The Chichimecas: Scourge of the Silver Frontier in Sixteenth-Century Mexico

Authors(s): Philip Wayne Powell

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Duke University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Hispanic
American Historical Review

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER

FRONTIER IN SIXTEENTH-CENTURY MEXICO

Dentro en su furor esquivo

Se encierran todos los males,

Y con flechas infernales

A ninguno dean vivo

De los miseros mortales.

-Fernan GonzAlez de Eslaval

The Spanish-Chichimeca War, which began in Mexico in the

year 1550, proved to be one of the most difficult phases of Iberian

conquest in America. This warfare, which lasted in its major

phases until the closing years of the century, was initiated by the

Indian tribes north of Mexico City when they began to raid and

destroy Spanish mining camps, wagon trains, cattle ranches, and

other settlements which were the advancing foundations and

symbols of a European civilization seeking and exploiting New

World wealth. The Spanish discoveries of great silver riches in

the heart of the unknown and mysterious lands of the north, be-

ginning in 1546, formed the mainspring of a northward rush

which provoked the first native raids. As these Indian raids

grew in number and ferocity after 1550 they developed into a

constant and vigorous warfare against the white intruder. For

protection and retaliation, the Spaniards were goaded into fre-

quent, costly, and sometimes consistent, measures to curb and

pacify the wild warriors of this new land of war which was also the

land of silver. For more than four decades after mid-century this

conflict raged, a full-scale war on New Spain's silver frontier, but

the nomadic Indian tribes of the tierra de guerra were never effec-

tively pacified nor conquered by Spanish military efforts.

This half-century of violent warfare was more costly to Spain,

in men, money, and property, than had been the original conquest

1 "In their elusive fury every evil is contained, and with their infernal arrows they leave

alive not a single hapless mortal." Excerpt from the coloquio espiritual, "De los siete

fuertes que el virey don Martin Enrfquez mand6 hazer, con guarnici6n de soldados, en el

camino que va de la ciudad de M6xico a las minas de Zacatecas: para evitar los dafios que

los Chichimecos hazfan a los mercaderes y caminantes que por aquel camino passaban"

(Fernin Gonztlez de Eslava, Coloquios espirituales y sacramentales y canciones divines

[Mexico, 1610], fols. 34-39).

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
316 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

by Cort~s in Mexico.2 But defense, counterattack, and reprisal

had to be undertaken by the Spaniards in order to insure success-

ful exploitation of the myriad new mines and to safeguard the

southward flow of silver to the viceregal capital, first leg of the

long journey to the mother country.3 Unfortunately for these

Spanish objectives, the northern nomads proved to be at once

elusive enemies and fierce fighters who could frequently hold their

own against Spanish horsemen, armor, lances, steel swords, and

firearms. In fact, the natives who roamed the territory of the

Gran Chichimeca did more than hold their own; as the decades

wore on after the middle of the century the danger from their

a medida que pasaban las décadas después de mediados de siglo, los peligros de sus ataques se hicieron cada vez más graves.
attacks became ever greater, in spite of the increasing numbers of

Spanish settlers and soldiery flowing into the tierra de guerra. It

was not until the years after 1590 that Spanish administration

was able to bring even comparative peace to this frontier; and this

only became possible through the more effective use of methods

other than military, particularly the utilization of missionaries and

defensive colonization by Indian allies of the European invader.

The reasons underlying the lack of Spanish military success

against the Chichimeca tribesmen were many and varied.4 On

the Spanish side failure could most frequently be attributed to

2At the hands of the Copuces, Zacatecos, and Huachichiles alone, more than ten times

as many Spaniards died than had lost their lives in the Cortesian conquest (Alonso de la

Mota y Escobar, Descripci6n geogrdphica de los reynos de Galicia, Vizcaya, y Le6n [Mexico,

1930], p. 114). It was estimated by Archbishop Pedro Moya de Contreras that in one

ten-year period (1564-1574) more Spaniards had died at the hands of the Chichimecas

than had fallen in the original Mexican conquest (Moya de Contreras to Juan de Ovando,

August 31, 1574, in Francisco del Paso y Troncoso, comp., Epistolario de Nueva Espana

[Biblioteca hist6rica mexicana de obras in6ditas, 2a serie, 15 vols., Mexico, 193940], XI,

179). A typical commentary, made in 1582, was that of Hernando de Vargas in his des-

cription of the Quer6taro jurisdiction: "[Los chichimecas] an hecho rrobos y saltos cali-

ficados que salto an hecho que a ualido de cient mill po5 arriba" ("The robberies and raids

of the Chichimecas are on such a large scale that one alone has cost more than 100,000

pesos) (Vargas, "Descripci6n de Quer6taro," in Primo Feliciano Ve]4zquez, ed., Colecci6n

de documentos para la historia de San Luis Potosi [4 vols., San Luis Potosi, 1897-99], I, 21).

3 The early recognition of the larger significance of this silver exploitation in the life of

New Spain was aptly phrased by the conqueror, Andr6s de Tapia, when he wrote that "el

ser desta tierra esta colgado de las minas de plata y como son minas acabanse; ya no hay

oro y si no hay plata habremos de tener por tesoro y por caudal pan y caree" (Andr6s de

Tapia to Licenciado Chavez, March 11, 1550, in Paso y Troncoso, ed., op. cit., VI, 8-9).

4 For fuller discussion of Spanish military failure against these tribes as well as some

of the defensive and offensive military efforts, see Philip Wayne Powell, "Presidios and

Towns on the Silver Frontier of New Spain, 1550-1580," THE HISPANIC AMERICAN His-

TORICAL REVIEW, XXIV (1944), 179-200; "Spanish Warfare against the Chichimecas in

the 1570's," ibid., XXIV (1944), 580-604.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER FRONTIER 317

poor soldiery, lack of fighting equipment, confused military juris-

dictions, badly organized and inadequate financing, and insuffi-

cient viceregal attention to the warfare during many of these

years. Factors even more fundamental in the failure, however,

can be found in the nature of the Indian foe the Spaniard faced.

Far harder it was to conquer a nomadic enemy, expert with bow

and arrow and ambuscade, who chose the time and place of attack

in terrain usually too rough for Spanish cavalry, than to defeat

the massed warriors of the southern sedentary tribes who could be

conquered in a comparatively few decisive engagements. Thus

the way of life and the fighting tactics of the Chichimecas in-

evitably determined the character of the Spanish war against

them, a military undertaking far different than that of the original

Mexican conquest. For an adequate understanding and evalu-

ation of the problems faced by Spanish arms on this vital North

American frontier it is therefore necessary to inquire into the

manner of living and fighting among the native races of the Gran

Chichimeca.

los nómadas del During most of the half-century struggle between Spaniards

norte eran mucho

simples molestias
fronterizas que mere frontier nuisances handicapping Spanish exploitation of the

obstaculizaban la
explotación new mines of silver. In some phases of the Spanish-Chichimeca

española de las
nuevas minas de War (notably in the early 1560's and 1580's),5 the attacks of the

plata
Indians were so numerous and so destructive that some areas were

levantamiento
A large-scale uprising of the Chichimeca tribes occurred in 1561, almost completely

stopping traffic on the northern highways. The mining camps and towns, especially

Zacatecas and beyond, were temporarily cut off from southern supplies. Under viceregal

orders aid, in food and soldiery, had to be hastily gathered in Michoacdn for the relief of

Zacatecas. This "confederation" of the Chichimeca tribes against the Spaniards was

smashed only with great difficulty by Spanish soldiers and Indian allies under the leader-

ship of Pedro de Ahumada SAmano ("Informacion acerca de la rebeli6n de los indios

Zacatecas y guachichiles a pedimento de Pedro de Ahumada Samano (1562)," in Santiago

Montoto de Sedas, ed., Colecci6n de documentos indditos para la historia de Ibero-Amrnica

[Vol. I of the Colecci6n de documentos in&ditos para la historia de Hispano-Annrica; 14 vols.,

Madrid, 1927-1937], pp. 237-368; also, "El trigo y maiz que se a detenido pa el socorro

[de Zacatecas] por el sefnor Ju? fnz madaleno Juez de Comision pa ello (1561)," Archivo del

Tribunal, P4tzcuaro, Michoacdn [microfilm copy in possession of the writer]).

