Author's note
Because it is expected that this document will be viewed on some type of electronic device screen, sources cited appear at the end of sections rather than as end notes. This was done strictly for the convenience of readers who wish to check a particular source. It should minimize the amount of scrolling needed. Fundamentally, citations follow The Chicago Manual of Style. The abbreviation BA is for the Bexar Archives, a collection of official letters and documents from the Spanish and Mexican period. Originally, these were kept in San Antonio, the capital at that time. The archives are now housed at the Briscoe Center for American History, University of Texas, Austin.
In an effort to reduce confusion, events are kept in Chronological order; or at least as much as was possible. For those with no knowledge of the Spanish language, a few translations appear in parenthesis. Finally, an explanation on the naming of missions. Missions were named much as Catholic churches are today, with one difference. Missions usually had added to their names the name of a benefactor, or in some cases the name of the native group they intended to gather. For example, Mission San Antonio de Valero, takes its name from Saint Anthony, and includes the name of the Marqués de Valero, who was viceroy at the time. Mission San José de Nazonis, comes from Saint Joseph, and includes the Nasoni, a Caddoan tribe.
In the eighteenth century as Spain moved eastward onto its Texas frontier, it used three components. First was the presidio. The presidio is usually likened to a fort, and it was indeed a military installation. Its soldiers, however, often acted as law enforcement, and its commander a judge of minor infractions and small disputes. Usually, the presidio contained a room of some kind that served as a jail. Rarely did a presidio in Texas contain more than fifty soldiers, and often it contained less.
Next was the villa. The villa, as the name implies, was a small village and was situated near the presidio. Initially it was made up of soldiers' families, a few tradesmen, and camp followers.
Then, there was the mission. A mission was more than a church and a residence for the priest. There were workshops, storerooms, and living quarters. Most important, there were people, the natives who were trying to assimilate into a new and strange culture. They were expected to learn Spanish, become Christians, and take up a trade or occupation. Few, if any, of these natives entered a mission thinking to change their lifestyle. The missionary needed to convince them of the need to do so. They entered to obtain a dependable food supply, and for protection or defense. Then in addition, the Spanish had a number of items that were new to the natives. From trade beads to steel knives and guns, the Spanish had them, and the natives wanted them.
The story of Mission Rosario is not a success story. In truth, its story provides several examples of what could go wrong with the mission system. However, to understand the story; an understanding of the people is needed.
Mission Rosario aerial view 1941 NPS photo
The Karankawa
What is known about the Karankawa before Spanish influence mainly comes from three sources. First, there is Alvar Nunez Cabeza de Vaca's Relacion. Then, there are statements made by Jean-Baptiste Talon, one of the few survivors of the LaSalle colony, who had lived among the Karankawa. Finally, some archaeological investigations provide information.
Karankawa is the general name given to native people inhabiting a narrow band of Texas coastal region from about Galveston Island to modern day Corpus Christi. Spanish records indicate five major groups of these people: Cocos, Carancaguases (Karankawa proper), Coapites (or Guapites), Cujanes, and Copanes. These five groups appear most often, but other names and spellings can be found. They all shared a common language and culture. Although Karankawa (Carancaguases) is the name that was finally settled on the tribe, in many Spanish period documents they are known as Cujanes.
They were hunter-gatherers who traveled a seasonal migration, but seldom went more than 25 miles inland. For traveling the bays and estuaries, and to reach nearby islands they built dugout canoes. However, they were not a maritime people.1 In the fall and winter they would congregate in large encampments directly on the coast using the bow, and probably weirs, to catch fish. To this, they added shellfish, roots, and other vegetation. In the spring and summer, they would divide into smaller groups, probably family size, and move inland. There they would camp at rivers or creeks hunting terrestrial game, and gathering roots, berries, and nuts.
By using a thorn and charcoal, the Karankawa would tattoo their bodies and faces. The markings probably indicated family connections. They also practiced piercing, using slivers of cane. Like many natives, they also painted their faces and bodies. Men usually went around naked, while women wore a short skirt of deer skin or sometimes Spanish moss. No matter the season or weather, they would bathe daily.
During both the Spanish and the Texas Republic periods, much was made of the Karankawa height. including claims of individuals exceeding 7 feet. Neither documentation nor archaeological examinations support these claims. Anthropological research conducted at Mission Refugio 2 concluded that the Karankawa were a "long legged" people, and such people often create the illusion of being taller than they actually are; but were in fact, no taller than any other of the native groups of Texas.
Most researchers agree that the Karankawa engaged in a form of ritualistic cannibalism; a few disagree. Although they are the ones most often singled out, Karankawa were not the only Texas tribe to engage in this activity.
The total population of Karankawa at the time of the Spanish arrival is difficult to calculate with certainty. Estimates vary between 2,800 to 8,000 individuals.3
From their earliest contacts with Europeans, the Karankawa showed a remarkable consistency when dealing with newcomers. At first, they were friendly and welcoming, but eventually the visitors would give offense. This offense, intended or not, real or imagined, received a response both swift and severe.
1. The Indians of Texas: From Prehistoric to Modern Times. W.W. Newcomb Jr., 1972, p
2. Jantz et. al, Archaeological Investigations at the Last Spanish
Colonial Mission Established on the Texas Frontier: Nuestra Señora Del
Refugio (41RF1), Refugio County, Texas.
3. The Karankawa Indians of Texas: An Ecological study of Culture Tradition and Change Robert A. Ricklis, 1992, pp 127-130
View of ruins as they appear today. looking North
Mission Rosario
I
First attempt to Missionize the Karankawa
Almost from the time of Spain's arrival in North America, the coast of Texas had presented problems. Not only was it considered a place of disease and fevers, but the native population was far from friendly. Notwithstanding these difficulties, the French presence in East Texas and the coastal region convinced the Spaniards to solidify their claim on the area. Since the Karankawa occupied a large section of that coast, it seemed logical to make them into allies. The first step was to get them to gather in a mission.In 1722 the Spanish founded Mission Nuestra Señora del Espíritu Santo de Zuniga (Our Lady of the Holy Spirit) on what is now called Matagorda Bay. Father Agustín Patrón y Guzmán was placed in charge of the mission.1 He was a zealous and capable missionary with considerable experience. Like all missionaries in Texas, Father Patrón was a Franciscan. These Franciscan Missionaries came from two colleges in Mexico, the College of Santa Cruz (Holy Cross) at Querétaro, or the College of Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe (Our Lady of Guadalupe) at Zacatecas. Espiritu Santo, as the mission was to be called, was Zacatecan.
At the same time the Spanish military established Presidio Nuestra Señora de Loretto (Our Lady of Loretto). It was at this early stage that the presidio gained the nickname "La Bahia" (The Bay). The name is still used today. Captain Domingo Ramón was placed in command of the Presidio, and demonstrated himself to be the wrong man for the job.
After what should have been a minor disturbance, Ramón attempted to entrap some Karankawa in the Presidio. One fast thinking native realized what was happening, and grabbed up a pair of scissors mortally wounding Ramón.2 Upon Ramón's death, his son, Diego Ramón, assumed command, and proved to be even more incompetent than his father.
By the time a true leader was assigned, namely Juan Antonio Bustillo y Ceballos, it was too late. The Presidio and its soldiers had been allowed to lapse into a deplorable condition. There had been crop failure and sickness. The natives would not even come near the mission, and were growing increasingly hostile. Bustillo and Father Patrón took the only path left to them; they jointly decided to move both mission and presidio.3
The move took them to an area near present day Victoria, Texas where they found a group of natives more inclined to accept life in a mission, the Aranama. If the Spaniards had thought themselves rid of the Karankawa, they were badly mistaken.
To the Karankawa, the cattle which were rapidly replacing the bison on the coastal plains served just as well and were fair game. Horses were always in demand. When pursued by the Spanish soldiers, the natives retreated to the coast and crossed over to one of their many islands. The soldiers had no idea what was beyond the shore of the bays, and had no boats that could carry men and arms. Eventually, they would turn back.4
1. Maria A. Mounger, "Mission Espiritu Santo of Coastal Texas: An Example of Historic Site
Archeology", (Master of Arts Thesis, University of Texas, Austin, 1959) 13-14
2. William H. Oberste, Texas Missions of the Coastal Bend, (unpublished manuscript, 1980), II 7- II- 8
3. Mounger, op.cit., p. 18
4. Robert A. Ricklis, The Native Americans of the Goliad Missions: Archaeological and Ethnohistorical Overviews, ( Resource paper, Texas Parks and Wildlife, 1998) 8
II
Rosario is Founded
In 1749, Mission Espiritu Santo and Presidio La Bahia were once again moved. This time to the banks of the San Antonio River, near the present town of Goliad, where they can be found today. The Aranama moved with the mission, since the distance moved was no more than 25 miles. At the mission, Father Juan Joseph Gonzalez had been assigned and to assist him was Father Juan de Dios Maria Camberos.
The presidio received a capable commander when Viceroy Juan Francisco de Güemes y Horcasitas the count of Revillagigedo appointed Captain Manuel Ramirez de la Piszina (sometimes written Piscina) to the position in 1750.
Later that same year, the Viceroy appealed to the two priests and Piszina to do all they could to congregate and convert the Karankawa.1 If they made any significant progress toward that end; it went unrecorded.
In San Antonio, Father Juan Mariano de los Dolores the head of the Querétaran Missions in Texas was doing some serious thinking. During the 1730's, the San Antonio Missions had been ravaged by epidemics. More neophytes were needed, but none were available near San Antonio. Although the Karankawa were more than 100 miles away, Father Dolores had a reason to consider them for his Missions. Groups are made up of individuals, and individuals do not always go along with the group. Such was the case with a few Karankawa; they had left their kin on the coast and entered Mission San Antonio de Valero. Father Dolores selected one of these, a Coco, to carry presents to his tribesmen on the coast. He also carried a message that a missionary would visit them soon.
The gifts must have been impressive, because the Karankawa decided that rather than wait for the missionary to come to them, they would go to the missionary. Fifty-four adults reached the La Bahia area on April 8, 1751. After some initial confusion, Piszina met with the group. They explained that they were on their way to San Antonio, as well as the reason for their journey. Piszina offered food and a campsite near the presidio, and the Natives readily accepted.
Strangely, after staying near the presidio for a while, the Karankawa did not continue on to San Antonio, but instead returned to the coast. Father Dolores provided his own explanation for this sudden change of mind. If the Karankawa were not prevented from reaching San Antonio, then they had been persuaded to turn back.2 Whatever the reason, this was only the beginning of a dispute that would involve both Franciscan colleges, and would last three years.
The Querétaran's position was that it was their own Father Dolores who had planted the seeds of the Karankawan conversion, and now the Zacatecans were trying to harvest the fruits. The Zacatecans had thirty years to gather the Karankawa, and were not able to do so. In fact, they had made little progress with the Aranama at Mission Espiritu Santo.
