Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1891-08-22
HISTORICAL SKETCHES OF NEW MEXICO
Francisco Sanchez Chamuscado ana the
Franciscan Missionaries, Fray Fran
cisco Lrpez, Fray Juan de san
ia Maria aud Fray Agustin
kourirueZ, 1851.

cisco Lrpez, Fray Juan de San
ia Maria and Fray Agustin
Rodriguez, 1851.
CONTINUED from August 10
The causes for this murder may easily
he coriectured, it was imprudent, in the
first place, for the frlar to undertake such
a long and dangerous journey. In the
second place it was still more lmprudent
on his part to travel from one tribe TO
another. He exposed himself to the
mlstrust of the natives for, previous to
the establishment OF the Spanish domino
ton, the different pueblos, in true Indian
fashion, were often hostile to each other.
At old San Pedro there was a pueblo OF
Tanos and that village he left in order to
enter upon the range of another tribe,
the Tiguas of Chilli, hence he exposed
himself to the suspicious of the former.
The temptation was too great Tor the In
dians, to rid themselves of the stranger,
in the woods of the Sierra de Carnue, ana
they performed the deed. From the
standpoint of their ideas and knowledge,
they naturally concluded that the people
to whom the friar belonged would never
learn of the manner of his death.
1t does not seem improbable that the
murder of Fray Juan de Santa Maria oc-
Cured previous to the departure OF Cha
muscaio and of his troop from New Mex
lean territory, but it is certain that they
had heard nothing of it. 1t must have
happened in November or Deem Der
1851. Neither is it likely that the other
two missionaries knew of it until some
time after Chamuscado had left them
detinitevely. Both Father Lopez and
Father Rodriguez were together at
Puaray either because they had renamed
there or because they had returned thlther
from their excursion to the Galisteo re-
gion. For them also that excursion
proved fatal mistake.
The martyrologies have the tragic death
of Father Francisco Lopez on the 2lst,
that of Father Rodriguez on the 18th OF
December, 1851. | ignore the sources
from which the martyrologlsts derived
these dates. None of the contemporaneous
documents at my disposal like the state
ments of the companions of Chamuscado
and the report of Espejo, mention dates,
it is probable therefore that the days IN
dicated in the martyrologies are but APP
proximations, still of sufficient approach
to accurancy to authorize US to assume
that the murders took place at the close
of the year 1881 or i'll the early part OF
1882. 1t seems certain that Father Lopez
was killed perhaps few weeks before
Rodriguez. His assassination took place
at Puaray opposite Bernalllo, and the
Indians asserted, that he was killed with
arrows, and while he was engaged In
performing his religious duties. Father
Rodriguez was yet spared and 1t appears
that part OF the Teguas were averse to
violence towards the Monk and that one
of their leading men lIarate-salmeron
SAYS the chief war captain seeing grow
ing disposition to make the aged MISSION
ary share the fate of his superior and
predecessor in martyrdom, took him out
of the pueblo secretly and brought him
to another village, situated about five
miles further north on the same side
of the river and where he confidently
hoped he would be safe. If this versions
derived from Indians 36 years after the
event is correct, Father Rodriguez was
carried to the pueblo, now in ruins, at
the Cangelon. But that village was, in
all probability, one of the QUERIES, and
the former settlement Of the tribe of Santa
Ana, not Tigua pueblo. However, this
may be, Father Rodriguez did not sur
vlve his companion very long. He also
was assaiIed by the Indians while at de-
votioDs and blow with a war-Club finished
his earthly career. OF the Indian servants
who had remained in New Mexico only
three escaped, the others were killed at
the time of the slaughter of their masters
or very soon afterwards.
What the causes may have been that
prompted the rigues to such merciless
butchery of defenseess men, is a wide
field for speculative ingenuity. Nowhere
have | been able to find any explanations
that would or could have been based
upon statements derived from the Indians
themselves. But there are explanations
which, being based on intimate know
ledge of the character OF the aborigne;
particularly of the New Mexican village,
present more likelihood than others, and
some of these may be presented here
without exposing one to the charge of
vislonarism or presumption. OF course
their ConjeCtural nature must be plainly
acknowledged beforehand. That certain
causes have often prevailed under similar
circumstances is undeniable, the main
doubt lies in our ignorance of the fact,
which of these causes or how much OF
them acted in the tragedy at Bernalilo.
First of all it is certain, that the teach
ings and examples of the missionaries
were or soon became, highly dstasteful
to the pueblos. The difference between
Christian principles and those of the
American natives are go enormous that
"a clash between the two is inevitable.
The pueblo Indian had, in the sixteenth
century, but vague notion of the stabii-
ty and sacredness of marital relations.
There was neither poygamy nor a sys-
tematic concubinauce, but facility for
union and disunion, or for side connec-
tons, which stood in glazing opposition
to the principles OF the church which the
missionaries represented. Any attempt,
on the part of the latter, to persuade tn