The greatly increased danger from Chichimeca raids in the early 1580's is made

abundantly clear in the testimony of leading frontiersmen, miners, and ranchers con-

tained in a petition to the royal government for more aid in pacifying the frontier. This

petition is dated 1582 and is included in, "Informaci6n sobre lo de la guerra con los Chichi-

mecas (1582)," Archivo General de Indias (AGI), Patronato, 2-2-2 (microfilm copy in the

library of the Department of Geography, University of California, Berkeley; made avail-

able to the writer through the courtesy of Professor Carl 0. Sauer).

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
318 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

almost lost to Spanish control; mining camps and other settle-

ments had to be temporarily abandoned, and communications

became extremely difficult or non-existent. The subjugation of

these native obstacles to Spanish advance in the continent be-

came, then, a primary and painful concern of the successive vice-

roys in Mexico after 1550. As such an important administrative

problem this formidable foe seems to merit investigation as a

principal actor in the drama of European conquest in America.

The name Chichimeca, by which these Indians were usually

known to the Spaniards, is a generic term at first applied by the

white men to almost any nomadic Indians they encountered on the

new northern frontier. However, closer acquaintance with these

and other peoples north of Mexico City brought about something

of a territorial limitation on the use of this name. The name

Chichimeca, in the historical rather than ethnographic sense, came

to be applied more specifically to those tribes and nations roughly

within the area bounded by Quer6taro, Cuitzeo, Lake Chapala,

and Guadalajara in the south; by Tlaltenango, Colotlan, and

Nombre de Dios in the west; by Cuencam6, Parras, and Saltillo in

the north; by Valles, Xilitla, and Zimapdn in the east. Within

this general territory the term Chichimeca was applied indis-

criminately during the sixteenth century, with or without specific

tribal names. Near the end of the century, as Spanish explora-

tion and settlement moved north and west of this area, the generic

name Chichimeca gave way to more definite names for specific

tribes or nations (e.g., Tepehuanes, Acaxees, Laguneros or Irri-

tilas, Tarahumares, Xiximes, etc.).

The exact meaning of Chichimeca is difficult now to determine.

Even during the period of the Spanish war against those tribes,

Gonzalo de las Casas, an outstanding contemporary authority on

the subject, admitted that he could only guess about the origins of

the word. It came from the Mexican usage to designate any

nomadic savage and, according to Las Casas, it was formed from

chichi, dog, and mecatl, a cord or rope, as if to say, "dog who drags

a rope." This definition was apparently based on the fact that

the Indians dragged the cords of their bows and they lived by

hunting, like dogs.6 The definition given by Antonio de Herrera

6 Gonzalo de las Casas, "Noticia de los chichimecas y justicia de la guerra que se les ha

hecho por los espafioles," in Hermann Trimborn, ed., Quellen zur Kulturgeschichte des

prakolumbischen Amerika (Stuttgart, 1936), p. 152. This document, a highly valuable

contemporary account of Chichimeca customs and the warfare against them, was probably

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER FRONTIER 319

y Tordesillas is identical and may have been taken from that of

Las Casas.' Matias de la Mota Padilla, on another basis, agrees

with the "dog" definition; he states that chichi meant perros

altaneros (haughty or insolent dogs), and that they were likened

to dogs because of their nomadic life.8

Father Juan de Torquemada gives what appears to be a more

logical origin for the word and, unlike the more modest Las Casas,

the worthy cleric admits of no guess-work. According to him,

chichimecatl meant "one who sucks," for chichtiztlti was the act of

sucking; similarly, chichinalidtli was a woman's breast, and the

teat of any animal was called chichihualli. Torquemada reasons

that, since these Indians ate uncooked animals and sucked the

blood from them, they were called "suckers," or "chichimecas."9

A later authority, Manuel Orozco y Berra, implies that the

generic name Chichimeca, which he believed included various

tribes quite distinct in language and customs, was adopted as an

historic memory, like an honorary title, and in this sense it would

represent the type of life and events in their wanderings from the

north.10 This use of the word, however, seems to be appropriate

only with reference to the pre-Spanish Chichimeca period of

domination in central Mexico; these earlier Chichimecas were of

higher type than the tribes encountered by the Spaniards north of

Quer6taro in the sixteenth century.

The accuracy of these definitions and origins of the word

Chichimeca can hardly be verified at this late date, nor is it

necessary to do so. The importance of the name lies in the fact

written for presentation before a council called together in 1574 by the viceroy, Martfn

Enrfquez, to discuss the legality of the Spanish war against the Chichimecas. Las Casas

himself had apparently led at least one expedition against these Indians, and his writing

shows evidence of careful examination into the legal and military aspects of the war as

well as the customs of the various tribes and nations in the Gran Chichimeca (Wigberto

Jim6nez Moreno, "La colonizaci6n y evangelizaci6n de Guanajuato en el siglo XVI,"

Cuadernos Americanos, III [1944], 144-145). For a recent summary of much available

information on the Chichimecas, see El norte de M6xico y el sur de Estados Unidos: Tercera

reunion de Mesa Redonda sobre problemas antropol6gicos de Mexico y Centro Am6rica

(Mexico, 1944).

7 Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas, Historia general de los hechos de los castellanos en las

islas i tierra firme del mar oceano (Madrid, 1601-1615), decada vii, libro ii, p. 54.

8 Historia de la conquista de la provincia de la Nueva-Galicia (Mexico, 1870), p. 50.

I Juan de Torquemada, Primera, segunda, tercera parte de los veinte i un libros rituales e

monarchia indiana, con el origen y guerras, de los Indios Occidentales, de sus poblagones

descubrimiento, conquista, conuersion, y otras cosas marauillosas de la mesma tierra...

(3 vols., Madrid, 1723), I, 39.

10 Manuel Orozco y Berra, Geografia de las lenguas y carta etnogrdfica de Mkico (Mexico,

1864), pp. 5-6.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
320 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

that it came into historical use by the Spaniards, adopted from

the Mexicans, to designate the native peoples in a fairly well de-

fined area with a generally similar manner of life. This Spanish

use of Chichimeca during the period of the warfare against those

tribes is the usage of the present writer, with the added observa-

tion that the name was undoubtedly based on the derogatory

implications of the definitions as given by such writers as Las

Casas, Herrera y Tordesillas, Mota Padilla, and Torquemada.

II

The territory roamed by the sixteenth-century Chichimecas

can be rather closely delimited by observing the locations of their

rancherias on the fringes of the tierra de guerra.1" It must be

understood, however, that absolute accuracy in defining these

limits is impossible because of the nomadic character of the tribes

under consideration. It should also be pointed out that, in the

early years of Spanish advance in this region, the so-called Gran

Chichimeca was considered to be a limitless expanse toward the

north, flanked by the two coasts ;12 but the contemporary writers

who discussed what they called the Chichimeca War concerned

themselves only with lands and tribes largely between the Sierras

Madres and south of the above-mentioned Cuencam6-Parras-

Saltillo line. In this more limited sense, the present writer uses

the convenient phrase Gran Chichimeca.

The southeastern limit of the Chichimecas, and the most im-

portant point of division between them and the usually peaceful

Otomies, lay just north and west of Querdtaro, on the highway to

Zacatecas. The Quer6taro jurisdiction marked, in fact and by

tradition, the dividing line between the tierra de guerra (the land

of war of the Gran Chichimeca) and the tierra de paz (the land of

peace, i.e., the territory of the sedentary tribes already subdued

by Spanish conquest). Queretaro had been an Aztec military

outpost against the nomadic Chichimecas before the arrival of the

Spaniards,"8 and it was wrested from Chichimeca control by the

11 The accompanying map will aid the reader in locating the outlines of this territory of

the Gran Chichimeca, as well as that of the major nations within it. The map also shows

the principal places mentioned in the pages that follow.

