BajaNomad

FINDING EL CAMINO REAL and maps added...

David K - 3-10-2004 at 09:33 PM

With a big thank you to Tim Walker http://timsbaja.com for his assistance, my 'Finding El Camino Real in Baja' series (originally posted here) has it's own web page.

But, what's new and cool is the addition of the 1954 hand drawn maps of the mission trail from Loreto to El Rosario drawn by Howard Gulick while researching for the Lower California Guidebook. These maps and Howard's notes greatly assisted Harry Crosby in his research for writing the 'Kings Highway in Baja California', 20 years later.

Now, 50 years after Howard Gulick drew them, we can still find value in his explorations and efforts. Howard's 1962 road maps from the guidebook are featured on my web site home page. My article 'Finding El Camino Real' is linked just below the road map link.

The ECR maps are on the last page of the article, with a quick link button to them on the first page... http://davidksbaja.com/ECR



[Edited on 3-15-2004 by David K]

David K - 3-14-2004 at 10:52 PM

Any suggestions for more history based articles?

BAJA MISSIONS 1600's- 1800's
http://davidksbaja.com/bajamissions

EL TRIUNFO and more 1800's+
http://community-2.webtv.net/drdrip/swords

EL CAMINO REAL 1699-1920's
http://davidksbaja.com/ECR

ERLE STANLEY GARDNER 1960's
http://choralpepper.com



[Edited on 3-15-2004 by David K]

Idea

academicanarchist - 3-15-2004 at 06:17 AM

Why not post parts of what Choral Pepper wrote, nd perhaps some of what I wrote to accompany it.

El Camino Real

Speedy Gonzalez - 5-9-2004 at 12:52 PM

Sorry, but it's wrong to use the expression "Camino Real" for the former jesuit trails in Baja California. They were never called like this.

The "Camino Reals" are found in mainland Mexico. They first connected the capital city of New Spain with the silver producing mines (Real de Minas) like Zacatecas, Durango and others and eventually also became trading routes for merchants and caravans.

The most famous "Camino Real" was the "Camino Real de Tierra Adentro" that connected Mexico City and Santa Fe (nowadays New Mexico).

EL CAMINO REAL ...

cristobal - 5-9-2004 at 04:12 PM

DAVID ...
I didn't realize that the ECR trail went right through RINCON and CANDELARIA until I looked more closely at your maps. Several years ago I visited RINCON and met MIGUEL VILLAVICENCIO.... he remembered me from years earlier from my visits to BAHIA TORTUGAS.( I did not remember him .... apparently people talk about the GRINGO on the fast QUAD .... which he remembered). I also stopped and spent the night at CANDELARIA before CHRISTMAS '02 with BETO VILLAVICENCIO (cousins with miguel) and his family. I understand more now ...why his home was built with 30' ceilings. It was built as a stopping point and not as a residence is built today. Between the two ranchos I saw no sign of the old trail. The new BULLDOZERS can tear up and cover up a trail very quickly.

MANUAL VILLAVICENCIO of LAS HIGUERAS had a road cut from rancho SANTA ROSA (between CANDELARIA and RINCON)up to his rancho several years ago. The new road saved him 20 minutes of road time each way to town. Since he drives a SUBURBAN .... that is real savings to him.

The TRAIL is out there ... you just have to look very close.

David K - 5-9-2004 at 06:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Speedy Gonzalez
Sorry, but it's wrong to use the expression "Camino Real" for the former jesuit trails in Baja California. They were never called like this.

The "Camino Reals" are found in mainland Mexico. They first connected the capital city of New Spain with the silver producing mines (Real de Minas) like Zacatecas, Durango and others and eventually also became trading routes for merchants and caravans.

The most famous "Camino Real" was the "Camino Real de Tierra Adentro" that connected Mexico City and Santa Fe (nowadays New Mexico).


Hi Speedy,

It is my understanding that ALL main trails in New Spain used to expand civilization and transport revenues (taxes) back to the king were called 'Camino Real' (Royal Road/ King's Highway).

In California (Baja y Alta), the trail(s) connecting the missions are known as Camino Real. However, no evidence is known to exist that the Jesuits ever used the full name, rather they simply called it 'The Road'.*

* Jesuits did call their trail El Camino Real per documents compiled my Miguel Venegas in 1739.

After the Jesuits were removed from New Spain (in 1768), the Franciscans and later the Dominicans did call the earlier built Jesuit roads, as well as the roads built after 1768, 'El Camino Real'. Perhaps this was out of respect to the king and to not propagate any ideas that were applied to the Jesuits which lead to their banishment.

I think I will dig into my copy of Antigua California and see if there was any Jesuit use of the term before the Franciscans... (post note: Harry Crosby does refer to the Jesuit trails as Camino Real, in Antigua California)

Thanks for your input... and welcome to Baja Nomad!


[Edited on 5-20-2004 by David K]

El Camino Real

Speedy Gonzalez - 5-10-2004 at 01:08 PM

Hello David K

Thanks for welcoming me to Baja Nomad and your comments regarding the use of the term "El Camino Real".

As you mention one of the purposes of a "Camino Real" was to transport revenues back to the king. But at the time of the missionaries there were no real revenues to be brought back to the king or rather the vice king. (There were no kings in New Spain.)

There were no mines or any other sources of revenue in Baja California during the missionary period.

And transport to mainland New Spain from Baja California was done by ship (to Ahome and other ports) and not by land. Therefore the use of the term "Camino Real" for trails in Baja California (especially in the southern part) doesn't make any sense to me.

