; Sonora, Materiales, 124-38; Tamaron, Visita, MS., 112-16; Sonora, Descrip. Geog., 176, p. 566-84; Pinart, Col. Pimería Alta, MS., passim; Compañía de Jesus, Catalogo; also Hist. North Mex. States, chap. xx., this series.
Tuscon, 5 1. N. of Bac, was its only visita, and there is no mention of white population in 1764-7: The visitas of S. Miguel Guevavi were Cala- bazas, 1} 1. N .; Sonoita, 7 1. E. N. E. (distinct from the western Sonoita); and HIST. ARIZ. AND N. MEX. 24
370
PIMERÍA ALTA AND THE MOQUI PROVINCE.
Nijarasº
Muqui .. .
₱ 0
SIERRA GRANDE
4635
APACHES
o 8. Dionysio 1700
R.Gila
CUTGANES 1701
· &. Pablo
· La Tota
OS. Mathias
· S.Simonde
Tuesani
Angelo ·
NOABO NOMAS
YUMAS
S.Pantaleon o
8.Bonifacio o
Sta.Catalina o
Horario OS
" La Tinaja,
08.Pranciaco
8.Cosme O
BAGIOPAS
4 · Serafin
8.Salvadoro
o Lona.
Bab o
º Agua Escondida
o La Merced
Reyes
Quiburio o
MONTE OTA.CLARA
og. Rafael
S.Luiso Guchavi . St. Maria de Suamea 98:Lazaro
6.Buchaycotura
· S.Marcelo
Busanic o o Aquimuri
· Carrizal
P
Tubutama).
o Cocospera
OSE
o Sta Isabel
Caborca S.Diego del
Himares o
0 o Baruachi
Tupu o
Daloren
· Chinapa
.Ignacio
Cucurpe
O Arispe
8.M.Magdalena
· Ticapa.
& Coopique
RemediosEt
LEDES
· Gpubede
O Banaichi
B. los Angeles
S.Juan Baptista
Populo ONacameri
· Guapaca
Real S.Juan Bautista
(San Rafael o
LES LORENZO
R. Sonora
Babiscora
GENTILES
N
Alamos o
Nacari
S.M Mag &
8.Miguel
Zuaque o Tunichi
· Uuabas
Nuro
Dolorea del Norto
oBican
· Toria
· Bacun
'S.Ignacio
S.Juan Bautista
P. Lobos?
R. Mayo
„Guadalupe
More Hermoso
S-Dliguel
LES ILDEFONSO
Dateroa de S. Marcos
LA ASUNCION
B. Comondi
P.San Lucas
LOS ABROJOS
Pulpito
CORONADOS
Puris Concepcion 8 Juaniegy
SI.DE
CARMEN
AGUAVERD
UCATALANA
SESTA.CRUZ
BESta. Maria
S.Lui Gonzaga
FARELEON
8.Cario
ESPEROTU
SANTO
DLG LORENZO
N.CERRALOM
Bajos Culiacan
GALLINA
Sta
CISA
En&
Pazz
PERICUE
ESTER
Santiago S.Susi
Ena Las Palmas
C.de la-Porfin
ELOS Joseph
6 [B.S.Bernabe
C.San Lucas
CINALO
Xavierº
S.Juan
g.JOSEPR
Bajos de 9.
B.Magdalena
Dolores del Sur
Prodel Marquer
SIERRAS
LAGUEY
5 Rosario
6. Miguel.
oMorhicaachi
· Cherai
~ Zibiryou OTegueco
P.ADO-Nucy
Joseph Comondu Loreto
AMIAN
.DA
D'S.COS
SERRATE
B.Francot
Pio. Escunitido
OSTIMURI
o Cedros
Conicare
IrtadIS-TORTUGUITAS
·Nabajoa.