The Zacatecans held that the Karankawa would never settle at a mission so far from their homeland. They also pointed out that traditionally when one religious order started to missionize a group, other religious orders did not interfere. This last argument when submitted to the Viceroy must have surely led to some head scratching since not only were both colleges Franciscan, but they were also both of the Order of the Friars Minor.
Early in 1754, Father Camberos appealed directly to the Viceroy. Along with the already stated reasons, Camberos added that if the mission were at La Bahia, it would be much easier to recover runaways. Whereas if taken to San Antonio, the missionaries and soldiers would spent most of their time pursuing them. Since the Aranama and Karankawa did not get along with each other, a new mission would be needed. Camberos felt that Mission Nuestra Señora de los Dolores de los Ais ( Our Lady of Sorrows of the Ais) in East Texas was all but deserted. He suggested moving its furnishings and priests to La Bahia for the Karankawa. Thereby saving a good deal of money. The Viceroy was convinced; he drew up Camberos' recommendations in the form of an order and signed it.3
Father Vallejo, the head of the Zacatecan Missions in East Texas, strongly disagreed with Frey Camberos assessment. He communicated his objections to Governor Barrios, who sided with Father Vallejo. The Viceroy was persuaded to rescind his order.
By this time the Viceroy must have been tiring of the business. After discussing it with his advisers, he signed an order creating a new mission in the La Bahia area. The mission would receive the normal start up funding given to a new mission. Of course, the money would not be paid until all the proper paperwork was completed and had passed through all the proper channels.
At La Bahia, Piszina and the priests had been improving relations with the Karankawa by supplying food and presents. Piszina knew very well that the wheels of a bureaucratic monarchy turn slowly, and he had no intention of waiting. In November 1754, he selected a site, and sent nine soldiers with Father Camberos to start construction.4
Father Camberos ideas concerning Mission Ais, although rejected, did provide some help. The head of the College at Zacatecas reassigned Father Jose Mariano Escobar from that mission to Rosario as Father Camberos assistant.
Within two months, a church, a dwelling for the priest, and other houses and structures had been built. Piszina provided one thousand pesos from his own funds, and the college at Zacatecas provided an old altar cloth and other items for the church. Mission Espiritu Santo donated a bell, and some furnishings.5 700 head of cattle, 100 sheep, and fifty horses were donated. It was named for the parish in Piszina's hometown in Spain. Not a very auspicious beginning, but at last Nuestra Señora del Rosario de los Cujanes (Our Lady of the Rosary of the Cujanes) was established.
1. Bolton, Herbert E. "The Founding of Mission Rosario: A Chapter in the History of the Gulf Coast", Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association X, no. 2 (1906) p. 122
2. Ibid., 124
3. Ibid., 129-131
4. Ibid., 132-133
5. Mounger, op.cit., pp. 31-32
Also while excavating the first church, the Gilmore team found a single grave very near the area of the altar. During the mission period, it was not uncommon to bury people in the floor of a church, and important people were located near the altar. There is only one person of importance who is known to be buried at Mission Rosario, Manuel Ramirez de la Piszina. The remains were examined in situ, and the grave carefully refilled. The old Captain is still at the mission that he was so instrumental in establishing.
In 1997 and 1998 Dr. Robert Ricklis directed the excavation of eight one-meter square units outside the south wall of the mission compound. A good collection of colonial artifacts were recovered, and important stratification data on the area was collected.
In an effort to preserve and protect the Rosario ruins, Texas Parks and Wildlife determined to stabilize the existing walls. Such measures required the removal of debris that had accumulated at the base of some walls. What the state needed to know was - to what depth could the debris be removed before disturbing intact archaeological deposits? In 1999, the Center for Archaeological Research, University of Texas at San Antonio was contracted to conduct testing and investigation. David L. Nickels headed the project, and John Dunbar, a geologist from Baylor University, was brought in to perform a geophysical survey. Information gained by this work should prove very useful to any future interpretive plans, as well as, future excavations.
Some human damage to the site has been noted. Over the years, it has been used as a campsite, and there is evidence that treasure hunters have dug holes. It is an unhappy truth that most of the South Texas missions had stone removed after being deserted. People arriving later in the area would use it to build newer structures. It is because of this Rosario has lost a large quantity of its stone.
As previously mentioned, Mission Rosario is a part of Goliad State Park and Historic site. In dealing with Rosario, the Park staff has a difficult job. They must preserve and protect the ruins, but at the same time provide some access to visitors. The difficulty is compounded by the fact that Rosario is at a separate location from the Park. To employ a staff member at the location on a regular basis is financially impractical. Today, a chain-linked fence that not only protects from vandalism, but also from animals, surrounds the site. Feral hogs are known to be numerous in the area, and can be very destructive. The Park staff also makes physical checks on the site.
Currently, visitors can reach the site from Texas Highway 59, approximately four miles from the town of Goliad. Historical markers and the 1936 Texas Centennial stone can be seen. The ruins can be viewed through the fence. Those wishing a closer look, inside the fence, must contact Goliad State Park and Historic site and make an appointment. A Ranger will then meet the visitor, and allow access into the fenced area. Because it was built in phases, even among those familiar with Rosario, it can be a confusing place. A Ranger guide is a definite asset, and is highly recommended.
As of this writing, in 2016, the Texas Legislature approved funding for El Camino Real de los Tejas National Historic Trail interpretive Project. A Texas Parks and Wildlife Department news release of July 7, 2016 states that improvements are planned for Mission Rosario. These include a new parking area, access paths, and interpretive signs to convey the mission's story. It is hoped that the mission can be connected into the wider scope of the Spanish mission system, and to El Camino Real. Of course, these are only plans, and it will be interesting to see how this project develops.
Copyright 2016/ revised 2021
E. E. Barnes
The presidio received a capable commander when Viceroy Juan Francisco de Güemes y Horcasitas the count of Revillagigedo appointed Captain Manuel Ramirez de la Piszina (sometimes written Piscina) to the position in 1750.
Later that same year, the Viceroy appealed to the two priests and Piszina to do all they could to congregate and convert the Karankawa.1 If they made any significant progress toward that end; it went unrecorded.
In San Antonio, Father Juan Mariano de los Dolores the head of the Querétaran Missions in Texas was doing some serious thinking. During the 1730's, the San Antonio Missions had been ravaged by epidemics. More neophytes were needed, but none were available near San Antonio. Although the Karankawa were more than 100 miles away, Father Dolores had a reason to consider them for his Missions. Groups are made up of individuals, and individuals do not always go along with the group. Such was the case with a few Karankawa; they had left their kin on the coast and entered Mission San Antonio de Valero. Father Dolores selected one of these, a Coco, to carry presents to his tribesmen on the coast. He also carried a message that a missionary would visit them soon.
The gifts must have been impressive, because the Karankawa decided that rather than wait for the missionary to come to them, they would go to the missionary. Fifty-four adults reached the La Bahia area on April 8, 1751. After some initial confusion, Piszina met with the group. They explained that they were on their way to San Antonio, as well as the reason for their journey. Piszina offered food and a campsite near the presidio, and the Natives readily accepted.
Strangely, after staying near the presidio for a while, the Karankawa did not continue on to San Antonio, but instead returned to the coast. Father Dolores provided his own explanation for this sudden change of mind. If the Karankawa were not prevented from reaching San Antonio, then they had been persuaded to turn back.2 Whatever the reason, this was only the beginning of a dispute that would involve both Franciscan colleges, and would last three years.
The Querétaran's position was that it was their own Father Dolores who had planted the seeds of the Karankawan conversion, and now the Zacatecans were trying to harvest the fruits. The Zacatecans had thirty years to gather the Karankawa, and were not able to do so. In fact, they had made little progress with the Aranama at Mission Espiritu Santo.
The Zacatecans held that the Karankawa would never settle at a mission so far from their homeland. They also pointed out that traditionally when one religious order started to missionize a group, other religious orders did not interfere. This last argument when submitted to the Viceroy must have surely led to some head scratching since not only were both colleges Franciscan, but they were also both of the Order of the Friars Minor.
Early in 1754, Father Camberos appealed directly to the Viceroy. Along with the already stated reasons, Camberos added that if the mission were at La Bahia, it would be much easier to recover runaways. Whereas if taken to San Antonio, the missionaries and soldiers would spent most of their time pursuing them. Since the Aranama and Karankawa did not get along with each other, a new mission would be needed. Camberos felt that Mission Nuestra Señora de los Dolores de los Ais ( Our Lady of Sorrows of the Ais) in East Texas was all but deserted. He suggested moving its furnishings and priests to La Bahia for the Karankawa. Thereby saving a good deal of money. The Viceroy was convinced; he drew up Camberos' recommendations in the form of an order and signed it.3
Father Vallejo, the head of the Zacatecan Missions in East Texas, strongly disagreed with Frey Camberos assessment. He communicated his objections to Governor Barrios, who sided with Father Vallejo. The Viceroy was persuaded to rescind his order.
By this time the Viceroy must have been tiring of the business. After discussing it with his advisers, he signed an order creating a new mission in the La Bahia area. The mission would receive the normal start up funding given to a new mission. Of course, the money would not be paid until all the proper paperwork was completed and had passed through all the proper channels.
At La Bahia, Piszina and the priests had been improving relations with the Karankawa by supplying food and presents. Piszina knew very well that the wheels of a bureaucratic monarchy turn slowly, and he had no intention of waiting. In November 1754, he selected a site, and sent nine soldiers with Father Camberos to start construction.4
Father Camberos ideas concerning Mission Ais, although rejected, did provide some help. The head of the College at Zacatecas reassigned Father Jose Mariano Escobar from that mission to Rosario as Father Camberos assistant.
Within two months, a church, a dwelling for the priest, and other houses and structures had been built. Piszina provided one thousand pesos from his own funds, and the college at Zacatecas provided an old altar cloth and other items for the church. Mission Espiritu Santo donated a bell, and some furnishings.5 700 head of cattle, 100 sheep, and fifty horses were donated. It was named for the parish in Piszina's hometown in Spain. Not a very auspicious beginning, but at last Nuestra Señora del Rosario de los Cujanes (Our Lady of the Rosary of the Cujanes) was established.
1. Bolton, Herbert E. "The Founding of Mission Rosario: A Chapter in the History of the Gulf Coast", Quarterly of the Texas State Historical Association X, no. 2 (1906) p. 122
2. Ibid., 124
3. Ibid., 129-131
4. Ibid., 132-133
5. Mounger, op.cit., pp. 31-32
III
Early years
Father Camberos insisted that the Karankawa had helped to build the church and had learned to plow and cultivate.1 However, from 1754 to 1758 only twenty-one baptisms had been performed, twelve adults and nine children. All of these were articulo mortis; that is, at the point of death. Whatever reasons the Karankawa had for entering the mission, to become Christian was not one of them. May of 1758 saw the first live baptism of a native. Frey Camberos remained very conservative in baptisms, fearing the woods would be filled with natives who would be Christian in name only.