Please let me know your historical sources if you can find the term "Camino Real" in the Jesuit, Franciscan or Dominic period of Baja California. It would be interesting to find out when and why people started to call the trails "Camino Real".

Looking forward to your comments!



David K - 5-10-2004 at 10:17 PM

Sure, the Jesuits may have only called their roads 'El Camino', but after 1768 all the connecting trails were called Camino Real (by the Franciscans and Dominicans) pg. 15, The King's Highway in Baja California by Harry Crosby c1974. On page 4, Harry says: "Use of the term 'El Camino Real' is consistant in the sense that it refers to a road which was built by mission labor and served to communicate each mission with its neighbors, uniting the whole group into an unbroken chain."

There was active mining during the Jesuit period at Real de Santa Ana. Silver was discovered there in 1720. The mission that started as 'Ensenada de las Palmas' (at Los Barriles) and ended at Santiago, was first moved to Santa Ana. The Jesuit road between Santa Ana and La Paz was called Camino Real per Crosby.

El Camino Real

Speedy Gonzalez - 5-10-2004 at 11:08 PM


Hi David

Thanks for your reply.

Maybe Harry Crosby used the term "Camino Real" for simple trails. But is there any historical evidence that this term was used by Franciscans and Dominicans?

Also the title "The King's Highway in Baja California" seems very inapropriate to me. Even nowadays we do not have a real highway through the peninsula... So why compare trails with highways.

On mainland New Spain there were indeed roads that deserved to be compared with highways. Those were the "Camino Real".

If you find any sources that dates back to the Franciscan or Dominican period refering to "El Camino Real", please let me know. Thanks and have a sunny day!

David K - 5-10-2004 at 11:27 PM

Glad you are interested in the history of (Baja) California! So many people just think of it as a place for recreation and game fishing, not so much for education and the whole experience of the land (not just the sea shore).

I have cited when and why the Franciscans (and later the Dominicans) began using the full name 'El Camino Real' in my post, above. I agree with you that the Jesuits (who had Baja pretty much to themselves) didn't credit the king with their road constrution. But, the Franciscans did... even to the Jesuit built sections. So, the name remains. Here in San Diego county, the route of Junipero Serra is mostly a 4-6 lane paved street called El Camino Real!

The English term 'highway' does not mean only a paved main road for automobiles... Harry used the term "King's Highway" to apply to the 'main route' used by Junipero Serra in his journey from Loreto to Alta California over 230 years ago to expand the king's territory and head off the Russians and English. It was never more than a foot and mule trail.

My son and I hiked some of it, near Gonzaga Bay last November and Don Jorge (with an earlier start) continued on to Mision Santa Maria, 2 weeks later: http://vivabaja.com/1103/page2.html

wilderone - 5-11-2004 at 09:05 AM

From "Journey of the Flame" - (not a historical publication, per se, but published in 1933, purportedly a true account):
"Now that I am old, they call 'road' that which is for wagons; but when I was a boy, 'El Camino del Rey' [fn.] was for a King where he should be - on the back of a serviceable mule. While we had, of course, two-wheeled ox carts with solid wheels, to bring in our sugar cane, we respected mules too much to use them in wagons ...." fn: "El Camino del Rey: the King's Highway, now changed in California to Camino Real, in deference to the Monroe Doctrine."

EL CAMINO REAL

Speedy Gonzalez - 5-11-2004 at 12:35 PM

Hola otra vez David K!

Sorry, I keep on insisting... ;D

We do agree that one of the main purposes of a CAMINO REAL was to transport revenues back to the viceroy. We also agree that the term CAMINO REAL was not used by the Jesuits that remained on the peninsula until 1768.

However, by that time we already had various CAMINOS REALES on mainland M?xico that had existed for over 200 years. The term CAMINO REAL started to be used between 1540 and 1550 after discovering silver in places like Zacatecas, Durango, Guanajuato etc. Those cities called REALES DE MINAS were connected by CAMINOS REALES. Due to the "traffic" on those CAMINOS REALES they could well be compared somehow with the highways of nowadays.

From our (Mexican) point of view, the trails in Baja California at no time deserved to be called CAMINOS REALES. And it's quite unlikely that you will find any mention of CAMINO REALES in Baja California in our history books.

But let's go back to the historical facts...: So we are in 1768 with the Jesuits. The term CAMINO REAL does not exist yet in Baja California. Well, there are exactly 42 years left until the beginning of the independence movement and therefore also to the end of a term like CAMINO REAL in the real sense of the word.

I doubt that there is any historical evidence of the term beeing used in that short period between 1768 and 1810. But even if we could find the term CAMINO REAL in historical sources dating back to that time, it is still a exageration to speak about CAMINOS REALES in Baja California.

CAMINO REALES were important trading routes with regular traffic and a tradition that existed nearly during the whole colonial period. There were no such roads in Baja California. The only road or trail on the peninsula that was maybe used for a short period like a real CAMINO REAL would be the one between San Antonio and La Paz. But I doubt that you will find the use of the term CAMINO REAL in historical sources that date back to that time.

I know that there is a large street in San Diego county called EL CAMINO REAL. You find a lot of expressions like that in Northern Mexico and especially in the former Spanish possessions in the USA that don't really match with the historical past. But it is a way of (tourism) marketing, a way of "making history" and a way of giving a identity to the people.

And therefore with all my respect for Harry Crosby's work, but if he uses the term CAMINO REAL I think it is rather based on his personal interpretation than on real historic facts.