12 Thus Father Beaumont writes of the Gran Chichimeca as including the lands of

Jalisco, CuliacAn, Copala, Chiametla, and California (IV, 537-8; for full citation see n. 30,

below). Herrera y Tordesillas includes Florida, Cfbola, the Huasteca, and New Mexico

in the Gran Chichimeca (op. cit., dec. viii, libro vi, p. 178).

la Isidro Fdlix de Espinosa, Chr6nica apost6lica y'serdphica de todos los colegios de propa-

ganda fide de esta Nueva-Espafia, de missioneros Franciscanos observantes . . . (Mexico,

1746), p. 1.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
SOL s d m IA

M A 0 I M DI

Ilk~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~-

JA~ ~ ~ ~ I~R I4

w ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~~,1

~~~~~~, N~~~~~~~~~~~~N

14006

~~ A ~~~~A

&ajc LA IIA 06

AA

T ~~~ 4

AYC y

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
its

-el v I

N ~ ~;" ?

~~~~~~~~ y~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~k

as 'J~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~5

AMU~~~~~~~~~~A

'~~~~ aLAY~~~~~~~~tg ~ ~ ~ ~ i

g C Z~~~~~~~~~~~4tvt: :tA. ~ ;t - 070

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER FRONTIER 321

Otomies in 1531. To the east of Queretaro, Chichimeca groups

were to be found as far south as Zimapan and almost to Izmi-

quilpan, as well as in the sierras near Meztitlan.14 A few peaceful

Chichimeca families were settled as far south as Pachuca, but this

area was not considered to be within the tierra de gquerra.'5

West from Quer6taro the division between the warlike Chichi-

mecas and the peaceful Tarascans lay just south of Celaya and

north of Acdmbaro, thence through Cuitzeo, Huango, and Taza-

zalca to Lake Chapala.16 From this point the line extended north

to the vicinity of Tepatitlan (just east of Guadalajara), thence

north to Nochistlin and Juchipila.17 From here the western

limits of the Chichimeca tribes followed along the eastern slopes

of the Sierra Madre Occidental, including Colotldn, Mezquitic,

Huejulcar, Atotonilco, and Nombre de Dios, just east of Durango.18

The northern edge of the Gran Chichimeca followed an indefi-

nite course toward the north and east, touching the Cuencame

region and the lands around Parras.19 Chichimeca tribes were to

be found as far north as Saltillo, and from that point south and

east to the Panuco River, bordering on the towns of Tamizin,

Tantuyuca, Tamaholipa, Tanchumizin, Tentepelete, Tanchipa,

Tancaxual, and Tamatain, all of which were on the Chichimeca

frontier during the main period of the Spanish-Chichimeca War.20

The P6nuco River was usually the boundary between the land of

peace and the land of war.2" Other towns in the Huasteca which

14 "Suma de visitas de pueblos," in Francisco del Paso y Troncoso, ed., Papeles de Nueva

Espana . . . 2a serie (6 vols., Madrid, 1905-1906), I, 125-126; "Relaci6n de las minas de

Pachuca," in ibid., III, 79; "Descripci6n de Yzmiquilpa," in ibid., III, 98-99; "Relaci6n

de las minas de Zimapan," in ibid., VI, 2-4.

16 "Relaci6n de las minas de Pachuca," in ibid., III, 77.

15 Diego Basalenque, Historia de la provincia de San Nicolds de Tolentino de Michoacdn,

del orden de N.P.S. Augustin (2nd ed., Mexico, 1886), p. 256; Herrera y Tordesillas, op.

cit., d&e. vii, libro v, p. 110; "Suma de visitas de pueblos," loc. cit., I, 117.

17 Ibid., pp. 87, 155-156, 262.

"I Mota y Escobar, op. cit., pp. 166, 169, 177-8; "Descripci6n de Nombre de Dios," in

Colecci6n de documentos inlditos, relatives al descubrimiento, conquista y organizaci6n de las

antiguas posesiones espanolas de Amlrica y Oceania, sacados de los archivos del reino, y muy

especialmente del de Indias (42 vols., Madrid, 1864-1884), IX, 245 (hereinafter cited as

D.I.I.).

19 Mota y Escobar, op. cit., pp. 150, 179; Jesuit "Carta Inua" (1602), in Herbert E.

Bolton Collection, Vol. IV of transcripts.

20 Andrds de Olmos to the king, November, 1556, Cartas de Indias (Madrid, 1877),

p. 128; "Suma de visitas de pueblos," loc. cit., I, 230, 236; "Descripci6n de Pinuco," in

ibid., III, 162-163; "Descripei6n de Pinuco," in D.I.I., IX, 134, 135, 172.

21 "Suma de visitas de pueblos," loc. cit., I, 228, 299-300; "Descripei6n de Tzitzicaztla,"

in ibid., III, 111-113; Gabriel de Chaves, "Relaci6n de Meztitlin," in D.I.I., IV, 533.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
322 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

lay on the Chichimeca boundaries were Tamalaquaco, Tanzu-

monoco, and Tantohox, while Tzitzicaztla, Jilitla, and Jalpa fell

well within the range of Chichimeca raids.22

III

Within this Gran Chichimeca several of the largest nations

played dominant roles in warfare against the Spaniards because of

territorial extent, bulk of population, fighting abilities, or a com-

bination of these factors. Within these larger nations were num-

bers of smaller groups, or tribes, some known to the Spaniards by

specific names, others not. It is extremely difficult, if not impos-

sible at this date, to locate the multitude of tribes, classify them

on a language basis, or place them within the larger "national"

or ethnographical groupings. The following paragraphs are, for

the most part, summaries of pertinent data relating only to the

larger Chichimeca nations.

The greatest Chichimeca nation in extent of territory was that

of the Huachichiles. Because of the large area roamed by the

tribes of this nation, the prevalence of their speech, and their very

warlike nature, the Huachichiles were probably better known and

more feared by the white men than any other one of the larger

divisions of the Chichimecas. They lived in the land now in-

cluded in the states of San Luis Potosi, southeastern Coahuila,

eastern Zacatecas, parts of northern Guanajuato and eastern

Aguascalientes, and the southern portions of Nuevo Le6n. 2

Within the land of the Huachichiles were located the sixteenth-

century settlements of Charcas, Venado, Salinas, San Miguel

Mezquitic, San Luis Potosi, Santa Maria, San Luis de la Paz,

Sichu', Mazapil, and others.24 Some Huachichil tribes extended,

at least temporarily, as far south and west as Ayo Chico, Comanja,

Lagos, and to the Rio Grande de Santiago.25 In the P6njamo and

San Pedro Piedragorda area there still exist cave fortresses sup-

posedly used by the Huachichil warriors.26 Generally, however,

the town of San Felipe was considered to be the southern limit of

22 Pedro Martfnez, "Descripci6n de PNnuco," in D.I.I., IX, 134.

23 Ralph Leon Beals, The Comparative Ethnology of Northern Mexico Before 1750 (Berke-

ley, California, 1932), p. 96.

24 Jose Arlegui, Chr6nica de la provincia de N.S.P.S. Francisco de Zacatecas ... (Mexico,

1737), p. 299; Orozco y Berra, op. cit., 285.

26 Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., p. 155.

26 Pedro Gonzalez, Algunos puntos y objetos monumentales antiguos del estado de Guana-

juato ... (Guanajuato, 1895), p. 8.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER FRONTIER 323

the Huachichiles, and the principal center of their population was

in the sierras of San Luis Potos.27

The name Huachichil (also written Cuauhchichil and Quauchi-

chiquilli) was given to these Indians by the Mexicans. It is com-

posed of two words meaning cabeza colorada (redhead). The name

apparently originated because they wore red feather headdresses,28

or because they painted themselves mostly with red (especially

their hair), or because they wore pointed head coverings (bone-

tillos) made of hides, painted red.29

The Huachichiles are thought to have had a language dis-

tinctly their own in the sixteenth century, but whatever that

language was, it has since disappeared.30 Other languages than

the principal one of the Huachichiles were also supposed to have

been in use in the lands of the Huachichiles; Orozco y Berra, for

example, mentions a Tantoyoc language used around San Luis

Potosi.,,

Included within the territory of the Huachichiles were a num-

ber of lesser tribal divisions. The Aliquis are listed by Orozco y

Berra as inhabitants of the San Luis Potosi sierras, as were also

the Mascorros, the Macones, and the Coyotes.32 In an account of

some of the famous Huachichil chiefs, Gonzalo de las Casas men-

tions various tribes and, in doing so, indicates probable origins of

27 Relaci6n de los obispados de Tlaxcala, Michoacdn, Oaxaca y otros lugares en el siglo XVI

(Luis Garcia Pimentel, ed., Mexico, 1904), p. 122 (hereinafter cited as Relaci6n de los

obispados).