The natives were difficult to handle, especially the Cujanes who were the most numerous. The Spaniards found them to be inconstant, unfaithful, and dissatisfied. Because of the volatile nature of the situation, Piszina sent repeated requests for more soldiers and more armament.2
According to Father Camberos, there were four hundred Cujanes, Copanes, and Guapites, not counting the numerous Carancaguases staying at the mission. No doubt, these numbers changed frequently as natives came and went according to their own whims and needs. The Spanish were in no position to prevent it.
On April 17, 1758 the Junta General approved the needed funds for Rosario. It also approved ten more soldiers and six cannon for the Presidio. It was September 1759 before the ceremony granting the Rosario lands to the natives was held. In attendance was Angel Martos y Navarrete who was now governor of Texas.3 Also present were Captain Piszina, and a few soldiers. Two residents of the village of La Bahia acted as witnesses.
In 1762, Father Camberos was reassigned to Mission San Jose in San Antonio. Father Escobar replaced him as pastor of Rosario.4 Two years later, at age forty-four, Father Camberos was dead. The years spent eating a poor diet, or going hungry altogether, of exposure to all types of inclement weather, sickness and disease, had taken its toll. The life of a Franciscan missionary in Texas was a hard one, and often short.
1762 also marked the end of an insecure peace the Spaniards had with the Lipan Apache.5 Mission Rosario was attacked twice resulting in the death of at least two people. It seems most likely these were feigned attacks. The Apache were not so foolish as to attack the Spaniards in a fortified position. Instead, the cunning natives made their camps between the Spaniards and their ranches. If the missions or the presidio wanted beef, they had to come out from behind their walls. Once out in the open, the Apache had a decided advantage. What eventually broke the siege is unclear. Probably, the Apache became bored with the business, and left to pursue other interests.
During this siege period, nothing is known about the Karankawa population at Rosario. The Karankawa and the Apache were sworn enemies, but for those mission inhabitants wishing to travel to the coast the Apache could not have presented much of a hindrance. The Karankawa had an advantage in their knowledge of the territory. Probably most chose to return to their homeland for safety and to obtain food.
In spite of what must have been setbacks, Captain Piszina reported to the Viceroy that 137 natives had been baptized at Mission Rosario, and others were receiving religious instructions.6
1. Carol Elaine Nunley, "A Translation of Spanish Documents Pertaining to Mission Nuestra Señora del Rosario", (M.A. thesis, Texas Woman's University, Denton, TX, 1975), 19
2. Bolton, op cit., 135
3. Oberste, op cit., IV-8
4. Marion A. Habig, "Spain in the Texas Gulf Coast area". El Companero, Texas Old Missions and Forts Restoration Association 4, no. 1, (1973)5
5. Ramírez to Piszina June 6, 1762 BA
6. Nunley, op cit., 19
1. Bucarely y Ursua to Ripperdá, December 21, 1774, BA
2. Croix to Ripperdá, January 11, 1778, BA
3. Navarro to Neve, (Cuaderno, November 25, 1782), November 7, 1782, BA
4. Ibid
5. Decree by Cabello on interrogation of Tomás de la Cruz, (Cuaderno, November 25, 1782),
March 12, 1779, BA 6. Cabello to Croix, May 30, 1780, BA
1789 would be an eventful year. For one thing, Joseph Maria was dead. Apparently, there were rumors that the Spanish were responsible, but this seems unlikely since it is not mentioned in period documents.1 They had openly sought his capture or death and had no reason to conceal it. It is more likely one of the numerous native groups that were constantly fighting with the Karankawa killed him.
In October 1789 Manuel de Espadas, who was now the commander at La Bahia, received a visitor who stated that Karankawa chief Balthazar wanted to talk peace. The astonished Espadas was quick to realize the opportunity being presented. After agreeing to a meeting at the presidio, he dashed off a note informing the governor, and detailed two soldiers to carry it directly to San Antonio.
The governor, Rafael Martinez Pacheco, also realized the possibilities. In his reply, the governor advised Espadas to receive them in love and peace, but with caution. He went on to say, "You are to proceed in this manner with the greatest freedom, since you have it directly in hand, so as to achieve our purpose and their well-being, as well as our own".2
Balthazar wanted to forget the past, and with his followers, settle at a mission to live in peace. The chief firmly insisted that the only mission his people would accept was Rosario, and the only minister they would accept was Father Jose Mariano Reyes.
Although the abandoned Mission Rosario had deteriorated, Espadas thought it would not take much to repair. The matter of Father Reyes posed a greater problem. It was the college that assigned missionaries to a post, not the civil authorities. The most Espadas, or even Pacheco, could do was request Father Reyes be assigned to Rosario. In ordinary circumstances, the college would acquiesce to the request, but there was nothing ordinary about Father Reyes. For a Franciscan priest, he was an anomaly.
Father Reyes was first assigned to Nacogdoches in 1782. In 1785, he decided to establish a mission among the Orcoquisac natives, a coastal tribe that had some Cocos living among them. Over the years the Franciscans assigned to Texas had developed methods and guidelines, both written and unwritten, to establish and maintain missions. Father Reyes sought no one's advice, or permission. He removed items, including cattle, from Nacogdoches for his mission.
When the college at Zacatecas learned of it, they approved of the idea to missionize the Orcoquisac; however, the items taken from Nacogdoches, including the cattle, were to be returned. Probably in attempt to reel in the eccentric Father Reyes, in 1788 he was assigned to San Juan Capistrano in San Antonio.
By April of 1789, the superior and his counselors had learned that Father Reyes had accumulated debts in carrying out his missionary activities in East Texas. Father Reyes was removed from his post, and ordered to account for his transactions and debts. After looking into the problem, Father Jose Rafael Oliva reported to his superior at Zacatecas that it was not easy for Father Reyes to leave San Juan Capistrano and return to the college because of "entanglements with the French and others".3
In late 1789, just as Pacheco and Espadas had messengers galloping back and forth between San Antonio and Goliad, Father Reyes assigned himself to the suppressed Mission Rosario. Apparently, the college at Zacatecas had already instructed Father José Francisco López, the head of the Texas missions, to send back the insubordinate Frey Reyes.
Pacheco, on learning this, wrote a note to Father López imploring him to at least delay the recall of Father Reyes "until [we] see where the Indians promises and desires may lead".4 In his reply Father López did not mince words. Father Reyes was unfit for missionary work. He stated that he had no doubt that the natives' idea of Father Reyes as pastor, came from Father Reyes himself. If the governor insisted on keeping him at Rosario, then the governor would answer for the consequences when they occurred.5 Pacheco wanted to bring peace and stability to the South Texas frontier, he would risk the consequences.
Father Reyes was now pastor of a mission with no resources. Over the years, soldiers, civilians and several native groups had preyed upon Rosario's cattle: now they were nearly obliterated. The funds available to purchase food, clothing, and other necessities for the natives were minimal. Father Lopez intended to keep a tight rein on his errant priest. He instructed the other Texas missions to give Father Reyes only what he absolutely needed.
The Rosario pastor selected six natives and sent them to Mexico to plead their case directly to Juan Vicente de Güemes, 2nd count of Revillagigedo who was now Viceroy of New Spain. As usual, he consulted with no one before sending them. He sent letters directly to the viceroy and governor asking for help, and solicited alms from the villagers of La Bahia.
Captain Espadas was Rosario's strongest advocate. He felt that God had brought about these events to save the Karankawa from eternal damnation. He had his soldiers round up orejano (unbranded, owner-less) cattle for them. He worked with the governor to acquire funds for the mission. However, he did not let his zeal blind him. When Father Reyes suggested withholding a portion of the soldiers pay to provide support for the mission, with repayment later when funds were available, Espadas adamantly vetoed the plan.
During Father Reyes' time at Rosario the only construction appears to have been brush huts and some repairs to the stockade that surrounded the Mission.5 He described the church as being made of grass and poles, and his own hut as being fit for a pig sty. This, in spite of Espadas earlier optimistic appraisal of the remaining structures.
In a letter dated May 01, 1790 to the viceroy, Father Reyes gives the native population of the mission as fifty-two people.7 The official census of the same date gives the number at forty-five.8 If the six sent to Mexico are added, then the two figures are close.
In September of 1790, Father Lopez conducted an inspection of Rosario.9 He counted the natives present as two men, three teenagers, eight children, and five women. The five women were the wives of the men sent to Mexico. Those who were missing, Father Reyes explained, had been allowed to return to the coast with his permission. Father Lopez learned that on their way to the coast they had stopped off at La Bahia just long enough to receive some gifts. Before leaving they also managed to steal some animals.
From January 20, to September 20, 1790 Rosario had received 171 head of cattle from Mission Espiritu Santo, and it continued to receive three head per week. Father Lopez thought this excessive. From funds and donations, the Mission had received 1,387 pesos, and another 118 pesos in clothing and gifts given by Espiritu Santo. Two workers and the foreman were still owed eighty-nine pesos. According to Friar Reyes, the money was used to pay workers and servants.
None of the existing buildings had been repaired, and the stockade was still in a deteriorated state. The church was still a grass and pole structure, and the minister lived in a mud hut. Father Lopez was not at all satisfied by Father Reyes' explanations.
In August of 1790, Father Manuel Julio de Silva was appointed Father Commissary and Prefect of the Franciscans in Mexico and Texas.10 He immediately planned a trip to Texas that was ostensibly an inspection tour of missions. It seems he had another purpose which was to see what could be done about the Karankawa that still refused to gather at Mission Rosario. He brought with him Father José Mariano Garza, who had considerable experience in the Texas missions. After a short stay in San Antonio, they arrived at Mission Espiritu Santo on February 19, 1791.
In this same month, Father Reyes was instructed to return to the college at Zacatecas. He protested and even procrastinated, but finally he did obey. Whatever his shortcomings, Father Reyes had renewed interest in Rosario and the Karankawa.
1. Antonio Treviño, Diary of expedition against the Carancaguazes, December 12, 1789, BA
2. Expediente 1789-1790 Pacheco to Espadas, October 29, 1789 BA
3. Benedict Leutenegger, "New Documents on Father Jose Mariano Reyes," Southwestern
Historical Quarterly, LXXI, No. 4 (April 1968): p. 585
4. Expediente 1789-1790 Pacheco to López November 14, 1789 BA
5. Expediente 1789-1790 López to Pacheco November 14. 1789 BA
6. Leutenegger op. cit., p. 595
7. Leutenegger op. cit., p. 594
8. Census report, May 01, 1790 BA
9. Lopez to Muñoz, October 8, 1790
10. Silva to viceroy, March 10, 1792, A.G.I. 104-1-1; D.T. (In William Oberste, History of Refugio Mission, p. 18)
7. Jaudenes to Sierra Gorda June 4, 1792, BA
8. Viceroy to Muñoz January 4, 1792, BA
9. Jaudenes list of Indians at Rosario September 26, 1794, BA
10. List of Indians at Rosario and census report October 23, 1796, BA
11. Silva to Muñoz April 15, 1796, BA
12. Census report, Garavito to Elguezábal, June 30, 1797, BA; in, William Oberste, History of
Refugio Mission (Refugio, TX, Refugio Timely Remarks, 1942; reprint, Salem MA:
Higginson Book Co. 2005) pp. 210-211
13. Nava to Muñoz May 2, 1797, BA
The natives were difficult to handle, especially the Cujanes who were the most numerous. The Spaniards found them to be inconstant, unfaithful, and dissatisfied. Because of the volatile nature of the situation, Piszina sent repeated requests for more soldiers and more armament.2
According to Father Camberos, there were four hundred Cujanes, Copanes, and Guapites, not counting the numerous Carancaguases staying at the mission. No doubt, these numbers changed frequently as natives came and went according to their own whims and needs. The Spanish were in no position to prevent it.