[Edited on 5-11-2004 by Speedy Gonzalez]

[Edited on 5-11-2004 by Speedy Gonzalez]

bajalera - 5-14-2004 at 10:49 AM

Somewhere or other, I once read that the original purpose of establishing a "royal road" was that it was open to all travelers--no one was allowed to charge a toll for its use. Maybe this meant "no one except the king"?

David K, you certainly contribute a lot of interesting stuff to this board!

bajalera

David K - 5-14-2004 at 04:41 PM

Thank you Bajalera! I love the California peninsula and all of its history, too. Unkike here in Alta California, one can still see most of the historical sites in Baja.

Speedy, it is important to you that the name El Camino Real only applies to tax revenue routes in mainland Mexico, I know. I am not sure why you don't think any revenues came out of Baja California, but silver, gold and pearls was extracted during mission times...

None the less, the main connecting mission trails in Baja are now (if not before) known as routes of El Camino Real.

Perhaps if you could give some evidence of what the trail was called (if not 'Camino Real'), that would be enlightening. I did site documentation that after 1768 all the main mission connecting trails were called El Camino Real. 99 years ago in 1905, Arthur North called the main Baja trail El Camino Real, in his book 'Camp and Camino in Lower California'.

I think you will find it difficult to change the name of the old trail after so many years 100-230 of its use.

Please continue to inject and post Mexican and Baja Calif. history and discussions!!!

Baja History

academicanarchist - 5-14-2004 at 04:55 PM

I agree with David that Baja history is fascinating. It has captivated me for more years than I would like to remember. The National Park Service has designated a number of trails historic trails, including sections of what they call the El Camino Real, for example through Texas. That is quite different from the El Camino Real bells along certain California hiways, such as 101. I personally have not given much attention to whether or not a trail was called el camino real in historic times. What is more important is if a trail served for communications, the movement of goods, etc.

El Camino Real

Speedy Gonzalez - 5-15-2004 at 01:56 AM

Hello again

Sorry for beeing that insisting... :(
Quote:

Originally posted by David K
None the less, the main connecting mission trails in Baja are now (if not before) known as routes of El Camino Real.

Maybe in the US but not in Mexico. We do not generally talk about a CAMINO REAL for any trail or camino rural. Otherwise there would have been thousands of CAMINOS REALES in mainland Mexico during the colonial period.

When we refer to the trails in Baja California we would rather use a term like "Camino de los Misioneros".
Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Perhaps if you could give some evidence of what the trail was called (if not 'Camino Real'), that would be enlightening.

I do not know about any names for those trails. I don't think that those simple trails had any name at all. They probably just called them "trail to ..." or "... trail" as you would name a small mountain trail somewhere in the US or as trails are still named in Mexico.
Quote:

Originally posted by David K
I did site documentation that after 1768 all the main mission connecting trails were called El Camino Real. 99 years ago in 1905, Arthur North called the main Baja trail El Camino Real, in his book 'Camp and Camino in Lower California'.

Writers like Arthur North and Harry Crosby have contributed a lot for the general interest of Baja California and therefore deserve my respect. I can however not take them as a source for historic facts for the colonial period as long as they do not refer to an essay, letter or book from a person that lived at that time.

I am aware that people in the US and maybe even in the border towns of Mexico (where there wasn't as much "real" Spanish colonial history as in the center of the country) will go on using the name CAMINO REAL.

But fact is that with using the term CAMINO REAL you give it much more importance than it really had.

To name the connection trails between all the missions from Alta and Baja California CAMINO REAL is also misleading. It makes you believe that there was a regular communication between those missions at all time. But the Franciscans and Dominicans for strategically reasons mainly worked in the Northern part and didn't care much for the southern missions.


Quote:

Originally posted by academicanarchist
The National Park Service has designated a number of trails historic trails, including sections of what they call the El Camino Real, for example through Texas.

This is another story.... EL CAMINO REAL DE LOS TEJAS really existed as such as a main connection between the territories of Coahuila and Tejas (Texas). This term was used at that period, therefore can really be considered a CAMINO REAL.


[Edited on 5-15-2004 by Speedy Gonzalez]

David K - 5-15-2004 at 08:45 AM

There was regular communication between the missions on the Camino Real. Even when Junipero Serra was walking north to San Diego (from Loreto) he recieved communications from other missions. In 'The Call to California' c1968, pg.39: At the abandoned mission site of Calamajue a mail courier going from Santa Maria to San Borja passed a little after midday.

Another thought on why this really was a 'Royal Road' is the fact that a goal of Spain in establishing a chain of missions was to beat the Russians and the English in establishing control over California. The missions were the first step in colonization as the lands were inhabited by 'savages' the padres seeked to Christianize. So, in securing territory for the king, the missions and the road were for royal needs.

The evidence shows the mission trail from Loreto to Alta California was indeed a Camino Real as were likely other connecting trails between the missions to the south.

I have to agree with Harry Crosby, Howard Gulick, Arthur North, and Fr. Junipero Serra who is quoted on pg.31 of 'The Call to California': "... and also on our return journey along the King's highway back to Mexico..." This was written at Mision Santa Gertrudis, in what was then known as California, offshore from Mexico.

Of interest, a mile or two west of Santa Gertrudis is a sign with 'El Camino Real' printed on it, pointing to the trail where it climbs a rocky hill, heading for San Borja.