oCorimpe
o Hechojoa
Heal Frayles
Guadalupe Sta,
Howalt
S. Chrutobal
Virgenes
.TORTUGA
o Raun
· Potan
· Cocorin
Comoriopa
Belen
R. Hiagut
Tecoriona
Azotzi
AGUSTIN
O
o Ures
08.Xavier
SERIS
Pto.S. Xavier
GUAIMAS
Matape
s.Joan y 8. Pablo
Ballenay
Butequi
.S.Luis de - M
Audi
8. Eduardo Bacspa
Bacanuchi
L
oPitquig
ERY
8.Stanisie B.de S. Lww Gonzaga
*ACQUAROK
IDEL ANGEL
PRO SOBAS
DE S.PEOR
JAN Tepoquis
Pto.Sta.Sabina
APACHES
. S.Agustin
17
MICHEL/ Quiquimas R.
COCOMARICOPAS
OSantiago
S.Felipe
Casa Grande
S.Fernamlp
JUAN GUALBERTO
Colorado o del Norte
Alchedomas
R. Asump
R.Arul
R. Gila
8. Pedro o
1690
· Victoria
8.Eugenio o
SIERRA DE SAN
8. Marcus o
3 Beye
P
o&n.Felipe
So S.Cruz !
1698
Tres Gjitos.
Fermion
Angeleso
o Tesis
Jo Canamoa
R.Fuerte
FARALLON DE COS ALISOS
R. Culiacan
VENEGAS' MAP OF 1757.
BERNABE
371
APACHE RAIDS.
The Apaches were continuously troublesome, and many campaigns were undertaken against them by forces from the presidios of Fronteras, Terrenate, and Tubac. One of these expeditions seems to have been almost exactly like another, but only a few are re- corded at all, and those very meagrely. The only success achieved was the killing of a few warriors, and the capture of their women and children; but often while one band of savages ran away from the soldiers another band attacked some point near the presidios; and it finally came to be seriously ques- tioned by many whether these campaigns were of the slightest advantage. If the diaries were extant, they would furnish some interesting items of early geo- graphic knowledge and nomenclature; but as it is, the mere mention in fragmentary reports is of slight value. Several of these entradas in 1756-8 and 1765-6, directed to the upper Gila in the regions about the later boundary between New Mexico and Arizona, are somewhat fully reported, but so con- fusedly as to yield nothing more satisfactory than a mere list of names. These campaigns were made by forces under the captains of Fronteras and Janos, Captain Anza of Tubac, and Governor Mendoza. They had some success in killing and capturing Apaches, found several groups of ruins, and satisfied themselves that the Moqui towns might conveniently be reached by that route if deemed desirable.25
Tumacácori, 8 1. N. N. w. The visitas of Sta María Suamca, some of them north of the line, were: S. Juan Quiburi, Santiago Optuabo, S. Andrés Esqug- baag or Badz, S. Pablo Baibeat, S. Pedro Turisai, and Sta Cruz Babisi. The presidio of S. Felipe Gracia Real de Terrenate is described as 4 1. N. (E. ? ) from Suamca, pop. 411 gente de razon, including the garrison of 50 men under Capt. Francisco Elias Gonzalez. The presidio of S. Ignacio de Tubac was 4 1. N. of Guevavi, pop. de razon 421, including 50 soldiers under Capt. Juan B. Anza, chaplain José Manuel Diaz del Carpio. Arizona is named as a visita of Saric, 5 1. N. E., where were the 'Bolas de Plata de Agua Caliente,' pop. 45 gente de razon.
25 Hist. North Mex. States, i. chap. xx .; Sanchez, Carta, 1757, in Sonora Mat., i. 88-94; Id., Carta de 1758, in IJ., 91-7; Mendoza (Juan), Carta del Gobernador de Son., 1757, in I.l., 84 8; Vildosola, Cartas, 186-206; Anza, Carta de 1766, in Sin. y Son., Cartas, 108-12. The places named seem to be chiefly in south-western N. Mexico.
CHAPTER XVI.
PIMERÍA ALTA, OR ARIZONA. 1768-1845.