On April 17, 1758 the Junta General approved the needed funds for Rosario. It also approved ten more soldiers and six cannon for the Presidio. It was September 1759 before the ceremony granting the Rosario lands to the natives was held. In attendance was Angel Martos y Navarrete who was now governor of Texas.3 Also present were Captain Piszina, and a few soldiers. Two residents of the village of La Bahia acted as witnesses.
In 1762, Father Camberos was reassigned to Mission San Jose in San Antonio. Father Escobar replaced him as pastor of Rosario.4 Two years later, at age forty-four, Father Camberos was dead. The years spent eating a poor diet, or going hungry altogether, of exposure to all types of inclement weather, sickness and disease, had taken its toll. The life of a Franciscan missionary in Texas was a hard one, and often short.
1762 also marked the end of an insecure peace the Spaniards had with the Lipan Apache.5 Mission Rosario was attacked twice resulting in the death of at least two people. It seems most likely these were feigned attacks. The Apache were not so foolish as to attack the Spaniards in a fortified position. Instead, the cunning natives made their camps between the Spaniards and their ranches. If the missions or the presidio wanted beef, they had to come out from behind their walls. Once out in the open, the Apache had a decided advantage. What eventually broke the siege is unclear. Probably, the Apache became bored with the business, and left to pursue other interests.
During this siege period, nothing is known about the Karankawa population at Rosario. The Karankawa and the Apache were sworn enemies, but for those mission inhabitants wishing to travel to the coast the Apache could not have presented much of a hindrance. The Karankawa had an advantage in their knowledge of the territory. Probably most chose to return to their homeland for safety and to obtain food.
In spite of what must have been setbacks, Captain Piszina reported to the Viceroy that 137 natives had been baptized at Mission Rosario, and others were receiving religious instructions.6
1. Carol Elaine Nunley, "A Translation of Spanish Documents Pertaining to Mission Nuestra Señora del Rosario", (M.A. thesis, Texas Woman's University, Denton, TX, 1975), 19
2. Bolton, op cit., 135
3. Oberste, op cit., IV-8
4. Marion A. Habig, "Spain in the Texas Gulf Coast area". El Companero, Texas Old Missions and Forts Restoration Association 4, no. 1, (1973)5
5. Ramírez to Piszina June 6, 1762 BA
6. Nunley, op cit., 19
The Solis Visit
In the way of period documents, not much can be found for the years between 1762 and 1767. It is known that on July 26, 1767 Captain Piszina died. In his will, he requested burial in the church of Mission Rosario.1 It would be December 3, 1767 before his replacement Francisco Tovar (also spelled Tobar, Thobar, Thovar) arrived at La Bahia. In August 1767, Hugo Oconor was named governor of Texas. In November of this same year, Father Jose de Solis left the college at Zacatecas for an inspection tour of the missions in Texas. It is important to note that Father Solis kept a diary of his travels.
On February 26, 1768, Father Solis arrived at Mission Rosario. At this point, Father Solis inexplicably refers to the mission as "Santisimo Rosario" (Holy Rosary).2 He states that the mission possessed two droves of asses, and approximately forty tame horses, thirty tame mules, twelve harnesses, 5,000 head of cattle, 200 milch cows and 700 sheep.3
He describes the priests and natives living quarters as being made of wood, but well constructed and providing ample space. He goes on to say, a palisade of good stakes to protect it from attacks, surrounded the mission . Father Solis describes the church as follows.
"The church, a very fine frame building, is white-washed and beautifully decorated. On the inside, it is plastered with clay, and is beautifully roofed with strong beams and shingles. It has sacred vessels, clean vestments, the necessary utensils, a pulpit, a confessional, altars, a baptismal font with its silver shell, and all things pertaining to divine practice. Furthermore, each article can be found in its place and in good condition."4
At one point in the diary, Father Solis enters into a long discussion of the natives. Unfortunately, it is nearly all worthless information. It obviously does not come from his observations, but from secondary sources.5 Some of the stories are so outlandish that one can imagine some soldier, or native, concocting these for their own amusement at the expense of the good, but gullible, padre. He also mentions that many of the mission natives had fled to the coast, or to the woods, which is quite believable.
After concluding his visit to Rosario, Father Solis went on to Mission Espiritu Santo. On March 7, he mentions receiving a letter from Captain Tovar "which contained many points for consideration".6
The following day the priest writes, "I answered the captain's letter and replied to all his questions." Although Captain Tovar had ridden out to meet Father Solis before he had reached Rosario, and the two had dined together on at least two occasions, these cryptic diary entries indicate some friction between Tovar and the priests.
The following month, Father Escobar from Rosario and Father Francisco Lopez from Espiritu Santo submitted a charge that Captain Tovar had prevented natives from entering their missions.7 The natives from Espiritu Santo had disobeyed him and returned. Those from Rosario were still at the Presidio. They also charged that Tovar had locked up the Sacristan of Espiritu Santo, and had failed to return a sacred vestment that he had borrowed. Both claimed that he had been antagonistic toward them.
On May 2, 1768 in a letter to the Governor, Tovar claimed that these charges were lies.8 He insisted that he had tried to get the natives to return to Rosario, but they refused to go. Now Tovar brought charges of his own. The Natives did not want to return because they had been deprived of food and decent clothing, forced to work hard, and had been cruelly whipped.
At the time, Captain Melchor Afan de Rivera of Presidio Agustin de Ahumada was staying at the Presidio La Bahia before going on to his destination of San Antonio. Tovar asked him to investigate Rosario.9 The results of Captain Rivera's investigation can be summed up in three points.
1. Mission Rosario was in a state of extreme poverty.
2. The natives of Rosario did not like work.
3. The soldiers assigned to Rosario did not like work any better than the natives did.
Although it was submitted to Mexico, the matter does not appear to have drawn a reaction. It was probably Tovar who came out the loser in the affair. It was one more mark against a man whose abrasive nature alienated his superiors and soldiers alike. Lieutenant Luis Cazorla replaced him in 1772.
1. Oberste, op cit., VI-5
2. Peter P. Forrestal, "The Solis Diary of 1767", Preliminary Studies of the Texas Catholic
Historical Society, I, no. VI, (1931):9
3. Ibid., 10
4. Ibid., 10-11
5. Ibid., 11-15
6. Ibid., 15
7. Ibid., 19
8. Tovar to Oconór, May 2, 1768
9. Secret investigation by Melchor Afan Rivera, 1768, Archivo General Mexico, Historia, Vol. 84, ff. 50
"The church, a very fine frame building, is white-washed and beautifully decorated. On the inside, it is plastered with clay, and is beautifully roofed with strong beams and shingles. It has sacred vessels, clean vestments, the necessary utensils, a pulpit, a confessional, altars, a baptismal font with its silver shell, and all things pertaining to divine practice. Furthermore, each article can be found in its place and in good condition."4
At one point in the diary, Father Solis enters into a long discussion of the natives. Unfortunately, it is nearly all worthless information. It obviously does not come from his observations, but from secondary sources.5 Some of the stories are so outlandish that one can imagine some soldier, or native, concocting these for their own amusement at the expense of the good, but gullible, padre. He also mentions that many of the mission natives had fled to the coast, or to the woods, which is quite believable.
After concluding his visit to Rosario, Father Solis went on to Mission Espiritu Santo. On March 7, he mentions receiving a letter from Captain Tovar "which contained many points for consideration".6
The following day the priest writes, "I answered the captain's letter and replied to all his questions." Although Captain Tovar had ridden out to meet Father Solis before he had reached Rosario, and the two had dined together on at least two occasions, these cryptic diary entries indicate some friction between Tovar and the priests.
The following month, Father Escobar from Rosario and Father Francisco Lopez from Espiritu Santo submitted a charge that Captain Tovar had prevented natives from entering their missions.7 The natives from Espiritu Santo had disobeyed him and returned. Those from Rosario were still at the Presidio. They also charged that Tovar had locked up the Sacristan of Espiritu Santo, and had failed to return a sacred vestment that he had borrowed. Both claimed that he had been antagonistic toward them.
On May 2, 1768 in a letter to the Governor, Tovar claimed that these charges were lies.8 He insisted that he had tried to get the natives to return to Rosario, but they refused to go. Now Tovar brought charges of his own. The Natives did not want to return because they had been deprived of food and decent clothing, forced to work hard, and had been cruelly whipped.
At the time, Captain Melchor Afan de Rivera of Presidio Agustin de Ahumada was staying at the Presidio La Bahia before going on to his destination of San Antonio. Tovar asked him to investigate Rosario.9 The results of Captain Rivera's investigation can be summed up in three points.
1. Mission Rosario was in a state of extreme poverty.
2. The natives of Rosario did not like work.
3. The soldiers assigned to Rosario did not like work any better than the natives did.
Although it was submitted to Mexico, the matter does not appear to have drawn a reaction. It was probably Tovar who came out the loser in the affair. It was one more mark against a man whose abrasive nature alienated his superiors and soldiers alike. Lieutenant Luis Cazorla replaced him in 1772.
1. Oberste, op cit., VI-5
2. Peter P. Forrestal, "The Solis Diary of 1767", Preliminary Studies of the Texas Catholic
Historical Society, I, no. VI, (1931):9
3. Ibid., 10
4. Ibid., 10-11
5. Ibid., 11-15
6. Ibid., 15
7. Ibid., 19
8. Tovar to Oconór, May 2, 1768
9. Secret investigation by Melchor Afan Rivera, 1768, Archivo General Mexico, Historia, Vol. 84, ff. 50
V
Joseph Maria
Because of the absence of records, not much is known about Mission Rosario itself during the early 1770's. However, there is correspondence that show the Karankawa were a cause of great consternation to the inhabitants of the La Bahia area.1 It is also apparent that the Spanish military was ineffectual at dealing with them.
In 1777, Provincias Internas, a new jurisdiction had been formed, and Teodoro de Croix had been named commander. Among other things, he declared that all unbranded cattle were property of the King, and anyone wishing to take the cattle had to pay a tax.2 It was extremely unpopular with the missions and private ranchers. Since neither had ever been able to brand all of their cattle, they would have to pay taxes on their own livestock.
At some point during this decade, Rosario would give rise to what surely must be the most notorious individual to come out of a Texas mission. Joseph Maria (sometimes written as Jose Maria) appeared to be a man of intelligence. He was a quick learner, and became fluent in Spanish.3 Like many other Karankawa, Joseph Maria grew up sometimes in the Mission, and other times out roaming along the coast. His motivation was to gain prestige and power, thus establishing himself as a leader. Although his attacks on the Spanish gave him prestige among some, he can not be said to have represented all Karankawa.