28 Pedro Gonzilez, op. cit.; Orozco y Berra, op. cit., p. 49.

29 "Se ynbixa[n] lo mas comu[n] co[n3 colorado, y se tifien los cabellos con ello / o porque

algunos de ellos vsan a traer vnos bonetillos agudos de cuero colorado" (Gonzalo de las

Casas, op. cit., p. 155). Las Casas adds that, "ansi a los garianes de las jaulas q[ue] tienen

las cabecas coloradas lRaman guachichiles."

30 Pablo de la Purfsima Concepci6n Beaumont, Cr6nica de la provincia de los santos

ap6stoles S. Pedro y S. Pablo de Michoacdn de la regular observancia de N.P.S. Francisco

(5 vols., Mexico, 1873-1874), IV, 538-9; Herrera y Tordesillas, op. cit., dec, iv, libro ix, p.

247; Relaci6n de los obispados, p. 123. Orozco y Berra (op. cit., p. 49) advances the theory

that the Caxcdn and Huachichil languages may have been derived from that of the pre-

conquest Chichimecas, since both languages seem to have come from a single source.

Some writers point out that there was also a distinct speech called Chichimeca, "a

language the others [Otomfes and Mexicans] do not understand," and at least one grammar

and dictionary of this language had been written, as well as a catechism (Orozco y Berra,

op. cit., p. 8, based on Montfifar and Beristain; Paso y Troncoso, Papeles de Nueva Espania,

III, 111-113).

31 Orozco y Berra, op. cit., p. 65. This author denies, however, the existence of a sepa-

rate Mazapil language which was supposed to have derived from the Mexican tongue

(op. cit., p. 11).

32 Ibid., pp. 67, 71, 288-289.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
324 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

their names. The 'best known group of the Huachichiles, accord-

ing to him, was that of Maticoya, achieving notoriety among the

Spaniards because of the able leadership of one Martinillo. Ma-

colia was another Huachichil leader well known to the Spaniards.

He lived in the San Francisco region, just south of the later Spanish

town of San Luis Potosi, along with a chief named Bartolomillo;

both were caught and hanged by Dr. Francisco de Sande, super-

visor of warfare against the Chichimecas during the viceregal

administration of Martin Enrfquez (1568-1580). Macolia was

succeeded as chief by a son of the same name. Other tribal groups

were those of Las Salinas, Pefiol Blanco, and the Samures.83 Ap-

parently the Spaniards sometimes named the tribes according to

their location and at other times they were given the names of

their chiefs. In the latter category would be the Macolias men-

tioned above and the Mascorros (a famous chief of this name was

active against the Spaniards in the 1550's)84 as well as the Copuces

of the Guamar nation (see below).

The second major nation of the Chichimecas bore the name

Guamar. They were, in the opinion of Las Casas, "the bravest,

most warlike, traitorous, and destructive of all the Chichimeca

nations, and the most astute.""5 These Guamares were composed

of four or five divisions, but they were all of one tongue. Their

territory lay between lat. 210 and 220 and included the lianos

(level country) of San Miguel (the center of their population), the

mining region of Guanajuato, and as far north as San Felipe. To

the south they extended into Michoacan and to the Rio Lerma,

including the towns of Juan de Villasefior, 36 Penjamo, Coromano

(their first place of habitation), the Comanja sierras, touching on

Los Orvanos and Portezuelo. the mountains of Xale. Bernal. the

33Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., pp. 155-6. Another great leader, Xale, had as his

domain most of the Tunal Grande; he was succeeded in turn by Bartolomillo and Ant6n

Rayado. Other leaders were Machicab, Guazqualo, Moquimahal, and Guayname. All

these leaders were active before the middle 1570's; the account by Las Casas was probably

written in 1573 or 1574.

34 Herrera y Tordesillas, op. cit., dec. viii, libro x, pp. 333-334.

35 "La nation mas valiente y belicosa traydora y dafiosa de todos los chichimecas y la

mas dispuesta" (Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., p. 154).

36 Juan de Villasefior, one of the original conquerors, was established at Guango by

Viceroy Mendoza, as early as 1544, in order to hold back the southward raids of the

Chichimecas. The towns of Guango, Numardn, Penjamillo, Conguripo, PuruAndiro, and

others were given to him and his family in encomienda for four lifetimes (Hubert Howe

Bancroft, History of Mexico [6 vols., San Francisco, 1883-1888], II, 471 [based on Beau-

mont, op. cit., III, 413419]).

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER FRONTIER 325

Valley of San Francisco, part of the Tunal, and the mountains of

Santa Maria and Atotonilco.37

Las Casas admits his failure to learn the meaning of the name

Guamar, saying only that among themselves those Indians called

their nation "Equamar." Within the Guamar "confederation"

there were smaller groups known to the Spaniards either by the

names of their military leaders or their territorial limits. Thus

the Copuces got their name from an early leader of one of the

tribes, Copuz the Elder (Copuz Viejo). One group of the Copuces

was further distinguished by the leadership of a chief known as

Alonso who often helped the Spaniards against other Chichimeca

tribes. Still another group of the Copuces, at the time Las Casas

was writing (probably 1573 or 1574), had achieved notoriety be-

cause of the leadership of a certain Don Pedro. With the Copuces

were allied the Guaxabanas and the Sauzas, although these two

groups were of the Huachichil tongue. Other Guamar segments

were "those of San Bartolom6," led by Don Francisco and Ber-

nab6, and "those of Comanja de Jaso," under Don Francisco

Cojo (the Cripple).38

The Zacatecos were another large nation of the Chichimeca

peoples. They roamed the territory from just south of the city of

Zacatecas, west approximately to Nombre de Dios, north to

Cuencam6, the Rio Nazas, and Parras, and probably extended as

far east as Mazapil. The eastern edge of their territory was in-

definite and overlapped the western extent of the Huachichiles,

with whom they were constantly at war.39

The Zacatecos were not quite as warlike as the Huachichiles,

nor were they as nomadic.40 Their name comes from the Mexican

word zacate, grass or bush, and they were so called because they

lived "entre la yerba" (in the brush). The braves of the Zaca-

tecos early earned a reputation as excellent fighters when they

came to the aid of the Caxeanes in the Mixtbn War (1 541-42) 41

37Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., p. 154.

38 Copuz Viejo was succeeded later by his servant, Domingo. One group of the Co-

puces, under the leadership of Pedro Narigileta (Peter Small-Nose), separated from those

of Alonso and joined the Copuces still at war with the Spaniards (Gonzalo de las Casas,

op. cit., pp. 154-155). The various alliances and separations mentioned above were doubt-

less temporary situations and may have been primarily applicable only in the early 1570's,

just prior to or during the time Gonzalo de las Casas was writing (1573-1574).

39 Orozco y Berra, op. cit., p. 285; Jesuit "Carta Anua" (1602), Herbert E. Bolton Col-

lection, Vol. IV of transcripts.

40John Lloyd Mecham, Francisco de Ibarra and Nueva Vizcaya (Durham, N. C., 1927),

p. 63; Orozco y Berra, op. cit., p. 285.