A MEAGRE RECORD-ERRORS OF MODERN WORKS-EXAGGERATIONS OF EARLY PROSPERITY-COMING OF THE FRANCISCANS-STATE OF THE MISSIONS- MILITARY AND PRESIDIO ANNALS-A NEW APACHE POLICY -- SAN JAVIER DEL BAC-PRESIDIO OF TUCSON-TUBAC-PIMA COMPANY-GUEVAVI AND TUMACACORI-CALABAZAS -ARIBAC - EXPLORATIONS IN THE NORTH- GARCÉS, THE FRANCISCAN KINO-TOURS TO THE GILA AND COLORADO --- ANZA'S TRIPS - CRESPO'S VIEWS - ESCALANTE-FONT'S MAP-GARCÉS VISITS THE MOQUIS-COLORADO RIVER MISSIONS -- THE MOQUIS PERISH- THE PERALTA LAND GRANT-MINING OPERATIONS-LATER ANNALS-ERA OF PROSPERITY-FINAL RUIN-APACHE WARS-END OF THE MISSIONS- AMERICAN TRAPPERS.
No chronologie narrative of early Arizona annals can ever be formed with even approximate accuracy and completeness, for lack of data. As already ex- plained, the country so far as occupied by Spaniards was but a small part of Pimería Alta, which in turn was but a part of Sonora, the annals of which province as a whole are but imperfectly recorded. From So- nora history we may get a general idea of progress in Pimería, and on Pimería annals we must depend for a similar general idea of events in Arizona, to which may be added only a few scattered items of local hap- penings. It is not strange, then, that nothing like a consecutive record can be presented; nor can anything be reasonably expected from future research beyond the bringing to light of new items. As we advance from the Jesuit to the Franciscan period, and from Spanish .to Mexican rule, the state of things, from a historic point of view, becomes worse rather than bet-
( 372)
373
CURRENT ERRORS.
ter. There is much reason, however, to believe that complete original records, could they be restored, would affect only local, personal, and chronologic minutiæ, and would hardly modify the general pur- port of these chapters.
In this connection, also, it is proper to note that the few and brief presentments of early Arizona annals which are extant, as prefatory matter to modern works devoted chiefly to later history, and to a description of the country and its resources, are not only meagre and fragmentary in detail, as they like my own must necessarily be, but full of errors, and almost wholly misleading in their general scope; though it should be added that the works in question often merit high praise for their accurate treatment of the later topics that come more properly within their field.1 In these works the tendency is to regard Padre Kino's wander- ings as mission-founding expeditions, though, as a matter of fact, there were no missions in Arizona till long after his death. From the Spanish names on early maps-identical with or corresponding to those of Kino and Venegas, as presented in the preceding chapter-the conclusion has been drawn that up to the Gila valley Arizona was covered with prosperous Spanish missions and settlements, which had to be abandoned later in consequence of Apache raids; yet in truth, as the reader knows, there was no Spanish occupation beyond a narrow region of the Santa Cruz valley, and even there only two missions, Bac and
1 Such works are Silvester Mowry's Arizona and Sonora, N. Y., 1864, 3d ed., in its original form an address delivered in 1859 before the Amer. Geog. anil Stat. Soc .; Hiram C. Hodge's Arizona as It is, N. Y., 1877; Richard J. Hinton's Hand-book to Arizona, S. F., 1878; the History of Arizona Territory, published by Elliott & Co., S. F., 1884; Samuel W. Cozzens' The Marvellous Country, Boston, etc. (1874); Edwards Roberts' With the Invader, S. F., 1885; and Patrick Hamilton's The Resources of Arizona, S. F., 3d ed., 1884. Perhaps some injustice is done by naming these books in a group, since they differ greatly in their value so far as modern Arizona is concerned; but these differ- ences to some extent will appear in later chapters. From all a very good sketch of modern condition and progress may be formed. In their treatment of early times they vary also-from bad to very bad. They contain some accurate statements drawn from well-known authorities on Niza's aud Coro- nado's expeditions; and it should be added that Hinton reproduces for the first time a valuable early map.