Very early in 1778, soldiers managed to apprehend two natives who were termed "apostates". Simply put, an apostate was a native who had undergone religious instruction and baptism; but then had deserted the mission and his new religion, returning to his old ways. One was an Aranama man named Antonio, the other was a Karankawan named Joseph Luis, said to be the brother of Joseph Maria.4 Both were scheduled to be sent to San Luis Potosi, and then on to Havana for punishment. However, both contracted smallpox while being held at Presidio La Bahia. As a result, Antonio died, and Joseph Luis was allowed to return to his Mission, namely Rosario. Under the care of Father Escobar, Joseph Luis recovered.
In March 1778, a Spanish mapping schooner from New Orleans reached the area of present day Matagorda Bay.5 The ship's supplies were running low and the Captain, Luis Antonio Andry.6, had thoughts of replenishing the stores from Presidio La Bahia. He sent six men ashore, hoping they could gather information. Despite the fact that the six did not return, Captain Andry sent two men off to look for meat, and three more to gather oysters. Of the ship's company of seventeen, only six were left aboard the schooner.
At this point, two natives approached the vessel. After a pretense of friendship, they were allowed to board. They perpetrated a ruse telling Captain Andry that Cazorla of La Bahia had placed them there as coast watchers. They assured him that they would find his missing men, and return them to the ship. The native, who appeared to be the leader, spoke fluent Spanish and offered to assist with whatever was needed. Evidently, Captain Andry was taken in, if not completely, enough that more natives were allowed onboard. The natives seized up the ship's weapons, killed Captain Andry, and the four crewmen on deck. One sailor, who happened to be below deck in the hold, hid among some sacks. The rest of the crew, including Captain Andry's fourteen-year-old son, were all killed.
The surviving sailors name was Tomas De La Cruz, a native of Yucatan. He would remain a captive until February 1779, when somehow, Father Escobar, of Mission Rosario, was able to obtain his release. He gave Spanish authorities an account of the attack, and stated that the leader of the natives was Joseph Maria, and his second in command was named Mateo (sometimes written as Matheo). The ships goods and arms were plundered, and the ship was burned.
The authorities had not yet come to grips with this problem, when in 1780 yet another ship was attacked.7 This time it was a two masted ship that had run aground near Copano Island. Since the water was shallow, Captain Don Joseph Montezuma ordered his nine-member crew to carry whatever supplies they could to the beach. While thus engaged, they were attacked and all were killed. This time a Karankawan named Manuel Alegre came forward as a witness.
Manuel Alegre was himself an apostate from Mission Nuestra Senora de la Purisima Concepción (Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception) in San Antonio. He claimed to be assisting the ship as a pilot, and was being returned to shore when the ship ran aground. He was able to save himself by running into the woods and hiding. Again, the leaders of the attack were named as Joseph Maria and Mateo.
Although these attacks were carried out by a relatively few individuals, many of the Karankawa thought the Spanish would seek retribution on all. The idea was probably encouraged by Joseph Maria. Some of those at Rosario fled in fear; those who remained behind were forced out when Joseph Maria attacked the mission.8
On one of their attacks in the La Bahia area, the Karankawa made off with the canoes that were used to cross the San Antonio River.9 This was a serious matter to the soldiers and settlers of the area. The only canoe left was an old one that leaked, and asphaltum was needed for repair. Asphaltum is oil that has seeped up from the ocean floor, formed into tar like blobs, and has washed ashore. For centuries, the Karankawa had used it as an adhesive, and as a means of waterproofing. The problem was that it was far too dangerous to send anyone to the coast to collect some.
Meanwhile, Joseph Luis, now recovered from smallpox, had remained firmly planted at Mission Rosario. His transport to Havana had been canceled, and the Spanish authorities were not sure what to do with him. He stepped forward and offered to go to the coast and bring back the asphaltum.10
Although the Spaniards were skeptical, he was after all the brother of Joseph Maria, he was given permission to try. He set off probably in July of 1781, and returned in August of the same year. Not only did he bring back the asphaltum, but also three apostates who wished to return to Rosario, and some information that the authorities found very interesting.
First, he reported that Mateo, Joseph Maria's second in command, had died of "stomach pain".11 In addition, there was a larger group who wanted to return, but wanted assurance that there would be no repercussions. They would wait until Joseph Luis returned with the Spanish answer. He had also spoken to three of the major Karankawa chiefs, who also offered to return to the Mission if they were assured of amnesty. Perhaps most surprising was that he had met with Joseph Maria. Joseph Maria also wanted to return to Rosario. He would cause no farther trouble, and would remain at the mission, provided, of course, that he would receive a pardon.
By this time Domingo Cabello y Robles was governor of Texas, and he informed Croix of the situation. Croix apparently deferred the matter to Pedro Galindo Navarro the Auditor de Guerra (Judge Advocate). Being a lawyer, Navarro informed Cabello of the laws dealing with such situations.12 He advised that any agreement of peace with the three chieftains must require them to leave hostages at La Bahia to ensure their continued good behavior. They also must surrender all captive Spaniards or friendly natives, as well as any apostates or fugitives from other missions that may reside among them. There would be no pardon for Joseph Maria. He also felt that since the Karankawa had not kept faith with past agreements, a severe punitive strike might make them more determined to maintain the peace.13 Cabello in turn passed the ruling on to Lieutenant Jose Santoja, who had been placed in temporary command at La Bahia. Santoja dutifully pursued the Karankawa whenever he could; however, the chase usually ended at the coast, where as usual, the natives disappeared to their islands.
Some of the Spanish leaders began to forget that His Catholic Majesty had ordered that the natives be treated with kindness and gentleness. They wondered aloud if it would not be a better solution to exterminate the Karankawa.14 Although, how they thought they could accomplish this when they were seldom able to get close to them, went unexplained.
In 1783, Felipe de Neve replaced Croix as commandant general. Neve recommended to governor Cabello what should have been an obvious course. If the natives were able to escape by using dugout canoes to reach islands, then maybe the soldiers should have canoes to continue the pursuit. He suggested that someone in Camargo could be found to construct the canoes. He also stated that paddlers and boat handlers could be found in Louisiana. He then left it to Cabello to work out the details.15
That a sea going European power, such as Spain, could not muster a few boats seems incredulous, but that was exactly the case. Cabello was unable to find anyone willing and able to build the needed dugout canoes, although the idea persisted for several years.
Mission Rosario was without residents, and it appeared that it would remain so for the near future. A decision was made to close it. Father Escobar in his final act as pastor of Rosario handed over all the furnishings of the church to Mission Espiritu Santo. Likewise, ownership of the livestock was transferred to Espiritu Santo. Since it did not undergo secularization, it was officially termed "suppressed". Whatever the term, the results were that Mission Rosario became a collection of abandoned structures.
In 1777, Provincias Internas, a new jurisdiction had been formed, and Teodoro de Croix had been named commander. Among other things, he declared that all unbranded cattle were property of the King, and anyone wishing to take the cattle had to pay a tax.2 It was extremely unpopular with the missions and private ranchers. Since neither had ever been able to brand all of their cattle, they would have to pay taxes on their own livestock.
At some point during this decade, Rosario would give rise to what surely must be the most notorious individual to come out of a Texas mission. Joseph Maria (sometimes written as Jose Maria) appeared to be a man of intelligence. He was a quick learner, and became fluent in Spanish.3 Like many other Karankawa, Joseph Maria grew up sometimes in the Mission, and other times out roaming along the coast. His motivation was to gain prestige and power, thus establishing himself as a leader. Although his attacks on the Spanish gave him prestige among some, he can not be said to have represented all Karankawa.
Very early in 1778, soldiers managed to apprehend two natives who were termed "apostates". Simply put, an apostate was a native who had undergone religious instruction and baptism; but then had deserted the mission and his new religion, returning to his old ways. One was an Aranama man named Antonio, the other was a Karankawan named Joseph Luis, said to be the brother of Joseph Maria.4 Both were scheduled to be sent to San Luis Potosi, and then on to Havana for punishment. However, both contracted smallpox while being held at Presidio La Bahia. As a result, Antonio died, and Joseph Luis was allowed to return to his Mission, namely Rosario. Under the care of Father Escobar, Joseph Luis recovered.
In March 1778, a Spanish mapping schooner from New Orleans reached the area of present day Matagorda Bay.5 The ship's supplies were running low and the Captain, Luis Antonio Andry.6, had thoughts of replenishing the stores from Presidio La Bahia. He sent six men ashore, hoping they could gather information. Despite the fact that the six did not return, Captain Andry sent two men off to look for meat, and three more to gather oysters. Of the ship's company of seventeen, only six were left aboard the schooner.
At this point, two natives approached the vessel. After a pretense of friendship, they were allowed to board. They perpetrated a ruse telling Captain Andry that Cazorla of La Bahia had placed them there as coast watchers. They assured him that they would find his missing men, and return them to the ship. The native, who appeared to be the leader, spoke fluent Spanish and offered to assist with whatever was needed. Evidently, Captain Andry was taken in, if not completely, enough that more natives were allowed onboard. The natives seized up the ship's weapons, killed Captain Andry, and the four crewmen on deck. One sailor, who happened to be below deck in the hold, hid among some sacks. The rest of the crew, including Captain Andry's fourteen-year-old son, were all killed.
The surviving sailors name was Tomas De La Cruz, a native of Yucatan. He would remain a captive until February 1779, when somehow, Father Escobar, of Mission Rosario, was able to obtain his release. He gave Spanish authorities an account of the attack, and stated that the leader of the natives was Joseph Maria, and his second in command was named Mateo (sometimes written as Matheo). The ships goods and arms were plundered, and the ship was burned.
The authorities had not yet come to grips with this problem, when in 1780 yet another ship was attacked.7 This time it was a two masted ship that had run aground near Copano Island. Since the water was shallow, Captain Don Joseph Montezuma ordered his nine-member crew to carry whatever supplies they could to the beach. While thus engaged, they were attacked and all were killed. This time a Karankawan named Manuel Alegre came forward as a witness.
Manuel Alegre was himself an apostate from Mission Nuestra Senora de la Purisima Concepción (Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception) in San Antonio. He claimed to be assisting the ship as a pilot, and was being returned to shore when the ship ran aground. He was able to save himself by running into the woods and hiding. Again, the leaders of the attack were named as Joseph Maria and Mateo.
Although these attacks were carried out by a relatively few individuals, many of the Karankawa thought the Spanish would seek retribution on all. The idea was probably encouraged by Joseph Maria. Some of those at Rosario fled in fear; those who remained behind were forced out when Joseph Maria attacked the mission.8
On one of their attacks in the La Bahia area, the Karankawa made off with the canoes that were used to cross the San Antonio River.9 This was a serious matter to the soldiers and settlers of the area. The only canoe left was an old one that leaked, and asphaltum was needed for repair. Asphaltum is oil that has seeped up from the ocean floor, formed into tar like blobs, and has washed ashore. For centuries, the Karankawa had used it as an adhesive, and as a means of waterproofing. The problem was that it was far too dangerous to send anyone to the coast to collect some.
