the nomadic Indians of eastern New Mexico are mentioned from actual observation.
To these sources, which have both the merits and the defects of all documents written under the impressions of first direct acquaintance with the subject, must be added the "Relacion postrera de Sivola" contained in a manuscript by father Toribio de Paredes, surnamed Motolinia, and known as the Libro de Oro, etc., which is an augmented and slightly modified version of that celebrated missionary's history of the Mexicans. It is a condensed report that had reached Mexico after Coronado had left for Quivira and before his return had become known. Its allusion to the Rio Grande Pueblos and to Pecos is not without value, although it adds little to what is contained in the sources previously mentioned. On the Indians of the Plains it is, comparatively speaking, more explicit. The general tone of the document is one of sobriety. The "Relacion del Suceso," published in the Documentos In��ditos de Indias under the erroneous date of 1531, is similar to the foregoing, but is more detailed in some respects and covers a longer period of time. It manifestly was written in New Mexico by a member of the expedition, but there is no clue as yet to the name of the author. It is a useful corollary to the other contemporary sources.
Although written more than two centuries after Coronado's march, the references to it and to New Mexico contained in the Historia de la Nueva Galicia, by the licentiate Matias de la Mota Padilla, find a place here, since the author asserts that he derived much of his information from papers left by Pedro de Tovar, one of Coronado's chief lieutenants. Mota Padilla generally confirms the data furnished by the earlier documents, and adds some additional information. It is however quite impossible to determine what he gathered directly from the writings of Tovar and what he may have obtained through other and probably posterior sources. At all events the Historia de la Nueva Galicia should never be neglected by students of the Pueblo Indians.
We now come to the two chief chroniclers of Coronado's time--both participants in his undertakings and therefore eye-witnesses: Pedro de Casta?eda de Naxera and Juan Jaramillo. The fact that they were eye-witnesses establishes their high rank as authorities, but there is a difference between the two in that Casta?eda was a common soldier, whereas Jaramillo (a former companion and, to a certain extent, a friend of Cort��s) was an officer. This fact alone establishes a difference in the opportunities for knowing and in the standpoint of judging what was seen, aside from the difference arising out of the character, facilities, and tendencies of the two individuals. Casta?eda is much more detailed in his narration than Jaramillo. Discontent with the management and the final outcome of the enterprise is apparent in the tone of his writings, and while this may not have influenced very materially his description of the country and its people, they render more or less suspicious his statements in regard to the dealings with the aborigines. Both Casta?eda and Jaramillo wrote a long time after the events had occurred, and probably from memory, hence the comparative accuracy of their descriptions is indeed remarkable. But that accuracy, however commendable, is relative rather than absolute, as both were liable to err, owing to the lapse of time and consequent failure to remember facts and events, and, especially with Casta?eda, the influence of personal prejudice growing stronger with age. Jaramillo had less occasion to fall into error resulting from such weakness, but he is much less detailed than Casta?eda. We might compare the two narrations by stating that that of Jaramillo embodies the reminiscences of one who stood officially on a higher plane and viewed his subject from a more general standpoint, whereas Casta?eda saw more of the inferior details but was more susceptible of confounding, hence to misstate, the mass of data which his memory retained. Both reports will always remain the chief sources on the subject of which they treat, subject of course to close comparison and checking with correlated sources, archaeological, ethnological, and geographical investigation, and Indian tradition.
Before proceeding further in the discussion of the documents it must be stated that all references to distances in leagues must be taken with many allowances. According to Las Casas there were in use among the Spaniards in the sixteenth century, two kinds of leagues: the maritime league (legua maritima) and the terrestrial league (legua terrestre). The former, established by Alfonso XI in the twelfth century, consisted of four miles (millas) of four thousand paces, each pace being equal to three Castilian feet. The length of the Castilian foot at that time cannot be established with absolute minuteness. The terrestrial league consisted of three thousand paces each, so

Continue reading on your phone by scaning this QR Code
Tip: The current page has been bookmarked automatically. If you wish to continue reading later, just open the
Dertz Homepage, and click on the 'continue reading' link at the bottom of the page.