374
PIMERÍA ALTA, OR ARIZONA.
Guevavi, with a few rancherías de visita, under resi- dent padres from 1732, or possibly 1720, and protected in their precarious existence by the Tubac presidio from 1752. The misleading Spanish saint names were simply those applied by Kino and his associates to the rancherías visited on their exploring tours, whose in- habitants, in some instances, were induced to make preparations for the reception of missionaries promised, but who never came. The Arizona missions were never more than two, and they were never prosperous. So, also, the rich mines and prosperous haciendas, with which the country is pictured as having been dotted, are purely imaginary, resting only on vague traditions of the Planchas de Plata excitement, and on the well-known mineral wealth of later times. The Jesuits of course-though the contrary is often alleged -worked no mines, nor is there any evidence that in Jesuit times there were any mining operations in Ari- zona beyond an occasional prospecting raid; and even later, down to the end of the century, such operations were, on a small scale, confined to the vicinity of the presidios; and the same remark may be made of agri- cultural operations, all establishments being often abandoned, and oftener plundered by the savages. And finally, it has been the fashion to regard Tucson as a more or less prosperous town from a very early time. Some writers even date its foundation in the sixteenth century; though, as a matter of fact, it is not heard of even as an Indian rancheria till the mid- dle of the eighteenth, and was not properly a Spanish settlement till the presidio was moved there in later years.2
2 ' For extreme instances,' says Roberts, With the Invader, 116, 'Tucson is an ancient city. Antedating Jamestown and Plymouth, it was visited by Coronado in 1540, lived in by Europeans in 1560, and had its first mission- aries in 1581. But long before 1540 there was an Indian village existing on the site of the present city, so that Tucsonians can, if they please, claim an age for their town as great as the Santa Feans claim for theirs. But for all practical purposes 1540 is a sufficiently early date.' And Hodge, Arizona, 17-18: 'About the year 1560 a permanent settlement was made by the Span- ish explorers and Jesuit (!) fathers near where Tucson now is. It may be mentioned in this connection that Santa Fé was supposed to have been set-
375
FRANCISCANS IN ARIZONA.
On the expulsion of the Jesuits in 1767, all mission property, being regarded as belonging to the Jesuits and not to the natives, was confiscated by the Spanish government, and its care was intrusted temporarily to royal comisarios. Respecting the definite acts of these officials in Pimería Alta we have no informa- tion; but respecting the whole province, the viceroy wrote in 1793: "There is no reason to doubt that they either wasted or embezzled the rich temporalities of all or most of the missions, and that these funds being lost, decadence or ruin could not be prevented."3 The southern Sonora establishments were secularized, but those of the Pimerías were put in charge of four- teen Franciscans of the college of Santa Cruz de Querétaro, who arrived and were distributed to their destinations in June 1768. Our chief authority for the ensuing period of mission history, though meagre in respect of most details, is the standard chronicle of the Santa Cruz college and the operations of its friars.4 On the condition of affairs during the few following years, I quote from another volume of this series.
" The missions were found by the Franciscans in a sad state. Some of the establishments had been plun- dered by the Apaches, and were again plundered, as at Suamca and Bac, during the first year of Francis- can occupation. In some cases the comisarios had grossly neglected their duties. Everywhere the neo- phytes had been for a year free from all control, and had not been improved by their freedom. Not only had they relapsed to a great extent into their roving and improvident habits, but they had imbibed new ideas of independence, fostered largely by settlers and soldiers. They regarded themselves as entirely free
tled in 1555' (really about 1615), 'Tucson in 1560, and San Augustine, Fla, in 1565, thus making Sta Fé the first, Tucson the second, and San Augustine the third settled town within the present domain of the U. S.'
Revilla Gigedo, Carta de 1793, p. 435.