41 Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., p. 156. The Mixt6n War was a large-scale Indian

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
326 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

They were supposed to have had a language of their own, although

it was more probably a dialect of the Mexican speech.42

Directly south of the Zacatecos the Caxcanes were the domi-

nant nation of the Chichimecas. Caxcan means "there is none,"

which was the answer the first Spaniards got when they ap-

proached those Indians asking for food and other things.43 The

land of the Caxcanes began at the Rio Grande de Santiago, bor-

dered on the tribes of the Tecuexes and Tepecanos, and included

the following towns and valleys which were their centers of popu-

lation: the Tlacotlan Valley, Juchipila, the valley and river of

Nochistlin, Tlaltenango, Teocaltiche, Tenancingo, Talpa, Meca-

tabasco, Jayahua, Mezquititula, Moyagua, Cuixpalan, Apulco,

and Tenayuca.44

These Caxcanes spoke a distinct dialect which was probably

closely related to the language of the Mexicans, since they were

able to understand the Mexican speech.45 In some contrast to

the bulk of the so-called Chichimeca population, they were not

generally nomadic, often living in fixed habitations. They also

had a more highly developed religion, centered in the principal

adoratorio (temple) and fortress at Teul, a city famous throughout

their lands as the site of the great temple of idols.46 Mingled with

the Caxcanes were the tribes of the Tecuexes, who also extended

into the Zacatecas area. The Tecuexes lived principally around

the pueblos of Teepatitlan, Teocaltiche, Mitic, Jalostotitlin,

Mesticatin, Yagualica, Tlacotlin, Teocaltitlan, Ixtlahuacan,

Cuautla, Ocotic, and Acatic. Cocas and Tepecanos also lived in

the general territory of the Caxcanes.47

uprising against the Spaniards in Nueva Galicia, a determined native effort to eliminate

Spanish control around Guadalajara and to the north and east. The threat to Spanish

domination reached such proportions that Viceroy Mendoza led troops in person to put

down the revolt, and the great conqueror Pedro de Alvarado lost his life in the fighting.

For a full account of this war see Jos6 L6pez-Portillo y Weber, La rebeli6n de Nueva

Galicia (Mexico, 1939).

42 Orozco y Berra, op. cit., p. 11. This author comments, however, that Beristafn

credits Fray Pedro Espinareda with an Arte y vocabulario del idioma zacateco.

43 Hernando Gallegos, "Descripci6n de Tequaltiche," in Noticias varias de Nueva

Galicia, intendencia de Guadalajara (Guadalajara, 1878), p. 348. Wigberto Jim6nez

Moreno suggests that caxcanes might be the equivalent of coyotes ("La colonizaci6n y

evangelizaci6n de Guanajuato en el siglo XVI," loc. cit., p. 126).

44Orozco y Berra, op. cit., p. 284; based on Beaumont, op. cit., chap. xxii and Mota

Padilla, op. cit., chap. ix.

45 Herrera y Tordesillas, op. cit., d~c. iv, libro ix, p. 247.

48 Orozco y Berra, op. cit., pp. 284-285; based on Mota Padilla, op. cit., chap. x, in

which there is a very complete description of the Caxcem city of Teul.

47 Orozco y Berra, op. cit., p. 278.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER FRONTIER 327

Along the eastern edge of the vast Chichimeca territory, in the

Sierra Gorda and Rio Verde areas, lay the habitat of the Pamne

nation, generally regarded as the least warlike of all the Chichi-

meca peoples. They were rather raiders of livestock than killers

of white men; they attacked ranchmen solely for the purpose of

killing their horses for food. Las Casas knew of only one murder

committed by the Pames.48

The Pame territory extended almost as far south as Acambaro,

in Michoacan, thus overlapping some of the lands of the Otomies.

Las Casas asserts that they even reached as far south and west as

Irapu'ndaro and Ucareo. From Michoacan they extended to the

towns in the Jilotepec jurisdiction, Queretaro, Tuliman, and San

Pedro; thence down the San Juan River, touching Izmiquilpan,

and on beyond Meztitlkn to the edge of the Panuco region. On

the west they included the settlements of Parr6n, Sinquia, Sichui,

and bordered on the territory of the Samuies, who were also of the

Pame speech. The Spaniards called these natives Pames, which

means "no," because they used that expression very much. They

were the Chichimeca nation nearest Mexico City.49

A few other Chichimeca groups of some importance are also

distinguishable in contemporary writings. The so-called Chichi-

mecas Blancos lived around Aguascalientes, Guanajuato, and

Quer6taro, and as far as the Lagos district in Jalisco. They may

have been part of the larger Huachichil nation, though it is also

possible that they were an offshoot of the Otomifes. In any case,

they were very warlike and did great damage in their raids on the

Spaniards. Aguascalientes was founded, in 1575, to hold them

in check.50 The Guaxabanas were a group of some importance

in the Guanajuato sierras; they spoke their own dialect, as did

the Jonases in the Guanajuato and Quer6taro areas.5"

48 The victim was a mulatto named Juan Domfnguez, killed in the savannah of San

Juan del Rfo (Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., p. 154).

4" Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., pp. 153-154.

50 Orozco y Berra, op. cit., pp. 69, 71, 278, 286. For more information on the defensive

foundation of Aguascalientes, see Powell, "Presidios and Towns," loc. cit., p. 197.

51 Orozco y Berra, op. cit., pp. 49, 71. There was such a multitude of dialects in the

Guanajuato region that when thirty natives came together they spoke four or five distinct

dialects and were unable to understand each other. This same observation was made of

the San Luis de la Paz area (Francisco Javier Alegre, Historia de la Compaifia de Jesus en

Nueva-Espafla [3 vols., Mexico, 1841-1842], I, 282; Jesuit "Carta 6,nua" (1594), Herbert

E. Bolton Collection, Vol. II of transcripts.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
328 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

IV

The general way of life throughout the Gran Chichimeca

varied but little from tribe to tribe and from nation to nation.

Contemporary Spanish descriptions of the customs and character-

istics of the Chichimecas seldom differentiate between the various

groups. Apparently this did not seem necessary, except rarely,

because of the uniformity in customs and living conditions which

set the Chichimeca tribes apart from the more sedentary tribes

the Spaniards had earlier encountered in Mexico.

The most prominent Chichimneca characteristic, and the one

most often commented upon by contemporary writers, was their

nudity. Usually they wore no clothes at all. When and if the

warriors did wear any covering, they would discard it before going

into battle, "for the effect."52 When clothing was worn, it con-

sisted of a covering for the private parts only, for the men, and a

deerskin skirt from waist to knee for the women. 3 They slept on

the ground, in their usual nude state and in any kind of weather,

and, as Mendieta comments, it seemed to do them no harm.54

Among their own people they felt no shame in their nakedness,

but when they came into contact with Spaniards (except in war-

fare) they would hasten to find something to cover their private

parts, even though that covering consisted of nothing more than

grass or weeds.55

Rather than wear clothing, they preferred to smear their

bodies with red ocher or other minerals of various colors, especially

black and yellow. This was particularly true when they went off

to battle or into mourning. For the latter purpose they would

cut off their hair, smear themselves with black, and wear this

paint for some time, after which they would hold a washing-off

ceremony in the presence of invited friends.56

The food supply of most of the Chichimeca nomads was very

meager. They usually cultivated no plants or trees, but sub-

sisted on wild fruits, roots, and seeds. Their most important

52 Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., p. 157.

53 Herrerary Tordesillas, op. cit., dec. vii, libro ii, p. 54.

54 Ger6nimo de Mendieta, Historia eclesidstica indiana, obra escrita d fines del siglo XVI

... (Mexico, 1870), p. 732.

55 Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., p. 162. It must be remembered that this statement is

made from the moral point of view of the Spaniards rather than that of the Indians.

56 Ibid., p. 162; Mendieta, op. cit., p. 732. The following paragraphs which treat of the

general customs of the Chichimecas are based on Las Casas, op. cit., pp. 156-162, unless

otherwise indicated.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER FRONTIER 329

fruit was the tuna, or prickly pear, of which there were many

kinds and colors. They also ate the fruit of a wild tree called

mezquilt (mesquite) which produced pods like algarrobas, or carob

beans. They ate these pods and from them made a kind of bread

for use when fruit was not plentiful. Another fruit they utilized

was called "dates" by the Spaniards, though the tree and the

fruit itself were only approximately like the dates and palms

known to the Iberians.57 Of the roots they ate, some were like

sweet potatoes, or yucca. Others were like those called by the

Mexicans cimatles.58 The maguey plant was used quite exten-

sively, as in the rest of New Spain, except that the Chichimecas

apparently did not make clothing from it. They ate its stalks

and roots cooked in small ovens, and this was called mixcali, or

mescal, still used as a food in Mexico. At least some of the Chichi-

meca tribes also ate cooked maize, which was called potzole.59

A large part of their food supply was obtained by hunting,

and even the smallest or most poisonous animal or reptile was not

overlooked as a possible article of diet. They ate worms, snakes,

rats, frogs, rabbits, birds, fish, deer, mules, horses, cattle, or any-

thing else they could find. They usually ate their meat raw and

unwashed or, at best, only partially cooked. Their expert marks-

manship with bow and arrow stood them in good stead, for they

were able to shoot such things as rabbits even while the animals

were moving. They fished with the same weapons, plus occasion-

al use of reed nets, or merely by swimming after their quarry.