Eli - 5-15-2004 at 10:18 AM

Sure have enjoyed reading everyone?s opinion in regard to this thread. As I am not a historian, (about now, I can visualize David K. nodding his head in confirmation of this), jejeje, ay yes, to say the least, this forum is the last place I ever expected to find myself. Still, my average person point of view, that the Camino Real existed in both Alta and Baja California is common thought, not just by gringos but locals also, and as such, had to come from somewhere even if it is in error. So, in order to confirm that this was not just some gringo misconception, I took this discussion to a civil engineer born and raised here in Buena Vista. I found his point of view on the subject interesting; His input being, his experience and knowledge is only of the local area, i.e., La Paz and south. His memory spans over 40 years, so his opinion was formed before the time of the gringo invasion, so it is not influenced by an outside perspective persay. Anyway, he gave several examples of roads and trails that he recalls all during his lifetime as always being referred to as Camino Real. He also remembers from Old topographic maps, local properties being named as bordering on ?El Camino Real? in their legal description. He is a busy man, so although he has promised to look for these maps, I am not going to pursue this with him further. As certainly, once one?s mind is set, on either side of a debate, it is not likely going to get changed, no matter how many examples are given.

Meanwhile, Speedy G, My friend, the engineer, did ask me to ask you if perhaps you might not be from Mexico City?

El Camino Real

academicanarchist - 5-15-2004 at 12:51 PM

Having given some thought to this, I would have to say that during the Jesuit period it would not have been known as El Camino Real, since the Jesuits colonized the Peninsula, with the King's approval of course. More importantly, the Jesuits controlled what passed as the government in the Peninsula. Following the Jesuit expulsion, things changed. The Crown asserted its authority with no limitations. More importantly, and this is something that our friend Speedy Gonzalez needs to keep in mind, Jose de Galvez spent time in the Peninsula reorganizing the missions and organizing the colonization of Alta California. It is important to remember that Galvez was the King's man in Mexico, given extensive powers independent of the Viceroy to implement reforms as he saw fit. In a sense he was the true alter ego of the King, and enjoyed the King's full confidence. The trail blazed to Alta California and running through the Peninsula would have been the El Camino Real, since it was blazed under orders from Galvez.

More...

David K - 5-15-2004 at 08:18 PM

Thanks Eli, very interesting!

I took the liberty to email Harry Crosby today and he confirms the term 'El Camino Real' was used on documents in Spain, New Spain (Mexico), and Baja California as early as 1705!

I did learn that in the case of California, El Camino Real was not built for tax collection the way it was in mainland Mexico (nobody there yet to collect taxes from). The purpose was to expand the King's territory and serve as a link for communication between the missions.
In the Winter 1977 Journal of San Diego History, Harry has an excellent article on the trail with detailed maps. Harry was going to fax me the pages with the article, but I already have it (thanks to Neal Johns)!

The term 'Camino Real' had its origin in medieval Spain. Any main road built with Royal authority since then was called El Camino Real or "the King's Highway". This was in Spain and in Spain's colonies.

The Jesuits were in power in California, but were there by permission of the king... the roads they built after establishing Loreto, were the king's roads.
Thank you Speedy for inspiring the research so we could confirm this. Many Camino Reals were built in Mexico!

Neal Johns - 5-15-2004 at 09:02 PM

David K and all, Great posts on my second favorite subject!

wilderone, "The Journey of the Flame" is fiction but the ECR details are very good. It was written by Walter Nordhoff, the father of historian Charles Nordhoff (Co-author of "Mutiny on the Bounty") under the pen name Fierro Blanco.

jeans - 5-15-2004 at 09:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Neal Johns
David K and all, Great posts on my second favorite subject!



Ok...I'll bite...what is your first favorite subject?:saint:

El Camino Real

Speedy Gonzalez - 5-16-2004 at 02:23 AM

Hello everybody

Thanks for all the posts and all the research concerning the term CAMINO REAL.
Quote:

Originally posted by David K
I took the liberty to email Harry Crosby today and he confirms the term 'El Camino Real' was used on documents in Spain, New Spain (Mexico), and Baja California as early as 1705!

Alright... but on what documents relating to Baja California? Do you have any source where we could find the answer and resolve "the mistery" about the term CAMINO REAL being used in Baja California?

Because even my history teacher in La Paz doesn't consider the term CAMINO REAL for the trails in Baja California apropriate. So if you could find any historical source and post it, I would highly appreciate it.


However I can understand that as a common thought all trails that dates back to the colonial period could be considered CAMINO REAL.

But somehow I feel that this is like making no difference nowadays between a highway, a federal road and a mountain trail.


Saludos a todos!

Speedy Gonzalez

Speedy Gonzalez - 5-16-2004 at 02:31 AM

Hello Eli

Nice post! Thanks!
Quote:

Originally posted by Eli
He also remembers from Old topographic maps, local properties being named as bordering on ?El Camino Real? in their legal description.


Would be great if those maps could be found and posted in the forum. It would also be interesting to know when those maps were made.

El Camino Real

academicanarchist - 5-16-2004 at 06:14 AM

Speedy. You would probably benefit from looking at Ernest BUrrus book of translations of reports from the Jesuit missions of Baja. There may be references to it there. I have over the years gone over many of the original documents related to the Baja California missions, but not with an eye towards references to El Camino Real. If I remember correctly, Burrus does have some of the earliest reports on the missions in the book.

Jesuit document using 'El Camino Real'

David K - 5-16-2004 at 11:18 AM

Fr. Miguel Venegas on Nov. 7, 1739, in Book X (10), Chapter 22 of The Apostolic Endeavors of the Missionary Fathers...

(Here are the Jesuit's mention of ECR in the fourth paragraph, I capitalized Camino Real)

"First of all, they had a main highway CAMINO REAL built through the center of the mission district extending through its entire area and running lengthwise from south to north, for it was a common advantage to them all. Then each rancheria assumed responsibilty for building a special road leading from its settlement and joining the CAMINO REAL which was, so to speak, the main trunk-line in which all the seperate roads from the rancherias terminated."

The Finding El Camino Real article is at http://vivabaja.com/ECR

[Edited on 5-16-2004 by David K]

Speedy Gonzalez - 5-20-2004 at 04:04 AM

Hola David

Thanks for your post. But as you probably know your source Venegas never set a foot on the peninsula. He got all his informations about California from letters and documents in the archives of the capital.

His manuscript "Empressas apostolicas" of 1739 was sent to Spain but only published 18 years later. But before beeing published the manuscript of Venegas was re-edited by Padre Burriel because Venegas' manuscript was considered incomplete and had in many points nothing to do with the reality of the life in California.
Quote:

Originally posted by David K
Fr. Miguel Venegas on Nov. 7, 1739, in Book X (10), Chapter 22 of The Apostolic Endeavors of the Missionary Fathers:
"First of all, they had a main highway CAMINO REAL built through the center of the mission district extending through its entire area and running lengthwise from south to north, for it was a common advantage to them all. Then each rancheria assumed responsibilty...


Only have a look at this sentences from Venegas! How can you possibly speak of a main highway from south to north in 1739??? And rancherias??? What rancherias??? Guaycuras and Pericues didn't have rancherias.


Have a look at Miguel Barco's "Historia Natural y Cronica de la Antigua California" which in my opinion is the best testimony of that time. Miguel Barco stayed in Baja California from 1741 to 1768 and travelled to all missions from north to south as a inspector of the missions. He doesn't use the term CAMINO REAL for the trails that connected the missions.

Take one of the the completest book about the history of the peninsula called "Historia de Baja California" from Pablo Martinez. No mention of any CAMINO REAL.


Who knows... you might find the term CAMINO REAL mentioned somewhere in an old source, but however... it was definitively not common to name those small trails in Baja California CAMINO REAL.

David K - 5-20-2004 at 07:01 AM

Good Morning Speedy,

I know Venegas never was in Baja. He was the Jesuit who compiled all the documents coming out of Baja. He drew the famous map in 1757 of the Baja missions. The point is he was a Jesuit and used the term CAMINO REAL for the main roads in Baja.

The Venegas quote was not part of the edit by Burriel. Venegas also did his best to confirm facts by writing many letters, befor completing his report. The Camino Real did run from Loreto to San Ignacio in that year (south to north). Indian settlements beyond the main mission, were called rancherias. Just because these terms were not used in mainland Mexico the same way as they were in Baja does not make them untrue.

It sounds as if your teacher is on a mission to rewrite California's history to make all the Spanish efforts performed less important, for some reason?

I had hoped this would have satisfied your desire to see that the Jesuits did call the trail Camino Real.

I now doubt if any evidence is going to change your opinion, and no matter how many hundreds of years people have called the (Baja) California mission trail 'El Camino Real', you won't accept that. There's nothing more I guess I can do... ?

How about a new topic to discuss?

[Edited on 5-20-2004 by David K]

Mexitron - 5-20-2004 at 07:14 AM

Re "the Journey of the Flame" author Walter Nordhoff's pen name---actually was Antonio Fierro Blanco.....great book! According to Frank Nordhoff, Walter's grandson, the character is fictional, but the events in the book were generally true(like Michener's writings).

Venegas

academicanarchist - 5-20-2004 at 07:29 AM

Venegas was the official historian of the Jesuit missions in Baja California, and most importantly he had access to and used reports and other documents generated by the Jesuits stationed in the Peninsula missions. The fact that he did not set foot in Baja California is necessary to note, but is irrelevant since he had access to reports and such from the Peninsula. Miguel del Barco wrote his text after leaving Baja California following the Jesuit expulsion, and did so from memory. Del Barco took exception to certain things that Venegas included in his history. The fact that Del Barco did not mention the term El Camino Real does not prove that it was not used.

David K - 5-20-2004 at 10:04 PM

Thanks for the added details Robert, one can never have too many historical facts on Baja!

Speedy Gonzalez - 5-21-2004 at 07:18 AM

Hi David
Quote:

It sounds as if your teacher is on a mission to rewrite California's history...

Considering the fact that the history books used in our schools and many other documents and books about the history of our peninsula do not mention any CAMINO REAL in Baja California I am wondering who is really trying to rewrite the history...

It should also make you think why there are no "historical landmarks" or informations to find around missions like Loreto or San Ignacio that clearly indicates that there has been a CAMINO REAL.

There are not so many historical sites for tourists in Baja California. A CAMINO REAL would definetively be a highlight and worth mentioning.

(Or have a look in the Sierra Tarahumara in the state of Chihuahua. The road or trail from Batopilas to Chihuahua was considered a CAMINO REAL. But the trails connecting some of the missions are not considered to be CAMINOS REALES.)
Quote:

Just because these terms were not used in mainland Mexico the same way as they were in Baja does not make them untrue.

Baja California was part of New Spain. I therefore don't see any reason why there should have been other terms used in Baja California.
Quote:

...to rewrite California's history to make all the Spanish efforts performed less important, for some reason?

It has nothing to do with rewriting history if you say that what happened in the northern part of New Spain and in Baja California was less "important" or less significant than what happened in the heart of New Spain.

I can understand that an US-American and especially a Californian might consider the history from Baja California beeing important. But taking it from a Spanish, Mexican or a global view... what happened in Baja California during the colonial period was compared to what happened in other parts of New Spain and the world rather insignificant.
Quote:

...for some reason?

My teacher is from Baja California and proud about it. Nevertheless he wouldn't consider a small trail a CAMINO REAL. He likes to stick to historical facts and doesn't want to "pump up" the history of his peninsula.


You might think that I consider history of Baja California not important or not interesting. Not at all... the opposite is the case. I love the history of Baja California and I have a lot of respect for the work of the Jesuits. But I like to look at it in a context with the rest of the history of New Spain. And... if you compare with what happened in the rest of the country (exept the northern part) than you must simply admit that what happened on our peninsula was "peanuts."
Quote:

How about a new topic to discuss?

Very good idea! :light:

To Speedy

academicanarchist - 5-21-2004 at 07:56 AM

I have been studying Baja California and other parts of northern Mexico for about 25 years now. I do not consider the history of the northern frontier of Mexico to be any less important than the history of central Mexico. In terms of the issues that I consider to be important in the history of northern Mexico during the colonial period, the use of the term El Camino Real or the non-use of El Camino Real to designate mission trails in Baja California is not all that important. I have read many 18th century documents related to the history of Baja California, but not with the intent of proving or disproving what the trails were called. I believe that there are far more important historical issues to address. Having said that, you have raised a question and I have given my opinion. There are many fine Mexican historians studying the same regions that I have studied, and I accept all historians regardless of nationality as professional colleagues. As I stated in an earlier post, the fact that there is no historical market identifying "El Camino Real" around Loreto is irrelevant. Obviously, somebody has to puyt up the money for historical markers.

PS. You may not have seen the earlier post where I listed my publications. You tell me if, by the number of books and articles I have written on the north Mexican Frontier, if I consider the region to be important.
Books

1.The Spanish Missions of Baja California. New York: Garland Publishing Inc., 1991.
2.Indian Demographic Decline :the Missions of Northwestern New Spain, 1687-1840. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1994.
3.Regional Markets and Agrarian Transformation in Bolivia: Cochabamba, 1539-1960. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1994.
4.Robert H. Jackson and Edward Castillo, Indians, Franciscans, and Spanish Colonization: The Impact of the Mission System on California Indians. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1995.
5.Erick Langer and Robert Jackson, editors, The New Latin American Mission History. University of Nebraska Press, 1995.
6.Robert H. Jackson, ed.,Liberals, The Church, and Indian Peasants: Corporate Lands and the Challenge of Reform in Nineteenth-Century Spanish America. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1997.
7.Race, Caste, and Status: Indians in Colonial Spanish America. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1999. Cited as an outstanding academic book for 1999 by Choice Magazine.
8.Robert H. Jackson, ed., New Views of Borderlands History. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 1998.
9.Robert H. Jackson, From Savages to Subjects: Missions in the History of the American Southwest. M.E. Sharpe, 2000.

Articles and Book Chapters

1."Epidemic Disease and Indian Depopulation in the Baja California Missions, 1697-1834," Southern California Quarterly 63 (1981), Pp. 308-346.
2."The Last Jesuit Censuses of the Pimeria Alta Missions, 1761 and 1766," The Kiva 46 (1981), Pp. 243-272.
3."The 1845 Villa de Branciforte Census," Antepasados 4 (1981), Pp. 45-57.
4."Causes of Indian Depopulation in the Pimeria Alta Missions of Northern Sonora," Journal of Arizona History 24 (1983), Pp. 405-429.
5."Demographic Patterns in the Missions of Northern Baja California," Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 5 (1983), Pp. 130-139.
6."Disease and Demographic Patterns at Santa Cruz Mission, Alta California," Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 5 (1983), Pp. 33-57.
7."Demographic Patterns in the Missions of Central Baja California," Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 6 (1984), Pp. 91-112.
8."Demographic Change in Northwestern New Spain," The Americas 41 (1985), Pp. 462-479. Reproduced in Antonine Tibesar, O.F.M., editor, Junipero Serra and the Northwestern Mexican Frontier, 1750-1825 (Washington, D.C., 1985).
9."Gentile Recruitment and Population Movements in the San Francisco Bay Area Missions," Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 6 (1984), Pp. 225-239.
10.Robert H. Jackson and Peter Stern, "Vagabundaje and Settlement Patterns in Colonial Northern Sonora," The Americas 44 (1988), Pp. 461-481.
11.Robert Jackson and Erick Langer, "Colonial and Republican Missions Compared: The Cases of Alta California and Southeastern Bolivia, Comparative Studies in Society and History 30 (1988), Pp. 286-311.
12."Patterns of Demographic Change in the Missions of Southern Baja California," Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 8 (1986), Pp. 273-279.
13."Patterns of Demographic Change in the Missions of Central Alta California. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 9 (1987), Pp. 251-272.
14.Robert Jackson and Jose Gordillo Claure, "Mestizaje y proceso de parcelizacion en la estructura agraria de Cochabamba (El caso de SipeSipe en los siglos XVlll-XlX)," HISLA 10 (1987), Pp. 15-37.
15."Evolucion y persistencia del colonaje en las haciendas de Cochabamba," Siglo XlX 3 (1988), Pp. 145-162.
16."Estructura agraria y mestizaje en el Canton Paredon a principios del siglo XX," Estudios-UMSS 2 (1988), 2-27.
17."Aportes para el estudio de la crisis regional a fines del siglo XlX," Estudios-UMSS 2 (1988), Pp. 110-118.
18."Markets, Peasantry, and the Formation and Fragmentation of the Cochabamba Hacienda. A Review of Larson, Brooke, Colonialism and Agrarian Transformation in Bolivia: Cochabamba, 1550-1900," a review published in Peasant Studies 16 (1988), 39-52.
19."The Decline of the Hacienda in Cochabamba, Bolivia: The Case of the Sacaba Valley, 1870-1929," The Hispanic American Historical Review 69 (1989), 259-281.
20."The 1781-1782 Smallpox Epidemic in the Baja California Missions," Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 3 (1981), Pp. 138-143.
21."Intermarriage at Fort Ross: A Case From San Rafael Mission," Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 5 (1983), Pp. 240-241.
22."La metodologia historica," Estudios-UMSS 1 (1987), Pp. 2-8.
23."The Justiniano Roxas Hoax: The Story of the Oldest Man on Earth," The Californians 4:6 (1986), Pp. 44, 54.
24."La dinamica del desastre demografico de la poblacion india en las misiones de la bahia de San Francisco, Alta California," Historia Mexicana 40 (1990), Pp. 187-215.
25) An English language version of this article was published in American Indian Quarterly 17 (Spring 1992), 141-156.
25."La colonizacion de la Alta California: Un analisis del desarrollo de dos comunidades misionales," Historia Mexicana 41 (1991), Pp. 83-110.
26."Population and the Economic Dimension of Colonization in Alta California: Four Mission Communities," Journal of the Southwest 33 (1991), Pp. 387-439.
27. Co-editor of the Fall 1991 issue of Journal of the Southwest, a special edition with a collection of six essays on the history of northern colonial Mexico written by younger scholars. My co-editor and I selected and edited the essays presented in the issue.
28."Repeopling The Land: The Spanish Borderlands," and 30) "Relations With the Mother Country: The Spanish Borderlands," in The Encyclopedia of Colonial American History (New York, 1993).
29.With Erick Langer, "El liberalismo y el problema de la tierra en Bolivia (1825-1920)," Siglo XlX 5:10 (1990), Pp. 9-32.
30."The Dynamics of Indian Demographic Collapse in the Mission Communities of Northwestern New Spain: A Comparative Approach With Implications for Popular Interpretations of Mission History," in Virginia Guedea and Jaime Rodriguez O., editors, Five Centuries of Mexican History/Cinco Siglos de Historia de Mexico, 2 volumes (Mexico D.F., 1992), volume 1, pp. 139-156.
31."Cambios en la tenencia de la tierra en la provincia de Cliza (1860-1930) y origenes de los sindicatos campesinos bolivianos," Historia Y Cultura [La Paz, Bolivia] 18 (1990), Pp. 99-110.
32."The Treatment or Mistreatment of Disease? Comments on Ronn Pineo's "Misery and Death in the Pearl of the Pacific: Health Care in Guayaquil, Ecuador, 1870-1925," Hispanic American Historical Review 71 (1991), Pp. 365-368.
33."The Changing Economic Structure of the Alta California Missions: A Reinterpretation," Pacific Historical Review 61:3 (1992), Pp. 387-415.
34."The Population of the Santa Barbara Channel Missions (Alta California), 1813-1832," Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 12:2 (1990).
35."Patterns of Demographic Change in the Alta California Missions: The Case of Santa Ines," California History 71:3 (Fall, 1992), pp. 362-369.
36.Robert H. Jackson and Gregory Maddox, "The Creation of Identity: Colonial Society in Bolivia and Tanzania," Comparative Studies in Society and History 35:2 (1993), 263-284.
37."The Impact of Liberal Policy on Mexico's Northern Frontier: Mission Secularization and the Development of Alta California, 1812-1846," Colonial Latin American Historical Review 2:2 (1993), 195-225.
38.with Jose Gordillo Claure, "Formacion, crisis y transformacion de la estructura agraria de Cochabamba. El caso de la hacienda de Paucarpata y de la comunidad del Passo, 1538-1645 y 1872-1929," Revista de Indias 53, # 199 (Sept.-Dec., 1993), 723-760.
39."Congregation and Population Change in the Mission Communities of Northern New Spain: Cases From the Californias and Texas," New Mexico Historical Review (April, 1994), 163-183.
40."Race/Caste and the Creation and Meaning of Identity in Colonial Spanish America," Revista de Indias 55, #203 (1995), 149-173.
41."Grain Supply, Congregation, and Demographic Patterns in the Missions of Northwestern New Spain: Case Studies from Baja and Alta California," Journal of the West 34:1 (1997), 19-25.
42."Naissance Et Metamorphoses Du Savoir Demographique: Le Mestizaje Des Communates Indigenes de la Valle Bajo de Cochabamba, En Bolivie," Cahiers Quebecois De Demographie 25:1 (1996).
43."Agriculture, Drought, and Chumash Congregation in the California Missions (1782-1834)," California Mission Studies Association Newsletter 16:1 (May, 1999), 3-10.
44."Agriculture, Drought, and Chumash Congregation in the California Missions (1782-1834)," Estudios de Historia Novohispana 19 (1999), 69-90.
45. ?The 1824 Chumash Uprising Reconsidered,? California Mission Studies Association Newsletter 17 (Fall 2000), 8-16.
46. ?Labor Rights and the Restructuring of Major League Baseball, 1969-1992: A Case Study of Franchise Performance and the Myth of Baseball Management,? in William Simons, ed., The Cooperstown Symposium on Baseball and American Culture, 2001 (McFarland & Co., Jefferson, North Carolina, 2002), 336-352.
47. ?Una frustrada evangelizaci?n: las limitaciones del cambio social, cultural y religioso en los ?Pueblos Errantes? de las misiones del Desierto Central de Baja California y la regi?n de la costa del Golfo de Texas/A Frustrated Evangelization: The Limitations to Social, Cultural and Religious Change Among the ?Wandering Peoples? of the Missions of the Central Desert of Baja California and the Texas Gulf Coast ? Fronteras de la Historia (Bogota, Colombia) 6 (2001), 7-40.
48. ? Demographic Patterns at Santa Clara Mission, 1777-1840,? in Russell Skowronenk, ed., Telling the Santa Clara Story (Santa Clara, 2002), 84-92.
49. "Wandering Peoples?: Seasonal Migration and Settlement Patterns in the Missions on the Northern Fringe of New Spain,? California Mission Studies Association Boletin 19:2 (Fall, 2002), 19-34.
50. ?Han ignorado la amrosa voz del Padre?: Reconsiderando los origenes del levantamiento de los chumash en 1824 en la California mexicana,? Descatos 10 (Otono-Invierno 2002), 77-93.
51.? ?lites ind?genas y pol?tica espa?ola en Cochabamba durante la colonia,? in Blanca Tovias and David Cahill, eds., Elites indigenas en los Andes: Nobles, Caciques, y Cabildantes bajo el Yugo Colonial (Quito, 2003), 243-247.
52. ?Missoes nas fronteiras da America Espanhola: analise comparativa,? Estudos Ibero-Americanos PUCRS 24:2 (dezembro 2003), 51-78.
53. ?A Colonization Born of Frustration: Rosario Mission and the Karankawas,? Journal of South Texas 17:1 (Spring, 2004), 31-50.


[Edited on 5-21-2004 by academicanarchist]

David K - 5-21-2004 at 08:21 AM

Interesting debate.

Baja has never had the population of mainland Mexico, so the Jesuit trail never got the same amount of use. The automobile, starting in the 1920's, required a different route than most of the Camino Real. So, the Camino Real (in many places) never got improved between Loreto and El Rosario. El Rosario to San Diego is different and the Camino Real (most of the original route) is paved (Hwy. 1). In the 1960's, I remember the bells along the route in San Diego County marking the Camino Real.

From a California-American (who loves Baja history) point of view: The school books and tourist guides barely mention the origins of California being in Baja. If you didn't do a little research, you might think San Diego de Alcala was California's first mission, and the El Camino Real started in San Diego and went north to San Francisco.

The truth is Baja California was California FIRST. The distant unexplored land to the north was simply called Alta California. The El Camino Real began in Loreto and eventually connected the missions in both Californias. Even missions like Guadalupe del Norte that were not on the main Camino, have an EL CAMINO REAL marker placed by INAH. See my photo at http://vivabaja.com/cabras/page4.html

I also highly recommend the Mexican movie 'BAJO CALIFORNIA, the limit of Time' and the El Camino Real is mentioned as it goes through San Francisco de la Sierra where the film's character Damian seeks his roots as an Arce family member.

I have provided evidence that even the Jesuits used the name Camino Real in Baja California. In your teacher's opinion Los Camino Reales were only tax collection routes and well maintained roads even beyond the Spanish era. In Baja California, this simply wasn't the case. Thus 'El Camino Real' didn't resemble the Camino Reales in mainland Mexico. Is Baja California differnt? YES!
I do thank you for your input. It forced me to research the name, even more. In my first post, I even bowed to your statement that the Jesuits probably didn't use the term Camino Real. However, I have found proof they did. I am sure Fr. Miguel Venegas wasn't the only one.

I also have the opportunity to soon meet again with Harry Crosby who I believe is the greatest living authority on El Camino Real, having explored it since 1967 (when he was a photographer for 'The Call to California'). Some of his books that cover the topic: The King's Highway in Baja California, Last of the Californios, Antigua California, and his new book Gateway to Alta California (intense deatail on the Camino Real from Mision San Fernando Velicata to San Diego and the people who traveled from Baja to Alta California with Serra). I will be asking Harry about your opinion. If you would like me to ask anything specific, please email me your question(s) before 8 am Saturday and I will ask Harry for you. My email address is in my web site (VivaBaja.com).

On speaking Spanish

jrbaja - 5-21-2004 at 09:07 AM

Never order Spaghetti in the Phillipines or a hamburger at the Red Lobster.:lol:

Speedy Gonzalez - 5-21-2004 at 09:07 AM

Hola David, hola academicanarchist

The EL CAMINO REAL discussion is over for me. Otherwise we could debate for another couple of months... :(

But in David's last post I found this interesting sentence...
Quote:

Originally posted by David K
From a California-American (who loves Baja history) point of view: The school books and tourist guides barely mention the origins of California being in Baja. If you didn't do a little research, you might think San Diego de Alcala was California's first mission, and the El Camino Real started in San Diego and went north to San Francisco.


I will open a new topic with that sentence to try to find out the reasons... Maybe we will get some new ideas from other members of the forum about the importance of Spanish colonial history in the Northern part of Mexico and in Baja California... :)

Excellent Idea!

David K - 5-21-2004 at 05:03 PM

I will look forward to that!