‘ Arricivita, Crónica Serafica y Apostólica del Colegio de Propaganda Fide de la Santa Cruz de Querétaro. Mexico, 1692, pp. 394 et seq. See also Hist. North Mex. States, i., chap. xxiv., this series.
376
PIMERÍA ALTA, OR ARIZONA.
from all control by the missionaries, whose whole duty in these later times was to attend to religious matters. The padres might not, so these independent aborigines thought, give orders, but must prefer requests to native officials; if they required work done for them they must pay for it. The friars at first had nothing to do with the temporalities, but Galvez in 1770"-it was really in June 1769-"ordered the property returned to their control, and the slight remnants were thus restored. They received a stipend of $300 each from the royal treasury, and spent it on their churches and neophytes. They worked faithfully, though often discouraged, and presently the state of affairs became, in all essential respects, similar to that in Chihuahua, the padres keeping together the skele- ton communities, instructing the children, caring for the sick, and by gifts and persuasion exercising slight and varying control over the masses of the Indians, who were Christians only in name."5 All this applies to Arizona as well as other parts of Pimería, and is all that can be said on the subject. Notwithstanding these obstacles, and the martyrdom of some of their number, the Queretaranos made some progress, es- pecially in the building of churches; and they even made some extensive explorations in the north with a
5 And to continue: 'Officers intrusted with the expulsion of the Jesuits, in order to reconcile the Indians to the change and prevent disturbances, had taken pains to make them regard the measure as a release from bondage. This had much to do with the independent spirit that proved so troublesome to the new missionaries. Yet it is to be noted that the Franciscans joined more readily than was warranted by justice or good taste in the prevalent habit of decrying the Jesuits and their system, as is shown in the correspond- ence cited, where it is often implied that the difficulties encountered were largely due to the oppression and neglect of missiouaries in former years. Naturally, the friars were disposed to magnify their troubles and throw the blame on others; but the only charge that was to some extent well founded was that the natives had not been taught to speak Spanish; the systems fol- lowed by the two orders did not differ in any important respect, and the Jesuits were by no means responsible for the evils that now beset the mis- sions.' 'By no means all existing troubles,' however, 'arose from the natives' new-born independence of missionary control. Each establishment had a large number of native officials who quarrelled among themselves; and the few settlers of Spanish or mixed blood had their separate jueces reales, who were not slow to interfere in matters that did not concern them. There was likewise confusion in ecclesiastical affairs, for the friars were forbidden to exercise control over any but Indians.'
377
MISSION AND MILITARY AFFAIRS.
view to extend the mission field, as we shall presently see. In 1769 the eight missions and sixteen visitas6 of Pimería Alta had 2,018 neophytes and 178 gente de razon ; in 1772 the two missions and three visitas of Arizona had 607 neophytes ; but all other statistics of the later part of the century pertain to all the Sonora establishments as a whole, and throw no light on the north. It is probable, however, that there was a marked gain before 1800; and Pimería Alta is also said to have been somewhat less unprosperous than more southern districts. It should be noted moreover that from 1783 the Sonora missions were organized as a custodia of San Cárlos, and thus removed from con- trol of the college. The change seems to have had no important bearing on our present subject; at any rate, the friars were not pleased with it, and in 1791 the old order of things was restored. Besides the work of Arricivita, and the viceroy's report of 1793 already cited, a leading authority for developments of the period, is a report of the Padre Antonio de los Reyes in 1772.7
Military annals, so far as our special territory is con- cerned, are no more fully recorded than those of the missions; yet in this case, as in the other, the general situation of affairs is clear. The coast and island tribes of Sonora had become even more troublesome than the Apaches, and in 1767-71, while these tribes were being reduced to submission, campaigns on the northen frontier were for the most part suspended, and attention was confined mainly, without notable success, to the protection of the presidios and missions. Then aggressive campaigns were resumed, though we have no particulars. By the reglamento of 1772-3, the service against Apaches was rendered more effect- ive by certain reforms in military discipline and Indian policy; and at the same time changes in
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.