Chichimeca preference for the meat of the larger animals

57 This is probably the tree called by the Spaniards "palma de ditiles" (date palm),

although it is a species of yucca, similar to the Joshua tree; it was called izotl by the Aztecs.

(This information was obtained through the aid of Professor H. S. Reed, Department of

Plant Nutrition, University of California, Berkeley).

58 Apparently the ordinary red bean so commonly used in Mexico today. These In-

dians evidently ate the nodule-bearing roots (the nodules being formed as a result of the

activity of bacteria) after thorough cooking. Sahagidn describes the root and its use as

follows: "There is a root which is called cimatl; the stalks (yerba) of this root are called

quavecoc and also cimatl: these stalks produce kernels (habas) which are like large beans

except that they grow wild. This plant spreads its long shoots over the ground; the roots

of it, if eaten raw or only partically cooked, cause vomiting or diarrhea which is fatal: . . .

in order to eat these roots it is necessary to cook them for two days, boiling them con-

stantly" (Bernardino de Sahaguin, Historia general de las cosas de Nueva Espaila [3 vols.,

Mexico, 1829-1830], III, 243-244).

$9 Antonio Tello, Libro segundo de la cr6nica misceldnea, en que se trata de la conquista

spiritual y temporal de la santa provincia de Xalisco en el Nuevo Reino de la Galicia y Nueva

Vizcaya y descubrimiento del Nuevo Mexico (Guadalajara, 1891), p. 776; Jesuit "Carta

inua" (1594), Herbert E. Bolton Collection, Vol. II of transcripts.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
330 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

brought in by the Spaniards became an outstanding character-

istic, and this was the principal motive underlying their constant

attacks on Spanish cattle ranches and wagon trains in and near

the tierra de guerra. Although they were very fond of beef, they

preferred to eat horses and mules, thinking thereby to acquire

some of the greater speed of those animals.60

Although the Chichimeca food supply was usually far from

sufficient, the same seems not to have been true of their liquor

resources. They were notorious drunkards, "since [as Las Casas

so quaintly puts it] up to the present time there has never been

known a people content to drink water only.""6 They used not

only the Mexican liquor made from maguey but also other drinks

made from tunas and mesquite. With these types of wine they

got drunk whenever possible. Experience had taught them, how-

ever, the trouble they could get into while in the drunken state;

and so, during their orgies, their women stayed away from them

and also hid their bows and arrows. They did not all get drunk

at the same time, for experience also dictated that they post

sentries so they would not suffer a surprise attack while indulging

in serious drinking. Inebriation was far and away their most

popular pastime and a habit which apparently made some con-

tribution to their fearlessness in battle. They often made their

attacks after fortifying themselves with alcohol, and this probably

accounts for some of their reckless courage against the lances,

swords, horses, and guns of the Spaniards.

The Chichimecas, for the most part, gave little attention to

religious practices, in which they seemed to be unlike most of

the other natives of New Spain. This impression, expressed by

contemporary Spanish writers, may have been gained however,

through lack of knowledge or appreciation of the religious cere-

monies they must have had. They were described as being given

to making exclamations to the sky and gazing at certain stars in

order to be free of thunder and lightning. Some Spaniards believed

that their ceremonies preliminary to the killing of captives,

which included dancing around them and forcing the captives to

60 Arlegui, op. cit., p. 151. This author also points out that a similar line of reasoning

led them to eat their curanderos (medicine men) and any other person of outstanding

ability, since they thus hoped to acquire the greatness of the deceased. They did this

even if the person died of smallpox. See also Tello (op. cit., p. 776) for more detailed dis-

cussion of the food and drink of the Chichimecas.

el "Tienen sus brevages q[ue] beuen, porq[ue] hasta oy nO se a hallado nation q[ue] se

contente con beuer sola agua" (Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., p. 162).

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER FRONTIER 331

dance with them, were a form of religious sacrifice; but Las Casas

thought this was nothing more than a refinement of cruelty taught

them by the devil "so that they would have no horror of killing

men but would kill with pleasure. " 62 Mendieta also believed that

the Chichimecas had no organized religion, although he was of the

opinion that they worshipped the devil and consulted with Satan

on military matters.63

The Chichimeca nomads were a hardy lot of natives, as well

they might be, considering the privations they daily endured.

From the time of birth their hardships began, for the women, in

view of the lack of dwellings or permanent residence, had great

difficulty raising their children. The women often gave birth

while traveling, under extreme handicaps ;64 afterward they would

wash the child, and, if they had no water, they cleaned the infant

with grass. There was nothing in which to wrap the new arrival,

and the best they could do for protection was to place the child in

the shelter of a bush or rock-"and with all this hardship they

live and multiply."65

As soon as the children could walk they were given small bows

and arrows and taught to shoot at insects (moscas) and very small

animals. As they grew older, they learned to shoot birds. This

early use of the bow and arrow was the children's principal enter-

tainment and was the groundwork for the unerring marksmanship

which so awed the Spanish adversary.66

The marriage customs of the Chichimecas were usually quite

simple. Each man had but one wife, and the union was contracted

62 it ... Pa[ra] q[ue] no tenga[nJ orror en la muerte de los hombres sino que los maten

co[n] plazer y pasat[iemp]o como quien mata vna liebre / o venado. . ." (ibid., pp.

156-157).

B3 Mendieta, op. cit., p. 732. This author states, however, that the Chichimecas would

bleed themselves from the ears and other parts of their bodies before idols of stone and

clay, apparently in penance or propitiation. This may have been true of some of the less

savage tribes, such as the Caxcanes, but Las Casas does not mention this practice as a

general Chichimeca custom. Arlegui (op. cit., pp. 163-166, 169) says they worshipped

animal deities, trees, and herbs (especially poisonous plants which they were careful not

to step on for fear that such an herb might became angry with them). The herb most

venerated was peyote.

64 "... Muchas vezes les aco[n]tegia, parir caminando, y aun co[n] las partes colgando

y corriendo sangre caminan, como si fuesen vna oueja, o cabra" (Gonzalo de las Casas,

op. cit., pp. 160-161; Arlegui, op. cit., p. 149).

6 it ... Y con toda esta aspereza biven y se crian" (Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit.,

p. 161).

61 Arlegui, op. cit., p. 149. See below for a discussion of Chichimeca efficiency in the

use of this weapon.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
332 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

by the parents. These marital relationships were often the basis

of inter-tribal peacemaking, for the man joined his wife's people.

They also practiced a type of divorce, based on the initiative of the

women rather than the men. But there were variations of these

practices among the various nations. In some groups the man

had only one wife but several other women in a less formal union.

In other groups, the men married as many wives as they could

provide for. Others, according to Arlegui, had their women as

common property.67 The men were, in the eyes of the Spaniards,

extremely lazy, for they let the women, like slaves, do all the work

except fighting. The women were even used in hunting, for when

animals were shot the women had to retrieve them and carry them

on their own backs. The men habitually carried only their fight-

ing equipment.68

The Chichimeca amusements, besides drunkenness, consisted

of a few dances and games. The dances differed from those of

many other natives of New Spain in that they were performed at

night around a fire. Here the Indians formed a circle by linking

arms and jumping and shouting in an apparently disorganized

fashion. Las Casas claimed they had no music for these dances,

but Arlegui states that they danced to the mournful sound of a

hollow trunk, beaten with small sticks or the jawbones of horses.

Added to this was the chant of old men who recited deeds of their

ancestors in hunting or other famous feats with the bow and arrow.