Meanwhile, Joseph Luis, now recovered from smallpox, had remained firmly planted at Mission Rosario. His transport to Havana had been canceled, and the Spanish authorities were not sure what to do with him. He stepped forward and offered to go to the coast and bring back the asphaltum.10
Although the Spaniards were skeptical, he was after all the brother of Joseph Maria, he was given permission to try. He set off probably in July of 1781, and returned in August of the same year. Not only did he bring back the asphaltum, but also three apostates who wished to return to Rosario, and some information that the authorities found very interesting.
First, he reported that Mateo, Joseph Maria's second in command, had died of "stomach pain".11 In addition, there was a larger group who wanted to return, but wanted assurance that there would be no repercussions. They would wait until Joseph Luis returned with the Spanish answer. He had also spoken to three of the major Karankawa chiefs, who also offered to return to the Mission if they were assured of amnesty. Perhaps most surprising was that he had met with Joseph Maria. Joseph Maria also wanted to return to Rosario. He would cause no farther trouble, and would remain at the mission, provided, of course, that he would receive a pardon.
By this time Domingo Cabello y Robles was governor of Texas, and he informed Croix of the situation. Croix apparently deferred the matter to Pedro Galindo Navarro the Auditor de Guerra (Judge Advocate). Being a lawyer, Navarro informed Cabello of the laws dealing with such situations.12 He advised that any agreement of peace with the three chieftains must require them to leave hostages at La Bahia to ensure their continued good behavior. They also must surrender all captive Spaniards or friendly natives, as well as any apostates or fugitives from other missions that may reside among them. There would be no pardon for Joseph Maria. He also felt that since the Karankawa had not kept faith with past agreements, a severe punitive strike might make them more determined to maintain the peace.13 Cabello in turn passed the ruling on to Lieutenant Jose Santoja, who had been placed in temporary command at La Bahia. Santoja dutifully pursued the Karankawa whenever he could; however, the chase usually ended at the coast, where as usual, the natives disappeared to their islands.
Some of the Spanish leaders began to forget that His Catholic Majesty had ordered that the natives be treated with kindness and gentleness. They wondered aloud if it would not be a better solution to exterminate the Karankawa.14 Although, how they thought they could accomplish this when they were seldom able to get close to them, went unexplained.
In 1783, Felipe de Neve replaced Croix as commandant general. Neve recommended to governor Cabello what should have been an obvious course. If the natives were able to escape by using dugout canoes to reach islands, then maybe the soldiers should have canoes to continue the pursuit. He suggested that someone in Camargo could be found to construct the canoes. He also stated that paddlers and boat handlers could be found in Louisiana. He then left it to Cabello to work out the details.15
That a sea going European power, such as Spain, could not muster a few boats seems incredulous, but that was exactly the case. Cabello was unable to find anyone willing and able to build the needed dugout canoes, although the idea persisted for several years.
Mission Rosario was without residents, and it appeared that it would remain so for the near future. A decision was made to close it. Father Escobar in his final act as pastor of Rosario handed over all the furnishings of the church to Mission Espiritu Santo. Likewise, ownership of the livestock was transferred to Espiritu Santo. Since it did not undergo secularization, it was officially termed "suppressed". Whatever the term, the results were that Mission Rosario became a collection of abandoned structures.
1. Bucarely y Ursua to Ripperdá, December 21, 1774, BA
2. Croix to Ripperdá, January 11, 1778, BA
3. Navarro to Neve, (Cuaderno, November 25, 1782), November 7, 1782, BA
4. Ibid
5. Decree by Cabello on interrogation of Tomás de la Cruz, (Cuaderno, November 25, 1782),
March 12, 1779, BA 6. Cabello to Croix, May 30, 1780, BA
6. Throughout Spanish period documents Andry is referred to as "Landrin"
7. Cabello to Croix, May 30, 1780, BA
8. Cabello to Croix, July 3, 1779, BA
9. Navarro to Neve, (Cuaderno, November 25, 1782), November 7, 1782, BA10. Ibid
11. Ibid
12. Ibid
13. Ibid
14. Cabello to Commandant of Río Colorado, July 8, 1785, BA
15. Neve to Cabello, October 3, 1783, BA
7. Cabello to Croix, May 30, 1780, BA
8. Cabello to Croix, July 3, 1779, BA
9. Navarro to Neve, (Cuaderno, November 25, 1782), November 7, 1782, BA10. Ibid
11. Ibid
12. Ibid
13. Ibid
14. Cabello to Commandant of Río Colorado, July 8, 1785, BA
15. Neve to Cabello, October 3, 1783, BA
VI
Father Reyes
1789 would be an eventful year. For one thing, Joseph Maria was dead. Apparently, there were rumors that the Spanish were responsible, but this seems unlikely since it is not mentioned in period documents.1 They had openly sought his capture or death and had no reason to conceal it. It is more likely one of the numerous native groups that were constantly fighting with the Karankawa killed him.
In October 1789 Manuel de Espadas, who was now the commander at La Bahia, received a visitor who stated that Karankawa chief Balthazar wanted to talk peace. The astonished Espadas was quick to realize the opportunity being presented. After agreeing to a meeting at the presidio, he dashed off a note informing the governor, and detailed two soldiers to carry it directly to San Antonio.
The governor, Rafael Martinez Pacheco, also realized the possibilities. In his reply, the governor advised Espadas to receive them in love and peace, but with caution. He went on to say, "You are to proceed in this manner with the greatest freedom, since you have it directly in hand, so as to achieve our purpose and their well-being, as well as our own".2
Balthazar wanted to forget the past, and with his followers, settle at a mission to live in peace. The chief firmly insisted that the only mission his people would accept was Rosario, and the only minister they would accept was Father Jose Mariano Reyes.
Although the abandoned Mission Rosario had deteriorated, Espadas thought it would not take much to repair. The matter of Father Reyes posed a greater problem. It was the college that assigned missionaries to a post, not the civil authorities. The most Espadas, or even Pacheco, could do was request Father Reyes be assigned to Rosario. In ordinary circumstances, the college would acquiesce to the request, but there was nothing ordinary about Father Reyes. For a Franciscan priest, he was an anomaly.
Father Reyes was first assigned to Nacogdoches in 1782. In 1785, he decided to establish a mission among the Orcoquisac natives, a coastal tribe that had some Cocos living among them. Over the years the Franciscans assigned to Texas had developed methods and guidelines, both written and unwritten, to establish and maintain missions. Father Reyes sought no one's advice, or permission. He removed items, including cattle, from Nacogdoches for his mission.
When the college at Zacatecas learned of it, they approved of the idea to missionize the Orcoquisac; however, the items taken from Nacogdoches, including the cattle, were to be returned. Probably in attempt to reel in the eccentric Father Reyes, in 1788 he was assigned to San Juan Capistrano in San Antonio.
By April of 1789, the superior and his counselors had learned that Father Reyes had accumulated debts in carrying out his missionary activities in East Texas. Father Reyes was removed from his post, and ordered to account for his transactions and debts. After looking into the problem, Father Jose Rafael Oliva reported to his superior at Zacatecas that it was not easy for Father Reyes to leave San Juan Capistrano and return to the college because of "entanglements with the French and others".3
In late 1789, just as Pacheco and Espadas had messengers galloping back and forth between San Antonio and Goliad, Father Reyes assigned himself to the suppressed Mission Rosario. Apparently, the college at Zacatecas had already instructed Father José Francisco López, the head of the Texas missions, to send back the insubordinate Frey Reyes.
Pacheco, on learning this, wrote a note to Father López imploring him to at least delay the recall of Father Reyes "until [we] see where the Indians promises and desires may lead".4 In his reply Father López did not mince words. Father Reyes was unfit for missionary work. He stated that he had no doubt that the natives' idea of Father Reyes as pastor, came from Father Reyes himself. If the governor insisted on keeping him at Rosario, then the governor would answer for the consequences when they occurred.5 Pacheco wanted to bring peace and stability to the South Texas frontier, he would risk the consequences.
Father Reyes was now pastor of a mission with no resources. Over the years, soldiers, civilians and several native groups had preyed upon Rosario's cattle: now they were nearly obliterated. The funds available to purchase food, clothing, and other necessities for the natives were minimal. Father Lopez intended to keep a tight rein on his errant priest. He instructed the other Texas missions to give Father Reyes only what he absolutely needed.
The Rosario pastor selected six natives and sent them to Mexico to plead their case directly to Juan Vicente de Güemes, 2nd count of Revillagigedo who was now Viceroy of New Spain. As usual, he consulted with no one before sending them. He sent letters directly to the viceroy and governor asking for help, and solicited alms from the villagers of La Bahia.
Captain Espadas was Rosario's strongest advocate. He felt that God had brought about these events to save the Karankawa from eternal damnation. He had his soldiers round up orejano (unbranded, owner-less) cattle for them. He worked with the governor to acquire funds for the mission. However, he did not let his zeal blind him. When Father Reyes suggested withholding a portion of the soldiers pay to provide support for the mission, with repayment later when funds were available, Espadas adamantly vetoed the plan.
During Father Reyes' time at Rosario the only construction appears to have been brush huts and some repairs to the stockade that surrounded the Mission.5 He described the church as being made of grass and poles, and his own hut as being fit for a pig sty. This, in spite of Espadas earlier optimistic appraisal of the remaining structures.
In a letter dated May 01, 1790 to the viceroy, Father Reyes gives the native population of the mission as fifty-two people.7 The official census of the same date gives the number at forty-five.8 If the six sent to Mexico are added, then the two figures are close.
In September of 1790, Father Lopez conducted an inspection of Rosario.9 He counted the natives present as two men, three teenagers, eight children, and five women. The five women were the wives of the men sent to Mexico. Those who were missing, Father Reyes explained, had been allowed to return to the coast with his permission. Father Lopez learned that on their way to the coast they had stopped off at La Bahia just long enough to receive some gifts. Before leaving they also managed to steal some animals.
From January 20, to September 20, 1790 Rosario had received 171 head of cattle from Mission Espiritu Santo, and it continued to receive three head per week. Father Lopez thought this excessive. From funds and donations, the Mission had received 1,387 pesos, and another 118 pesos in clothing and gifts given by Espiritu Santo. Two workers and the foreman were still owed eighty-nine pesos. According to Friar Reyes, the money was used to pay workers and servants.
None of the existing buildings had been repaired, and the stockade was still in a deteriorated state. The church was still a grass and pole structure, and the minister lived in a mud hut. Father Lopez was not at all satisfied by Father Reyes' explanations.
In August of 1790, Father Manuel Julio de Silva was appointed Father Commissary and Prefect of the Franciscans in Mexico and Texas.10 He immediately planned a trip to Texas that was ostensibly an inspection tour of missions. It seems he had another purpose which was to see what could be done about the Karankawa that still refused to gather at Mission Rosario. He brought with him Father José Mariano Garza, who had considerable experience in the Texas missions. After a short stay in San Antonio, they arrived at Mission Espiritu Santo on February 19, 1791.
In this same month, Father Reyes was instructed to return to the college at Zacatecas. He protested and even procrastinated, but finally he did obey. Whatever his shortcomings, Father Reyes had renewed interest in Rosario and the Karankawa.
1. Antonio Treviño, Diary of expedition against the Carancaguazes, December 12, 1789, BA
2. Expediente 1789-1790 Pacheco to Espadas, October 29, 1789 BA
3. Benedict Leutenegger, "New Documents on Father Jose Mariano Reyes," Southwestern
Historical Quarterly, LXXI, No. 4 (April 1968): p. 585
4. Expediente 1789-1790 Pacheco to López November 14, 1789 BA
6. Leutenegger op. cit., p. 595
7. Leutenegger op. cit., p. 594
8. Census report, May 01, 1790 BA
9. Lopez to Muñoz, October 8, 1790
10. Silva to viceroy, March 10, 1792, A.G.I. 104-1-1; D.T. (In William Oberste, History of Refugio Mission, p. 18)
VII
Father Jaudenes
Named to replace Father Reyes was Father José Francisco Jaudenes (at times, he would sign his name Josef Francisco Jaudenes). While Father Jaudenes busied himself at Rosario, the visiting Father Garza had managed to prevail upon the Karankawa chief Fresada Pinto (Spotted Blanket) to escort him to the coast.1
Father Garza's objective was to persuade the natives to enter Mission Rosario. His presence, if not welcomed, was at least politely tolerated. He distributed gifts and spoke to several groups, some of whom were baptized, and some of whom were not. All remained silent and noncommittal. Finally, Fresada Pinto took his guest aside and explained. The people did not want to go to Rosario because the Mission was not in their lands. He went on to say that if the priest wished, he could build a mission on the coast, in the lands of the Karankawa, then the people would be willing to enter. It was not the answer Father Garza was hoping for, but it did plant an idea. He returned to Mission Espiritu Santo to rejoin Father Silva.
Meanwhile, back at Rosario Father Jaudenes had not been idle. Having been accepted by the natives, he worked at increasing the mission population. He also intended to rebuild the mission. Since there were only a few cattle left in the mission's pastures, he asked the governor to issue orders to prevent their slaughter.2 In eight days the order was issued and forwarded to Espadas for enforcement.3
In April 1791, Father Jaudenes sent a status report to governor Muñoz.4 With the help of a missionary named Father Cárdenes, a large amount of beams had been cut, mostly for the repair of the stockade wall. He also mentions some wood cut for flooring. He was able to purchase seven yokes of oxen, and four saddle horses.
They had planted corn and, and he hoped to add beans after a rainfall. In this part of South Texas, the San Antonio River had cut deep into the landscape, making it very nearly impossible to build an irrigation dam. Farming relied on rain that in some years was scarce.
The stockade wall had been completed by July, but not the portals. Also completed were one room, a hall, an office, and a sacristy. The church was about half way done, but work had been halted due to a lack of funds.5 The population of the mission had risen to Eighty-five.
Governor Muñoz provided the 100 pesos needed to finish the church, and on October 9, 1791, it was blessed and dedicated. An itemized account of expenses submitted by Father Jaudenes lists payments, to a master mason, to workers for firing a limestone oven, and to workers for hauling stone, sand, and clay.6 Some of the earlier buildings may have used some stone in their construction. However, this list leaves little room for doubt that most of the ruins visible today at Mission Rosario, are what remain of the buildings constructed during the time of Father Jaudenes.
In letter after letter, Father Jaudenes appealed to government officials for assistance in obtaining food and clothing for the mission residents. During this time, leadership of Texas went back and forth between viceroyalty and a commandant general, which surely caused confusion. In addition, Spain's financial status was being stretched to near breaking point by its constant involvement in European conflicts. Father Jaudenes had difficulty in obtaining even the most basic of necessities for the Karankawa of Rosario.
In June of 1792, Father Jaudenes explained his dilemma in a letter to the recently named provisional governor of Texas, Conde de Sierragorda.7 He had at the mission 114 natives, and the number could have been 132, but did not solicit them, as he had nothing to give them. For this same reason, he did not encourage the return of twenty-five Karankawa who had gone to the coast to consume the fruits of prickly pear (these fruits are often called tuna).
Fathers Silva and Garza proposed establishing a mission near the coast, just as the Karankawa had requested. It is somewhat perplexing that given the situation at Rosario, such a plan would be approved, but in fact, it was. The viceroy said that the idea of a coastal mission, "deserves to be favored for the worthy goal of settling those savages of the coast, freeing the surrounding areas from their hostilities, along with many other benefits that can follow to humanity and to religion".8 In 1792 Mission Nuestra Senora de Refugio (Our Lady of Refuge) was established. It would be the last mission to be established in Texas by the Spanish.
By September of 1794 Father Jaudenes reported that there were 139 natives at Rosario.9 In October of 1796 a report presents that at the mission were ninety-four Christians and thirteen infidels for a total of 107 souls.10 It also states that thirty-nine Cocos were absent with permission.
Of course, the Karankawa who left Rosario traveled to the coast. Since most of them had relatives or friends at Refugio, it was only natural that they would stop to visit. Father Silva, who had been appointed pastor, began to object when these visits stretched out into weeks. He felt that the Rosario natives were the cause of much discord and disorder. In a letter to governor Muñoz he called for Refugio to be dissolved if the Rosario natives could not be kept at their own Mission.11 The governor did not have the authority to close any mission, even if he had the desire to do so.
Father Antonio de Jesús Garavito, who had taken over as pastor of Refugio, conducted a census in June of 1797.12 He listed natives that he termed "Sons of the Mission", and in a separate column he listed Karankawa and Cocos from Rosario. The "Sons of the Mission" numbered seventy-five. Karankawa from Rosario numbered forty-six, and the Cocos fifty-one. Father Garavito was of the same mind as Father Silva. These ninety-seven should be returned to Rosario before they could destroy Refugio.
The matter was eventually presented to Pedro de Nava, the commandant general. To solve the problem, he ordered that all Cocos should be settled at Rosario, and Karankawa at Refugio. Thereby dividing up the ninety-seven troublemakers between the two missions.13 The problem with this plan was that it depended on voluntary compliance by the natives; the Spanish had no way to enforce it.
It was during this period that the Comanche began arriving in South Texas, sometimes in large numbers. It should come as no great surprise that the Karankawa viewed them as bitter enemies. As a group, Karankawa felt safest when near the coast. Should the need arise; they could quickly reach their island sanctuaries where no enemy could follow. Rosario was just too inland to suit them; the Refugio location was more to their liking. The commandant general's order was ignored. Probably because the Karankawa were so vociferous about their bravery, the Spanish authorities never seemed to consider that fear could be a motivation for them to remain at Refugio.
1. William H. Oberste, History of Refugio Mission, (Refugio, TX, Refugio Timely Remarks,
1942; reprint, Salem, MA: Higginson Book Co., 2005) 32-38
2. Jaudenes to Muñoz March 11, 1791, BA
3. Muñoz to Espadas March 19, 1791, BA
Meanwhile, back at Rosario Father Jaudenes had not been idle. Having been accepted by the natives, he worked at increasing the mission population. He also intended to rebuild the mission. Since there were only a few cattle left in the mission's pastures, he asked the governor to issue orders to prevent their slaughter.2 In eight days the order was issued and forwarded to Espadas for enforcement.3
In April 1791, Father Jaudenes sent a status report to governor Muñoz.4 With the help of a missionary named Father Cárdenes, a large amount of beams had been cut, mostly for the repair of the stockade wall. He also mentions some wood cut for flooring. He was able to purchase seven yokes of oxen, and four saddle horses.
They had planted corn and, and he hoped to add beans after a rainfall. In this part of South Texas, the San Antonio River had cut deep into the landscape, making it very nearly impossible to build an irrigation dam. Farming relied on rain that in some years was scarce.
The stockade wall had been completed by July, but not the portals. Also completed were one room, a hall, an office, and a sacristy. The church was about half way done, but work had been halted due to a lack of funds.5 The population of the mission had risen to Eighty-five.
Governor Muñoz provided the 100 pesos needed to finish the church, and on October 9, 1791, it was blessed and dedicated. An itemized account of expenses submitted by Father Jaudenes lists payments, to a master mason, to workers for firing a limestone oven, and to workers for hauling stone, sand, and clay.6 Some of the earlier buildings may have used some stone in their construction. However, this list leaves little room for doubt that most of the ruins visible today at Mission Rosario, are what remain of the buildings constructed during the time of Father Jaudenes.
In letter after letter, Father Jaudenes appealed to government officials for assistance in obtaining food and clothing for the mission residents. During this time, leadership of Texas went back and forth between viceroyalty and a commandant general, which surely caused confusion. In addition, Spain's financial status was being stretched to near breaking point by its constant involvement in European conflicts. Father Jaudenes had difficulty in obtaining even the most basic of necessities for the Karankawa of Rosario.
In June of 1792, Father Jaudenes explained his dilemma in a letter to the recently named provisional governor of Texas, Conde de Sierragorda.7 He had at the mission 114 natives, and the number could have been 132, but did not solicit them, as he had nothing to give them. For this same reason, he did not encourage the return of twenty-five Karankawa who had gone to the coast to consume the fruits of prickly pear (these fruits are often called tuna).
Fathers Silva and Garza proposed establishing a mission near the coast, just as the Karankawa had requested. It is somewhat perplexing that given the situation at Rosario, such a plan would be approved, but in fact, it was. The viceroy said that the idea of a coastal mission, "deserves to be favored for the worthy goal of settling those savages of the coast, freeing the surrounding areas from their hostilities, along with many other benefits that can follow to humanity and to religion".8 In 1792 Mission Nuestra Senora de Refugio (Our Lady of Refuge) was established. It would be the last mission to be established in Texas by the Spanish.
By September of 1794 Father Jaudenes reported that there were 139 natives at Rosario.9 In October of 1796 a report presents that at the mission were ninety-four Christians and thirteen infidels for a total of 107 souls.10 It also states that thirty-nine Cocos were absent with permission.
Of course, the Karankawa who left Rosario traveled to the coast. Since most of them had relatives or friends at Refugio, it was only natural that they would stop to visit. Father Silva, who had been appointed pastor, began to object when these visits stretched out into weeks. He felt that the Rosario natives were the cause of much discord and disorder. In a letter to governor Muñoz he called for Refugio to be dissolved if the Rosario natives could not be kept at their own Mission.11 The governor did not have the authority to close any mission, even if he had the desire to do so.
Father Antonio de Jesús Garavito, who had taken over as pastor of Refugio, conducted a census in June of 1797.12 He listed natives that he termed "Sons of the Mission", and in a separate column he listed Karankawa and Cocos from Rosario. The "Sons of the Mission" numbered seventy-five. Karankawa from Rosario numbered forty-six, and the Cocos fifty-one. Father Garavito was of the same mind as Father Silva. These ninety-seven should be returned to Rosario before they could destroy Refugio.
The matter was eventually presented to Pedro de Nava, the commandant general. To solve the problem, he ordered that all Cocos should be settled at Rosario, and Karankawa at Refugio. Thereby dividing up the ninety-seven troublemakers between the two missions.13 The problem with this plan was that it depended on voluntary compliance by the natives; the Spanish had no way to enforce it.
It was during this period that the Comanche began arriving in South Texas, sometimes in large numbers. It should come as no great surprise that the Karankawa viewed them as bitter enemies. As a group, Karankawa felt safest when near the coast. Should the need arise; they could quickly reach their island sanctuaries where no enemy could follow. Rosario was just too inland to suit them; the Refugio location was more to their liking. The commandant general's order was ignored. Probably because the Karankawa were so vociferous about their bravery, the Spanish authorities never seemed to consider that fear could be a motivation for them to remain at Refugio.
1. William H. Oberste, History of Refugio Mission, (Refugio, TX, Refugio Timely Remarks,
1942; reprint, Salem, MA: Higginson Book Co., 2005) 32-38
2. Jaudenes to Muñoz March 11, 1791, BA
3. Muñoz to Espadas March 19, 1791, BA
4. Jaudenes to Muñoz April 7, 1791, BA
5. Jaudenes to Muñoz July 20, 1791, BA
6. Itemized account of expenses at Rosario October 21, 1791, BA7. Jaudenes to Sierra Gorda June 4, 1792, BA
8. Viceroy to Muñoz January 4, 1792, BA
9. Jaudenes list of Indians at Rosario September 26, 1794, BA
10. List of Indians at Rosario and census report October 23, 1796, BA
11. Silva to Muñoz April 15, 1796, BA
12. Census report, Garavito to Elguezábal, June 30, 1797, BA; in, William Oberste, History of
Refugio Mission (Refugio, TX, Refugio Timely Remarks, 1942; reprint, Salem MA:
Higginson Book Co. 2005) pp. 210-211
13. Nava to Muñoz May 2, 1797, BA
VIII
The End of a Mission
Father Jaudenes left Mission Rosario sometime in 1797. Records are not clear, but it appears that Father José Maria Puelles took over, at least temporarily, at that time. At times, other priests, supernumeraries from Mission Espiritu Santo or Mission Refugio, were temporarily assigned. At other times, it had no pastor. With most of the natives staying at Refugio, there was not much need of one.
It was not until 1804 that the college at Zacatecas assigned Father José María Huerta de Jesús as a full time minister. Father Huerta de Jesús, a young friar who had shown much promise, must have felt despondent looking over his mission for the first time. The buildings constructed by Father Jaudenes were starting to crumble from sheer neglect and lack of maintenance. The few natives present were nearly naked, and food was scarce.1
Juan Bautista Elguézabal was now governor of Texas, and Father Huerta de Jesús wasted no time in telling him verbally of conditions at the mission. When this failed to obtain results, he complained in writing. He pointed out that recent rains of August twentieth and twenty-first of 1804 had caused great pieces of wall to fall, including "a piece of the church at the door". These rains may have been from a hurricane.
Possibly prompted by Elguézabal, Father Huerta de Jesús drew up an estimate of cost to repair the buildings. He submitted this to Captain Francisco Viana, who was now commander at La Bahia.2 Most likely it was forwarded to Elguézabal where it remained undecided. The matter was further delayed when Elguézabal died in office October 5, 1805.
By this time, Father Bernardino Vallejo, the superior of all Texas missions, concluded that Rosario could not be repaired at any cost. In addition, the missionaries may have noticed the decline in the Karankawa population. The natives low natality, combined with high losses in combat and raiding, illness and disease were all taking their toll. Father Huerta de Jesús had to admit that most of the Rosario natives had gone to Refugio. It did not make a great deal of sense to spend money rebuilding a mission that would, no doubt, remain empty. Father Vallejo concluded that it would be best to incorporate Mission Rosario into Mission Refugio.
Father Vallejo's plan to close Rosario required permission from the college at Zacatecas, and from the commandant general. While they waited for an answer, he informed Manuel Antonio Cordero y Bustamante, who was now acting governor, that the two missions would temporarily merge until a decision was made.3 Father Huerta de Jesús was sent to Refugio to join his flock.
The commandant general, Nemesio Salcedo y Salcedo, was agreeable; however, he pointed out that the mission's lands would revert to the supreme government. The college was inclined to favor Father Vallejo's recommendation. On February 7, 1807 Salcedo wrote to Cordero making the merger official.4 However, it appears that Salcedo did not entirely give up on rebuilding Rosario for at least another year and a half.5 It was not to be, Mission Nuestra Señora del Rosario de los Cujanes would never be rebuilt again.
Possibly prompted by Elguézabal, Father Huerta de Jesús drew up an estimate of cost to repair the buildings. He submitted this to Captain Francisco Viana, who was now commander at La Bahia.2 Most likely it was forwarded to Elguézabal where it remained undecided. The matter was further delayed when Elguézabal died in office October 5, 1805.
By this time, Father Bernardino Vallejo, the superior of all Texas missions, concluded that Rosario could not be repaired at any cost. In addition, the missionaries may have noticed the decline in the Karankawa population. The natives low natality, combined with high losses in combat and raiding, illness and disease were all taking their toll. Father Huerta de Jesús had to admit that most of the Rosario natives had gone to Refugio. It did not make a great deal of sense to spend money rebuilding a mission that would, no doubt, remain empty. Father Vallejo concluded that it would be best to incorporate Mission Rosario into Mission Refugio.
Father Vallejo's plan to close Rosario required permission from the college at Zacatecas, and from the commandant general. While they waited for an answer, he informed Manuel Antonio Cordero y Bustamante, who was now acting governor, that the two missions would temporarily merge until a decision was made.3 Father Huerta de Jesús was sent to Refugio to join his flock.
The commandant general, Nemesio Salcedo y Salcedo, was agreeable; however, he pointed out that the mission's lands would revert to the supreme government. The college was inclined to favor Father Vallejo's recommendation. On February 7, 1807 Salcedo wrote to Cordero making the merger official.4 However, it appears that Salcedo did not entirely give up on rebuilding Rosario for at least another year and a half.5 It was not to be, Mission Nuestra Señora del Rosario de los Cujanes would never be rebuilt again.
1. Huerta de Jesús to Elguézabal August 26, 1804, BA
2. Report of Francisco Viana, La Bahia November 15, 1805, BA, Haggard Translations,
Part two, p. 105, 1805; in, William Oberste, History of Refugio Mission (Salem MA:
Higginson Book Co. 2005) p. 254
3. Vallejo to Cordero December 13, 1806, BA
4. Salcedo to Cordero February 7, 1807, BA
5. Salcedo to Cordero October 4, 1808, BA
2. Report of Francisco Viana, La Bahia November 15, 1805, BA, Haggard Translations,
Part two, p. 105, 1805; in, William Oberste, History of Refugio Mission (Salem MA:
Higginson Book Co. 2005) p. 254
3. Vallejo to Cordero December 13, 1806, BA
4. Salcedo to Cordero February 7, 1807, BA
5. Salcedo to Cordero October 4, 1808, BA
IX
More Recent to Today to the Future
The Rosario Mission grounds along with its lands were eventually opened up for colonization. Because records are lacking, nothing is known about early ownership. At some point, the grounds became part of the O'Connor Ranch. In 1935, William O'Connor donated the Rosario site to Goliad County, and in 1971, it was transferred to the state. It then became part of Goliad State Park and Historic Site. There have been four archaeological excavations at the Rosario site.
The National Park Service conducted an archaeological excavation from July 1940 to April 1941. A few pages of summaries and a collection of black and white photographs are all that remain of this project. Field notes, maps, profiles, and collected artifacts have all been lost.
The most comprehensive excavation at the site was by Kathleen Gilmore for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department in 1973 and 1974. Gilmore hoped to identify the areas of the NPS excavation, and to find structures no longer visible at the surface. She also wanted to determine occupation periods. As part of her investigation, she hoped to locate activity areas, such as, living quarters and workshop areas. It was Gilmore's team who excavated the wall fragment, from the first church. The fragment currently is displayed at Mission Espiritu Santo in Goliad State Park.
 |
| Mission Rosario wall fragment |
In 1997 and 1998 Dr. Robert Ricklis directed the excavation of eight one-meter square units outside the south wall of the mission compound. A good collection of colonial artifacts were recovered, and important stratification data on the area was collected.
In an effort to preserve and protect the Rosario ruins, Texas Parks and Wildlife determined to stabilize the existing walls. Such measures required the removal of debris that had accumulated at the base of some walls. What the state needed to know was - to what depth could the debris be removed before disturbing intact archaeological deposits? In 1999, the Center for Archaeological Research, University of Texas at San Antonio was contracted to conduct testing and investigation. David L. Nickels headed the project, and John Dunbar, a geologist from Baylor University, was brought in to perform a geophysical survey. Information gained by this work should prove very useful to any future interpretive plans, as well as, future excavations.
Some human damage to the site has been noted. Over the years, it has been used as a campsite, and there is evidence that treasure hunters have dug holes. It is an unhappy truth that most of the South Texas missions had stone removed after being deserted. People arriving later in the area would use it to build newer structures. It is because of this Rosario has lost a large quantity of its stone.
As previously mentioned, Mission Rosario is a part of Goliad State Park and Historic site. In dealing with Rosario, the Park staff has a difficult job. They must preserve and protect the ruins, but at the same time provide some access to visitors. The difficulty is compounded by the fact that Rosario is at a separate location from the Park. To employ a staff member at the location on a regular basis is financially impractical. Today, a chain-linked fence that not only protects from vandalism, but also from animals, surrounds the site. Feral hogs are known to be numerous in the area, and can be very destructive. The Park staff also makes physical checks on the site.
Currently, visitors can reach the site from Texas Highway 59, approximately four miles from the town of Goliad. Historical markers and the 1936 Texas Centennial stone can be seen. The ruins can be viewed through the fence. Those wishing a closer look, inside the fence, must contact Goliad State Park and Historic site and make an appointment. A Ranger will then meet the visitor, and allow access into the fenced area. Because it was built in phases, even among those familiar with Rosario, it can be a confusing place. A Ranger guide is a definite asset, and is highly recommended.
As of this writing, in 2016, the Texas Legislature approved funding for El Camino Real de los Tejas National Historic Trail interpretive Project. A Texas Parks and Wildlife Department news release of July 7, 2016 states that improvements are planned for Mission Rosario. These include a new parking area, access paths, and interpretive signs to convey the mission's story. It is hoped that the mission can be connected into the wider scope of the Spanish mission system, and to El Camino Real. Of course, these are only plans, and it will be interesting to see how this project develops.
Copyright 2016/ revised 2021
E. E. Barnes
No comments:
Post a Comment