The dances often lasted twenty-four hours at a stretch and ended

with the performers in a complete alcoholic stupor. In war

dances they would get drunk and then be tongue-lashed to a

fighting frenzy by the old women of the tribe, for these women

were respected as soothsayers.69

The most common game in the Gran Chichimeca was one played

with a ball and called batey by the Mexicans. In this sport they

used a bouncing ball made either from the resin of a tree or from

some species of wild plant producing a gummy substance which

could be used for the purpose, possibly guayule. They used their

hips extensively, often dragging them along the ground ("rras-

trando las nalgas por el suelo").70 Another game involved the

67 Ibid., p. 157.

68 Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., pp. 160-161; Jesuit "Carta Qnua" (1594), Herbert E.

Bolton Collection, Vol. II of transcripts.

69 Arlegui, op. cit., p. 158.

71 Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., p. 160. This may be the game called ule by Arlegui,

played on a level plain of three or four leagues in length and lasting several days, with

much gambling (op. cit., p. 162).

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER FRONTIER 333

use of beans and small reeds with which they gambled arrows and

hides. In yet another type of sport, the women shot arrows at a

target composed of a tuna leaf filled with the red juice of the

fruit. They played this when contemplating war, "and in it they

placed their auguries."''

In the war practices of the Chichimecas, and in their cruel

treatment of captives, are to be found important factors which

contributed to Spanish lack of military success against the war-

riors of this tierra de guerra. Chichimeca methods of waging war

were, to put it mildly, a revelation and a constant discomfiture to

Spanish soldiers accustomed to European warfare or to the mass

attacks, on open ground, characteristic of the more civilized native

tribes of New Spain. Chichimeca cruelty to captured enemies

caused the Spaniards to fear them greatly, and this was a serious

psychological handicap which kept the morale of the Spanish

frontiersmen at a consistently low level.

Most of the Chichimeca tribes had no leaders except when

actually participating in war. Their lack of allegiance to any

law, leader, or other authority was an outstanding characteristic

and so inherent in their nature that even the children flouted the

authority of their parents.72 For such leadership as they had,

each rancheria elected its own captain, invariably the one con-

sidered the bravest in battle. But their hatred of any authority

was such that they often treacherously killed these elected chiefs

"in order to throw off the yoke of even that light obedience."73

Lack of over-all leadership among the Chichimecas was one of the

71 Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., p. 160. The gambling game played with reeds may be

that mentioned by Arlegui in which six sticks of equal size, having "puntos seflalados con

sus rayas," were thrown into the air and the bets won or lost on the way the sticks fell.

While the sticks were in the air, the natives beat themselves mightily on their chests with

their fists, often causing abscesses from which they died (Arlegui, op. cit., p. 161). A

similar Indian game in Lower California was played with four small sticks, white on one

side and black on the other, of about a span in length and a finger in thickness. These

were tossed into the air and the game went to the player who tossed the greatest number

with white, or black, side up (Jos6 Longinos Martinez, California in 1792; the expedition

of Jos6 Longinos Martinez, translated by Lesley Byrd Simpson [San Marino, California,

19381, p. 15).

72Jesuit "Carta Anua" (1594), Herbert E. Bolton Collection, Vol. II of transcripts;

Torquemada, op. cit., III, 602.

73 it . . . Por sacudir el yugo aun de aquella leve obediencia" (Arlegui, op. cit., p. 153).

See also: Martinez, "Descripci6n de PAnuco," in D.I.I., IX, 145; Mendieta, op. cit., p.

732; Torquemada, op. cit., III, 602. Here again it must be remembered that these

Indians are being judged by their enemies and by Spanish standards.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
334 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

greatest handicaps faced by the Spaniards in trying to arrange

definitive peace treaties on this frontier.

Within the Gran Chichimeca, the various groups and tribes

were constantly fighting, usually for the most petty reasons.

These inter-tribal conflicts, however, had also a traditional or

historical basis, for they were sometimes inherited from their

ancestors. Had it not been for this internecine strife, the north-

ward advance of the Spaniards would have been infinitely more

difficult.74 However, this inter-tribal warfare was somewhat off-

set by their occasional collaboration against a common enemy.

The two most notable examples of this were the Mixt6n War and

the Uprising of 1561, both representing serious threats to Spanish

control north and west of Mexico City.75 In the observance of

the terms of peace treaties these Indians were invariably treacher-

ous in the extreme, as the Spaniards learned by costly experience.76

The typical method of Chichimeca attack was the ambuscade,

usually in early evening or at dawn. They lay in wait for pack or

wagon trains in some narrow pass, ravine, stony or brush-covered

ground, with mountains or large rocks nearby which would handi-

cap the Spanish horsemen in pursuit. The attacks were made

with great suddenness and to the accompaniment of much shout-

ing, which, added to the frightening aspect of their nude, fan-

tastically painted bodies anid their headdresses, had a devastating

effect upon the unsuspecting animals and men of Spanish cara-

vans. The warriors kept their quivers full of arrows, plus four or

five in hand, and they could easily outshoot the Spanish cavalry.

A further advantage was their method of protecting their bodies

with bow and arrow and attacking in broken ranks, fighting a

little apart from each other, "the better to see the arrow coming

and avoid it.""7

The ferocity and reckless courage of the Chichimeca braves

74 Mendieta, op. cit., p. 732; Arlegui, op. cit., p. 150; Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit., pp.

152-153; Torquemada, op. cit., III, 602. They had their tribal hunting and fishing

territories well defined, and if one of another tribe entered this territory, even to shoot a

rabbit, they would go to war over the matter (Arlegui, op. cit., p. 162).

7 Arlegui (op. cit., pp. 159-161) gives an interesting description of the methods and

formulas (such as the use of emissaries and ceremonial sacrifices) used in cementing these

alliances and confederations. See above, footnotes 5 and 41 on the Uprising of 1561 and

the Mixt6n War, respectively.

76 MartInez, "Descripci6n de PAnuco," in D.I.I., IX, 145.

77 " . . . Por mejor ver venir la flecha, y guardarse de ella" (Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit.,

p. 157). See also Arlegui, op. cit., p. 162; Basalenque, op. cit., p. 421; Herrera y Torde-

sillas, op. cit., dec. viii, libro x, p. 333.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER FRONTIER 335

made them greatly feared. Thirteen of them were known to have

attacked and defeated as many as twenty-five armed Spaniards.78

On one occasion four Chichimecas, near Zacatecas, attacked and

put to rout fifty or sixty Mexicans.79 Baltasar Temifio de Bafiue-

los, one of the original miners at Zacatecas and an Indian fighter

of large experience, claimed to have seen two Chichimecas attack

a group of more than fifty Mexicans and Tarascans and make

them flee. He also saw one Chichimeca warrior fight four armed

Spanish horsemen and, with one lance already through his body,

take the lances away from the other three Spaniards.80 These

are just a few examples of a type of Chichimeca fighting ability

which was only too well known to the Spaniards on the northern

frontier in the decades after 1550.

If pursued, these savages were very hard to catch, for they

were almost as fast on foot as the Spaniards were on horseback. 81

They seldom attacked in groups of more than two hundred, and

after a raid they would return to their territory in small bands in

order to throw off pursuit.82 These warriors were considered to be

very astute in matters of warfare. One Spanish contemporary

expressed this by saying that "they have such tricks that I doubt

very much if soldiers long in Italy have better ones and, further,

they never fail in anything they attempt."83 At least one of these

stratagems which proved a dangerous nuisance to the Spaniards

was the Chichimeca use of spies and scouts to learn the where-

abouts and strength of Spanish troops and wagon trains. 84 Some

of them had also learned the use of horses, at least as early as

1580, and this made them even more dangerous.85

78 Testimony of Francisco de Tapia, "Informaci6n acerca de la rebeli6n de los yndios

zacatecos y guachichiles . . , "loc. cit., pp. 340-341.

79 Ibid., p. 250.

80 Ibid., p. 299.

81 Mendieta, op. cit., p. 733; Torquemada, op. cit., III, 603. This Spanish impression

was undoubtedly gained from the fact that the Indians attacked in places where the

broken ground would greatly handicap the Spanish horsemen.

82 Herrera y Tordesillas, op. cit., dec. viii, libro x, p. 333.

83 "Tienen tantos ardides que dudo yo que soldados muy biejos de ytalia los tengan tan

buenos finalmente no yntentan cossa que no salgan con ella" (Vargas, "Descripci6n de

Quer6taro," loc. cit., p. 21).

84 "Informaci6n acerca de la rebeli6n de los yndios zacatecos y guachichiles . . .," oc.

cit., p. 254.

85 Vargas, "Descripci6n de Quer6taro," loc. cit., p. 21. By the 1580's the Huachichiles

in the mountains around San Luis Potosi were riding herd on large quantities of stolen

livestock which they exchanged for women and weapons (munici6n) in the tierra adentro

(petition of the estancieros, in "Informaci6n sobre lo de la guerra con los Chichimecas"

(1582), AGI, Patronato, 2-2-2).

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
336 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

The almost incredible Chichimeca dexterity and accuracy with

bow and arrow was ever a source of surprise and wonder to the

white invaders, and this accomplishment was perhaps the greatest

single factor in the Spanish failure to subdue them by force of

arms. Though their arrows were made of thin reeds and appeared

to be very weak, they were able to hit the smallest of targets and

shoot with tremendous force. Arlegui once saw some of the In-

dians of this area throw an orange into the air and then shoot such

a quantity of arrows into it that it fell to the ground in many small

pieces.86 Their arrowheads, of stone or probably obsidian, and

the thin shafts passed through coats of mail, unless the mail was

very tightly woven.87 Las Casas once saw a Chichimeca arrow

pin both hands of a Spanish soldier to his arquebuse as he held it

to his face. On another occasion he saw an arrow shot with such

force that it pierced a horse's head-stall (made of a double thick-

ness of leather and a metal plate) and passed completely through

the horse's head and into the chest, killing the animal instantly.88

Vargas, in his description of Querdtaro (1582), relates the incident

of a Chichimeca arrow which hit a Spanish soldier's powder flask,

went completely through the man's armor (consisting of a leather

jacket of eleven thicknesses of buckskin, a coat of mail, and a

doublet), and wounded him. The same writer tells of an arrow

passing through a horse's armor and head, and then entering the

chest of the horseman, "something which, if it were not known to

be a fact, would certainly seem incredible."89

Chichimeca cruelty to captives seemed to know no bounds.

Male captives were invariably killed, as were most others; age or

sex made little difference. Occasionally they kept captured boys

and young women as slaves, but this was the exception rather than

the rule. They usually killed even young Spanish women, "des-

pues de auer vsado dellas," because of their desire for scalps as

trophies; scalping was a general characteristic of the natives of the

Gran Chichimeca. 90 They preferred to scalp their prisoners be-

86 Arlegui, op. cit., pp. 149-150; Mendieta, op. cit., p. 733; Torquemada, op. cit., III, 603.

87 Herrera y Tordesillas, op. cit., dkc. viii, libro x, p. 333.

88 "t . .. A un soldado . .. le diero[n] un flechazo, e[n] la cabega del caballo sobre una

testera doblada de cuero de vaca y vna hoja de lata y le pasaron la cabega y pecho hasta

q[ue] dio redondo con el caballo muerto en [e]l suelo . . . " (Gonzalo de las Casas, op. cit.,

pp. 159-160).

89 .. Cossa que ciertamte si no se tuuiera por muy cierta Parece cosa yncreible"

(Vargas, "Descripci6n de Quer6taro," loc. cit., pp. 21-22).

90 Herrera y Tordesillas, op. cit., dec. viii, libro x, p. 333; d&c. iii, libro iii, p. 121; Gonzalo

de las Casas, op. cit., p. 159; Vargas, "Descripci6n de Quer6taro," loc. cit., pp. 20-21.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
THE CHICHIMECAS: SCOURGE OF THE SILVER FRONTIER 337

fore killing them. They did this by placing their foot on the

victim's throat and jerking off the scalp and face "against the

natural lay of the hair" (al redopelo),91 leaving the crown clean

"like the crown of a friar."92 Not content with this, they often

removed the captive's leg, arm, and rib bones while he was yet

alive. They thereafter wore these grim trophies on cords tied

around their waists. Las Casas, with an eye for graphic detail,

adds that some of the scalps they thus carried had been taken

from blonde, long-haired women.93

Other refinements of cruelty consisted of removing the hearts

while the captives still lived. They might also cut off the victim's

private parts and stuff them into his mouth, and continue cutting

off various parts of the body until the captive died. With others,

they cut open the back and tore out the tendons, which they used

for tying arrow points to the shafts. Captured children were

usually grabbed by the feet and their heads beaten against rocks

until the brains squirted out. Some captives were merely hanged,

and they were evidently the more fortunate ones. Even after

death the atrocities were not at an end, for the victim's entrails

were often extracted and draped in the trees and their skulls were

used as goblets in drunken orgies of victory.94

VI

From the above summary it can be appreciated that the

Chichimeca tribesmen were formidable enemies indeed. At least

the poorly paid and poorly armed Spanish frontier soldiery of the

period found them so. Their ambush style of attack, expert

marksmanship, reckless courage, fleetness of foot, and use of spies

made these natives of the north extremely dangerous in warfare.

The inaccessibility of their mountain hideaways, the great extent

of their habitat, the absence of central leadership, and their

thorough disdain for peace treaties were all factors which tended

to nullify sporadic Spanish military gains. Dread of Chichimeca

attacks, with attendant cruelties and destruction, kept the work

of Spanish miners, cattlemen, missionaries, merchants, settlers,

91 Ibid.

92" A . . . Dexando el caxco. mondo, tanto como toma vna corona de un frayle" (Gonzalo

de las Casas, op. cit., p. 157). This author comments that he had seen some Spaniards

who had suffered this treatment and had lived for many years afterward.

93 Ibid.

9 Arlegui, op. cit., p. 151; Herrera y Tordesillas, op. cit., dkc. iii, libro iii, p. 121; Gonzalo

de las Casas, op. cit., pp. 157-159; Vargas, "Descripci6n de Quer6taro," loc. cit., pp. 20-21.

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
338 THE HISPANIC AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW

and Indian allies at low efficiency during most of the half-century

after 1550 and definitely slowed the advance of Spanish civili-

zation into the land of war.

Despite all the difficulties to be overcome in subduing and

pacifying the Indians of this frontier, Spanish policy makers of the

period were firm in the opinion that the war against the Chichi-

mecas was a just and legal war.95 Accordingly, a vigorous prose-

cution of the war was the guiding viceregal policy during most of

the half-century of the conflict, but factors already mentioned

operated against the success of this policy in its military aspects.

By the middle 1580's the futility of Spanish military methods had

become apparent, and changes had to be made toward a more

realistic policy of promoting peace by increasing the tempo of

missionary penetration and satisfying the fundamental needs of

the Indians by giving them food and clothing in exchange for

peace. In combination with these measures, the Chichimecas

were encouraged to settle near the pueblos of newly arrived Tlax-

calan colonizers, allies of the white men. In this way began, in

the late years of the century, a pacification of the Chichimeca

frontier which was to allow greater efficiency in mineral exploita-

tion and prepare the way for Spanish advance into the tempting,

mysterious lands of the New Mexico.

PHILIP WAYNE POWELL.

Northwestern University.

05 Gonzalo de las Casas, after a lengthy consideration of the morality of such wars

against heathens, justified the war against the Chichimecas on these grounds: the necessity

of defense against their aggressions; they should be punished as rebellious apostates; they

were sacrilegious; they were incendiaries; they were highwaymen and murderers; they were

robbers of livestock (op. cit., pp. 171-172). These conclusions drawn by Las Casas seem

to have epitomized contemporary Spanish opinion on the subject of the warfare against

the Chichimecas. The principal exception to this point of view was to be found in the

Dominican contention that the Spaniards were aggressors and therefore had no right to

wage war against the northern nomads. This view was expressed by the Dominicans

during a council of the learned men of the realm called together by Viceroy Enrfquez, in

1574, to discuss the problem of the Chichimeca war (Moya de Contreras to Juan de

Ovando, August 31, 1574, in loc. cit., p. 179).

This content downloaded from 202.28.191.34 on Wed, 30 Mar 2016 01:00:43 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms